as Acting Chairman, presented a Report of the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders, as follows:

Your Committee, having considered proposed amendments to the Standing Orders, begs to recommend as follows:

Standing Order No. 75

Standing Order No. 76

F. J. LE ROUX, Acting Chairman

Committee Rooms

House of Assembly

23 September 1981.

stated that unless notice of objection to the Report was given at the next sitting of the House, the Report would be considered as adopted.

Mr. Chairman, this is the first opportunity I have to address this House as an elected member. Consequently I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to express my gratitude to the voters who elected me. It is an exceptional honour and privilege for me to represent the constituency of Modderfontein in this House.

Hear, hear!

The defence of the Republic of South Africa is a matter of great national importance. Therefore I wish to express my thanks to hon. members on both sides of this House for not having dragged the S.A. Defence Force into the political arena during the last election. Those who did so, with scant regard for the national interest, and who tried to make cheap and reprehensible political capital out of the Defence issue, in spite of the actions of the S.A. Defence Force which are aimed at ensuring national security, are fortunately not represented in this House.

During our recent visit to the operational area, where we witnessed the culmination of Operation Protea, the Defence spokesman of the various parties reconfirmed this standpoint. I wish to convey my appreciation to all these Defence spokesmen. I wish to reconfirm once again that the policy in connection with the participation of the S.A. Defence Force in politics is set forth in a reply to a question which was put in this House. It is question No. 6 of Tuesday, 6 May 1975, which was put to the then Minister of Defence.

This is also the first opportunity I have to deal with this Vote here in the House. Once again I wish to pay tribute to my predecessor, the hon. the Prime Minister. He dealt with this Vote for 15 years, and with his insight and tact, his strength of purpose and his vision of the future, he established for the Republic of South Africa an effective S.A. Defence Force, and an Armscor, to ensure the national security of our country.

I have just referred to the hon. the Prime Minister’s vision of the future. In military terminology I would describe that attribute of his as follows: In the years 1963 and 1964 the General Assembly of UN instituted a voluntary arms embargo against the Republic of South Africa. At the time the Department of Defence decided that the arms embargo would be circumvented, in other words the sources would be retained and our dependence on those sources would remain, only we would acquire channels through which weapons could still be imported to South Africa. Consequently, when the hon. the Prime Minister became Minister of Defence, this was probably one of the first momentous decisions he had to make. He had to decide to rectify this matter. He then made a decision and caused that decision to be formulated. What it amounted to was that the Republic of South Africa should establish its own arms industry in South Africa and should do so on a permanent basis. Actually, this is very important. During World War II South Africa manufactured certain arms and supplied them to the Allied Forces. But this was of a temporary nature. At the close of World War II those arms manufacturing installations were dismantled. In 1963, however, the hon. the Prime Minister decided that arms manufacture in South Africa would in future have to be established on a permanent basis.

As a result of the establishment of this arms industry we are today assured of the national security of the Republic of South Africa and all its people. When the Security Council of the UN instituted compulsory arms sanctions against South Africa in 1977, and applied these sanctions, we had already established a permanent armaments industry in South Africa, as a result of that farsightedness and as a result of the decision which had already been taken in the late ’sixties. It was a daring decision. In the late ’sixties there were few people who believed that there would be an onslaught on the Republic of South Africa at a later stage. At the time, too, there were few people who believed that compulsory arms sanctions would be instituted against the Republic. Therefore, this is what I would call a vision of the future.

It was no easy task. The national priorities of this country had to be reshuffled. The funds for the establishment of this arms industry had to be found. As a result of that decision, that vision of the future, the Republic of South Africa rests assured today that the physical onslaught on it will not succeed. Therefore we shall not go the way of many other countries in Africa. It is as a result of this efficient Defence Force, and of Armscor, that we are able to discuss our future so calmly in this House today.

I also wish to give my hon. predecessor all due credit for the successful and first-rate action displayed by the S.A. Defence Force in Operation Protea. These are the fruits of his labour that we are plucking. Ninety-four per cent of the arms used in that operation was manufactures in the Republic of South Africa.

Hear, hear!

As Minister of Defence I probably owe the taxpayers of South Africa an explanation of the reasons why defence, as a national cause, requires such a big slice of the Treasury cake. An amount of R2,6 milliard is a vast amount of money. I notice that erroneous reports appeared in certain of our media in regard to this amount and the comparisons which they drew in this connection. I should like to rectify this misunderstanding. Certain things were written and a comparison was drawn between the amount which was appropriated for the 1981-’82 financial year and the one for the previous financial year, 1980-’81. In that specific report it was stated that the amount had increased by 30%. However, if we take note of the amount which was appropriated for the 1980-’81 financial year, we see that the total appropriated amount came to a total of R2,3 milliard. This was the total appropriated amount, plus the amount which was appropriated in the additional appropriation, together with other funds appropriated, for example bonus bonds. This year’s amount totals R2,6 milliard. Therefore, the actual increase so far is approximately 14%. When we think in terms of the inflation rate in South Africa, and in terms of the escalation of prices, this is quite normal. I must point out that the escalation of prices in connection with weapons systems can even exceed 100% without being considered unusual. Consequently I would say that the actual increase is very reasonable. I can give hon. members the assurance that the S.A. Defence Force and Armscor apply meticulous managerial awareness in the spending of these funds. In real terms the amount is therefore R300 million more. If one considers the other national priorities which exist, we must ask ourselves this question: Is this amount too little or is it too much? If one thinks of the financial allocations which have to be made on the national level, I would say it is a tremendously complex process because there are factors, for example the economy, which have to be taken into consideration when it comes to defence. It would be no use our having a lively economy which was growing and flourishing if we had no Defence Force, or security force, which could protect this country from a physical onslaught. Nor would it be of any avail if we had a strong security force which could defend the country against any physical onslaught, and did not have a growing economy, or if the economy was stagnating.

There are other factors which have to be taken into consideration in regard to the allocation of funds. For example there is the escalation of the threat. I am also thinking of factors such as the determination of needs in respect of other spheres and other fields. These are all factors which have to be taken into consideration if we have to make a balanced allocation of funds for the security of our country. I think the Republic of South Africa is entering a very dangerous phase, a phase in which the threat is escalating, and I shall elaborate further on this at a later stage. Despite the escalation of the threat, we have just been going through a period in which the economy of this country grew. In addition we were very successful against Swapo in the physical onslaught sphere with Operation Protea. We seized in the region of R200 million’s worth of arms, weighing approximately 3 000 tons, and approximately 1 000-plus terrorists were killed, which set back the effectiveness of that terrorist organization by approximately one year.

I now ask this question: Does John Citizen understand this situation? Does he understand the situation of an escalation of the threat, a successful military action and economic growth? How does it affect him? If one makes a study of the physical onslaught, we find that it is aimed at our free continued existence. It was instituted—and to my mind this is the important factor—to bring about the violent overthrow of the present State structure. One of these hostile parties, the South ANC, is directly associated with and receives direct support from the Communist Party. Only recently it participated in and assisted with the celebration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Communist Party. Its objectives are not geared to granting the population groups in this country political rights. This terrorist organization has not set its sights on peaceful evolutionary development, but on change by means of a revolutionary overthrow of the State. If one were to study the history of revolutionary warfare, one would find that the aim in all the countries in which it has occurred was the violent overthrow of the constitutional structure of the country. Consequently I want to predict that as social and other adjustments occur in this country, the enemy is going to attempt to intensify the revolutionary climate in South Africa and to capitalize on this climate. The greater the number of adjustments which are made, the more desperate they are going to become, the more their activities will intensify and the more the nature of the targets will begin to differ, from hard targets to soft targets. John Citizen will have to steel himself for this type of climate.

One of the goals of the revolutionary South African ANC is to build up its image with maximum publicity and a minimum effort. Its target is the entire population of the Republic. It is trying, by exerting influence, to break the spirit of the population by creating defeatism. The target is not only a sector of the population; it is the entire population. It is not concerned with faith, population groups or skin colour, it is concerned with the breaking down of morale and creating a situation of surrender. I should like to make an appeal to the media, particularly the Press, to ensure that any publicity given to this hostile organization should be balanced and should not be sensational. That organization is geared to obtaining maximum publicity with a minimum of effort. I should like to refer here to a book compiled by the ANC. The title of this book “The African National Congress in combat over the period January 1979 to April 1981 as observed and reported by the official Press in South Africa and compiled by the ANC.” This book was compiled by duplicating Press reports, sensational Press reports which appeared here in South Africa in respect of sabotage activities. It is being used as propaganda for these revolutionary forces.

They are doing the work of the ANC.

We shall have to guard against having this kind of sensational reporting in our country; we shall have to be careful that we do not build up the image of the terrorist and enhance his prestige. I am making a very friendly appeal to the Press to see to it that balanced reports appear in respect of these matters. I am sure that all of us—the Press included—have the same common goal, viz. to achieve orderly development for the people of this country.

Last week, during the discussion of the Foreign Affairs Vote, the hon. member for Yeoville asked whether the tense situation in Southern Africa was not the result of the fact that it lies midway between the East and the West; whether that was not the reason for the tension. He asked this question with reference to a speech made by Dr. Crocker. He went on to discuss this conflict situation or tense situation further, and he also asked whether it was not as a result of the envisaged independence of South West Africa/Namibia, or whether it was not perhaps as a result of the so-called domino theory. I think that these questions which the hon. member asked are very important questions. I think this is the type of question we should know more about and that this is the type of aspect to which we should give more thought. I have discussed this subject here before, but I wish to refer to it once again.

As point of departure we have to accept that the onslaught here in Southern Africa is communist-inspired, communist-planned and communist-supported. The aim of the onslaught is to gain control over Southern Africa. I am not looking for a communist behind every bush now. On the contrary, I am merely repeating what Russian leaders have said. Stalin said it for the first time in 1923 and Brezhnev subsequently reiterated quite a number of times that what Russia was striving for, what communism was striving for, was world domination. They want to dominate the world. On their way to this ultimate goal they have selected certain interim objectives, and Southern Africa is one of those interim objectives. The reason for Southern Africa’s great importance is, I would say, basically the importance of the strategic minerals which are to be found in Southern Africa. I think that control of the strategic minerals or the strategic treasure-house of the world in Southern Africa acquires even greater significance if we consider what minerals are in fact being exploited here. Actually there are four fundamentally important minerals, i.e. manganese, chrome, platinum and vanadium. The world reserves of these four minerals are situated in Russia and in Southern Africa. If the communists are able to control Southern Africa, then they control the total world reserves of these four strategic minerals, apart from the other minerals which may be exploited here in Southern Africa as a bonus. They will then find themselves in the proverbial situation where they have a stranglehold on the Free World.

There are other reasons, too, why the communists have selected Southern Africa as a very important interim objective. One of these is its geographic situation. It is situated at the southernmost point of Africa. It is at that point where the two important oceans, viz. the Indian and the Atlantic Oceans, meet. That is where the well-known and strategically important Cape sea-route is to be found, 20 km south of Cape Point. That is the point past which between 6 000 and 7 000 ships belonging to the West travel every year. That is the point past which plus-minus 80% of Europe’s oil is conveyed, to say nothing of food and other similarly important commodities. In addition there would be other bonuses if the communists or Russia were to control Southern Africa. Russia would be gaining an infrastructure here, the best in Africa. Just think of South Africa’s five deep-sea harbours, and one of the largest naval harbours in Africa. We have a transportation system which is so extensive that approximately 74% of the total transportation systems in Africa are located in the Republic of South Africa. The other day the hon. the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries said that South Africa was one of seven countries in the world which were net exporters of food—the only country in Africa to do so. These are some of the bonuses they would be getting.

I think there is another bonus—possibly the most important one—and that is the human material it would find here, where so much is being accomplished by so few.

I should like to reply to the question put by the hon. member for Yeoville about the domino tactic. He wanted to know whether that was the reason, and to that I reply categorically that it is. If one analyses the struggle which has taken place here in Southern Africa and one considers the progress which has been made in less than ten years, one finds that the State structures of three countries were overthrown. Those State structures were replaced by other political systems. I am going to summarize the position in these three countries very briefly.

The first is Angola. Next to the Republic of South Africa, Angola is probably one of the richest countries in Africa. It is one of the countries with the greatest potential. And today? Next there is Mozambique, which has almost as great a potential. Today both these countries, Angola and Mozambique, have dictatorial régimes. They are one-party States. These Governments are being bolstered up by tens of thousands of communists, who are there to keep these Governments in power. Virtually the only activity which is taking place in those countries, is the training of terrorists, who are on their way to the Republic of South Africa. If one looks at their economies, one finds that the economies of both countries have been ruined. Whereas they were once exporting countries, they have to import everything today—there are no more exports. There is famine—the people are suffering untold hardships—and there is poverty. There is also civil war. I think one could sum up the situation by saying that chaos is prevailing. This is the tragedy of Africa. It is as the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Information summed up the situation the other day: Africa is dying; it has passed the point of no return.

It would be wise if we learnt our lesson, from this chronicle, the lesson of revolution in Africa. What is the end result? Chaos!

It is debatable whether Zimbabwe is also going the same way. I must point out that the national sport there at present is to import arms and munitions as well as communists. Recently they imported a number of North Korean units. If I had to hazard a prediction, I would say that they are going the same way Angola and Mozambique went. They are sending their pilots and technicians to Russia. In fact, the first group returned recently. To me it is no wonder that a former Minister of that country said that the future pattern of that country had changed drastically. He said that he had never seen the economy of a country collapse so rapidly.

We do not want to see this happening in Zimbabwe. Our economy and their economy is interdependent. It would be a tragedy if Zimbabwe had to go the same way as Angola and Mozambique. It is in the interests of neither South Africa nor Southern Africa that Zimbabwe should also be heading for chaos.

I think I should refresh my memory a little and look up the history of how this development has taken place in Southern Africa during the last few years. When the clouds of revolution appeared on the horizon, the statements, the themes or the slogans of the leaders were: The colonial yoke of the Portugese must be thrown off. That was the popular theme. The terrorists who operated in those countries were communist-supported. They were supposed to liberate these territories. That was the culminating point of the onslaught. And then? As greater progress was made, Rhodesia was also dragged in. It was then said that Rhodesia had an illegal Government; that that country should also be liberated. Then the themes and the slogans were: Let us set Rhodesia straight as well; then the situation in the whole of Southern Africa will be straightened out. As progress was made, South West Africa was in due course dragged in as well, for according to them, matters in that country were not satisfactory either. If one were now to follow the publicity media, one would see that the Republic of South Africa is the culminating point. What does all this actually amount to, Sir? It is the salami theory, or the domino tactic—one cuts off one slice after another; one does not tackle it all at once. First swallow up one country, and then go on to the next.

If we were to analyse these events and the evidence we have found, and try to establish what has actually happened in Southern Africa and then analyse realistically what is going to happen in future, we must take the importance of Southern Africa into consideration. In such an analysis we must take cognizance of the strategic minerals, the situation and the development of this area, and the result will indisputably be that there is an onslaught on the Republic of South Africa. South Africa is the cherry on the top. The culminating point of this onslaught is therefore the Republic of South Africa, while the other territories were merely interim objectives.

If one takes into consideration the progress which has been made during the past ten years in Southern Africa, I think the next five years are of vital importance in the history of the Republic of South Africa, and our actions in many spheres will be decisive. When I speak of spheres, Sir, I am not speaking only of the sphere of security, but also of the constitutional, diplomatic and economic spheres. I believe that time is an extremely important factor, and I also believe that there is not much time left.

One aspect of Operation Protea which astounded me and which to my mind presented indisputable evidence to justify the strike, was the enormous posters which one came across everywhere in the towns, which were aimed at urging the Russians, the Cubans, Swapo and the inhabitants of the country on to destroy the “enemy”. And the enemy was not the South West Africans, but the South Africans. In other words, we were identified as the enemy, as the people who have to be destroyed.

The second conclusion which I would draw from such an analysis is that the communists, the Russians, constitute the brain-power, they are the initiators. They are the force and the supplier behind the effort in Southern Africa to destroy South Africa. I just want to furnish a few examples of what we encountered during Operation Protea. The hot-pursuit operation which turned into an operation to neutralize Swapo was imperative because Swapo had received a protective umbrella of sophisticated equipment and munitions, inter alia, rockets and radar. This would have enabled them to operate in safety under the cover of a protective umbrella and to infiltrate conventionally into northern South West Africa. The directive for Operation Protea was to take action against Swapo and not against the foreigners in Angola or against Fapla, the military wing of the MPLA. For this reason our Air Force dropped pamphlets over the southern area of Angola in which we warned the local population that our troops were entering the territory for one reason only, viz. to track down Swapo. We warned the population to get out of the way and even indicated roads to them on which the territorial forces of South West Africa and the S.A. Defence Force would guarantee their safety and along which they could escape from the area. Forty Russians escaped from Xangogo along these roads, although we were aware of them. However, we did not want to hurt them and allowed them to escape because we did not want to take action against them. Closer to the border, a further 30 Russians escaped via these “safe roads”, and we deliberately allowed them to do so.

A disturbing aspect of this operation, however, was that there were Russians everywhere, even along our borders. The only industry which is practiced in this area is terrorism against South West Africa, but I do not know what the Russians were engaged in doing. The defensive positions there were constructed according to the Russian doctrine, and were manned by Swapo and by Fapla. To tell you the truth, Swapo and Fapla’s defensive positions were intertwined, and their layout was precisely according to Russian strategy. The Russians had gone even further, however, and we received this information from our prisoners of war. The Russians had told the MPLA, Fapla and Swapo that those defensive positions were impenetrable. That was where they would give the South Africans a bloody nose. That was why Swapo came forward with such bravado, halfway through the operation. That was in reality the reason why they came forward. However, they forgot one thing. They did not reckon with the calibre of the troops and the equipment of the South African Defence Force and the South African territorial forces.

Hear, hear!

The maps and tracings which we seized in those defensive positions, showed that their layout was based on Russian strategic doctrine. The commanding officer there was a Russian artillery commander. He directed the artillery fire. He was directly involved in that. The political commissar, who lost his life there, was there to indoctrinate Swapo and the local people with communist ideology, if they had not already been indoctrinated, and to keep them informed of the latest trends. Since I am talking about indoctrination now, I should just like to add that the Russians or communists were out to indoctrinate the local population and to get the people to join the communist party. Our soldiers came across a building with a cellar in which there was a shop where our soldiers found some of the best imported luxury items one could imagine. We must remember that the people outside were suffering from hunger and deprivation. In that shop, however, there was every imaginable item of food. Above the door the inscription in Portugese read: “The Communist Shop”. On the side of the shop there was a notice stating that membership cards of the communist party had to be displayed before one could enter that shop. The Cubans, the East Germans and the Russians had automatic access.

Like “Whites only”.

The whole purpose was to persuade the other people, the rest of the population, to join as well. [Interjections.] I have further evidence of Russian involvement in Southern Africa. [Interjections.] It was reported to me only this morning by the South African Air Force.

Horace, why are you such a nasty man?

They informed me that a maritime patrol aircraft of the South African Air Force had spotted a Soviet naval task force, consisting of a Kara-class guided-missile cruiser, a Krivak-class destroyer and a Kazbek-class support vessel, along our West Coast. Although this has not yet been confirmed, it is nevertheless suspected that two Russian nuclear submarines have rendezvoused with them. At the speed at which they are travelling, they are probably off Cape Agulhas by now on their way round the Cape. For a time this naval group was just off Luanda, engaged in exercises there, but during Operation Protea they moved southwards to a position directly opposite the mouth of the Cunene River. They left that position a few days ago. Although this group does not pose a direct threat to us, they are certainly engaged in a show of solidarity with the Luanda Government, and to bolster the Soviet-supported terrorist movement on the subcontinent.

The third conclusion which one may draw is that the Republic of South Africa is already involved in this struggle. We have deployed troops in the operational area in South West Africa, as everyone knows. I am of the opinion that the intensity of these activities is going to increase and that it is also going to make greater demands on our manpower and financial resources. I am also thoroughly aware of the fact that we shall have to maintain a sound balance between our manpower needs, our security, our economic growth and our prosperity. The utilization of our manpower is a complex problem. Consequently, I wish to thank all hon. members in this House for the patience they have displayed during the investigation on which we in the Defence Force are engaged. I promise that we shall come forward next year with well-thought-out proposals for consideration by this House.

I have said that the intensity of the activities is increasing. The enemy is opening up a second front against the Republic of South Africa, and with this additional front he is engaged in building up certain conventional capacities. In exactly the same way as has happened in Southern Angola, the enemy will offer the terrorists a safe haven, and this could in future compell us to launch another Operation Protea.

In respect of this stepping up of the intensity, I looked at the statistics for the incidents of internal sabotage occurring within the Republic of South Africa. We compared the number of incidents during the last six months of last year with the number of incidents from January to June this year. There was a 200% increase during the latter period. What was even more shocking, however, was that when I compared the number of incidents during June this year with the number of incidents during the first six months of this year, I found that 66% of all the incidents during the first six months of this year had occurred during June.

I come now to the final conclusion which may be drawn from this situation, viz. that the pressure on the Republic is going to increase. The most important conclusion we may draw, can be proved historically, and that is that the onslaught is aimed at the prevailing State structure, i.e. the present South African democratic way of life as represented or symbolized by Parliament. There are not a large number of terrorist organizations. They are more the exception than the rule. However, they are communist-supported. The onslaught by those organizations is aimed at bringing about violent changes here by overthrowing the political structure, instead of pursuing their goals by means of evolutionary, legal, constitutional and peaceful methods.

With this situation of tension which is going to increase there should be no lack of clarity in respect of how the Defence Force should be utilized. How is the Defence Force going to be utilized? The S.A. Defence Force should have the means to preserve and be geared to preserving the highest democratic body, viz. Parliament, and affording it an opportunity to bring about the essential changes in an evolutionary way, so as to meet the reasonable constitutional and cultural needs of our peoples. Hon. members are probably fully aware that this in itself makes comprehensive security demands on the S.A. Defence Force. Allow me therefore to spell out these demands clearly today, so that there may be no misunderstanding about them. The demands made directly and indirectly on the Defence Force by Parliament, and therefore by the State, may, in order to obtain clarity, be reduced to South Africa’s general interests, aspirations and goals. The interests and aspirations of the Republic of South Africa, as approved by Parliament, are embodied in the preamble to our Constitution Act.

†I quote from the preamble to the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, as follows—

To fulfil these aspirations, the aim, mission or goal for our security forces and in particular those of the S.A. Defence Force, should be to ensure the security of the Republic of South Africa against any threats. With such a security aim, the security policy for the Defence Force should contain certain essentials. I am formulating this military or security policy because South Africa has lately been blamed for and accused of many deeds.

*The Republic of South Africa has been, and is still being, blamed for deeds and actions which did not occur or which we were not guilty of. I am referring in particular here to one of our northern neighbouring States. The leader of that country said we were training people to send across the border to overthrow his régime. He also insinuated that it was our aim to destabilize his country. Recently he stated that we were involved in the blowing up of an ammunition dump there. This is all part of the propaganda onslaught on us. Perhaps it testifies to their inability to manage their own affairs, which causes them to hide behind this kind of accusation.

†Sir, I continue. The following should be included in such a military or security policy: Firstly, the security of the Republic of South Africa must be maintained by every possible means at our disposal. Therefore the Defence Force must be prepared to guarantee orderly government by maintaining law and order and securing the country’s borders. Here I should like to reiterate what the hon. the Prime Minister has stated previously—

*This implies that the Republic of South Africa is not pursuing a policy of aggression against any State or group of States, or contemplating any territorial expansion. The security forces must, therefore, guarantee an orderly body politic by maintaining law and order and the integrity of the State with its borders. The S.A. Defence Force is therefore pre-eminently a peace-keeping task force, but owing to the communist threat and the instability which is increasing in Southern Africa, the Defence Force must also be prepared at all times to ensure the security of the territory of the Republic of South Africa by taking offensive pro-active steps. I am referring specifically to this requirement, because the kind of action which has just been taken in Southern Angola with Operation Protea, is evidence of this.

Secondly the body politic of the Republic of South Africa must be protected and safeguarded by every possible means at the disposal of the security forces against any form of foreign or internal revolution, whatever its nature and origin. Even in this connection the taking of pro-active steps may be required. This means that the security forces should protect the people of the country against whatever may constitute a threat to them. It also means that the Defence Force should maintain an orderly and predictable society.

Thirdly, all population groups should be involved in the maintenance of public law and order and the defence of the Republic of South Africa. Consequently the security forces should also be representative of all population groups. The security forces should not only safeguard life and ensure an orderly society, they should also ensure that its members are able to live decent lives.

Fourthly, to underpin the civil infrastructure of our country, the preservation of life, health and property and the maintenance of essential services is a requirement. From this it is obvious that the Defence Force has to make itself increasingly available to assist the other security forces and civilian services, particularly, perhaps, in safeguarding internal strategic places and ensuring the maintenance of law and order.

The fifth and final aim is to make the Republic of South Africa as self-sufficient as is practicable in respect of arms and also to make the continued production and export of such arms possible.

This defence or security policy will ensure that the S.A. Defence Force and Armscor will have to perform tasks which will ensure that the present State structure is maintained. They will ensure that there is only room for evolutionary development in this country, and that there is no room for evolutionary and violent action, for that would lead to chaos in accordance with the African concept.

My detailed analysis of these policy aims indicate the extent of the commission and the tasks which have to be carried out by the S.A. Defence Force and Armscor. In financial terms the implementation of these tasks represents an enormous amount of money. It also makes heavy demands on our manpower. Additional to these tasks, it is also essential that Armscor and the S.A. Defence Force—and when I speak of the Defence Force, I mean the Permanent Force, the Citizens Force, the commandos and the national servicemen, who all have a very important responsibility—should be well-disciplined. We should always be able to rely on them. They must have a sound grounding. They should be well-equipped and well-trained and should be cared for spiritually and otherwise. They should also be motivated to accept the challenge and to be prepared with determination and perseverance. It is important that the leadership training of the Defence Force should take place in a circumspect and efficient way.

South Africa is also extremely fortunate that it possesses the necessary know-how and an excellent munitions manufacturing organization. This organization and its subsidiaries also have good leadership. I am referring in particular here to the board of directors and the management. They are also extremely well-staffed, from all groups of the population, and they have professional management ability which is geared to making maximum use of South African industries.

Armscor offers South Africa excellent opportunities to develop further in the field of science and technology. I would say that the most important attribute of Armscor is its efficiency and productivity. The message which I wish to convey to the general public is symbolically combined in these two organizations, Armscor and the Defence Force, and is concerned with their approach to the conduct and implementation of their task in these challenging times. I could also describe this as their managerial philosophy, the spirit which prevails in them. It is in the first place to be geared and prepared for any eventuality “when I shall give of my best in rendering service to my country and its people”. In the second place the contributions must be as productive as possible: “I must carry out my task and my duty to the best of my ability.” In the third place, an attitude of positiveness and confidence should be created and constantly displayed. With such a spirit and attitude of preparedness, productivity and positiveness, the Republic of South Africa can only triumph, and we will easily overcome, regardless of how great the challenges are.

In conclusion it is now my honour and privilege to convey once again the thanks and congratulations of the Government and of hon. members on this side of the House to the officers and men for the successful outcome of Operation Protea and for the way in which they bore the banner of South Africa aloft.

Hear, hear!

They fought against a well-armed and well-trained enemy, and emerged from the conflict with honour. Towards the members of the civilian population of Angola whom they encountered, they behaved as one would expect of true South Africans. They fed the civilians, provided them with medical care, and held the banner of South African civilization aloft. I should also like to avail myself of this opportunity to convey the profoundest condolences of the Government and hon. members on this side of the House to the next of kin and loved ones of those who died. We shall remember them and we pay tribute to them.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the privilege of the half hour.

