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

Standing Order No. 55

1. (4) If the motion is agreed to, the bill shall be deemed to be read a first time.

J. P. DU TOIT,
Chairman

Committee Rooms
House of Assembly
17 March 1982

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. Speaker, I believe that I have replied in full to all the questions asked in the debate. I shall therefore let that suffice.

Question put,

Upon which the House divided:

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we saw very little of all the intimations we had received before the time of how the official Opposition were going to oppose the Second Reading of this Appropriation Bill. There was a feeble attempt on the part of the official Opposition, and an even feebler attempt on the part of the NRP, to oppose the Bill. What I really found interesting, however, was the wording of the amendment which was moved by the hon. member for Hillbrow.

I wish to begin by referring to that amendment. I wish to point out that the hon. member for Hillbrow and his party are contradicting themselves as far as certain elements of their amendment are concerned. The first leg of the amendment of the hon. member for Hillbrow states that they decline to pass the Post Office Appropriation Bill unless the Government undertakes, firstly, to obtain the prior approval of Parliament for all proposals to increase tariffs for postal and telecommunications services.

Yesterday the hon. member for Umlazi pointed out very effectively to the hon. member for Hillbrow what the provisions of the Post Office Act in this connection were. What the hon. member for Hillbrow does not seem to understand at all, after much trouble on my part as well as on the part of other hon. members on the Government side, is that there is an agreement with the private sector—an agreement by way of the organization known as the Co-ordinating Committee for Post Office Affairs—which has probably been in force for the past 10 years or more and in terms of which I have to notify them approximately three months before new tariffs are introduced, to enable them to make the necessary adjustments to their own budgets. On the part of the Post Office, when tariff adjustments have to be made, we try to keep them as close as possible to the beginning of the financial year, so as to manage our own financial administration in an orderly way. Consequently, in terms of that undertaking, I gave notice of the proposed tariff increases on 5 January this year, approximately three months before the time. I shall go into greater details on this matter at a later stage.

However, the hon. member for Hillbrow now wants to have his cake and eat it. On the one hand, he is reproaching me by saying that I did not inform the private sector. I do not know whether three months is not sufficient time in his opinion. On the other hand, he is reproaching me by stating that I circumvented Parliament by announcing the tariffs when Parliament was in recess. I think that it would be clear to every reasonable person—and I wish to emphasize “reasonable”—that I had no choice but to announce the tariffs at the beginning of January. I want to put it to the hon. member for Hillbrow that the Act provides that tariffs do not necessarily have to be announced during a parliamentary session. This may also be done out of Parliament. However, the appropriation of expenditure has to, be approved by Parliament. If the hon. member therefore wishes to imply that Parliament does not have the opportunity of discussing the new tariffs, he is misguided for that was precisely what he did yesterday. But surely the hon. member debated the tariff increases in any case, and I therefore cannot understand why the hon. member should make such a condition. I propose that he should go and study the Act. If he has something against the statutory provision he should move that the Act be amended.

The second leg of his amendment reads—

In my Second Reading speech on Tuesday, I said that if one looked back over the past decade, the average of the increases in Post Office tariffs lay very far below, about halfway below, the average increase in the inflation rate over the same period. I therefore do not understand what the hon. member means by saying “to avoid large periodic tariff increases”. Does the hon. member want us to introduce tariff increases every second month in one or other facet of the services of the department? The true test is how the tariff increases keep pace with the inflation rate, and here we find that over a five year period, the tariff increases of the Post Office, on average, are situated well below the average increase in the inflation rate.

The third leg of the amendment of the hon. member reads—

Those tariffs were announced on 5 January and were published in the Gazette on 26 February. They had been thoroughly considered, and in the budget papers before us we can see the impact of the new tariffs. Therefore I cannot understand why the hon. member wishes us to revise those new tariffs once again. Of course, the hon. member may argue that those tariffs are too high. What was definitely lacking yesterday, not only from the hon. member for Hillbrow, but also from all hon. members on the Opposition side who took part in the debate, was that not one of them told me which tariff should be reduced and to what extent. Therefore I can only describe his attitude as being merely an emotional approach, an approach which was completely unrelated to the facts and to reality.

The fourth leg of his amendment reads—

Did I not mention in my speech on Thursday that, apart from the visible progress in the improvement of the quality, new methods were being introduced to improve the quality? Did the hon. member not take cognizance of this? The hon. member says that we should continue to expedite the installation of telephones.

†But what did the hon. member himself say right at the end of his speech? He said—

This standpoint is completely contradictory to this leg of the amendment.

Why is it contradictory?

Of course it is.

Why?

How can one increase the number of telephones, how can one expand that particular service by cutting down on one’s capital programme?

Is the telephone the only capital expenditure item?

Let me ask the hon. member to have a look at the estimates of revenue and expenditure before him. Capital expenditure is dealt with on page 5 of these estimates. Has the hon. member done his duty by making a study of this document?

Yes.

Let the hon. member then point out to me which of the capital items we can do away with in the meantime.

You can do away with the Minister’s salary for a start. How’s that?

I shall come to that hon. member later. [Interjections.] Mr. Speaker, the hon. member comes along here every year and does not do his homework properly. Right at the start of the session he even gave wrong information to the leader of his party and the hon. the Leader of the Opposition in consequence made some statements here that were quite incorrect because he made use of information given to him by the hon. member for Hillbrow who never does his homework properly. I should like the hon. member for Hillbrow to stand up in this House and tell me which of these capital expenditure items we can do away with. I shall be very obliged if he will do so.

Mr. Speaker …

Order! The hon. member must resume his seat.

Very well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member can do so across the floor of this House. He can tell me which of these items we can either scrap or do without. [Interjections.] The hon. member will have the opportunity to do so during the Committee Stage and possibly during the course of the Third Reading debate. I hope the hon. member will make use of the opportunity to do so then. If he is prepared to tell me, as he did at the end of this speech during the Second Reading debate, to reduce the tariffs even if it means reducing the capital expenditure programme, then he must tell us which of these items can be done away with which will not disturb or interfere with our programme of expansion in respect of our telecommunications service.

*The final leg of the amendments of the hon. member reads as follows—

I have the greatest compassion and highest regard for Post Office pensioners, just as I have for the present staff. However, the hon. member for Hillbrow ought to know that their pensions are administrated in terms of the provisions of the same legislation as that which applies to the rest of the Public Service.

Why don’t you read the amendment?

How should I interpret it then? [Interjections.] After the main budget speech next week, the hon. member will have the opportunity of returning to the subject of the pension schemes of the Public Service. This will give him the opportunity of broaching this subject.

It falls under the Government. Read the amendment.

I wish to deal further with the hon. member for Hillbrow. I have said before that he is very hasty to comment on Post Office affairs. As I see it, he sometimes does this of his own accord, and sometimes if a newspaper approaches him for his opinion. I wish to be fair to the hon. member. I would think that when a newspaper telephoned him early on the morning of 5 January, or perhaps even the previous evening, asking him to express his opinion on this, he was on holiday and did not have his homework things with him. I wish to make that concession, and therefore I did not blame him at that stage for what he did. However, I wish to quote what the hon. member said. He said, inter alia, the following—

†It would appear that at that stage he was well aware of the terms of the Act—

You are contradicting yourself.

We are facing each other here today, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, but it is completely academic. All the increases have already been announced.

The hon. member went on to say—

I stand by every word I said.

That is what the hon. member said at that stage and I had the feeling. Forgive him for he knows not what he is doing, or else he did not have his homework with him.

The hon. member came back yesterday and said exactly the same thing. Together with the concession which I made in respect of the fact that he did not have the documents with him, I do know that after the Parliamentary session began, he asked me whether he could have the complete statement which I made in the announcement. That was about a month ago. That statement which contained all the particulars, besides other motivation, reads as follows in the second sentence, and the hon. member must have seen it—

Yesterday the hon. member claimed once again that the private sector had been caught off balance. The hon. member should know by this time that the Postmaster-General informed the National Consultative Committee for Post Office Affairs as early as 20 November last year, that general tariff increases were imminent and that they would be announced three months before the time, according to the agreement. Furthermore: It was accepted that the tariff increases were unavoidable. Not one member of the Consultative Committee objected because we had given them too little time. I should like to ask the hon. member whether he had any contact with that organization to determine whether the facts which he points out in his statement, are correct. Did he have any contact with them?

No.

Why does the hon. member come to Parliament and repeat that incorrect statement he made?

I shall tell you why.

It is very difficult to get through to the hon. member by means of ordinary logic in the orderly progress of circumstances.

Perhaps the hon. member for Umhlanga also allowed himself to be caught out by the newspapers. When the hon. member, Mr. Vermeulen, said yesterday that the hon. member for Umhlanga had made a wild statement in the Rand Daily Mail, the hon. member for Umhlanga replied in a seminegative way by means of an interjection, but here I have a clipping from the Rand Daily Mail of 6 January—

No, mismanagement by the Minister. I did not use the words that were printed.

Now the hon. member is running away from his own words. Have I not just read them out to him?

Oh, please!

How does one argue with somebody who says “Oh, please”?

Certain things you read in the Rand Daily Mail you consider to be absolutely false.

Order!

The hon. member is now running away from what he told this newspaper.

I told that newspaper that it was due to your mismanagement.

Order! The hon. member for Umhlanga must stop arguing across the floor of the House. The hon. the Minister may proceed.

Sir, I can even argue with the hon. member on what he has just said. If I mismanage the department, what does it really mean? It means that those who actually manage the department and who come to me with their final proposals have not done their job properly, and it also means that I am not in a position to judge their evaluations.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether, in terms of the observation that he has now made, he says that he is not prepared to accept his ministerial responsibility as the man in charge of that particular department?

Once again the hon. member is running away from the argument. The hon. member is just as aware as I am that the management of the Post Office is vested in the Postmaster-General and his top staff. I am politically in control of the department, but if the hon. member can prove to me that I cannot evaluate what the senior officials of my department are doing, we can continue that argument. In any case, here we have in print what the hon. member actually said.

We have in Hansard what you said too.

I wish to return for a while to the hon. member for Hillbrow. The two statements which he made in January and which he has now repeated here, are absolutely contradictory. How can he tell me that I did not inform the private sector in time, when I did in fact do so?

Is the National Consultative Committee for Post Office Affairs the private sector?

They are representative of Assocom, the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut, the FCI, and others. Even if I give the private sector and the man in the street, in terms of the speech by the hon. member for Sunnyside yesterday, three months’ notice, how on earth can one then say that the price increases came as a shock? How can a person in his proper senses tell me that I have not informed the public, or the private sector for that matter, long in advance?

Have you ever done this before?

Yes, it was done on several occasions before, although not in my time. I introduced a tariff increase which was announced in a previous year. I introduced it on 1 February 1980.

The hon. Minister De Klerk announced it in Parliament.

The hon. member was holidaying on the East Coast and did not have the necessary documents with him at the time, but on 5 January The Star—I believe the hon. member has faith in The Star—published a leading article which I will quote from.

Why do you not quote from the Rand Daily Mail?

Yes, I can even quote from the Rand Daily Mail if the hon. member so wishes. [Interjections.]

Order! It is not necessary for hon. members to question all the hon. the Minister’s statements. They have had their turn. The hon. the Minister may proceed.

I quote from The Star of 5 January—

Here The Star is probably referring to the hon. member for Hillbrow. I quote further—

*I hope the hon. member for Sunnyside is also listening to this, because he said yesterday that I had made a mistake by not notifying the man in the street of the price increases well in advance by enclosing a letter with his telephone account. I quote further—

I wonder how much notice the hon. member for Bezuidenhout gave of price increases in the days when he was still a manufacturer and was selling a certain type of cheese.

Ask the Dairy Control Board.

I quote further from The Star—

*This is what The Star wrote that day. But I am having problems with the hon. member for Hillbrow because he still cannot understand that report.

The hon. member for Umhlanga wanted to know why I had not quoted from the Rand Raily Mail.

†On 13 February, about a month ago, the Rand Daily Mail published a report under the heading: “Want a cheap call?”—

The paper carried out its own investigation and reported further as follows—

So those hon. members adopted a standpoint without paying regard to the truth. Apart from that, the hon. member for Hillbrow also said the day before yesterday, and I quote from the unrevised Hansard—

I have also found those very words about everything in the garden being rosy in one of the hon. member’s previous Press statements. I quote further—

I want to ask the hon. member for Hillbrow who it was who painted that rosy picture of the finances of the Post Office last year.

You did.

I never did. On the very day of the budget I complained about the fact that that very morning there had been a report of an interview given by the hon. member for Hillbrow to the Rand Daily Mail. Under the caption “No need to raise Post Office rates—M.P.” the following is said—

That was the very day before the budget.

The trouble is the funds have been flushed out.

He painted that rosy picture of the Post Office, but in that statement he made some mistakes. I quote further—

He was referring to February 1981. I then had to inform the hon. member that he did not understand the financing of the Post Office.

That makes two of you.

No, that makes two on that side. You see, Sir, in his interview with that paper that hon. member was referring to the surplus of the previous financial year, a surplus which had already been used for the capital programme of the year that ended on 31 March 1981. I had to tell him that simple little story. As a result of his misinterpretation of the budget documents and all other information at his disposal, he painted this rosy picture of the Post Office’s finances. I certainly did not. [Interjections.]

*Let us see how the media interpreted my budget speech last year. For the edification of the hon. member for Sunnyside, I should like to refer to a newspaper which circulates in his part of the world. I refer to what was reported by Die Transvaler of 2 September last year. Under the heading “Tariefaanpassings moet wel kom” it says—

It is referring to the present financial year—

†I should now like to quote at some length also from the Financial Week—

How can the hon. member then accuse me of painting a rosy picture in September last year…

Because you did.

… or blame me for not increasing tariffs at that time? He is well aware that in the latter part of the year we budgeted for the entire year and that, in doing so, we budgeted for a surplus of R41 million. Hopefully a surplus of R47 million will be achieved by the end of March of this year. What we are debating today is the budget for the ensuing year, i.e. for 1982-’83. Once again we had to make provision for salary increases. We also had to make provision for an extended capital programme which is 38,1% higher than it was for the previous year. It is a completely different story to that of the current financial year. I do not think that can be so difficult to follow.

