There are two matters which I want to raise with the hon. the Minister. Both are important although the one is more so than the other. The first is in connection with the salaries paid to the drivers at our various airports. I may be wrong and I am open to correction but I understand that the maximum salary of those men is R133 per month.

Which drivers?

The drivers of the vehicles at the airports.

Which vehicles?

The vehicles of the Minister of Transport; the vehicles which take passengers to and from the airports.

That falls under the Minister of Railways.

I shall then raise it at the appropriate time.

Let me come to the next item which is the expropriation of land for the building of roads. As hon. members will know up to a few years ago land for the construction of roads and railway lines was expropriated under the same terms and conditions, the terms and conditions being that the people were only compensated for buildings that were pulled down or for improved land. According to the report of the Transport Department there were 209 cases in respect of which compensation was paid, the compensation ranging from under R500 up to R5,000. I have raised this matter with the hon. the Minister before. As a matter of fact I was one of a deputation who saw him in this respect and I want to ask him whether his heart has not softened in the meantime because the existing position is untenable.

You must look at the matter from this angle. Sir, these national and special roads are playing an increasingly important role in the life of the country. As a matter of fact. Sir, in all modern countries the accent is to-day being placed on road motor transport. As more and more goods are being transported by road the greater will the demand be for national roads. Where a national road is constructed over a farmer’s farm a fairly large piece of land can be expropriated and to-day he is not compensated for that land at all unless that land is improved land or unless there are buildings on it which are going to be demolished. I think all farmers in this Committee will agree with me that this is wrong. A road which is built under the Ribbon Development Act which we passed last year is not in the interest of the farmer over whose land that road goes. As a matter of fact it becomes a liability to him because he is only allowed access at certain places and sometimes rather impossible places. Whereas previously you could expect a national road over your farm to enhance its value the opposite is the truth to-day. It is a liability. My contention is that the people who benefit by such a road should bear the cost and compensate the farmer for his land which is taken away from him. I want to put a specific case to the hon. Minister in my own constituency and I think he knows about it. I want to remind him that near Nottingham Road there was an old railway line and a new railway line was built there and a national road. Subsequently a new national road was built there, running parallel with the old national road. As a result the farms there were cut into four strips. And whilst the Act has been changed in regard to the Railways it has not been changed in regard to roads. Consequently a man finds himself in the position that his farm has been cut up into four strips, and three of these strips directly the result of the building of national roads, and that man does not get any compensation at all because it happened to be ordinary prairie land and it was not improved land and there were no buildings or trees on that particular portion of his land. It can become impossible for a farmer to farm in some instances if we keep on developing our country as we want it to be developed. I think I am speaking for all the farmers if I say that the time has come to have a change there. I know that the hon. Minister will say to me that he cannot accept this because the provinces will not accept it. Mr. Chairman, it is well known that the Government superimposes its will on the provinces if it so wishes, and to me that is not a valid excuse.

Order! I am sorry but the hon. member cannot discuss that. It would require new legislation.

Sir, I am discussing it under the Minister’s policy, because it is the Minister’s policy to keep things as they were.

No, it would require legislation.

My difficulty is that I cannot find any heading under which I can raise this.

Order! This is the hon. member’s problem, but it cannot be discussed here.

May I then just express the hope that the hon. Minister will change his policy in the direction I have indicated.

I want to express my appreciation of the progress which the Weather Bureau has made in recent times. Until comparatively recently the area in which I live has been classified for weather forecast purposes, under what is called “Elsewhere” by the Weather Bureau. They now call it by its name, namely, Gordonia. Not only have they made progress as far as the details which are supplied are concerned, but also as far as the accuracy of the forecasts is concerned. That does not mean that they are perfect, but when they are wrong with their forecasts for that area, the barometers in that area are also wrong. I take it, therefore, that they are in good company. The fact remains, however, as I see the position, that the Minister can feel happy about the progress which has been made in connection with the work which falls under him.

There is another matter which I should like to bring to the notice of the Minister. I want to ask him whether it is not possible for the South African Railways to follow a policy of constructing weighbridges at the larger stations, and if that is already the accepted policy of the Railways …

Order! The hon. member cannot discuss Railway matters at this stage, but only transport.

Then there is another matter in connection with traffic on the roads. Until recently certain representations have been made to me by farmers organizations in my area in connection with the curtailment of the bus service along the Onseepkans-Aughrabies-Kakamas route. When complaints were lodged the Department said it was not profitable. I want to point out immediately that that region falls in the area where certain private undertakings have certain rights. If I am correct they have the right to operate within a radius of 100 miles. I want to point out that the farmers are very well disposed towards the road transportation system of the Department.

Road motor services also fall under Railways.

I would like to raise with the hon. Minister the question whether the time has not come for a stricter examination of pilots of aircraft when these licences come up for renewal. I do so because if one looks at the incidence of accidents the figures are somewhat disturbing. Of the 675 South African registered aircraft in the year 1962, more than 10 per cent were involved in accidents of one form or another, and there was a loss of some 15 lives. I do not know what the percentage of injuries was. I am not referring now to public transport but to civil flying. Whilst there were 75 or 79 accidents, a statistical analysis of those accidents indicates that no less than 41 accidents occurred during landings. That may be due to two causes, either a fault in the aircraft, or insufficient landing facilities at the smaller aerodromes. Of the 61 accidents, excluding the nine accidents that occurred in the case of public transportation, 51 accidents occurred to privately owned aircraft and of the 51 accidents that occurred to the privately owned aircraft apart from the percentage of landing accidents of the 79 accidents, 22 were due to poor technique. And of the 79 ten were found due to carelessness. Taking these two average figures alone of 22 due to poor technique of the 79 accidents, it appears to indicate that when pilot licences come up for renewal insufficient attention is given to the efficiency of the pilots themselves and their right to get a renewal of their licence. The other aspect is that a very high percentage of the accidents are due to carelessness and also due to faults in the aircraft themselves—no less than 51 accidents occurred during landing operations, and this also seems to indicate that faults have been found in the aircraft themselves, either during flight or during the operation of landing. When one looks at the total of 675 aircraft registered with the Minister’s Department and one sees that nearly 50 per cent of the aircraft are ten years old, I would suggest to the hon. Minister that the time has come for a stricter supervision in regard to possible mechanical faults in these aircraft when they come up for renewal of their certificates. I understand that quite a large number of the certificates have not been renewed or that the owners have not applied for renewal. But even on the figures available of the total number of aircraft, when 10 per cent are over ten years old I think the time has arrived for stricter supervision and stricter examination when these aircraft come up for renewal of their licences. I would go further and ask the hon. Minister whether he could state whether the examinations that are carried out, both of civil pilots and in regard to public transportation pilots —well in the case of public aircraft the standards laid down are very strict and we are satisfied with the standard there—but as far as civil pilots are concerned, I would ask the hon. Minister whether he could state whether the standards of examination both of aircraft and pilots are conforming to general international standards as such.

Then I want to refer to another matter which I raised earlier in the debate and that is the difficulty that we are experiencing in regard to possible threats of denial of airspace and landing rights to South African aircraft in Africa. I agree with the hon. Minister that it is a very delicate subject and one does not want to discuss it here at length. But I raised the matter with the hon. Minister in regard to our participation as a member of the Southern Africa Air Transportation Council of which our country is a foundation member. In reply to me the hon. Minister stated that he was well aware of these difficulties and that at the present time there was nothing to fear. But I also raised it in another context, viz. in regard to our over-border aircraft service, both South African and international lines being supplied with adequate data in regard to weather reports. As the hon. Minister knows the Southern Africa Transport Council was formed for the purpose of better aviation communications and a closer association of civil aviation communication within the African continent. A large number of the African territories—some were not independent then and were subject to the jurisdiction of metropolitan powers—are members with us of the Air Transport Council and have as much interest in being supplied with adequate information to facilitate the flight of aircraft on the African continent as we are ourselves. I feel that it may be more diplomatic of the hon. Minister if he is in a position to do so, to indicate that we wish as a country in Africa to play our part with the rest of the African countries in continuing forms of cooperation as far as civil aviation is concerned. I asked the hon. Minister when last this council did meet, and his reply to me was “not for some time As a foundation member of that council, as a country to whom air communication is a matter of vital importance, I want to suggest to the hon. Minister that he should go a little bit further and that he should publicly indicate that he wishes to continue to co-operate, that he considers it in the interest of all countries in Africa that there should be this co-operation as far as aviation is concerned. It involves many aspects, Mr. Chairman. The hon. Minister stated on Friday that one of the difficulties he experiences with our over-border services is the supply of adequate weather information over the whole African route between Jan Smuts and Athens. He said that one of the difficulties was to get adequate information of weather conditions in regard to the rest of the African continent. Well, Sir, if there were full co-operation between the members of the Air Transport Council, we would be supplied with that information. We not only want it, but the other airlines operating over the African continent want it as well. I would respectfully suggest to the hon. Minister, rather than to make a curt statement in the House that we have nothing to fear as a country the Minister should state that we wish to play our part with the other countries concerned. He should let it be known that we do wish to play our part with the other countries in Africa in the field of civil aviation. I hope the hon. Minister will do so.

There is one final point I wish to raise and that is that there have been complaints from pilots, not only South African pilots but to my knowledge of pilots in the service of other international airlines, of difficulties in obtaining suitable radio receptions, suitable telecommunication reception of weather conditions between Jan Smuts Airport and Nairobi Airport. These complaints seem to be justified because there is a clear statement in the latest report of the Department of Transport, to the effect “that difficulties have been experienced in finding suitable night frequency for the Jan Smuts-Nairobi circuit, due to the congestion in the required frequency bands”. I would like the hon. Minister to say whether these difficulties have been experienced and where the remedy lies, and whether those difficulties have now been overcome.

There is one matter which I think is of the greatest possible importance which I should like to bring to the notice of the hon. the Minister. That is in connection with the traffic on our roads, more particularly on our national roads and our special roads. On 30 September 1962, we had 4,920 miles of tarred national road and 420 miles of special roads which were tarred. In other words we have 5,340 miles of tarred roads. That was on 30 September 1962. I have tried to ascertain what was really happening on our roads and I asked the Department of Transport to make certain figures available to me. I find that in the year 1960, that is to say, during the 11 months from 1 January to 30 November (December excluded) there were 2,742 fatal accidents on our roads; in 1961, during the same period, the number of accidents was 2,996 and in 1962, over those 11 months, there were 3,200 fatal accidents on our roads. In other words, during a period of three years there were 8,938 fatal accidents on our roads. When we compare that with World War II we find that over a period of three years there were as many fatal accidents on our roads as the number of South Africans killed over a five-year period of war. That is the position according to the figures. It is a serious position and we should give our serious attention to it. It is not only as though there were 8,938 fatal accidents on our roads, but over the same period of three years many people were seriously hurt: 8,641 in 1960; 8,760 in 1961; 8,434 in 1962, a grand total of 25,835 serious accidents on our roads. As far as non-serious accidents are concerned the figures are as follows; 26.958 in 1960, 26.961 in 1961 and 25.605 in 1962; a total of 79,524. The number of fatal accidents plus serious accidents plus non-serious accidents amounts to 114.277. When you think of that. Sir, it is clear that we should do something to remedy the serious situation and to prevent those accidents. I have gone into the position as far as our national roads are concerned, and there is no doubt about it that at the beginning when we started with the construction of national roads, the roads were made too narrow. They were only 18 ft. wide with a five-foot strip on either side. It is obvious that accidents must happen in those circumstances.

It was then changed from 18 ft. to 20 ft. and still later it was changed to 22 ft. but that has not reduced the number of accidents on the roads. It is impossible to estimate the loss of human life and the cost to the country in terms of money; the position is disturbing. Something must be done but the question is what? As far as I know we have a Road Safety Board but I do not know what its functions exactly are, nor do I know what status they enjoy, but no matter what it is, they try to give us information in connection with what is happening on our roads. But that does not assist in remedying the position. I want to ask the hon. the Minister that a special effort should be made in some way or other to bring about an improvement in the position. Whether the Minister should hold a conference with people interested in transport, with provincial councillors or officials or whether he should send a committee overseas to ascertain whether there is anything wrong with the construction of our roads, I do not know. But I do feel, however, that I must draw this matter to the serious attention of the Minister for his consideration.

Something else is taking place. You have your tarred road and alongside it you have a gravel strip. When two vehicles pass one another, often at great speed, the one vehicle goes off the tarred road on to the gravel portion with the result that those wheels throw up stones and I myself have seen how such a stone hits the windscreen of the car travelling in the opposite direction. As a matter of fact I personally have been in three cars of which the windscreens have been broken to pieces. This is a serious matter which deserves our whole attention. I do not want to suggest a solution, nor am I in a position to do so, but I do feel that it deserves urgent attention because many human lives are lost in that way.

Then there is the case of a road crossing a railway line. I am aware of it that the hon. the Minister is spending vast sums of money on the construction of fly-over bridges and subways but also in this case many human lives are lost. I want to know whether it is not possible to expedite the construction of flyover bridges and subways. [Time limit.]

I want to ask the hon. Minister whether any discussions have taken place between the Civil Aviation Board and the Defence Council, or the Defence Department, in relation with Air Commandos. All A licences, B licences and civil aviation pilots and the licensing of all civil aviation aircraft are under the Civil Aviation Board, and their regulations are very strict, and if there are any crashes that take place because of the disobedience or the non-carrying out of any of the provisions of the air regulations, which of course appertain to low-flying, and certain other regulations, such a pilot who is involved may lose his licence. But under the Air Commando system it is essential that the civil aviation pilots, those who belong to aero-clubs and private aircraft pilots, will have to fly low, and it is going to be very difficult to carry out the regulations of the Civil Aviation Board, such as landing only on airfields which are licensed by the Civil Aviation Board, and suchlike. This is important because most insurances which are carried by aero-clubs and by private aircraft owners in respect of the aircraft and the lives of pilots, or the people they carry, are based on the fact that these people must conform to the civil aviation regulations. How can these people conform to that when they have to take part in their Commandos. A full discussion is necessary as to the question at what stage these pilots who are licensed under the Civil Aviation Board can fly other than under the Civil Aviation Board regulations and land on air-strips which have been built for the Army or near camps of the Defence Force, or in other operational areas other than those licensed. Because anything that appertains to those aircraft and those individuals is tied up with the licence, whether the licence entitles them to carry passengers, or even in the case of commercial B licences. The insurance covers insurance of the machine, insurance on his life, and so I want to ask the hon. Minister if he has not already had talks with the Civil Aviation Board and the Defence Department on these issues which are so very important and which of course will form the basis of any success of any Air Commando in the future. If not, such talks or conferences should take place at the earliest possible moment, for I cannot see how private-owned aircraft or aircraft owned by aero-clubs can otherwise take part in such operations and join such Commandos.

Then there is the question of subsidies. In speaking on another occasion to the hon. Minister of Defence I suggested that he should approach the Minister of Transport in regard to the subsidies which are still on the old basis of R100 (£50), and I suggested that in obtaining an A-licence by a pilot who is flying a private aircraft and who gets a subsidy of R100, such a licence should only be granted to a young man who joins an Air Commando or the Air Force Reserve. I would commend the Minister to overhaul the whole question of subsidies so that the R100 subsidy should be_ made to fit young men who are prepared to sign on for the Air Commandos or the reserve. I do not think we ought to subsidize people who just learn to fly for the fun of it if they are not prepared to help in the defence of their country. Most of us who are interested in flying-clubs before the last war only taught people who were prepared to sign on for the reserve, and I would commend to the Minister that he go back to the old system of granting subsidies only to young men who will join the reserve or an Air Commando.

There is one other matter, and that is the question of the smog dangers on the national road created by old diesel engines of heavy transport vehicles, which throw up this heavy smog going up the long hills. Many accidents can be directly attributed to the smog which completely shuts off the view of the motorist behind. Going up the long hills, especially in Natal, you find diesel vehicles emitting heavy exhaust fumes that completely shut off the view. To stay behind those vehicles, you have to drop down to five miles an hour and you are choked by the smoke, and in desperation people pass these vehicles and accidents are caused, and it is nobody’s business to enforce these regulations. I think the Minister would be doing a service to the country and to every road-user if he took steps immediately to enforce the regulations to see that this type of smog is stopped as soon as possible.

I want to draw the attention of the Minister to a few other matters. I want to refer to the third-party insurance premiums which are brought to the attention of the Minister from time to time. I am in favour of it that these premiums be paid and that the insurance companies be placed in a position in that way to pay the claims for compensation for the loss of life. Following upon that, however, there is another matter which I wish to bring to the notice of the Minister, I think it would be much wiser and much more effective to take action to prevent this loss of life than the steps we are taking to-day. We should look at this matter in a different light, namely, that it was as a result of the contravention of the traffic rules that the State was forced to make arrangements with the insurance companies to pay compensation. Would it not be much better if we followed a different method, namely, if we brought the motorist to his senses by means of fines and other means of punishment so that there will be less loss of life on the roads? I think it can be arranged by this Minister with the Minister of Justice and the local and provincial authorities that in the case of traffic offences the fines and sentences should be increased substantially. I want to refer to Cape Town. I live in an area where there are two very clear traffic signs, namely, a stop sign which is painted on the street itself and a sign indicating that you cannot turn right. I do not think a day passes without those signs being ignored a dozen times, where the people do not stop or where they turn right. If this offence is subject to a very heavy fine I believe those motorists will come to their senses. I think the fact that these traffic signs are ignored is one of the main reasons why there is such a heavy loss of life against which third-party insurance has to be taken out. I want to make an urgent appeal to the Minister to give this matter his attention. The local authorities and the provincial administration retain those fines: they go into the General Revenue Fund. That is why there should be a specific increase which should be ear-marked for a specific purpose so that the increased fines can be paid over to the Minister of Transport or by way of a bonus to the insurance companies so that the third-party premiums can be reduced.

Order! Third-party insurance is the subject of a Select Committee, and I want to ask the hon. member not to discuss it now.

In that case, Sir, I hope the Minister will bear it in mind when he receives the report of the Select Committee. In that case I cannot refer to the third-party insurance of trailers either, so I shall say no more than merely to ask that the fines be increased considerably and that a more watchful eye be kept over the Cape Town motorists.

I wish to raise with the Minister a subject of grave importance, namely the roads from Johannesburg to the airport, which go through the municipal areas of Germiston, Bedfordview, Edenvale and Kempton Park. The Minister has taken a great deal of interest in this matter and has indicated that the funds are available for the completion of the special road which will link up with the roads provided by the Johannesburg Municipality and will provide rapid access from the centre of Johannesburg to Jan Smuts Airport. Part of the work has already been done in the Johannesburg area itself, and work has recently commenced on the portion of the road in my constituency through the Village Council Area of Bedfordview. There special service roads are being built which will be a temporary solution of the problem and which will in due course be portion of the final scheme. I cannot too strongly stress just how strongly people feel about the statement to which wide publicity was given in the Press yesterday to the effect that as far as the provincial council was concerned they apparently do not regard this road as urgent, and it would appear that they are quite prepared to go along slowly over the period of the next ten years before this road is finally completed. I would like to say to the Minister that I believe that when a matter is of great national importance, as the Minister has recognized this road to be, he should be entitled to have the full co-operation of the Transvaal Provincial Authorities to get on with the job. The authorities who examined the matter include all the municipalities concerned, the S.A. Road Federation and the Chamber of Commerce, and all of them regard this road as of the utmost importance not only to these areas I have mentioned but also to the areas further east, because from this road will be taken off a branch road which will go to the northern part of the East Rand and that obviously cannot be proceeded with before this road is constructed. I am very glad that the service road is being constructed through Bedfordview, because there we have a very dangerous position at present. The present road is inadequate. I hope the Minister will agree that the mere construction of a service road over portion of the area, from the robot on the road between Edenvale and Germiston up to the Johannesburg boundary, is enough. I make an earnest appeal to the Minister to use his influence, because I believe he could render no better service than to ensure that the Provincial Council gets on not only with the construction of the service road, but that it should proceed as soon as possible with the construction of the remainder of the scheme, which in any case will take some years to complete. But it is quite clear from an examination of the problem and from a traffic count taken on the road from Johannesburg to the airport that that road is utterly inadequate and that the traffic service will break down but for the building of this service road. The special road to be erected is one for which there will of course have to be complicated planning and one knows that that will take time. But there is great distress in the whole of that area about the attitude of the Provincial Council, which simply does not seem to realize how urgent this road is. Whatever the politics may be of those who represent an area, there is complete unanimity as to the essentiality for the construction of this road being proceeded with with the utmost despatch. I sincerely hope that we will have a public statement from the Minister this afternoon, and that he will indicate that he agrees with those bodies that this is a matter of great urgency, and that he will try to speed up the work.

The hon. member for Turffontein (Mr. Durrant) this afternoon rendered civil aviation no service by his erroneous views as regards air accidents. He came here with two propositions. The first is that the standard of training of our pilots apparently is not effective.

I did not say that.

The whole argument of the hon. member was based on the fact that an analysis of the accidents reveals that the standard of training should be raised. That was his whole approach, and the second point he made was that the airworthiness of our aircraft leaves much to be desired.

I was referring to the standard of inspection.

That is just the same submission in other words. In other words, he says that the pilots are not tested properly, and their poor training is not shown up because they are not tested adequately. There has been no better evidence than that of the hon. member for Kimberley (North) as to the safety of civil aviation in South Africa. We have had only 83 accidents, of which 79 were investigated and analysed, and that is a very small number in comparison with the number of accidents on our roads. But let us examine the hon. member for Turffontein’s submissions in regard to these accidents. He says that 41 accidents occurred while aircraft were landing. When we analyse those 41 accidents, we find that only a small number of them could have been caused by possible mechanical defects in the aircraft. In five cases the under-carriage collapsed on landing. It is possible that that could have been the pilot’s fault, or it could have been a defect in the aircraft itself.

Or the airport.