I should like to begin by associating myself and hon. members of this party with the words of the hon. the Minister in also conveying our condolences to the next of kin and the loved ones of those who have perished serving their country since this Vote was last debated here in this House. We should also like to express our sympathy with those who have been wounded in military operations, not only in Operation Protea, but also in preceding military activities.

One of the remarkable things which one should perhaps mention right away in respect of Operation Protea is that while one mourns the loss of every single life—and we do hold every life precious—the operation was conducted I believe with the greatest care. The approach was that there should be the lowest number of casualties possible. I believe this goes to the credit of all who were involved. It is commendable in fact that an operation of this magnitude could be carried out with so few casualties.

Hear, hear!

While I am on this subject, I believe it is not inappropriate to mention that members of the defence group of this party have recently visited the Air Force base in the Eastern Transvaal. They visited the No. 1 Military Hospital and also the new military hospital. In the company of the defence groups of other political parties they also went to the border. The one thing which I believe needs to be said—apart from thanking those who arranged the tours—is that we found that the young men serving South Africa were in good spirit, that their morale was high and that they were being cared for. I think that parents and wives can be assured that their sons and husbands are in good hands.

I should also like to congratulate the hon. the Minister on this his first appearance on this Vote as an elected member of Parliament. As he knows, I wish him well in his new job and I look forward to a period of fruitful co-operation. However, there is just one matter which I am sure he will forgive me mentioning. We both believe in the domino theory and if he looks at what has happened in regard to the constituencies that the PFP have won from time to time, he will see that Modderfontein is next on the list. So, as a friend, I would like to at least give him the warning that he is on the fist and that in that respect he should watch out.

The new Chief of the S.A. Defence Force is also with us here this afternoon and, having known him in other capacities, I have a very great respect for his ability and also for his courage. I am sure that under his leadership the Defence Force will continue to maintain and improve not only its effectiveness, but also its morale in every respect. The chiefs of the other services, Gen. Geldenhuys, the new Chief of the Army, Gen. Muller, the Chief of the Air Force, and Admiral Edwards all have our appreciation, as have the officers and the other ranks of all branches of the services, whether they be in the Permanent Force, the Citizen Force, the commandos or whether they are national servicemen. Not to be forgotten is Armscor, because I think in recent times people have become more aware of what the contribution of Armscor has been to the defence effort in South Africa. I should therefore like to thank the dedicated men at the head of that organization for the service that they have rendered in the period of time that they have held that office. One of them—I shall not even mention his name—I have known from university days. Sometimes when people are taken from the right universities and from the private sector one finds that they can make a considerable contribution and be of considerable help to one in the executing of these tasks. Perhaps this will be done in other sectors as well.

Are you looking for a job?

In recording our appreciation here I do not think it is out of place, in reacting to the hon. the Minister, to examine how we see the role of the Defence Force in the situation that is developing in Southern Africa. In the interests of all the Southern African people there should in our view be a high degree of regional cooperation. Unfortunately the political ingredients necessary for the degree of cooperation that is required are absent. Their absence in the main is due to three factors. Firstly, there is a heritage of colonialism and of colour issues that results in competing nationalism and other problems in the area. Secondly, there is a high disparity between the degree of economic development which has created a North-South world issue in miniature in this sub-continent. Thirdly, there are the competing spheres of influence of the great powers: the USSR and its satellites on the one hand and the United States and its allies on the other. The Government has for some time stressed to the West the Republic’s strategic importance and its mineral wealth, and the hon. the Minister has done so again today. I think that appreciation has been in the minds of the Eastern bloc for considerable period of time. However, an appreciation of that factor by all the conflicting power groups has, if anything, now directed more attention to the Republic. It is therefore little wonder that Dr. Chester Crocker refers to the region’s potential as becoming “a cockpit of mounting East-West tension”. In other words, it is no longer only a local or regional issue or only an issue of change internally in South Africa. It has now become a question of East-West conflict. The problem is that the internal issues of South Africa will also have a tendency to become internationalized, something which is certainly not in our interests. I do not believe that it is in South Africa’s interest to be in the cockpit of East-West conflict.

Periodically and sometimes consistently, some regions become conflict areas. This has been a historic world pattern. In post-World War II we have had among others Korea, South East Asia and the Middle East. None of these areas where the conflict has actually taken place has benefited from this situation. In fact, the very contrary is the case. I have said before and I want to repeat that I would rather that my country are off the front page of the world press than to become the centre of attention and the object of big power competition.

Unfortunately, there are clear signs of a number of factors that are disturbing. In this I include the arms build-up that is taking place on the subcontinent. As I see it, that arms build-up in terms of the so-called East-West conflict is in fact a one-sided one. As far as I am aware, the United States of America has not indulged in any arms build-up in this region. The Republic of South Africa itself has been subject to an arms boycott and has therefore been required to build up its own arms industry which, by reason of the economies of scale, has of necessity restricted itself to arms of the nature required to meet the anticipated threats and in respect of which the degree of sophistication is limited by the amount of capital available and the demand of the other sectors of our economy. The Soviet Union and its associates, however, have been major exporters of arms to countries on the subcontinent. I think that Operation Protea demonstrated the extent to which some of this weaponry is in fact in existence on the subcontinent. It certainly is not in dispute that Soviet tanks, aircraft and other arms are present in substantial quantities in, for example, Mozambique. As the hon. the Minister has said, Zimbabwe now has a north Korean presence, there are Cubans in Angola and East Germans and others of similar political affiliations are in many countries in the Southern African region. As has also been shown, Russians themselves are, of course, not absent. The American Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Dr. Chester Crocker, says that Warsaw Pact countries have arms agreements with four nations in the area and provide the bulk of external military support to guerrilla groups aimed at Namibia/South West Africa. I think therefore that the case is proven. However, when we speak of an East-West conflict in South Africa, it is clear that there is a massive presence of material and personnel on the Eastern side, but I pose the question: Where is the Western side? To all intents and purposes, if the Republic’s presence is not regarded as part of the West, then in reality the West has no presence at all in this so-called East-West conflict situation of which Dr. Chester Crocker speaks. That is the question that has to be posed. If there is an East-West conflict, if there is competition between the East and the West, where is the West if we are not part of the West? I say, therefore, that the responsibility resting on the Republic is great.

There are a number of matters that concern us which I want to pose as questions and I shall answer them myself. Is it in South Africa’s interests for our country to become the battleground of an East-West conflict at all? The hon. the Minister can reply to this but I should like to give our reply to this as well. I believe that it is not in our country’s interests to be in that position. The position becomes even more disadvantageous if, as I have said, the West is a reluctant and inactive participant in such a conflict, a conflict the responsibility for which lies almost entirely upon the shoulders of the Republic. Secondly, there is the question of the build-up of arms with the potential for major conventional conflict which exists and which cannot be ignored. Arms such as those our forces captured can without doubt be replaced in larger numbers and in more sophisticated forms. In this regard I should like to quote here, not from a local paper because, as we all know, these reports appear elsewhere as well. This is what Sam Nujoma had to say—

This is a quote from the London Financial Times of 17 September of this year. According to this report Sam Nujoma goes on to issue this warning—

The reality is that a massive arms build-up is about to take place. I do not believe that a massive arms build-up can be in the interests of the region as a whole, let alone our own interests. More important, and I want to stress again, is it not actually a one-sided arms build-up that is taking place in this region? The third question I want to ask is: In whose interest is it to destabilize the South African region? In whose interest is it for South African forces to be engaged beyond its borders? There can be no doubt that the Eastern bloc is seeking a major destabilization of the region.

What is remarkable is that it seeks to identify three things and make them one: Black national aspirations, communist ideology and Soviet imperialism. It seeks to identify those three, because by bringing about this identification, the Soviets obtain support for their own cause by association with the aspirations of the Black people of this subcontinent. They supply the arms for the purpose of committing the acts of violence and terror to destabilize the region and so make the advent of Soviet imperialism and ideology much easier.

The destruction of this threat to stability, the destroying of this identity of objectives which I believe must be broken, can to my mind only be achieved if the Black people of the region see alternative methods of achieving their aspirations, and the only alternative which has a hope of doing this is, within our country, genuine reform politics. It is the only alternative to this threat which exists.

There is another issue which relates to identification. The South West/Namibia situation is an internationalized situation where the solution sought is an internationally recognized settlement based on free elections and security for the inhabitants. What is remarkable, however, is that in the speeches, even of Western politics, there is now a blurring of this issue because the internal situation in South Africa is now being blurred together with the South West Africa/Namibia situation. A recent speech of Lord Carrington in the General Assembly of the UN is to my mind a classic example of it where, in fact, the whole South West Africa/ Namibia situation and the situation of South Africa tend to be telescoped together. This has real risks for the Republic. I believe that we therefore have to be careful, both militarily and politically, to ensure that these issues are kept separate, because the danger of the internationalization of domestic problems is already there, and we certainly should do nothing to aggravate that situation.

Where is the applause of the hon. members behind you?

Are you suggesting that we disagree?

The issue of South African forces being engaged in activities beyond our borders also needs to be examined. Hot pursuit, retaliatory and pre-emptive raids are recognized counterinsurgency activities. That is recognized and those who condemn it, must remember that others too have used this technique. It is not inappropriate to mention for example that France, who has condemned it, in fact indulged in that very activity when it was trying to hold Algeria, and justified it both legally and otherwise.

The question that I pose very simply to those critics is: Can a country which gives bases for terrorism, bases for attacks upon its neighbours, expect those bases to be immune from attack by the people that they are designed to destroy? That is the simple question. Can one allow a base on one’s territory and then think it can be immune from attack?

There is a difference, a very real difference between the type of action to which I have referred and a war in which large numbers of troops are tied down. If we were to allow ourselves to be embroiled in a long-term conflict outside our borders, we would in fact fall into the Russian bear’s trap. We would be tied down then in a war without end.

I, for one, am more than satisfied that Operation Protea was an in and out operation. It should be clear to the world that there was no intention on the part of the Republic to occupy the territory of others and no desire to be involved in long-term conflict situations in a foreign territory. I think everybody who went on the recent visit to the border would be able to confirm that that is so.

Let me put specifically how we see the position of the Defence Force. We see the Defence Force as a shield to protect South Africa from aggression and violence, while South Africa seeks by peaceful means to find a solution for coexistence. The function of the SADF is to maintain peace in the Republic, to protect its citizens, its territorial integrity and its resources. Bismarck used the military as an instrument of policy as part of his whole concept, but the way that we see the military in South Africa is not as a solution to our problems, but as an instrument to maintain peace while the reforms are effected which must procure solutions to the problems that we face. In other words, there is not a military option where we can solve our problems by military means only. The military is there to provide the shield, while we solve the problems.

It need not be said again that South Africa is a society that is undergoing change. But change in political, social and economic structures often creates uncertainty, and uncertainty can have destabilizing effects. At such a time, law and order must be maintained. Without peace there can be no peaceful change. It is therefore an essential ingredient of this party’s commitment to peaceful change that the Defence Force, together with the Police Force, must maintain peace and deal with threats of terror.

Our Defence Force has demonstrated its ability and efficiency. Operation Protea has, I think, been a textbook operation. Specific limits and objectives were stated and were achieved with a minimum number of casualties. Locally-made equipment was tested in battle conditions and found efficient. Enemy positions were taken, equipment was captured, and once the operation was successful, the civilian population was not only properly treated, but also assisted, so that when the withdrawal took place it could take place without hindrance from the local population, and perhaps with a degree of regret on the part of some that our troops had to depart, as the flow of refugees across the border to the south bears testimony. I wonder how many armies in the world drop pamphlets beforehand to warn people that they are coming, to warn people so that they can get out of the way? It is a unique situation in the history of warfare.

Hear, hear!

Politically the operation demonstrated the presence of the Russians, of heavy conventional arms, and furthermore not only dealt with Swapo as a military force, but indicated the strength of South Africa to the potential enemies of this country. I believe therefore that the S.A. Defence Force has done its job. I think it has proved that the shield is effective. But while this is so, we must not regard the shield as the solution. Long-term security lies in the contentment of a people. The Defence Force, however strong it is, is not the solution. It is the shield that protects people from violence, while the politicians seek to find a solution. Let us therefore make it clear that we support the Defence Force because it is fundamental to our concept of peaceful change. Without it such peaceful change is impossible.

We do not see the Defence Force as being concerned with crusades to convert, nor as an instrument of conquest. The Defence Force is to South Africa a means of defence. It is not a defender of apartheid, but the instrument to achieve peace for all the people of all political persuasions and all races. Even if one is not satisfied with this Government’s actions on change—and we are not satisfied with it, Sir—the reality is that the country as a whole still needs the shield to create time for the solutions to be found and to preserve peace.

What about the alternatives to military service now?

There is, however, an obligation on the Government as well. I believe that every precaution must be taken to ensure that the Defence Force is not politicized. The Defence Force contains people of all political persuasions, faiths, language groups and races. To unite in an effort to defend the country, this fact must be recognized. The temptation to identify the fight with a party or a religious or ideological cause should, I believe, be resisted. The ideology which binds South Africa together is the ideology of peace, the ideology of resistance to terror and violence and a sincere endeavour to find, on our own, a basis for peaceful coexistence.

Hear, hear!

I believe that when the hon. the Minister was head of the Defence Force he gave a clear indication that this was also his wish. There were problems from time to time, of course, but despite that we believe that he still agrees with us on this approach. We therefore look forward to a recommitment to this concept of the Defence Force as a unifying force.

There is, however, another matter that I believe has to be mentioned. Different people have different approaches to the solution of South Africa’s problems, but their actions are nevertheless bona fide actions, and they are acting sincerely. People like that are not only to be found here in this House; they are also to be seen all over South Africa. There are, of course, also such people in the Defence Force to unify our defence effort. Does it help to seek to impugn the loyalty and patriotism of those who may have a different view to that which those hon. members may hold? [Interjections.]

Hear, hear!

Does it help to keep the South African Defence Force politicized? [Interjections.] We do not ask for any quarter in any debate. Nor do we fear political attacks in this House, but we must ask ourselves what the young man who may differ from those hon. members politically—not any man sitting here, but one who is serving—thinks about such actions and what such actions may do to his morale, to his willingness to participate when his patriotism is being impugned. [Interjections.] We have—and we also have a need for—a defence force that cuts across party lines, the lines demarcating race, faith and religion. Is it therefore not better for the South African Defence Force that we in this House should be opposed on policy, on merit, rather than by impugning our loyalty?

There is another matter I should like to touch upon, and that is the question of South West African and South African forces and the combat situation they are engaged upon, which is not actually a declared state of war. The actions and behaviour of the troops are, as I see it—and the Minister has stated this—in accordance with the accepted concepts and norms of behaviour and the rules of correct conduct towards prisoners and others that are encountered in combat. There has been some propaganda levelled against our forces by the signing, by a certain insurgency organization, of a Geneva Convention-type document, while South Africa has allegedly failed to do so.

There are obvious obstacles to the signing of such a document by the Republic, particularly the recognition aspects, as the movements concerned are revolutionary organizations opposing a legally constituted government authority. Whilst in every army there may be acts contrary to established discipline and rules, I believe that the conduct of our troops is the complete opposite of that alleged in the propaganda against us. I think that it is necessary to say that on a recent visit to the border, specifically at our request, we visited a camp in which prisoners were being detained. I think that my colleagues would agree that the conditions in the camp, and the conversations we had, certainly indicated that proper treatment was, in fact, the order of the day. I believe that this should be known, not only here in South Africa, but also abroad.

The question of prisoners brings me to a delicate subject concerning one of our own young men. I am referring to Sapper Johan van der Mescht who has been in captivity since February 1978. Naturally we would like to see him brought home. It also brings us to Warrant Officer Pestretsov, the Russian prisoner, and the Fapla soldiers who may be in captivity. We are not at war with Angola, and at the right moment and in the right circumstances I believe that their soldiers should be returned, and I do believe that an exchange could possibly be negotiated. Not only could we bring our own man home, but I believe that the Fapla soldiers who would be returned to Angola would be able to testify to the falseness of the propaganda against the Republic. Pestretsov will doubtless also be returned one day, that is if he wants to go home, but I am not in a position to say. One assumes, however, that negotiations will take place at the right level to ensure that our man also comes back home.

There are many other matters I should like to refer to and perhaps I should end on the following note. We get many requests for deferments and exemptions. We have now evolved a procedure with the hon. the Minister in terms of which these can be dealt with. There are, however, problems in regard to people in the Citizen Force and the Commandos, and people who have one-man businesses whose careers are affected. I believe we have to review this whole structure. I believe we must have equity in the sharing of the burden to which I have referred before. We need to look at all this again. I thought it would not be an inappropriate moment to refer to what used to happen in biblical times when it came to military service. I invite the hon. the Minister to read a passage from Deuteronomy 20:5, where it is said that one can get exemption from military service on the following grounds—

I think some of these concepts which existed in the Old Testament times, might well apply today. The Old Testament had the concept that a man only became liable for military service at the age of 20. He went into battle after he had tasted life, after he had had a home, had married and had seen what life was all about. We seem to have taken a different turn, for we send our young men into battle before they have experienced all of life. [Interjections.]

Don’t you believe it!

I should like to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he should perhaps look at the Old Testament again to get some guidance from it. There was a call-up even while the Israelites were in the Sinai desert. When some did not want to serve, they said: “Shall your brethren go to war and shall you sit here?” Perhaps we should also say that to some of our people. The reality is that when one defends a country, one has to have a belief because when one has a belief, it makes it easier to defend one’s country.

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his performance in this first discussion of the Vote since his appointment. He would appear to be familiar with the entire set-up of our South African Defence Force, and I believe he is a worthy successor to our celebrated hon. Prime Minister. Our best wishes go with him.

We should also like to congratulate the Chief of the S.A. Defence Force and the General Staff on the successful Operation Protea. The good spirit built up among the population was again confirmed by the competent action of the S.A. Defence Force. I also wish to congratulate the generals who were promoted to senior positions. May their valued services be available to South Africa for many years to come.

I should now like to react to the speech made by the hon. member for Yeoville.

†The hon. member drew very broad lines on the international front. I specifically timed him up to 15h25. Up to that time I completely and wholeheartedly endorsed what he said. Up till then he made a very good speech, with a good content, and I thank him for that. I think he did the S.A. Defence Force a service. He also put some questions which he proceeded to answer himself. Therefore I shall not go into that any further.

It is true that different people have different approaches to the problems of South Africa. It is admissible for them to have different approaches, and that does not mean that they are not loyal. I agree with the hon. member for Yeoville, but I must also point out that when people oppose certain things in South Africa, they may not be disloyal to their consciences, but disloyal to the country, and they then become irrelevant in fighting the total onslaught that we face.

*I should like to express my thanks and appreciation to the hon. the Minister for taking a large number of members of Parliament to the operational area, under his protection. They included representatives of all the parties, and this was rightly done, because we have a national Defence Force. The Defence Force belongs to the entire nation. I also wish to thank the hon. the Minister for taking some of our women to the border. They also have a better understanding of what is going on there now. I believe this will be to the benefit of the goodwill of the nation towards the Defence Force.

Our MPs were informed in the operational area, at high level, of the situation surrounding Operation Protea. It is clear that Operation Protea was very necessary. In this regard I wish to agree with one of our newspapers, namely Hoofstad, in which a report appeared under the headline: “Suid-Afrikaanse soldate, wapens, is puik—Protea het sy kwota helde gelewer.” This expresses the sentiments of all of us here in this House.

The hon. member for Yeoville, the hon. member for Durban Point and I were so impressed with the S.A. Defence Force on the border that we issued a joint statement which has already been read by everyone.

†I think I would paraphrase the contents of this joint statement as follows: Firstly, that we are proud of our men and their weaponry; secondly, that Operation Protea was fully justified; thirdly, that the S.A. Defence Force is above party-politics; fourthly, that it is a Defence Force of the people for the people and, fifthly, that their struggle is ours.

In this struggle of ours against the total onslaught, the perception or understanding one has of the total onslaught is of the utmost importance, because that determines the manner in which and the intensity with which one views this onslaught. It also determines one’s stance vis-à-vis the onslaught. As I have said, it determines, firstly, the quality of each person’s personal involvement in fighting the enemy and, secondly, the urgency with which one prepares for and meets the onslaught. Therefore the most relevant question we can ask ourselves today in the House is: Do we agree that there is indeed a total onslaught against South Africa? You see, Sir, if this question is answered in the negative, three things automatically follow. Firstly, there is then no real incentive to become personally involved in fighting the onslaught. Secondly, there is then no urgency in preparing to meet the onslaught. The third result is by far the worst. I quote from the Daily Telegraph—

… such people then become resistance fighters and a resistance movement against our efforts to overcome the total onslaught is created. That is the worst aspect.

I must ask what view the PFP holds. I must ask this because as recently as the Justice debate the hon. members for Sandton and Port Elizabeth Central emphatically stated that there was no total onslaught. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North, a Whip of that party, said the following—

He said that. So I can continue. I want to say that the majority of the PFP do not consider there to be a total onslaught. I say “the majority” advisedly, because I know that there are members, like the hon. member for Yeoville, who do view the present situation as a very serious one. However, that hon. member’s sentiments, good as they are, have not won the day in that party. His powers of conviction have in that respect failed him, and for that very reason that party has become irrelevant in the fight against the total onslaught. I must put this question to the hon. member for Yeoville, for whom I have great respect. The hon. member must tell us how he can himself be relevant in his opposition to the total onslaught if he belongs to a political party that has become irrelevant. How can he be relevant if he belongs to a party that has become irrelevant? How can he still escape from being irrelevant himself? I think this is a very valid question and the hon. member should take the first opportunity to answer this question.

*Now I should like to refer to Armscor. In view of the total onslaught on South Africa, especially the compulsory arms embargo against us, it has become necessary for us, as the hon. the Minister also stated, for us to obtain our own instrument for the manufacture and supply of arms. In this technological age a defence force is only as good as the weaponry it uses. Armscor was established precisely as a result of this need. Armscor grew until today it is the second largest industrial company in the country. This is an undertaking with capital assets of approximately R1,2 milliard, and approximately 29 thousand employees, which manufactures 141 types of ammunition, and even exports munitions. This is an achievement. This growth to the second largest company in the country could only be brought about by a dedicated top management and a satisfied work force. These two components were absolutely essential. Therefore, on behalf of hon. members on this side of the House, I wish to convey my thanks to Commandant Piet Marais, chairman of Armscor, for the inspired achievements of his top management and for the absolute dedication with which they perform their task. I also wish to thank Mr. John Marais, chairman of the Pretoria Metal Pressings for his contribution in this connection. Armscor has succeeded in meeting the demands made of it within the framework of the financial limitations which existed. This is indeed commendable, and we thank them for it.

I should also like to emphasize the efficiency of Armscor. The rapid-fire unit of Armscor in Pretoria West was constructed within 30 months at a total cost of R90 million. This is a complex, refined technological plant, which once again testifies to the managerial techniques and expertise of the people of Armscor. Approximately 65% of the employees of Armscor are skilled people. This is a high percentage, an achievement which the private sector would do well to emulate. Armscor has 1 000 apprentices, 5 000 workers …

Order! I am sorry, but the hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to give the hon. member a chance to complete his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Hillbrow for giving me an opportunity to complete my speech.

Someone once said: “There is no substitute for victory”. In view of this we say thank you to Armscor for the arms it manufactures, arms which were used in Operation Protea. I hope that many young men and women will join Armscor in order to make their contribution.

This brings me now to the total onslaught on South Africa, an onslaught which definitely exists. In this connection I should like to quote from a report which appeared in the Pretoria News of 19 September of this year. In this report, inter alia, the Washington Post was quoted. I quote—

This emphasizes what Dr. Glagolev said, and it is time we took cognizance of this. This was written in The First Domino, and I quote—

This is of course the Cubans and other pro-Soviet troops. It is time we took note of this.

†It is also true that the battlelines have been drawn and the forces opposing us have been co-ordinated and their plans are tending towards fruition. Firstly, there is clearly an UN-bias in favour of Swapo. Secondly, there is a stockpiling of weaponry of a conventional warfare nature in adjoining States. Thirdly, terrorist forces are being integrated with the conventional armies, for instance Fapla with Swapo. Fourthly, there is an importation of pro-Soviet forces into Africa. I therefore want to say that peace and prosperity in Africa will be attained and expedited only when the Cubans leave this continent and wave goodbye to its shores.

The present situation is worrying. There is also a message for Western Europe in this. 25% of their foodstuffs and 60% of their oil move round the Cape. However, to us in the Republic the message is crystal clear in its unmistakability. It is clear that we have to strengthen our resistance potential; secondly, we must co-ordinate all our resources, e.g. manpower and weaponry-wise and, thirdly, we must attend conferences and talk at tables from a position of strength. As Sir Walter Walker has said, and he has put it very succinctly—

”Therefore I wish to make an appeal to every citizen in this country, because everyone is involved in the onslaught. Every citizen of this country is already involved because the Russians compel everyone to become involved. Today I want to ask every citizen to become involved in a positive and co-ordinated way. Why do I say coordinated way? Let me give an example. For example, if we have an oxwagon standing on level ground, we can inspan four oxen and those four oxen will pull the wagon to the north. The wagon will succeed in its goal and accomplish its task. But if we inspan 16 oxen to the north, 16 to the south, 16 to the west and 16 to the east, those oxen can pull as hard as they like but the wagon will not move. But what is even worse, that wagon will be pulled asunder. I want to ask everyone in South Africa not to contribute to tearing South Africa to pieces by each going their own way. I am asking everyone to co-operate in a co-ordinated way in the total national strategy. This is my appeal today. I shall tell you where we need not seek a national strategy. We shall not find it among the PFP because they do not believe in a total onslaught. We shall not find in the AWB either, because people clad in leather jackets who ride on motorcycles cannot resist an onslaught. We shall not find it among the HNP either, because with their politics they divide every population group and every community in South Africa. We shall find it only in the NP. The NP has already devised a total national strategy. I am not talking politics now, but there is a total national strategy. It is the 12-point plan. The 12-point plan is the basis of our national strategy, and that is what the people voted for. In a democratic country, if the majority votes for something, it is the right strategy and we must adopt it. This is my appeal today. Let us be democratic and follow the guidance which is being given. But how does the Defence Force fit into this pattern to succeed in implementing the total national counter-strategy against the total onslaught? It is very clear. The State Security Council, of which the hon. the Prime Minister is chairman, obtains information, this information is processed and directives are issued to the South African Defence Force to act, and this is how the South African Defence Force carries out these directives. Therefore, in a Defence Force context, in a uniformed context, when a person is a member of the Defence Force, whether a national serviceman, a member of the Permanent Force, a member of the Citizen Force or a member of the commando’s, makes no difference, that person is involved in a co-ordinated way. He is involved in a co-ordinated way to ward off the total onslaught. He is part of the indispensable cornerstone of the South African Defence Force. Any attack—this we must understand clearly—on the system of national service, on discipline in the Defence Force, is an attack on the foundation of the national strategy and on our personal freedom. We on this side of this House are determined to identify such attacks and to ward them off with everything at our disposal. For this reason we want to thank the hon. the Prime Minister and the State Security Council for allowing Operation Protea to take place. We believe that it was without doubt the right decision.