The hon. member should have looked at the comment that appeared in a newspaper by a gentleman who knows his story as far as finances and economics are concerned.

*In the latest edition of Beeld a report appears in which Prof. Geert de Wet, head of the department of economics at the Rand Afrikaans University, is quoted as follows—

Then the hon. member for Umhlanga comes here and talks about “mismanagement”. I read further—

He also said—

My department operates on a daily basis as far as its administration and its finances in particular are concerned. Every month I receive a statement which indicates the financial position. How can the hon. members for Hillbrow and Umhlanga speak of “mismanagement”?

In the September budget last year, I had to make provision for the present year. Then we were still able to budget for an operating surplus to employ for the capital programmes for the same financial year, the year in which we still find ourselves. However, when we had to make provision in November for the following year, we had to deal with a levelling off in the investment level of the Post Office savings facilities in spite of three increases in interest rates pertaining to our investment facilities; to such an extent in fact that while we had budgeted for an amount of R240 million in investment at the Post Office which we could utilize for our capital programme for the current financial year—to say nothing of the following year—because it is at a reasonable and fair interest rate in comparison with interest rates in respect of overseas loans, the present indications are as I said on Tuesday, that we will not even reach an amount of R100 million for the full financial year at the end of this month.

I shall deal with the argument of the hon. member for Bezuidenhout at a later stage. However, it is a fact that we will not achieve what we expected to achieve. On 1 September, the day of the budget, new interest rates were announced on certain of our investment facilities. On 1 October last year, there was a new issue of national savings certificates. We monitored the course of events almost from day to day. However, when one has to deal with the situation that interest rates in the private sector have increased to the extent that the sensible man sees that it is to his benefit to invest with a private financial institution, rather than at the Post Office, in spite of the tax benefits which he has in respect of investments at the Post Office, matters take another course. It is not only the Post Office which has been affected by this. Building societies and other financial institutions are in the same position.

Is Telebank something more than just a bank?

Telebank is an extension of the Post Office Savings Bank.

Does the Post Office Savings Bank therefore control it?

Yes, and I shall refer to this again later. What I am trying to explain is that there was no “mismanagement” in the Post Office, but that immediately after last year’s budget planning began for the year beginning on 1 April 1982. However, the indications were that we were not going to get reasonably inexpensive loan capital through our own investment institutions, and that we would have to negotiate foreign loans at interest rates varying between 16% and 18%. However, we also realized that we had to acquire a greater share through selffinancing.

I agree.

I am glad that the hon. member agrees, because I know he is a businessman, and it is his opinion as a businessman that the Post Office should finance a greater part of its capital programme from its own revenue. I am glad the hon. member supports this idea.

As long as you control it properly.

Initially I was rather worried yesterday that the hon. member for Bezuidenhout would echo the hon. member for Hillbrow and would therefore also adopt two opposing standpoints. I therefore welcome his support, and I sincerely hope that he will inform the hon. member for Hillbrow of the business principle that one should use one’s own revenue funds for capital work because that would be less expensive to raise foreign loans at high interest rates.

As regards tariffs, there was the major shortcoming that hon. members did not indicate which tariffs were too high. No one made any recommendations on how they could be lowered either, nor did they ask what the financial implications would be if certain tariffs were lowered. If they had done so, we could have debated in a sensible way, but the fact that they merely acted emotionally and said that the tariffs were too high, without suggesting any alternatives, indicated that they had not done their homework. Hon. members complained that the proposed tariff for telegrams was too high, and that it would have all kinds of results.

†The hon. member for Hillbrow as well as the hon. member for Umhlanga, said that the effect of the increase in telegram tariffs would lead to an overloading of the telephone service, in the sense that people who presently would send telegrams, would in future make telephone calls instead.

[Inaudible.]

I do not have any quarrel with that. I merely wish to point out that our telephone service cannot get overloaded just because of people who previously made use of our telegram service now switching over to using their telephones. Approximately 9 million telegrams are despatched annually from post offices in this country, and the phasing out of this service during the past few years took place at about 750 000 per annum. Now, if in the course of one year 750 000 more telephone calls were to be made, instead of 750 000 telegrams being sent, that would in no way disturb our telephone service. The fact is that the increased availability of telephone services is actually the cause of the phasing out of the telegram service. My information is that at an average only 15% of the ordinary public make use of the telegram service. That means that commerce and industry are responsible for 85% of the service. In Johannesburg, for instance, the ordinary public is responsible for only 5% of all telegrams sent, while 95% …

And in Pofadder?

Now why should the hon. member for Bezuidenhout want to refer to Pofadder? If the hon. member wants to know anything about Pofadder he should ask the hon. member for Namaqualand to enlighten him.

As is the case with any other rural town one can talk about Pofadder vis-à-vis metropolitan areas, of course.

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member for Bezuidenhout is running off to Pofadder. I am talking about the nine million …

He should go to Pofadder and remain there. [Interjections.]

I hope a puffadder swallows him there. [Interjections.]

The interesting thing is that the hon. member for Umhlanga argued that we were making the telegram service too expensive now for Black people, who were making extensive use of that service. I wish to differ with the hon. member for Umhlanga on this point. Black people do use telegram services for money transfers. As the hon. member should know, there is no tariff increase in respect of money transferred by telegram whatsoever. To illustrate to the hon. member for Umhlanga that Black people nowadays make very little use of telegram services, I can refer to a telephone call received by my office this morning from a non-White postmaster. He asked my private secretary to ask me to inform the hon. member for Hillbrow that he did not know what he was talking about. That postmaster said he was in charge of a post office and he knew that virtually no use was made of telegram services by Black people. According to him Black people, almost without exception, only make use of telegrams for the transfer of money.

Ask him when last he saw the inside of a post office. He last went to a post office when he was still a little boy. [Interjections.]

Yes, I suppose that is true. The principle of a service levy on telegrams which we are now introducing in South Africa, is certainly not a strange concept in other countries in the world. For the information of hon. members, I want to emphasize once again that our tariff per word remains unchanged at 5c. The tariff is not being increased. In Switzerland the tariff per word is also 5c. There, however, one pays a handling levy of R1,71 per telegram. In the Netherlands the tariff per word is 18c.

Mr. Speaker, I should like the hon. member for Hillbrow to listen to me now. He must please give me a chance to speak now. After all, he is an important man. He is the PFP’s main speaker on Posts and Telecommunications. The hon. member for Sandton must not bother him now. He can speak to him later. I should like the hon. member for Hillbrow to listen to me now.

In the Netherlands the tariff per word for telegrams is 18c. In addition one must pay a handling charge of R3,62 per telegram. In France the tariff per word is 10c. In addition a handling levy of R1,69 per telegram is payable. In Britain the tariff per word is 17c, while the handling fee per telegram is R1,70. We are therefore not out of step at all.

But this is the first time in South Africa.

Correct. When the hon. member for Hillbrow was born, it was also the first time an Alf Widman was born in South Africa, not so, Mr. Speaker? [Interjections.] Surely there is always a first time for everything.

I hope there are not two Alf Widmans.

We therefore see that the telegram service is a service that has tended to level off over the years. It is a service that was being provided at a great loss.

I think that I should also mention at this stage that the hon. member for Nigel definitely made the most practical and well-considered proposal in this specific connection. That was when he asked if we could not consider levying a service fee calculated as a percentage of the cost of each telegram instead of a service levy of R1 per telegram. Surely this is a sensible suggestion the hon. member made, and I want to assure him that we did in fact consider doing so.

†The hon. member for Umhlanga wanted to know whether I had given sufficient consideration to this matter. The reply is in the affirmative. On 5 January I said that the aspect of telegram tariffs would be left over until a later stage in order to enable us to make an in-depth study of the whole situation. And we did just that. I can inform hon. members today that if we had decided on an increase in the per word tariff of 60%, in other words from 5 cents per word to 8 cents per word as in the case of stamps, the nett effect on our income would have been more or less R5 million. This would have left the telegram service in more or less the same financial situation as it has been during the current year. On the other hand, if we had left the word tariff as it is at present and imposed a handling fee of 50 cents instead of R1, the nett income for the Post Office would also have been only R5 million, leaving the total income more or less where it was during the course of the last financial year.

*I now want to return to the argument put forward by the hon. member for Nigel. We considered his proposal. But if one were to do what he suggested, one would be overloading the cost of overseas telegrams. Their tariffs per word are very much higher. Then one would have to work out a percentage on that high tariff. In the case of businessmen, one would also be overloading the service with such a distorted ratio. However, the hon. member put forward a suggestion. That is what I was waiting for other hon. members on the Opposition side to do. I was waiting for ideas I could react to. The new telegram tariff which is to be introduced, will not really affect the man in the street, because it is not going to have any effect on money transfers. However, it is going to affect the business sector. We once had a case where a single business undertaking sent off 5 000 telegrams in one day to advertise its new products. The business sector will therefore be affected. I am also aware that business undertakings use telegrams for debt recovery, but a little bird has told me that they add R5 to the collection costs. That is what I heard. In this case the costs will not in fact be passed on to the public.

It is going to cost the NP a lot of money at times of an election.

I suppose it will cost the PFP a lot of money, too, and I hope they pay those high costs.

They do not have that many voters whom they need to contact.

Too frequently the incorrect premise is adopted.

I do not think you have that many voters left.

Mr. Speaker, please shut that hon. member up for a while. One would prefer to debate with more sensible members.

I think this is the first time the hon. member has made an interjection today.

I hope it is also the last time. People frequently make the mistake of referring to Post Office tariffs—as they do in the case of S.A. Transport Services rates—as taxes. Today I want to say here with great emphasis that no taxpayers’ money is used to provide Post Office services. No building is erected with the taxpayers’ money. The Post Office generates its own funds and operates solely with money it receives from the public for the use of its services.

I have already referred to the story of the “rosy picture” I am supposed to have painted. I have told the hon. member that he was in fact the one who painted it, and I am afraid I must say the same thing to the hon. member for Sunnyside. Yesterday this hon. member said virtually the same thing—he is moving more and more to the left!—as the hon. member for Hillbrow. He said—

It is true.

It is true, but I wish the hon. member would draw a comparison between my speech and the speech he made last year. Then one would know what glowing praise was. The hon. member went on to say—

Surely I quoted to him from Die Transvaler what he should actually have read.

About the budget?

Yes, the budget. I said so last year in the budget debate. I quoted to the hon. member from Die Transvaler and from other articles to indicate to him how the public had approached it. The hon. member went on to say—

You see, he is speaking in the same manner as the hon. member for Hillbrow—

However, in February this year we held a study group meeting at which I covered the entire field with the members of the study group and the hon. member was the chairman of that group. Again he was aglow with praise. The hon. member went on to say—

Sir, how does one get through to them? I gave three months’ notice and neither the hon. member for Hillbrow nor the hon. member for Sunnyside were able to understand this. They do not realize that if I notify the private sector in a public announcement then John Citizen also knows. It seems to me only Jan van Zyl does not know. The hon. member went on to say—

Here the hon. member again referred to the announcement in January. He went on to say—

I think under the circumstances prevailing at present, I should forgive the hon. member.

I should like to thank hon. members on this side of the House, who made positive contributions, most sincerely for those contributions, particularly the hon. member for Umlazi who took part in this capacity for the first time. I think he made an excellent speech and he spoke with insight and with knowledge about the financial position of the Post Office as well as the legal situation. If the hon. member for Hillbrow were to study his speech, he would also learn something about the legal position. I also want to thank the hon. member for Newton Park for his contribution and as regards the question he put to me as to whether the Post Office’s own home ownership scheme could be extended to Port Elizabeth, I should like to tell him that a few months ago I approved such an extension and that the scheme is also to be extended to Cape Town. This is in addition to the Vaal Triangle, the Transvaal area and Durban where it is also in operation. [Interjections.] Yes, in the past housing in Port Elizabeth was not such a problem. However, we have now transferred people there from Pretoria and they must find accommodation. I trust that the hon. member agrees with me that we also did this for Port Elizabeth. The same also applies to the Cape. We are transferring people from Pretoria and we must therefore make the necessary provisions here as well.

As always, the hon. member for Maitland effectively discussed the financial aspects of the debate and I want to thank him for his contribution. The hon. member Mr. Vermeulen also made a sound contribution, particularly on the philatelic services in which he has a special interest. Yesterday the hon. member raised an important point in connection with the telephone waiting list. He told us that every day an average of almost 1 000 telephones were being installed. I also wish to thank the hon. member for his contribution.

†I have already dealt with some of the aspects referred to by the hon. member for Umhlanga. The hon. member also referred to the telephone backlog. Furtunately, the hon. member also said that he fully supported the expansion of our capital programme, unlike the hon. member for Hillbrow and his colleagues. The hon. member for Umhlanga believes this to be necessary and I can assure him that the department is doing its utmost in this regard. In fact, we have had assurances from the private sector in this particular area that they are receiving the full support of the officials of the department in regard to the services there. However, as the hon. member is aware, the system in Durban especially was not originally planned by the department, but taken over from the Durban Corporation towards the end of the 1960s.

But we are now talking about 1980.

Yes, indeed, but we took over the system from the Durban Corporation. If the hon. member would listen to me, he would learn that the original planning was not done by my department. There are backlogs in Durban as there are all over the country at the moment. This is the situation against which we are battling. The hon. members will appreciate that we have problems with even the official Opposition to go with us all the way in so far as the capital program is concerned.

The hon. member complained about the poor postal service. I do not take it amiss if the hon. member tells me that the postal service is not as good as it should be, but I do not think it is proper for him to come here with a couple of empty envelopes and to tell a beautiful little story about each one of them. That is why I asked the hon. member yesterday whether he had at the time reported those incidents to the local postmaster. After all, the Postmaster is the man in charge locally who could have immediately taken the necessary steps to have each incident investigated—one particular envelope out of 2 000 million per annum.

What could he actually have done about it?

Oh, he could have done quite a lot. He could have informed the hon. member and apart from that he could have suggested to the regional office of the department corrective measures; that is to say if there really was something wrong. Instead of informing the local postmaster, the hon. member displays annually a couple of empty envelopes and tells the House a beautiful story about each of those envelopes. Until this moment neither I nor the Postmaster-General has even seen those envelopes. What can we do about it?