That possibility is remote. Among hard landings there were five accidents that were grouped separately, and there the collapse of the under-carriage was also one of the causes. Then we have to assume that in another five cases the collapse of the under-carriage possibly was a mechanical defect or a mistake by the pilot himself. Only one accident was caused because the engine failed. Two were caused because the brakes became defective, and a burst tyre was responsible for another one. In other words, I want to submit that the mechanical condition of the aircraft left nothing to be desired. When we look at the numbers of flying hours logged by civil aircraft in South Africa and when we look at the hundreds of thousands of miles they cover, and we then have regard to the small number of accidents, and if we were to analyse the accidents carefully, and do not arrive at hasty conclusions like the hon. member for Turffontein, we see that the safety of our civil aviation leaves nothing at all to be desired.

I wish to refer to what the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) (Capt. Henwood) has said in regard to the Air Commandos, and that they allegedly act contrary to the aviation regulations. But the hon. member knows that when pilots, who are members of the Air Commando, are having their 24 hours’ training for the Air Commando, they will be accompanied by an instructor, and the civil aviation regulations provides that training may be given under certain conditions if the pilot is accompanied by a qualified instructor. I should also like to point out to the hon. member that almost without exception, all the training aircraft connected with flying-clubs are licensed in the training category of civil aviation. In other words, they are certified and licensed, and with an instructor in charge and a member of the Air Commando as pupil, these problems he envisages cannot arise.

However, I should like to refer to some other matters briefly. I wish to emphasize a fact mentioned by the hon. the Minister, and I wish to thank him for doing so, namely, that no expense should be spared to make available the best navigational aids. I wish to thank the Minister for the assurance he has given us, that that extremely imporant link in our aviation safety will not be neglected because of a shortage of funds or for any other reason. However, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister a question. On 11 August 1961 steps were taken to put into operation a panel to report upon accidents or near-accidents that could have occurred. I should appreciate it if the Minister could tell us whether that panel has made certain recommendations as yet. In South Africa we are dealing with a rapidly increasing volume of air traffic. If we look at Jan Smuts Airport in 1961, we see there were more than 23,200 air movements, and more than 441.000 passengers were carried, and when we look at the four large airports of South Africa we see there are more than 59,500 air movements and more than 750,000 passengers passed through those airports. I wish to make the submission that aviation is progressing apace in South Africa, and we must devote attention to a few necessities in able to apply this greater volume of air traffic to the best effect.

We have at our disposal the services of a civil aviation advisory committee. I should like to recommend that this statutory body, which exists in terms of Section 5 of the Aviation Act of 1962, should be expanded and converted into a body we could for the sake of convenience call a National Aviation Board, and that it should be similar to the National Transport Commission, and that it should be the first step in the development of a full Department of Aviation.

I should like to raise another matter, and that is the feeder air services. The hon. the Minister said under his Vote that it appeared that this was not a paying proposition, and that the S.A. Airways do not exploit it. There are two ways of tackling this problem. The one is that it should be exploited by the S.A. Airways, but then suitable aircraft should be used, light aircraft which can carry six or seven passengers. The second solution is to grant a subsidy to private enterprise to exploit this air traffic. A proposal was made to the hon. the Minister on one occasion, but I should like to ask again that the Minister should investigate the possibility of giving private air services an opportunity to exploit those services, and that a subsidy of say R40,000, should be given in the initial stages, and that it be reduced to nothing after five years when these services will have become known and will have overcome their initial difficulties. I predict that if such a scheme were to be tackled, it will prove that these air services will receive increasingly greater support. The facilities are available. I may mention my own town, Bethal, for instance, where we have all the facilities. The passengers are there. At the moment they are carried by air in other ways, but if this matter could be assisted in its initial stages, I believe there is a great untapped potential that could be put to good use. [Time limit.]

I want to touch on another section of this Vote, the Marine Division. I would like to ask the Minister this. On page 80 of the Estimates it sets out the table of officials concerned, and we see that all told, leaving out the chief ship surveyor, we have a dozen ship surveyors, three principals, three seniors and six ship surveyors. I want to ask the Minister whether he finds in fact that these numbers are sufficient to be able to cope with the growing magnitude of this task. Are all the posts actually filled, and can they cope with the volume of work, seeing what a wide range of ships there is? From the ocean-going vessels to the larger fishing vessels, all the surveys of which have to be done by this staff. Perhaps the Minister could also tell us how far the duties of this section cover the surveys and registrations not only of the ocean-going vessels but of both the larger and the smaller types of the growing fishing fleet we have, and also whether the staff available can call on any other staff for assistance. Is there anything provided in the Estimates to enable him to spread the load of work? I want to make it clear that I am not criticizing the work done by that staff. That they are able to get through all the work, I think, reflects the greatest credit on them. But one has to face the fact that there has been a tremendous expansion in the type of fishing craft developing all along our coast, and we are still very far from the limit of that expansion. I think the latest figures reveal that there are approximately 4,000 vessels of various types engaged in the fishing industry off our coasts, and they vary considerably according to the section of the coast off which they operate. The vessels operating off the South West Africa coast and the Cape coast differ enormously from those operating off the Natal Coast, and each in turn provides a different problem to the survey staff responsible for certifying and registering them. The different types of craft, from the nature of their calling, run different risks from those of the sea-going vessels. The risks they are subject to are very often aggravated by the human element, like for instance the desire to take advantage of the occasion when there is a huge run of fish and to overload beyond the scope for which the vessel is registered. I also know how difficult it is to keep up supervision of such vessels. The vessels do most of their work at night at sea and it is almost impossible to exercise full supervision over them. But that being so it also imposes the necessity for a higher standard of certification, than one would normally accept for a vessel where you do not have to face these risks. You set a higher standard to allow for the unknown factors, which you do know will develop as a result of the human element. When I refer to the human element, I mean that people are prepared to take a chance; they are prepared to overload to a certain extent when there is a big run of fish in order to get the fish into the factories. When they accept a measure of overloading they immediately create other risks; they interfere with the stability of the vessel; they interfere with the trim of the vessel. I have myself seen many of these craft hopelessly overloaded and as soon as they meet heavy seas they start shipping water over the bows.

Then the next circumstance comes into operation. On many of the older craft they have a type of hatch, a cap-scuttle hatch, which if it is properly secured is reasonably safe, but again the human element comes into it. It is a little more difficult to unfasten the hatch to get up and down, so they are not properly secured, some of them have not got hinges on them and wash away. You will often find them washed up along the beaches. Then you have a combination of the seas coming over the bows and the open hatch causing flooding of the fish hold, and then risk number three comes into operation. The one which sends her to the bottom eventually. That is that at the entrance into the pump-line the screening is inefficient. You have a full cargo of fish, the bottom of it being mashed and pulped and in very little time your pumps are choked so that there is no hope of keeping pace with the incoming water. The engine goes out of action and there is another casualty. The craft themselves are all wooden craft with a high freeboard when light. They may be exposed to the sun for several weeks in the summer season so they open up; the caulking gets slack, and it takes several hours of immersion before that swells up again sufficiently to keep the water out. When they are overloaded they push this particular portion of the vessel’s hull under water and so they start up another series of leaks. Sir, these are some of the headaches which your staff have to cope with. They have to cope with the certifying of these vessels with the knowledge that these things will be done outside of their control and there is little chance of their exercising adequate supervision over that part of their job, until it is too late. The first that you really hear about it is when the vessel is a loss. I would say without any hesitation that the vessels of the fishing fleet, particularly the newer vessels —and when I say “new” I do not mean of to-day only but going back for a few years— are vessels which reflect the greatest credit both on the South African boat-building firms which are building them and on the men who sail them. It is not shoddy work. You certainly do find a number of craft which fall outside that high category, but in general even they are a decent type of boat. The weakness is that the factor of safety at the moment is not sufficiently high to take into account the human element which does not observe the rules which are supposed to be observed when loading with fish. Sir, those are just some of the troubles. I would ask the Minister if he would be prepared with his advisers to give consideration to the question of setting up a special department dealing with this particular type of craft. They have their special problems. They have their own particular type of troubles. Quite dissociated and quite separate from those of the larger types of vessels. Each and every one of them is an important problem. The growth of the South African fishing trade is such, that according to the last official return it either occupies the ninth of tenth place in the world as far as sea fishing is concerned— in fact I think a few months ago, on the monthly intake of fish, we moved up to something like eighth place in the world fish production for that particular month. It is a new and major development for South Africa which has brought new problems with it. This is of the utmost importance to the future of the country, not only the Republic but to the many thousand which are dependent to-day on the fishing industry. This industry is a tremendous factor both in our domestic food supply and in our overseas trade. [Time limit.]

I should like to bring two matters to the notice of the Minister. The first matter concerns the standards of our roads, bridges, traffic interchanges, traffic circles, etc. I think the time has arrived that the Department of Transport should proceed, on the basis of the collected knowledge of the Department and the provinces, to lay down standards that could be applied throughout South Africa, e.g. the size and shape of the most ideal road circle we can have, the requirements for traffic switches, the width of road shoulders and road widths in relation to the traffic count, bridges, bridge approaches, etc., and that as the standards are formulated by the Department of Transport, they should be applied through a process of negotiation with all the local authorities who are doing much of this construction work, and with the provinces, uniformly throughout the country with the least deviation that may be necessary in a particular situation. In South Africa we are struck by the numerous different patterns of solution for the same road construction problems that are applied. I should like to make this small request, that the Department of the hon. the Minister should devise South African standards as far as possible and should have them carried out through voluntary co-operation.

The second matter I should like to raise is the Jan Smuts Aairport-Johannesburg road, which has already been raised by the hon. member for Germiston (District) (Mr. Tucker). I do not wish to emphasize that it is a necessary and desired improvement, but what I should nevertheless like to ask the hon. the Minister is that either he or his Department of Transport should make an authoritative statement on the matter. We are aware of the Transport Department’s strong action to have this scheme carried out, but the general public are not aware of the problems because the traffic interchange on the eastern by-pass past Johannesburg and a second traffic interchange on the provincial road from Benoni to Johannesburg and other technical problems are involved. Many rumours are spread about the matter, of which many are unfounded. I do not know whether this House is the most convenient place for it, but I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether he or his Department will make an authoritative and somewhat full statement on this matter so that all the interested parties may know exactly where they are. I do not think that at this stage it is justified to criticize the Transvaal Province pertinently, although it does appear as if the province is very tardy in regard to certain aspects of planning. I should like to take the liberty to suggest that if the planning of the province does not progress rapidly enough, the Department of Transport should seek its own remedies by means of private enterprise to have the planning completed.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister if he does not think it is time that the policy of using major civil airports for blind-flying training for defence purposes should be reviewed. The hon. the Minister will remember that during the course of the last recess I wrote a letter to him with regard to an accident which took place in the approaches to the Louis Botha Airport in Durban where a defence plane which was practising blind approaches collided with a passenger aircraft. At the same time I wrote to the hon. the Minister of Defence, who sent me a very nice reply pointing out, quite sanely, that those were the only places where the Air Force could in fact practice blind approaches, because they were the only places where the necessary equipment was installed. This hon. Minister has not had the courtesy yet even to give me an answer to a question which I posed to him in the letter, and that is why I raise this subject here. At the moment Harvard aircraft are largely being used for the purpose of training pilots in blind flying and blind approaches, but with the speeding up of our defence programme it seemed likely to me that we are going to use faster and faster aircraft even for training purposes, and there must come a stage when the pilots of these faster aircraft must be taught blind-flying approaches at airports other than defence airports which exist in the area of Pretoria. I think that now that we are embarking upon this expansion programme, where obviously our flying activities as well as ground activities in the Defence Force will be stepped up, it might be an opportune time for the Minister of Transport to have discussions so that some of this huge amount which is being set aside for defence, might perhaps be applied for regional bases for the practice of blind-flying approaches by defence aircraft. I think personally that it is very wrong that an airport such as Louis Botha Airport should be used for this purpose, because around that airport quite a big housing scheme has been built. Obviously the approaches to these airports must be the most congested parts in the air, and to superimpose upon all that blind-flying approach practice by aircraft, must impose an extra strain upon the personnel. As the hon. the Minister knows there was an accident there last year which very luckily did not end in calamity for a civil aircraft. As it was the military aircraft crashed. I think this might be an opportune moment for the Minister to reconsider the whole basis on which this blind flying is practised in the area of civil airports.

The hon. member for Kempton Park (Mr. F. S. Steyn), although he approached the matter from a somewhat different angle, did, I think, join in the appeal of the hon. member for Germiston (District) (Mr. Tucker) to the Minister to make what he, the hon. member for Kempton Park, called an authoritative and comprehensive statement in regard to this question of the six-lane highway between Johannesburg and the Jan Smuts Airport. Sir, one of the aspects of the matter is discussed in a Press report, in the Sunday Times of yesterday, and from this it would appear that the President of the Transvaal Chamber of Industries, Mr. Campbell-Pitt, actually led a 15-man deputation to the provincial road authorities last month about what this report calls the delay and confusion which has surrounded the building of the road. Apparently as a result of that approach, the Provincial Director of Roads, Mr. Krogh, made a statement which is quoted in this report. He said—

He then went on to say that the traffic from Jan Smuts Airport to the business centre of Johannesburg would be able to use the freeway along its entire route only after the following freeways have been constructed: the eastern, by-pass of Johannesburg, the Johannesburg municipal east-west motorway. My first point in this connection is that that is a completely new approach to the question of the six-lane highway from Johannesburg to the Jan Smuts Airport, and perhaps the Minister can explain whether this new approach conceived by the Provincial Administration of the Transvaal was, in fact, undertaken as a result of any negotiation or discussion with the hon. the Minister of Transport. Furthermore, Mr. Krogh made a statement on which I think the Minister should enlighten this Committee. He said that the reason for this delay was that there would be “little prestige attached to a freeway which discharges its traffic into a municipal street at Kensington. Full prestige will only be attained when the traffic can be discharged into a freeway system which will carry the traffic close to its destination”, Surely the Minister will be the first to agree that in agreeing, as he did, to the building of this road—and there is reference in the report to the fact that the Government will meet 70 per cent of the cost of this road—that in agreeing to that, “prestige” was not a first consideration. I think to anyone who has any knowledge of why road-building is undertaken by a local authority or through the National Transport Commission, the last question, surely, is the “prestige” value of the road. The first question is its essentiality or utility, and even its strategic importance. I fail to understand how it can be said that this road from Johannesburg to the Jan Smuts Airport, which at this stage is the only international airport in South Africa, for practical purposes, should be discarded because there is not sufficient “prestige” attached to it. Prestige for whom? I do not know whether it is prestige for the province, or for the Provincial Roads Engineer. That is obviously a statement which cannot be seriously regarded. Finally, in this connection it is clear that the Automobile Association as well as the Municipality of Kempton Park are interested in this matter. In fact Kempton Park, according to the Town Clerk, is now considering certain recommendations in regard to the taking of certain steps, obviously to approach the Minister. I can only say again that this is a very important matter which cannot be sidetracked by any consideration of prestige, and on which the people of this country, let alone the people of Johannesburg, are entitled to have the fullest information—because I for one cannot accept that the Provincial, Administration unilaterally, without any consultation with the hon. the Minister of Transport, decided to defer the scheme for a period of from nine to 16 years, according to the estimated time.

The other point that I want to deal with, in the time left to me, is the question of the services provided for the transportation of people living in the south-west complex of Johannesburg. I have here certain information from the South African Railway News of January 1963, which is not a propaganda pamphlet, but an authoritative, very objective publication, indicating quite clearly that the difficulties experienced in regard to the transportation of the Bantu residents of the south-west complex have not yet been eliminated. There is, for example, the statement that—

It goes on to indicate that there are 70 trains carrying workers in each direction every working day. But the point is that in regard to this particular matter, the budget of the Minister of Transport shows that the subsidy on the operation of railway Bantu passenger services to and from townships is r3.500,000, for this year at any rate. The significant statement, in addition to the number of passengers carried, is that the peak hours are from about 4 o’clock to 8 o’clock in the mornings and from about 4 o’clock to 6 o’clock in the evenings, and anybody who lives in Johannesburg and who actually employs Bantu labour will tell you that the Bantu worker living in the southwest complex of Johannesburg has a daily spread-over time of 12 hours because of this transportation difficulty.

Order! The hon. member should discuss that under Railways.

May I not refer to this at all? Sir, I refer to the Minister’s publication, the South African Railway News. What I am trying to get at is this: In regard to the difficulty which the Railway Administration has in transporting these passengers within reasonable peak hours, is it possible for the Minister to tell this Committee what provision is made in regard to bus transportation?

I am not responsible for bus transport.

Where does the subsidy of R3,500,000 go to?

The subsidy goes to the Railways.

Sir, I am now addressing the Minister of Transport who subsidizes somebody to the tune of R3,500,000 to transport Bantu to the townships, and surely I must raise this matter with the Minister whose Vote includes this amount.

Order! The hon. member should discuss that under Railways. This is not a matter of policy—it is a detail.

Well, if the R3,500,000 vote is a “detail”, then I have nothing more to say!

I should like to associate myself with the hon. members who have expressed their views on the subject of road safety here. I do not think I need apologize for reverting to this subject, for it certainly is a subject of vital importance, a subject of increasing importance from day to day. I believe South Africa cannot afford to lose a single life on our roads unnecessarily. Yet we find, as the hon. member for Kimberley (North) (Mr. H. T. van G. Bekker) I think said, that every day between two and three White people are dying on our roads, and between six and seven non-Whites. I say South Africa cannot afford that. If one studies the cost aspect of the matter, one comes to a shocking conclusion, but it will suffice if I merely point out that a number of people equal to all the immigrants we are annually bringing here at great cost and with much trouble, are wiped out by road accidents. I am mentioning this merely to show how extremely important the matter is. That is one side of the question. On the other hand again, we find that the number of vehicles on our roads is increasing from day to day, from year to year, at a rapid pace; that those vehicles are becoming faster and more powerful, and that on the part of the Government and the provinces large sums of money are being spent to improve our main roads so that they can absorb this traffic. So it remains a matter of the greatest seriousness, but I would just say that we are pleased that the State is not apathetic regarding the question of road safety. We know that the Road Safety Council itself does outstanding work through its road safety associations, but I believe that the hon. the Minister will agree there is still room for improvement. I feel particularly that the Road Safety Council could perhaps work much more effectively if it were supported by a national set of traffic rules. I believe there may be objections on the part of the provincial authorities because there may be interference with their autonomy, if I may put it thus, but I think that if such a set of national rules were established, and the provinces were entrusted with the task of administering those rules, they could not object on that ground, but personally I think that if we could give the Road Safety Council of South Africa a set of national road rules, we shall achieve still better results. I believe also that the Road Safety Council has to contend with another problem, and that is the fact that you find one region that could very easily and very, effectively be served by one road safety association, and then you find more than one association existing in that area. I am thinking of the Cape Peninsula, e.g. where we have two—let me say two good— associations, but I do believe that in an area such as the Cape Peninsula, where the traffic interests are identical, we ought to have one powerful road safety association that could serve the whole area. I think that if we were to have that national basis, we could possibly pass on the application and the implementation of those road or traffic rules. I think one could approach the matter from two directions, on the one hand educational and on the other hand the more effective application of such laws or rules as may be in existence. Educationally much has already been done. We are aware of the fact that our children in both the primary and the secondary schools— perhaps to a lesser extent in the secondary schools—are being well trained as regards road safety, but I am concerned about the fact that the man behind the wheel does not receive proper training. Of course that is an entirely different matter. I am convinced—and I say this with the greatest deference—that where we at present have a wide range of road signs, perhaps 50 per cent of the hon. members sitting in this House do not know those road signs. All those road signs have been devised to promote road safety, and I believe it is most important that those rules and those signs should be observed. I think our problem is that we too easily issue drivers’ licences, and I have wondered whether the hon. the Minister should not give consideration to the possibility of drivers’ licences being issued periodically, and that they should be renewed after a period of say five years, and that all those who have committed traffic offences during the period of five years should again be tested as to their competency as drivers at the end of those five years. That will not mean that all drivers will have to be tested. Those who have no endorsement on their licences will automatically receive their renewals, but those who have been convicted of traffic offences ought to be tested on renewal. I also believe that the manner in which drivers’ licences are issued in the rural areas and in the cities and the application of the Specific rules according to which it is done, should be exactly the same. It is a disturbing fact to me that the incidence of accidents and the incidence of road deaths in the rural districts are about three times as high as in the cities, and it seems to me that it may be attributable to the fact that the roads in the country are not so good and that the ability to drive in the rural areas might not be so great either. I personally know of people who come from the country, here to the outlying areas of your cities and the motor-car is left there because they are afraid to drive in the cities.

But on the other hand the city-dwellers drive recklessly when they come to the rural areas.

I have no objection to that statement. I am sorry only that the hon. member did not raise it earlier in the debate. I should also like to see that our traffic officials should not be connected with specific municipalities. These people should in my opinion be invested as it were with the powers of a police officer. They should enjoy a higher status, and I wonder whether the hon. the Minister should not perhaps consider giving proper training and a proper status to the traffic officials so that they may be able on their own to put the requisite traffic work on a much better basis. But most important of all, we should have a set of national traffic rules for the whole Republic, and I am convinced that if the Road Safety Council were to apply it to all sections of the people, we shall largely succeed in reducing the mortality rate on our roads.