In conclusion I want to quote as a precept to this House what Sir Winston Churchill once said—

This is the attitude we should adopt in this matter. We on this side of this House will have to expand the strength of the S.A. Defence Force as it becomes necessary. We shall expand its strength with women if necessary. We shall expand its strength with volunteers if necessary. We shall have to expand its strength in every other acceptable way, but we shall move forward to meet the onslaught. We shall also expand the financial inputs we make in respect of the S.A. Defence Force, as this becomes necessary. One thing is certain: We are determined to overcome. And our enemies must know this.

The hon. the Minister said that our enemies have now been set back a year and the time we have thus gained, we want to use in this House—we undertake to use it in this House—so that we can do three things. In the first place we must use the time we have gained to get the constitutional dispensation among non-Whites off the ground and to get it to work. In the second place we must establish a confederation in the broader context of the third point, namely the constellation of States in Southern Africa.

The time the South African Defence Force has given us, cost them dearly; let us then use it wholeheartedly and effectively! On behalf of the people of South Africa I should like to thank the S.A. Defence Force for this, as well as I did for the other things.

Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the second half-hour.

In the first place, I wish to associate myself with what the hon. member for Pretoria West said in connection with the visit paid by our wives to the border. Later in the course of my speech I shall discuss the other visits. I think it is very important that our wives should accompany us on such visits, for they are the people who talk to the mothers of our soldiers. Their word often carries more weight with a mother than ours. We men are regarded as the hierarchy, because we make the money, etc., available. However, when a woman returns and says: “Madam, I have seen your son on the border. Things are going well with him; he is well treated and he gets good food”, it carries far more weight and means a great deal to the mother of that soldier.

I also wish to congratulate the hon. the Minister and welcome him as Minister of Defence. We knew him in a different capacity, i.e. that of a soldier. I want to say that we came to know him as a very good soldier. However, I must issue a warning to him not to become contaminated by the company he is keeping. [Interjections.] I must point out that I am now referring to political contamination and not personal contamination. Something I greatly appreciate in some people is their sense of humour! The hon. the Minister has always kept defence out of politics, and this is something I have always appreciated. That, too, is why I am warning him at this juncture not to allow politics to cause him to stray too far from that course.

On behalf of this party I also wish to congratulate the new leaders within our Defence Force. General Viljoen will now for the first time have the opportunity to be accounting officer for a Vote, and together with him there are several other generals who are here in a new capacity for the first time. I have in mind General Geldenhuys, his colleagues the Chief of the Navy and the Chief of the Air Force, and General Gleeson, whom we also encountered in the operational area where he has served South Africa very well.

I also want to take this opportunity of addressing a word of thanks to General Jack Dutton. He, too, has served the Defence Force very well, but today he is serving his country in another capacity.

†Mr. Chairman, I want to deal this afternoon with what is, after all, the purpose of this debate and that is the amount of money, the R2 600 million which this House is asked to vote for the security of South Africa. I want to say at once that I feel that this record budget is one that very few people would want to cheer—if it was at all possible to avoid it. I am sure this is so even in the Forces themselves. I do not think anyone in South Africa is pleased or happy to see this sort of expenditure if it were at all avoidable. It is therefore necessary in this debate to balance the money to be voted against the extent of the need, the extent of the threat, and to evaluate this position against the manner and the effectiveness with which the money is in fact to be spent. This debate is the occasion for us to do this.

In the debate on the Vote of the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Information I set out the attitude of this party towards South West Africa and what we felt was our responsibility towards that territory. I do not intend to repeat that view here this afternoon because it is on record and very clearly so. In this House we have repeatedly discussed the 80/20 law of counter insurgency—the 80% which is the civil administration and the 20% which is the military content. I want to say that we in this party have particular recognition for what the Defence Force itself is contributing over and above its 20%—its contribution as part of the 80% in the civil administration. This is the work it is doing in civic action, the work it is doing outside the field of purely military activity. Equally though, we recognize what is still required and what still has to be done. This is the essence of the political debate that we have been and are conducting and will continue to conduct on the urgency of finding political solutions to our problems. However, I want to confine myself in this debate to the military component of that package of counter insurgency operations, an essential requirement for the stability without which, as the hon. member for Yeoville said, it would not be possible for us to find political and administrative solutions.

Let me for a moment refer to the hon. member for Yeoville’s theme. In doing so, I should like to congratulate him on an excellent speech. I should also like to congratulate him on the attitude he adopted and on the fact that he committed his party as their official spokesman to this attitude on behalf of his party. I think that it is important that this sort of attitude should be demonstrated. The hon. member for Yeoville spoke of South Africa in the “cockpit of the East/ West conflict”. Others have spoken and written about “becoming locked into a Vietnam situation” and similar descriptions. I want to say, Sir, that I do not think that we have any option in this regard. We are not in South West Africa because we are being locked in by an East/West struggle. We are in South West Africa because it is South Africa’s duty and in our interests to be there; it is our responsibility and our duty to be there in order to carry out our responsibility towards the people of South West Africa. The presence of our Defence Force is, I believe, essential for creating a situation in which free elections can be held. Without our presence that would never be possible. I do not therefore see us being locked in, as though we were being manipulated or pushed in by East-West pressures. I see us primarily involved in South West Africa because we have no option; it is also our duty, and it is what we have to do to carry out our responsibilities under the mandate.

But if one has no option, one is locked in.

One is locked in, but the hon. member said that it was not in our interest. However, I believe that we have no choice; we are there and we have to carry out our duty to the best of our ability. I agree that we should not become the tool of any other force, but in these circumstances this is not a question of choice but one of inescapable involvement in a situation that is not of our own making.

I welcome the development of the South West African Defence Force, the SWADF. It has made tremendous strides and is now contributing to a large extent to the defence of that territory. However, between them and ourselves we have to accept the reality of Marxist objectives, and I do not think I can put it better than it was stated in The Star of Tuesday this week. In a leading article the editor of The Star said—

It continues—

It means that Moscow’s African adventurism is entering a new phase of direct land warfare, and it is aiming closer than ever before at the continent’s big prize, South Africa.

I think that is a fair and accurate assessment and one with which I can agree, and that is why I say it is not a question of choice. That is part of the threat that we have to face.

In evaluating the defence budget, I believe we must look at every aspect, and I first want to express appreciation to the hon. the Minister and to the Chief of the SADF for the way in which the Opposition—and I am sure I speak also for the hon. member for Yeoville—has been kept informed. The Opposition has been kept in the picture and earlier in this session we were fully briefed. I believe this is an important indicator of the common purpose of the people of South Africa. It is an indicator of the common purpose in this House towards a common objective. When I say it was a full and frank briefing, I want to add that it was meaningful—because you will excuse me, Sir, if I say that there are such things as briefings and briefings. Some briefings are sometimes a question of bulldust baffling brains, but I do not imagine that the Defence Force thinks it can get away with that kind of briefing where we are concerned.

What is that word you used?

“Bulldust”. From the dust of Angola, as that hon. member knows.

The dust of the bull.

I almost misunderstood you for a moment.

Add to that the border visit, during which we had access to the men who had come back from Operation Protea and talked to them. Incidentally, it was interesting to read, days after we had met them and talked to them, way back at the base, that they were “still there”, holding the places they had evacuated a week or more earlier. That visit gave us a tremendous opportunity to evaluate this budget. I have expressed, publicly and on TV, my admiration for and congratulations to the Force that was involved, both in the planning and the execution of that operation. It was a very small cross-section of our capability, a tiny cross-section of our capability, that was involved. Like other hon. members, and the hon. the Minister, I want to join in expressing our condolences, our sympathy, to those whose loved ones lost their lives. It was a small handful of men, but each of them is precious to his family. To all of these I express the sympathy of those on this side of the House. We must help them realize that the sacrifice was not in vain.

As I said, this was a small cross-section of our capability. It consequently gives one a good feeling to know what our full capability would be if we were really extended. If a small group like that could achieve what they achieved, what could our full capability not do if it were fully extended. What it could do, without question, would be to defend this country against any Force that could be mobilized, if such a Force did not have the backing of international forces including those of major countries. That is something to be grateful for. It is something which we must appreciate and for which we must give thanks to the men who made it possible. In our appreciation we must include Armscor. I have been a critic of Armscor in the past. I believe, however, that I criticized Armscor correctly at the time, because many of the things I criticized have been changed, and many of the things I asked were done as time went by. I might refer, for example, to bringing the organization together under one control. The hon. the Minister will remember my plea. He will remember how I was shot down. And so it was very pleasant, two years later, to have been able to vote for the measure that did exactly that. Not only did Armscor deliver the goods, but what is important is that what it delivered worked. Every man I spoke to, when they came back from that operation, emphasized that they did not have misfires or breakdowns and that what they were given to fight with worked. Even when they had land-mine damage, they were able to carry out repairs in the field and to bring back every single vehicle, plus a couple as “bonsellas”. It was certainly not a bad “bonsella” to bring back toys worth about R200 million, in fact some quite interesting-looking toys. Perhaps we could invent a mobile bakery ourselves one of these days. It is certainly not something I have ever seen before. This is the force we are evaluating here.

I want to say clearly, and without any equivocation, that this party, the NRP, gives its full and unqualified support to this money we are voting in this debate. We support it fully. In fact, I believe South Africans can be grateful that it is not more. It can be grateful for the stringency of control, the strict limitation which is placed on budgeting. In the situation in which we are placed, we are spending only about 3,5% of our GNP. America, with its multi-billions of dollars, is spending 5,2%, and other countries are spending from 10% to 31%.

In saying all these nice things about the Defence Force, nobody pretends that it is a fairy-tale Force, that everything is perfect and that it has no warts or blemishes. Problems do exist, and there are even serious shortcomings in places. I want to refer to one or two of them in the time remaining to me. Others I have taken up directly with the hon. the Minister or with the Supreme Command. In passing I should like to welcome the channels of communications which have now been laid down and agreed upon between the hon. the Minister, the department and members of Parliament. We accept those channels, and we are in full support of them. It is through those channels that 95% of the problems which I raise with the Defence Force are sorted out without ever coming to the hon. the Minister’s attention. They are sorted out administratively. As I have said, however, there are problems. One of the things with which there is no problem in the operational area is the morale of our men who are up there. I say this not only as a result of briefings, but also as a result of personal contact which I have been privileged to have, particularly with Natal units. I should like to thank the hon. the Minister, the Chief of the SADF and the Chief of the Army publicly for that opportunity. One of the shortcomings is that there is not always a full appreciation at the top for the problems of the man in the field.

That is a platitude.

No, I am being realistic. I am not a rubber stamp. I am dealing with things I know about. The top leadership constantly visits. They have inspectors who go out; they make contact and they show personal interest. I wonder, however, whether that contact and interest always goes far enough down the ladder to the people who handle decisions at the middle levels of control. I should like to give an example. What should a person think about men who had to march 150 km when it was not necessary and should not have been necessary? What is their reaction to whatever it was that went wrong and made it necessary? I do not want to go into details. The hon. the Minister knows about these problems, because I have spoken to him about some of them. These things, however, do have an effect. I believe we have to get it realized right throughout the Forces—including the middle and lower ranks—that we are no longer in a peace-time situation. We no longer have the situation where we can work from 08h00 to 16h00, do all we can during the day, go home and start again tomorrow because tomorrow is another day. The war-time situation does not end at Oshivello or on the red line. The whole of South Africa is involved in it. That is why I say I sometimes wonder whether the reality the highest Command knows about and the men in the field know about always goes right through the channels down to the bottom. But, I repeat, to me the morale in the field is not only good but also inspiring. When one goes up and meets the same chaps one has heard grousing one finds them in absolutely fine fettle when they are in the field. Grousing is the only right a soldier has. It is his only privilege. If a soldier was not grousing, I would say there was something radically wrong somewhere. I would say there was either bullying or there was something that was shutting him up, because it would not be natural. What is important is to know when those grouses are justified and then to remove the cause which makes them justified. When the grouses are unavoidable, one must explain them. This, I think, is another important aspect. When something is unavoidable, explain it to the people who are affected by it. When it can be corrected, correct it.

One of the big problems, as everybody knows, is the three-month camps, the three-months’ Citizen Force call-up. It is a problem especially for the leader group and the older men involved. It does not only affect the men, but it also affects the small firms which are involved, not only one-man businesses, which the hon. member for Yeoville mentioned, but also bigger businesses, businesses which may employ 15 to 20 people and all the activities of which hinge on one key figure. I am not saying that such people should simply get off. I am emphasizing the difficulty which the three-month camps cause for the people involved and particularly for the leader group and, above all, the volunteer leaders, the people who love the Army but who simply cannot afford to be called up for three months year after year and be away from their business or employment for that period of time.

The only answer is one we have often discussed and which is being implemented, although I do not know if it is being done fast enough, viz. a permanent operational force and the involvement of all racial groups in the defence of South Africa on an ever-increasing scale. It is being done, I know. I know the difficulties, I know that there is a shortage of instructors and facilities, but the only way in which we can lessen this burden is by having a permanent operational force and by bringing in other race groups.

In the meantime one of the vital factors in morale is to ensure that people do not feel they are wasting their time. One does not find this problem in the operational area. In the red areas it does not occur. However, in other areas we need more motivation and fuller briefing to get across the real reasons why the people involved are essential to South Africa’s security. We have to minimize as much as possible the syndrome of “What am I doing here? Just picking up ‘stompies’!” All of us know it. People say: “Wat maak ek daar? Ek moet die hele dag rondloop en stompies optel”. It is the result of a lack of understanding that in a war 90% of one’s time is spent doing nothing but waiting. It is the same in any war. However, if one does not get that through to the men and if they, and particularly members of the Citizen Force, start thinking that they have been called up for a month or three months to walk around the parade ground picking up bits of paper, one destroys the morale and motivation of those men. In this regard a particularly heavy responsibility rests upon the lower leadership levels, because that is where it is important. The lower levels of leadership are responsible for keeping the men interested, occupied and motivated.

Another field in which morale is affected is that of remuneration, a topic which I have broached here so many times before. In his very first speech in this House this hon. Minister made a very rash promise. He promised that by election day the pay situation in the Army would be solved. He told us not to worry because by election day the problem would be solved. That was his first political blunder. I should like to tell him that the problem has still not been solved. Complaints are still coming in regularly in spite of the hon. the Minister’s promise. I have a whole batch of letters in front of me, letters in which people complain about problems with pay. Here is one letter, dated 14 September. Well, there has not been sufficient opportunity yet of solving this problem. This particular man, however, has not been paid since May 1980.

That was a vintage year.

Yes, that was a vintage year. Here is a second letter. This man complains about receiving incorrect pay since February 1980. Only the other day I had a letter from his father thanking me.

Why? Did you pay him? [Interjections.]

No, I did not pay him. I simply make a nuisance of myself. We should not forget that the hon. the Minister promised that the whole problem would be fixed by election day. I have a number of letters here written during the election time.

Which election?

The April 1981 election. These letters all contain new complaints, new problems, some of which have been finalized since the election. Nevertheless, the hon. the Minister says the whole problem has been solved.

You had better call another election, Magnus! [Interjections.]

I must point out though that these problems have not been solved.

Do you realize how many problems have to be handled?

I know how many problems they are handling. The hon. the Minister said here in this House that the complaints would be reduced in number to not more than 100 a month. I say that the number has not been reduced to that rate.

What really worries me is that the people who inquire experience such difficulty in getting answers. I happen to know of one case in which a young man sent in six copies of his matric certificate over a period of 18 months. Yet, nobody saw a single one of those copies! In other cases parents have even travelled to Pretoria. Others make phone calls. Some go to Command Headquarters. I appreciate that mistakes are made. What matters, however, is that mistakes should be rectified when they are brought to attention. This is where, I believe, there is a breakdown in communications. Mistakes will never be completely obviated, but it is wrong that people who draw the attention of Defence Force authorities to such mistakes do not even receive an acknowledgment. Ultimately such complaints are referred to one of us, while matters drag on over a period of a year or longer, as happens in numerous instances.

Finally, I should like to thank the hon. the Minister for his letter on travel concessions for servicemen. This is a matter I have been writing about for some three years to the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs. I thank the hon. the Minister for his reply.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Point delivered a very positive speech in this debate, which is indeed what we have become accustomed to him doing. The hon. member does have a fairly thick file in connection with military pay. However, I can assure him that that file is only a quarter as thick as it was last year. I believe that not a single letter will remain in that file by next year.

I should like to associate myself with the hon. member for Durban Point in the gratitude that he expressed towards the hon. the Minister for our visit to the operational area. I should also like to turn my attention to some aspects of this. The brilliant success with which the S.A. Defence Force undertook Operation Protea, has grasped the imagination and gained the admiration of old and young in South Africa. Not only did it strike a serious blow at the morale of the enemy, but it was also a tremendous boost to the morale of our own soldiers and of our entire population. One encounters this wherever one goes in our country.

We were privileged to see what really happened there. We saw the weapons and other booty to the value of almost R200 million. Furthermore we were also privileged to speak to our men, people who carried out a carefully planned task with great courage and military precision. For instance, it really was an experience to stand next to an eighteen year old national serviceman who stood next to his rifle with a spark of pride and satisfaction in his eye and showed one how it worked and how he he had contributed his share towards the victory, an experience which not only filled one with pride, but which also made one fully aware that should the existing order be threatened by military violence alone, the frontline States, even with the assistance of Russia, East Germany and the Cubans, would never succeed. The quality of our armaments and the quality of the South African soldier is too much for them on that score. That is why it is only good and right that tribute should be paid to all those who made this operation possible, viz. to the hon. the Minister, the Chief of the S.A. Defence Force, the Chief of the S.A. Army and all the officers down to the last private.

According to the media of 16 September, which described Operation Protea fairly fully, the brilliant success that was achieved could be ascribed to the following, inter alia: Firstly, the perfect understanding between Air Force and Army. I want to add the S.A. Medical Service here. Secondly, the thorough, disciplined action of the security forces and the thorough training that preceded it. Thirdly, the efficiency and excellent quality of the S.A. armaments. Fourthly, the fact that Swapo, Fapla and the Russians had totally underestimated the South African forces and fifthly, the high morale with which our troops entered the fray, with bravery and conviction. All of this is very true, but in considering everything that really happened there, we cannot overlook the protecting hand of our Heavenly Father, the Lord our God. Indeed, he protected our soldiers in the hollow of His hand and delivered the enemy into our hands. We must have no doubt about this. We must recognize it and it cannot be argued away by anyone. The evidence is there, exhibited at Oshakati for everyone to see whilst the ripple effect thereof carries into the farthest corners of the earth, into Russia itself.

On this occasion I want to draw attention to the role played by the S.A. Medical Service, an important gear in the mighty machine which has trampled every enemy in its path. The S.A. Medical Service has a comprehensive task in the S.A. Defence Force. It does not simply entail the surgical care of the wounded. It encompasses the entire spectrum of health care, such as environmental medicine, preventive measures against malaria and bilharzia for instance, welfare services which also have to see to all the social problems of the S.A. Defence Force, psychological services, veterinary services for the large numbers of dogs and horses in the S.A. Defence Force, dental services, etc. The medical equipment and facilities required for the curative task, are of the very best and most modern that are available today. From the two large full-fledged hospitals at Voortrekkerhoogte and Wynberg to the unit hospitals in every far-off unit and the operational hospitals that are set up in the operational area where no local hospitals exist, the facilities are manned by the staff of the S.A. Medical Service, but just like the rest of the S.A. Defence Force they are largely dependent on a large, very important citizen force element. The operational units in particular are composed chiefly of members of the Citizen Force, particularly when it comes to specialists who serve in the operational area on a regular basis. We are very much indebted to these men who display this degree of goodwill and preparedness to serve their country in such an unselfish way.

It has just been proved once again. There were four fully equipped theatres at Oshakati, ready to deal with any emergency rapidly and efficiently. It speaks volumes for this service that all our badly wounded men who are brought in from the battlefield, can be treated efficiently. Even the seriously wounded Unita prisoner who had survived a contemptible, murderous onslaught by Swapo, was saved. A very important success factor here is of course the immediate assistance by doctors doing their national service and other medical staff who were at hand on the battlefield to carry out the vital resuscitation there before the patient was transferred to hospital. In this regard it is very striking that exactly a month before Operation Protea took place, the Surgeon-General, Liut.-Gen. Nieuwoudt, said the following in Die Transvaler of 24 July 1981—

And that is exactly how it was demonstrated there on the battlefield. Therefore, it is in fact true today that a South African soldier’s chances on the battlefield of being in the care of a doctor within 30 minutes, are better than any injured person in a motor accident for instance on our roads which are situated far from a hospital. This, therefore, is the factual situation which has just been illustrated in South West Africa once again.

In conclusion I want to discuss the issue of the provision of staff to this extremely important section of the Defence Force. As in all other sections of the Defence Force, the need for sufficient staff is going to increase as our defence requirements increase. I want to ask the hon. the Minister of Defence whether he does not want to consider enlarging the voluntary women’s element and if necessary, to introduce compulsory military service for our daughters, rather than expanding compulsory military service to some other sectors of our community which may entail tremendous economic implications, inter alia, apart from the other disadvantages related to it. After all, it has already been proved that the woman can be used for a wide variety of tasks in the Defence Force. Indeed, I am convinced that the vast majority of our daughters would be prepared to do this. I am sure that not only will they be prepared to do it but that there are many of them today who are burning to make a contribution towards the total defence strategy of our fatherland.

In this way all of us, man woman and child, can co-operate in order to safeguard the future of this country and to protect it and to safeguard our lives against those who seek our downfall.

Mr. Chairman, every soldier has a body and that is why no Defence Force can manage without effective medical services. The hon. member for Pietersburg has just pointed out clearly that the Defence Force does have such effective services at its disposal. However, every soldier also has a soul and that is why no Defence Force can manage without an effective chaplains’ service. This afternoon I want to refer briefly to the valued work that chaplains perform in the South African Defence Force. However, before I come to that, first allow me to make a remark in connection with another matter.

Eldridge Cleaver said on one occasion—

Without attaching a literal meaning to his statement—in any event I am not an advocate of the God-is-dead-theology—one nevertheless feels that one wants to agree with him, particularly when one looks at Africa and at Southern Africa in particular. The past decade has been characterized by bloody wars in Mozambique, in Zimbabwe and in Angola, but apart from that, the war on the northern border of Ovamboland, in which South Africa is involved, has been lasting for 15 years now. In that period many South Africans have lost their lives. I am sure I too will be allowed, in association with the hon. the Minister and the hon. member for Yeoville, to pay tribute not only to the men who died during Operation Protea but to all the men who have lost their lives in the operational area over the period of 15 years.

Sir, whilst you and I have been able to sing “At thy will to live or perish, oh South Africa, dear land” with security on the occasion of political gatherings and national celebrations, these men have been putting the words into action. They have in fact died in the interest of a free and safe South Africa and South West Africa. I think we owe it to these men to see that regardless of what happens in the future, it will not become evident later on that they have died for nothing, as it has in fact become apparent that many Americans in Vietnam and many Rhodesians in Zimbabwe died in vain. I think we owe it to these men to ensure that a safe, free South West Africa will come into being in the future, and will not be bowed down by Marxist domination.

This brings me to the matter that I want to bring to your attention today. It is the valued work that chaplains are carrying out in the Defence Force. The fact that R3 345 200 has been voted for ministering to spiritual needs for the 1981-’82 financial year, is evidence of the fact that the Defence Force places a high priority on the spiritual needs of its members.

In a book that was published recently, dealing with the Rhodesian war, Contact II, the author maintains that if South Africa does not politicize its soldiers in the way that the ANC and Swapo did, it does not have a hope of success. I do not want to express an opinion on this, but I want to remark that unless South Africa equips its soldiers spiritually for the fray, it has equally little hope of success.

The chaplains play a very important role in equipping the soldier spiritually. True to the principle of the freedom of religion which is characteristic to the Republic of South Africa, the policy is also that every member of the S.A. Defence Force is served according to the customs, traditions and practices of his church. This means that more than 100 different denominations or religions are served by the chaplains’ service in the Defence Force. In addition, it means that more than 1 000 clergymen from different churches are actively involved in the S.A. Defence Force.

In this respect it is remarkable that in spite of differences in creeds, there is nevertheless a healthy co-operation between the various church communities and churches in the Defence Force. One hopes that this cooperation will not be restricted to the Defence Force only. It is general knowledge that the onslaught against the Republic is being aimed specifically at the church in all its manifestations. That is why I think it is essential for the church too to display a unified front to the outside world. Another pleasing aspect is the excellent co-operation which the chaplains’ service obtains from all churches, in spite of the less pleasant statements which some church leaders make from time to time.

The chaplains’ service covers a wide spectrum. Chaplains are amongst their people and with their people under all circumstances. Services are held at home bases, hospitals and detention barracks—an attempt is made to visit every detention barracks on a daily basis—but services are also being held in the operational area in particular. Every Sunday, between 60 and 70 different church services are held in the operational area. It appears from experience that many of the national servicemen really become properly acquainted with the church for the first time during their national service. Therefore, it appears that evangelization is an important by-product of Defence Force training, and I am not insinuating that we are dealing here with a case of “gospel from the barrel of a gun”.

I would also be neglecting my duty if I did not give attention to the following important matter with regard to the chaplains’ service. A chaplains’ service fund amounting to R200 000 has gradually been built up from donations from the public and the object is to distribute Bibles and Christian literature. During the past year R77 174 was voted from this fund for Bible distribution in Angola. This meant that over the past five years the S.A. Defence Force has distributed more Bibles in Angola than all the churches together have been able to do over the past 100 years.

What a startling contrast this is in comparison with the behaviour of the World Council of Churches. This body has just voted $125 000 once again for Swapo’s activities in Ovamboland and in Angola. This sanctimonious Christian body is giving guns and ammunition by implication—even though they theoretically vote it for another purpose—to the people in South West and in Angola, whilst the reviled S.A. Defence Force is distributing Bibles. One wonders who is actually complying with Christian norms, the World Council of Churches that distributes guns or the S.A. Defence Force that distributes Bibles.

I want to express the hope that the public should also reach their hands deep into their pockets for developing the chaplains’ service fund which has the distribution of Bibles as its object. I believe it is essential for the chaplains to continue with their good, excellent work, even if the results cannot always be seen, and we want to wish them everything of the best for the future.

Allow me just to make a final remark, Sir. When one pays a visit to the operational area and comes into contact with the people of the Defence Force, one is struck by the high quality of our officers corps. They are men of sterling character, but the most pleasing characteristic is that they are pious church-going people who remain true to the Word. I want to say once again that this is possibly the most pleasing characteristic of our Defence Force, because this is where our continued existence and our future lies.

Mr. Chairman, in view of the limited time I have at my disposal the hon. member will forgive me for not reacting to the thoughts expressed by him. This party accepts the importance of the ecclesiastical work being done among our young men on our borders.

†The recent Operation Protea has jolted most South Africans into a new awareness of the real military threat that South Africa has to face. To those who were perhaps sceptical about the seriousness of the intentions of the Marxist expansionism, this operation showed clearly that we are not simply dealing with a small band of terrorists who dislike South Africa’s presence in South West Africa.

It has become abundantly clear that our forces are facing an enemy that is becoming more sophisticated by the day and that is supplied with weapons, both in volume and modernity, that cannot be taken lightly. However, while we were highly successful in this operation, I believe we must guard against complacency because from all the reports that I have had, we did not meet serious air hostility. I fear that the operation could have been far more hazardous if our Air Force had to cope with enemy planes from the north.

The purpose of Operation Protea was clearly a limited one. It was a pre-emptive strike and there was never any intention of it being more than just that. The fact that such a vast amount of equipment was brought back, shows us that the decision to go in at that time was the correct one. The alternative was that all those arms and ammunition would have eventually been hurled against the inhabitants of Namibia with what could have been disastrous results.