He was talking about the system.

He says he was talking about the system, but I can tell him that we are only too aware that we have problems with our postal service in particular areas. Those problems are especially caused by the very large expansion in the turnover of postal items handled.

*As a result of this concern we have felt for some time—there are levels where it works extremely well, but there are also levels where it is causing concern—the Postmaster-general appointed a special committee under the chairmanship of Mr. Ridgard, the Deputy Postmaster-general for Staff and Posts, and also consisting of Mr. Van Rensburg, Regional Director for the Transvaal, Mr. De Meyer, Senior Director of Posts, Mr. A. G. Meiring, Postmaster of Johannesburg—this is the largest post office in the country—Mr. I. van der Wath, Director of Posts and Management Services on the Witwatersrand, Mr. Du Plessis, Postmaster of Pretoria, and Mr. C. Nel, Senior Deputy Director of the Postal Division. The committee’s terms of reference were—

The hon. member also knows that we are dependent on transport services, on contractors, the S.A. Transport Services and others. The terms of reference were further—

There are also other important terms of reference. I trust that in due course we shall be able to report on what has arisen from the recommendations of the committee.

Now that we are aware of it, we are happy.

I do not hold it against the hon. member for saying that things are not always as they should be with the postal service. Remember there are 2 billion envelopes a year, and in my opinion bringing a few of them to Parliament is not the way to solve the problem. We must at least have a little praise for the Post Office as well, because no problems are experienced in the handling of by far the majority of those two billion postal items. I should now like to quote a letter I received recently. When I received this letter on 24 February I was surprised to see it had been signed by a certain “Widman”. However, once I had adjusted my spectacles and taken a closer look I saw that it did not come from a Mr. Widman, but in fact from a person in Johannesburg with an almost similar name.

It is a very good name.

It was not exactly “Widman”, but let us not pursue the matter. The writer would seem to be an elderly person, although he used a business address. He wrote as follows—

†Mr. Speaker, I have read this letter especially for the edification of the hon. member for Umhlanga.

You cannot have the credit for that since you are only the Minister!

The hon. member cannot have it both ways. If one looks at the envelope, one sees that the original address consisted of the person’s name and telephone number, together with “Johannesburg, 2000”. The correct residential address was subsequently written in by a clerk of the post office. I do hope the hon. member for Umhlanga will take note of how one advertises one’s country and the excellent services in one’s country. One does it in the way this gentleman has done.

That is lovely; that is sweet.

The hon. member for Hillbrow complained about the secrecy surrounding salary increases. I want to tell hon. members that all the staff associations of the Post Office prefer the percentage increases not to be announced. After all, different situations prevail as far as the staff is concerned.

*We have adopted a system of vocational differentiation, and a system of regional differentiation. Even under these difficult circumstances the staff associations are satisfied with this state of affairs. If percentage increases are announced, particularly at this time of year, the private sector sits back and waits to hear the size of the increases before they adjust their own salaries in order to be competitive. That is why the staff associations prefer salary adjustments to remain confidential, and I am asking hon. members to help me in this connection.

[Inaudible.]

The hon. member must ask him that himself when he gets a chance.

†The hon. member for Bezuidenhout asked for a telephone service between the operational area and the Republic to enable national servicemen doing military service in the area to contact their families. As I have already indicated to the hon. member yesterday, we do not operate in South West Africa. The position in South Africa is, of course, a different story. The operational area in South West Africa is completely undeveloped as far as telecommunication services are concerned, except for small villages, such as Katimo Mulilo. Apart from that, however, I believe that this particular request is one that he should really address to the hon. the Minister of Defence because there are technical and other problems involved in this particular issue. I think it is better for us not to discuss this matter in this debate, in fact I think it is better if we do not discuss it in public at all.

The hon. member referred to our savings facilities, as he also did last year. I must admit that the hon. member again made some very positive suggestions, but we have a problem in the sense that we have to co-ordinate. The Post Office only wants to obtain, for the purpose of deposits, 5% of the total investment capital available annually in the country. We do, however, have a problem very similar to that of the private sector, banks and other institutions. We all have to co-ordinate with the Treasury in terms of national policy. As I informed the hon. member, in the course of last year we announced three increases in interest rates. We made three new issues available, beginning with one on 1 March, then another on 1 September and yet another on 1 October of last year. At this moment we are once again in the process of co-ordinating with the hon. the Minister of Finance and his department, and fairly soon we hope to announce better interest rates in order to get more investment capital from that source.

I do not see the hon. member for Constantia here this afternoon.

He is out of town.

That hon. member says he is out of town today. Perhaps I should then reply to the hon. member at a later stage, either tomorrow in the Third Reading debate, or later this afternoon in the Committee Stage, if he does return in the course of the day.

Good idea.

If I have perhaps not replied to any question or issue raised by any hon. member, I shall do so in the course of the Committee Stage, or even after this budget debate by correspondence, if necessary, as we often do.

It strikes me that I have not yet replied to the hon. member for Mooi River, but I shall come back to him during the Committee Stage.

Question put: That all the words after “That” stand part of the Question,

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister will forgive me if I do not at this stage deal in detail with the various points that I should like to react to, because I will have another opportunity to speak today, namely on the Third Reading later this afternoon. I have, however, some matters that I think can be discussed in the Committee Stage.

I should like immediately to respond to the hon. the Minister in regard to some of the arguments he put forward. I wish to point out that we had two Post Office budgets last year, one in February and one in September. As recently as 3 September 1981, he gave no indication whatsoever that he contemplated an increase in tariffs, and yet, only a few weeks later, on 20 November, he tells the National Consultative Committee for Post Office Affairs about the increase in tariffs. That has been the gravamen of our arguments against him.

I indicated in the Second Reading that I should like to deal in more detail with a specific item that is causing problems, and that is the question of cash-on-delivery payments. As hon. members know that up to now there was a handling charge of R1 on parcels. That charge has now been increased to R1,30. In addition to that there is a levy of 1% on the trade charge. The increase is therefore substantial, and I should like to give one example. If a parcel valued at R40 has to be sent c.o.d., a levy of 1% is added on the trade charge, which means a further 40 cents, and together with the handling charge of R1,30, it will now cost R1,70 to send off this parcel. This represents a 70% increase. In my view the 1% levy is unfair and unjust, because not only does it entail a lot of administration work for the Post Office, but also for everybody involved in the particular type of trade that sends of c.o.d. parcels. Secondly, how is the Post Office going to assess the 1% on the value of a parcel? If a person comes to post a parcel and says the value is R60, R80, R90 or R97, how is the Post Office employee to know what the actual value of the parcel is? If a person sends off a parcel worth R100 but puts the value down at R10, is the Post Office going to be any the wiser? This will in my view create tremendous difficulties. In the first place it will be difficult to assess what the true value of a parcel is and, secondly, it will be difficult to work out the exact cost. If, for example, the value is assessed at R27,94, it will cause a delay for the firm sending off the parcel. This is the first time that a levy of this nature is introduced by the Post Office, and I suggest that it is an extremely bad one.

The average weight of a c.o.d. parcel is 2 000 gram. On 1 February it would have cost 60 cents to send off this parcel, but as from 1 April it is going to cost R1,05. When a parcel is sent c.o.d., the sender pays the postage. The postal tariff has gone up by 60% on postage stamps while c.o.d. charges have gone up to the extent that I have just mentioned. There is further injustice. When that parcel is sent to a particular address and it is not received by the consignee, it is returned to the sender. When it comes back to the sender, the sender then has to pay the postage on that parcel, as well as demurrage charges calculated on the number of days the parcel has been kept at the post office. In addition to that, the sender also has to pay back to the post office the c.o.d. charges at an increased rate. Does the hon. the Minister think that that is fair and just? The hon. the Minister must bear in mind that 25% of the revenue derived from Post Office tariffs is obtained from the senders of these parcels. In this respect I want to refer particularly to people who are members of the Mail Order Association. The revenue expected to be derived by the Post Office from this source alone is now estimated to be R223 million, of which R56,5 million will be contributed by members of the Mail Order Association. I believe that this policy of the Post Office needs being reviewed urgently and carefully. We are not dealing here with individuals, but with a body of people who are virtually partners of the Post Office and who earn their living through the medium of the Post Office. The Post Office cannot do without them and they cannot do without the Post Office. Moreover, they make a substantial contribution to the revenue earned by the Post Office. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that what the Post Office is actually doing in this respect is to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. To members of the Mail Order Association postage is not simply a sundry expense item; to them it is an item which they look upon as a major marketing cost. Any change in tariff not only affects the profitability of this particular association and the business it conducts, but can also affect the viability of the entire enterprise and of its scheduled projects.

Major tariff increases of the order envisaged can cause this industry to become completely dislocated, which, in turn, could lead to serious repercussions for the Post Office itself. Who would be the loser in the end? It will only be the Post Office that will be at the losing end.

It is true that these people make their profit. That is what they are there for. At the same time, however, they are invaluable to the Post Office and to the economy of South Africa as a whole. They provide the rural inhabitants of South Africa, for example, with retail articles that would otherwise never be available to them. This section of industry serves more than 4 million rural people a year, providing them with goods valued at more than R135 million. Furthermore, it directly and indirectly provides employment for more than 20 000 people. I am sure that this is an important economic factor to South Africa. It also provides an educational service by mail to people who cannot afford full-time education. It reaches in particular the poor sections of our population, those who are, of course, not White, and provides them with education.

Furthermore, regular bulk mail users have to depend on mail orders for their businesses. They spend considerable sums of money on specialized equipment for preparing and posting their mail. This assists the Post Office, especially as far as its productivity is concerned. Therefore I believe they are partners playing a full role in the activities of the Post Office Administration. Because of the importance of postal costs in the budgeting of mail-order houses, and in view of the long time required for the preparation of catalogues, mailing brochures and other advertising items—this is where the period of three months comes in to which the hon. the Minister also referred—it is impossible for them to adjust prices within the time-span provided in order to recoup the substantial losses and extra expenses for which they have already budgeted. It is calculated that in stamps alone the cost increase to them is approximately 60%.

There is an urgent need, I believe, for the Post Office Administration authorities to change their attitude towards these people and to treat them like a wholesale enterprise instead of like a retail undertaking because they are really the wholesale users of Post Office facilities, and they should be seen in that light.

I also want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he should consider, in the first instance, that the c.o.d. percentage levy of 1% be not introduced. If necessary, however, he should rather have a basic c.o.d. charge which he can then increase to say R1,65. It will eliminate all the calculations, extra administrative work and all other hassles to which I have already referred. Secondly, the hon. the Minister should consider a correction of the c.o.d. charges by means of a final deduction from the remittance of trade charges by the Department of Posts and Telecommunications’ c.o.d. section in Pretoria. The injustice of the present system lies therein that it does not allow for the refunding of c.o.d. charges on parcels returned to sender.

Thirdly, the Post Office should draw a clear distinction between bulk mail users and other mail users, and accord a minimum trade discount of 40% on the tariff rate to registered bulk mail users who mail more than 500 articles at a time. I think that it will then be accepted that they are wholesalers and that they are bulk users as well. Even when a letter is returned, the original sender does not have to pay for the stamps on the letter. So why do these people have to pay all the charges that I have referred to? It would be easier for the Post Office to make adjustments when they send out their cheques from Pretoria than to persist with the present system, which is cumbersome and where when money has to be repaid, it goes back and forth, while where there is one account, it could be handled at one central place.

On a slightly different note, I should now like to refer to registered letters. I should like to ask why the insurance payable on a registered letter is limited to R4. Although many people are apparently aware that it is illegal and unlawful for them to place cash in an envelope, they nevertheless do so. For example, they send money to their children at boarding school, and if the money or the envelope is lost the total liability of the Post Office for that envelope, no matter what it contained, is only R4. I believe that is something that should be looked at.

In the short time at my disposal I should now like to refer to the pensioners, particularly to the pre-1973 pensioners who have given many years of good service to the country. They are the forgotten pensioners because of the big change that came about after July 1973. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will say that this resorts under the Department of Health and Welfare, but even the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs did something for these pensioners during this session.

His is a separate department.

I know it is separate. I am fully aware that the Government Service Pension Act, No. 57 of 1973, brought in these last changes. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow delivered a lengthy plea here this afternoon for changes with regard to those very spheres and areas in which the Post Office’s greatest shortages lie. However, I am going to leave him at that because my time is very limited and the hon. the Minister will deal with him thoroughly.

The first matter that I should like to raise here this afternoon in my limited time, is to say that we in this House are privileged to be here. We who are in this privileged position, are probably most aware of how indispensable and how important the postal services are in one’s life. Our Post Office here in the parliamentary building and our parliamentary exchange are indispensable to us as members. It is this telephone and postal service that makes it possible for every member to have the closest of contact with his home, with his children if they are not here, and with his voters. It also enables him to manage his farm properly, if he has one, or his business, if he has one. Without it we could not do our work here and in our constituencies as we should. We would not be able to manage our farm or our business successfully if it were not for these postal facilities. Therefore I want to congratulate the Post Office today on the excellent service that they render to the members here in this Parliament. I want to thank our postmaster here and the attractive ladies on the exchange as well as the people who relieve them, for the excellent, helpful, courteous and friendly service that they render us under very difficult conditions. I have been there when it looked like an ant’s nest or a beehive, but in spite of that these people remain cool and their hearts are warm and they give us an excellent service. Without them we would be lost. Yesterday I was privileged to have a lady here who told me, when we passed by the post office, that I should make a point of thanking those ladies for the friendly way in which they treated her when she made a call here in order to speak to an hon. member. I extend my very hearty thanks to these people.

In the second place I want to raise an issue that is possibly not such a pleasant matter to discuss. I want to ask the hon. the Minister and his department in all seriousness today please to ensure that we in the PWV area do not fall behind in the planning and provision of telephone and telex services. It is not the first time that I am discussing this. When I listened to the hon. the Minister’s speech the other day and read it again after that, I felt oppressed at the tremendous demands that are being made of our department and I felt that I wanted to raise this matter here once more. Surely it is true that Kempton Park is one of the areas that is undergoing the most rapid development in our country.

Where is that?