About a year or two ago there was some talk of erecting a hotel at the Jan Smuts Airport for the convenience of passengers. The idea was that it should be an international hotel where descent and race would not count and which could serve at the same time as a centre for international conferences, particularly for delegates from Africa states. I shall be pleased if the hon. the Minister can tell us what has become of this idea and whether it is still the intention to use this hotel as a centre for international conferences. I think it will be generally welcomed if something of this nature can be done for the convenience of air passengers, although I would give preference in this connection to private initiative. But I want to say to the hon. the Minister that if this idea of erecting a hotel at the airport is proceeded with I feel that psychologically it will be wrong if it is intended to serve as a centre for international conferences, and I say that for two reasons. In the first place I feel that an airport is not really the most suitable place for such conferences. Delegates from abroad who come to one’s country do not want to be dumped at an airport. The other reason is that delegates from non-White countries may feel that this is an attempt to withhold the facilities of the city from them. Personally I hope that the State will do something for the convenience of air passengers in respect of an hotel at or near the airport, and I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister will make a statement. Whenever one arrives at Jan Smuts Airport from some other country, one has the feeling that this airport is not the advertisement for South Africa that it can and ought to be. As far as its appearance and its interior arrangements are concerned I am afraid that it compares rather unfavourably with airports in other parts of the world. Take the Nairobi Airport, for example. It is difficult to say where the fault really lies, but I think I can say that what is lacking at Jan Smuts Airport is the atmosphere that one finds at an airport such as the Nairobi Airport, for example. It lacks a South African character. I do not suggest that I have a plan to overcome this, difficulty, but I wonder whether the hon. the Minister would not consider the question of appointing a panel of artists, for example, to see whether they cannot do something about this matter so that people who disembark at Jan Smuts can feel that they are in South Africa and that we are doing something to give Jan Smuts a South African atmosphere and character. One welcomes the improvements which have been made in recent times but I am afraid that there are still a good few shortcomings. The cafeteria is not attractive; it is not attractively furnished and in summer one can hardly endure the heat there. Moreover, the toilet rooms are not convenient and attractive. I do not want to suggest that that is the general rule but I have noticed very often that they are not clean. In some of them there are no towels, soap or other facilities. The service definitely compares unfavourably with the service that one gets in this connection at overseas airports. The hon. the Minister knows as well as anybody else that one often has to spend hours at an airport. I wonder whether, instead of having a small number of toilet rooms, where the facilities are not particularly convenient at any one of them, consideration cannot be given to the question of equipping one large, decent toilet room where one can have a bath or a shower-bath, where one can have one’s shoes cleaned and which is staffed with servants who exercise proper supervision over the facilities there. I think it would be a good thing to ensure that there is the necessary supervision at the main toilet rooms at an international airport such as Jan Smuts.

I have noticed that a number of changes have been made at Jan Smuts in connection with the apartheid arrangements which formerly existed there. Non-Whites are also allowed into the main hall now. I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister will just explain to the Committee what the present arrangements are; whether Jan Smuts is also regarded now as an international airport in this respect and what the position is of high dignitaries, particularly non-White dignitaries who land at Jan Smuts and spend a little time there. Do they have to use the separate conveniences or are they allowed to make use of the general conveniences?

I do not want to waste the time of the Committee but I just want to raise one point with the hon. the Minister. If the Minister travels on the national road from Cape Town to Swellendam he will notice that two new fly-over bridges have been constructed to join the road from Hermanus with the national road. Sir, I travel that road about twice a week and I have never been held up for more than two minutes by cars coming from Hermanus, yet the authorities have spent anything up to R140,000 to build two bridges and I do not know now many miles of road to allow the cars from Hermanus to get on to the national road. A roundabout costing a couple of thousand of rand, like the ones at the Strand or Somerset West junctions with the national road would easily have sufficed. I think this is a gross waste of money. They could easily just have widened the road to Caledon with this money. It is a gross waste of money to build these two fly-over bridges, a subway, and I think about four or five miles of tarred road to lead to these two bridges. It is time the Government took steps to see to it that the authority does not waste money like that when the old national road needs widening and repairing. I just wanted to bring this to the notice of the Minister because I think it is time that the matter is gone into.

The Hermanus road merely joins the national road at Bot River, unlike the “roundabouts” near Somerset West which serve cross roads carrying 20 times more traffic and I know of no accidents having happened at these points.

I also want to make a plea to the hon. the Minister in regard to the construction of a road in the Witwatersrand area which I think should receive top priority. I have cause to believe that I will get considerable sympathy from the hon. the Minister in this plea because the road I have in mind traverses a large portion of the hon. the Minister’s own constituency. I refer to the main Reef road which gives access to Johannesburg from the west of the Witwatersrand. The north and the south are linked up with the expressways traversing the city of Johannesburg; we have a very good road which goes east to Springs via Alberton. But I think the hon. the Minister will agree with me when I say that the greatest death-trap anywhere in South Africa, is the main Reef road that goes through Langlaagte, Maraisburg, through the outskirts of Roodepoort, through to Krugersdorp. That road has the highest percentage of accidents in the whole of the Republic, particularly that portion between the city confines and the turn-off to the Western Native Townships. The hon. the Minister knows that road well. He knows that it is spattered with yellow crosses where corpses have been picked up from the tarmac as the result of motor-car accidents. The traffic departments of the townships concerned confirm that there is not a single day in the week that an accident does not take place on that road. All the traffic going west from Johannesburg travels along the main Reef road. The Minister knows there are difficulties about construction because quite a number of municipalities are involved. It affects the Minister’s own constituency of Maraisburg; it affects the constituency of Florida, Roodepoort and Krugersdorp and the Johannesburg Municipality. One of the difficulties in coming to finality in regard to the construction of this road has been the fact that each municipality if they wish to construct it as an expressway, has to initiate the planning, the financing, the construction and the maintenance of this road individually. Up to now no finality has been reached. Johannesburg is the premier city of South Africa and it should have the best access roads of all cities. In fact, Sir, it has the worst access roads of all the cities in South Africa.

I want to plead very strongly with the hon. the Minister to use his influence to see if some priority could not be given to the planning and the construction of an adequate highway traversing that section of the Reef, i.e. west from the City of Johannesburg.

I just want to raise a small point before I sit down. The Minister will recall that I raised the policy followed by the Government Garage earlier in the debate. I asked the Minister whether, in view of the increasing cost of Government transport, it would not be a better policy to subsidize the field officers, in particular, of various Government Departments to use their own transport instead of using Government transport. I think it would be more economical to subsidize those officers to use their own transport than to provide them with Government transport. I shall be grateful if the hon. the Minister will reply to that; I think it escaped his attention earlier in the debate.

Subsidization has taken place over a number of years, so it is nothing new. It is very problematical whether it is more economical to subsidize an officer of the Department to purchase his own car and paying him a certain travelling allowance than it is to allow him to use a Government car.

In regard to the question of the main Reef road I can only inform the hon. member for Turffontein (Mr. Durrant) that the National Transport Commission does not build roads. In regard to urban roads the National Transport Commission subsidizes local authorities so it is a matter for the local authorities concerned.

But there are so many of them.

If they want the road built they must come together, draw up their plans and submit them to the National Transport Commission. Johannesburg is already being subsidized to a very large extent—I think to the tune of some R 15,000,000. That is a matter purely for the municipalities concerned. I agree with the hon. member that there should be an improvement on that road.

Should it not be declared a national road?

You do not declare national roads inside urban areas; we are concerned about roads outside urban areas.

The hon. member for Turffontein also raised the question of the examinations to be passed by civil pilots. I think he has been replied to very adequately by the hon. member for Bethal-Middelburg (Mr. J. W. Rall) who has practical experience of this matter; he owns his own plane. All I want to add to what the hon. member for Bethal-Middelburg has said is that most of the accidents happen as a result of negligence, apart from mechanical defects. No matter how high the standard of examination, no matter how adequate the training is the human factor is still involved when there is an accident. This is not confined to airmen alone. We have the same position on the Railways. Drivers are put through a very severe test; they are highly qualified; they have an excellent record over a number of years and suddenly the human factor enters into the picture, negligence takes place and an accident occurs. What I can say is this that the overwhelming majority of accidents as far as civil aircraft are concerned, are of a minor nature. It is seldom that a person loses his life, as the hon. member will see from statistics. That is, in proportion to the number of accidents. The supervision is strict and the standards are sufficiently high. As the hon. member knows there is a Civil Aviation Advisory Board on which air interests are represented; the pilots are represented on that board. They are consulted in regard to all the regulations drafted by my Department before they are promulgated. They are also consulted in regard to the standard of examination and other ordinary requirements. They are perfectly satisfied with the standards laid down by the Department.

The Southern African Air Transport Council consists of the following members: the United Kingdom, South Africa the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, the British High Commission Territories, Kenya, Tanganyika, Uganda, Zanzibar, Nigeria and Sierra Leone. The functions of this Transport Council are the following: To keep under review and promote the progress and development of civil air communications in Southern Africa; to serve as a medium for the exchange of views and information between member countries on civil air transport matters; to consider and advise on such civil aviation matters as any member may desire to refer to the council; to furnish a link and to co-operate with the Commonwealth Air Transport Council; to keep C.O.C.C. fully informed of its deliberations. The hon. member knows what our relationship is with some of these states. It is perfectly obvious from the experience we have had in Africa in regard to other organizations that to hope for co-operation with some of these states at the present stage is a very idle and a very vain hope. I can only say that South Africa desires to co-operate with all these states and if they are prepared to cooperate we are quite prepared to co-operate with them. We will be only too willing to call this Southern Africa Air Transport Council together again if we have any assurance that these territories will agree to co-operate and to take part in the deliberations.

The hon. member again stated that there had been complaints from pilots that they have been unable to obtain suitable weather reports when they fly between Jan Smuts and Nairobi. My Department assures me that they have received no complaints. There have been difficulties in regard to the frequency but those have been overcome. But there has been no complaint from any pilot that he has received inadequate or insufficient weather information.

*The hon. member for Kimberley (North) (Mr. H. T. van G. Bekker) and several other hon. members raised the question of road safety. I agree with hon. members that the slaughter on the roads is causing concern. There is, however, a small ray of light to be seen, namely that the number of accidents has decreased just recently. Nevertheless the figures are alarming. The road safety organization is doing splendid work. It is a statutory body established a few years ago and it is representative of all interested parties. This organization does not confine itself to publicity only, but they do research educational work, etc. The one shortcoming of this organization is that it does not possess executive powers. This organization can only make recommendations. As hon. members know, the Department of Transport is not responsible for the enforcement of rules of the road. The Department of Transport is not responsible for the control of road traffic on the roads. It is the task and the responsibility of the several provincial administrations, and road traffic is controlled by road ordinances that are administered separately by each provincial administration. That may be one of the defects in the whole system. The road safety organization makes recommendations to the various provincial administrations in regard to heavier punishments, the improvement of road signs and all the various matters that are concerned with the promotion of road safety. But then the provincial administration has to approve those recommendations, and then the various road ordinances have to be amended so that they can fit in with those recommendations. It is a lengthy process. I have proposed that I should have a central traffic Act passed by this Parliament that will bring about uniformity, but which may be administered by the various provincial administrations. I made this proposal to the various provincial administrations but to my disappointment they nearly had convulsions about it. They say I want to deprive the provincial administrations of their powers; they consider they are quite capable enough to draft their own ordinances and to carry them out and to administer them; they do not approve at all of the Minister of Transport drafting a Road Traffic Act and having it passed by this Parliament. I have not yet abandoned the idea; I am still negotiating with the various provincial administrations. If it can be done, it will expedite matters and there will be uniformity. For instance, a year or two ago I appointed a commission that inquired into the matter as to whether a central bureau for traffic offences should be established, in other words, a central bureau where a record could be kept of all traffic offences. When a person commits more than one or two offences, steps could then be taken against him immediately. It could be done much more effectively if there were such a central road traffic Act for the whole country, legislation administered by the provincial administrations, but for which this Parliament will be responsible. In any event, this is a matter that is now being considered.

An hon. member raised the question of heavier penalties. That is also in the hands of the several provincial administrations. They can provide for the punishments in their ordinances. Personally I think the only real hope for an improvement is that the various provinces should agree that I should have a central traffic Act passed by this Parliament. That will bring about uniformity and eliminate delays.

Who is talking legislation now?

Yes, I think we shall have to move that you become Chairman of the Committee.

That would not be a bad idea.

Order! That is a reflection on the Chair; will the hon. member please withdraw that?

I withdraw, Sir.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) (Capt. Henwood) has suggested that a conference should take place between civil aviation and defence in regard to the training of defence pilots to do blind flying. I can tell the hon. member that when both civil aviation and defence make use of a particular airport all the aircraft are controlled by the same control tower, consequently there is very little danger of accidents taking place. The accident which occurred at the Louis Botha Airport has been inquired into and the report has been submitted. That report will be tabled very shortly. The hon. member will then be able to see to what conclusions that commission came to.

The hon. member suggested that subsidies should only be granted to young men who were prepared to join the Air Force Commandos. I think it would be an excellent thing if that could be done but in a time of war, of course, everybody is called up to do his duty. Even the young men who are not prepared to become members of the Air Commando are liable for service in the case of an emergency. They can be commandeered. I think the more young men we train to become pilots the better it will be for us in future.

I suggested that the subsidies should not be given to old men.

That is the policy of the Department; we try to limit the subsidies to men under the age of 35 years.

The hon. member for Germiston (District) (Mr. Tucker) and other hon. members want me to make a statement in regard to the building of a road between Johannesburg and the Jan Smuts Airport. I have no jurisdiction over that matter. Hon. members must realize that the National Transport Commission is purely a financing authority. At the request of the Transvaal Provincial Administration this was declared a special road and the only responsibility that the National Transport Commission has is to pay 70 per cent of the construction costs of that road. In regard to the construction itself, the time it will take, etc., are matters which are entirely the responsibility of the provincial council. Hon. members must make their representations to the provincial administration.

Once the subsidy has been agreed to, have you no say in the matter?

No.

The matter is really of national importance and I shall appreciate it if the Minister would use his personal influence.

As the hon. member knows, he came to see me privately about the matter and I gave him all the information available. The provincial administration have their difficulties and troubles too. I am convinced in my own mind that they are not deliberately delaying the construction of that road, If the provincial administration can overcome their difficulties they will be prepared to expedite the matter as much as they possibly can.

*I can only tell the hon. member for Bethal-Middelburg (Mr. J. W. Rail) that the panel has not yet reported. They will report to both the advisory committee for civil aviation and to the Minister of Transport. The hon. member has also asked that the civil aviation advisory committee should be expanded to a national board, and that civil aviation should ultimately have its own department. This matter has already been considered by me for I had already received suggestions in this regard from certain associations before I introduced the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill last year. It was felt that at this stage there is no need for it. It is felt that the advisory board is quite representative, that it will serve no purpose to expand it further, and that a national council for civil aviation will virtually have no functions. There is a separate section of the Department of Transport which deals with civil aviation exclusively, and thus far no difficulty has been experienced to take all the necessary steps that have been deemed necessary, and to give all the requisite advice and to make inquiries, to conduct examinations, to carry out inspections, etc. However, if it does appear some time in the future that it should be expanded, the question will most certainly be considered. As regards the subsidies for private feeder air services, this also is a matter that is being considered at the moment by the civil aviation advisory committee. In the last resort it is really a matter for the Minister of Finance, for the subsidy, if granted, will have to be granted by the Treasury. I do not know what the attitude of the Minister of Finance and the Cabinet will be in that connection, but I am awaiting a report of the civil aviation advisory committee.

The hon. member for Simonstown (Mr. Gay) wanted to know whether there were sufficient ship surveyors and whether all the posts had been filled. All the posts have been filled and my Department has made representations for the creation of additional posts. The hon. member also wanted to know whether fishing vessels were adequately inspected, and I agreed with everything that he said in regard to the fishing fleet. As the hon. member knows fishing vessels do not fall under the International Convention but South Africa has its own strict regulations to cover every aspect of the fishing fleet. Before a boat is built the plans have to be submitted to the Department for approval and the boat is under inspection from thence forward. In cases where problems arise or have arisen my Department has consulted with the United Nations consultative organization at Rome where experts on the fishing boats of the world are ready to give advice. The larger trawlers are still being built overseas although smaller trawlers are built in South Africa. All fishing craft are surveyed annually before they are granted a fishing licence. They are inspected afloat and in drydock in respect of hull, machinery, navigational equipment, life-saving equipment and fire-fighting equipment. All other vessels are inspected at yearly or two yearly intervals as required by the International Convention or our own regulations in respect of load lines, life-saving and fire-fighting equipment, and are further under the inspection of the classification societies such as mentioned before, Lloyds, Germanischer Lloyd, Bureau Veritas, etc. Surveyors are stationed at Walvis Bay, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth and Durban and these travel to the smaller port such as Saldanha Bay, Mossel Bay several times a year for the purpose of inspecting craft. By special arrangement with the General Post Office radio inspectors inspect all larger size vessels entering the ports and frequent surveys for renewal of international radio certificates are made on vessels of all nationalities. The smaller vessels are usually equipped with radio telephone. The South African seafaring industry has a very good record in regard to accidents.

*The hon. member for Kempton Park (Mr. F. S. Steyn) has asked that standards should be laid Sown by the Department of Transport for the construction of roads, the erection of traffic interchanges, etc. Of course the Department has its standards for national roads and for special roads, but they vary according to the circumstances. A road constructed by the Provincial Council and carrying much less traffic has totally different standards from those of a national road. But of course the standards fixed by the Department of Transport are within the discretion of the Provincial Administrations and the local authorities that build roads. To the hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. J. D. du P. Basson) I just want to say that the hotel project has been shelved. As regards the atmosphere at Jan Smuts, the question is what is a typical South African atmosphere. The hon. member will find, when he comes through the part for overseas passengers, that there is nothing more typically South African than that. There is one of the most splendid collections of game heads to be found in the country. All the South African game heads are there. That ought to create the proper South African atmosphere for all the overseas passengers who arrive there. There is only one head missing, namely a lion’s head, and I hope to shoot a couple of lions this year and to present them with the heads. We obtained the heads from the old Stock Exchange Building. They had the collection in Johannesburg and when the old Stock Exchange was demolished, they gave all the heads to the Department of Transport as a present.

The hon. member for Green Point (Maj. van der Byl) said that it was a waste of money to build the interchange at the national road Caledon-Hermanus. I don’t think it is a waste of money. It is in the interest of road safety and when freeways are built, interchanges must be built to allow the incoming traffic to get onto the freeway, and these interchanges are built in consultation with the Provincial Administration after a survey has been made, and after a count of the vehicles entering or passing over that crossing has been done. I am assured that the interchange being built at that particular spot is absolutely essential in the interest of road safety.

The argument is that a round-about road would be just the same.

The hon. member must realize that we have got to protect people against themselves. I have already told members on a former occasion that at a railway-crossing for instance, despite the fact that you have flicker-lights there, red lights, people still ignore those lights and come into collision with trains.

I want to ask the hon. Minister one question: I wonder if he could tell me what progress has been made in increasing the number of trains running between Johannesburg and the Bantu townships?

I will make inquiries from the Minister of Railways and I will let the hon. member know.

Vote put and agreed to.

Loan Vote put and agreed to.

Votes 5 to 9 (Lands) to have precedence.

On Vote No. 5,—“Lands”, R1,655,000,

We all regret the circumstances under which the hon. Minister has to take this Vote in the House to-day, and I would like to assure him of the sympathy of millions of people in this country going out to him, as also of the thousands of families on our land settlements whose well-being he fathers. We know the hon. Minister wants to take his Vote in the thorough manner that we have become accustomed, and so I would like to ask him certain information.

We would like to know what progress the Land Board has made as regards valuing the land to be submerged under the Orange River Scheme. We would also like to know under sub-head F “Maintenance and Development of State Land” which covers the control of drift sand, for which an amount of R2,000 is now made available, whether the hon. Minister thinks that this is adequate. I know the hon. Minister flies over these areas, as I also fly over some of these areas between Cape Town and Port Elizabeth, and it seems that an amount of R2,000 is very inadequate. We appreciate that the hon. Minister in certain legislation has taken steps to assure improved conditions and control of our various land settlements. I would like, however, to have some information. Could the hon. Minister inform this House what proportion of land will be allowed to the Bantu under the R36,000,000 Pongola Dam. Hrs the necessary survey been completed, and what area is each erven to comprise? We understand that under sugar not quite the same area is necessary as on the Orange River and in the other areas. We wonder if the area to be allocated to each holding is possibly smaller? We would also like to know how many probationers and settlers the hon. Minister aims at accommodating on this Pongola Settlement and if any progress has been made in placing any further settlers there under the enlarged scheme coming under this Pongola Dam project. I take it that the Bantu area will come under the control of the Minister of Bantu Administration, but if the hon. Minister can give us any information regarding this scheme, it would be appreciated. Could the hon. Minister also give us information as regards the Sand-Vet Irrigation Settlement, and how many holdings are prepared for occupation? We would like to know too if any of these settlers have had to leave the Riet River Settlement on account of the scarcity of water there. We would like to know if the Minister regards the scheduling of water there rs having been excessive, and will he have perhaps to reduce the scheduling, and whether it is going to be possible for settlers who have left to come back to the settlement, or will they be given priority on some other settlement?

We know that the scheduling of ground has been a difficult proposition on many irrigation schemes. Over-scheduling took place on all the Fish River-Sunday River schemes, and then the area had to be de-scheduled. Perhaps the Minister can give us any information as regards the de-scheduling or the allocation of ground on the Riet River, because from the conditions appertaining there and the history of that scheme, it does appear that too much ground was scheduled for irrigation.

I would also like the Minister to answer my usual question on what progress he has made in increasing the holdings of the Boegoeberg Settlement on the Orange River.

What have you got to do with that?

I have always been interested. I think I was the first person to bring the matter to the notice of previous governments, the disability settlers suffered under the Boegoeberg scheme. The area allocated is seven morgen, and it was hopelessly inadequate. The hon. Minister has taken this matter in hand and he has said that he is making provision on the other side of the river so as to make the extension of these plots possible. We appreciate that action.