Not only must we guard against complacency, but we must also guard against being lured into a war on foreign territory. It may well be part of Moscow’s tactics to get South Africa involved in a conventional war beyond our borders, and I think that we must be very, very careful not to fall into such a trap. The reason for raising this matter, is not because I do not have the confidence in our ability to handle the threat from across our northern borders. With the required equipment and manpower we can deal with the situation, but as we have no territorial ambitions, we must not allow the war to escalate and get ourselves embroiled in operations which, in the end, would simply bleed us dry.

On a completely different tack I want to say that we cannot rely on the SADF to solve our internal problems. Senior Defence Force personnel—and the hon. the Minister, when he was still one of them—have often said that 10% of the solution to our problems lay with the military, but that 90% would have to be worked out and implemented by politicians, and that means that we in this House are the ones that must do it. I do not believe that we are making the best use of the time available to bring about the necessary changes within our society.

Hear, hear!

I believe that too many of us are dragging our feet and putting obstacles in the way of meaningful change. By the skilled use of our young men, the SADF has created a strong shield—we have all referred to it—under which changes can be brought about in a peaceful manner. In fact, one of the prime objectives of a Defence Force is to maintain a peaceful atmosphere so that a society can confidently go about its business of living, developing and evolving. I stress the concept of evolusion and planned and evolusionary change. By resisting positive change we may ourselves, if we are not careful, become part of the threat to peace in South Africa. If we really wish to show our appreciation for what our young men are doing, we must use the time far more constructively than we are doing at present. On many occasions the generals have said that they can extend the protection, but that it is up to the politicians to get on with the job of peaceful political change. I believe that that is good advice, but I also believe that it is a warning to those who do not take heed.

One of the aspects of the S.A. Defence Force which I myself am very worried about, and which should certainly receive attention, is the question of the utilization of manpower. Even if a settlement is reached in Namibia in the near future, thereby relieving some of the pressure on the Defence Force, I do not believe that we can continue drawing on the manpower of the White segment of our community as we are doing at present. Already there is a tremendous shortage of skilled manpower, and I do not think our economy can continue to stand up to the burden which is being placed upon it by the need for our young men to attend regular army call-ups. I believe that this is a serious problem. I know that the hon. the Minister is giving attention to this problem, but I want to suggest one or two solutions for his consideration.

Firstly the burden must be spread more evenly by making a career in the S.A. Defence Force far more attractive to Black South Africans. I know that much has already been done in this connection, but I also know that the last vestiges of race discrimination have not yet been removed. Earlier this year the hon. the Minister said, in answer to a question, that to equalize pay in the S.A. Defence Force would cost the country something like R8 million in the first year after the introduction of such a policy. I think that compared to the advantages that this could bring about, the amount pales into insignificance.

A second proposal I should like to make, concerns the expansion of the Permanent Force. Other hon. members have referred to this as well. At present only something like 12% of the S.A. Defence Force consists of permanent personnel, and although I do not know what the target figure is, it must be considerably higher than that, perhaps 17% or 18%. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will refer to that. Not enough is being done to attract the right kind of man. I believe that the argument that we cannot offer attractive salaries, is an invalid one. Whether we pull an experienced man out of civilian life or whether we pay an equally skilled professional soldier, really makes no difference to the society as a whole, except that the disruptive effect of pulling men out of their jobs renders them less effective in their civilian capacity and I believe it also takes them a bit of time to slot into their military situation. It is really not a very efficient way of doing things.

There are some other aspects that I should like to refer to. One concern which I have and which I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister, is the dissatisfaction of servicemen with some of the decisions which are made by the Exemption Board. I have personally assisted with a number of applications for the permit which, to my way of thinking … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Wynberg disturbed this fine calm debate by hurling reproach at us. He said that we are dragging our feet with regard to certain attitudes, developments and adjustments. I should like to ask the hon. member: Which party is it that is boycotting certain bodies that are being established for the political development of people in the country? Which party does not want to participate in the structures that are being created? The hon. member must not hurl reproaches in this debate and think that we shall cheerfully accept them.

However, I want to say in a calm way that whereas the hon. member for Yeoville spoke so well here this afternoon, he looked a little pathetic. I consider him a person who would like to play in a winning team, because he is a winner.

That is where he is.

However, just look at the team that he is playing in. He is scoring good tries, but those hon. members do not even say “hear, hear” or “well done”. They sit quite still, because he is in a losing team. He must adopt another war-cry and say: “We are fighting for South Africa. We are not fighting against the Government.” Then that party will do better. That party’s war-cry is: “Fight against the Government”. The war-cry on this side of the House is: “We are not fighting against that party. We are fighting for South Africa.” [Interjections.]

Since a great deal of appreciation has been expressed today towards the Ministry of Defence, our military command, our officers and the men, Armscor and to the men with power, I want to associate myself with this and say that we in the House have to convey our thanks to the mothers who provide the sons on the border. There may be fathers here today who will appreciate that concept.

In conjunction with this I should like to look at one specific aspect today. I am referring to the lady, the woman or the daughter in the service of our Defence Force. I want to ask the hon. the Minister and the military command to take another in-depth look at this sphere again. There are two divisions for women members, viz. the Permanent Force and the voluntary military training scheme at the S.A. Army Women’s College at George. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether these facilities cannot be expanded. Is it not possible to expand the existing facilities further so that we can increase the intake capabilities of 150 in January and 100 in July? Or could we possibly provide another college or colleges of this kind? Is it not possible also to introduce national service for girls on a selective basis?

I should like to motivate these allegations and questions of mine. In the first instance, the military training of our daughters is a process of enrichment. We should like to see every girl experiencing that enrichment.

The advantage on the short term, in the first instance, is the utilization of better equipped women by both the Government sector and the private sector. When our daughters have completed that military course, they are sought-after people in various branches of the Government service, the private sector, our colleges, universities and technikons, because these people are balanced, disciplined and rounded off people who approach their task with confidence.

Now I come to the benefits on the long term. The women who have completed that course, who have that background, who have that ability, understanding and insight, are worth more to our nation since in future we shall have to pay more for our peace. These people have an understanding of warfare and of the task of the soldier on the border and the stronger the spirit of the women, the girlfriend, or the mother at home, the stronger the soldier on the border will be. This is true. However, if the man on the border knows that his mother is a nervous wreck who has to be given tablets by the doctor every two minutes, he is going to be concerned about it too.

I want to point out another benefit. These women are equipped with the ability to enter married life in a more adult fashion. This has been proved. There are people in our midst who can testify to this. Rev. Mr. Mossie Van den Bergh who is very closely involved in our Defence Force, has ensured that all his daughters underwent that course. It is a brilliant course. From 1 July last year to 30 June this year there were 20 091 divorces in our country. Nearly 22 000 children were involved in those divorces. I am no expert in this sphere, but when one has stripped everything to the bone, this problem area can be ascribed to one specific cause, viz. the immaturity or the inability of the people to make a success of that great undertaking. It is an expensive matter for our nation, and for the taxpayer too.

I ask that the colleges for our daughters should be expanded. Do you know, Sir, what we spent on children outside the family context during the past financial year? The House voted R47,2 million for this purpose. If each one of the colleges were to cost R10 million, we could build four such colleges with that money.

It has been scientifically proved that after such training men achieve better in their studies, and this applies to our daughters too. It gives our daughters the opportunity to escape the tunnel training where they progress from the primary through the secondary to the tertiary level in a tunnel of protection and are ultimately offered in a wide world and on an open market. They are then knowledgeable and academically equipped, but they are unprotected and they are not ready for the spheres in which other demands are going to be made as well.

The Defence Force can utilize these women as a work sphere, as a professional sphere, because they have received some professional training at those colleges. I recently read an interesting article in Die Huisgenoot about the women in our Defence Force; an excellent article. These women can be utilized because of their training, particularly in administrative positions, positions that are so important. They are important as a part of the infrastructure by means of which we are enabled to keep our men on the border. For instance, women can work in the supplies division, in the communications division, etc.

These women can also be utilized in the Defence Force in another context. I am thinking of the commandos, for instance. My commando in Standerton needs such women to carry out duties in the infrastructure of that commando. It is a commando consisting chiefly of farmers and it is sowing and ploughing time at the moment. The offices of the commando must nevertheless be manned fulltime. That is why we should like to make use of the services of these efficient women.

I believe that we should make provision for more of our women entering this fine sphere. We must involve them with their gifts and abilities. In any event, it is a sphere in which as far as salaries are concerned, there is no discrimination whatsoever. Equal salaries are paid to people of equal rank. If we can achieve this, our women will become the proud flower of our Defence Force.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Standerton entered this debate as if he wanted to inject life into it. However, it is not very easy to inject life into a debate after the hon. member for Wynberg has spoken. Therefore, I must congratulate the hon. member for Standerton on the brave attempt that he made. He only just succeeded in his aim.

I am really sorry that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is not here in the House now. However, I imagine that he will still enter the debate. In fact, the country is still waiting for a reply from the hon. the Leader of the Opposition to a certain statement that he made. On 14 September a small report appeared in Die Burger, in which the hon. the Leader of the Opposition was quoted as saying: “Ons gaan vandeesweek in die koukus bespreek hoe die aangeleentheid gehanteer moet word”. Therefore, apparently there was disagreement in the PFP caucus. Of course, this is something on which we will not be fully informed.

A group of us went to the border. When we arrived at the border, peace reigned there. We then read that our soldiers lost the soccer in Angola. Of course, one cannot win everything. However, discord now reigns in the PFP. Peace reigns during this debate tonight too. Therefore, I believe that it is only fair on our part to ask how great the peace in the PFP caucus is. [Interjections.]

Just like the hon. member for Yeoville, the official Opposition’s main spokesman in this debate, I too want to choose the calm waters tonight. That is why I should like to associate myself with what has already been said by the hon. member for Pretoria West, and dwell for a moment on this giant in the making in the industrial sphere, the organization that we know as Armscor. Of course, the hon. member for Durban Point made a great deal of fuss here today about Armscor. However, what are the facts?

As early as when we became a Republic in 1961, the black clouds of arms embargoes gathered on our horizon. Now you may possibly not believe me, Mr. Chairman, but it is true that a good number of these old “bitterbek-verkramptes”, people who never wanted to let go of Mother England’s apronstrings—some of them are still sitting here today; more than one of them—called out loudly at the time: “Never ever!” We know who they are.

Some of them are now in the NP. [Interjections.]

The Government, the NP, however, displayed the daring and the courage to say that we had enough confidence in our own technologists and that we could manufacture weapons, ammunition and armaments from our own resources, and supply our Defence Force with them. [Interjections.] That is why, in the ’sixties—this was still in Oom Jim Fouché’s time—we established the Armaments Board. The hon. member for Durban Point will recall it too. [Interjections.] Shortly after that the Armaments Corporation was formed. These two bodies existed parallel to one another. Now the hon. member for Durban Point is suddenly alleging that Armscor was established on his recommendation. Allow me to enlighten the hon. member. [Interjections.] The hon. member must give me a chance because I have never interrupted him.

I did not say so.

Mr. Chairman, do you know what happened? In 1974 a number of new hon. members came to this House. Do hon. members know how well they did? The chief spokesman on Defence for the official Opposition was a member of that corps too. So was the chief spokesman of the NP. They had been here for a mere two years and then they sorted the entire matter out. They said: Let us establish Armscor. That is why we established Armscor in 1976. We then combined all these functions and today hon. members are seeing the results of it.

And where were you?

It is merely as a result of positive thinking. The hon. member for Durban Point, however, is alleging that he asked for this.

But where were you?

I should like to draw the House’s attention to the fact that in 1974 the assets of these organizations were a mere R200 million. Today they are placed at R1 200 million. It has already been pointed out how many officials are working for this organization, viz. 29 000. However, what has not been pointed out, is the training which Armscor gives its people, and as has already been pointed out, 1 000 apprentices were employed this year. However, hon. members will also be interested to learn that more than 5 000 of Armscor’s staff underwent training in some form or other this year.

If I may congratulate Armscor on cooperation, I want to do so in two respects. In the first instance there is the example that the staff of Armscor sets for the whole of South Africa, an example of co-operation across the colour line. This corps consists of Whites, Coloureds, Blacks and Asians, to such an extent that more than 5 000 Coloureds are employed by Armscor in highly skilled positions. These people hold a record of labour stability, of labour peace and productivity, but I want to refer in particular to their safety record. We must realize that these people are working with dynamite. They are working with explosives. They are working with the most dangerous ammunition that can be manufactured. Nevertheless we can look with a sense of appreciation and satisfaction at the safety record of this body.

Secondly, Armscor has set an example of co-operation that is unequalled in South Africa. It is co-operation between the public sector and the private sector. I do not think there has yet been a case in the history of South Africa where a semi-public body like Armscor has co-operated so intimately and so closely with the private sector.

Who proposed it?

The hon. member is interrupting me now. After all, he is one of the group of 74 as well; why is he moaning now? Surely I have already given him credit. He must just not go too far because in a moment I am coming to the negative aspects.

I just wanted to know …

Order! If hon. members want to put questions, they must rise in their seats and ask for permission to put a question.

Other hon. members will go into the finer details of this cooperation. However, I should like to say thank you very much to the hon. the Minister and his predecessor for that stimulus that was granted to heavy industry by Armscor, to the electro-technical industry, to electronics and also to the sophisticated chemical industry. Many of these industries are situated in my constituency and I am aware of what a tremendous stimulus it was for these enterprises as well.

I do not want to go into the arms manufactured by Armscor. I just want to say the following. When we were on the border, there were buses which we were meant to travel on. However, there were also four Ratels. When we passed the Ratel in front, the young corporal standing there—about 19 years old with a small white moustache, said: “Do you not want to travel in the Ratel that was the first one in Angola?” I said that I would travel with him. He then said: “Do you see that mark on the outside? Those are the mortars that struck us but they make no impression on this bus!” [Interjections.] While I was travelling with him, I said to him: “Old chap, you are probably going to miss this Ratel when you are back in the ‘States’”. He replied: “Yes, that is true, but do you know what? I should just like to take my girl out to the drive-in one night in this Ratel.” [Interjections.] I just want to tell the hon. the Minister that hon. members have asked for women to be employed in the Army. I just want to say that if these things are going to happen then the camps will have to be very far apart! We know what a Ratel can do in one night.

I should like to congratulate the top management as well as each member of the staff of Armscor on what they are manufacturing. It is no use having prepared soldiers if our soldiers are uncertain about the arms that they have to use. They must not be unsure about whether that weapon is going to carry them through or not. That is why I believe that this House should pay a compliment to that organization which provides us with a strong fist so that our prepared Defence Force, our strong Defence Force can defend our country and its borders by means of that strong fist, that iron fist of Armscor.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to tell the hon. member for Roodeplaat that if he did not read Die Burger only, he would be able to find answers to his questions in other newspapers too.

As a Reserve Officer with approximately 13 years experience in the commandos, it was very interesting for me to visit the border recently, particularly so soon after Operation Protea, because apart from courses in Kimberley and Pretoria most of my camps were on the Natal South Coast, and therefore very far removed from the true war situation. The biggest problem for our officers there was to motivate the men to take military preparedness seriously. For most of them it usually meant an annual free holiday camp as well as an annual free hair-cut which was quite an event for most of them. However, as the years went by, one could definitely feel the unrest growing in these young people, particularly since more and more of them usually spend a short time at the border before they are allocated to us. Gradually the threat to their peace also began to take shape and I think that various groups of young people have attached different faces to that shape. For some of them it was simply a communist somewhere far away and for others it was an unspecified Swart Gevaar in our midst which possibly also meant a threat to the status quo, a threat to their privileges or position of power. For others in turn it was the very status quo that caused the threat. Of course, the truth is that the monstrous form has all three faces at the same time and the truth furthermore is that all these three groups of people are prepared to fight in order to remove what they see as the threat from the country, because they love their country. That is why I want to say that no one can do a greater disservice to the country and its people than to call into question the patriotism or the loyalty of any of these people or to forget what the tripartite nature of this threat to our long standing peace is.

Many young people who view the present system of government as one of White domination or injustice, wrongly link the Defence Force with the NP. They sometimes see the Defence Force as the defence force of the Afrikaner and for many Black people it is the defence force of the White man. Whilst I am aware of the broader international power struggle and was also able to see the extent of communist involvement recently, I consider it my duty—and I do this regularly—to tell people: “Yes, there is a threat from outside. Yes, I also believe that the present political system in South Africa does not comply with my requirements for a democracy. Yes, I also believe that there is no greater threat to law and order here within the country than injustice. Yes, I also believe that no normal person prefers unrest to peace or breaking down schools and burning down factories to building for a better future, or fighting for rights and justice to the freedom of expressing oneself to the best of one’s abilities and expectations in an orderly, justified community.” As long as I believe this, I also say it is my duty to tell them: “It is not the defence force of the NP, the Afrikaner or the White man; it is a defence force which has a duty to ensure that the entire community is protected from onslaughts from outside and from within regardless of the historical facts which may have made it possible for communism to find allies in people within the country who believe that the time for speaking about injustice has passed.” I also tell them that just as injustice disturbs law and order, law and order are necessary for justice to triumph.

That is why the policy of those of us on this side of the House is that we are prepared to do our duty in the Defence-Force, but that we also find ourselves arguing with the NP here in this House about which changes are necessary for ensuring lasting peace. Then we do not expect our patriotism to be called into question if we work for peaceful change here or outside. If this type of accusation is in fact made, as we have been experiencing here over the past few weeks, and should hon. members continue to do so, they would be damaging the country and the Defence Force and simply helping to strengthen the distorted image of the Defence Force held by all those who do not agree with the NP. [Interjections.]

Do you not want to be a little more specific?

There is very little time at my disposal.

In conclusion, I want to raise a subject to which I know it is very difficult to find answers. I am referring to the increasing militarization of our young people on both sides of the colour line. This, one must say, is an inevitable consequence of the length of the conflict situation in which we find ourselves. Unfortunately, it is also true that many young people see the enemy first of all as being Black, due to the increasing integration between the unrest within the country and the communist onslaught from outside. We see the manifestation of this militarization in the regular involvement of members of the Defence Force or those who have recently returned from the border, in murders and other violent incidents. There are many examples and it is not necessary to quote them.

Do you have any statistics in this regard?

I speak to many young people and soldiers. I regularly travel on the Trans-Natal and I often give lifts to young soldiers. I am amazed to hear that the term “Boy” applies to any and every Black person. I also hear from some of them that at times they feel bored or useless in camps on the border for three to four weeks at a time and that they look forward to the week when they will be involved in action. This is what they tell me too. Therefore, it amounts to young people looking forward to the time in which their own lives will be in danger and in which they will have to kill. They look forward to that rather than to the time when they will no longer be involved in the violence. I do not know what the answer is to this, because as I said, it is a difficult issue. [Interjections.] Possibly the hon. the Minister may have an answer to it. I believe that with a state of mind like this, change for peaceful co-existence is practically inconceivable.

I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister how active the re-orientation services that were launched in 1978 have been, and how successful they have been in involving local authorities in their efforts. Furthermore, I want to express the hope that the Defence Force will do everything in its power to ensure that the men are demilitarized before they return to civilian life.

As far as the militarization of young Black people is concerned, and the distorted image which is being created, viz. that the Defence Force is involved in the suppression of peaceful protest, I want to ask whether the hon. the Minister and his colleague, the Minister of Police, could negotiate about the use of camouflage outfits by members of the Police. During the peaceful school boycotts by Indians in Natal last year, I myself saw policemen in camouflage outfits standing guard in front of schools in Land Rovers. As a result of this, the wrong impression was created that the Defence Force had been called in to intimidate peaceful protesters. This damages the image of the Defence Force and I believe it gives the militant elements the opportunity to say that the police are not in a position to protect their home and hearth or to maintain order, an allegation in which to my mind there is not a shred of truth.

Mr. Chairman, tonight I saw an amazing example of a man with a split personality. The hon. member said that we should not accuse them of lack of loyalty towards South Africa, but in spite of what was said here this afternoon, some of them say implicitly that there is no threat. The hon. member did not agree with that tonight, and admitted that there is in fact such a threat. He said inter alia that they are prepared to fight together with us at the front, but at the same time he said that the fact that the men on the border are inspired with a desire to kill people—which is probably the most natural emotion amongst soldiers—gives him the impression that peaceful coexistence in South Africa is impossible. How is one to understand such a person?

He does not understand himself.

The only way in which I can explain it, is that the hon. member has a split personality. [Interjections.] If he takes the accusation that his loyalty is under suspicion to heart, he may be correct in doing so. I do not want to react further to what the hon. member said because we know him as a person who sometimes make statements which cause one’s hair to stand on end, and therefore I shall leave him at that.

In spite of the fact that I detest repetition, I nevertheless feel a great need to address a few words to the hon. the Minister.

Order! Because of the conversation which is in progress around the hon. member, I am unable to hear what he is saying. Hon. members must allow the hon. member to deliver his speech himself.

Mr. Chairman, I hope I shall have injury time for that.

Apart from the fact that I detest repetition, I nevertheless feel a need to say to the hon. the Minister, the Chief of the Defence Force and all the men: Congratulations on having made yet another brilliant addition to the annals of military history in South Africa by way of Operation Protea.

The Minister spelled out very clearly this afternoon the extent of the threat against South Africa. This immediately makes one realize that since South Africa’s small White population has practically exclusively been responsible for safeguarding this country thus far, one knows that manpower—or rather the shortage of manpower—is the key word. One should therefore take an in-depth look at potential resources which can yet be tapped. In the first instance the hon. the Minister and his department are moving in the direction of tapping the resources provided by peoples of colour and other population groups.

However, I want to leave that subject and rather refer to another resource which is also available. I am referring to the so-called national reserve. For those who do not know exactly what this means, I should just like to explain. It includes all men from 18 years to 65 years who are liable for military service but have never been ballotted, called up for national service or had any military training by way of voluntarily joining the commandos or undergoing any military service whatsoever. There is an amazing 720 000 of those people. Taking our population figures into account, one immediately realizes that it is a larger number of people than those who are involved in the military or security actions in South Africa. However, in my opinion this is a state of affairs that we cannot allow to continue in South Africa.

I live in Nyanga.

This afternoon I want to make a very serious request of the hon. the Minister, although I am really quite sure that an in-depth look is already being taken at this matter. Every member of this national reserve is just as indebted to South Africa, when it comes to its defence, as any other person is. With the exception of people in essential key positions, those people must become involved in the safeguarding and security of South Africa.

Of course there are certain sectors in which those people can be used, and the first of these is the commandos. I am aware of the fact that our commandos are alarmingly below strength, and I do not really want to put it more strongly than that. It is a state of affairs that we cannot put up with any longer, because those people have very important tasks to carry out. The proposal that I want to make this afternoon, may indeed sound revolutionary, but those people must be incorporated in the commandos. It must be made compulsory. They must be subjected to the normal disciplinary measures of the Defence Force. Then we must not simply aim at bringing the commandos to full strength, but to more than full strength. We must think of a numerical strength of 120%, 130% and even 150%. This must be done so that we can ensure that when they are used in the operational area, they will in fact be at full strength. As a former soldier the hon. the Minister knows that when a unit is called up, there are always a good number of requests for postponement or exemption, and that many of the requests have so much merit that one cannot refuse them. I want to put this idea to the hon. the Minister. Perhaps the hon. the Minister and his department can consider it.

In my specific constituency, where there are many strategic national key points which must be safeguarded by those people, the commandos also have to see to additional security services that are complementary to the security services of the industries concerned. There is increasing unrest, frustration and bitterness amongst those men. Some of them come to me and ask whether I cannot please speak to their commander. They say they are still studying and will not pass their examinations because they have too little time to study. They then ask whether they cannot be exempted from their duties for a while. This is one of the reasons why the numerical strength of the commandos is continually decreasing. There is a strong feeling amongst many men that while they are doing voluntary service and inconveniencing themselves and their families, some of their neighbours—in the city and in the rural areas—are looking after their own material prosperity and in addition sometimes act in a derogatory manner towards those volunteers because they say that they are neglecting their business and their family. I can assure the hon. the Minister that this is one of the reasons why the commandos are experiencing problems with their numerical strength.

Another area in which those people can be utilized, is of course in our civil defence services. Once again I want to use my constituency as an example. Civil defence services are of the utmost importance there because we are dealing with highly explosive material and extremely poisonous gases. My municipality has established a fine communications infrastructure, etc., but they cannot find the volunteers to carry out that important task. The people simply say that they work the whole week and are not going to tolerate being hounded for the whole day on a Saturday to undergo training in order to carry out those tasks. They say their first duty lies with their families and not with the other people. We cannot allow this state of affairs to continue any longer. It is fine if it can be done voluntarily, but in the times in which we are living it simply no longer works in that way. Now I know that this would probably imply that the Defence Act would have to be amended, but I think it is in the interest of South Africa and in the security and safeguarding of us all that it should be done. I want to repeat once again that the time has come in South Africa for every able-bodied man to be involved in the safeguarding of South Africa. I even want to make another revolutionary proposal—and I think if the hon. the Minister of Police were here, he would have said, “hear, hear”—and this is that some of these people, if any of them are left over, could possibly be used as police reservists. There is a serious shortage in that regard too. If the ancestors of the hon. member for Yeoville could live and work with the spear in one hand and the trowel in the other, and my own ancestors could be productive with a gun in one hand or in the saddle bag and with a spade in the other, the majority of South Africa’s able-bodied men can achieve the very same. I think we have reached the stage where it is absolutely essential and of primary importance.

Mr. Chairman, just like the hon. member for Sasolburg, I too am experiencing problems in assimilating the anomalies in the approach of the hon. member for Greytown. Nevertheless I want to say to him: Far be it for me to question his and his party’s patriotism as such, but I think that similarly we also have the right to call into question some attitudes and statements of that party. I shall do so later on in the course of my speech. To begin with I want to associate myself with hon. members on both sides of the House who have congratulated the hon. the Minister, the top structure of the Defence Force, the officers and the privates, on their fine achievement with Operation Protea. I think they deserve the biggest conceivable bouquet of proteas from all of us inside and outside the House, indeed from everyone in South Africa. Not only did Operation Protea succeed in its military aim. It was also a resounding blow to the morale of our enemy, as well as a political set-back for Russia and its hangers-on and surrogates here in Southern Africa. I think the loss of prestige and the international embarrassment for Russia must be considerable under the circumstances. In a somewhat lighter vein, I want to say that I am rather surprised that the Soviet Union has not yet been charged by the UN for a gross violation of the international arms embargo against South Africa, since they have exported sophisticated weapons to the value of over R200 million to this country. To be more serious, if one looks at the nature and extent of the tremendous quantity of weapons that were captured and destroyed—and many of them were offensive, not simply defensive weapons—the situation is just as alarming as it is pleasing.

The value of those weapons amounts to nearly 10% of our annual defence budget, and indicates without any doubt that the enemy is preparing to launch a conventional onslaught on us at some time or other. This indication is endorsed by the capture of Staff Sergeant Nikolai Pestretsov, the death of his high-ranking Russian military colleagues and the fact that approximately 70 other Russian military staff members were so far south. All of this supports this statement of mine. Nevertheless there are people inside and outside South Africa who continue to adopt the view that there is apparently no onslaught against South Africa. Apparently there are such people in the House too. If those people do not want to believe their eyes and ears, they should at least not shut their eyes completely to what the Soviet Union itself has been stating over the years. As early as in 1955 the Central Committee of the Soviet Union, under the chairmanship of Nikita Krushehev, formulated and declared their strategy in so far as it was applicable to us. It was to restrict and curtail the options of the Western power bloc in any future confrontation, and this would be done by encircling territories in the developing world that were of strategic importance to the West, with Marxist satellites, client States or surrogate States, from which these strategic areas could then be infiltrated and undermined by way of terrorist activities, strikes, civil disobedience and other destabilization actions. It is important to note in this regard that the Soviet Union seldom initiates wars as such, but encourages domestic instability in the target areas, chiefly by exploiting imagined and sometimes real grievances. In this way people and organizations who are not Marxist or Marxist orientated per se, often become the pawns of such an onslaught and the instrument of this attempt to cause instability.