A good, reliable telephone service is of vital importance for the general public, but particularly for the industrialist and the businessman. The hon. member asks: Where is Kempton Park? I want to tell the hon. member that Kempton Park is situated at the pulse of the industries and the economic life of South Africa. [Interjections.] I do not want to be understood incorrectly and I want to say that I have a great deal of understanding for the problems with which our department is struggling. I am aware of the financial problems. I am aware of the staff shortages, I understand the tremendous demand that must be complied with. I know that often it is those who complain the most who lure our valuable trained staff away from the department. However, having said this, I want to say that the PWV area is the heartbeat, the hub of the wheel, the artery of the country’s economic and industrial life. It is my serious request to the hon. the Minister that this area should please not suffer or fall behind. I assume that there are many other areas that could put forward the same arguments but as far as this area is concerned, I simply feel that if we were to suffer from a lack of services, essential services, then not only would the PWV areas suffer as a result, but it would be detrimental to our country as a whole.

The provision of postal services remains one of the biggest problem areas of the department’s activities. It remains a tremendous problem to provide for the Post Office services at this increasing demand. The tremendous financial losses that are suffered by the postal service and the telegram service, are increasing from year to year and are assuming serious proportions. One way of saving costs and labour—we started this a number of years ago already—is to establish post-box areas or postal collecting points. As far as I have been able to establish this system works very well. To my knowledge more than 38 500 such collection post-boxes have been erected and I believe that others are about to be erected. I consider it a very good method of combating these problems.

During a previous debate I also raised the idea on one occasion of using agency services in developed areas. It is a well-known fact that if a new residential area arises, a business complex rapidly arises which usually consists of a cafe and a grocery store. Shortly after that it is followed by a greengrocer and a little later by a dry-cleaning depot and so it develops further. What I am wondering now, is whether we are utilizing this situation to the full so that a postal service can be created as such a business complex on a commission basis. Most of the functions of the Post Office can be carried out on such a basis. For instance, I am thinking of the sale of stamps, the registration of postal articles and the issue of postal orders. In that way the work of the Post Office will be facilitated. In addition valuable services could also be provided to the community in question whilst the postal services in general cannot yet do so. In any event, this would bring about a considerable saving.

I know that such agencies are already in existence. When the first postal agency was introduced in the hon. the Minister’s town of Yzerfontein recently, I was privileged to be present there. I submitted an envelope to that agency and the date was stamped on it. I collect this type of thing. Therefore, I am aware of the fact that these things are happening.

The question is whether we could not make more use of such agency services. Are local postmasters, our city councils or municipalities and our public leaders, including MPs, geared to pointing out such places to the Post Office, where such agency services could be rendered in the future? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, since the previous speaker, the hon. member for Kempton Park, emphasized the indispensability of the Post Office, I am pleased to follow on from him.

As I said during the course of the Second Reading debate, we support the budget. Although it is a difficult budget, we understand it. That is why we are also delighted about the developments that are going to take place.

My constituency is one of the constituencies on the Eastern Rand that is growing most rapidly. I find the proof for this statement in the latest delimitation of constituencies, because at that time we parted with approximately 5 000 voters and did not gain a single one from elsewhere. Surely this proves that there is growth and consequently also a tremendous need for telephones.

It is true that it has been agreed in principle that a new post office is going to be built in Heidelberg. In this regard I should like to thank the hon. the Minister and his staff because they are expediting that matter. However, I want to point out that Heidelberg is a town that is growing rapidly. For many years that town was practically dedicated to education alone—it is still an educational centre par excellence—but now it is also becoming an industrial centre. There is a shortage of telephone facilities as well as other post office services. We know that the post office is not accommodated in a building that belongs to the post office there, but we also know that other premises have been obtained. We also know that the planning has progressed very far. Therefore I want to say thank you very much that progress is being made in that sphere. I am not asking for a luxury item, and if the hon. the Minister can recall the speech I made yesterday, he will know that my premise is that one should ask for only those things without which one cannot manage. I just want to point out to the hon. the Minister that at the moment it is very difficult for that rapidly growing town that was satisfied with that post office for many years, to mark time. I am sure that if the “Sanger van die Suikerbosrand”, Dr. A. G. Visser, had been alive today, he would have put it to the hon. the Minister as follows—

I now come to the self-service post office at Minnebron. Minnebron is one of the areas that is undergoing the most rapid growth in my constituency. It lies within the urban area of Brakpan, as the hon. member for Brakpan will be able to confirm. It was my privilege two years ago to ask for a post office service there. A self-service post office was set up there at the time, but at the moment the position is such that even that self-service post office is finding it difficult to manage. People can collect their post there themselves, but surely this is not the only purpose of a post office. At present there are many more houses in that area. People from this area must travel several kilometres to reach a post office. For instance, now they have to go to the post office at Brakpan, or the post office at Dalvias, and this is inconvenient. Therefore I want to ask that this post office be manned so that all the services offered by an ordinary post office will be offered there, too. That post office is very necessary. With regard to the post office at Schapensrust, I want to remind the hon. the Minister that vandals or terrorists—whatever one wants to call them—set fire to this post office several years ago. That post office has never been the property of the State and for a period of a year or so it was not at all necessary. Now that that area is experiencing more rapid development as well, however, I have begun to receive more requests to open a post office in the region of Sally’s Mine, which is undergoing tremendous development at the moment. The need for a post office is on the increase. I want to propose that consideration be given to a plot in 15th Avenue, Witpoort, near Sally’s Mine. Residents of this area have to travel far in order to reach their nearest post office. It is absolutely essential that consideration be given to the establishment of a post office, even if premises have to be rented. These people need such a service. I am convinced that the hon. the Minister, who is a very fair person, and his staff will give my request a sympathetic hearing. There is no reason why the development in the area in question should not warrant a post office. I would not have asked for a post office if there was not an absolute need for one.

I should like to express my gratitude for the post office at Alrapark. Hon. members will recall that last year during the budget debate I asked for a post office to be provided here. The establishment of this post office relieved the burden on the Nigel post office considerably. Consequently I want to thank the hon. the Minister and his staff for the speed at which the new post office was provided. Although this post office has not eliminated the pressure on the Nigel post office completely, it definitely is a great help in that regard.

I also want to express my gratitude for the post boxes that have been installed in the post office at Nigel. The Nigel post office has enough post boxes now, and I am sure that things will run smoothly in this sphere for the next year or two. I can mention that by far the most of the new post boxes are already in use. I should like to express my gratitude towards the hon. the Minister and his staff for the speed with which this request was granted.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Nigel mainly discussed local affairs and put questions to the hon. the Minister. I accept that the hon. the Minister will reply to his questions.

I should like to talk about one section of the department, viz. Potelin, the electronic institute of the Post Office. In an organization like the Department of Posts and Telecommunications, it is important that development both here and abroad should keep pace with the latest developments and that the existing services should continually be investigated and improved. As early as in 1979 the department established a research and development section. It is known as Potelin. The main activity of this sub-department is to carry out research and to make a study of the development of new telecommunication systems and data processing. In the execution of its duties, it liaises closely with the CSIR, the commercial world, foreign manufacturers, as well as with universities. That is why every year the department donates sums amounting to R110 000 to the various universities, for instance the University of Cape Town, the University of Natal and the University of Pretoria, for their various chairs. This prevents duplication in the research sphere and ensure that there will not be any wastage of talent. The first priority that Potelin laid down, was the decision to introduce the new electronic telephone dialling system, the so-called French SA 128E and the German EWSD-system. When these systems were accepted, research was carried out in connection with the transmission, the signalling, the quality of speech and finally, the incorporation of the electronic system into the existing equipment. When South Africa accepted this system, it became one of the pioneering countries in the sphere of the development of telecommunications. In as early as October last year the hon. the Prime Minister opened the exchange of the first French system in Pretoria, and on 4 November the second one, with the German system, was opened at Sunninghill Park in Johannesburg. The new electronic exchanges entail endless benefits. They are much more reliable and give a more rapid dialling service, and the maintenance of those systems is minimal.

This brings me to the development of the new coin-operated telephones. Potelin researched this too. At the moment coins are inserted and one can speak until the time for which one has paid has expired. However, since the service had to be improved in order to adapt to new systems world-wide, research was carried out into a new type of coin-operated telephone. As the hon. the Minister has already said in his Second Reading speech, these coin-operated telephones will be installed this year. Coins of four different sizes can be used in these new telephones. The system is such that one first inserts one’s coin and then dials. If one speaks for a shorter time than that for which one has paid, one is automatically refunded. A similar system has already been put in operation in the transit area of the Jan Smuts airport. Sometimes there are international passengers who use Jan Smuts for connection purposes only and therefore do not have South African money on them. As a result they cannot make international calls if their aircraft is delayed. The department researched the matter and installed an experimental telephone there. In the first week after the telephone had been installed, 29 international telephone calls had already been made. This shows that there was a tremendous deficiency in that regard.

The Post Office laboratory at Derdepoort falls under Potelin as well. In that laboratory developmental work is being carried out in various sections, as well as the design and modification of instruments used in the department. Work is also being carried out on testing new apparatus and equipment. The laboratory is well equipped with micro-processors that have various practical applications.

I referred earlier to the new electronic exchange systems. It may be a good thing just to point out what the benefits of these new systems are. Since there is a sharp increase in the demand for telephone services, that demand will be complied with only if we change over on a large scale to the use of these new electronic systems. A good deal of progress has already been made with the planning and introduction of these systems and an agreement has already been reached with the local manufacturers that these systems should be manufactured locally. The technology that is used in these new exchanges, is very advanced. It is an entirely new development in the sphere of telephone dialling. Therefore, when it was decided to change over to these systems, the department chose some of its most skilled staff and sent them to France to be trained. The benefit of the electronic exchanges is that there are no moving parts in these exchanges. No lubricants are required and therefore this causes very much fewer problems. It is much more reliable and also requires a smaller maintenance staff. Mistakes in these electronic exchanges can also be identified more easily. Merely by replacing a faulty console which can then be repaired in the workshop, the mistakes can be easily and rapidly eliminated. Time and money is saved in this way. With regard to buildings and floor space as well, up to 40% of the floor space can be saved because the new system is more compact. Since it contains fewer mechanical parts, it has also been calculated that 20% will be saved on the manufacturing costs. This progress in the technical sphere is due solely to the results of the research carried out for this department by Potelin.

Mr. Chairman, I see on page 5 of the estimates that the capital expenditure on telephone equipment is going to amount to approximately R627,5 million, an increase of some R140 000 on last year’s figure. Hopefully the Department of Posts and Telecommunications is going to spend some of this money on the Umzumbe exchange at Port Shepstone. That is on the South Coast, in case the hon. the Minister does not know where it is.

They cannot even spell that, so you have no chance.

I should like to tell the hon. the Minister a long, sad story about this exchange. If you will give me a few minutes, Sir, I shall explain it to him.

Do not make it too long.

It started on 15 July when some 12 people signed a letter which they sent to the Postmaster-General complaining about the service. They got a reply in July saying it would be looked into. Then in August 1980 they were told the fault had been found and that everything was going to be okay. That was not the case. The people battled on and in October last year I received a letter from one of those 12 people from which I just want to quote a few words. The people there just got sick and tired of this exchange and told the following story—

I took this up with the local post office which I always deal with, and I must say that I have a very good rapport with the local staff. They acknowledged my letter and said they would submit it to their superiors for attention. That was in December. That was the only letter I have had from them. Subsequent to that I have again had two letters, both from one of the 12 people who originally complained. The last letter says—

I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister if possible to look into this matter and either to fix the exchange once and for all or to pitch it out and give them something that is going to give them the service they are paying for. That is all I am asking for.

I should like to ask the hon. the Minister what year this is. He mentioned it earlier on. I did not hear the hon. the Minister’s reply.

I told you outside. It is the Year of the Aged.

That is what I like to hear.

Of aged machines.

With that in mind and for the information of the House let me say that 60% of my constituency consists of retired people. Of that 60%, 34% are social or war veteran pensioners. Also for the information of the House, there are some 19 post offices along the coast and of those 19 post offices only one has a postal delivery service. Do you know what this means, Sir? This means that elderly people have been encouraged by the hon. the Minister’s department to hire private boxes. I submit that when the hon. the Minister drew up his budget this year, he did not consider our senior citizens. The only methods of communication available to them, are the telephone and the postal services. The rental for private boxes, has, as I have indicated, now been increased by 50%, the postal tariffs by 60%, telephone rentals by 33⅓%, telephone calls per unit by 20%, and the installation of telephones has gone up by 66%. I want now respectfully to ask the hon. the Minister how our senior citizens can possibly pay the extra cost for those absolute essentials. I maintain that they are absolute essentials because for an elderly person the telephone is in the first place essential for protection.

It is their lifeline.

Secondly, the telephone is essential in cases of emergency, for instance calling a doctor etc., and in the third place it is essential for them to be able to keep in touch with family and neighbours.

The postal service is equally important to them. As the hon. the Minister knows, our old folk are very fond of writing letters. For them there is nothing more exciting, especially when they lead lonely lives, to receive a letter from a friend or from a member of the family. I again ask the hon. the Minister to consider their position. Individuals receive a pension of R122 per month, and in the case of a married couple R244—that is if a couple gets the full pension. If the hon. the Minister is a compassionate man—and I hope that he is—I suggest that he should seriously consider reducing the tariff for the genuine pensioner in respect of private boxes, telephone installations and telephone rentals. This has been done in the case of television licences, and I cannot for the life of me see why it cannot be done in regard to postal tariffs. I do not believe that the small amount that will be involved here, will affect the hon. the Minister’s budget, but it will make life more tolerable for our senior citizens. I therefore appeal to the hon. the Minister to give this serious consideration.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for South Coast has problems in regard to elderly people, and post offices in his constituency, and I believe he has put forward a sound case. I also believe that the Minister will undoubtedly deal with this very well.