Now I come to a more entertaining subject. Could the hon. Minister give us information as regards the Zebra Park at Kromhoek under the Vote “National Parks We would like to know how many zebras there are now, and whether the Minister does not think that there is a fear of over-stocking on account of the springbok which have again been introduced there. We all know that the mountain zebra is the most beautiful zebra in Africa, and up to recently it was threatened with extinction. So we are particularly interested in any information the hon. Minister can give us a regards the Zebra Park. There is also the Addo Park where the elephants from all accounts, and from my own observation, are thriving. There is no doubt that they are increasing to such an extent that very soon the area allocated to them is going to be inadequate. Elephants cannot thrive in too restricted an area. The elephant wanders around and I wonder whether the hon. Minister has also made plans for an extension of that park. That park I regard as one of our best game tourist attractions. It is within 30 miles from Port Elizabeth and is easily accessible to tourists, it has the last remnants of our Cape buffalo, the number of which is estimated at 400, but I doubt whether that is correct—but it is a very important park and we appreciate the work the National Park Board has done to develop that park, especially by introducing the eland and other game there, as also the bushbuck. The Minister has taken a great interest in this work and has sought to make provision for adequate funds, and we would appreciate what he can tell us in regard to the development of our national parks.

I want to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Albany (Mr. Bowker) in regard to the Minister’s bereavement.

I should like to touch on a matter which undoubtedly lies near to the heart of the Minister. Here in the Western Province, where we have these beautiful mountains and all kinds of lovely flowers and plants, we find that they are continually being destroyed by fires which occur from year to year. I know that quite a number of the mountain tops belong to the State, but as the result of the whole picture, viz. that with soil conservation certain land may no longer be ploughed because it is too steep, and lies against the mountain slopes, I ask myself whether the hon. the Minister should not consider purchasing some of the mountains in the Western Province for the State while they may still be bought cheaply. We know that disas have practically disappeared. Our proteas in the Western Province are so scarce to-day that they are to be found in only a few spots, and the ixias, or green galoshes, which in my childhood were so plentiful in the Western Province, in the Tulbagh mountains and in the Porterville mountains, are becoming increasingly rare as the result of fires and also as the result of other ways of eradicating them, such as the digging out of bulbs and the injudicious picking of the flowers, not even to mention the nerinas. Is it asking too much that, where we are now so conscious of erecting monuments, the Minister should seriously consider purchasing those areas of the Western Province mountains which must in any case serve as the water sponge, the catchment area for rainwater, and which is not under cultivation, for the State. I suggest it for what it is worth, but I see every year how fires are destroying our mountains.

That brings me to a second point, namely that I see in the Estimates that under “Temporary Labour”, i.e. in so far as the Bantu are concerned, hardly any provision at all is made. Cannot the Department of Lands render us in the Western Province a great service by making more use of temporary Bantu labour in eradicating these weeds, particularly renosterbos which is so imflammable, from the mountains, and perhaps by planting something else in its stead, in consultation with the Department of Agricultural Technical Services, and by making compost of these bushes? These bushes are perhaps the main cause of fires. I personally have had experience of how easily they can be set on fire by lightning. The fire roads which are supposed to be there hardly exist at all. It is so easy to make use of this temporary Bantu labour if there is the necessary co-ordination with the Department of Labour and perhaps in consultation with the Department of Agriculture. During the season when we need labour here, e.g. for grape-picking, etc., we in any case do not have enough labour to supply the needs for temporary labour, and if a reasonable number of labourers are permanently employed by the Department of Lands and are released during those times when the Western Province really needs them for other work, the Minister will be rendering a great service to the Western Province and to South Africa in general. Let us try to preserve our natural beauties for future generations.

There is just one other matter I should like to put to the Minister, and that is perhaps of a local nature, and it is in connection with Voëlvlei. Five years ago I raised the matter in Parliament and inquired regarding the future of the land in the vicinity of Voëlvlei. At the moment it is being leased very uneconomically and forms the breeding-ground of jackal, lynx and other vermin. There we have a few large farms adjacent to each other which will never be used by the Department of Water Affairs. The old argument that the land may not be ploughed because it will pollute the water in Voëlvlei no longer applies, because it so happens that the topography is such that the rainwater does not run into Voëlvlei. I think the Department would do well to reach finality because there we have enough land to give a few young farmers the opportunity to make a good living if the Department is willing to make available for settlement that land which is near the water, or to sell it to the farmers. I hope the Minister will investigate that matter.

I should just like to put one or two small questions to the Minister in regard to the Orange River scheme, both in respect of Van der Kloof and Ruigtevlei. I receive calls and letters daily from people who are affected by the construction of the two dams. The riparian occupiers are not yet quite clear as to which farms will be inundated, but two months ago a start was made with the valuation of land at Ruigtevlei dam, but that work of appraisement was suddenly interrupted. I assume there are reasons as to why the appraisement was not continued. My question to the Minister is whether he cannot make a statement to more or less reassure the people. Cannot he tell us more or less when a start will be made with the valuation. The farmers along the Orange River there are fairly young farmers. They are not very keen to abandon their farming operations, and in the meantime there is speculation in land. There are people who are trying to purchase land in the hope that the State will subsequently have to buy it again and they will then make a big profit on it. That is why the matter is urgent. I suppose that certain difficulties are being experienced in the valuation of the land. A policy has to be adopted and the valuation should be watertight so that difficulties will not arise eventually, but I should like to have it on record from him that there will be no undue delay in the valuation of the land. People are becoming impatient. They would like to make improvements on the land but they do not know whether they will have to get out to-morrow or the day after, and the improvements may then be useless. I hope therefore that the Minister can make a brief statement on the valuation of land along the Orange River above the Van der Kloof and above the Ruigtevlei dams.

I should like to raise with the hon. Minister the question of the sufficiency and accuracy of surveys and departmental maps presently available in regard to State land. We have passed the stage where there is an over-abundance of State land. It is now in short supply and it becomes more valuable by the day as we build larger and larger irrigation schemes and the question arises whether those areas comprising State land are clearly defined and surveyed and mapped with the right degree of accuracy. The problem arises in this form that as a result of certain questions put in the Other Place last year, in regard to the proposed dam at Hluhluwe in Zululand—it appears as a result of those questions and as the result of a White Paper put out by the hon. Minister of Water Affairs, that the scheme there to be put into effect was planned on the basis of the 1:50,000 topographical map and the 1:18,000 map of the trigonometrical survey office. When that scheme was worked out, either as a result of the inaccuracy of the State maps, or as a result of an error in the calculations in the Department of the Minister of Water Affairs, in some instances points were a mile out of position from where they should have been. That immediately raises the question and puts doubt in one’s mind as to the accuracy of the maps upon which those calculations, also by other departments were based. One does not know how old these surveys upon which these maps are based are. One does not know how long ago that was done. But it does raise a doubt in one’s mind whether we have sufficiently accurate surveys of State land at the present time, and because the disposal of State land is assuming an importance to-day which 30 years ago it did not have, I would ask the hon. Minister to, if he is not able to reply immediately, inquire into this question with a view to having more accurate surveys taken so that there can be no disputes over boundaries and matters of that kind in future. The hon. Minister will agree that a lot of this land these days is extremely valuable and it is important that we should have accurately defined land maps of State land in the Republic, wherever it may be, and in Zululand in particular.

There is just one matter I would like to draw the hon. Minister’s attention to and it arises out of the fact that a lot of attention has been given recently to the sub-division of land and the provision of economic units for farming in the future. While we are doing that, we are allowing sub-divisioning to continue that are really endangering farming in many districts. The hon. Minister will call to mind that some years ago, I drew attention to the very factor that I am raising now again, because it continues to exist. Where you have the sub-division of communal grazing ground where the new allotment was separated from the original allotment, the hon. Minister stipulated that that might be sold. What is happening is this, that certain people are acquiring the original allotments and then selling those original allotments and retaining the new allotments, with the result that you get the same uneconomic state of affairs in respect of each of those pieces of ground. That is being done before the transfers are going through, and let me say that I regard it as a nefarious practice by certain speculators. I would like to see the hon. Minister taking steps at the very earliest possible date to put a stop to it, because we cannot continue to have two uneconomic sections of ground, separated, as they are to-day, and a man who is carrying out this practice purchasing the one piece of ground and knowing that the new piece has been allotted, he sells the original allotment. It is a practice that I regard as a bad one. They have got to have the hon. Minister’s permission to do it, but they are being held now by these people who have purchased this land and who carry out this practice. I would honestly urge the hon. Minister to take immediate steps to put a stop to it.

The matter raised by the hon. member for King William’s Town (Mr. Warren) is a matter particular to his area, because this has to do with the cutting up of the old Crown Land there, and as he knows we have had a lot of problems that arose from time to time with regard to that, and I might say that with his very valuable help we managed to iron out a lot of these difficulties, and I will be very glad if he will come to my Department, because what he has mentioned now is something that apparently has arisen now and it was unforeseen as far as I am concerned, and I promise him that I will go into the matter very thoroughly. Mr. Chairman, might I be allowed to start with the last speakers: The hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Cadman) raised the question of certain maps of areas in Zululand which appear to be inaccurate, and he then raised the general question of the accuracy of our system of surveying and mapping in South Africa. As far as the question of surveying is concerned. I think South Africa can be extremely proud of the efficiency of our surveyors and our surveying in South Africa. We are one of the countries where people are very property-conscious and in all the countries where you find people property-conscious, you find that the systems of registration as well as of survey are very accurate. Now I come to the maps. We have in South Africa some of the finest maps, or maps as good as any in the world, but we have not got them for the whole of South Africa yet. The Department of Trigonometrical Survey that is responsible for drawing up maps in South Africa, has got a very efficient staff and some of the most modern machinery for the making of maps you can get anywhere in the world. The hon. member, I take it, knows that maps are no longer made in the old way, because a lot of use is made of aerial-photographs which are reduced to a certain size and then the points are laid down on maps. We are busy with that, but the hon. member will realize that the country is very big and they are working from certain important points, like the Rand and Durban and the Western Province, and also from places öf strategic importance in our defence. We have increased the amount spent on making these maps very considerably, because we have to make a large number also for defence, which were very inaccurate, and that cannot all be done at the same time. I have a map somewhere showing the areas which have already been done. I think about 20 per cent of the total area of South Africa has already been done, and we are going on and the work is being done extremely efficiently. I would like to invite any hon. member to come to our Department of Geometric Survey and see the work being done there. I think they will find it extremely interesting.

*The hon. member for De Aar (Colesberg) (Mr. M. J. de la R. Venter) has raised a ticklish problem. It is always a ticklish question when a dam is built, namely the expropriation of land there. It is not something that can take place immediately, because we cannot start expropriating until we know exactly where the dam walls will come. When we know that, we go ahead as speedily as possible. I give the assurance that I am doing my best to expedite the matter there as much as possible, and the reason is this. When a man knows his land is going to be expropriated, he is like a bird on a twig. He cannot leave until he has received the money for the sale of his land. Therefore he cannot purchase another farm, and he cannot proceed with improvements, because they will be inundated by water. I am always very sorry for those people, and I try to expedite matters as much as possible. There are many difficulties. We stopped the valuations for a time for it came to light that the basis on which we were appraising was not correct. In the long run, I may say, we get very few people who are dissatisfied with the prices that are paid. Of course we do find some who think the Government is a milch cow that can be milked, and we have to take them into account, but we try to expedite the matter as much as possible in regard to all the expropriations.

The hon. member for Sea Point (Mr. J. A. L. Basson) i.a. asked about Voëlvlei. Some time ago I received an application from somebody to purchase a piece of land in the immediate vicinity of Voëlvlei. It was land we are holding on behalf of the Department of Water Affairs. In other words, the land is registered in the name of the Department of Lands, but if Water Affairs says the land is required for their purposes, we cannot sell it; although we may lease it. They objected to the sale of this piece of land, because they said the water coming from there runs into the vlei. Now the hon. member says there are certain areas the water of which does not flow into the vlei. But our general policy is this: When we expropriate land for a dam, we buy from the surrounding owners as much land as we require, and if it leaves them with too little land, we buy the whole farm from them. We are morally obliged to do so. Then we try to consolidate the land we have bought but which is not required for the dam, and to lease or to sell it. That is our general policy. If the hon. member could give Water Affairs the proof that this land is not required for the dam or for its extension, there is nothing in principle to debar us from selling it.

The hon. member also referred to fires on the mountains and the beautiful flowers that are being destroyed. That is true. I do not think it is so much the fire that destroys the flowers. He has mentioned the nerinas. They are always at their best after a fire. Fire stimulates the growth of some of the flowers and assists their germination. I think the majority of our flowers, and the disas particularly, are exterminated by injudicious picking. The people uproot them and when you uproot a bulb, it cannot grow again. I know of places that used to be red with disas when I was a boy, and there is never a fire there, yet there are only a few now. All the mountain-tops belong to the State. Usually private land extends up to where the krantzes begin. I am now referring to the mountains at Worcester, Stellenbosch, Paarl and Hottentots Holland. The hon. member is thinking more of the mountains at Porterville but there they farm right up to the top of the mountain. But the case of all the other mountains, the tops of the mountains were never allotted under deed of grant. But it is terribly difficult to control them. Some years ago we established fire-fighting organizations. At the beginning it seemed as if the people would not take to it, but suddenly all the farmers decided it was a good thing, and now we have these committees from here to beyond Port Elizabeth. We would rather prevent a fire than extinguish it once it is there, and we prevent it by making fire-breaks, etc. But what is still more important, are access roads to the mountains so that when a fire breaks out, you can speedily extinguish it. Take Simonsberg now. I live near Simonsberg. Never a year passed but the whole mountain was on fire, but I think I can rightly say that it is ten or 15 years since last that mountain had a fire, as a consequence not only of the fire-breaks but also of the access roads, so that when a fire does start the people can be there timeously to extinguish it. With this organization, if there is a fire, the people are called up and all the people help and it is very successful.

The hon. member for Albany (Mr. Bowker), who always takes a great interest in land settlement, asked me about Gariep. It is getting on fine. We will be able to place about 120 people there. Some have been placed already, and it has already relieved the pressure on the south bank. The ground there is probably of the best along the Orange River, but as the hon. member knows, you do not get a good return the first year or so, because the ground has to be tamed first. The lots there are double the size of the lots on the soutern side and we have, of course, many applications. We are using it essentially to relieve the congestion on the south bank, but unfortunately many of the people on the south bank who have small allotments and whom we hoped would apply for lots on the north bank say they are too old and do not want to start a new farm, and that they prefer to stay where they are. But quite a number have changed over. We have had to allow new people to come in on account of the fact that the people whose congestion we wished to relieve did not make sufficient use of it.

The hon. member asked me about the zebra park. The zebra park at Cradock is one of the few places where there are mountain zebra left in the world. I think there are 20 zebras in the park and they are increasing, but on the farm adjoining it, belonging to Mr. Michau, there are also a number of zebra. We are negotiating to increase the size of the park considerably, and we hope to incorporate some of the zebras which are not in the park now. As far as I know, there are only three places where mountain zebra are still found, in Cradock, near George, and in my own constituency. Up to 1902 there was a herd of 120 at Piketberg, but they were unfortunately shot out during the Anglo-Boer War by people who mistook them for the enemy. We are very careful in controlling the game there and when they reported to me a week or two ago on the number of springbok in the Addo Park, I mentioned that we should keep very few springbok there. We do not want to allow other game there in great quantities, because although the eland, the rooi hartebees and the springbok do very well there, we want to keep that park essentially as a zebra park, and we do not want to allow too many other game to encroach there. At Addo we are also trying to get more ground. There is a fork of ground belonging to private people which comes into the Addo Park and we are trying to round off the park, which will make it considerably bigger. Of course, a little influence used with my colleague the Minister of Finance will make my proposition easier. The Addo Park now has a very fine collection of animals. There are the elephants which are increasing. If they increase too much we will have to thin them out. There are quite a large number of buffalo, and there are also buffalo outside the park on private land. They have now brought in a number of types of game which were indigenous to that area before, like eland and the rooi hartebees and rhino and hippopotami. Unfortunately the hippopotami had some very serious trouble between the females, and one of the most valuable females was killed by another equally valuable female. We have now discovered some oribi, which are also indigenous there. Fortunately a farmer in my constituency still has some of them, and we will take some of them over. We have not taken bush buck there because there are many bush buck there already. But Addo Park is getting on very well indeed.

The hon. member asked me about driftsand. It has nothing to do with this Vote; it comes under Forestry, but with the permission of the House I will reply to it. We have estimated that there are 54,000 morgen of drift sand in the Republic, which will have to be stabilized. At present we are busy with 16,700 morgen, of which 6,500 morgen have already been stabilized satisfactorily. I appointed a Committee to go into the whole question and to see whether the methods we were using, both from the organizational point of view and the work itself, were satisfactory and they have submitted a report and I think that as the result of the report we will make faster progress than before. But the work is proceeding satisfactorily.

The hon. member wanted to know, in regard to Pongola, whether we would go on with sugar there, and how much of the land there will be given to the Bantu and how many people it can accommodate. In the first place, the number of people who can be accommodated depends on what they farm with. If you farm with sugar, you use considerably more water than for mixed farming. The figures I gave last year showed that if we farmed with sugar we would be able to put about 50,000 morgen under irrigation, and if we went in for mixed farming it might be 60,000 to 65,000 morgen. Last year the sugar position was very bad, and although we started if off as a sugar scheme, we were very chary as to what it would end up as, because if there was going to be a surplus of sugar in South Africa it would be very stupid of us to increase that surplus unnecessarily. However, it seems that the sugar market has taken a change for the better and in all probability we will be able to stick to our first idea to make this a sugar-growing area. It is intended that quite a large section of this land will be used for irrigation by the Bantu. But as the hon. member knows, a Committee has been appointed and it has been taking evidence in Zululand and Northern Natal in regard to what will happen to all the State land there, and this is one of the questions they have to investigate specially, how much of this land which falls under the Pongola scheme will be reserved for the Bantu.

The Sand-Vet scheme is getting on fine. We have already placed 144 people there and as it develops we will place considerably more there. I am not sure what the total number is that we will be able to place there, but it will be between 300 and 400. Of course, when we start with the Orange River scheme we will have a large number of settlers. In passing, I may say that I hope that the Orange River scheme and also the rest of the Sand-Vet scheme will be able to be used for cleaning up the small, uneconomic holdings. In other words, people who have uneconomic holdings will be able to be placed there, and we will be able to consolidate their uneconomic holdings and put other people there. But I explained that matter fully when I introduced the Land Settlement Bill a little while ago. The hon. member asked how many people had to leave the Riet River scheme. I do not think anyone had to leave permanently, but we had applications from a number of people to be allowed to go and work elsewhere, and we gave them all permission, so that they could increase their income. But now I think that most of them are coming back because there is no shortage of water at all now. The dam is 75 per cent full, which means that there is enough water for about two years, and it is hoped that when the Orange River scheme is tackled it will supply the Riet River scheme with water to supplement any water shortage there. The hon. member asked whether we did not give too great an allotment of water. I think we give too much water everywhere. The man who knows how to irrigate, like the man who comes from Oudtshoorn or Calitzdorp, always manages with much less water than an inexperienced man. When I was in charge of Water Affairs, we started selling water as the man used it, and we credited him at the end of the year with the water he did not use, and that had a very beneficial effect. But as far as Riet River is concerned, we have not given out all the plots there are. Quite a lot of them were not allotted during Mr. Conroy’s time because they were afraid there was not sufficient water. But if the water there is increased by the water from the Orange River, it will enable us to consider allotting it all.

We on this side of the House just want to tell the Minister that to-day we sympathize with him. All of us appreciate what he must be going through, and that is why we shall, out of respect, trouble him as little as possible. We just want to say thank you to him for everything he has done for us, particularly in the Eastern Province, and for what he is going to do for the Zebra Park. We are grateful also for the tact he has used in acquiring the lands in the Fish River Valley, and for the manner in which he handled the matter. I just want to tell him that we in the Eastern Province, and I think everybody in South Africa, sympathize with him to-day.

There is one point the Minister touched on which I feel I must reply to. He said he was considering reverting to the original idea of growing sugar under the Pongola scheme. He referred to current conditions in the sugar industry, but I hope that the Minister will take no steps in that regard without consulting the Minister of Economic Affairs and the South African Sugar Association.

We always do it.

As the Minister probably knows, this current expansion may be only a temporary position, and the whole situation could change within six months. We are only able to expand and export at present for two reasons, because the severe winter in Europe has damaged the beet crop there, and because of the difficulties obtaining in the surgar industry in Cuba through the advent of the Castro regime, which resulted in a marked fall in production. That is an area where the climate enables a recovery within 12 or 18 months, and within that period the sugar producers in South Africa might well be back where they were, fighting, as they always have, the difficulties arising from over-production, and trying to find economic markets for our surplus. In those circumstances I would ask the Minister to approach this question of growing sugar and Pongola with great circumspection and not even to consider embarking on that course unless there is general approval of those connected with the sugar industry. I venture to suggest that if the Minister approaches the industry at present they would strongly advise against it, despite the apparently improved position in the overseas sugar market.

I might just point out that my colleague the Minister of Water Affairs has delayed the tempo of construction there for this very reason, and secondly I would like to assure the hon. member that in building any of these dams we always consult Economic Affairs, both Departments of Agriculture, and the industry concerned with the production of the particular article which we think can be produced there, because it is very easy to create surpluses by building a big irrigation scheme. When we decided to go in for sugar there we had the almost enthusiastic agreement of the sugar industry. But the hon. member need not be afraid that we will put up Pongola as a rival to the sugar industry of Natal. We want to work in conjunction with that industry because it is of vast importance to South Africa and it would be very stupid of us to undercut it.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Loan Vote “D”,—“Lands and Settlements”, R 10,410,000,

I should just like to ask one question in regard to the loan to the National Parks Board of Trustees, R 160.000. What is the purpose of that loan?

The rate of interest is the ordinary rate at which the Government lends money. The purpose of the loan is to purchase new areas for the various public parks, to construct more roads and camps and dams and windmills and to construct fences around some of the camps. Those are the main reasons for it.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Revenue Vote No. 6.—“Deeds Offices” R 825.000,

I should like to break a lance for the Deeds Registries, and I do so because I have so much respect for that office. I think we can justifiably say that the Minister and all of us can be proud of that office. It is not only an office that renders important work, but the work is also being done by extremely competent people. The result is that we in South Africa have the most efficient system of registration in the world. Since the earliest times it has been important to us to have title deeds, for we attached great value to our land. It is important also in our economic life because ownership in land passes on the registration thereof. After the Deeds Registries Act was passed, it was provided by regulation that five days after it has been lodged a deed must be registered. It goes without saying that there consequently always is an inducement to the officials in that office to do their work according to that schedule. But it is important also because all who are concerned with it, such as the banks and other organizations, must know in advance when registration will take place. Without it, the financial position will be chaotic.