Not only did the Soviet Union formulate and announce the umbrella strategy at the time, but it also identified the target areas. These target areas were firstly, the strategically vulnerable adjacent to the important sea and trade routes of the world and in the second place, the producers of strategic minerals, including oil. As the hon. the Minister has already indicated in his speech, our part of the world qualifies on both these points. We are situated on a strategic trade route and we are also an important producer of minerals.

The latest example of this tactic of encirclement and creating disorder is, of course, Iran. I do not have the time to go into this in detail. Here in Southern Africa the same tactic is developing and South West Africa and Botswana are all that remain in the path of completing this girdle of encirclement. The front along which the hangers-on and pawns of the Soviet Union’s strategy, such as the ANC, the PAC, Swapo and other similar organizations, can infiltrate South Africa and undermine it, are becoming increasingly longer, as the hon. the Minister indicated too.

Not only has Mr. Leonid Brezhnev adopted this strategy, but with his Brezhnev doctrine he has elaborated upon it and perfected it. This is the doctrine according to which direct military intervention in socialist States can be justified on the pretext of rushing to the assistance of friendly Governments who feel threatened from within or without. This is the doctrine according to which Afghanistan was invaded, according to which Czechoslovakia was invaded during the Dubcek period, according to which Poland will be invaded when the Soviet supreme council deems it necessary and according to which 24 000 Cubans are present in Angola. By means of the so-called friendly treaties which the Soviet Union has signed in the interim with countries such as Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Algeria and many others, the Brezhnev doctrine has also been elaborated and made applicable to Africa, specifically to Southern Africa too.

Despite these facts, despite the evidence which Operation Protea produced, despite the fact that Moscow’s pawns such as the ANC have accepted responsibility for incidents of internal terrorism and sabotage, despite the fact that the ANC and its hangers-on are openly involved in school boycotts and strikes and on such occasions also distribute pamphlets, there are members of the official Opposition—I want to say that the hon. member for Yeoville is the exception here—who want to allege in the House that there is no total onslaught against South Africa.

The hon. members for Pietermaritzburg North, Port Elizabeth Central, Berea, Sea Point and Greytown have all done this during this session. We have seen it in the debates on the Votes of the hon. the Prime Minister, the hon. the Minister of Justice, etc. They have all done so whether by way of interjections, or by statements during their own speeches. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North, who is unfortunately not here this afternoon, even went so far as to quote Angola as an example of the failure of the Russian strategy in Africa and the rejection of the Kremlin. Can one credit that? Can one really credit it? And this is when our sons in their thousands are in danger on the Angolan border, when the Defence Force, in the nature of our total situation—and all other sectors too—is experiencing problems in obtaining the necessary trained labour forces, and also at a period in which a deliberate attempt is being made by various organizations to discourage national service. In this situation hon. members of the official Opposition say that a total onslaught against South Africa does not exist. What are they achieving in doing so? Surely they are only giving more power to those who want to make it more difficult for us to defend ourselves against our enemies. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend following on what the hon. member for Benoni had to say. I agree with much of what he did say, but I do have a speech of my own which I wish to make.

Right at the outset I should like to tell hon. members that there is a film currently showing here in Cape Town, which is set against the background of the Vietnam War. The title of the film is Hair. I saw a stage production of it in London some years ago. This film depicts the hippy cult and the attitudes of the hippy cult to the normal values of a basically conservative Western society. If one watches this film one realizes that a favourite public activity of this cult is the burning of call-up papers for military service—I believe in the USA they call it draft dodging—and trying to do the clever thing, as they look upon it, of getting out of the draft or of national service in any way possible.

Here they call it the alternative to military service.

As a matter of fact, in one of the scenes a group of hippies try to persuade a young man who is on his way to report for military service not to do so. This young man insists that it is his duty to report for military service. He is asked by one of the hippies: “What are you doing it for?” He answers: “I do not think you will understand”. Again they ask him: “What are you doing it for?” This time he answers: “I am doing it for you”. “Do not say that to me”, says the one hippy, “because I will not do the same for you”.

That statement, I believe, is symptomatic of a sickness that is prevalent in the West today, this self-indulgent, self-centred, pull up the ladder, I am all right Jack mentality, the unwillingness to fight for that in which one believes, or even worse, a complete lack of strong beliefs. This attitude today threatens the survival of freedom and democracy right throughout the world.

There is no shadow of a doubt that the world is mobilizing for conflict. The Russian Army is engaged in massive manoeuvres. We see evidence of this nightly on our television screen. Today, I understand, it has been reported that China is also engaging in massive manoeuvres, and the USA have woken up to the fact that its military capability leaves much to be desired. The attitude, however—and here I agree wholeheartedly with what the hon. member for Yeoville said—of Western Europe can only be described as chilling. One finds it in many places. In this German Tribune, that arrived today, one finds it. In this magazine mention is made of South Africa, of the South African invasion of Angola. This is the sort of reporting that demonstrates the attitude to which I am referring, this attitude which I describe as chilling. Unfortunately I am afraid that that attitude also manifests itself in certain sections of our own community. Unfortunately in South Africa—and we must face up to this fact—it is a growing belief that it is futile to fight. There is a voice that is saying: “We cannot win. Our case does not have a moral foundation.” There is a voice that is saying that maybe Marxism is the answer anyway. Sadly, these are things that one hears on our university campuses and in other parts of our country. We even have letters to the Press that warn of South Africa’s military activities in South West Africa as though a Vietnam type of situation is inevitable. We have all read those letters. They appear in our Press almost on a daily basis in one or another newspaper in the country.

Having said that, I want to add a few thoughts to what my hon. leader has already said on the subject of our efforts in South West Africa. I also want to outline the NRP’s attitude to the role of the military. We have taken note of the right-wing party’s attitude and we were horrified to read in the morning Press, and I am sure that many hon. members also read it in Die Burger, that—

When was that?

It was in Die Burger, but I regret that I do not have the date. I think it is in Die Burger of this morning. We dissociate ourselves from this attitude. The NRP is committed to a peaceful solution in South West Africa, a solution that satisfies the majority of the people of that territory and one that will ensure the survival of freedom and democracy. In a speech that I made during the Foreign Affairs Vote I said that it was our prayer that such a settlement would be possible. It is also our prayer that such a settlement will receive, if not total recognition, then at least recognition of those powers who count and those powers who uphold Western values. As my hon. leader said, the military role is only a small part of the solution. A political settlement is of cardinal importance, and until such a solution is found we believe that the S.A. Defence Force and the SWA Defence Force must be there to look after the security of all the peoples of South West Africa. These forces must be there to keep the Marxist aggressors at bay and they must be there to push them right away from the border, as was done so successfully in Operation Protea.

I now wish to turn briefly to the members of the PFP, and I want to speak with the hon. member for Yeoville with sincerity and I want him to please understand that I am not trying to make cheap political play of this matter. I am concerned and deeply troubled—and I mean this with sincerity—by an article that appeared in a Natal Sunday paper on Sunday, 20 September. It was an article—I oave it here—that outlined alleged differences in the PFP caucus relating to defence. These differences, according to the report, were prompted by the hon. member for Yeoville’s comments after the visit to the operational area by members of this House. According to this report PFP members are reported to have been unhappy with the statement that was made because they felt that it overemphasized the military component. The report goes on to say, and this is what concerns me—

Later on the article says—

[Interjections.] Mr. Chairman, I am trying to make this a sincere issue with the PFP. The article says—

That is a cause of concern to me because I believe that this is the type of article that can lead to doubts arising in the minds of our young people who have been called upon to do military service. That is the problem posed by this article. I am concerned about what this type of article will do to the youth of South Africa. I am talking across political lines now. I am referring here to the doubts that can be sown in their minds.

Order! I regret the hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, seeing that the hon. member for Umhlanga is making a very good speech, I firstly want to invite him to address a party rally at Kuruman and secondly I want to afford him the opportunity to continue with his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. Whip for being so accommodating.

†I want to say, Sir, that I would have expected a clear and unequivocal statement from the Defence spokesman for the PFP.

Did you not listen to me?

I would have expected such a statement, Sir, particularly refuting the statement that the Defence Force is the military wing of the NP. I sincerely hope we can get clarity in respect of this article from the PFP during the course of this debate. [Interjections.] You know, Sir, that hon. back-bencher there should rather learn to keep quiet because he puts his foot into his mouth with monotonous regularity. Having said that, Sir, I want to say that I believe that as far as South Africa is concerned, international acceptance must not be at the expense of democracy. A Swapo dictatorship in South West Africa will open the way for the Russians to move in with their T34 tanks some of which we saw after they had been captured by our men during Operation Protea. Not only will this provide a direct threat to South Africa but it will also put the most severe pressure upon South Africa to give up Walvis Bay. It will use the argument that this is the only viable port for that territory and it will use that argument in international forums. If we lose Walvis Bay and the Russian warships which are at present in Maputo move into Walvis Bay, the consequences for South Africa and for the West will be dire.

The Progs want to make it an open port.

Therefore, Sir, until real freedom is brought to South West Africa, South Africa must prepare and be prepared to keep up her military vigil in the interests of the security of the territory and its peoples as well as in the interests of its own survival.

In conclusion, I want to say that we do not have unlimited time to find our political solutions. We must remove every obstacle to a peaceful and lasting settlement in this part of Southern Africa as expeditiously as possible because, if we fail, the light could go out again on this dark continent. However, if we succeed, it will be the first step towards rolling back the red tide from our borders.

To all our young men serving I say this: Your cause is worthy; do not falter.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to tell the hon. member who has just resumed his seat that I listened with gratitude to his attitude regarding the warning he issued that we should not pollute our young people’s minds with anti-military ideas.

Before I proceed to say what I actually wanted to say, I should like to turn for a moment to the hon. member for Greytown. I listened to his speech and I tried to fathom what he was saying. But what I now want him to tell us is what he thinks of a member of Parliament who does the following. If a member of Parliament were to attend a briefing in which a general is giving a run down on Swapo, and he then points out inter alia that Swapo has a political organization in South West Africa but that Swapo is the only political party which also has a military wing abroad and an MP were then to say: Just like the National Party, what would he think of that MP? [Interjections.]

I ask the hon. the Leader of the Opposition what he thinks of such an MP. [Interjections.] I want to ask him and the hon. member for Greytown, if he were to go and look at the spoils of war and walk with his colleagues between the vehicles, the cannons and the tanks and when they return to the buses say: “South Africa had no moral right to take those weapons, because they belonged to FAPLA” what would he think of such an MP? Who did so, moreover, after he had attended a briefing on where those weapons came from and how they fell into the hands of Swapo. What would he think of such an MP? I also ask his hon. leader what he thinks of such an MP? [Interjections.]

Who is that man?

It is obvious who that man is; I do not wish to discuss it any further. I just think that when we rise in this House and pay lipservice in respect of our attitude to military actions, we should also reveal what our own attitude is and not just the official standpoint of our party.

The hon. member for Greytown is leaving.

Go! Go!

Sir Walter Walker made a speech last month in Taiwan. The hon. the Prime Minister also referred to it, but I do not think there would be anything wrong with my quoting the same part which has already been quoted by the hon. the Prime Minister, because I think it is good and necessary that it be quoted in this debate. Sir Walter Walker told the Chinese—

The judge is also leaving; I presume he is going to give some advice.

I continue with the quote—

I want to affirm this with acclamation. Those strong men, that high quality of leadership and that sheer professionalism which we who made the visit to which so much reference has already been made, experienced in both the professional soldiers and the national service men, was a revelation to us, and also a joy to us. The clean-cut, open faces, the proud bearings, the shining eyes that look right through one, the total absence of war weariness, I believe inspired everyone who met those young men.

Why is it that in a world and a time in which there is cynicism and a great deal of negativism in respect of military service, we can still experience this? I believe that there are several explanations for this, but one of the explanations is something that has already been referred to here today. This is the solicitous way in which the Defence Force involves itself in the physical and mental needs of its members. I cannot think of a single aspect of the mental and physical welfare of the members of the Defence Force, whether they be professional soldiers, national servicemen, citizen force or commando members, in which there is not a purposeful attempt to care for them. I do not have the time to elaborate on this fully, but am merely making a general statement and in addition it has also been further emphasized by the hon. member for Pietersburg and the hon. member for Randfontein.

There is another very important aspect which must be taken into consideration, and that is that one cannot inspire the ordinary soldier to such an extent if the higher echelons do not set an example and radiate a spirit which is contagious. I am not saying this to flatter the men, but because I believe one should give credit where credit is due. From the highest officer, through the general staff, the commando’s and the unit commanders there is an example of discipline to the ordinary troops. And this has been so contagious, as we saw for ourselves, that it was reflected in those men. I wish to thank the Chief of the Defence Force and his men for this and assure him that we noticed it and appreciated it and that we are placing it on record here.

There is a third factor which I believe contributes to the spirit which radiates from those men and that is the knowledge that people at home are thinking of them, that they are being cared for lovingly and that they are awaiting their return. This message is conveyed to them in many ways, sometimes not as directly as one would like, but it also takes place indirectly, for example through the actions of the Southern Cross Fund, the Defence Force Fund as well as the funds of other bodies. In this connection I wish to refer to the women’s action of the National Party of the Transvaal which, during the past few years under the leadership of Mrs. Engela Treurnicht, has done a tremendous amount to convey this message to the men. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it has really been a pleasant afternoon in this House. After the proceedings had opened with a prayer and we had resumed our seats, we could look up at the gallery and see the wonderful young men, the pride of our nation, sitting there.

Order! The hon. member may not refer to the gallery.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to refer to it, because those young men inspire in one a feeling of security. This feeling of security was again experienced recently after the action of the Defence Force. I am sorry if I have contravened the rules, but I was really shocked when the Defence Force was referred to as a defence force of the National Party, and it was said that these young men are wasting their lives on the border for two years. Among other things, the Defence Force is considered to be the cheap barber of South Africa. Surely this is inconsistent. In contrast with this image, I see the S.A. Defence Force in my mind’s eye as the largest single training institution for the citizens of South Africa. In real terms, however, it is measured by what it is worth for South Africa now and in the future. In the report we see that the Defence Force trains approximately 5 000 artisans every year. On the border we met one of these men. His name was Yster. He has designed a recovery vehicle which is being used very effectively in the operational area. If one considers the initiative and success of such men—actually there were three men who worked on the project—one sees how effective the training there really is.

The Defence Force trains 7 000 vehicle drivers every year, and in addition to the fact that those drivers can subsequently be employed in certain categories of work, that training also contributes to the prevention of accidents in our country. The Defence Force is also one of the largest trainers of pilots, not only for the South African Airforce, but also for the South African Airways and the Citizen Force. This large organization also has its staff management, its logistic and financial management systems. There are also the medical and dental services, and the engineering and other professional branches. In the Defence Force one receives very wide-ranging practical training. There are also the clerks in the stores depots and the caterers. They are also people who teach in various capacities. They are teachers in the sense that they convey a broader knowledge of life, and the pupils in their turn convey that knowledge to the outside world where they subsequently find themselves. The knowledge is also transmitted to other population groups when contact is made with them.

In addition there are 1 200 chaplains in the Citizen Force. They are the bearers of the message of life in its widest form. In the West Caprivi we came upon a small Bushman community with approximately 200 christianized souls. They had their own lay preacher who could speak seven languages. It is a pity that the S.A. Defence Force cannot afford every individual an opportunity to do the things he is specifically interested in. However, we must look further at the South African Defence Force and its real values. The RAU instituted a very interesting investigation into the integration of the national servicemen into the community upon his return to everyday life. It was found that they adjusted with greater maturity, self-confidence, certainty and responsibility, and with greatly improved motivation, to the academic programme of the university after they had completed their national service. The second finding was that 30,3% of the national servicemen financed their own studies when they returned, which again proves that the experience they gained in the Defence Force was cherished and used later in society. It has also been proved that the national servicemen, after returning from their national service, perform better, and that there is a far smaller failure rate among such national servicemen. One asks oneself why this should be so. The training given by the Defence Force is very comprehensive. The Defence Force is not only interested in specific knowledge as an infantryman, an artilleryman, pilot or whatever specific task a serviceman is trained for, but also his physical and mental development for a far healthier lifestyle. But what goes even deeper is the development of patriotism, the growing conviction in one’s mind that South Africa is your country. Patriotism has nothing to do with party politics. It is concerned with a feeling which is indispensable for characterizing a person as a citizen of a specific country. In addition the serviceman also has a personal discipline, an indispensable attribute which plays an important part in subsequent achievements when he returns and must adjust to civilian life again. We consider this to be the total scope of the Defence Force when we speak of our Defence Force ballotees and the function which the Defence Force has in preparing these young men to be useful citizens who accomplish far greater achievements than merely visible achievements when we see them in uniform.

Mr. Chairman, time does not permit to reply to the hon. member for Brentwood.

I am happy that political neutrality is the stated policy of the SADF. I am also impressed by the high professional calibre of the top echelons of Defence Force officers with whom I have had dealings. However, I believe there are times when that neutral policy is not implemented as firmly as it should be. I wish to make the strongest appeal for every case of political bias, or even suggested political bias, which may arise in the SADF to be severely dealt with, and to be seen to be dealt with. We in the PFP have repeatedly said that we are implacably opposed to violence, and that we support the concept of a strong Defence Force as a shield against the politics of violence. We support the concept of a strong shield behind which peaceful change must come about, because we recognize that security and stability is essential in a time of transition. We recognize that if we were the Government, we would also lay claim to the protection of that shield. But—and this is a very big “but”—the shield provided by the SADF must be politically neutral if it is to command broad support. The SADF must be seen to be the servant of the State and of all the people, or else it will itself fuel the fires of revolution. If the Defence Force ever came to be seen as the military arm of the NP, it will, as my hon. leader has said, split the country from top to bottom. The consequences of political partisanship on the part of the Defence Force would have massive implications. I should like to mention just three. Firstly, it would strike at the heart of parliamentary government and would undermine the fundamental democratic assumption that the Defence Force is the servant of Parliament, no matter which party is the Government of the day. Secondly, it would steer this country towards the abyss of civil war in that more and more political movements would decide to seek power by force of arms. Thirdly—this would be a more immediate effect—it would make recruitment outside the narrow White ranks of the supporters of the NP almost completely ineffective.

Stop imagining things.

I want to say that I am prepared to support the need for a strong Defence Force from any forum in the land so long as that Defence Force is politically neutral, completely politically neutral. I would rather cut out my own tongue than persuade a young man to go and risk his life for the apartheid policies of the NP, because the apartheid policies play a major part in sucking communism into this part of the world.

Are you not ashamed of yourself?

If we want to understand the importance of the military staying politically neutral, we must consider the lessons of Iran where the Iranian Defence Force became too closely associated with the Government of the Shah. The revenge of the people was terrible. To this day the orderly processes of peaceful civilian government have not been able to reassert themselves. It is my belief that the Iranian nightmare could possibly come to pass in South Africa if we do not stand constantly vigilant against any evidence of political partisanship on the part of the SADF. To stand vigilant against political partisanship means to stand guard against every little transgression so that one does not get a big transgression. As the English say: “If you look after the pennies, the pounds will look after themselves.”

Let me give an example. Last year in this debate the hon. member for Yeoville made reference to an article in The Warrior which confused the concept of the Republic and the policy of the NP Government. I refer hon. members to col. 5176 of Hansard. There was no adequate reply to that from that side of the House. I ask again that that article be repudiated, as well as every other example of language which confuses Government and State and which might suggest the S.A. Defence Force’s support of the NP Government’s policy. Another example was the non-publication of the Biermann Report on the psychological action plan. Rightly or wrongly, the non-publication of that report created an impression of cover-up with the general public.

But that was agreed to by all parties.

That hon. member himself called for the publication of that report in the debate and then he agreed not to have it published.

A third example I wish to quote is a poster I saw pinned up at a military base entitled “Smash Swapo”. I would prefer a poster to identify violence or terrorism as the enemy, rather than an organization as such … [Interjections.] … particularly since there is an internal Swapo which, as I understand it, is a lawful organization. Another thing is that the Defence Force should stop the troops calling the enemy “boy”, because that implies that the enemy is Black.

A further example I want to refer to—and I do so with regret—concerns the hon. the Minister himself. He is a person who progressed from the politically neutral post of Head of the Defence Force to the front ranks of the NP, with all that that implies, as if it was the most natural development in the world.

You are talking rubbish!

Frankly, Sir, I think there should have been a decent interval between resigning the one post and entering politics, because the way it happened leaves unsettling questions in the public mind about the relationship between the former Head of the Defence Force and the NP. Both the S.A. Defence Force and the Government should have displayed more sensitivity on that issue.

While I am referring to the hon. the Minister, I should like to ask him whether a statement allegedly attributed to him and made in October 1979 is true or not. It is said that in October 1979 when he was Head of the Defence Force he made the following statement—

And also—

That is the language of the NP and it was alleged in The Cape Times of 8 September 1980 that he had said that in October 1979. I should like the hon. the Minister to repudiate that statement if it is not true, because if it is true, it raises unsettling questions. I should like to ask him whether he would tolerate that kind of language from serving officers in the Force today.

Finally I should like to say that having served in the Defence Force myself, and having spoken to many young men who served in that Force—members of my family and others I know—I am aware of a sprinkling of individuals who say things, things with political content, which make—let me put it mildly—a very poor impression on young serving men who happen to see the need for change in South Africa. These are the wild horses in the ranks. There are some of them in the ranks, and they need to be tamed because they are capable of doing enormous damage to the interests of this country through the negative ripples which they send out.

It is exactly what you are doing now.

I am sure the hon. the Minister—and I hope he will do this; I expect him to do it—will share my strong disapproval of such individuals’ behaviour, and I also ask him to assure the House that in his term of office he will do everything he can in order to ensure that a spirit of complete party political neutrality will be the hallmark of the Defence Force from top to bottom.

Mr. Chairman, if there is anything appropriate that I can say to the hon. member for Yeoville it is: Harry, your party’s slip is showing. [Interjections.] That is my only comment to him following the speech by the hon. member for Constantia.

Today we have had expressed, from a young man, from a political babe in arms, the true spirit and the true outlook of hon. members of the PFP, at least of many of them. [Interjections.] In other words, the hon. member for Yeoville is an exception in his attitude. I take it that he is indeed sincere in his attitude. I give him credit for that. I should say, however, that the protestations we have had from hon. members of his party in this debate today about how they resent being accused of being unpatriotic and un-South African, and proclaiming what loyal South Africans they are …

Do you want to allege that we are not good South Africans? [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, it ill becomes them to proclaim it when we have to listen to a speech such as that made by the hon. member for Constantia. [Interjections.]

Do you mean to say that we are not loyal South Africans?

Yes. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon. member Mr. Theunissen entitled to suggest, to say in fact, that this party is unpatriotic?

Order! Did the hon. member Mr. Theunissen say that hon. members of the PFP are unpatriotic?

Mr. Chairman, in view of what the hon. member for Simonstown said, I confirmed that the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central was unpatriotic. I withdraw that, however. [Interjections.]

There was only one point made by the hon. member for Constantia with which I should like to deal. I shall not have time to deal with the rest of his speech, because the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central has achieved his objective, namely to reduce my speaking time. The hon. member for Constantia says that he objects to a certain Border poster which states: “Smash Swapo”. What sort of poster would he like our men to have had? Would he like to have had a poster that said: “Support Swapo”, a Marxist terrorist organization? [Interjections.]

Please do not be daft.

Do not be absurd.

It makes one wonder if this is the sort of objection the hon. member has to a poster of this nature. [Interjections.]

During the past ten years we have lived through what can, I believe, be generally called a decade of détente. I should call it a decade of a Münich mentality. It was believed by people in the West, particularly in the USA, that a decade of détente meant steps towards an international structure aimed at reducing the possibility of war, and a structure for crisis control in various regions of the world. In actual fact it was the liberals of the world who had their heads in the sand, who hoped for the best, and consequently all that was proved in actual fact during that decade was that the position of the West was weakened immeasurably and that many of the Western powers, their Press, their armed forces, their churches and their Governmental structures, had been infiltrated by international communism. One hopes that with the advent of the Reagan administration, and with a strong man like Haig as American Secretary of State, there will be a realization among the great American people of the harm that was done during that decade of shame, a decade which was for the West the so-called decade of détente. It is hoped that the Americans, even at this stage, will be able to redress the balance of military power and that they will realize the imminent danger of world domination by Soviet Russia. I believe, as many others believe, that world conflict is inevitable. The world has never seen a build-up such as we saw in the last ten years of Soviet military and naval power. Therefore the bubble must burst some time. The Russian army will be across the face of Europe and on the borders of the English Channel within a matter of weeks and not months unless America is able to redress the balance of military power. The Nato forces as they are at the moment will have no opportunity and no hope of standing up against Soviet military might, but it seems that at long last America appreciates this.

What are the Soviet aims here in Southern Africa? First of all they are aimed at the erosion of the residual interests of the capitalist West in Southern Africa and the establishment of Soviet influence wherever and whenever possible. Until recently their main efforts have been diplomatic. They were behind the erosion of the Portuguese power and they were also the architects of the Rhodesian handover to Marxism. Their next aim is South West Africa, again through the channel of diplomacy. Ultimately their objective, which is already showing, just like the PFP’s slip has shown today, is South Africa itself. Latterly we have had the physical participation of Russians, East Germans and others on the borders of South Africa. Then there is also the large scale supply of military hardware, some of which we have now captured. This brings me to the rôle of the Soviet Navy. The Russian merchant navy transport heavy armour and machinery because to fly it in to their satellite countries would be prohibitive. However, the Soviet Navy has to be on hand to back up its merchant marine service. Secondly, the Soviet Navy is used to show that Russia is a super-power—they do this by showing the flag—that they are able to operate globally and that they are able to compete with Western naval forces. Thirdly, in the Indian and South Atlantic oceans Russia has a substantial navy which carries out surveillance network, using surface vessels, submarines, fishing fleets and land-based naval aircraft from bases such as Mozambique. Their aim, their objective is to keep tabs on the merchant marine and the fleets of the Western powers.

They do this in preparation for a confrontation which is inevitable, I believe in the short term rather than in the long term. In the event of such hostilities it will be the task of the massive Soviet Navy, the biggest in the world, to cut the vital oil supplies that are transported around the Cape of Good Hope. Through subversion internally and also through pressure on our borders by way of terrorist organizations such as Swapo, they hope to cut off the West from its mineral supplies. With the reopening of the Suez Canal, the logistic problems of the Soviet Union have been immeasurably reduced. Mozambique has become one of the most important naval bases available to the Soviet fleet. Should South West Africa go Marxist in the same way that Rhodesia has gone Marxist, the next objective will be Walvis Bay. With Walvis Bay on the one side and Maputo on the other side, both of them the most southerly naval bases, their onslaught will next be aimed at the heart of South Africa.