I should like to bring a matter which has arisen in my constituency to the attention of the hon. the Minister. The little town of Theunissen is in my constituency, and for the information of those hon. members who are perhaps not all that well informed on geographical matters, I just want to explain that it is a beautiful little place where only sincere people with Christian convictions live. They are people who do not often complain and who live upright lives. However, this little town is also developing. It is not only places such as Kempton Park, Nigel and the PWV area in which development is taking place. In my constituency, we are on the verge of large-scale coal-mining activities. In addition, they are sinking a goldmine. Something which is unique in our country, is the uranium mine, the Beisa Mine, which produces gold as a by-product. Furthermore, there is a diamond-mine which produces some of the best diamonds in the country. As I have already said, this place is developing and is forging ahead. However, these activities and the accompanying growth of the town has resulted in the service which is provided by the post office exchange, not being able to keep pace at all with the needs and requirements, and I particularly wish to mention three of the problems which have cropped up.

Firstly, there is a shortage of indicators at the telephone exchange. Secondly, there are too few outgoing lines, and thirdly, there is a shortage of staff. Now I should like to point out that I contacted the Regional Director in Bloemfontein, Mr. Van Antwerpen, and I received only the most cordial co-operation from him in my effort to solve these problems. I think, though, that we can succeed in solving some of those problems temporarily. However, staff shortages are being experienced throughout the country. This is only limited to our area. I think that in order to solve this problem, we shall have to change over to the automation of the telephone service. There in my part of the world we are, of course, still using the manual telephone exchange.

The present situation is truly irritating for both the subscribers as well as the exchange staff. In the case of outgoing trunk calls, delays of an hour or more often occur. I have received a number of letters of complaint in this regard. Allow me to read a single paragraph from a letter which I received from the General Mine Manager there. In this letter, he explained his problems very well. Inter alia, he made the following statement—

Of course, this is not the fault of the exchange; on the contrary, it is because there are too few outgoing telephone lines. As a result, all the outgoing telephone lines are overloaded. Personally, I can testify to an urgent telephone call which I had to make to Pretoria. There was a delay of an hour. I wish to repeat that I understand the difficulty in which these people find themselves. Nevertheless, this is something which irritates subscribers tremendously. As far as I am concerned, the solution to the problem is that the telephone exchange should be automated. I know of no other way to alleviate the staff shortage there.

Of course, it is true that that area is part of the provisional automation programme for the 1984-’85 financial year. That programme is, of course, subject to alteration. I already know what this means. Of course, this means that everything depends on whether there are funds available and whether there will be enough technicians to do the work. Therefore, I wish to ask the department today that that area should not be moved down on the programme. Of course, we are quite prepared to wait for the 1984-’85 financial year. However, we would like the department to please see whether it could fulfil the automation programme concerned for the financial year. Should this be possible, I think that it would be a great step forward in meeting the needs of a growing economic community, that truly needs such a service.

Finally, I cannot omit to address a word of thanks to the Post Office officials who work behind the counters and on the exchanges, especially those in the country. They are on their feet for eight hours or more every day. Often they do not even have time to have a cup of tea. However, when one enters the post office, they are serving the public with a smile. Unfortunately, the public is not always equally friendly and polite to those officials behind the counter. However, I wish to tell the hon. the Minister today that we have only appreciation and the highest regard for those Post Office staff who render a very thorough service to the public under difficult circumstances.

Mr. Chairman, I listened to the remarks of the hon. the Minister with much attention and I hope he has listened with the same attention to the hon. member for Virginia because at the moment the Minister does not appear to be paying much attention to anybody whatsoever. With regard to the criticism passed by the hon. member for Hillbrow about the announcement that was made on 5 January, I think it is high time that there was closer liaison between the hon. the Minister on the one hand and other hon. members of this House, particularly those who are in the Opposition. Let us find out how I heard about this announcement on 5 January. I was ’phoned at approximately 19h00 by a particular Afrikaans-language newspaper for my comments on an announcement that was going to be made that evening. I knew nothing about it and I then asked the caller to send it to me on the telex, which he did. That was the first I knew about it.

Were you not on television at the same time as I was?

No, that was the next day.

On 5 January?

No, I was phoned on 4 January.

No, that is not true.

The first I heard about it was at 19h00 on 4th January. I then ’phoned the hon. member for Hillbrow who was on holiday at the coast. That was also the first information that he had had of it. It is all very well for the hon. the Minister to criticize the hon. member for Hillbrow when he did not even know what the information was going to be. That information had in fact to be conveyed to me by a newspaper man in the first instance, a newspaperman who told me that the announcement was about to be made. I think the hon. the Minister should have had the courtesy to notify the hon. member for Hillbrow and the other hon. members of the Opposition parties.

Thank you.

I am talking about all Opposition people. It is very easy for hon. members opposite to know because the hon. the Minister can inform his own people. However, it is very difficult to operate in the Opposition and not know what is going on. The only place where we have an opportunity to speak is in this House, but nevertheless the hon. the Minister gets up and criticizes us when yet we do not know what is happening.

But you had three months to make a story of it.

I am talking about when the announcement was made. In addition to that the hon. the Minister goes to private enterprise and discloses to them what he intends doing without coming to the Opposition and informing them at the same time. I do not think that is correct. I think that the hon. the Minister should ensure that the members of the Opposition should also be allowed the opportunity to sit on the National Consultative Committee.

That is not your place. Your place is here.

Then the hon. the Minister must make his announcements here. How can the hon. the Minister tell private enterprise what he is going to do without the Opposition knowing what is happening? It is absolutely incorrect. One cannot expect an Opposition to operate correctly if the hon. the Minister, as the representative of the Government, consults everybody without telling us. Then he expects us to come here and to criticize correctly. The purpose of an Opposition is to fulfil a function and play a role in this House and the hon. the Minister is trying to prevent it from playing that role.

And you cannot even do it properly.

How do you expect us to do it properly if you do not co-operate with the Opposition and do not provide us with the necessary information? It is all very well for the hon. the Minister to come here and to throw up his arms in horror, or whatever he is trying to do. He does not tell the Opposition what is happening and therefore he cannot expect them to fulfil their function. The hon. the Minister could at least have had the courtesy to let us know in advance. This does not only apply to this hon. Minister; it also happens in many other cases. This House would operate far better if such information were given correctly.

He cannot even afford to send you a telegram.

No, it costs an extra R1 now. Another matter to which I wish to refer is the fact that the hon. the Minister made his budget speech on Tuesday afternoon. At 18h10 I had not yet received my copy of the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure. I then went out to find out where they were. They had not yet even been delivered to the House. The first time that the Estimates arrived on any hon. member’s desk was on Wednesday morning, and the hon. the Minister talks about one doing one’s homework.

That is not my fault.

Then it is your duty to see that it is done.

Did you inquire from the House?

The point is that the hon. the Minister must not accuse us of not doing our homework when we do not get the papers with which to do our homework. If it is not the hon. the Minister’s fault, it is somebody else’s fault. The Estimates should have been given to us as soon as the hon. the Minister had completed his speech. Therefore the hon. the Minister must not come and criticize us. It is difficult enough for us to do all our work but it is very much more difficult for us when we do not have all the necessary information. It would be very much easier for us if we had that information.

I should like to deal now with some of the estimates. There is one particular thing I cannot understand. The total amount of revenue to be obtained from the Gentex system this year is an amount of approximately R35 million and yet the total amount of capital expenditure on telegraphic equipment is going to be R40 million. It seems incredible to me that where one’s income is only going to be R35 million, one is going to spend an amount of R40 million.

The next question I want to ask deals with publicity and the spending of an amount of R842 000. Last year I raised the question of publicity by the postal and telecommunications service and I am very pleased to see that they have already started advertising on television. I want to compliment whoever produced those particular advertisements on their quality. I hope that they will improve the business of the Post Office. The hon. the Minister did not mention the question of publicity at all. I said it last year and I still say that an amount of R840 000 for publicity in respect of a business with a turnover of approximately R2 billion is a ridiculously small amount.

Last year the amount was R750 000.

Yes, I know. However, an additional amount of R100 000 is peanuts as far as this type of advertising is concerned.

Another question I want to raise is once again the question of the tariffs. There has been a great deal of discussion in this regard. I also said last year that there had to be cross-subsidization. This year the hon. the Minister expectes approximately 10,5 billion metered telephone calls to be made. If one were to impose a tariff increase of 1c in this regard it would mean additional revenue of R100 million. That is what the additional revenue will be if these calls are increased by 1c. Instead of raising telephone call tariffs from 5c to 6c each, if they had been raised to 7c each, the hon. the Minister would not have had any problems whatsoever in regard to postal services. The hon. the Minister could have created a bigger subsidy for these services by this means and it would have been far more beneficial to the country because such an increase could have been borne more easily than the 50% and 60% increases in respect of postal services that are causing so much criticism.

A matter which I should like to discuss once again is the question of telephones in the operational area. I feel that something can be done between the Department of Defence and the Department of Posts and Telecommunications. In fact, I hope that the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications will himself approach the hon. the Minister of Defence to try to have this service introduced. I am glad that he has given that assurance. However, I do ask that once the service has been installed, it be a low-charge service to any part of the country from that particular point. I suggested 50c per call and that a box be made to take those coins. Somebody accused me of talking about “tickey-boxes”. However, although everybody knows what this means as far as call boxes are concerned, I must say that it discloses my age to the House because tickeys went out of circulation a long time ago.

Finally, I want to deal with the Post Office Savings Bank. I want to repeat that the Telebank must be a bank and not merely a continuation of the savings services. It must be a proper bank with proper banking people in it. It must be a place in which people are prepared to make deposits and it must be an improvement on the present savings bank system. It must also be advertised and greater efforts must be made to attract more money. I do not believe that the system the hon. the Minister now envisages, merely of having deposits and withdrawals is going to help very much because that can be done at any building society or any bank. All he will be doing will be to duplicate those services. The hon. the Minister must establish this bank properly. I believe that he should appoint a committee of people who know something about banking to organize this matter because this is a very important method of collecting funds.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to tell the hon. member for South Coast that there is a movement under way to discourage the delivery of post and not to encourage it. If the hon. member were to look at the annual report of the department, he would be aware of the losses that are suffered as a result of the delivery of post. [Interjections.] That could definitely be done, but if the tariff is increased, the hon. member would complain about it.

I want to tell the hon. member for Bezuidenhout that I feel that the estimates of the budget were made available in good time. Possibly the hon. member for Bryanston hid his copies of it. [Interjections.]

Last night two of the top athletes of the Northern Transvaal, Ina van Rensburg and Mimi Snyman, set two excellent records on the athletic track. Towards the end of this month another record is in the process of being set. From the report of the Postmaster-General it appears that 270 584 new telephones were installed in our country during the year 1980-’81. This is a new record. It was achieved in spite of the staff shortage that was experienced in the course of that year. There are still 12 days left before 31 March, but our technicians have already exceeded the 269 000 notch with regard to the installation of telephones. If nothing unforeseen happens now, I think they will set a new record in spite of greater staff shortages than those of last year. I think we can wish the Post Office staff everything of the best and express the wish that they will achieve this fine goal in the course of the following two weeks.

The number of telephones in private homes is an indication of the wealth of a nation. If we accept this as an indication, South Africa—I am now referring more specifically to the White section of the population—is one of the richest countries in the world. As far as my constituency is concerned—and I visit many people there—I cannot think of anyone who does not have a telephone. In addition, my constituency is not one of the richest constituencies in the country.

On 31 March 1981 the telephone backlog amounted to almost 176 000, and on 31 March this year, according to calculations by the hon. the Minister, it will be 190 000. It is interesting to note that the bulk of these applications that have been dealt with come from the non-White section of our population. This proves that as a result of the steps that the Government has taken over the past few years, the non-White section of our population is becoming richer. Their wealth is increasing, and because this is the case, the logical result of it is that they want to make use of the telephone service. Therefore in the years that lie ahead we can expect a greater demand for telephone services on the part of the non-White section or our population.

Of course, this creates a tremendous challenge for the people of colour in our country, who are interested in this direction. The challenge is to qualify themselves or be qualified as telephone technicians so that they can make this important service, for which there is going to be and already is such a tremendous demand, available to their people by being able to install telephones in their community areas themselves.

Mr. Chairman, in his reply this afternoon the hon. the Minister launched quite an attack on me. He did so merely because I said that he made a small mistake. That is true: I did in fact say it. If I were still chairman of the study group of the NP I would still have said it. I paid tribute to the hon. the Minister for his budget last year, because it was worthwhile praising that budget. What happened here? The hon. the Minister spoke to the commercial world and three months later announced price increases.

No, that is wrong. It was only six weeks later. The Postmaster-General spoke to these people on 20 November.

In that case I apologize. I thought it was during September. Yesterday I said to the hon. the Minister that he should have announced the price increases when he consulted with the committee. The hon. the Minister says that I have now moved to the left because I am going along with the hon. member for Hillbrow by raising the same complaint. The hon. member for Hillbrow objected because the tariff increases were announced in January. I did not object to that; on the contrary, I attacked the hon. member for Hillbrow and pointed out to him that it was quite correct that the hon. the Minister had announced the price increases in good time. I praised the hon. the Minister for his action. If I attack the official Opposition, surely I am not moving to the left. What we have in fact seen this afternoon is that the official Opposition is falling into the arms of the NP and agrees with it on power-sharing. [Interjections.] Therefore we differ completely.

I gave the hon. the Minister a few hints and put a few questions to him and I hope he is still going to reply to them. I should appreciate it. I am speaking in the interests of South Africa and of the people of the Post Office. We have a good Post Office organization that renders good service and I shall praise it for that. I shall not allow anyone to push me to the left or to the right. I walk straight ahead, and hon. members may take note of that.

I am going to give the hon. the Minister a few hints once again and put a few questions to him. I am doing so in good faith and I hope the hon. the Minister will take note of this, as he took note of hints in the days when we were together in those benches.

I want to make a few remarks about our savings bank service in the Post Office. It is the poorer people in particular, but also other people in general, who make use of this service. Can more propaganda not be made for this service? This service enables people to invest and draw money throughout South Africa. I think this service should be linked to tourism. During 1980, 703 000 tourists visited South Africa for an average period of 18 days. This provided South Africa with currency to the value of R476 million. This is brilliant. I should like to ask for the possibility to be investigated of promoting inland tourism further by advertising it more widely. I want to say thank you very much for the advertisements on television in this regard. The attention of our people must, however, be drawn to the facilities that the savings bank service of the Post Office offers them. This service is very convenient. It is safe too. One invests one’s money in the Post Office and one can draw that money anywhere in South Africa. We can also draw much larger amounts than previously. However, I do not think everyone realizes yet that this is possible. Therefore I think it would be a good thing to bring it more definitely to the attention of our people, whether by way of advertisements or in some other way.