Every transaction in the Deeds Registry is examined very carefully by the officials of the Deeds Registry themselves with regard to the description of the persons involved, the description of the properties, the extent of it the validity of the transaction, the nature of the transaction and a number of the matters that have to be taken into consideration prior to registration. In addition, the Deeds Registry Officials must see to it that the registration complies with our common law principles as well as all the relevant statutes that may be applicable to the registration of deeds. I have said that we have an extremely efficient system and an excellent staff, but for the very reason that that personnel has rendered such sterling services to South Africa in the past, it has in the meantime become customary to burden the Deeds Registry with more and more duties. At the present time we get numerous Acts and ordinances of which the Deeds Registries are aware, and which have to be taken into consideration before registration can be effected. We think e.g. of the townships ordinances, the municipal and divisional council ordinances, the Ribbon Development Act, the Slums Act, the Group Areas Act, the Groups Areas Development Act, the Housing Act, the Water Act, the Native Trust Act and numerous other Acts. The staff of the Deeds Registries have to be acquainted with all those Acts and have to see to it that the, requirements of those Acts are complied with before registration can be effected. We know how many Acts have been passed in this House: we think, e.g. of the Housing Act which was passed here recently, where provision is made for the Deeds Registry to be the safety valve to see to it that the requirements of that Act are duly complied with. As the result of that the Deeds Registry therefore also to a large extent serves as an instrument for carrying out State policy because, as I have said, the Deeds Registry is the safety valve through which that policy is implemented with regard to the registration of titles and other deeds. That means that we should have well-trained people in the Deeds Registries with fairly long experience and a particularly good knowledge of the law because every day in their work they have to deal with lawyers in regard to the registration of deeds. We find also that the Deeds Registry is a very important cog in the State machine that runs quietly from year to year without much being said about the Deeds Registries. But it has come to our attention that much difficulty is being experienced in seeing to it that there always are sufficient trained staff in the Deeds Registries to do the work. We frequently find that when people have been properly trained in the Deeds Registries they receive offers from outside, and that in consequence of that they leave the service and accept other appointments. That is a pity and I think we should try to avoid that. After these many years of training devoted to the staff of the Deeds Registry, it is not desirable that we should lose the Deeds Registry staff, because they have been trained specifically for that work, frequently under very difficult circumstances. We frequently find, as a result of the resignation of officials from the Deeds Registries, that those who remain are so overloaded with work that they simply cannot cope with all the work. Quite recently I ascertained here in the Deeds Registry at Cape Town that the office was no less than four days in arrear with its work. I pointed out earlier on that the regulations provide that deeds must be registered five days after being lodged. They were four days in arrear with their work, and in consequence of that more and more work is loaded upon the remaining officials. I also tried to investigate and asked myself what we could do to make the Department a little more attractive. I made a comparison in the light of our Estimates of Expenditure, and I should like the hon. the Minister to look at page 276, the staff of the Master’s offices. I think that is an office we could very conveniently compare with the Deeds Registry. When one looks at the Master’s Office, one finds that the estimated expenditure of the Master’s Office is a good deal less than that of the Deeds Registry. The personnel in the Master’s Office is considerably smaller than that of the Deeds Registry, and as regards conditions of employment, I think the two are very comparable, save that I can say, from my experience, without the slightest hesitation and without derogating in the least from any other government department, that there surely is not another office in our state machine where so much hard work is done as is done in the Deeds Registry. If one draws a graph of the establishment of the Master’s Office in comparison with that of the Deeds Registry, one finds that in the Master’s Office and in the Deeds Registry there is one official on the highest scale; on the next scale there is no officer in either of the two offices: in the next scale there are four officials in the Master’s Office whereas in the Deeds Registry there is only one official on that scale. In the next scale again there are no officials in either of the offices; in the next scale there are four officers in the Master’s Office and five in the Deeds Registry, and then we find that the number in the Deeds Registry increases tremendously; in other words, on the lower scales there are many more officers in the Deeds Registry in comparison with the number in the Master’s Office. On the next scale there are nine in the Master’s Office and 21 in the Deeds Registry; on the next scale there are only 11 in the Master’s Office and 32 in the Deeds Registry, and as you go further down the scale the position becomes worse. It amounts to this; When one draws a graph of the two, one finds that the funnel created in the case of the Deeds Registry comes in from the outside and becomes narrower with a long tube towards the top. The Deeds Registry has an establishment of 348; the Master’s Office has 256. The Estimates of the Deeds Registry amount to R769,000; that of the Master’s Office amount to only R419,000, but in spite of that there are fewer high positions in the Deeds Registry than in the Master’s Office, with the result that there are not the same opportunities in the Deeds Registry as in the Master’s Office which I used as a comparison. Therefore in the Deeds Registry there are not the same opportunities for these people who have to study and work very hard, to be able to reach the higher rungs of the ladder to a greater extent. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister, in the light of these circumstances, to make some inquiry into the position of the personnel of the Deeds Office.

When the hon. the Minister replies would he indicate why the allocation as far as Pietermaritzburg is concerned is down by R 1,761? I notice that there is a general increase so far as the various Deeds Offices are concerned, and this is what one would expect under present circumstances. Knowing something of the work which is being done in the Deeds Office in Pietermaritzburg I am concerned to see that with the exception of Vryburg, which is down by a few hundred Rand, the allocation for Pietermaritzburg is down by a fairly substantial amount. I do not know whether the Minister can tell us why that drop in expenditure has taken place so far as the Deeds Office in Pietermaritzburg is concerned.

I would like to support the appeal which has been made by the hon. member for Ceres (Mr. Muller.) We can be very proud of the quality of the men who have built up our registration system and we can be tremendously proud of the work they do, but undoubtedly the shortage of staff is causing difficulty throughout the Republic. Very often these officers have to work long hours. It is not in the interest of the public that that should be so. I really do believe that the whole matter should be gone into because I believe that the really splendid work done by this Office cannot be maintained if the officers have to work under the conditions which exist to-day. I trust that the Minister will be prepared to go into this matter to see what can be done.

The hon. member for Ceres (Mr. Muller) has raised quite an important matter here. While he was speaking he sent over to me a graph which is quite impressive but as in the case of most graphs it requires a thorough study to find out what the implications really are. The position does not seem to be quite right to us either, but the way in which the matter is rectified if a department feels that a sub-division of the department is unbalanced, is to call in the Public Service Commission and to cause the work done by the various persons in that department to be evaluated. These evaluations are applicable throughout the Public Service. Hon. members will realize that we cannot, simply because we are sorry for the officials in one department, go along and improve the grading of the posts in that department if the evaluation of the work does not justify it. But we have now asked the inspectorate of the Public Service Commission to examine the whole set-up in the Deeds Office. The inspectorate is doing that at the moment. I hope that we shall have the report in the near future and I can give the hon. member the assurance that we shall act on that report.

Then there is still the question of the shortfall of R 1,500 in the allocation for Pietermaritzburg. Unfortunately I do not have the information here, but I want to assure the hon. member that we shall find out what the reason is for this reduction and let him know.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Revenue Vote No. 8,—“Forestry”, R 1,300,000.

Last year when we dealt with this Vote the Minister gave us some very interesting figures in relation to the amount of South African timber that was being used in the boxwood industry in South Africa; he gave us the percentage of the total amount used in the boxwood industry and I hope he can give us that figure again for the past 12 months and that he will be able to show that that percentage is increasing, because there must be a growing use of boxwood in the fruit industry of South Africa.

Then I should like the hon. the Minister to give us some information with regard to the wattle industry. I make no apologies for asking the Minister again, as we did last year to give us some information as to the position of the wattle industry in relation to overseas markets because we know that the wattle industry is in a very parlous position. The wattle producer was in a very bad position last year as far as quotas were concerned. I think judging by what happened last year we are going to be in an even worse position as producers in the coming year. Many of the small producers will go under if the present small quota is going to be kept as the limit. Many wattle growers have tried to switch to other agricultural products, mainly dairy produce, and there again they have not only come up against over production as far as the markets are concerned, but as everybody in this House knows, prices in the dairy industry dropped last year. The fixed price for the producer was decreased, with the result that those who switched over from the wattle industry to the dairy industry suffered once again. The question is what these people can do to-day. Practically every market that the producer has in this country is over-supplied. Many producers try to go in for the production of maize, but as everybody knows there is tremendous over-production in maize. The Department of Agricultural Technical Services advised the wattle growers to turn to the production of milk and what happened to them? Milk prices dropped considerably in the last year. At the time we dealt with this Vote last year, there was a conference overseas at which we were represented by officials of the Department together with officials representing the overseas producers of quebracho and representatives of the continental producers of chestnut. Of course, it is the Argentine producers of quebracho who have queered the market and caused a drop in the price of tanning products over the whole world. I wonder if the hon. the Minister can tell us whether there is any hope of international conferences arriving at the sort of agreement which we had and which worked so successfully over the years, an agreement which was based on a quota system and a fixed price system. The Minister himself went across to the Argentine but nothing came out of that visit. At the time we discussed the Vote last year, the Minister informed us that there was a conference going on in Europe at that time in relation to tanning material, and I would like the Minister to tell us whether there is any hope of some future conference helping us in that regard, because the wattle producer is in a very bad way at the present time. Sir, last year at the annual general meeting of the S.A. Timber Growers’ Association very interesting papers were read by certain of the manufacturers of timber with regard to the construction of houses constructed entirely from timber. In those papers they dealt not only with the experiments which they had made in relation to the various types of timber and how it should be used and treated to stand up to the extreme weather conditions in this country but also with the prejudice that had to be overcome especially on the part of local authorities who feared the risk of fire where timber houses were situated close together. This prejudice is not confined to local authorities only; we find the same prejudice on the part of the various planning bodies. I wonder whether the hon. the Minister can give us any idea what the attitude of his Department is in relation to houses constructed entirely of timber.

Earlier in this Session the hon. the Minister, in connection with a debate which took place on a private member’s motion, referred to his policy in relation to Government sawmills and their general activity and the part that they play in the economy of the country. The Minister will correct me if I am wrong when I say that the Minister then stated his policy as being in favour of the maintenance and support generally of private enterprise so far as the timber industry was concerned, in certain directions, more particularly with regard to sawmilling and the processing of timber. The Minister went so far as to say that at the appropriate time, sooner or later, his intention was to dispose of the Government sawmills, starting with those which were making no profit or a very small profit, and then gradually going on until the others were disposed of. The question of the processing of timber of course, goes along with that, but I wonder whether the Minister would elaborate on that and tell us precisely what he has in mind so far as that aspect is concerned. Private enterprise, of course, is now coming more and more into the picture so far as sawmilling and processing are concerned, and therefore this becomes a matter of supreme importance to us. I do not want to go into the question of the use of timber at the moment. I have been associated with that aspect of the matter in another capacity. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) (Capt. Henwood) has raised this matter and if the Minister replies to him, perhaps his reply will also answer my questions. Sir, there is one small item on page 28 of the Estimates to which I would like to refer and that is under Head G, where there is a small note which recurs year after year, “subscription to International Union of Forest Research Organizations”, R20. That is such a small amount that while I understand that it may simply be a gesture on the basis of good neighbourliness, it does not seem to mean very much …

It is just a subscription.

The point that I am coming to is what we get for our subscription. You, Mr. Chairman, with the background that you have, will understand the value of research organizations, or organizations which are set up for the purpose of research. That is perhaps the better way to put it. Sir, as I have stressed before in this House, in my opinion money spent on research in connection with all aspects of timber, that is to say, right from the selection of your seed trees, your seed, your sowing, your processing and the final marketing of timber—is money well spent. There is no aspect of it which will not benefit from more research than we have been able to do so far. I simply want to know from the Minister whether we are getting something out of this subscription. Is this an organization which furnishes us with reports from time to time or with the papers which are read before that organization so that we can be kept up to date so far as our own Department of research is concerned; to keep our department of research abreast of the lessons being learned by other departments of research, lessons which may perhaps be learned at perhaps very great expense in other countries. If those lessons are made available to us we then do not have to spend money on original research in our own country. The work will have been done and paid for in some other country and we get the benefit because we are associated with this organization. Are we getting that kind of benefit or are we just paying a subscription as a good-neighbour policy, without getting very much out of it?

I think the hon. member will be surprised to learn how much we are getting for our R20. I think this is probably one of the most profitable investments which anybody has ever made. The International Union of Forest Research Organizations is an organization which undertakes research in forest bibliography, general forest influences, research on site factors, study of foreign plants, technical means of amelioration of forest production (silviculture), forest protection, study of growth and yield and of forest management, forest economics, operational efficiency, mechanical conversion of forest products, etc. All the results which this organization obtains are conveyed to members for a subscription of R20 per annum. I do not know who pays for it but we get the results. I would like to add that as far as our own particular research is concerned, more particularly as applied to our South African conditions we are now doing much more than we have ever done in the past. The grants to our universities have been increased fourfold in the last few years. We have put it to the Treasury, which has accepted this proposition, that forestry in South Africa is becoming a very large industry and that we are entitled to spend more money on research and on advertisement of our products than would be the case ordinarily. Our income from our state forests is very considerable; it amounted to R9,000,000 last year, just from our own forests. The Treasury realizes this and is making more assistance possible. We are undertaking research into the wattle industry through the Natal University and also through the Faculty of Forestry at Stellenbosch as far as silviculture is concerned and we are also doing a lot of research ourselves. We have a very fine developing research station in the Sabie district where they are doing very fine work on selection and reproduction of selective strains.

The hon. member also raised the question of our milling policy. The policy remains exactly as I put it. I just want to make one thing quite clear. The hon. member might have created some apprehension amongst people when he said that it was my policy to get rid of the Government mills. What I said was that we would not in the first place erect any more Government mills; that we would leave that to private enterprise. The only new mills which we might erect would be specialized mills for certain types of timber in which private enterprise is not interested. I said that we were doing away with a number of our smaller mills which were uneconomic, and that we have done already. The increase in the number of mills as between private enterprise and our mills shows that private enterprise is now forging ahead. In 1948 private mills milled 1,500,000 cubic feet; last year they milled 22,500,000 cubic feet. The mills which are operated by the Government milled 12,000,000 cubic feet. They are already 10.000,000 cubic feet a head of us, and I may say that the milling industry is quite satisfied with the arrangements which we have made with them. The hon. member will remember that there was a time when the Government mills milled even more wood than private enterprise did, and then a predecessor of mine who is now the Minister of Transport, made an arrangement with them whereby the wood would be divided on a 50-50 basis; that was the first stage. Then as the private millers came in and improved their machinery, which was very important also, I went a step further and said that we would stop the development of Government mills and leave the milling industry to the private millers.

May I ask you a question before you leave that point? Is private enterprise milling 22,000,000 cubic feet of its own wood?

No, a very large proportion of that is our wood. We are selling it and we will continue to sell it.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) also raised the question of timber houses. There has been a prejudice against timber houses by local bodies and municipalities in South Africa. I do not know why that prejudice is there. I am informed that 70 per cent of the houses in Canada are constructed of timber, or at least that they have bricks for the first few feet and then timber higher up. In certain parts of America it goes up to almost 100 per cent. It differs in parts depending upon the availability of wood. I think it has been established satisfactorily in this country that a timber house lasts just as long as a brick house. A timber house also has certain advantages; it is extremely attractive inside and it is so well insulated that it is cool in summer and warm in winter. The risk of fire is no more serious in the case of a timber house than in the case of a brick one. This statement might be rather unacceptable but I believe that is actually the case. We have been trying to propagate the use of timber houses and there are various associations who are also propagating the further use of wood in this country. We work in close co-operation with them and we also subsidize them to a certain extent. They are doing a great deal of good work to encourage people to build timber houses. They are having a certain amount of success. What is actually taking place is that in some towns people have started to erect timber houses just outside the municipal area. The people within the municipal area see those houses and want to know why they cannot erect similar houses within the municipal area. They then exert pressure on the municipalities and many of these municipalities have revised their old rules. I might also add, not by way of an advertisement, but because we consider it more economical, that the Department intends to build wooden houses in certain areas for its employees. Otherwise it will be a bit anomalous if we who propagate the use of timber build brick houses for our employees in the forests.

The wattle industry has, of course, been in deep waters lately. What we have managed to do as a result of the Wattle Bill which I introduced a few years ago, has been to get the whole industry reorganized. I might just say, although the question was not put to me, that the new board is functioning, the relationship between the new wattle board which consists of a chairman appointed by me who is an official of my Department and the millers, the processors and the producers of wattle-bark is most amicable, much more amicable than ever in the past, and I think as far as that is concerned we can be very satisfied indeed.

We then come to the question of the marketing of wattle. As the hon. member knows quebracho came into the market at a considerably lower price than before and has upset things to a very large extent. I have had talks with the Argentinians and I have sent Mr. Malherbe of my Department to have further talks with them and quite recently unofficial discussions took place in London between members of the quebracho industry, the wattle industry and I think the chestnut industry although they are not so much affected. I think I can say that we went considerably further at the London discussions than before. We hope that in the course of time we will be able to get something done. The quebracho people are in this enviable position that they do not have to plant the trees. You find them in enormous areas in different parts of Argentina; you just erect your factory and start working it. When you have exhausted the supply you move your factory and you start all over again. You have no other costs than the costs connected with the collecting and the processing of this tree. That makes it rather difficult for the wattle industry. I do think, however that we are making progress, perhaps not the progress we should like to make. At any rate we have agreed to exchange information and we are also getting information from them which we did not get before.

The hon. member also asked me about the use of boxwood. The Department produced 1,600.000 cubic feet of boxwood this year. This is about the same as last year. I want to warn the manufacturers of boxwood; they are up against a serious problem indeed and that is cardboard. I think it is just as well that I utter this word of warning. I cannot say that I hold a brief for the one or the other because they are both products of the forest. Cardboard is made by a few large firms only whereas there are probably a few hundred small firms sawing boxwood. The cardboard people are pushing their products very hard and if the boxwood people are not careful they are going to find themselves in difficulties. I received a box of apples the other day in a cardboard box. I have seen grapes packed in cardboard boxes; admittedly it was an experiment, but I have seen it. That was for shipment overseas. The cardboard box is more expensive but it has certain advantages.

When the hon. member spoke about boxwood I also think he had the question of the general production in mind. I might just give a few figures to show the enormous increase in production of wood from our Government plantations; that is wood which is either worked by us or sold. In 1940 we produced 10,000.000 cubic feet of wood and last year we produced 52,000,000 cubic feet. This shows that there has been an enormous increase over this period of 23 years. There was a considerable increase last year. The production in 1958-9 was only 35,500,000 cubic feet. Wood is not a product like mealies where the production varies from year to year. We have had a steady increase except for one year where the production was less than the previous year ard that was due to the war and not due to the non-availability of wood. We are now getting a market for our wood in South Africa because the prejudice against South African wood is disappearing to a large extent. Our wood is graded according to the specifications of the Bureau of Standards and people have come to realize the value of wood with the mark of the Bureau of Standards on it. For the first time there is very close cooperation between the saw-millers on the one hand and those people who use the wood on the other hand. I can say quite frankly that in the olden days people were more interested in imported wood than in South African wood but that has changed completely. The timber merchants are pushing South African woods as enthusiastically as the millers and the growers themselves. I think that has contributed largely to the general sound state of the timber industry in South Africa.

I should appreciate it if the Minister could give us for general information the area which is under forest plantations or the number of trees that have been planted. I should also be pleased if the Minister could inform us what area of forest plantations will be handed over to the control of the future Transkeian Government. Now that the Minister is in a giving-away mood I should like to appeal to his generosity to meet the needs of certain White people in the area which I represent. The Minister holds a considerable extent of almost useless land in that area. It is absolutely useless for afforestation. Bits and pieces of forest land have been sold by him in the Alexandra district and there are numerous pieces in the Bathurst district which are only a menace in that they encourage stock diseases. It would be far better if those pieces of land were sold to the agricultural community. Some of these bits could be turned into useful farms and be to the public advantage of the country generally. These pieces of land can never be of any advantage to the Minister as far as afforestation is concerned. They are actually only a encumberance to his Department.

My principal appeal is in regard to the forestry land which adjoins Bathurst. The inhabitants of Bathurst all own erven and they have the right to run a certain number of stock on the commonage. In previous years that stock had the free run of the adjoining Government forestry ground in extent about 2,000 morgen. Latterly the Government has fenced off that forest area so that the available grazing has become very limited. At the moment there are 18 very decent houses vacant in the village of Bathurst. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to consider making available to the inhabitants of Bathurst this area of forest ground adjoining that village. In the early days there was a dispute in respect of this ground. The inhabitants of that village regarded it as their own property and they were allowed to use it. Latterly, however, the Government has, because of its hunger for land, decided that they, the inhabitants of Bathurst, were not entitled to this land so they fenced it off. This land is of no value to the Department whereas it will be of great advantage to the inhabitants of Bathurst. This is something which will be appreciated for very many years and I appeal to the Minister to give this question his serious consideration.

The hon. member for Albany (Mr. Bowker) should come and see me about this Bathurst question. It is rather a parochial matter to discuss across the floor of the House and quite frankly this is the first time I have heard about it. The hon. member did ask me how much land we have, under, forests and I should like to give him these figures. To-day there are 318,746 moreen of land under afforestation of which 266,094 morgen are under my Department and 52.652 odd morgen under the Native Trust, I might tell the hon. member that we do the work for the Native Trust. It does not belong to the Department of Forestry but we manage it for the Native Trust. During the year 1961-2 we planted at the rate of about 6.400 morgen and we think that the same number of morgen will be planted during the coming financial year.