South Africa’s own strategic importance is as a supplier of minerals and as the guardian of the Cape sea route. With regard to naval matters I say that South Africa must have a small-ship navy, with fast coastal strike craft and submarines, but before it is too late I want to make a plea that our frigates not be scrapped. There are many people who believe that our fleet of frigates still have a very vital role to play and that we should allow those frigates which would cost something like R100 million each to replace, if we could replace them, to be allowed to continue in the service of South Africa. Which of our ships are capable of travelling to Marion Island, Tristan da Cunha and to Antartica? Only a frigate can travel that far and only a frigate can be a replenishment ship for the small strike craft if we are forced to use them outside of our borders. Apart from that, one thinks of the distances that S.A. Airways have to fly over the oceans of the world. Strike craft cannot rescue survivors from an aircraft that has come down in an ocean, but a frigate can. For all of these reasons I hope that another look will be taken at the decision in principle of scrapping the frigates.

Lastly, I say that we must concentrate on harbour defence. I have referred before to the need for better harbour defences around Simonstown, obviously, Walvis Bay and Salisbury Island. It is not only those military harbours that we must defend, but also the commercial harbours around South Africa. In that regard immediate attention must be given to the existing duality of control. I think there are too many governmental bodies that have control over our commercial and naval harbours, and I think a new look has to be taken at the defence capabilities of all of our ports and of our harbours, both naval and civilian.

I believe that South Africa is going to come into its own. I am pessimistic, as I said before, but I think that a Third World War is inevitable. I think that the West, under the leadership of America, is going to wake up in time, but it is nevertheless a vital role that South Africa has got to play in the meantime. When the world comes to its senses, it will ultimately appreciate that, by having South Africa on its side, instead of being a polecat to the Western world, it is also looking after its own vital interests, which happen to be the interests of the entire world.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to speak after the hon. member for Simonstown. The hon. member for Simonstown made a very strong and positive speech and I hope he will forgive me if I do not react to what he said, except for saying that his speech was like a fresh spring breeze after the speech made by the hon. member for Constantia, who spoke just before him. The hon. member for Constantia made a speech here tonight which was probably the most irresponsible speech I have ever heard in my life, a speech that hon. member should be ashamed of. I do not believe that the hon. member for Constantia will henceforth be able to look a member of the S.A. Defence Force, a member of the public or even one of his voters straight in the face.

In the few minutes available to me I should like to highlight a few other matters concerning one of the extremely important components of our total defence organization, namely the commandos. I certainly do not believe it is necessary for me tonight to discuss in detail the function and the role or the use of the commandos in the defence organization of our country. Certainly there is no longer any doubt in anyone’s mind about the important role played by the commandos as a link in our total defence network.

I should like to take this opportunity tonight of conveying my sincere thanks to all the commandos, officers and other ranks of our commandos for the special services they are rendering to our country and for all the sacrifices they make by devoting so much of their spare time to making a success of the commandos and developing them into units which we may all rightly be proud of. It should be mentioned that the commandos have been extremely successful in performing the important task allocated to them. Their high level of preparedness, of training and of discipline is in the best traditions of the S.A. Defence Force, and members of the commandos have also served with great distinction in the operational area.

However, there are factors and influences which are having a negative effect on the commandos, and which, if urgent attention is not given to them, may have such an effect on the efficient performance of their specific task and, as I shall indicate later, the morale of some members of the commandos, that they may not be able to perform their important task as they should.

The first problem I want to refer to—and in this connection I want to endorse wholeheartedly what the hon. member for Sasolburg has said here this evening—is the manpower problem. In this respect I am referring mainly to our smaller towns in our rural areas, because I understand that there is no such problem in the cities. I put it tonight as an established fact that our commandos in most rural areas are hopelessly understaffed. This is cause for great concern and is certainly the biggest single factor which can prevent the commandos from attaining the level of efficiency which is generally expected of them. The most important task and function of the commandos is regional protection. Who is better equipped for this task than the very people who five and work in those regions? I say that the most important task of our commandos is regional protection. I want to ask this question tonight: “Where are all the people who live and work in our rural areas?” There are people who have great investments in those areas and who operate great business enterprises there, but who have no involvement whatsoever with any military, police, security or essential services. The hon. member for Sasolburg referred to the 720 000 people in the National Reserve Force who have no active involvement with our national security. When one considers the numbers and the total onslaught on our country, we can no longer afford the luxury of so many people who are not involved. The times are too serious and there are too few people in this country. For this reason, it has become clear to us that voluntary commando service simply is not working any more, and I want to endorse the proposal made by the hon. member for Sasolburg and the appeal he made to the hon. the Minister, namely that some form of compulsory commando service be introduced so that our commandos, and other organizations such as Civil Defence, may be properly staffed. There is a non-involvement syndrome in our country, and it is regrettable that this should be so. As far as cultural and spiritual matters are concerned, people or individuals may be left to decide about these for themselves, but I want to say tonight that where the defence and security of the country are at stake, the State must intervene and see to it that everyone contributes his share in that connection.

The other aspect I want to refer to is the degree of subversion which is taking place in some areas among some commandos as a result of the activities of people belonging to some of the small splinter parties who go ferreting around. I want to make it quite clear tonight that I do not wish to use this platform in order to attack a party which is not represented in this House or to abuse the privilege I enjoy in this House. However, it will be a serious dereliction of duty on my part if I did not mention these matters in this House tonight so that the people in our commandos may take cognizance of them. We do not mind if these people, and I refer specifically to the members of the HNP, go ferreting around on the political rubbish dumps, but then they must stay away from the S.A. Defence Force and they must stop using the commandos to promote their own political aims. We have been to the border and we have seen how strongly our young men there are motivated. I spoke to them and I saw this for myself, and it is one of the finest and most wonderful things I have ever seen in my life. However, what are these people doing on the home front? They are demotivating our people, and in the times in which we are living I regard this as a crime against our fatherland. One of our commanders prepared those young men to go and participate in Operation Protea. He also prepared them spiritually. I am told that he said to them: “Our cause is right”, and indeed our cause is right! When we consider tonight what the struggle in South Africa is really about, namely the perpetuation and protection of Christian civilization against the attacks of the Marxists, we know that our cause is right. In the light of this, if people wish to promote their political aims for the sake of petty political gain in units such as the commandos of the S.A. Defence Force, they are committing a crime. For this reason I ask the hon. the Minister to consider bringing regulation 15 of chapter 2 of the General Regulations of the S.A. Defence Force to the attention of these people once again, and to take the strongest measures against them.

The word “patriot” has only one meaning, and loyalty is an attitude of the heart.

Mr. Chairman, I want to convey my sincere congratulations to the hon. member for Kroonstad on a very positive contribution, and I support his remarks wholeheartedly. The commandos are very close to my heart, and therefore I want to assure the hon. member that he has my support.

I want to discuss a very important matter tonight, namely the importance of sport within the Defence Force context. I do not think it is always realized what sport means to members of our Defence Force. Successes in war are primarily determined by the military and spiritual strength of a country, its armed forces and its citizens. Although military strength and preparedness are mainly dependent on the effectiveness of one’s arms, the role played by the psychological and physiological factors is by no means a subordinate one. Indeed, it is the way in which the soldier meets the severest spiritual and physical demands which determines the degree of success or defeat. Since the earliest years, sport as a part of the physical education programme has formed an integral part of the training programme, and it is intended to involve the soldier as a total psycho-physical being.

However, physical strength cannot only be pursued in times when a country is being threatened. The principle of preparing for war in times of peace is observed in all defence forces of the world today. In preparing the soldier for operational service, however, it is not only physical strength which is important; spiritual strength is just as important, if not more important, because spiritual strength is regarded as the incentive to action, while physical strength can be seen as the energy of action.

Sport is practised mainly in two categories in the S.A. Defence Force, namely general or mass participation sport and individual achievement sport. Mass participation sport is not neglected, because it forms the basis on which individual achievement sport is built and helps to utilize and develop fitness and other desirable qualities arising from participation in sport. By imbuing members of the Defence Force with a positive attitude towards participation in sport, it helps to improve the general standard of health, the productivity and the efficiency which are closely connected with the fitness of members of the Defence Force.

In addition to the physical benefits which the men derive from it, sport also helps to promote qualities such as courage, perseverance, comradeship, team spirit and human relations. In this way, sport also helps to develop well balanced personalities, and the qualities acquired in this way can be used to good effect in other spheres of society. In order to involve the great majority of men, sporting events are arranged between units or within the same unit every week. On the other hand, individual achievement sport is just as important to the Defence Force, since top young sportsmen report for military service at the peak of their sport careers. First-class sport achievements also help to enhance the image and prestige of the Defence Force. Good achievements in sport also serve to motivate the great majority of sportsmen to develop their potential. For the top sportsman, the S.A. Defence Force provides facilities and training and competition possibilities so that the standard of the top achiever may be maintained and improved. In order to achieve this, the S.A. Defence Force tries, by means of organizing sport, to give them an opportunity to participate in competitions at the international, national, provincial, Defence Force and club levels, depending on their military training and operational obligations.

Because sport also has an educational value which must be utilized in the interests of our young people, the Defence Force attaches great importance to the training of sport leaders, coaches, officials and organizers. In fact, the Defence Force uses academically qualified physical education teachers and sport officers to offer sport on a full-time basis. Training courses for people involved in sport, including courses for coaches and officials, etc., are held regularly within the Defence Force. 106 sport courses have already been offered this year. State funds are also made available for the provision and maintenance of the necessary sport facilities. This is something for which I am very grateful. All the members of the Defence Force also pay sport fees every months, which are used to offer sport at the various levels. The Defence Force also tries to offer a wide range of different sports in which members can participate. Provision is now being made for the practising of 43 different kinds of sport, 14 of which have full provincial status. As such they qualify for national champion status. What is very important is the fact that over the past year, in spite of international boycotts, blacklists and greater pressure on the Republic, the South African Defence Force has nevertheless succeeded in participating in international sporting events and competitions inside the Republic as well as abroad, and I regard that as a very great achievement.

I should like to mention some exceptional achievements in the field of sport. The South African Defence Force yacht, Voortrekker., took part in the international race between England and America and came 18th out of 103 participants. This underlines the high standard of the yachtsmen of the S.A. Defence Force. An S.A. Defence Force boxing team, together with an Anglo American team, undertook a successful tour of the Republic of China and did very well in the tournaments. What makes that tour important is the fact that it was the first amateur boxing team which had participated in tournaments beyond the borders of the RSA since the RSA was expelled from the international boxing body in 1966. Six junior tennis players of the Defence Force were chosen by the South African Tennis Union to undertake an extensive coaching tour of Europe earlier this year. Apart from the coaching they received from prominent coachers abroad, they also took part in the Wimbledon championships. For the first time, an Argentinian military target-shooting team is now taking part in the service and pistol-shooting championships of the S.A. Defence Force. I happened to see in a report in Die Transvaler this morning that six of the eight Springboks were members of the S.A. Defence Force. That is indeed an achievement. Of course, it also means that shooting techniques, training programmes and coaching techniques can be exchanged between two defence forces and that friendships can be formed and strengthened, which is very important. In this way I could mention several achievements.

However, I just want to mention the following as well. The rugby coach of the S.A. Defence Force is coaching players in Paraguay at the moment, and according to reports he is doing a very good job. He is acting as a very good ambassador for the South African Defence Force there. This year the South African Defence Force has once again proved itself to be one of the biggest—if not the biggest—sources of Springbok and other international invitation teams. So far this year, 41 members have been chosen as Springboks, while 35 members have been included in the South African invitation teams. 26 members have also been crowned as South African champions in various sports. Nine members of the Springbok rugby team which has toured New Zealand and which is playing in a series of matches in America at the moment are members of the S.A. Defence Force. In other words, it is very clear that the S.A. Defence Force regards sport as an important facet of its training programme. Accordingly, it is the ideal of the South African Defence Force, not only to promote sport in its own ranks, but in so doing also to improve the standard of sport in the RSA. I do not think there can be any doubt about the fact the S.A. Defence Force is doing an excellent job and has therefore succeeded in what it set out to do.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to refer to the remarks made by the hon. member for Kroonstad. I agree with his remarks concerning the commandos, which have been an excellent force in South Africa. With regard to what the hon. member for Ladybrand said with regard to sport, I just want to remind him that the Duke of Wellington said that the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing-fields of Eton.

When I went to the border, I was very proud to find that my own regiment had been in action. I was particularly proud, of this, because the first battle honours won by the Transvaal Horse Artillery was in German South West Africa in 1914, and in 1981 that regiment again served well in Operation Protea. What was even more satisfying, was the fact that when I went into the mess, they were wearing their white lanyards and saddle belts in the best military tradition, of the regiment, as they had done in 1914, nearly seventy years ago.

I should like to speak about the manpower problem in the Citizen Force. In terms of section 16 of the Defence Act, the Citizen Force consists firstly of officers, both commissioned and non-commissioned, secondly, of persons allotted in the first instance as national servicemen for two years’ compulsory service and thereafter for ten years, with compulsory service of 240 days, thirdly, of citizens liable to render service in the defence of the Republic and who engage to serve in that force and fourthly, of citizens who are called up in time of war, to combat terrorism, for armed conflict outside the Republic or internal disorder. The officers, both commissioned and non-commissioned, who serve in the higher ranks of the Citizen Force are, to a great extent, persons who have completed more than the necessary compulsory service and are volunteers. The Citizen Force consists of many famous traditional regiments, such as the Cape Field, the Transvaal Horse Artillery, the Natal Field, the Natal Carbineers, the Durban Light Infantry, the First City of Grahamstown, the Kaffrarian Rifles, the Cape Town Highlanders, the Transvaal Scottish, the Kimberley Regiment, the Regiment Botha, the Regiment De Wet, the Regiment Louw Wepener, the Regiment Christiaan Beyers, the South African Irish, the Regiment Delarey, the Natal Mounted Rifles, the Umvoti Mounted Rifles, the Pretoria Regiment, the Pretoria Highlanders, and a host of others. The establishment of the usual Citizen Force regiment consists of about 45 officers and 500 other ranks. Yet it is the senior officers of these regiments, the captains, the majors and the commandants and the senior NCO’s, sergeants, staff-sergeants and warrant officers, who ensure that the continuity, the tradition and the state of preparation of the unit is effective, so that South Africa can be defended effectively in time of war. The Permanent Force is the efficient core providing, inter alia, the organization, equipment, services and training on which the Citizen Force must rely. As the name implies, it is a force of citizens who besides being available to defend South Africa, have civilian lives to lead. The manpower problem we have, is to maintain an efficient Citizen Force because so many different demands are made on these men who are required to maintain this efficiency particularly for conventional warfare. South African soldiers are great individualists and compulsion to perform a task is not to their liking.

If one reads the books on the Anglo-Boer War, one sees that the Boer commandants suffered from exactly the same problems. The introduction of conscription for a two-year period may have been unavoidable, but we must devise means to make the Citizen Force attractive for persons to rise to the senior non-commissioned and commissioned ranks, and then recognition must be given to their volunteer status. These senior ranks are filled by men who are approaching the end of or have completed their 10-year compulsory period. They serve their country and their regiments as volunteers and are vital to our security.

I wish therefore to propose the formation within the Citizen Force of an active reserve to be called the Veterans Volunteer Reserve to which persons who have completed or about to complete their compulsory service are transferred after fulfilling conditions which can be prescribed by the S.A. Defence Force. These conditions must be fully investigated, but it must, inter alia, have the characteristics of a club which men will wish to join. At present it would appear that little or nothing is being done to encourage Citizen Force personnel to continue after their 10 years have been completed. The person who is on the suggested Veterans Volunteer Reserve will automatically be posted to a Citizen Force unit of his own choice, and serve in that unit, but enjoy the privileges of the Veterans Volunteer Reserve.

In order to attract persons to join the Veterans Volunteer Reserve, I would suggest some of the following. Firstly, the pay and allowances of the Veterans Volunteer Reserve for service rendered should be the same as those for the Permanent Force. Secondly—and this is a very important point—the buildings of the various regimental headquarters should be made attractive and properly painted and Citizen Force units should receive an annual allowance to allow them to maintain such attractive headquarters which can be developed in the character of a club with good social amenities. Nothing is more depressing than to attend voluntary parades under poor circumstances. Everything must be done to devise a cameraderie among the troops and to develop a loyalty to the regiment. Thirdly, any employer employing a person in the Veterans Volunteer Reserve should be entitled to some form of tax incentive for each volunteer. If the State can allow tax incentives for training of employees, the employer should receive some benefit when he allows his employee time off for training in the service of our country. Fourthly, any person, including his family, who joins the Veterans Volunteer Reserve should be entitled to the same facilities afforded to members of the Permanent Force. Fifthly, there should be some form of pension fund available in relation to the period of service which should become effective after the person had served for, say, five years. Sixthly, the period of non-continuous training for officers and NCOs of the Veterans Volunteer Reserve should be increased and pay and allowances for non-continuous services must be higher. A small travelling allowance should also be provided to cover the cost to a person of travelling from his home to his regimental headquarters and back. That would be to cover some of his petrol and maintenance expenses. Seventhly, recognition of time served on the border should count double for the award of the John Chard Medal and Decoration for today this is active service in the real sense of the word. In addition, the period served above the normal 30 days as set out in section 22 of the Act should grant additional seniority to the volunteer. Eighthly, regimental associations, which play such an important part in maintaining the tradition of these regiments, should be encouraged to attract men with leadership abilities to the unit and some form of legal recognition in the Defence Act should be given to them as they can be very useful indeed.

Finally, the regiment should consist of persons who are within a reasonable travelling distance of the regimental headquarters so that they can be encouraged to use the facilities of the regiment and, what is more, desire to belong to the regiment. It seems futile that often half of the officers and senior NCOs of most Citizen Force units five so far away that they only appear on the scene when they are called up for camps. While many senior officers do not wish to lose their good officers and other ranks who live so far away from regimental headquarters, it does seem absurd to me that a unit stationed in Johannesburg has officers and other ranks living in the Cape Province, Natal and the Orange Free State. The question of recommending exemptions or otherwise would be much simplified if the person concerned was near enough to see his Commanding Officer personally so that his whole case could be discussed. On the other hand commanding officers could more easily investigate if they are not satisfied with the excuses offered by the applicant for examption. Finally, persons belonging to the Veteran Volunteers Reserve should be allowed to wear some token of recognition indicating that they are volunteers. We had such a token during World War II. South Africans serving in various parts of the world were proud to display the fact that they were volunteers.

This whole matter should be fully investigated and I commend it to the hon. the Minister. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member for Bezuidenhout, I should very much like to devote a few moments to expressing my appreciation for the privilege we had of paying a visit to the operational area and once again seeing the evidence there of the ability of our Defence Force to defend the Republic of South Africa and South West Africa effectively. For us it was also an opportunity to orientate ourselves once again with regard to our own approach to the Defence Force. However, I shall only say that we have reason to be very grateful for having been able to see what we did see. One was very deeply impressed by it all; especially to see the great sense of responsibility which the Government feels towards its people.

In saying this, I am not trying to be sentimental. I am saying it for the information of those who underestimate these things, those who so often wish to dismiss them as political games, as the HNP is still trying to do by saying, for example, that the Government is deliberately using delaying tactics in the war against Swapo and does not really wish to put an end to it. Such people do not know what they are talking about. I want to say to them that they do not know what the truth is.

National defence is civic duty which affects us all. In my days at school, the history of the fatherland and civic duty were included in our history syllabus. I feel a deep resentment towards those who abolished that part of the syllabus. I should have liked to discuss that, but unfortunately I do not believe that time will allow me to do so. When a better understanding of civic duty has been restored to our people, there will be fewer people who will refuse to contribute their share to the defence of this country because of religious objections or other reasons. Then they will be silent again and help to defend our country in a positive way.

National defence affects us all, irrespective of our occupation or qualifications, and requires that all possible professions and occupations be utilized in some way to fit into the defence pattern. Unfortunately, the same people also have to maintain the national economy and to ensure a certain economic growth. It is precisely the common manpower requirements of the Defence Force and the economy which are creating such difficulties for a people’s defence force such as we have in South Africa. We are already faced with a shortage of manpower, as a result of which there are vacancies in virtually every economic and public sector. The greatest burden with regard to the national defence as well as the economy and the public service rests mainly on White men. The resource is being exhausted and completely over-taxed. It is urgently necessary that a solution be found to this by obtaining supplementary workers from other sources of labour in order to relieve the burden resting on the young White men. This must be done in order to prevent a feeling of resistance from developing on the part of White men with regard to the defence of the country.

It is gratifying to note that an in-depth investigation is being undertaken into the utilization of manpower in the Defence Force. Therefore I should very much like to voice a few thoughts in connection with the problems experienced by the commandos.

Along with other colleagues, we attended a conference of commandos in Region 12. That was in June this year. It was disquieting to learn about the manpower problems which the commandos are experiencing. I believe that the inquiry into manpower utilization will produce a solution as from next year. Meanwhile, I should very much like to describe my observations with regard to the commandos. I believe that in this way I could contribute to creating a better dispensation. Everyone, including 90% or more of the national servicemen, realizes that national service is essential and nowhere have I found any unwillingness in this connection. However, there are various matters which are making these people unhappy and which are really causing a feeling of discontentment, with the result that such a measure of resistance is building up against military service that very few of the young men join as voluntary members after their period of service has expired. Generally speaking, national servicemen do their two-year period of national service upon leaving school, after which they are allocated to a unit for their further national service. In many cases these are the commandos. From the nature of the case, those young men find themselves at a stage of their fives where they have to qualify themselves for a profession or a trade. Some of them take up farming as a one-man enterprise or they start a one-man business.

When we look at the present system, we see that the national serviceman serves for four periods of 84 days and four periods of 30 days. This amounts to a total of 454 days, and for this they get credit for 240 days. In the case of the commandos, duties are not limited to border duty. There are certain other tasks in their own regions that have to be performed. These tasks are supposed to be performed by volunteers, but they cannot always be effectively performed with volunteers, and then national servicemen have to be used. This means that the commando serviceman has to serve more days, for which he does not get any credit. This method of national service causes great uncertainty on the part of young men, at the very time when they have to find their feet, economically as well. Furthermore, employers are becoming reluctant to employ young men because they are never sure whether their workers may be called up for service at an inconvenient time. One could sum up the problem by saying that there certainly is dissatisfaction about the present system of national service, not only among the national servicemen, but also among employers. I want to say at once that on the part of the S.A. Defence Force, and generally on the part of the Exemption Board as well, there is great understanding for this problem.

I cannot omit to refer in passing to the pleasant and sympathetic treatment which members of the House of Assembly have received from the staff of the hon. the Minister and the department when we have discussed the problems of our voters with them.

This also causes great uncertainty among people in respect of their activity in the economic sphere, because it affects their future and their finances. However, our people still have the same patriotism, so much so that I can honestly say that I have never encountered anyone in my constituency who has rated material gain above his duty to defend our country. Therefore it is not a question of money. I want us to look for a solution which will enable us to achieve the maximum military, economic, social and spiritual strength. Therefore I want to say that in the fight of the increasing internal pressure we should specifically consider developing our commandos by making them more attractive to able-bodied men over the age of compulsory service, and also by making it attractive for national servicemen to join the commandos when they have completed their compulsory service. In my opinion, two very important ideas are to give members credit for every day of service and perhaps to divide service into two categories, the first half being border duty and the second half being involved with their specific areas.

Unfortunately, time does not allow me to motivate my ideas. There are other solutions, too, which could be suggested to relieve financial problems and to enable national servicemen to meet their financial obligations.

I want to conclude by saying that when we consider the possibility of increasing internal unrest … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Middelburg, but I am afraid I cannot say the same of the contributions made by the hon. member for Constantia and the hon. member for Greytown. I respectfully suggest to the hon. member for Yeoville tonight that in spite of the fact that an attempt has been made to keep politics out of this debate, a point has unfortunately been reached were an ideological gulf has developed in that party which it will simply not be possible to bridge after tonight unless the hon. member for Yeoville adopts a very clear standpoint in this connection.

I wish to make a few remarks in connection with the Armaments Board. In the early ’sixties, a voluntary arms embargo was imposed against the Republic, which was actually a blessing in disguise since it forced the Republic to become self-sufficient. When the compulsory arms embargo was imposed in 1977, the local armaments industry was already well developed. The Government anticipated the position in the ’sixties by introducing the Armaments Development and Production Act, Act 57 of 1968, and since then, Armscor has gone from strength to strength. The value of armaments produced by Armscor increased from R32 million in 1968 to an amount of R979 million in 1978, and it is expected to rise to R1 400 million during the 1980-’81 financial year.

Furthermore, I should like to refer to armaments production and the role this plays in the national economy. With a total local value of R870 million during 1980-’81, the contribution made by locally manufactured armaments to the gross industrial production of R13 316 million amounted to 6,5%. Gross industrial production in its turn constituted 22,8% of the gross domestic product of R58 259 million. Therefore there is a healthy ratio between armaments production and the total industrial activities of the RS A.

Another less measurable contribution in armaments production is the contribution to the skill of the South African labour force. Armaments production requires the highest standards of technological and managerial skill, attributes which now have to develop at an increased tempo. Once it has developed, fortunately, it also rubs off on existing activities. According to what Commandant Marais said on 18 September 1981, Armscor and its subsidiary companies can now provide the full range of 141 types of ammunition required by the Army, the Air Force and the Navy. The cross-fertilization which has taken place between the activities of Armscor and the South African economy in general is not readily discernable in the private sector of the economy. Because the activities of Armscor are not of the kind that generates revenue, it does not make a direct and obvious contribution to the economy of the country, and too much attention is sometimes given to the question of expenditure.

Colonel S. S. de Ridder made two remarks during 1977 which I should like to endorse. In the first place, he said that a strong Defence Force was a guarantee for healthy and strong economic development in the RSA, and secondly, he said that a sound economy with a well-developed infrastructure was the guarantee for a strong Defence Force. Obvious benefits resulting from the fact that the Republic has its own armaments industry include the following: It provides direct employment to 29 000 persons and direct and indirect employment to another 100 000 persons in the private sector, including all race groups. In addition, it stimulates other enterprises as a result of the demand for specific intermediary products and components. During 1977 and 1978, Armscor awarded contracts to about 900 main and sub-contractors. According to Paratus of July 1977, Armscor, through its subsidiary companies, awarded contracts to the value of R5 636 million during that financial year. A further advantage is the saving on the importation of foreign armaments, which are very expensive, as well as ammunition, which contributes to the improvement of our current account position and also means that we save foreign exchange. Furthermore, it creates a greater demand for local raw materials. It stimulates the development of the production of electronics and optical instruments, which are of very great strategic importance to our country at this stage. A further advantage is the acquisition and importation of technological expertise which, as I have said, is also used in other sectors of the economy. At this stage it is also meeting the demands of an export market which we have already entered and which, it is hoped, will expand greatly in the future. It also improves the inter-action and exchange of managerial and other skills between the armaments industry and the private sector.

Another aspect which deserves attention, to mention one example, is the fact that the development of mine-proof vehicles has been 100% successful in preventing casualties. This has boosted the morale of the S.A. Forces and increases their mobility in the operational area.

Finally, I feel that after the conclusion of Operation Protea, we should express our gratitude towards the Creator in particular, as well as paying tribute to the hon. the Minister, to Gen. Viljoen and to his officers. The high quality of Defence Force officers has already been commended. I wish to associate myself with that. I have no doubt that if we pursue that course, our country is in safe hands.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Roodepoort will forgive me if I do not react directly to his speech.