I should like to talk about postal deliveries as well. I think a matter to which we should give more attention. We all know what it is like when we have to visit our voters. In South Africa our people are not geared to displaying the numbers of their houses properly. The numbers are hidden away and one does not know what the numbers of the houses are. Therefore I think it is high time that we in South Africa should ensure that the number of every house be indicated on the outside. Nor should the post-box be hidden underneath a tree. The post-box should be in a prominent place so that the postman can see it easily. The position should be standardized. If we cannot succeed by means of advertisement or courteous request, perhaps we shall have to implement it by regulation later on. This also applies to names of buildings, particularly flats. I think that we should try to achieve standardization in that respect in South Africa. Whether the name is hidden behind a tree and whether it is placed in a prominent position, the cost involved is the same. Perhaps we should bring our people’s attention to this more pointedly.

I should also like to talk about buildings. The Post Office erects many buildings. However, here I want to refer specifically to the post office in Sunnyside. It is a very fine building, a very good building, and we are very grateful for it. However, when that building was under construction, I asked that provision be made for parking space underneath the building. However, when I arrived there, I discovered that this had not been done. On the northward side of that post office building there is a tremendous stoep and a large area of land that no one uses. It is unutilized and therefore a waste. However, if that piece of ground could be excavated and made available for parking, it would be of tremendous value. The Post Office renders a service to South Africa, and just think how much that underground parking would have meant to the Post Office people. I want to ask that the hon. the Minister and the department should look at these type of facilities when post office buildings are erected, so that provision can be made for parking space underneath the building. Then we will not have the type of problem that we have in Sunnyside, because one cannot find parking space anywhere there. It would be a very good thing if the hon. the Minister could do this.

My next compliment has a bearing on motor vehicle licences. I believe that motor vehicle licences are being paid at post offices in the Cape. Could the hon. the Minister possibly indicate to what extent we could do this in the other provinces too? Could he possibly indicate whether it would be lucrative or not? If motor vehicle licence fees could be collected in such a way, it could mean additional income for the Post Office. However, if it is being done at a loss, we should rather not do so. I think it would be a good thing if the hon. the Minister could indicate what the position in fact is. It is being done in the Cape, and we should very much like to know whether it could be done in the north as well.

I should just like to mention labour saving as well. I offer my full support to any attempts by the post office to mechanize or automatize, in order to save labour. I want to express the gratitude of our side of the House for this as well as to express the hope that it will take place on a larger scale, because by saving labour, we are rendering a better service to the population of South Africa. On the long term we therefore cannot but benefit financially.

I just want to tell the hon. the Minister too that I do not want to be personal, I simply want to be positive, and if I have to criticize, I am going to do so positively.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to reply to what the hon. member for Sunnyside has said. I think the hon. the Minister will reply to his statements himself. I was just amazed about one of the statements by the hon. member for Sunnyside. He says he is a straight man who walks a straight road. If this is in fact the case, the hon. member should start following the straight road back to this side of the House, under the banner of which he came here. As a person who walks in a straight line, we can expect this from him.

I am still advocating the policy for which I fought. I have not deviated from it.

I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to congratulate the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications and his department on the budget that is before us at the moment. If one had really done one’s homework and looked at this budget objectively, it would be very clear that the hon. the Minister and his department made careful plans and produced work of a very high quality. This is clear particularly when we see how little real criticism can be made of this budget despite all the efforts to criticize.

With regard to the provision of telephone services as well, the Department of Posts and Telecommunications deserves the highest praise. I think that it was an excellent achievement for such a young, extensive country as South Africa that on 31 March this year, 91,49% of the telephones were already automatic. Only 8,51% of the telephones in South Africa were connected by manual exchanges on that same date.

However, there is one other matter that I should like to raise concerning these manual exchanges, a matter that causes tremendous problems for me in my constituency and I think, for many other hon. members who still have manual exchanges in their constituencies as well. These problems that are related to the existence of manual exchanges in the rural areas, are experienced not only by the subscribers themselves, but also by people who telephone from outside from urban areas or other automatized areas to places which still have manual exchanges. The hon. member for Winburg has already pointed this out. The vast majority of mineral spring holiday resorts in the Northern Transvaal are situated in my constituency and they deal with nearly 500 000 holidaymakers per year. This makes tremendously high demands on the telephone service if one thinks of the large number of reservations that must be made by telephone. In spite of this, those areas in my constituency do not yet have automatic exchanges and those people are faced with the inconvenience of manual exchanges. Furthermore, it must be mentioned that Warmbaths, Marble Hall, Roedtan and Naboomspruit are rapidly developing communities and that the manual exchanges have to deal not only with the calls from Whites in those areas, but also those from the Black people who live in the surrounding independent States or self-governing homelands.

All of this leads to the manual exchanges being totally overloaded, as is probably the case everywhere. The pressure gradually increases to such an extent that telephonists at those exchanges cannot do anything but resign from their positions. I want to tell the hon. member for Winburg that all one can do is to increase the number of keys in order to deal with the increasing number of calls, but that one then does not have enough people to do the work, particularly not trained people, because the people resign. If the staff at manual exchanges know that automatization is in the pipeline, they look for another job as soon as possible or join another division of the Post Office. With a view to the serious shortages of telephonists for manual exchanges, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether the campaign to recruit more staff members for this sphere, cannot be stepped up drastically. I also feel that, if one looks at this facet of the work of the Post Office, better salaries and conditions of service could possibly relieve the pressure. Where adequate staff is available during the day at some manual exchanges, there is the problem of shortages after six o’clock in the evening. Between six o’clock and nine o’clock in the evening the number of calls increases considerably, and then there are not enough telephonists to deal with them. People have already told me that they are prepared to do night duty on a manual exchange, but that the remuneration is so poor that it is not financially worth while for them to work night shifts. I do not know what the exact tariff is that is being paid for this work at the moment, but someone mentioned a figure which I feel is extremely low. I therefore want to ask the hon. the Minister please to give attention to this and to make the remuneration of temporary telephonists, who fulfil a tremendous need, more attractive. If temporary workers could work these night shifts and be properly paid for doing so, it would be easier to recruit staff for the manual exchanges.

It is pleasing to note in the report that 46 manual exchanges have been replaced by automatic exchanges during the current financial year, and that provision has been made in the 1982-’83 year for the automatization of another 38 manual exchanges. The programme of replacing manual exchanges with automatic exchanges, will be complete by the end of the 1993-’94 financial year only, provided that adequate funds and labour forces are available. In the meantime the rural areas in particular will be faced with this problem until such time as automatization has taken place country-wide, and therefore I want to address a friendly request to the hon. the Minister to give attention to the replacement of manual exchanges, particularly to the problems in my constituency, to which I have referred. In this way he could eliminate a great deal of friction and dissatisfaction.

In conclusion I want to tell the hon. the Minister that the people in my constituency are very happy about the fact that the manual exchange at Warmbaths will be fully automatized by the second half of 1983, and I convey my hearty thanks to him for this.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to refer to one of the points that was raised by the hon. member for Potgietersrus and I wish to associate myself with comments that he made in regard to the people who have that very difficult task of operating manual exchanges. The task performed by these people is often forgotten or is taken for granted by not only the public, but by the department as well. The operating of a manual exchange requires something special in a person’s character. It requires something in the way of patience and a dedication to the communities in which these operators live. We therefore respect and pay tribute to the people who perform this very difficult task.

As the hon. member for Potgietersrus said, one of the problems in rural areas is the question of what we might call after-hour or weekend service. One often finds that the smaller exchanges are plugged into a large exchange, and somehow there is a reticence on the part of the operators of the larger exchanges to accept the added responsibility of the smaller exchanges. I would therefore ask the hon. the Minister to bear this in mind. It is important that the people who operate in the rural areas become absorbed into that community, because dedication is a vital factor in rendering a satisfactory service to a rural community. Let us not forget that the communications system in the rural areas has a far greater significance than it has in the urban areas.

I wish to touch on one other point which is relative to the postal services in rural areas. We are confronted with a situation in which, in some of the smaller areas, the postal services have actually deteriorated over the past 20 years. When one comes to question this in order to establish why it is that there used to be pride in the manner in which regular postal deliveries were made some 20 years ago and, why it is no longer the case, the reply that one inevitably receives is that the running time of trains has been changed, that train time-tables have been altered or that postal bags are now carried by road transport which runs to altered schedules etc. I would like to know from the hon. the Minister whether the time has not come for consideration to be given to the severing of the existing contract with the S.A. Transport Services. Is it not time for the Postal Department to give very serious consideration to providing a service of its own in those rural areas which are being detrimentally affected by the present uncertainty of delivery? If a bus arrives late there may be no postal service for the day again. If a driver should be taken ill there may be no postal service. Therefore I would strongly recommend that the hon. the Minister gives consideration to the possibility of terminating his dependence on the S.A. Transport Services in certain areas where postal services have deteriorated to a degree that they are now causing problems for the community.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Mooi River on his well prepared and well delivered contribution. His suggestion of an alternative own transport service in certain areas is undoubtedly an interesting one. Whether it is practical and whether it can be introduced economically is, of course, a different question.

The hon. member for Mooi River and I have literally come a long way together, having been on a Foreign Affairs tour together. I can assure the hon. member, now that he has snuggled up closer to us, that if he should wish to make the tie formal, I have no doubt that he will be more than welcome. [Interjections.]

*In fact, what I want to speak about today, is the use of sunlight as a source of energy, and in particular, in the sphere of telecommunications. However, before I come to that, I wish to point out to the Committee that this year we have reached a milestone in the history of our telephone service, as it is exactly a century ago that the first telephone exchange was erected in South Africa; it was in Port Elizabeth, in 1882. That first telephone exchange had 20 subscribers. Natal followed, with a telephone exchange in Durban in 1886, where there were 12 subscribers. The Transvaal had its turn in 1890 with a telephone exchange in Pretoria. As is often the case, of course, the Free State was the last in line, with a telephone exchange of 150 subscribers in Bloemfontein in 1906.

In the search for the use of solar energy in the service of man, its first known recorded use was as far back as the year 2000 BC, when the Egyptians used it for the lighting of altar fires. Tradition has it that the first military use of sunlight took place in 212 BC, when Archimedes set the sails of the ships of the attacking Romans alight by means of mirror reflections, thus destroying the entire Roman fleet. The first really purposeful investigation and research into the use of solar energy only occurred in the nineteenth century, and this was concentrated more on the use of sunlight in the desalination of seawater. It was discovered as far back as 1839 that sunlight, when conducted through an electrolytic solution, can generate a weak electric current. After this, progress was slow and sporadic, and it was only in 1931 at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Germany that success was achieved with an experiment in which sunlight was used to propel an electric motor by conducting it through a solid solenium cell. In 1954, too, successful tests were carried out by the Bell Telephone Laboratories in the USA where sunlight was used together with thin sheets of silicone to convert electricity with an efficiency co-efficient of as much as 16%.

Sunlight has emerged, particularly during the past two decades, as a highly effective means of heating water and buildings, in which sphere it is, indeed, being applied economically and effectively on a large scale today. However, it has only been since the oil crisis in 1973 that solar energy is being regarded as an alternative general source of energy. Whereas previously the technique of converting sunlight into electricity was excessively expensive in comparison with other available sources of energy, the sudden and drastic increase in the cost of these alternative sources are now making it more attractive as a viable alternative. Unprecedented and purposeful research is continuously taking place today, and the refined technique results in the ever-widening application of sunlight as a source of energy, and this applies in the sphere of telecommunications as well. The most striking example of this is the use of solar-powered generators in telecommunications satellites, inter alia, in the United States’ “Telstar” series.

Nearer to home, solar-powered generators are increasingly being used by the department when the normal power supply is not readily or economically available. Two solar powered exchanges are already in use at the mobile exchanges at Betty’s Bay and New Bethesda and, inter alia, at certain microwave stations in the Northern and Western Cape and in the Transvaal. Furthermore, tenders have been accepted for the erection of four solar generators between Van Rhynsdorp and Springbok, to supply power to microwave stations. The erection of a further 36 such stations countrywide is being planned, and it is expected that most of them will be installed in the coming financial year. The department is also investigating the use of solar panels to replace the well-known old batteries used with the magneto farm telephones.

Our climate really lends itself to the use of this natural and pollution-free source of energy. The capital costs involved are steadily decreasing as a result of improved technology, in comparison with the other alternative sources. The operating costs of such a unit are practically non-existent, and they have been shown to be effective in practice. There is no doubt that solar energy can play an increasingly more important role in our everyday life. One can only thank the department for the leading role it has taken in this sphere and request that this outstanding research and its implementation be continued.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for East London City gave us some very interesting facts and figures in regard to solar energy and the role that it will play in telecommunications in the future. I should like to come back later to some of the points he made.

The hon. the Minister complained earlier that he had received nothing but criticism and complaints from this side of the House so perhaps at this late stage of the debate a few pleasantries will be in order. A fortnight ago I had occasion to approach the hon. the Minister with a request on behalf of a severely handicapped person for a telephone that was urgently required. This person had not had much success through the normal channels but within 48 hours of my making this request of the hon. the Minister, the telephone was installed. The person involved was most grateful. I believe that this was a remarkable performance on the part of the hon. the Minister and his staff. Rudyard Kipling once said that he could live for two whole months on a single compliment so I hope that what I have just said will be sufficient to see the hon. the Minister through this session!