Can the Minister tell us how much is under pine and how much under gum?

The most is under pine, various varieties of pine. The gums are planted mostly in Zululand where they do particularly well and where they have a specific use. They are also planted where they are not too far from the gold mines because they are used as mine props. They are also planted as fire-belts; the pines being much more inflammable. I cannot however say what the proportion is but as far as we are concerned pines are far in excess of eucalyptus. The excess is not so great in the case of private plantations belonging to the mines for the reason that I have already given.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Loan Vote F,—“Forestry”, R9,600,000,

I refer to (f) Zululand Conservancy. There are a number of districts which fall in the Zululand area. Does the same apply in the case of these districts as in the case of the Native Trust to which the Minister has just referred? As the Minister has said his Department does the work, as far as afforestation is concerned, for the Department of Bantu Administration and Development. I should like to learn from the Minister whether his Department manages all these areas as set out here for the Department’s own account because nowhere do I see the Department being reimbursed for services rendered. Does the Department manage these areas for its own account?

I am informed, yes.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Revenue Vote No. 9,—“Public Works”, R21,688.000,

What I should like to have from the hon. the Minister is information rather than anything else. I should like to have some information in connection with a possible new set-up between his Department and another Government Department, namely the Department of Posts. A statement has been issued by the Government to the effect that the Post Office is going to take over certain functions of the Department of Public Works. In so far as it affects the Department of Posts I shall, of course, deal with the matter under the relevant Vote, but in view of the fact that these two Departments are specifically mentioned in that statement I should like to know what the position is as far as the Department of Public Works is concerned. I think more than 10 per cent of the work that is done by the Department of Public Works is in connection with the Post Office itself. If there is going to be a new set-up, if some of the powers which the Department of Public Works has at present are going to be transferred to the Department of Posts. I should like to hear from the Minister to what extent such powers are going to be transferred; whether this is going to be purely a formality or whether there is a possibility that a portion of the architectural division, the building workers division, etc., of the Department of Public Works is going to be transferred to the Department of Posts. Provision has already been made for a very large building programme as far as the Department of Posts is concerned. Is the Department of Posts going to carry out that programme or is the position simply going to be that the Department of Posts will lay down certain specifications and that Public Works will carry out the work? It will be interesting to know whether this is going to bring about any saving and if so, what saving? I should also like to know how far this new arrangement between the two Departments has progressed. This is the only opportunity that I have to raise this matter.

The change is not as great at all as the hon. member thinks. There were certain respects in which it was difficult to draw a dividing line between the activities of the Department of Posts and those of the Department of Public Works and certain other Departments. A committee was therefore appointed to draw a dividing line. It is true that there are certain works which were formerly done by Public Works and which are now going to be done by the Department of Posts—minor works such as day-to-day repairs. The specifications for large buildings which have to be erected, are drawn up by our architects in co-operation with their engineers. We are simply trying to remove the small hitches with the object of getting the work done more expeditiously.

I should like to extend the same invitation to the Minister of Public Works which I extended to the Minister of Transport on Friday namely that he should visit the East London Airport to study the position there. A serious position has now arisen there as a result of the unprecedented rains we have had. The old apron has been put completely out of action, the apron which adjoins the old buildings, which are a relic of the last war. That apron is now completely out of action and the planes are now landing at the new apron which is right at the other end of the aerodrome. The public has to stand outside in all weather while the plane is being refuelled. They are transported to the old buildings a mile or more away; there is a regular circus of vehicles crossing the runway everytime a plane arrives, as a result of which planes sometimes have to remain circling in the air until the runways are clear. The Minister of Transport has told us that it was not considered worthwhile doing anything to the old area and that the only solution was to get on with the building of the new buildings for which an amount of R260,000 has been allocated, although provision is made in the Estimates for only R50 for this year. On account of the rains the position has now become one of urgency and I hope the Minister for Public Works will give this matter his attention. I shall be very grateful if the Minister will give a statement in connection with this matter.

I want to raise a few points in general under this Vote. Although I want to associate myself to some extent with the remarks made by the hon. member for Orange Grove (Mr. E. G. Malan). I should like to know whether the Minister thinks that the Department of Public Works, particularly the architectural section, is keeping pace with development which is taking place in the rest of the country. To judge from inquiries made with Prisons, Defence and from other Departments where new buildings are required and for which money is already provided in the Estimates, substantial delays take place before actual work can be commenced, delays which are caused by the Department of Public Works in preparing their documents. I want to make it quite clear that I am not in any way criticizing the staff of the Department. It is something which we come up against time and time again where the expansion of the Department is not keeping pace with the activities of the State. If you look at the amounts provided for in the Estimates and in the Loan Estimates which have a bearing on the position although I cannot discuss them at this stage, you find that we are being asked to vote very large amounts of money for building development in practically every Department of State. We have Bantu Administration which is developing; there is Coloured Affairs, Justice, Defence in particular. We are making provision for very, very large sums, a programme with which the present staff will be unable to cope. One of the points I want to put to the hon. Minister is this: Can more use not be made by the Department of outside industry? We have established civil engineering firms in this country who have quantity surveyors, civil engineers, architects, etc., available. Is it not possible to off-load a quantity of this work onto them thus avoiding the red-tape which is slowing down and hampering the Department of Public Works? Like all other Departments, Public Works is tied up with a number of regulations which have been in existence for years until they have become a sort of religion in the Department. In the meantime building techniques and building material are changing almost overnight in the outside world. What used to be a tremendous job two or three years ago is to-day taken in its stride by outside industry, and the buildings outside industry produce are equal to anything we require and comparable to any in the world. I would urge upon the Minister to have that aspect examined with a view to making more use of those facilities which are available in the country. There has been a dearth of work in the building industry; it may be speeding up now but qualified personnel has been available and still is to tackle some of the Government works which are all urgent works. In the majority of cases the fact that this work is not completed is holding up other development in the Department concerned.

Mr. Chairman, hon. members may be surprised that I am standing here where the Deputy-Chairman of Committees usually sits when not in the Chair. In the Committee which is considering the Rules of the House a suggestion was made that members in charge of a Bill or matters before the House, especially Ministers, should sit here so as to have the advantage of the proximity of the officials next to them, and this is really in the way of an experiment to see how the House likes it. That is the reason why I am standing here.

Mr. Chairman, when proceedings were interrupted by the suspension of business, I had been suggesting to the hon. Minister of Public Works to give serious consideration to greater use being made of what one might term the commercial professional resources of the country to help the Department cope with the tremendous plans of development requiring the construction of buildings in some shape or form. One of the benefits which will flow from it is that in many of the cases where proposals have to be translated into an item on the Estimates, the first thing required is that the Public Works Department has to draw up a report covering the aspects of the particular proposal before it can be converted into plans and specifications and that type of thing. A report is first of all forwarded by them on various points, such as whether the site is suitable, whether the necessity for the proposal exists, etc. etc. If one relieves them of a certain amount of the professional planning work which follows after that report is completed, it would to some extent relieve the pressure on the Department. The more one studies them, and sees the many millions of rand provided in the Estimates before us, one realizes that almost every item entails a building of some sort, and in the majority of cases buildings which are extremely important. I can think of half-a-dozen cases in the Peninsula where post office development is being held up, it has been approved of, but is being held up, waiting for plans and specifications. If one thinks only of the Defence Department where there is tremendous expansion, the whole organization is being handicapped as a result of the absence of the huge mass of new buildings required. It is unfair to expect a Department which in itself has had practically no expansion on the technical side—if you compare the figures between this year and last year, you find that the total increase in the architectural branch, the engineering branch and the survey branch of the P.W.D. amounts to four additional staff members for this year, termed as “other staff”. Yet the amount of work involved is out of all recognition when compared with previous years. Therefore I would urge on the hon. Minister to give attention to the greater use of the private civil engineering professional services in the Republic. We have got them. In many cases they can cope with all phases of the extra work. They will relieve some of the pressure, and will tend to speed up the work. I am sure the hon. Minister can place full confidence in those people. You only need to look around and see the amount of building work they have dealt with, monuments to their profession, works of tremendous importance which would be a credit to any country. So there is no question of any doubt in regard to their capability to tackle this work. If we do that, I would suggest that they be given an over-all picture of what the requirements are. Do not tie them up with too much red-tape as to what details they have got to adhere to. Let them produce the answer that will get the particular accommodation that the Department requires. If that answer is satisfactory, let them prepare the remaining documents and get on with the work, the same as they would when working for another client. In other words the Public Works Department becomes their client and the Minister passes the work out to them. I am sure that if that scheme is given consideration the hon. Minister will find there will not only be a substantial speeding-up in the work, but it will allow the next stage, the development of the country which has to proceed from these particular works and buildings to make quicker progress. It will also relieve the work of the Minister’s Department, so that they can tackle other important and urgent work, which only the Department itself can do.

I wish to raise with the hon. Minister the question of housing for married members of the South African Police. In all fairness to this hon. Minister I should say that all the correspondence with which I have been asked to deal with is not with the hon. Minister of Public Works, but with the hon. Minister of Justice, but subject to your ruling, Mr. Chairman, I believe that this is a matter that must be raised with this hon. Minister.

I think the hon. member is in a dilemma. The actual amount voted for these houses would be voted on the Vote of Public Works, but Public Works would only commence building these houses if a sufficiently high priority is given to them by the Department of Justice. I would suggest that the hon. member would be in order to address you, Sir, on this matter on the Vote of the Minister of Justice, although the amount would have to be voted here. At present it is a question of the Department of Justice giving sufficiently high priority to the project to be included here.

Mr. Chairman, if you will allow me to raise this matter when we come to the Justice Vote as suggested by the hon. Minister, I will be quite happy to leave it till then.

Yes.

I should like to support the hon. member for Simonstown (Mr. Gay) with reference to the erection of Government buildings, and I would urge on the hon. Minister of Public Works to give very serious consideration to the employment of civil engineers and architects outside the civil service, if only to get some modern designs. I want to suggest to the hon. Minister that when he next visits Durban, he should go and have a look at the latest Public Works building, viz. the new Magistrate’s Court. If ever there was an example of an old-fashioned designed building and an uninteresting building, it is that building. It was only built last year. It is mainly occupied by the Department of Labour to-day. I do not think the hon. Minister would be very proud of that building. It is an old-fashioned design, uninteresting and drab, and I want to suggest that if buildings are erected for Government Departments we should get some younger men with modern ideas so that a building does not look like a government building and people would ask “Who designed that building?” or “Who designed the other building?” I think the design of public buildings should be a challenge to our young men with new ideas, but there seems to be a tendency in all Government Departments to have a sameness. In recent years the provincial authorities have handed out many of their buildings to different architects, and one has seen that when these architects have had some scope, they have introduced some novel ideas, for instance in regard to school buildings. And I know that in his own Department when outside architects have been called in, one has had the opportunity of seeing a few innovations and new designs. I do suggest that when it comes to buildings erected by the Public Works Department, they should be an advertisement for South Africa, and we should be proud of our South African buildings, and they should have a South African character. There are occasions when we have to keep to the original design, for instance in the case of this House of Parliament where the extensions have to conform with the design of the original building, and here a first-class job was done, but the building when completed had to conform with the design of the original building. But when breaking new ground, when it is a question of a new building on a new site, I do suggest that we should encourage new and modern designs which will be a good advertisement for South Africa and to the Department of Public Works, rather than the old type of building which is unimaginative.

I would like to carry just a little further the point raised by the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Cadman). I agree entirely with what the hon. Minister said that it would be best to raise these matters on the Vote of the Minister concerned. But last year I raised a question of a magistrate’s court in Germiston and I wish to raise it this year. I was told last year that the matter should be raised on the Vote of the Minister of Justice. The Minister of Justice said: Well, there is no provision on the Vote, and in any case it is not a matter for me, it is a matter for the Minister of Public Works. I raise the point, because it appears that it is most important that there should be complete clarity and I hope also that in those circumstances, viz. that when it is urged that priority should be given to the building of a new courthouse or any other public building under any of the posts, it would obviously be convenient to deal with it under that particular Vote, and I wonder whether the hon. Minister can make a statement in that regard in order to clarify the position.

The position is this: I have no cognizance in my Department of any such building until it is placed sufficiently high on the priority list of that particular Department to come under the purvey of the possible works for the next financial year, or that it should be planned for future financial years. But until it comes on the priority list. I have no cognizance of it and I know nothing about it. The Department of Public Works is in so many words the agent for the different Departments, and the placing of it on the priority list is an instruction in the first instance to us to start planning—not necessarily building it. We have a certain amount of funds made available to us and we can go down the priority list of a Department to a certain extent and then we cannot go any further, but if it is on the priority list, we start planning, we start getting ground, etc. But until it comes on that priority list, we have no cognizance of it. Once it is on the priority list, members are perfectly justified in asking how far we have made progress with it and then I will be able to give them the reply, which I can give in respect of a large number of buildings on the list. I do not know whether the hon. member is worried about the Magistrate’s court at Germiston, but I can tell him that the work is proceeding and the estimated cost is R62.000, of which R40,000 will be voted this year.

As far as the airport at East London is concerned, the Department of Transport has instructed us to build the new apron there and at the present time we are busy drawing up plans for the building, and we hope that as soon as they are finished we will be able to proceed with the work. That is why such a small amount is put on the Estimates because the actual work will not be commenced in this financial year.

The hon. Minister referred to the apron, but the apron is already there. I take it he referred to the building.

Yes. the building is being planned, but the actual start of constructing the building will not take place this year.

The hon. members for Simonstown and Pinetown have raised a point which is very important, and it boils down to this, that with the big developments which are taking place in South Africa, the Department of Public Works might be overburdened and that it is trying to do too much, and that we should make greater use of private enterprise, private architects, engineers, quantity-surveyors and so on, to do the work. All that is perfectly true and we are trying to do that at the present time. I may say that we have a panel of architects from which we choose. It is free for anybody to come onto this panel, and we have between 400 and 500 private architects on that panel. To what extent do we make use of them? There are two contracts we enter into with them, either the one or the other. In the one case the private architects, the private quantity-surveyors and the private engineers are entrusted with the full work, or otherwise we work in conjunction. More and more, I might say, we are entrusting them with the full work. But we have got to keep a certain amount of control. Because let me give a hypothetical example. Department A comes along and proves to us that it requires a new administrative building. We say “All right we will build an administrative building for you Then we appoint Mr. X as architect. Now Mr. X goes to that Department and ascertains what their requirements are, and if we do not control that Department A tells Mr. X as to what they require, you will be surprised about the buildings that will go up. They all have grandiose ideas if they are dealing directly with the architect. So the architect has got to come back to us and we have to exercise control. Certain standards of office requirements are laid down, for typists, for first-grade clerks, second-grade clerks, senior clerks, right up to the Minister are laid down, and that is controlled by my Department. That control sometimes takes quite a while, but without that control, and if we should work through the Public Service Commission we would have some beautiful buildings erected at an enormous cost, and possibly very inefficiently planned. But we are doing this, and I might point out to the hon. member that at present we are busy on work to the value of R70,000,000, and of that R50,000,000 is being done by private practising architects, engineers, quantity-surveyors, that is to say two-thirds of the work. Now one might ask whether it cannot be increased to above two-thirds. We can perhaps but not to a very great extent, because the one-third are minor jobs, alterations to buildings, repairs to buildings, adding a room on here, or an office on there, for which it is not necessary or advisable to get a private architect. But for our new works we are to a very large extent relying on private architects, engineers and quantity-surveyors. We are already working in the direction which the hon. member suggested, and for the reason suggested by the hon. member, but not for the one reason suggested by the hon. member for Pinetown, namely that the architects of the Department of Public Works are without imagination, and only the private architect uses his imagination. I am not certain who built the building he complains about, but I would not be surprised if it was a private architect. But in any case we have very good men in the Department, but there is too much work for them to cope with, and we have to put a lot of work out. The same applies to building. We are building more and more by private tender. In fact the only building work the Department actually undertakes to-day is reparation work, small alterations and that sort of thing. All our big contracts are being put out on public tender.

I was very pleased to hear the hon. Minister’s assurance that a large proportion of the work is at present being handed out to the private firms, but I think the hon. Minister put his finger right on the spot that I was trying to get clarified, namely in regard to the red-tape which is sometimes applied to these private firms and which hampers them giving of their best. The hon. Minister said that you have got to comply with certain regulations and standards laid down governing facilities provided for different purposes and officials. I know exactly what that is. I have been in an Admiralty Department for 25 years and seen things tied up with the same sort of bundle of red-tape. Nelson had decided that a room had to be constructed in a certain way and to a certain size and Nelson still decides it to-day—in the Admiralty. But here as the Minister said we have standards laid down, we have specifications laid down. I would not go back so far as to say who decided them. But you have them. People in the Department have not got the time to fiddle around and change those specifications, as they should be changed to meet new conditions. They are tied down by State requirements and State specifications and by what I call a bundle of red-tape. I do not say that the staff in the Minister’s Department have not got imagination. The trouble is that they are so balked by the restrictions which bind them that they are not allowed to use their imagination. That does not apply to the other private enterprise side. I have been a party to many contracts that had to be given out, where we gave it to an outside engineering firm—they can take the whole lot, lock, stock and barrel. If it is a first-class civil engineering firm; they in turn have all the necessary architectural staff, the quantity-surveyors and the civil engineering staff. You give them your rough overall requirements, the number of rooms you require and to what use they are going to be put, and the total over-all cost which may not be exceeded. You give an estimated cost which is your ceiling. Then they fit into that framework the job that you require. They are not hampered by what your Department is hampered with, Mr. Minister. The world is at their feet in regard to new developments in building technique, the world is at their feet with regard to new building materials which often cuts the cost and halves the time of the job. They have all these facilities at their finger tips because they have to show a profit or go under. In their own business concern they have to be able to cut down costs, or their competitors will put them out of business. So they are keen. I believe that if some relaxation were introduced on these lines, if they were given a little more positive freedom of action, so that they are not tied too hard and fast by existing specifications—I know you have got to have these and it would be folly to abandon them, and the Minister has rightly said that you have to exercise control— but within that framework there still remains scope for improvement. In many cases before your own Department or any other Department can embark on the erection of a building, the Minister’s own Department has to report on the groundwork, say exactly what you are going to do and what work it is going to embrace. Until that report is considered and approved of, you cannot start the planning and the architectural work which is later going to be translated into bricks and mortar. Free your Department of some of the routine work. Once the report is finished; free your Department and let the outside business men take on the job which you have approved in principle and in respect of which you have laid down the main characteristics and costs. I believe that it will help to speed up the work and to streamline the work in the Department itself. It will relieve your own officials of a considerable amount of work which they could well do without, and it would help them to meet the tremendous development load particularly in regard to new buildings which is coming about as a result of all these changes in policy which we are dealing with. Take only the defence buildings today. It is impossible to hope that any Department could speedily deal with that expansion. Take the new construction with regard to your Bantu development. Necessary construction with regard to schooling, with regard to education. Take your post office expansion—my own constituency to-day there is need for post office expansion as a result of the development of the naval base. The existing post office is completely out of date and has been so for years. I believe that the matter is now receiving highest priority, by the Postal Department, according to a letter to the local authority. But your Departmental people cannot get to it because they are bogged down with other urgent work. These are the things we want to clear out of the way. Let the Departments do the work they have got to do, but farm out everything that you can put out to private contract. We have got in this country the engineering firms with the necessary ability and experience. The proof in the pudding is in what they have produced, something in building that South Africa can be proud of. We have got that asset. Let us use it and get on with the job.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Loan Vote B.—“Public Works”, R 19,722.000,

I draw the hon. Minister’s attention to an item on page 6 of the Loan Votes, “Additions and Improvements to the Embassy at Washington (D.C.)”. There is a nominal amount of R50, but the improvements are to cost over R500,000. I wonder if the hon. Minister can give us more particulars. The Embassy at Washington, as the Minister knows, is far out of the city, a long way from the centre of the city, and while the accommodation there is somewhat limited, it does seem a considerable sum.

This is a building which we are building for the Department of External Affairs and we are supplying them with what they asked us to supply them with, and that will cost R550,000.

They had the imagination.

No, we have the imagination to carry it out. They had the incentive to ask us for such a large building.

Is it going to be on the existing site?

Yes.

I am sorry to take part in the debate in the exceptional circumstances as far as the hon. the Minister is concerned, but there is a matter which I have to submit to him in the interests of my constituency. I refer to page 32, Loan Vote B, No. (16) “Posts and Telegraphs: Boksburg: New post office”. The original estimate of total cost is R112,000 and the approved costs for 1962-3 is R112,000, the revised estimate of total cost is R112,000 but the Estimates for 1963-4 shows an amount of R50. This is the third year in succession that these figures have appeared as they do here. In other words, it is pretty definite that the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs regards the post office at Boksburg as a matter which deserves high priority. I may say that I led a deputation froms Boksburg to him in 1960 and he then assured us that this matter enjoyed high priority as far as he was concerned and that was also evident from the estimates for the years to which I have referred, namely 1961-2, 1962-3 and again in 1963-4 when an amount of R112,000 was approved every year for the post office. But again it states here that only R50 will be spent in the year 1963-4. There is a long history to this matter. The question of the main post office at Boksburg was already raised in the ’thirties when the late Mr. Walter Madeley was still Minister of Posts and Telegraphs. The post office itself was built towards the end of the last century. In the meantime Boksburg has made progress. It has grown and developed, yes it has even become National. Boksburg has grown in a wonderful way but its post office does it no credit. Boksburg is known as “beautiful Boksburg”, but the one thing which is not to its credit is its post office. The post office reminds me a great deal of one of the lean cows in Pharaoh’ dream. It is not spacious enough. Additional buildings have to be hired and the building itself looks dilapidated. The staff is cramped because it has grown greatly over the years. They are so cramped that they even have to use the lavatories for storage purposes. I should like to learn from the hon. the Minister what the delay is. After I had made representations to the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs in April 1962, he inquired from the Department of Public Works and it appeared that even they regarded the matter as urgent because Public Works telexed back as follows—

That is to say at the end of May 1962—

That raised great expectations in Boksburg, but according to these Estimates nothing is again to be done about it and I should like to learn from the Minister what the reason is for the delay.