†I should like once again to associate us on these benches with the sympathy expressed towards those who lost husbands, sons and loved ones and add our prayers to theirs for the complete recovery of those who were wounded. Our debt to them is nation-wide. Particularly we in this House have a duty towards those who serve our country in this way in that we should create a South African society in which loyalty and patriotism will prevail, with the self-generating potential that such a just society will have.

I should also like to endorse the good wishes to those members of the General Staff who have been promoted and also to the hon. the Minister in his new position. I should also like to use this opportunity to react to some of the remarks made by the hon. member for Constantia. I feel the sort of remark I am going to make should come from somewhere other than the Government benches so that it will not be regarded as just another “dank-die-Minister-toespraak”. That is what I do not want my remarks to sound like. I take exception to the remarks by the hon. member for Constantia and I should like to put the matter in proper perspective. The remarks were in fact totally lacking in good taste and can be of no possible value whatsoever to the defence of this country. It shows a total ignorance of the factual situation regarding the build-up of the Defence Force over the years and of the situation we have achieved. The advent of the hon. the Minister, Gen. Malan, to his post as Chief of the S.A. Defence Force was characterized by and heralded an era of unprecedented advancement, planning, improved efficiency and purposefulness, and ushered in an era in which a young, vital, dynamic general staff had to produce the goods. The result of this was felt by all of us throughout the S.A. Defence Force. That staff produced the goods that enabled us to embark on an operation such as Operation Protea with all its precise planning. Our feeling on these benches is that this country is fortunate to have a man with the background and the in-depth knowledge that the hon. the Minister has, not only of his trade but of the people in the SADF.

There is one vital point that I think must not be overlooked, one that has not been mentioned in this House, and that is that we now have in our Army a cadre of leaders, right from the top to the bottom, who are battle-tested. We have had tremendous training facilities and excellent material for a long time, but we have not, in fact, had a throughput of battle-trained personnel and I believe that the existence of such personnel who have acquitted themselves so well, makes the effectiveness of the training and the material 100% more valuable.

We do not live in normal Utopian idyllic times where academic theories can be risked. In international politics the rules are made by the strong and the weak go under. In the Communist Russian world, the norm of life is struggle. Peace is for the weak and is the abnormal. That is a negative society. In our society peace is the norm and war or temporary struggle a means of returning to peace or our normal society. That is a positive society. The two are absolutely irreconcilable. They are irreconcilable opposites. Because of the difference of the value systems, if the West does not match the ruthless discipline of the East with an equal discipline and resoluteness in its own value system then we will be at a constant disadvantage.

In this regard I should like to react to some of the remarks made by the hon. members for, inter alia, Sasolburg, Kroonstad, Middelburg and Roodepoort. I believe it is within this question of the manpower investigation that the Defence Force is busy with, that one must look at the question of discipline and the application of the will of the people in a very realistic light, with particular reference to the rural commandos, because there is no question, without discussing the strength and denigrating the position further, that that system in the sparsely populated rural areas has not succeeded in terms of available strength. The serving members are stretched to their limits in undertaking their duties and effective training, and also with a view to the necessity of maintaining internal security operations such as manning roadblocks, the protection of key points and matters of this nature. The climate which I am sure the staff are aware of, is one in which there is a slow erosion of people away from the Force. Although they remain committed to the ideal, they find themselves at a great disadvantage in their communities. They and their families are at a disadvantage financially through having to travel long distances and giving up their time. In some cases the men are discouraged from doing service or at least they are not assisted to meet their obligations.

I believe that this will continue to be the situation as long as service of this nature is the exception and not the rule. I quite understand that it is very easy to be an armchair critic or an armchair soldier, but for years and years, at command conferences, commando OC’s have been pushing for phased-in conscription. Had it been done long ago, we would have achieved a far better situation now. It is absolutely true that serving people are in a position now where they are, to a certain extent, scoffed at. It is much nicer to belong to a comfortable service club, perhaps, where there is a little more social status. We believe, however, that service to the country should come first and that the other aspects of one’s life should take second place.

Carrying on with the thoughts expressed by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout on the question of phased-in compulsory service, let me say that I also believe that one can rationalize the commando and CF-system—within the infantry corps certainly-—far better than is done at present. One of my reasons for saying this is the tremendous fall-away or loss of highly trained officer and senior NCO personnel who have done border duty, have reached the end of their 10-year period but cannot continue at the pace that a regiment would like. They have perhaps come to that stage of their lives when they have additional family responsibilities. They then find the going too tough, but their pride is with their unit. They will not go and join a commando unit within the area. They hold themselves back because they think they might rejoin their regiment and therefore do not get round to making themselves available for the commandos. There are a great number of these people about, and after discussion with members of our defence group, let me say that we believe that we could make a great deal of use of those people if we were, in fact, to rationalize the commando and the CF infantry.

Mr. Chairman, one cannot but agree completely with what the hon. member for King William’s Town said, particularly about the hon. the Minister.

I want to congratulate the hon. member for Yeoville on the contribution made by that side of the House to the debate this afternoon, for until the hon. member for Greytown and the hon. member for Constantia spoke, one could plainly perceive the philosophy and the hand of the hon. member for Yeoville in this debate. The standpoint he adopted in this House this afternoon was moderate and we were able to agree with 95% of it. However, I want to sympathize with him as well. We are sorry for him. We sympathize with him.

He does not need it.

I think he does need it, for there are things wandering around in that party, and they are not akin to his spirit. [Interjections.] All is definitely not well in that party.

Nonsense.

It is very clear that the hon. member for Yeoville cannot ride the black horse which is loose in that party. In fact, the horse has thrown him off. [Interjections.] A false peace is prevailing in the PFP. I think The Cape Times was quite correct this morning, although the hon. member for Yeoville tried to cover up very well. This morning’s Cape Times said—

This afternoon, however, the hon. member for Constantia objected to the fact that we had killed the Swapos. [Interjections.]

No, he did not do that.

But the hon. member for Yeoville is very skilfully trying to present this whole matter in a favourable light here this afternoon. I have respect for the hon. member for Yeoville, for I agree with him. We as South Africans agree with what he said here this afternoon. However, we find fault with the things the hon. member for Constantia said.

You misunderstood him.

The hon. member must just give me a chance. [Interjections.] I shall tell him what that hon. member said. I think it must have come as a very great shock to the hon. member for Yeoville to hear what the hon. member for Greytown and the hon. member for Constantia had to say in this House this afternoon. In the first place the hon. member for Greytown made the unfounded and malicious statement that national servicemen were allegedly becoming increasingly involved in violent crimes and atrocities. Those were his words. Where do they come from? How does he come by his facts to justify making this statement? There were a few cases in which national servicemen, while they were engaged in their national service, were involved in this kind of thing, but that was by way of exception. Why is the hon. member trying to make the exception the rule here? There are thousands of young men who undergo their national service every year. In fact, all our young men are now undergoing national service. [Interjections.]

I wish that hon. member for Bezuidenhout would go and busy himself with his cheese factory and leave us so that we can speak here in Parliament. There are very few young men left who are not involved in the national service system, and that is why almost everyone can be classified as national servicemen. Then why does the hon. member for Greytown say that our national servicemen are becoming involved to an increasing extent in atrocities? I think this is a disgrace. This can have only one consequence. It will arouse an unfavourable feeling towards our national servicemen among our people. I think he ought to be ashamed of himself for maliciously casting this slur on the name of our national servicemen. I think it was recklessly irresponsible of an hon. member of this House to do a thing like that. In this connection I should like to hear what the standpoint of the hon. member for Yeoville is in regard to this matter.

But after the hon. member for Greyton had resumed his seat, worse was yet to come. The hon. member for Constantia was then called upon to speak and he said that the PFP supported the efforts of the Defence Force, but did so conditionally! And with a big “but”, he said. Surely this is not what the hon. member for Yeoville said this afternoon. The hon. member for Yeoville gave his unqualified support for the Defence Force. Is this not true?

You want to put words in his mouth.

The hon. member for Constantia also said that apartheid was dragging communism into this country.

He is a Swapo man.

I think the hon. member for Tygervallei is correct.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: The hon. Chief Whip of the governing party referred to a member of the House as a “Swapo man”. I ask you to ask him to withdraw that.

Order! If the hon. member said that, he must withdraw it.

Mr. Chairman, Swapo is a legal political organization in South West Africa …

Yes, but there is another Swapo as well. The hon. member must withdraw that.

I withdraw it, Sir.

I should like to ask the hon. member for Constantia who or what is bringing communism into France. Who or what is bringing communism into Afghanistan? Who or what ideology is bringing it into Britain? If the hon. member wants to make a fool of himself, he must not drag the Defence Force or South Africa into it. He must go and do so in a place where he will not bother anyone.

Hyde Park.

The hon. member went on to mention examples of so-called political intervention in the Defence Force. Inter alia, he used the placard with the words “Smash Swapo” which he had seen in the operational area as an example. In that case, surely the report in this morning’s Cape Times is correct, because he objected to our killing members of Swapo? Now the hon. member is sitting there, gaping at me.

Get on with your speech.

What does the hon. member want us to do with the Swapo terrorists? Should we invite them into South West and South Africa? Whose side is the hon. member really on? Is he on our side, or is he on Swapo’s side? Is he the South African representative of Swapo? These are the questions to which we want replies. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: That question implies that the hon. member for Constantia is the South African representative for Swapo. I was asked to withdraw an implied allegation the other day. If you imply an allegation, it is the same as when you make it. I ask you to ask the hon. member to withdraw it.

Mr. Chairman, I shall make things easy for you and withdraw it.

I have another bone to pick with that hon. member! [Interjections.] He can sit there laughing now, but this is a serious matter. The hon. member came forward here this afternoon and tried to hold up to us a united PFP front with regard to the Defence Force.

But it is true.

But surely I am in point of fact indicating that there is a vast difference between the standpoint of the hon. member for Yeoville and the standpoint of the hon. member for Constantia.

Nonsense.

The hon. member for Constantia also objected to the appointment of the former head of the S.A. Defence Force as Minister of Defence. He also objected to that hon. the Minister ostensibly speaking the language of the NP now. I just want to tell him that while the hon. the Minister was still head of the S.A. Defence Force, the only language he used was that of “South Africa first”. That was the language he used and nothing else. However, it is not the language of the hon. member for Constantia. The hon. member for Yeoville agrees with it. Why in that case does he allow the hon. member for Constantia, a back-bencher, to cast this aspersion on the former head of the Defence Force, who is at present the Minister of Defence? I think it is disgraceful!

Do you agree with that alleged statement?

Order!

Sir, the absolute temerity of that hon. back-bencher knows no bounds. I think he really ought to be ashamed of himself. Surely Gen. Malan and the present hon. Prime Minister, the former Minister of Defence, have built up a Defence Force consisting of all political factions in South Africa, which is the strongest in Africa today. Surely the PFP and all these parties have not existed only from today. Surely they have existed for decades and over that period the present Minister of Defence and the hon. the Prime Minister built up the Defence Force, based on this standpoint of “South Africa first”. Now the hon. member comes forward and makes all those allegations. He must really keep his nose out of this. He must not come and strew his venom around here and bedevil the Defence Force. That spirit which the hon. the Minister of Defence instilled in the Defence Force when he was still its head, he is still instilling today, too, while he is Minister of Defence, as we heard very clearly today in the security and defence policy he spelled out to us. I want to ask the hon. member for Constantia whether he agrees with this policy which we heard this afternoon. [Interjections.] Apparently he does not understand what I am asking. He does not agree. However, the hon. member for Yeoville does agree with it!

Just make your own speech.

Since the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is listening to us so calmly here, I want to ask him whether he agrees with it. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, this debate has now reached the very interesting level where, within the limitations we set ourselves not to make a political debate out of this, personalities are now emerging. The first personality I want to talk about, is the mysterious MP to whom the hon. member for Waterkloof referred. In passing I should just like to say that the hon. member for Waterkloof made a very good and interesting speech. He referred to a mysterious MP who allegedly said that the Defence Force acted immorally when it brought the spoils from South Angola into South West Africa. If there is such an MP here, I want to go on record as saying to him: He is no patriot; he is not on South Africa’s side; he is on the side of the enemy; he is nothing but a terrorist.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order … [Interjections.]

Order! I have allowed hon. members a measure of freedom, but I think that hon. members should now afford the hon. member for Yeoville an opportunity to put his point of order. They should make fewer interjections.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: While you were not in the Chair you delivered a speech in which you made an allegation, I understand, against some unidentified MP. Therefore we must assume that you would not have sucked that out of your thumb, in other words, that you made an allegation against an MP, whoever that unidentified MP may be. Now, the hon. member for Jeppe is using unparliamentary language in respect of an hon. member of this House. If you, Sir, should rule that he is allowed to do that, it implies that what you said this afternoon was not true. Therefore, Sir, I ask you to rule that the hon. member for Jeppe should withdraw those words. [Interjections.]

Order! Precisely what words did the hon. member for Jeppe use?

Mr. Chairman, I said he was a terrorist.

And an enemy.

Order! The hon. member for Jeppe must withdraw those words.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw those words.

Who is that unknown man? [Interjections.]

However, another phenomenon has reared its head here, a phenomenon which is also based on personalities. It is that certain hon. members of the PFP tried to create the impression that they possess special military experience. They tried to create the impression that they had served in the citizen force and in the commandos. By doing that they suggested in a very cunning way that they would ostensibly be able to see to the special needs of the S.A. Defence Force. The implication is of course that there is a lack of such well qualified people on this side of the House, that there are no people in the NP who can see to the needs of the S.A. Defence Force. As far as that insinuation is concerned, I want to begin by referring to the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications. He is a colonel in the S.A. Defence Force. He still attends camps with servicemen and is also regularly present at target shooting practices. The chairman of the Defence study group of the NP, the hon. member for Pretoria West, was a commandant in the S.A. Defence Force, and also the commanding officer of an infantry batallion. In addition we have few other commandants on this side of the House.

Yes, and I was a general in the Ossewa-Brandwag. [Interjections.]

Order!

Is your name Oom Kowie? [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of hon. members on this side of the House I should like to avail myself of the opportunity to tell the PFP about the expertise we on this side of the House possess. In our ranks we have a commandant of the Citizen Force. It is the hon. member for Sasolburg. Then we also have a commandant of a commando in the person of the hon. member for Ladybrand. Then we have yet another person—a man I am very proud of—a man who has completed special courses, and that is Major Thomas Langley. Then there is still the hon. member for Ventersdorp, who has the rank of captain. As far as the S.A. Air Force is concerned, we have a Mirage pilot in our midst, Captain W. N. Breytenbach. Furthermore, we have Sub-lieutenant Danie Schutte of the S.A. Navy. As far as the medical services of the S.A. Defence Force is concerned, we have private Dr. W. J. Snyman, and last but not least we even have a general in our midst. I should, therefore, like to suggest that the NP side of this House is intensively and thoroughly equipped to care for the special needs of servicemen and of every facet of the Defence Force.

What about the 50% ex-servicemen in this party? [Interjections.]

Vause, surely you are talking only about yourself now. [Interjections.]

Order!

I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister that I have received inquiries about the two-year national service. Rumour has it that the two-year period of national service is going to be extended to three years, and I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister were to make a statement about it.

Another aspect I want to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister is one I want to put to him in the form of a question. Is it not possible for the hon. the Minister to issue instructions that when a military funeral takes place, the MP involved will be notified in time so that he can also attend the funeral? There are factors which specifically distinguish the S.A. Defence Force from all other Government departments, and it is not just the fighting ability of the S.A. Defence Force. The fact is that of all the Government Departments the Defence Force is the department which controls the largest single quantity of moveable assets in the Republic of South Africa. During the discussion of this Vote it is, therefore, obviously in the national interest that Parliament should require specific accountability from the S.A. Defence Force for the manner in which the Defence Force controls the enormous amount of State property. In order to ascertain whether the Defence Force is really administering this enormous amount of State property efficiently, one, firstly has to consider what the Defence Force’s attitude to this State property is. The attitude of the Defence Force can hardly be summed up better than by the maxim “A soldier’s life depends on his equipment”. Indeed, this extremely effective maxim creates a remarkable climate, a climate which really appeals to the soldier, a climate which proves to this Parliament the deadly earnest in which the S.A. Defence Force accepts this responsibility. The extent of Government assets controlled by the S.A. Defence Force is really enormous. For example, the Quartermaster of a mechanized infantry batallion controls more Government property than the Director-General of most Government Departments. The consignment of submarines alone, which South Africa received at one stage, was worth more than R50 million. A squadron of fighter planes easily costs R100 million today. An infantry division has about 6 000 vehicles available and the rifle every soldier carries costs nearly R1 000. Having regard to the enormous amounts of State funds that are involved, one realizes the almost superhuman task which the S.A. Defence Force has to account to Parliament for their control over their equipment. The control over equipment by the Defence Force takes place by means of two categories of action. The first category is awareness of the value of equipment and the prevention of losses. The principle of awareness of the value of equipment, of control over stores and the prevention of losses is impressed upon every soldier. The S.A. Army has established a full-fledged Citizen Force unit, known as the S.A. Army Loss Control Unit with its headquarters in Pretoria, especially for the prevention of losses. Loss control teams of this unit, made up of knowledgeable specialists, are allocated to the commands. The loss control units have already been developed into an efficient organization and their achievements include a decline in the frequency of accidents, shooting accidents which have dropped by 10%, and deaths and injuries by 29%. From this it is very clear that there is evidence to prove that Parliament ought to be satisfied that the S.A. Defence Force acquitted itself properly of its responsibilities with regard to Government property.

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend following the hon. member for Jeppe except in regard to his initial remark where he joined the hon. member for Verwoerdburg in trying to work up excitement over the speech made by the hon. member for Constantia this afternoon. Really, this was only an attempt of simulated anger and horror at what the hon. member for Constantia was alleged to have said. In fact, if one listened to the speech of the hon. member for Constantia, the main thrust of his remarks was an appeal to the hon. the Minister and the department to remain neutral from party politics. That was the message that he was giving. That was the appeal that he was making to the hon. the Minister. His appeal was to keep defence neutral from party politics in South Africa. Surely hon. members on that side of the House are not suggesting by their simulated indignation that there is anything wrong with that sort of appeal? I would have thought it is common cause that if one has a Defence Force in a situation like this in South Africa, the worst possible thing that could happen is for that Defence Force to be motivated by party political considerations. One would have thought that it would be common cause to ensure that the Army is not made the tool of any political party in South Africa. Our attitude to this situation was stated very clearly this afternoon by the hon. member for Yeoville. He said that we see the Army as a shield. He said that if there is to be evolutionary change in South Africa it is obviously necessary that there should be a shield so that law and order is preserved while that evolutionary change is coming about. He also stated very clearly that this shield was a shield to preserve law and order in South Africa and that it was not a shield to defend apartheid or the policy of any political party in South Africa. Quite clearly we are involved in this situation. It is not only members of the NP who are involved in rendering service on the borders of our country. Members of all political parties and their families are involved in this and in preserving law and order in South Africa. However, having said all of that, having said that we see the essential function of the Army as acting as a shield to preserve law and order, and that we support it for that reason, this of course does not mean that we will give the hon. the Minister or the Army a blank cheque to do what they please in the future. This of course does not mean that we give unqualified support. I am sure that the hon. the Minister who is a reasonable person would not suggest that he must be immune to any criticism. It is the function of a political party, it is the function of an Opposition to criticize and to take up standpoints from time to time where necessary. I am sure that the hon. the Minister does not expect immunity in this regard. It is not a question of giving the hon. the Minister a blank cheque. We are as aware as anybody else of the dangers that confront South Africa. We are concerned that those dangers should be opposed. We are concerned more than ever that there should be reforms within South Africa while the Army holds the position.

Having said that, I want now to deal with the topic which I originally intended to discuss during this debate. I want to deal with the involvement of the Department of Defence in socio-economic matters in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, may I put a question to the hon. member?

No, Sir, my time is very limited. I give the hon. member permission to make another speech when I have finished. I want to say to the hon. the Minister, Sir, that I have been very impressed with the Army’s commitment in assisting sections of our population who are underprivileged and who live in underdeveloped areas in South Africa. I say that this is a major contribution but I also want to say that there is tremendous scope for a great deal more to be done in this regard. I know that in specific areas very good work is being done to identify with the needs and the problems of the civilian population. I want to say that I was particularly impressed during our recent visit to the border where we had the privilege of seeing these things for ourselves. I was impressed by the dedication shown by Defence Force personnel in providing social services for underprivileged people in South West Africa. We saw schools and health services there and we saw other projects where sections of the local population were receiving the direct benefit of the expertise of Defence Force personnel and were receiving the benefit of amenities that were being made available to them by the Army.

I believe that this is a positive contribution which not only brings credit to the Army but which also helps in the creation of a much more contented local population which is very necessary in these circumstances. I am also aware of the Army’s policy to second trained specialist personnel to assist in providing these services to the homelands or the self-governing States as they are called, and this too is an area of involvement that I would like to see extended. In kwaZulu, for example, where in the field of health there is the staggering statistic that there is one doctor for 40 000 people, the assistance of the Army in seconding qualified medical doctors to assist in the hospital services is obviously of inestimable value. The same sort of situation obtains in other parts of South Africa. However, obviously much more is needed. In these regions where there are vast needs not only in the field of health services but in welfare services, in education, in housing, in the whole field of providing an adequate infra-structure for developing the area for its people, the needs are endless. I believe that the Defence Force can play a far more imaginative role in rendering these essential socio-economic services where the needs are so great.

In normal circumstances one may ask why the Defence Force should be involved in matters of this kind. However, these are not normal circumstances and the Defence Force is already involved to an extent. The reality of the present circumstances is that we have a situation in South Africa where ever-increasing demands are being made mainly upon our minority White population for defence needs, and the operation of compulsory national service draws into the Defence Force people from the full spectrum of economic activities in South Africa—artisans, doctors, lawyers and architects. All are drawn into the Defence Force because of our system of national service. We know that this imposes a tremendous burden and strain on our socio-economic system in South Africa. That is why the Defence Force has a duty in this regard. It places a strain on us, and it does so at a time when we ought to be committed, as a matter of national strategy, towards not only defending our borders against external aggression, but also towards building up a contented internal population. One must build up a contented internal population by providing the infrastructure necessary to overcome the enormous disparity which exists in this country between the haves and the have-nots. I think this is necessary, and we know that the hon. the Minister has himself said on more than one occasion, and so have other military people, that the ultimate security of South Africa depends not only on our ability to defend ourselves against external aggression, but also on our ability to ensure that we have a contented internal population. These are the twin challenges which face us at this time. Clearly, the Defence Force with its enormous human and other resources and with the extremely powerful position it has at the present time, must play a major role in meeting both of these challenges. We know that we must have military preparedness to meet the external threat.

On the other side—the internal side—I would like to say that although the involvement of the Defence Force on the socioeconomic side is laudible and welcome, I believe that there is very much more that should be done in this regard. I believe that if the Defence Force did involve itself more extensively, there would be an immediate and positive response from young South African national servicemen if they were asked to be involved on a much wider scale in these essential services. I listened this afternoon to various complaints from hon. members of time being wasted and servicemen who complain about time being wasted. We all know that we get these complaints. They are often called to camps and they do not do anything and become bored. I know of a number of servicemen who, willing though they are to defend the country, very often do find themselves being bored during their period of national service. They are involved in work which is non-productive, because very often their training and skills in life are not sufficiently utilized. I suppose that this is inevitable in any situation where there is compulsory national service. As I said, there is more in meeting the challenge to our national security than being trained and used to meet external agression only. Wherever possible—and I make this appeal to the hon. the Minister—I would like to see the skills and professional training of individuals being used much more imaginatively in the socio-economic field. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, if ever I had any doubts as to whether the hon. member for Verwoerdburg had confronted the hon. member for Constantia with well-founded complaints this evening, those doubts disappeared completely after the hon. member for Berea had stood up and politely repudiated the hon. member for Constantia. We must therefore take it that what the hon. member for Verwoerdburg said, is absolutely true and correct.

I wish to put forward a few ideas this evening about the greater involvement of the rural areas in all facets of the S.A. Defence Force. I want to refer in particular to the people in our commandos and those involved in civil defence. While I am talking about involvement, I cannot let the opportunity pass without referring to the hon. member for Jeppe. He spoke about all the competent officers in the Defence Force sitting on this side of the House. The hon. member for Jeppe was a major in the S.A. Defence Force and has had several periods of service in the operational area, and I think that for that he also deserves the sincere thanks of all members of this House.

I also want to refer to our visit to the operational area. It was a wonderful opportunity afforded us by the hon. the Minister and the Chief of the Defence Force. It was indeed a special occasion. We returned with a far better perspective as to the scope of the struggle in which our men are involved on the battlefront. We returned with a better realization of the necessity that all South Africans should become more involved in active support of all facets of our Defence Force. Unfortunately, it is true that a spirit of total uninvolvement prevails nowadays in virtually every sphere of life in South Africa. This is an attitude which is not only detrimental to South Africa; it also has a destructive effect on the struggle we are waging to counter the attacks on our country. This spirit of uninvolvement is without doubt a very serious problem and can definitely affect the morale of the S.A. Defence Force. In addition, it also undermines the secure and continued existence of our country. When I talk about the total lack of involvement of our people in so many spheres, including the Defence Force, I do have to admit that a tremendously positive attitude towards the S.A. Defence Force can be encountered among many South Africans. Of that we have much evidence. In many towns in the rural areas, people are prepared to be very generous when they are asked to make financial contributions to the activities of the Defence Force, and this makes one feel very happy. However, we are very worried about the spirit of uninvolvement, which often becomes an indifferent unwillingness, in making an active contribution to the Defence Force. I have in mind in particular a lack of involvement in the commandos and also in the civil defence services in the rural areas. I conducted a survey among six commandos recently to establish to what degree farmers and people in the rural areas were involved. The data were disappointing. Those commandos were often only at 20% to 25% strength, and in some cases the figure was even lower. Interestingly enough, 75% to 80% of them are farmers and not rural townspeople. This spirit amongst our townspeople is disturbing, and I therefore feel that something must be done about it. I reached two conclusions from the figures revealed by the surveys. Firstly, only a small percentage of farmers is involved in the commandos and in civil defence, and secondly there is shocking neglect on the part of townspeople to play their part too. The South African Defence Force is after all a national defence force and it is therefore the duty of each person to make his contribution. For this reason we are concerned and ask that steps be taken to eliminate this lack of involvement.

As regards the commandos I want to ask, as other hon. members have done, that we make the commandos exclusively locality-bound. I think this is necessary and entails many advantages, and I will advance reasons for my request that it should be made exclusively locality-bound. The farmers, who for the most part are and will be involved in commandos, are farmers who know their own area well, because they live and work there. They therefore know the area like the backs of their hands. Indeed, the commandos and civil defence form a vital infrastructure in the already seriously depopulated rural areas, especially in the border areas where the commandos I have referred to operate. A commando’s link with a locality will therefore contribute towards maintaining and protecting those infrastructures. Indeed, this is what we are advocating too. Another factor is the farmers in the area concerned. We should try to arrange things in such a way that the farmer, together with all his workers, establishes a formidable observation system. We know for a fact that a farmer can very soon be aware of all movements on his farm. I therefore think it is essential to make arrangements such as these. I have no doubt that there are many farmers who are not involved at present, but who would contribute voluntarily if they knew that the commandos were exclusively locality-bound. I am sure that in those circumstances they will offer their services voluntarily.

What about urban commandos?