The hon. members for Mooi River and Potgietersrus both raised the problem of rural exchanges. This is quite a well-worn topic. It is an old chestnut that is raised regularly. I think the hon. member for Umhlanga also discussed it during the Second Reading debate. However, the fact that this subject keeps on cropping up seems to indicate that perhaps there is a very real problem in this regard. I should like to say that in my own particular case, the house in which I have been living for the past 42 years has had the same telephone standing in the same place for that entire period. The system that that telephone operates in has not changed at all in 42 years. It is still the old crank-handle system which has many disadvantages. I think that those of us who are from the rural areas feel just a little disappointed and let down. Particularly so when we enter a city such as Cape Town and can sit down at a telephone and within a matter of minutes or even seconds dial virtually anywhere in the world. We feel that we have rather been left out in the cold. During the last session of Parliament the hon. the Minister did tell us about a new telephone—I think it was the R18— which was being developed by his department and which would be put into operation in the rural areas. This telephone would apparently link us up in a more sophisticated way with the modern network. I want to say that we all look forward very much to the day when we will be linked up with this new system.

The second point that I should like to raise concerns the shortage of skilled technicians to which the hon. the Minister referred earlier in the debate. This shortage of skilled technicians is evidently having a debilitating effect on the department and one cannot help thinking that perhaps one could look for the reasons for this problem in the wages or working conditions or perhaps even in the image of the department. With regards to wages, I know that the hon. the Minister has made provision for an increase, although we do not as yet know what it will be. However, we hope that it will go a certain way towards alleviating this problem. As far as working conditions are concerned, there is not very much that can be done here. It is in the sphere of the third debility, namely that of the image of the department, that perhaps we can make some constructive progress.

I should like to refer in this regard to the television advertisements that have recently been screened. These depict the operations of the department in a more favourable and exciting manner. I believe that this is a progressive move on the part of the department and in this regard the hon. member for East London City did indicate some of the developments that have taken place in this field. The field of telecommunications is a new and exciting one and is one that should attract young school-leavers, those young people with the necessary qualifications. In regard to this aspect, however, there is a problem. Somebody who leaves school needs a relatively high qualification—I believe it is matric maths—to go into the technical side of the Post Office. One has the feeling that quite a number of youngsters who leave school with those qualifications would rather go into some other—to them it might appear to be so—more glamorous and exciting field than the Post Office. I believe that this is something which should be changed. I believe that the image which is being created by the department, that is one of an innovative, new, exciting department should help change the negative image. I therefore believe that the kind of advertisement which has been put across via the television should be expanded. I believe it is a good thing.

There have been people who have complained about this advertising, and who have claimed that this is a waste of money, but I do not agree with them at all. I hope that by creating a new image, his department will be able to solve a number of its problems and to eliminate the shortage of technicians.

I also believe that the department has a role to play in the socio-economic upliftment of particularly the less privileged sectors of our population. I believe that the way in which the department is structured makes it more attractive to people who perhaps cannot have the same opportunities as those who belong to the more privileged classes of society. People who may find it difficult to make progress in the hurly-burly of the job market in the private sector, could make good progress in the Post Office organization. I believe that there are many talented young men in the private sector who have not achieved their full potential and who probably never will, but who could make a valuable contribution in the higher echelons of the Post Office. I believe that in this regard the Post Office can play as important a role in the socio-economic upliftment of the less privileged sectors of the economy as the S.A. Transport Services, for example, did in the past.

Mr. Chairman, it is a great pleasure for me to speak after the hon. member for Albany, particularly in view of the fact that he, for his part, gave the hon. the Minister and his department credit for what was being done by the Department of Posts and Telecommunications. I am in the particularly privileged position that I can concur with the hon. member, and I feel that it is a positive means of debating when we say that we are satisfied and that we have received good service from the various departments.

I wish to associate myself with the hon. member in thanking the hon. the Minister for the swift reaction which I had after I had asked him last year during the Committee Stage what the possibilities were of a post office being made available in the Baillie Park area of Potchefstroom, in my constituency. As early as 26 October—shortly after the adjournment of that session—I received a letter from the hon. the Minister in which I was informed that the post office had been approved. Fortunately, we had the ground, but as a result of a shortage of funds, a building could not be erected immediately. Meanwhile, an attempt will be made to find rented premises.

I am aware of the fact that progress has already been made in negotiations with the owner of a building to acquire an available plot for the opening of the post office. I am continually being asked when the post office is to be officially opened. If it is possible, I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister, could give me an indication of when the opening of the post office is expected to take place. Another problem I had, has fortunately been solved by the department before I had the opportunity of bringing it to the attention of the hon. the Minister. When I raised this matter with the department, I received a positive reaction within a day. I mention the name of Mr. Raath with appreciation, who reacted immediately without hesitation by giving the problem his attention, and who has solved it to the extent that I can return to my voters with a positive reply.

The hon. member for Bezuidenhout mentioned during this debate that telephone services should be made available to our soldiers in the operational area and elsewhere. The hon. member proposed that a basic tariff of 50 cents be charged regardless of the distance. I do not wish to go into that specific aspect now, but I want us to look at the positive side for a while, viz. the post distributing system as it functions in the operational area. Firstly, parents, family and friends may rest assured that post is routed daily from the Republic and South West Africa via Windhoek and Grootfontein to the operational area by means of air and rail transport. Letters destined for units in Owambo, Kavango and the Eastern Caprivi are conveyed twice a week by the S.A. Air Force to Ondangwa, Rundu and Mpacha, respectively. Parcels for Katima Mulilo are conveyed by air, while parcels for Oshakati and Rundu are conveyed by road.

The second link in the chain is the operation units which are widely scattered over the area. Field post offices are erected during military operations, but it cannot be the task of the field post office to deliver postal articles and telegrams. Each unit has the responsibility of fetching postal articles from the field post office, and because it is not possible for every individual to fetch his postal articles from the field post office himself, a postal orderly who deals with the post office matters of the whole unit on behalf of that unit, is appointed in every unit. This postal orderly has a letter of authority which is confined to him personally, and is not negotiable. Unit commanders are very careful in their choice of a postal orderly. They are careful not to choose an unsatisfactory soldier, since such a soldier has no feeling for his unit. An incorrect choice could lead to the morale of the unit being placed in the hands of an unreliable, feelingless and even dangerous person. As post is the number one morale builder, the lack of it could become a destroyer of morale. When morale is low, the soldiers are more defenceless and at their most vulnerable. I cannot but make an earnest appeal to the parents, family, friends and particularly girlfriends, of our soldiers to guard against breaking down the morale of our soldiers at all costs. When things happen at home which they can deal with themselves, they should not burden the soldier on the border with their complaints and problems at home. They should rather try to deal with their problems as far as possible and write motivating letters to the soldiers. The soldier should know that we are very grateful that he is prepared to make these sacrifices. The soldier should always realize that he finds himself in the operational area out of love for his country and his people. He should go to the operational area well motivated, and should remain well motivated.

However, we all have a duty to explain to our sons at home that it is not a burden to do national service, but it is indeed a great honour which they should look forward to wholeheartedly. But we all have a responsibility towards the country. This does not only apply to the soldier, but also to the public. To me it makes no difference what the colour of one’s skin is, as this will not ensure our salvation.

I now wish to return to the postal orderly. What kind of soldier should such a person be? After all, he has a great responsibility. He also has to know a great deal about the activities of his unit, although such information is not blazoned abroad and is regarded as confidential. He therefore has to be a very reliable person in all respects. We can therefore see that he should not be the worst, the laziest, the most disinterested or the most sickly soldier in the unit. On the contrary. He must have the interests of his unit, his fellow soldiers and the S.A. Defence Force at heart. He therefore has to be reliable, honest, conscientious and alert, and he must also have a feeling for his comrades. After all, he is going to have a great influence on the morale of his unit, and thereby also on the preparedness of the members of his unit. Since the field post office staff are well aware of the fact that most postal orderlies have little or no knowledge of postal activities, continuous efforts are made to give each postal orderly sufficient information concerning his task. This is done by giving him a complete manual when he reports to the field post office, while regular lectures are offered to keep the postal orderly up to date.

Let us remember one thing, however. Morale begins with post, particularly the post of the unit. It therefore begins with the postal orderly. If he is the right man, the unit will remain prepared, to the benefit of our country and our nation. These men are so easily forgotten in the many other more important factors in our military activities. Yet it is they who can build up the morale of the S.A. Defence Force. However, our parents with sons in the operational area, their friends, their girlfriends and families should also help to build up the morale of these men with the aid of the contents of the postal articles which are sent to them.

Finally, I just want to say that we should not regard the task of the postal orderly as insignificant, or take it for granted. Let the unit commander give more attention to their extremely important role in our military setup when appeals are made for our country to be defended.

Mr. Chairman, we are now coming to the end of the Committee Stage discussion and I should like to react to the hon. members who took part in the discussion, in chronological order.

The hon. member for Hillbrow again mentioned the fact that in the previous budget in September I gave no indication of tariff increases. I should just like to repeat my standpoint. The interpretation given by the newspapers perhaps indicated that I did in fact give an intimation of this, but this related to this year’s budget and not the one to come. However, if that hon. member was unable to spot it, I am sorry. Does that hon. member want me to make a statement today about the budget of 1983-’84? Surely that is ridiculous. Even in the time of my predecessors an agreement was reached with the consultative committee that three months’ advance notice would be given of increases. It seems to me as if this is a case where my predecessor gave an inch and they are now demanding an ell. The Opposition even wants to be present at the meetings of the consultative committee four or five months before tariffs come into effect.

What is wrong with that?

There is a great deal wrong with that. That is not the place for members of Parliament. Their place is here. The hon. member for Sunnyside also states that the public should have been informed before, by November. I am doing what not one of my colleagues did. Because one of my predecessors gave an inch years ago, the Opposition now wants to know as much as five months before the time, and the hon. member for Sunnyside expects that the man in the street should also know. Is this not becoming a farce? Are we attempting to evade the discipline of this Parliament?

Power-sharing.

The hon. member for Hillbrow spoke about c.o.d. packages.

†He spoke on behalf of the Mail Order Association. I can inform the hon. member that that particular organization is in regular contact with my department. It has made representations of the same kind as the hon. member made this afternoon and we are at the moment investigating those representations.

The hon. member referred to the question of losses of registered items. I do not know where the hon. member got the figure of R4 from. According to my information, the maximum compensation for the loss of a registered letter as a result of burglary, fire or theft of mailbags is R50. In addition, the insured parcel service exists, allowing the sender to insure the contents of a parcel up to an amount of R1 300. That is the information I can give the hon. member at the moment.

*The hon. member for Kempton Park made a plea for the PWV region. I can tell him that 24% of all the staff of the Post Office are employed in the Post Office’s Witwatersrand region, which also includes Kempton Park. This is only a part of the PWV region, but the other components are equally important. I think this is one index of the importance the department attaches to this specific region. It is also the most densely populated region in our country. As far as telecommunications services are concerned, I can tell the hon. member that due to the tremendous increase in demand in that region, the Postmaster-General has again made a special effort, along the lines of the Operation Commando of some years ago, to get matters moving there.

The hon. member called for service centres. I want to express my appreciation for that. This is something that we want to propagate in new developing townships. On Monday we are opening the large new post office at Secunda. The people in that community have come from all parts of the country, and even though they were at first unwilling to do so, they have now accepted that there will be no personal deliveries there. Service centres will be made available in the various suburbs of Secunda. In South West Africa the people have never had postal deliveries. At one time Windhoek had more post boxes than Cape Town. The public are used to this. However, these service centres have the added advantage that one does not even pay post box rental. One only pays for one’s key at the outset, and then one collects one’s mail there.

As far as agency services are concerned, I can say that where the need arises and the community does not yet justify its own post office, we can establish such an agency if we can get anyone to provide those services.

The hon. member for Nigel spoke about various post offices in his constituency. I should like to give him the assurance that we are going ahead with those projects, as he will know. As he rightly said, that is an important area where major expansions are taking place. We are doing everything possible to have those services in operation as soon as possible. I was also pleased to hear that the hon. member attested to the sound functioning of the Alrapark Post Office. Moreover, my information is that we are studying the representations received in connection with Schapensrust and Minnebron and we shall reply to them as soon as possible.

The hon. member for Alberton made an interesting speech about Potelin. One could almost describe Potelin, the Post Office’s Telectronic Institute, as the Post Office’s own mini-CSIR. Thanks to this organization we remain abreast of the best development in the world; indeed, we even take the initiative in some respects. I am pleased that the hon. member focussed on the important work done by Potelin.

†The hon. member for South Coast referred to the exchange at Umzumbe.

Your pronunciation is correct.

I cannot speak Zulu, but I try my best. I do not know what the specific circumstances are, but I assure the hon. member that we will investigate the situation. I do believe, however, that since it is an automatic exchange, a good telephone service is necessary and that it should be attended to. We will come back to the hon. member in this regard.

Without mentioning the numerical year, the hon. member asked me what year this was, and I told him that it was the Year of the Aged. With that in mind he made several pleas, and said, inter alia, that 60% of his constituents living in that particular area of the South Coast are aged people, and that out of the 19 post offices there, only one undertakes delivery of private mail. We can have another look at this situation, but the modern trend is to make provision for service centres. If the number of residents is large enough to secure the services of an additional postman, then perhaps delivery of mail is possible, but I do believe that as most of the people living in that area have to come to town occasionally they could then collect their mail. I do hope, however, that the hon. member, like the hon. member for Kempton Park, will support the idea of making use of service centres as this system is working perfectly well wherever it has been introduced.

The hon. member also pleaded for reduced tariffs for the aged. I am not going to give the hon. member a final reply in this regard, but once again I must draw his attention, to the fact that the Post Office is being run on the same lines as a private business concern. We will, however, in consultation with the Department of Health and Welfare, look into this matter. The hon. member compared the Post Office with the SABC, but I do not think that one can really make such a comparison, because a substantial part of the income of the SABC is derived from advertisements. On the other hand, the Post Office has to pay for their advertisements on TV and cannot earn money through advertising. Nevertheless, I thank the hon. member for his contribution to the debate.

*The hon. member for Winburg referred to the development taking place in Theunissen. I am aware of the mining and other activities there, and I realize that Theunissen is by no means a dying town. Indeed, I can give the hon. member the assurance that my son is perhaps even more interested in Theunissen than I am, and that I am therefore fully aware of the fact that it is an important and developing place. Automation of the local exchange is scheduled for the year 1984-’85, and in view of the hon. member’s plea, I shall do my best to see to it that automation is not delayed. However, we are dependent on suppliers who are able to supply within an average period of 27 months after an order has been placed for an exchange. Unfortunately I cannot undertake to advance the date of installation of the new exchange, because new exchanges also have to be installed throughout the length and breadth of the country. I think the hon. member for Kempton Park mentioned the number of new exchanges to the automated next year, and these exchanges have to be programmed many years in advance. Therefore one cannot depart from the programme to satisfy anyone and in the process cause other people to wait longer. However, we shall see to it that Theunissen does not lag behind, because it is fairly centrally situated in the Free State.