I do not think hon. members realize how these things work. The Department of Public Works receives a certain amount of money every year for the erection of public buildings and it is then decided, together with Treasury, how much can be given to each Department according to its needs. We may approve of certain works for, say, the Department of Posts; we are given a certain amount that we can spend in the course of the year. We then take the priority list of the Department of Posts and start at the top of the list, and we then work down the list as far as the funds voted by Parliament permit. We cannot go beyond that. It will not avail the Department of Posts to say that a certain work should have received a higher priority if the Department itself did not give it a sufficiently high priority to be included amongst the works for that particular year. It is very easy for them to say that it enjoys a high priority and then try to put the blame on Public Works, although Public Works are not at all guilty in this matter. We start at the_ top of the list, and gradually the works which are lower down on the list move up on the priority list. This year we are voting the sum of R50 so that we can make a start with this particular work, but it has never enjoyed a sufficiently high priority before to be able to make a start with it. In the meantime we are planning the building but we cannot proceed with the actual building until Parliament has voted the money, and we first have to dispose of those works which enjoy a higher priority. It is easy for them to say that it was given a high priority when they know that we cannot do the work. They passed the buck. They gave a higher priority to other cases. We have reached the stage now where it will come up for consideration and that is why this sum of R50 has been provided for in the Estimates.

But this sum of R50 has stood here unchanged for the past three years.

Unless a certain amount is provided for in the Estimates, we cannot make a start with it. Unless we make provision for it again, this item will fall away. The hon. member should be very pleased therefore that we are making provision for this R50. It is in order to assist him that this sum of R50 appears in the Vote.

Vote put and agreed to.

Precedence given to Revenue Vote No. 20.

On Revenue Vote No. 20.—“Social Welfare and Pensions”, R77,456,000,

I ask for the privilege of the half-hour. One of the most important Votes to be considered by the Committee is that of Social Welfare and Pensions, because it concerns so many persons’ livelihood, and that is why this evening I wish to address the hon. the Minister in regard to his policy with particular reference to Item “K”, war veterans, old age and blind persons’ pensions and disability grants for Whites, which amounts to R39,638,000. This, I believe, is perhaps the first occasion when this Vote is dealt with purely for the White race. It seems that as a result of legislation passed by this House the Department of Social Welfare has become fragmented to such an extent that it mainly deals with White persons. We have seen this Department developing over the years, and we believe that this fragmentation is not in the best interests of that Department. However, I intend to concentrate on the section of the Department which deals with the White people of the Republic.

When we take into account the recent Budget debate and the increases made in the pensions for the Whites, the increase that was received was R30 per annum, but the proviso was that that R30 per annum shall merely be payable to persons who do not possess other assets. Consequently it is another example of the person who has saved during his working life and who has acquired certain assets and who has bought a home for his family being discriminated against, because this R30 is only applicable to those persons who have no assets at all. This came as a great disappointment to a large number of persons drawing the old age pension. When we look at the position we find that the great tragedy of South Africa to-day is that a large number of aged persons are passing the twilight of their lives in abject poverty. There is no need for me to enlarge upon this position, because it is a fact. We know what the increase is in the cost of living. I appreciate that the Government has granted certain increases in the cost-of-living allowances from time to time, but that has lagged behind the cost of living, because the purchasing power of our money has been reduced. It is no good saying that the cost-of-living index is such-and-such and the pensioners’ allowances have been increased by such-and-such an amount. We must look at the position as to how it affects these people in their pockets, and the position is that these people have not sufficient means to live and have to rely to a great extent on charity. I know that the Minister’s view is that in welfare services there must be co-operation between the State, the Church and private charity. I appreciate that position and we on this side would be the last to try to bring about a situation whereby private initiative is stifled, but at the same time it can be stifled by the lack of sufficient funds to continue to function. A number of welfare organizations have to devote almost their entire time to raising funds to keep going, rather than on concentrating on the aims of their association. Consequently, in view of the plight of the pensioner and in the light of the surveys that have been made, I think the State owes a great debt indeed to the contributions of private welfare organizations and Churches. There is an organization like S.A.F.T.A. which assists the aged, but we find that in their annual reports they say that an increasing number of aged persons are finding it impossible to live without assistance from some of these charitable organizations. Particularly in regard to accommodation, surveys have been made and I am sure that hon. members know of many instances where these aged persons are unable to find suitable accommodation and they have to live in back streets in abject poverty. [Interjection.] The hon. member for Rosettenville (Dr. Fisher) says they even live in backyards. I think I might quote from a letter I received from a constituent a few weeks ago, in which this person suggested that the Government should do something to provide homes or flats for the aged, for couples and also for single persons.

The money is available. Why do you not make use of it?

The hon. member will have ample opportunity to address the Committee. I just want to read portion of this letter to show how some of these people are living. The letter says—

This person goes on to state that her room is a drab back room, the only window of which looks on to a dirty backyard, with Native quarters. Here is an example of an old age pensioner who is unable to find suitable accommodation. These persons are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain accommodation at a rate within their means. [Interjections.]

Order!

We know that a number of old buildings are being demolished and replaced by new buildings, and every time an old building, which is often occupied by old people, is demolished they have to try to find other accommodation, and we know how difficult it is to find it at a rental within their means. In my own constituency there are no fewer than four large homes for the aged, which might help the hon. member over there who asked about homes for the aged, and I can tell him that in the one home providing accommodation for old women there are nearly 200 on the waiting-list. These people find it very difficult to find suitable accommodation. Some of these people who are faced with this financial predicament in the twilight of their lives have no alternative but to lower their standard of living. That is why I think it is a pity that more attention is not paid to this position by the Department. I realize that funds are limited. The Minister, I am sure, in his own heart believes that these people should receive more pension. I am sure he does not believe that this is an adequate pension on which to maintain a decent standard of living. But what is restricting the payment of better pensions is the fact that we have in operation today a system of old-age pensions which is noncontributory, and consequently they have to be subject to a means test. We on this side of the House would not be so irresponsible as to suggest that the means test should be abolished immediately, but we do believe that with the introduction of a contributory pension scheme it will be possible to abolish the means test. The present means test discriminates against the person who has made some provision for his old age. Where a person’s income exceeds R312 per annum, he is disqualified from obtaining a pension. Up to R180 per annum a person can obtain the full pension, but thereafter, for every R12 per annum or any portion thereof, their basic pension is reduced. Consequently they get a minimum pension of R12 a month, and in addition a bonus, which is increased whenever the pensions are increased. Those people who have managed to save some money and have invested it are discriminated against. Similarly, in regard to property, the basis of calculation is R2,400, and thereafter the pension is reduced according to the value of the property. Consequently there are people who fail to qualify for a pension, if they have such a property. Property revaluations have now taken place in all the major municipalities and I know of cases where a person applied for a pension eight years ago, before there was a revaluation, and obtained a reduced pension. The person living almost opposite him, after the revaluation, lived in a property which previously was valued more or less the same as that of his neighbour, but with the revaluation he now falls outside the means test and he does not qualify for any pension whatever. I mention this to show the necessity of revising the means test. I believe the Minister could do a great service to the country by appointing an inter-departmental committee to devise ways and means of modifying and relaxing the means test and at the same time it should investigate the possibility of introducing a contributory scheme. The relaxation of the means test is not something new. As far back as 1944 the Select Committee on Social Security recommended strongly that it be relaxed. The other points raised in connection with the means test are all of vital importance to these people, particularly those who find to-day that they just fail to qualify for a pension, because they are not receiving an income which is sufficient for them to survive, and at the same time they are disqualified from receiving any State assistance by way of pension. This is one of the urgent problems facing South Africa. We are told by the Minister of Economic Affairs that the country should spend more so as to boost our economy. I am sure that whatever additional amount these pensioners are paid, they will spend every penny of it, because they have to spend it in order to survive. But they cannot take the advice of the Minister of Economic Affairs to spend more, because they are merely eking out an existence on the present pensions. I believe that if such a committee were appointed, it would be consistent with the Minister’s policy whereby—and I must give credit where credit is due—this Minister has carried out investigations and has appointed a Committee of Inquiry into the treatment of alcoholics, which produced a very illuminating report, so much so that the Government saw fit to incorporate many of those recommendations in legislation. Similarly, an inquiry was held in regard to family allowances and once again a most illuminating report was received and I am quite sure that the Minister, after considering that report very carefully, will see fit to introduce legislation incorporating many of those recommendations. Incidentally, that report also stated that one of the limiting factors in regard to larger families is the fact that some young couples are compelled to assist their parents. That is part of the answer that the Minister often gives to the House when we plead for increased pensions, namely that it is the responsibility of the children to maintain their parents. [Interjections.]

Order!

My plea to the Minister is to appoint such a committee to investigate every possible means of relaxing the means test. I realize it will require the work of an actuary, because it is not a matter which can merely be surmised. This side of the House does not have the available figures to ascertain what the cost will be of relaxing the means test. But this is an important matter and I believe the Minister should take the initiative by instituting such an inter-departmental inquiry.

While mentioning the question of a contributory pension scheme, reading through the reports of the Department of Social Welfare— and I might say that I hope that these reports will become available to the House more often, because the previous report we received was for 1952 to 1959, and thereafter we had this other report covering the period of two years from 1959 to 1962. However, the research that has taken place gives us vital figures to assess what is being done by the Department. In the report covering the period 1952 to 1959, on page 66, it says that the International Social Security Association held a meeting in London in May 1958 which was attended by Mr. I. J. de Villiers of this Department as an observer, and at the same time he studied the contributory social pension scheme of certain European countries, and he also submitted a report. So here we have an official of the Department studying the position overseas, which shows that the Department has taken cognizance of the fact that it is a possible solution to the problem of the increasing number of old persons, which will lead to greater expense as the years go on. So I believe that the Government has seriously considered the matter, but I believe that at this stage, with the increasing amounts—and this only covers the White pensioners—the Government should take some positive steps to ascertain what the position is.

In regard to other points, I know that the Minister has received a report covering the position of the aged which was undertaken by the Department of Education, Arts and Science. Certain information was obtained, but unfortunately the only way that I have been able to read anything concerning this report has been in the Press, because all efforts to obtain a copy of the report, either from the Department of Education or the Department of Social Welfare, have failed. I believe this must be a very interesting document and I hope it will be made available to Members of Parliament who are interested in this problem. One of the important factors divulged here is the present position of the old age pensioner, the increasing number of aged people, which is now something like 10 per cent of the population, and all this shows the urgency of the problem. The hon. the Minister in the Other Place quoted certain figures and said that if the means test were abolished it would mean an expenditure of R75,000,000. I have tried very hard to reconcile these figures, but I am afraid I was unable to do so because I did not have sufficient information. I hope the Minister will give us an indication as to how that figure was arrived at. However, the contributory scheme has been discussed here very often. It is a matter we have raised on numerous occasions. Numerous motions have been moved calling upon the Government to introduce a contributory pension scheme. The point was raised from time to time by various members and we on this side have put forward a suggested scheme on several occasions. I do not wish to repeat that scheme, but I might just mention certain factors which we put forward from time to time. The one is that we believe that a pension could be paid of R40 a month if a contributory scheme was introduced, on the lines whereby the contributions were fixed on a sliding scale. Briefly, this scheme showed that an amount of R25 a month would be the State’s responsibility and would be supplemented by R15 per month by a contributory scheme. The contributions which were suggested in those days when Mr. Pocock was still the member for Sunnyside was that 30 cents a week would be paid by an employee under the age of 21 years and then it would go up on a sliding scale to R1 per week after he reached the age of 30. Various other things have taken place since then, like a change in the ratio in the population. Other schemes have also enjoyed the attention of the House. There is the Swedish system which is partly contributory and partly State-supported and which provides for a basic pension and in addition a supplementary pension, and which is claimed as a right by everybody provided his income from other sources does not exceed a certain amount. There is also the scheme in France and other countries, and we know that the scheme in New Zealand is one of which they are very proud, where they pay an amount of Is. 6d. in the £ for social security, which yields an amount of £4 10s. a week for a single person, and £8 a week for a married couple. That was found to be a practical scheme and I am sure it is not beyond the ingenuity of our South African people and the Department to devise a means whereby such a scheme could be introduced; because with the introduction of such a scheme we can see the eventual abolition of the means test. When we consider the disadvantages of the means test, not only the discrimination against thrifty persons but also the over-payments which occur, it is quite pitiful to see how these old people are suddenly confronted with a letter from the Department stating that due to a change in the circumstances that have come about, they are now liable for a large sum which has been overpaid to them. The Department is very sympathetic but it means that a deduction must be made from their pension, if it is not completely withdrawn, and that aggravates the position of the old people. The question of these over-payments must be very costly to the Administration by the Department. There must be thousands of files in the Department and a tremendous amount of checking must take place to find out whether over-payments have taken place, and that must be a very costly administrative matter indeed, to carry out the provisions of the means test. All these costs could be saved by introducing a contributory pension scheme. Some of the hon. members opposite who do not seem particularly concerned about this and want to make interjections—I hope they read the leading article in the Vaderland on 15 September 1962. This is a translation of the leading article, which says—

This is a very important factor and one which I have tried to stress here this evening in my urging of the Minister to carry out an inter-departmental investigation of the whole question of the means test and the possibility of introducing a contributory pension scheme.

There are other aspects which I believe can also assist to make the lives of these people a little happier. The one is the question of loneliness, which is perhaps the greatest bugbear in old age. I believe that this could be overcome to a large extent by establishing clubs for the aged. In the last report of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions the matter was referred to under “General” on page 52 and certain remarks were made in regard to the subsidization of clubs for the aged, and it ends on the note that the Department recognizes the need for these clubs, but considers it a service which should come from the community. Well, I know that certain local authorities and other organizations have tried to institute such clubs for their aged, but they find that economic factors are the main drawbacks to the establishment of such clubs. I hope the Minister will give further consideration to this aspect and see whether it is not possible to grant some form of financial assistance to those organizations which wish to establish such a club. That would help a great deal to overcome the problem of loneliness.

There is another matter I should like to raise with the Minister, and that is the private pension fund. Hon. members opposite have said from time to time that it is their policy to encourage private pension funds. I agree, and indeed it is consistent with our point of view that a person making some contribution to a fund then becomes entitled to a pension as of right and not merely as a privilege. However, there are certain drawbacks in regard to these private pension funds. We know that some unemployed persons find it almost impossible to obtain employment with large concerns which have pension funds but which limit the age to 45 years. These persons are left out of these pension schemes, even if they manage to secure employment with such a firm. However, the Minister replied to a question that I put to the Minister of Finance on Friday, 4 May 1962, where I asked him the number of pension funds registered with the Registrar. One question I asked was whether any special steps have been taken or are contemplated by the Department to encourage the establishment of private pension funds. The answer was no; no special steps were being taken or contemplated, apart from certain tax concessions already enjoyed in respect of contributions to a pension fund. So I would like to know what the Government is actually doing to encourage private pension funds. The amount voted here also affects the position of a contributory pension scheme, because the more persons that are covered by a form of insurance or by contributing to a fund the more people will be able to spend the twilight of their years in some security. After all, security in old age is perhaps the corner-stone in any system of social security. In South Africa we have a modified form of social security. We do not have a welfare State, and we on this side do not want a welfare State, because there are great disadvantages in having a welfare State, but at the same time we must see that adequate provision is made for those persons in need of State assistance.

Another point on which I should like to have information from the Minister is in regard to the investigations being carried out. I realize that the services of an actuary will be required and I am interested to see that in the Estimates before us, on page 90, under Miscellaneous Expenses, there is an item “Fees for Actuarial Services, R55,000”. For the previous year the amount was R17,000. There has, therefore, been a considerable increase. [Time limit.]

Having listened to the remarks of the previous speaker, who has tried to paint a very sombre picture to us of the conditions under which the aged have to live, I think we are all sorry that they have to live under those conditions, but at the same time we say that we are grateful that we now have a Government which has ameliorated their lot to such an extent, because if the Government had not done that I wonder what the position of those people would have been to-day. We know that over the past 10 years, from 1953 to 1963, no fewer than ten concessions have been granted. In 1954, for example, the basic pension was supplemented by bonuses amounting to R84, and since then there have been further bonus additions which in 1962 amounted to R66, and apart from that there has also been a constant relaxation of the means test. If the previous speaker goes into the position carefully, he will have to admit that big concessions have been made in respect of the means test. He himself referred to the fact that in 1947 the limit was R184 per annum. But at the moment it stands at R312. That means that since 1947 there has been an increase of 80 per cent, while the cost-of-living index has risen by 68.2 per cent. In the case of oudstryders there has been an increase of 257.7 per cent. Sir, there are many questions that we should like to ask in connection with the means test. We constantly ask ourselves whether it is not possible to apply the means test in such a way that a much greater number of people can become eligible for the old-age pension. But we must concede that that is not a very easy task. If we work it out actuarially and make the test easier, a larger number of people will become eligible, and we must take into account the financial carrying capacity of the country. I think the aged themselves realize that in the circumstances as much as possible is being done to ameliorate their lot. But while we are on the subject of the means test, I would like to put a few questions to the Minister. I should like to know whether in the light of a recent survey made by the Educational and Social Research Bureau into the living conditions of the aged, his Department is going to make further inquiries into the possibility of bringing about further improvements to the existing means test. The previous speaker also referred to that report, and I just want to know whether further investigations are going to be made by the Department. Then I should also like to ask the Minister whether benefits are not likely to flow from a simplification of the whole system. The previous speaker has also pointed out that an involved formula has been built up over the years. Would it not be possible to simplify the whole formula and in that way save a great deal of manpower while at the same time simplifying the whole process? Then I should like to ask the Minister whether in spite of everything that has been said investigations cannot again be instituted into the methods used in respect of the means test, as well as the possibility of a contributory pension scheme. The previous speaker had referred to the fact that the United Party Government repeatedly went into this matter in the past. One of their prominent Ministers of Social Welfare, the late Mr. Hofmeyr, when it was proposed at the time that a contributory pension scheme should be introduced, rejected it as impracticable. I want to know whether somebody cannot be sent overseas or whether the Minister himself cannot go overseas to find out whether something cannot be done to improve this position. The previous speaker only emphasized the position of the aged. It is right, of course, that we should take the aged into consideration. We rejoice over the improved housing which has been provided for the aged. Do you know, Sir, that in 1948 there were 25 old-age homes for all the different races in this country. Since this Government has come into power that number has been more than quadrupled. I want to ask the Minister pertinently whether there has ever been a single case where the building of an old-age home or the equipment of an old-age home has been turned down as the result of a shortage of funds. I personally have not heard of a single case. We note that this matter is receiving the attention of the Minister and his Department.

We are particularly glad that this work is not being done by the State alone. We hope that the Minister and his Department will see to it that the churches and welfare organizations come into their own more and more in this sphere. The State should do this work together with these welfare organizations and the churches.

And now we come to the question of family care and child care. The previous speaker concentrated largely on the aged. We know that the numbers of these people are increasing because the average person to-day lives to a riper age because of improved medical facilities. We are glad that in this connection the Department has recently conducted important investigations.

Here I also want to refer to the Piek Committee. This was also referred to by the previous speaker. This Committee brought out an important report with regard to family allowances. Then there is the report of the Brummer Committee which has also helped to create a sounder family structure. The necessity for a sound family structure is also emphasized in the latest report of the Department itself. There it is stated—

That is the matter that we should emphasize in particular. That is also the task on which the Department has concentrated particularly in recent times. I want to express our gratitude and our appreciation of the increased maintenance allowance for children who are cared for in children’s homes. Although this concession is not as great as we should have liked it to be, it is welcomed by every one of these children’s homes and by every one of the welfare organizations who are concerned with this matter and by every one of the churches interested in this matter. But the churches and the welfare organizations must also make their contribution. The State has already made a great contribution. The year before last a commission was appointed by the churches, and it was then found that the cost per child per annum was in the neighbourhood of R340. Of this amount the State provided 66 per cent. We are grateful for this contribution and we hope the welfare organizations and the churches will also make their contribution.

It was recommended by the Piek Committee that a body should be instituted to formulate family policy. I should like to know whether, when the National Welfare Council is re-constituted, steps cannot be taken to see that one of its branches concentrates its attention on this matter. [Time limit.]

This is a Vote under which we all are trying to do something for our fellow men. I differ from the hon. member for Kimberley (South) in only one respect. I agree with everything he said about family life, but I am a more practical man than he is, I think. He thinks that more than enough has already been done for the old-age pensioner and others. That is perhaps not fair. He thinks the Government has done as much as it could. This side of the House, however, does not think so and this is the only point on which I differ from the hon. member.

I want to talk to-night on a subject on which I have talked before, namely, the War Pensions Act, i.e. the Act which applies to all ex-servicemen and also the new trainees. I want to talk about the Minister’s policy under this Act as it affects ex-servicemen of the previous wars and the man who is being trained to-day and who will be the ex-serviceman of the next war. To-day we are a country in arms. The Minister knows from his own family’s history that when a country is in arms and a war comes casualties result. In 1948 I had to lead a deputation to the late Klasie Havenga, who had then just taken over the Ministry of Finance. Pensions were then under that Department. Mr. Havenga. who is a man for whom every ex-serviceman of this country had, still has, and will for ever have the greatest regard, listened to my case. Certain promises had been made, but then there came a change of Government and these promises had to be redeemed. Klasie said to me, “Ross, do not worry. All the promises made by the country to the ex-servicemen will be redeemed.” He then told me that there was one thing on his conscience, namely, the war veteran, his old comrade, and the war veteran’s pension. In those days this pension was the same as the old-age pension, but Mr. Havenga intended to give him a further £4 per month. He wanted to know what we thought about it. When Governments have wars men suffer. This Minister’s family, I believe, suffered greatly during the Boer War as I call it.