I want to make the same appeal in respect of our townsfolk. Regulations regarding civil defence have indeed been changed to enable the members of our commandos, too, to be of assistance there. Therefore, if our city-dwellers were to join the commandos in very large numbers, they could automatically be of assistance and provide civil defence services. At virtually every town in the rural areas we struggle to launch such services. If our commando members were to participate actively in this regard, there would certainly be much more certainty that this could be successfully executed. That is the reason for my appeal to the hon. the Minister. One gains the impression—and this has been said here this evening—that the time will come when we shall have to make it compulsory for every farmer and city-dweller to be actively involved in the commandos.

I do not know whether my time will permit me to do this, but there is another matter which I should like to raise. I have said that our Defence Force is a national defence force. Accordingly the standpoint adopted recently by the HNP in connection with bilingualism is to me a matter of very grave concern. We know that bilingualism is the official policy of the South African Defence Force. However, that party has adopted a viewpoint which in effect means that they discourage their members, indeed, make it virtually impossible for them, to play their part in the Defence Force actively and enthusiastically. One asks oneself where Mr. Jaap Marais, who is in fact a political Rip van Winkle, is heading for with this viewpoint which he and his party are now adopting to the detriment and harm of the South African people in general, and the South African Defence Force in particular. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I take great pleasure in associating myself with the plea for involvement made by the hon. member Mr. Theunissen. In my view that hon. member is perfectly correct when he says that the root of the counter-strategy against the total onslaught is indeed involvement. Any counter-strategy undoubtedly depends upon the awareness of what the onslaught involves, and, on the basis of such awareness, on preparing for what has to be done to launch an effective counter-strategy or action. Involvement is therefore a very fundamental element of this and I fully support the hon. member.

In the process of involvement one can, in the nature of things, encounter the situation where is an over-emphasis on the total onslaught on the one hand, which can indeed result in the perpetuation or stimulation of the onslaught as such. However, on the other hand one can encounter a disregard for the gravity of the total onslaught and, by the same token, perpetuate or promote the onslaught as such. If, then, we look at the matter in its entirety, it is in my view important that a good balance be maintained and that a good, cold, clinical judgment be passed on the real facts at issue, in order to develop and to launch an effective counter-strategy or action on that basis. Of course, all this is connected with involvement. Everything has to do with the question of attitude, which the hon. member Mr. Theunissen spoke about. In my view, it is the basis upon which the entire planning of the counter-strategy must be approached. If one does not have the right approach or the right awareness, you cannot launch a successful attempt at a counter-strategy. If we talk about an over-emphasis or a disregard for the onslaught, the falsehoods preached by the hon. member for Constantia this afternoon to the effect that what moves Soviet Russia to involve itself with South Africa has been the policy of apartheid—something to which the hon. member for Verwoerdburg has already referred—a factor which can increase the onslaught or at the least the potential for revolution in South Africa. His statement can lead to nothing but a feeling of hatred for the Whites among people of colour in the country. Whether the hon. member wants to deny it or not, he too is a member of the White group against whom the onslaught will ultimately take place. The hon. member and that party must not think that if their policy were to be implemented in the country at any stage, we would in any way escape the Soviet threat to this part of the world.

I should like to make a few remarks about finance. The size of the Defence budget has been written and talked about. The first point I wish to make is that defence as such is a matter of national importance, as several speakers have said this afternoon. I asked myself why this is so. When I took another look at the estimates of expenditure, I came to the conclusion that this was so because defence is probably the one department in which all sections of the population have a direct interest, either because a member of the family is involved in the Defence Force, or because that individual, who can be a member of any group, benefits from the task performed by the Defence Force in South Africa. That, in my view, is the basis of the national importance of defence in South Africa for all population groups at this stage. In the light of the national importance of this department, its financial requirements are also a matter of national importance. Therefore we cannot for one moment complain about the amount being spent on defence in South Africa at this stage. We even lend our emotional support to this. I shall come back to this shortly. If we consider this aspect on its merits, it is, I feel, necessary to ask oneself: Is the expenditure of funds allocated for defence functional and effective with a view to the object pursued by the Defence Force? I think that we can say without detailed analysis and without fear of contradiction, that the funds are indeed applied functionally and effectively in the interests of the national cause which is at stake. It is not so easy to determine how much money is necessary for the task of the Defence Force. This is based on a very precise calculation of what the situation will be in the future. There is talk about the operational prediction with regard to what the future demands will be. When one has made that prediction, one then have to make a calculation and prepare the necessary means to meet that prediction in terms of one’s requirements. In doing so, it is important to ensure that one can be self-sufficient in terms of the prediction in order to handle sanctions, but also self-sufficient with regard to the increase in one’s own demand. Those of us who were recently fortunate enough to obtain more information, were impressed by the accuracy and intensity with which planning has been carried out and the absolutely spot-on calculation in terms of the prediction of our future position as reflected in the present situation. I think that we can indeed congratulate our top Defence Force officers on the quality of their management and planning, with regard, too, to the expenditure of State funds.

I should like to make just one brief remark about how our defence spending compares with other items in the budget. It has been said that we spend too much on defence in comparison with the social needs in the domestic economy. The total expenditure in the social field in respect of all population groups—this includes health, education, training and community development—represents about 23% of the total budget. In contrast, the total expenditure on security services represents about 18,5%, and this includes Police, Justice, Prisons and Defence. We therefore spend a great deal more on social services than on security services. The difference amounts to approximately R600 million. I am referring to security services as a whole. If we only look at defence, it represents about 15% of the total budget. Then we must also take into account the fact that a major part of the Defence spending—the hon. member for Berea did point this out—is in fact spent to good effect in the social sphere, and not only for Defence Force staff, but also for the people for whose benefit the Defence Force operates. This means, therefore, that the defence spending makes a contribution on the level of social needs as well. Apart from our emotional involvement in it, therefore, based on the true merits of the case no one in the country need have any complaint that too much money is being spent on defence.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Johannesburg West really made a positive contribution when he gave us an indication of what percentage of the budget comprises defence expenditure. I should like to congratulate the hon. member on a very fine contribution.

I resolved not to react to speeches of hon. members of the official Opposition this evening, but if there is a member on Opposition side with whom I sympathize, then it is the hon. member for Yeoville. He is the captain of the team. However, there is a problem between the manager and the captain. At half-time we saw the captain and his team go into a huddle in this House. The manager and the captain had the problem that someone had to be sent off the field, viz. the hon. member for Greytown. I am extremely sorry that the hon. member for Constantia was not sent off the field as well. The captain has my sympathy this evening. I want to tell him that the third team in this House, i.e. the NRP, beat them in this game.

In the short while at my disposal I should like to turn to social work or welfare work in the Defence Force. The concept of military social work is not an unfamiliar concept. In many Western countries it is accorded a high priority. We are exceptionally grateful to take cognizance of the fact that social work is being accorded a high priority in the S.A. Defence Force as well.

The first qualified social worker in the S.A. Defence Force was appointed on 1 April, 1968. Eventually, in 1970 the full-fledged Social Service Division was established in the S.A. Defence Force. We are exceptionally grateful and appreciative of that. We are delighted that that service, too, is being rendered in the Defence Force. Military social work is aimed at creating a sound social climate and at maintaining stability among members of the Defence Force and their families. This is done through the prevention, the elimination, and the handling of social problems which may inhibit the effective functioning and combat-readiness of the Defence Force man.

Consequently the objectives are in accordance with the policy and aims of the S.A. Defence Force, which are concentrated on the establishment of a strong Defence Force which is combat-ready and capable of dealing with every enemy action, whether internally or on our borders. A good demonstration of this was Operation Protea, to which frequent reference has already been made in this House today.

In the first place the social welfare officers are rendering a service to members of the Permanent Force and their families. In the second place, however, this division is also rendering a service to the national servicemen. Furthermore they are rendering a service to the citizen force and commando members when they are undergoing national service. Welfare officers of the Permanent Force are trained, registered social workers who have acquired professional experience even before their appointment to the Permanent Force. It is clear that high demands, professional as well as military, are made on welfare officers. The welfare officer is not only a professional person who is practicing his profession in the Defence Force. He is also a soldier and officer. This, of course, implies that certain things are expected of him and that certain military demands are made on him as well. This is certainly no easy task, but nevertheless a task which offers a great deal of professional satisfaction to everyone with a strong feeling of patriotism and loyalty to the Republic of South Africa.

The Welfare Division of the S.A. Defence Force is rendering a service in the operational area as well. Furthermore one is aware of the fact that there are those who are also rendering that service in the larger centres in the operational area. The welfare officers are privileged to be able to utilize certain auxiliary services within the Defence Force. In this respect we are thinking, for example, of the chaplain’s service. In fact, the hon. member for Randfontein referred to the chaplain’s service earlier this evening. It is a very important service, for it is important for our Defence Force to be prepared. However, I should like to emphasize that the importance of their spiritual preparedness should not be underestimated. Consequently the chaplain service is rendering an important service in that sphere as well. Then I also have in mind psychiatrists, speech therapists, etc., all people who are also of general assistance to members of the Defence Force.

In addition the welfare officer in the Defence Force at times forms part of a team of therapists that also offers assistance to people who are experiencing social problems. I want to mention just a few of these. In this respect we think, for example, of drug addicts and alcoholics. A special service is being rendered to them in the Defence Force.

However, when we examine welfare service in our country as a whole, we observe that there are other Government departments, too, that have their own welfare services. In this respect I could for example mention the prisons’ service, as well as the Railways, which has its own welfare service. The State should also give attention to the training of social workers. I had access to the statistics indicating the number of students who are enrolled at our universities as well as at our colleges for training as social workers, and the dwindling numbers are cause for concern. Consequently I should like to request the hon. the Minister to give attention to the training of social workers in the Defence Force as well.

I should just like to make one final remark. I have appreciation for the work which is being done by the Exemption Board. It is true that people sometimes have problems and that there has to be an application for exemption—a young man informed me that every year for the past four years his employer had asked for exemption from his national service. Incidentally, the hon. member for Yeoville also referred to this when he asked whether our young men should not be slightly older before undergoing their national service. However, the young man to whom I referred resigned from his present employment in order to continue his national service and is at present doing border duty. As a result of this the young man is unhappy because he is not getting any younger. I am aware that the Exemption Board gives attention to all possible aspects of exemption. However, I think that we should also inquire from the person who is being called up for military service what his own feelings are in respect of the national service he has to do, in particular with regard to exemptions requested by employers.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to follow up on what the hon. member for Witbank said with regard to the final matter to which he referred, viz. the Exemption Board and the problems a young man had ostensibly experienced because his employer had for four successive years applied for exemption with the result that he had had to perform his national service so many years later than he would have preferred. I personally find it rather difficult to believe that a young man would have allowed his employer to apply on his behalf without his having supported the application himself. My experience suggests the contrary. Hon. members will recall that I spoke about this same matter, viz. the Exemption Board, during my previous speech earlier this afternoon.

†I was saying that I was concerned about a particular matter that I wanted to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention, namely in regard to the dissatisfaction of servicemen with some of the decisions by the Exemption Board. I said that I had had personal experience of and had assisted with applications for deferment that to my way of thinking were unreasonably turned down. There are many young men who for various reasons at certain times have to ask for exemption. It is not a case of not wanting to do military service, but in some cases they really do not have any choice. I want to give the hon. the Minister one or two examples. There is, for instance, the man who runs a small business that at certain critical times of the year requires his presence because his absence could make the continuation of that business virtually impossible. In such cases I think young men have a very, very strong case and I think the hon. the Minister will agree with me on that. I know of such a young man who is doing his service right now.

*It is now September and next month is October. Here in the Western Cape this is perhaps the farmer’s busiest time. If he farms with tobacco as well as wine, he will be planting a vineyard as well as tobacco. The farmer to whom I want to refer is married and has no foreman. He applied in good time for exemption during these periods. If I remember correctly, he proposed that he might perform his national service in December, or at more or less that time. I discussed the matter with senior officers after he had brought it to my attention. As far as I could ascertain, his application was rejected out of hand. I must point out that this young farmer is facing a possible loss in turnover due to the possibility of that crop not being planted at all. His loss may amount to many thousands of rands. I believe that in this case the board could have given more attention to the application so that the young farmer could in fact have been granted exemption.

It is not only farmers in the Western Cape that experience problems in this regard; there are, of course, others, too, and here I have in mind, for example, the men who have to plant their maize at certain times of the year. If such a man cannot be on his farm during planting time, he is faced with severe difficulties. In addition, there is, of course, the man who has a small business undertaking such as a garage or small engineering firm. Such people have tremendous problems and if they have to be absent from such an undertaking for two to three months, this means that in certain cases they are unable to continue with the undertaking.

I call upon the hon. the Minister please to lay down for us certain guidelines in this regard so that we may know more or less what to expect when having to assist with applications. We shall then be able to give the applicant a reasonably accurate answer, although we accept that we cannot give a definite one.

†There is another problem area to which I should like to refer and that is the question of the reserve list.

*I cannot say exactly how many, but over the past five to six months about 10 to 12 people have approached me and said: “As far as I can work out, my period of national service has now come to an end. Would you please ascertain for me what the position is?” What happened in probably half of those cases was that after we had written a letter to the general, we received a letter in which it was mentioned that the person in question was to be transferred to the reserve list. When I receive such a reply I wonder what would have happened if we had not contacted the Defence Force. Would it have meant that apart from the national service being required of him, that man would have to do further service merely because his case had not been brought to the attention of the authorities in good time?

This debate certainly cannot pass without an in-depth discussion of the transport facilities available to our Defence Force men. I know that applications have on various occasions been submitted to the hon. the Minister himself as well as to the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs to the effect that certain concession benefits be granted to young men engaged in their national service so that they may go home on leave or over a weekend from time to time. At present they simply stand beside the road and hope that they will be given a lift.

My problem is that a person who can get away for a brief period of three to four days usually overtaxes himself by not sleeping in spite of the long distances which have to be covered en route to his destination. These young men often drive for hours on end; sometimes even the motor-car of the person who offers them the lift. Everyone knows how many men we have lost in the recent past due to road accidents.

Meanwhile I have ascertained from the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs that most of our aircraft on the domestic routes were not fully occupied last year. On the Johannesburg-Cape Town-Johannesburg route, a mere 75% of the capacity was utilized and on the Johannesburg-Port Elizabeth-Johannesburg route, 84%. Other routes, too, were only utilized up to about 75% to 80% of capacity. In other words, there are aircraft with empty seats. My proposal is that we grant an Army man the right to obtain a concession ticket at half price on standby so that he can arrive at his destination without delay. Not only will this have the advantage that a man will be able to arrive home soon; it will also contribute towards having the S.A. Airways operate at full capacity. We are not asking that these men should travel free. In the past the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs said that they were already operating at a loss and consequently did not see their way clear to granting our Defence Force men free flights. We ask that concession tickets be made available to Defence Force men.

In this regard I also just want to draw to the attention of this House to the fact that to the best of my knowledge, a petition with over 20 000 signatures has been submitted. The hon. the Minister must tell me whether this is correct. I am not sure whether there are 10 000 or 20 000 signatures on the petition, but a tremendous number of mothers and women came together to submit such a petition. I was informed this evening that there is a further petition … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, listening to the hon. member for Wynberg one realizes once again that …

Do not come along with that old story again. [Interjections.]

Now the hon. “Piet-my-vrou” is also chiming in again. Mr. Chairman, we were correct in saying this afternoon that the hon. member for Yeoville and the hon. member for Wynberg have a philosophy in respect of our Defence Force which is acceptable to us. Now the hon. member for Wynberg has once again made reasonable representations pertaining to problems being experienced with regard to the Exemption Board, for example.

I did not make them to you. Let the Minister reply to them. [Interjections.]

The hon. member must please keep quiet now and listen to what I have to say. [Interjections.] Mr. Chairman, that hon. member has made sound proposals and we have no problems with them. I do just want to point out to him, though, that the Exemption Board is a statutory body which falls under the Minister of Manpower and that this hon. the Minister has only one representative on that Exemption Board. However, if the hon. the Minister is able to assist the hon. member he will definitely do so.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Wynberg also referred to transport facilities for our Defence Force men. I should like to associate myself with him. This is a vital matter. We, too, have made representations in this regard. Some of our young men who are granted leave simply cannot get home, due to the distance involved and the lack of time. Accordingly I think that if the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Minister of Transport could do something about this matter we should all be delighted. Consequently we ask them please to see whether they cannot assist the young men.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to express a few thoughts on the maintenance of discipline in the S.A. Defence Force. Discipline is apparently something which does not exist in the PFP at all, particularly if we consider what happened here today. [Interjections.] They are laughing now, but it is true. [Interjections.] Discipline is of such importance that one could say that the effectiveness and successes of our Defence Force depend primarily on the sound training and discipline of our soldiers. This afternoon the hon. the Minister explained the threat to us here and pointed out that we were the people who were the target of the enemy. They want to destroy us here in Southern Africa. Consequently it is of cardinal importance for our continued existence that the Republic should have a well-trained, well-disciplined, tightly-knit and loyal, motivated Defence Force. If we want to continue to exist here, this is of vital importance. All of us should know this, including the hon. members of the PFP. Discipline means “to learn” and consists of two elements, viz. self-discipline and the discipline to carry out instructions to the letter. Sound discipline ensures that instructions are carried out promptly and that appropriate action is initiated even in the absence of such instructions. In addition, it is the product of purposeful training and capable leadership. It is consistent and functions independently of an emotional display of bravado. The effectiveness and accompanying discipline of a military organization are measured not by the number of orders and instructions issued, but by the number of instructions executed promptly and correctly to the letter. Discipline is so important that it has been defined as follows—

This, Sir, is a quote from Principles of War by Field Marshal Foch.

However, discipline implies not only the element of hard steel. The human factor must also be taken into account at all times. In this regard a Chinese author Sun Tzu expressed himself as follows—

In his book The Art of War Nicole Machiavelli has this to say—

This, Sir, is what we encounter in our Defence Force. It is the spirit one consistently encounters when one has to do with our national servicemen, the commandos, our Citizen Force and the Permanent Force.

I agree.

The hon. member for Hillbrow agrees, and we are gratified by that. We are good friends, and accordingly I want to ask him whether he does not want to instil this idea in the members of his party as well, for there is no discipline among them whatsoever. They are all pulling in different directions. [Interjections.] We find the sound discipline and the results they can produce in, for example, Operation Protea. The will to see a task through to the end and to win does not come of its own accord, but is the result of training and discipline, something which we undoubtedly have in the S.A. Defence Force. We are indeed grateful that the maintenance of sound discipline in the Defence Force at all times is being accorded a very high priority by the hon. the Minister as well as the chiefs of the Defence Force, and this does not only mean the implementation of the steel element of discipline, but also the humane way in which discipline is maintained. A spirit of dedication, enthusiasm and sacrifice, of task orientation and the all-conquering desire to win—we encounter these things among the troops in the operational area. It is this spirit which is being cultivated by way of the implementation of strict and humane discipline, and as long as this is the point of departure of the S.A. Defence Force, so long will our Defence Force form a reliable bastion against the enemies of South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to follow after the hon. member for Verwoerdburg. Earlier this afternoon we saw him rushing out of a loose scrum waving his elbows and fists and we have just seen him again in a fixed scrum. The theme of his speech fits in very well with a speech that I am now going to deliver. I agree with him whole-heartedly that discipline in the Defence Force, as in the entire community, is extremely important.

I should also like to avail myself of this opportunity to pay tribute to our S.A. Defence Force. We have just paid a visit to the operational area and we have seen that our young men are fighting in a motivated, purposeful and aggressive way for the preservation of Christian civilization here at the southern tip of Africa. Therefore we are entitled to be proud of our officers and men in the Defence Force. We have the will and the faith to continue with the struggle. We are proud of our Defence Force and we want to say thank you very much to them.

I should like to talk about the role that the community must play in supporting our national servicemen. We heard once again here this afternoon—I think we are all aware of it—that today we have a Defence Force that is prepared and that is equal to the task. Once again we were impressed by the idea of the total onslaught which is being launched at the Republic of South Africa. We also became aware afresh of the fact that this onslaught is being aimed at the entire population of the Republic of South Africa. The following five years will be crucial ones for our continued existence in this country. The hon. the Minister pointed out that the onslaught is going to increase in intensity in the years that He ahead. We have been made fully aware of the challenging times in which we are living. Once again this afternoon we heard that our Defence Force is a Defence Force from the people and for the people. The defence of the country affects all of us, and consequently I want to make a request to the community, wherever they can, to do their share to support our national servicemen.

In the first place I want to express my hearty thanks to existing organizations for the valuable work that they are doing in the interest of our national servicemen. I want to dwell briefly on the Southern Cross Fund which has spent no less than R1,03 million over the past year in support of our national servicemen. These people visit military hospitals with the aim of inspiring our young men with the necessary courage. Here I want to appeal to employers too. Employers usually pay the difference between what the State pays to the national serviceman and what he would normally earn. Employers usually pay this in order to eliminate the backlog that the national servicemen may experience. However, I should like to address an appeal to those who do not do so. I want to ask them to fulfil their duty in this regard. Employers who cannot do so, could perhaps assist in the sphere of pension contributions by freezing the contributions for the period of national service or making them paid up. This will help national servicemen during periods when they do not receive their full salaries. Employee’s contributions to insurance may possibly also be suspended during the person’s absence on military service. Contributions of married members in particular to medical funds may possibly also be suspended for the duration of their absence on military service, without suspending medical benefits for the dependants. It is also important for leave privileges to be recognized whilst an employee is away on military service.

Another important aspect is that communication with the national serviceman and his family should be maintained so that the national serviceman may have peace of mind during his period of absence. I should like to pay tribute to the “Ballerina” (“bel-en-ry-na”) organization. A certain lady, Mrs. Ansie Jooste, has established this organization. We want to thank her sincerely for the tremendous task that she is doing in arranging lifts for our national servicemen. At Empangeni, in my area, there is a lady called Kleintje Beneke, and at Richards Bay, Florrie Neethling, and also a Mrs. Mostert who assist in this task. I have spoken to them often, and know what frustrations they are faced with in carrying out this task. It is the duty of every motorist in this country to pick up a national serviceman along the road. The other day I picked up a national serviceman after a motorist had passed him. I overtook the person concerned, pulled him off the road and asked him why he had driven past that young man, who had been standing in the pouring rain. His reply was that he considered it a risk to stop and pick up a young man along the road. One can do something about this. Is it not possible to issue every national serviceman with a permit on which his photograph, his service number and the name of his base camp appears? Then the motorist can take down the particulars, and this will also prevent national servicemen behaving badly, because in that event the motorist can report a national serviceman to his base camp.

He has his Defence Force permit.

That is correct. Then the motorist has no excuse not to pick him up. He can take down the particulars and this will protect the motorist. He has third party coverage. I want to ask for an advertising campaign to be launched by the media in order to make people aware of their duty towards national servicemen. We have already had a Water Year and a Green Heritage Year. Let us have a “Ride Safe” year in order to make all our people aware of the importance of everyone doing his duty. One must not wait for a Ride Safe lady to phone and ask whether one can give anyone a lift. It is everyone’s duty, when one goes on a journey, to telephone the “Ballerinas” and to say that one is going somewhere and to ask whether there is anyone to whom one can give a lift. Announcements can be made in churches on Sundays to ask whether there is anyone driving somewhere who could give a national serviceman a lift. The community must co-operate in an attempt to perfect a valuable service to our national servicemen.

I want to express my gratitude towards the newspapers who publish the numbers of bonus bonds that are drawn from time to time. I want to ask them also to publish the names of the “Ballerinas” throughout the country, with their telephone numbers. They must do so on a regular basis so that everyone knows where the contact people are and the public can contact them spontaneously and offer their assistance. It should not be necessary for those people to struggle. Let us launch a campaign to make the “Ride Safe” effort a great success.

I should like to extend my hearty thanks to the local authorities that are doing their duty. However, there are still many local authorities that are neglecting their duty. I was on the border recently and I saw how proud the young men were who participated in Operation Protea. When such a young man returns after having accomplished an heroic deed, like anyone else, he wants some recognition. It is the duty of every MP and every local authority to find out who has returned from the border so that occasions can be organized for the leaders of the community to gather in public and then give recognition to such young men. As far as our churches are concerned, it is true that our clergymen regularly pray for the young men who are leaving for or returning from the border. I want to propose that the young man be mentioned by name in the course of the service, and that recognition should be granted for heroic deeds accomplished in the interest of the continued existence of the country and of Christianity at the southern tip of Africa. If we all co-operate in this regard and everyone gives the necessary recognition, it will lead to the morale of our young men being kept up, and this is important. We want to wish the hon. the Minister everything of the best for the future. He has the necessary knowledge and experience. We reject the remarks about his appointment from that side of the House with the contempt that they deserve. It is important that we have a Minister with the required knowledge and experience.

Order! I am sorry but the hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member is making such a fine speech that I should like him to complete it.

Thank you very much. Sir, the hon. the Minister is extremely well equipped for carrying out this task and we know that every member of the Defence Force has the necessary confidence in him and that he will achieve the required team work. The Chief of the Defence Force is also such a wide-awake and energetic man that it is in fact contagious when one watches him walk. He also gives the necessary inspiration to the young men. When we visited the operational area, he was walking along with a machine gun over his arm. Sir, if I were to have a machine gun, I know in exactly which direction I would aim!

We in this country are privileged to have leadership of a high quality in the Defence Force. The quality of the training that is given, fills our young men on the border with confidence. Our young men are satisfied with the quality of the training that they receive and our generals in turn are satisfied with the quality of the young men that we have at our disposal. With that knowledge we can face the future with a great deal of confidence. In our visit to the border we were deeply impressed by the motivation of our young men. As a result of this, the mothers and fathers who have stayed at home, can be assured that everything is running smoothly and that they have nothing to fear. A nation that wants to survive in this country, can feel very fortunate that our Defence Force is of this quality because it gives us the confidence and the necessary faith in the future. We know that the struggle which is being waged, is not being waged to no avail.

Mr. Chairman, we have today again witnessed some curious phenomena in the House, particularly the hon. member for Constantia objecting to anti-Swapo posters. I wonder whether that hon. member thinks that one can defeat one’s enemy with flower-power or something like that. Does he think that, if we hand out bouquets to Swapo, they will then stop the war because he is against violence? Does he think Swapo will then agree to stop the violence and stop the war? This is an attitude which is ingrained and which is related to their denial of the total onslaught on this country, something to which several hon. members on this side of the House have referred. Sufficient evidence of this total onslaught has been provided by the hon. the Minister of Defence and several hon. members on this side of the House. That is ostrich politics of the worst kind. It is reminiscent of the situation that pertained just before the outbreak of World War II when Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Daladier went to Munich to discuss with Adolf Hitler the expansionist intentions of the Nazi empire.

Whose side were you on in that war?

These two gentlemen went to Germany and saw the massive conventional arms build-up. It was also clear from their discussions that Hitler had every intention of invading Poland.

Jingo talk.

In spite of this, they did not wish to face reality. These truths were too unpleasant for them. They went home and pacified their people, telling them that everything was going to be fine and that Hitler was going to behave. “Peace in our time”, they said. What happened? When Hitler did in fact do what they knew he was going to do, but which they would not face, they found themselves unprepared, they found their people unprepared and they found their war machine unprepared, almost with disastrous consequences for the Western Alliance of that time.

And you wanted South Africa to be neutral.

By this neglect and by this failure to face up to reality, Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Daladier unwittingly became part of the Nazi onslaught on their countries. I want to warn the hon. members opposite, who deny the existence of a total onslaught, that it would not be in their interests, in the interests of South Africa or in anybody’s interests in this country—Black, White or Brown—if they were seen, through this kind of attitude of theirs, to be part of the total onslaught on this country. [Interjections.]

I think you have got a bloody nerve!

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 22.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.