The English War!

I call it the Boer War; you can call it what you like.

Order, order! The hon. member must address the Chair.

I ask this Minister to take up the same attitude to the men who served during the war as Mr. Havenga took up …

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. The row coming from this corner is unbearable.

Order, order!

I want to deal with that shameful clause in our war pensions legislation dealing with the so-called time limits. This does not only affect the men who served …

Order! The hon. member cannot discuss legislation which has already been adopted by this Parliament.

No, Sir, I am not doing that. I am discussing the Minister’s policy. I am only referring to the fact that certain legislation already passed is now going to affect those men serving in new forces. I do not think, therefore, that I am transgressing in any way. This does not affect only the men who served in previous wars, but also those boys now being trained in their country’s service. These will number tens of thousands in the years to come. Now it so happens that the particular Act about which I am talking was recently made to apply also to them.

Ex-servicemen have been fighting this particular injustice for decades. Recently I understand the Minister’s Department informed the S.A. Legion of the B.C.E.S.L. that the Department could not do anything about the removal of the so-called time limits. One can only assume that that was done for financial reasons. I am not asking the Minister to do something in this respect this year, but I want him to do something in future. I just want to give the House the history of those pernicious time limits. I have done it before and I make no apology for doing so again. In 1942 the following definition of “child” was laid down—

In 1943 the definition was changed to—

“Child” means a child of a volunteer born before, during or within five years after the termination of the volunteer’s service.

In 1944 it was changed to read—

In 1946 the definition was further amended to mean—

Exactly the same history applies with respect to the definition of a “widow”. Now when gentlemen on the other side with such alacrity vote something like R170,000,000 for defence they do not realize that once the weapons bought by that money are used there will be casualties. It is the duty of the country, including hon. members Opposite, to see that such casualties are looked after.

I have already said that the same history which the definition of “child” underwent, applied to the definition of “widow”. To-day “widow” is defined as the widow of a man, only if he married her within ten years of his discharge. Just let me give the House the actual position in which we now find ourselves. Firstly, if any war pensioner marries more than ten years after his discharge, or if any of his children are born more than ten years after his discharge, he is not entitled to the allowances laid down for them under the Act. I want to remind you, Mr. Chairman, that these provisions also apply to those fellows who are now being trained for the defence of our country.

There is another point. Should a war disability pensioner who married after the time limit of ten years, die from the effects of his disability, his wife and children will receive no benefits whatever under this Act. Perhaps you, Mr. Chairman, can find logic in that; I cannot. The payment of family allowances to disability pensioners is a principle which has been accepted right throughout the civilized world. Now I should like to ask the Minister where the logic is in making pensions payable to some wives but not to others? Where is the logic in that, where the basis of such pension is war disability, caused through service to your country? [Time limit.]

I should like to bring one aspect of child care to the notice of the hon. the Minister. Before doing so, however, I feel that I must express my appreciation not only to the Department but also to churches and other bodies which maintain and control children’s homes. In this connection they are doing wonderful work. If there is one thing which proves that a nation is highly civilized, then it is the fact that it provides homes for the care of its children. We have a large number of children’s homes in our country. In this connection there is one matter that I should like to bring to the notice of the Minister, and that is whether there cannot be further specialization in this connection. The children who land in these homes are children who come from unhappy home conditions. That is why we quite frequently find problem children in these institutions. One finds these children in every children’s home. What they need is psychological treatment.

We find that every home has its hostel parents and staff. But at the same time the position is that the members of the staff are not trained psychologists. In the nature of things one cannot expect all children’s homes to have staff who are trained psychologists. Apart from the fact that it would mean a tremendous waste of human material, it would also be a very expensive process, because that type of specialist is entitled to much higher remuneration than the staff attached to these homes to-day. I have already said that we find problem children in every children’s home. What I should like to know is whether it is not possible to bring all these children together and to put them in a special institution where trained psychologists can then be appointed. They can then concentrate on guiding this type of child along the right lines.

I contend that it would be in the interests not only of this type of child that he should receive such treatment, but that it would also be in the interests of the other children in these institutions who come into contact with these problem children. The fact of the matter is simply that where a number of children are thrown together in an institution it is the example set by the naughty child that is followed rather than the example of the child of exemplary behaviour. If children of this type are brought together and placed in a special institution where they can receive special treatment, a large percentage of them can become useful citizens of this country.

I hope that the hon. the Minister will give his attention to this aspect of child care and that this suggestion of mine will eventually bear fruit.

I agree with everything the hon. member for Winburg has said. I only wish I could follow him up in this discussion and to support him in his arguments but I hope he will forgive me if I do not do that at this stage.

When the time for my previous speech ran out, I was saying that the payment of family allowances to disabled military pensioners was a principle which was accepted by the entire civilized world. I also asked where the logic was in making pensions payable to some wives but not to others; why allowances were paid in respect of some children in a family but not in respect of the other children in that family.

The point I now wish to make in regard to the injustice of this pernicious clause is its effect on a heavily disabled volunteer. There are many of these volunteers, and it looks as if we are going to have more in future, who have lost their wives while still requiring constant care and attention. If he remarries after ten years, he will not receive any allowance in respect of his wife. I am not plucking cases out of the blue sky. There are many of them in actual fact. There always are after wars. If this volunteer has children more than ten years afterwards, he will receive no allowance for them either. There are many boys who joined the Army at 18 years of age or even earlier who became casualties. But now there is this one clause. I want to be fair to the Minister and say that the rest of the Act is first class. I cannot understand why this Minister in particular allows this one clause to remain in the legislation. Many men joined while very young. Now, if they became totally disabled, they could not receive any allowance for any children born after ten years. Where is the logic or fairness in this?

Our young men are being conscripted to-day in their tens of thousands. We do not want to see more casualties as a result of a war but should a war come, this blot remains on our pensions legislation. I ask this hon. Minister to give this matter some real consideration for a change. Finance cannot be the trouble. We are providing somewhere near R 170,000,000 for defence. In comparison with this, only about R7,000,000 is provided for war pensions per annum. Can anyone tell me that on that basis the removal of this shocking and pernicious clause …

Order! The hon. member must employ a different approach. He cannot reflect on legislation which has already been adopted.

May I then call it an unfortunate clause. There will be many young men who will be affected by this unfortunate clause. I ask this hon. Minister please to remove this injustice.

This is the only country that still has this clause. It has been a heritage for many years. In Rhodesia such a clause was removed in 1958; Australia never had it in respect of Second World War ex-servicemen and removed it for the First World War ex-servicemen in 1950; Canada did not have it for Second World War ex-servicemen and removed it in respect of its First World War ex-servicemen in 1958; New Zealand never had these time limits although there was a provision there making it possible to check on possible death-bed marriages. That was very easily dealt with. In the United Kingdom the time limit was abolished in 1946. In South Africa there is no justification whatever for retaining it any longer.

I repeat: We are a nation at arms. This clause constitutes a grievance which ex-servicemen will never forget. Just as Klasie Havenga did not forget for 40-odd years, so will the ex-servicemen not forget. We are now on a war footing and this question must be given attention. We hope another war will not come, but obviously there is such a possibility; otherwise we would not be spending all this money on defence.

I hope the Minister of Defence will support my plea and that the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions will give us his reasons for his decision if he cannot meet this plea. It cannot be justified on the ground of a lack of funds.

As happens year after year, I have once again listened to this debate, particularly to the contribution of the hon. member for Umbilo (Mr. Oldfield). The hon. the member for Umbilo regularly opens the debate on this Vote with a degree of vehemence which, coming from him, surprises me. After all, he is a person who takes an intense interest in the matters with which we are dealing here. If there is one person who appreciates the hon. member’s interest in these matters, and particularly his interest in the less-privileged people of our country, then it is I. And if there is one person who knows that I appreciate it, it is the hon. member himself. In spite of that he comes along every year and opens the debate on this Vote on an aggressive note which, as I have already said, surprises me.

That is not so.

In that case I cannot quite understand the hon. member. I do not want to do an injustice to him, and he knows that. All I want to do is to remind him that in the first portion of his speech he alleged that very little had been done. He stated that the improvements which have been brought about are so slight that they amount to practically nothing. He talked about “discrimination against people living in poverty

I talked about “discrimination between the aged as regards the provision which is being made for them”.

The hon. member knows that I will deal with him fairly. He also talked about the “small increases notwithstanding the greater increases in the cost of living”. But surely the hon. member has repeatedly heard the figures which were again mentioned by the hon. member for Kimberley (South) this evening. According to those figures the increased concessions granted by the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions far exceed the rise in the cost of living. The figures which were given here this evening have been given to the House before. I personally have done so repeatedly. But then the hon. member comes along and says: “These people cannot survive without some form of charity.” That was a cutting remark.

But I do not propose to argue with the hon. member about these matters in a spirit of malice. I should like to give him the total concessions. The total provision in the Social Welfare and Pensions Vote, excluding social pensions and allowances to Coloureds and Indians, for the financial year 1958-9 was R60,833,000 in comparison with R80,041,000 for the financial year 1963-4, that is to say, an increase of R 19,000,000. In the light of these figures, can the hon. member say that the sentences which I quoted from his speech reflect the correct position?

May I ask the Minister a question? Does the hon. the Minister realize that although the figures he quoted may sound great, by the time they get into the pockets of the pensioners, they are extremely small?

I can reply to that in a spirit of goodwill and understanding by saying that I do realize it. As a matter of fact, I have said so year after year. But I also said that the rendering of assistance to the underprivileged was not solely the duty of the State. That was acknowledged by the hon. member for Umbilo.

He said that he was supporting the idea which I have been propagating all these years and that is that social welfare services should be the joint responsibility of the State, the welfare organizations and private initiative. I gave reasons time and again why I thought that that should be so. And the hon. member for Umbilo conceded that in the latter part of his speech.

*The hon. member for Umbilo also referred to what I said in the Other Place, viz., that hon. members, in spite of any doubts they may have, must in any case come to the conclusion that as far as I and my Department are concerned we approach the activities of this Department in a spirit of goodwill and willingness. They know that this is a difficult Department. It consists of a multiplicity of sections, as in the case of no other Department. It is a Department with Estimates larger than those of any other Department, except Defence. It is a Department which has to make administrative arrangements in connection with all matters concerning the over-payment of small sums of money to hundreds of people every month.

I do not want to summarize again what has been done through the years in regard to bringing about improvements. The hon. member for Kimberley (South) has already done so. I have a list here of the concessions granted since 1953. I know that every time we make concessions the pensioners appreciate it, and I also know that in his heart the hon. member for Umbilo also appreciates it.. There is one problem with which this Department has to cope, and that is the multiplicity of activities in its administration. We have to deal with all the problem cases throughout the country, from the cradle to the grave. We have to deal with those cases as individual cases. We cannot deal with them unsympathetically, because we are dealing with human beings. From the very nature of the activities of the Department, we continually have to make new investigations, investigations into each separate case, apart from the investigations with which we are continually occupied in regard to improving the position of the less privileged, the aged, and the children who are supported by the State.

One of the things which has kept us very busy through the years is the special investigations we have had to institute from time to time in regard to the application of the means test in the case of pensioners. That is not a matter which can be disposed of in a year. I want to take this Committee into my confidence. I want to tell hon. members that after several years of thorough study, my Department has come to the conclusion that this whole system should be simplified as far as possible. Hon. members will allow me to make a short statement in regard to the simplified system we envisage. Apart from what I am now going to say, I want to give hon. members the assurance that as soon as the details of this system have been worked out further, I will and a copy of this system’ to every member of this House and of the Senate. Then if, when we assemble again next year, hon. members tell me that improvements made be made here or there, I will appreciate it very much. I think this Vote is par excellence one where we should ignore everything else and just concentrate on the interests of those people whose care is entrusted to us.

Due to the complicated formula of calculating social pensions which has developed over the years, and because of the time and labour involved in lengthy investigations which in terms of the existing formula have to be made, and because of the accompanying growing staff problems, a simplified system has been evolved which will be introduced within the next few months. I do not want to go into details and weary the House with details of a technical nature, but I just want to mention a few of the most important changes. Some of these changes may under given circumstances directly or indirectly benefit some pensioners, probably not too much, and this benefit is purely coincidental. It was not deliberately aimed at. I just want to mention a few of these changes. The determination of the value of assets will now be ignored, and the basic pension will be determined only by the unencumbered value of all assets. That means that all investigations as to the use to which assets are put will be eliminated. As hon. members will understand, assets vary in value, and if one continually has to institute investigations in connection with those assets, one gets a variation in the amount of the pension. We are now eliminating that and the value of the assets will be determined according to one factor only, viz., the unencumbered value. We all know that the unencumbered value of any asset is its true value. That is the first change.

Secondly, instead of trying to ascertain the self-support of a person and his net income, e.g. from agriculture, such support and net income will in future in all cases be calculated at R144 per annum. When I have completed my statement. I will explain a few of these figures. Thirdly, a more uniform basis in respect of assets which are alienated will in future be applied, viz; a diminution in value of R500 per annum per person will be allowed for every year which elapses from the beginning of the year in which the asset was alienated. Say, for example, a person has alienated an asset of R2,000, then that R2,000 will decrease annually by R500 until it completely disappears after four years. This is a very sound system which is being applied here.

Fourthly, the income derived from casual work and unemployment insurance benefits will in future be calculated on an annual basis instead of calculating this income over every separate period within a period of 12 months. Perhaps I should briefly explain this. If a person now draws unemployment insurance benefits for three weeks or six weeks or two months, that amount is calculated at so much per month and he perhaps loses his pension, or his pension is reduced accordingly. In future we will calculate that income over a period of 12 months. In other words, if over a period of three months he earned R36, it will be calculated at the rate of R3 per month, and on the basis of R3 per month it cannot affect his pension. That will be to the advantage of the pensioner who can still earn something extra. Usufruct will also in future be calculated according to a simplified formula. A very important change in this new scheme is, inter alia, this, Sir: The whole matter in regard to the repayment of amounts overpaid has been reviewed. Hon. members will remember that every year when my Budget is discussed I ask them to get into touch with me in regard to any case which has come to their notice, and I promise to investigate any specific case. I do not think I am wrong in saying that many of those cases were instances of over-payments. This matter has been thoroughly reviewed. In view of the increasing difficulty in collecting over-payments, which usually results in hardship to the pensioners, and also the heavy expenditure incurred in regard to collecting these over-payments, it has been decided in future to demand repayment only under three circumstances, namely when the Department is of the opinion (a) that there has been deliberate fraud, i.e. when inaccurate statements have been made; (b) when the holders of powers of attorney were responsible and not the applicant himself; and (c) when clerical errors have been made. Any retrospective calculation—and in my opinion this is of great importance— will be made on the basis applicable when the case is adjusted, and it will not be retrospective for longer than three years. One finds cases where it has to be made retrospective for years, and with the best will in the world these people cannot repay the money, and therefore we are not making it retrospective for more than three years.

The main effect of this system which I have now briefly explained to hon. members will be as follows: It will lead to the elimination of certain investigations, which will be welcomed by all pensioners. Hon. members know hºw it irritates pensioners if they are continually subjected to investigations, and the game is just not worth the candle. Secondly. we will have a simplified and improved system which may possibly eliminate clerical mistakes and lead to greater efficiency and speed. Existing benefits remain unchanged, and any additional future benefits will be negligible. Tests were made in regard to various cases, and that is what we found. I may just tell hon. members that with this complicated system, we had, it was physically impossible to calculate everything even when using the Hollerith system. We had the case of a junior official in the office who wrote the following letter to a pensioner: “Your old age pension has been cancelled because you are dead”. That is the sort of thing we sometimes find. This simplified and improved system will eliminate clerical mistakes and will speed things up. The existing benefits will remain unchanged and any future additional expenditure will be negligible. After all the discussions we have had we are convinced that it will result in a saving of time and manpower. It will also result in the elimination of over-payments and the time and labour involved. It will greatly facilitate the eventual mechanization of the section concerned, and simplify it. I think this is a great step forward, the introduction of this simplified system, and we hope that it will bear good fruit.

I said I would tell hon. members where we got certain figures from. In connection with the provision as to the use of assets, tests were made, and the value of the basic pension is practically not affected at all. Say, e.g., a person owns a house. In future we will take into account only the unencumbered value of that house. Previously we always had to make investigations from time to time to determine whether the person occupied that house, whether he let it, what he received as rental, or whether he allowed it to stand unoccupied or gave it to someone else on condition that he could occupy a room himself. The tests which were made proved that this new scheme will amount to the same thing, but with fewer problems and less frustration for the pensioner.

Then instead of trying to ascertain the extent of the self-support of the person and his net income from agriculture, such net income and self-support will in future in all cases be taken at R144 per annum. The position is generally such that the self-support of a person who farms, according to the statistics of my Department, has hitherto been put at R72 per annum per person, and then the net income from agriculture has been added. Experience has taught us that in the majority of such cases of people who farm and who draw pensions, there is only one result, viz. that the estimated income from agriculture is practically nil. That is taking it over a period of a few years; one year it is more and the next year it is less. Instead of continuing these investigations, it will in future be a fixed amount of R144 per annum, irrespective of whether the person is married or not. That is an amount equivalent to the self-support which was assessed formerly in the case of married people. We assessed the married people and came to the same figure.

I briefly want to reply to the request made to me by the hon. member for Umbilo in regard to the committee of inquiry which he requests should be appointed into the operation of the means test and all matters concerning the Department of Social Welfare. I can tell the hon. member for Umbilo that I doubt whether any other Department has been the subject of investigations from time to time over the years as often as this Department has been. In many instances it got no further than an investigation. I said just now that I would deal with this positive contribution towards this debate when he referred with gratification to the investigations instituted by the Brümmer Committee into alcoholism and by the Piek Committee into family allowances. I think those two committees did outstanding work. As far as the Brümmer Committee’s report was concerned, we immediately, as hon. members know, busied ourselves in seeing which of the recommendations we could implement. I may not speak about this, because there is legislation in that regard on the Order Paper. But it was a great step forward to have had such a Committee, and that they were able to make so thorough an investigation into that particular matter. We now have the advantage, on the strength of that comprehensive report, of being able to bring about changes which will considerably improve the position. These improvements will also give effect to the plea made by the hon. member for Kimberley (South), to the effect that in saving the family you save the child, and in saving the child you ensure the future of the nation. We must concentrate our attention on the subject of the structure of families, and remedy the defects there to the best of our ability. Every year I meet the regional heads of my Department, together with the chief officials of my Department. We hold a conference for a week in Pretoria and they each give me a report regarding the matters for which they are responsible. On the last occasion we devoted our attention particularly to the question of family life, and the discussion centred primarily around the prevention of disruption in family life and the restoring of family life after disruption had already taken place.

I want to mention three other matters which are of particular importance. The hon. member for Umbilo mentioned these matters as well, and with the exception of one they are dealt with in the report of the Piek Committee. The one is in connection with the care of the aged. I will see what can be done in regard to this report being made available by the Department of Education, Arts and Science. I received it only a little while ago. I have instructed my officials to study this report thoroughly.

Is it our own report?

Yes, the Department of Education, Arts and Science has a national bureau for educational and welfare research. It is their report, and it contains useful information.

Hon. members will remember that I have said repeatedly that welfare work is not static. Every year under this Vote I have stressed that it varies and changes like the weather. It is like Shelley’s “ ever-changing cloud”. It is something which is constantly changing because it has to be adapted to life’s demands. The regulation of our services must also be determined with an eye to the highest possible standards of social care. The hon. member for Umbilo has now asked for an inter-departmental committee to institute an investigation as to the highest possible standards of social care that can be achieved. I can only say that from time to time we have sent missions overseas which have investigated certain aspects of our pension and old-age problems, as well as our child welfare and family problems. From time to time study tours are undertaken and reports are submitted to us. Then our problems are reconsidered. We endeavour to keep abreast of developments elsewhere in the world. I have now singled out an official from the research section of my Department to make a thorough study of all the systems obtaining in countries outside South Africa in regard to pensions, the care of the aged, in which pensions play a very important role, as well as in connection with the building up of family life and child care. We want to study all these systems thoroughly. I have thought the matter over again and have come to the conclusion that it would be a good thing if I myself went to make investigations in certain countries in Europe where the people have had to cope with the problem of building up the nation again after a period of a devastating war. The reason why I am thinking of going myself is not just to make a study on paper of the systems presently in operation there, but to see how those systems work and to see the circumstances in which those people live to whom the system is being applied. We are very keen to see how they take care of their aged. We have already received various schemes from several countries. Many of those schemes I rejected at once as being impracticable. To give one example: There is Section A which consists of sub-economic cottages; Section A has to be very close to Section B where people live who are no longer able to take such good care of themselves. The people well able to look after themselves live in Section A. Those who need care and nursing are moved over to Section C. When they get ill they go to Section D, the last section. My impression is that this is wrong. It is not right that those old people should think: “To-day I am in A, tomorrow in B, the next day in C,” and so on. I think we must do everything in our power to keep those people within the community so that the community will show an interest in them and so that they, too, can remain interested in the community.

The one aspect which I particularly want to investigate is the question of the care of the physically feeble aged. We have not advanced much as far as the question of their care is concerned. In a short tour of about six weeks we hope to obtain first-hand knowledge, and then to come back and devise a scheme to see how improvements can be brought about. The other questions posed by hon. members I will reply to when the debate is resumed. The hon. member for Winburg put certain questions in connection with children’s institutions. According to him, there are certain children who are virtually problem children. My experience is that a large percentage of them are difficult. I discovered, at such an institution which I opened, that of the I00 children there, almost all of them were children who had been committed and not orphans. Children who have been committed can be so influenced by the environment from which they come that they are not really problem children in themselves, but as the result of the circumstances in which they have been living. That is a matter which we have to take into account. Hon. members are free to express just as much criticism as they like, but it should be done in such a way that we always feel that the State, society, church institutions and the people together bear the burdens of these under-privileged people.