†On occasion the hon. member for Bezuidenhout is very helpful. He assisted me last year and also in the course of this debate. On the other hand, he sometimes makes strange statements. For instance, he said that I should have informed hon. members of the Opposition, and in particular himself and the hon. member for Hillbrow, beforehand of my intention to raise tariffs. The hon. member has only been in this House for a couple of years, and I would advise him to make a study of the procedures of Parliament and everything connected with it.

I shall be coming back a little later to another issue relating to Parliament too. I believe it is not my function to inform people privately about imminent tariff increases. If I do indeed inform the entire country, the general public, the private sector, the whole lot, three months in advance that new tariffs are about to be introduced, why then should there be any need to inform individuals privately prior to that announcement?

*That is also my reply to the hon. member for Sunnyside, who apparently does not quite understand it. It seems that he, too, wants me to inform the public about this months in advance. Next it will be five months in advance. If it goes on like this I wonder where it will end. Eventually it will have to be 18 months in advance. The problem I have concerns the misuse made of a special arrangement my department has with the private sector. Already we see where all the requests are coming from and what demands are being made on me with regard to time. Surely this is now becoming quite ridiculous. We should really remember, too, that Parliament has its own discipline.

The hon. member for Bezuidenhout reproached me in a sense—it was when I told him it was not my department’s responsibility—for the fact that they received the budget documents late. I want to point out once again that this is a matter between the Government Printer and Parliament. However, I have information to the effect that at least the hon. member for Hillbrow and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout received their documents on Tuesday, in the course of the afternoon.

We did not receive them.

The hon. member for Bezuidenhout told me outside that he did not receive it officially, but that he went to ask the Clerk of the Papers for it. Whatever the case may be, I have definite information that the Opposition received those documents on Tuesday afternoon. You understand my dilemma, Mr. Chairman. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout is arguing with me now, but at the same time he was in possession of the documents.

I did not have them.

If at that stage the hon. member was bothered about not having received the documents, then the correct channel for him to have followed was to approach the Office of the Secretary to Parliament. He should not, therefore, address me across the floor of the House in connection with this matter. He ought to follow the correct procedure, and then we should understand one another in regard to these matters. In that case I would naturally be understanding if an hon. member received his documents late. However, I do not believe the hon. member received this document too late. I am now referring to the document I showed the hon. member for Hillbrow here earlier this afternoon.

†As far as advertising on television is concerned, I am very happy to point out that the hon. member for Bezuidenhout reacted very positively last year when we voted R750 for this purpose. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout has reacted very positively throughout. We have now increased that amount, and it is no longer meant for television advertising only, but also for advertising in newspapers and other media. I am very grateful for the support given us in this respect by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout.

I must say that was a very nice advertisement.

Yes, indeed. Should the hon. member for Hillbrow, however, have any ideas of how we can improve on that advertisement, he is most welcome to submit his suggestions to the department.

For the first time now an hon. member, with the exception earlier of the hon. member for Nigel, came forward with a real and positive suggestion in connection with tariffs. He suggested that telephone tariffs should be increased from 5 cents per unit to 7 cents per unit instead of 6 cents per unit. He then adds that by doing that an increase in postal tariffs could have been obviated. Do you see what the hon. member for Bezuidenhout is after, Mr. Chairman? I could have done that, of course. If I had done so, however, I would have departed from what I have been advocating for the past two years, namely that we should try to close the gap between the costs of postal services and the income from those services. It is our aim ultimately to narrow that gap to 10%. It is still in excess of 30% at the moment.

Well, you have a monopoly.

Fair enough. We have a monopoly. The result of that suggestion by the hon. member, however, would be that users of telecommunication services would have to pay more so that users of postal services could pay less. I do not know whether the hon. member is aware of the fact that there are individual companies that are making use of certain postal services to such an extent that what it really amounts to is that those companies are being subsidized by the Post Office to the tune of R60 000 to R70 000 a year. Therefore the hon. member’s suggestion means that he would like to increase the subsidization of individual companies in particular at the cost of other companies or the public at large who make use of the telecommunications service. It is obvious that I cannot accede to that suggestion. It was indeed a suggestion, and I must congratulate the hon. member that he eventually did come forward with a suggestion.

The hon. member also made the suggestion yesterday that the department should make lower-charge calls available to national servicemen. We can have another look at this suggestion, but at present I must inform the hon. member that it can only be done through a manually-controlled exchange and not from an automatic telephone. With the latter we would be running into technical troubles. However, I shall come back to the hon. member later.

Can you not make a plan with the hon. the Minister of Defence?

I shall discuss this matter with him in any case. The hon. member also referred to the Telebank. I can confirm that the Telebank is designed to give a much improved service compared with the existing savings bank service and also that it will operate on a basis more in line with the banks in so far as savings and money transfer facilities are concerned. In fact it will participate with the commercial banks and the building societies in an integrated national electronic savings and money transfer system. Initially, when the Telebank system is started later this year, we are going to start off with our own staff by asking them voluntarily to join the service by opening Telebank savings accounts by means of which they can then withdraw and deposit money. We are going to learn from that experience and then expand the system afterwards.

*This brings me to the hon. member for Sunnyside, who asked yesterday whether it could not also be used for the administration of old age pensions. My answer is that it could indeed be used for that, but this would mean—and we cannot impose an obligation on these people—that people receiving social pensions would have to open a Telebank account with the Post Office into which their pension moneys could be paid by the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions and from which they could draw the money. Each one would receive a booklet and a plastic card, by means of which all the transactions, including deposits, could be effected. In other words, this could also be done for the elderly. I hope this also satisfies the hon. member for South Coast if we can do something of this kind for the elderly in this Year of the Aged.

The hon. member for Hercules had a positive contribution, particularly with regard to his appeal to the non-Whites in this country to make themselves available in the technical fields. I appreciate his support in that regard.

I now come back to the hon. member for Sunnyside. I think that I have already dealt with his speech in part. I am now being asked, and it is being expected of me, to inform everyone at an earlier stage of what is going to happen. The hon. member will understand that that is impossible. I want to ask him and the other hon. members who put this request, why they ask this of me, and not of the Ministers of Transport Affairs and Finance as well?

Forget it.

Should I forget it? Very well. The hon. member also asked that the postal savings banks be linked to tourism. This is one of the things we are investigating. This will of course mean—even if only temporarily—that tourists may enjoy the convenience of linking up with our Telebank or postal savings bank system. I also want to support the hon. member’s request relating to house numbers. He asked that where post is delivered, numbers should be clearly indicated. The hon. member also asked for a parking area below the Sunnyside Post Office, which is a very large post office.

As an example for other buildings.

Yes. Underground parking however, is an expensive business because it increases the construction costs of the building. At Drie Lelies, which also falls in the constituency of the hon. member, two blocks of flats are being built at the moment and we have made provision in the basement—because this is one of the most densely populated areas in the country—for the eventual installation of electronic exchanges. In the interim we are going to make this area available as parking for the staff who are accommodated there. However, the fact that timely provision had to be made for that in the costs of construction increased the cost of that complex by almost R2 million. Even the hon. member for Hillbrow gossiped about the Post Office in this regard on one occasion. He said that we were building expensive and luxury buildings there—not knowing that we had to make provision for these electronic exchanges in the basement.

How could we know if you did not tell us.

I told the hon. member that last year, and the matter has been disposed of. That is why the hon. member has nothing more to say about that. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout should just keep abreast of affairs. In any event I think that the construction of the Sunnyside Post Office was before my time, but nevertheless I want to say to the hon. member that to make provision for space in the basement is an expensive matter, and except in those cases where the Post Office has to make parking space available for the staff in post office buildings, it is not the function of the Post Office to make provision for public parking. In that regard we co-operate with the local authorities as far as possible. The hon. member also asked a question about the administration of car licences in other provinces. This is not very remunerative work for the Post Office. The Post Office does this work in the Cape as a service because there was a specific problem in the Cape in this regard. However, I am told that the other provinces are not interested in having the Post Office do this work. In the Free State they have a special problem of depopulation and in order to keep the revenue offices at rural magistrate’s offices, they would prefer to continue performing that service. Therefore the Post Office is not involved, and I think that the position in the Transvaal is more or less the same.

At this point I do not wish to argue further with the hon. member about the other remarks he made. I had better, though, quote to him from his speech and comment on what he said. The hon. member said—

I just want to repeat that the public was indeed informed. I have been trying to make this understood for the past two days now. The public, like everyone else, was informed three months before the time.

The hon. member also made the statement yesterday that the recruitment campaign abroad had not been very successful. I just want to say to the hon. member that the recruitment campaign was an outstanding success and that we received 512 positive applications. These applications are now being rounded off. I do not want to say that all of them will come, but what I do say is that the recruitment campaign which was launched over the space of a few weeks last year and which is now being rounded off, was one of the most successful ever. These applications have all come from trained artisans and people who are well-equipped for this work.

The hon. member said that in his opinion, the contribution in regard to training of R110 000 was not very much. If the hon. member takes a look at the department’s budget of revenue and expenditure he will see that an amount of almost R1,5 million appears under the item “Education”. This money is spent on technical training in the form of bursaries, and therefore the hon. member will realize that these contributions to universities and technikons form only a fraction of the money spent by the Post Office in this regard. Moreover, this does not include the money spent on overseas study.

The hon. member also asked whether we could not hand Telebank over to the private sector to be managed on a commission basis. I fear that although the service must be bank-orientated, it can only be operated within a post office because the terminals have to be there. It is electronically linked and as I say, it can only be operated in the post office.

The hon. member also asked me for video-conference for his party. During the experimental period we are making it available free of charge. I want to remind the hon. member that he was one of the privileged ones who took part in that experiment together with the Cabinet on 11 November— he was the only member in this House who was present. As far as parliamentarians are concerned, one of these days we shall let interested persons from all parties take part. This is the orderly way and this is how the Public Service does it.

Will we be able to discuss healthy power-sharing?

The sharing of seats is something which the hon. members opposite can work out; I do not intend working it out for them. They had better decide amongst themselves whether it is healthy or not.

The hon. member for Potgietersrus discussed manual exchanges. He sketched a situation of blockage in his constituency. In his constituency there are various holiday resorts, including places like Warmbad. However, all the telephone traffic from the north to Pretoria comes through the hon. member’s constituency. The hon. the Minister of Justice and I had personal experience of such a blockage last year when we wanted to make a telephone call from Warmbad to Pretoria. Due to the manual exchange at Warmbad we had to wait for half an hour.

Manual exchanges give rise to specific problems. As the hon. member also mentioned, it is expected that the exchange at Warmbad will be automated in the second half of next year. With reference to this and to the speeches of certain other hon. members, I just want to touch on this problem. The most difficult time for a community, after they have been notified that their telephone exchange will be automated in the course of a few years, is the period between the notification and the date on which automation takes place. As soon as the notification is received, the staff of the exchange realize that they are in fact members of a profession that is being phased out. Because they know that before long their services will not be required, they try to find permanence elsewhere. I ask that communities understand this and try to co-operate.

†The hon. member for Mooi River also referred to this particular problem in rural areas. He said that this was often taken for granted by the public and the department, but I wish to disagree with him because it is certainly not taken for granted by the department. I said on many occasions, and so did the Postmaster-General and many senior officials of the department, that if the public complained about manual exchanges, they should go there to have a look. Once they had visited such an exchange, they would never again complain. I am aware of the problem, but the difficulty in this connection is the shortage of well-trained operators. In the smaller centres we have to revert to the system of plugging in to the bigger exchanges over weekends.

The hon. member also referred to the deterioration in postal services in the rural areas. I informed him last year that the Post Office had to rely on the railways and other means of public transport.

Like bus services.

Yes, even bus services. If such a concern closes down or cuts down its services, there is only one alternative available to us—the hon. member actually pleaded for this—and that is that we make available our own transport. But at what cost? We do fulfil a sort of socio-economic role in the rural areas because it is one of our functions, but the department can do this only to a certain degree. Nevertheless, I can assure the hon. member that we are paying attention to our rural areas as well.

As far as our telecommunication system is concerned I remember telling the hon. member for Albany last year that the rural areas served by exchanges which are to be automated will have the SOR system available. This system was developed in South Africa and it enables up to 19 subscribers on a single pair of wires all to ’phone at the same time the world over without the one subscriber hearing or disturbing the other. We are very proud of this system which we developed specifically for our rural areas. This reply is also addressed to the hon. member for Albany, because he once again referred to this problem. I am not quite sure of the time schedule in respect of the different townships in the hon. member’s constituency, but these people can rest assured that they will be receiving good news in due course.

The hon. member discussed the loss of technicians and suggested that we should also pay attention to the image of the department. I agree wholeheartedly with the hon. member. We are actually trying to do just that by way of television advertising and other media. The newspaper Rapport commented very negatively on the latest annual report of the department. I think all hon. members in the House will agree that our annual report is a wonderful publication and that we can all be proud of it. I can also inform the hon. member that the printing works of the Post Office have produced this annual report themselves at a cost of just more than R2 per copy. Up to five or six years ago when we had to rely on the private sector for the printing of our annual report— and not getting the same quality as our present annual report—the cost per copy was more than R3. Considering inflation, the cost per copy should at present have been R5. As I say, I think our latest annual report is a wonderful publication which helps to boost the image of the department, even in overseas countries, with bankers and others, with whom we have to deal. We have received the very best reaction from all these sources. I am grateful to the hon. member for his remarks in this regard.

The hon. member also said that the Post Office should play a kind of socio-economic role. Once again I agree with the hon. member. We are indeed trying to do that by making available job opportunities to all population groups in the country.

*The hon. member for Losberg praised the way in which we attended to problems in his constituency. I can tell the hon. member that the negotiations that had to be conducted in regard to the lease of the building have been disposed of and that the post office will come into operation within about a month. We want to congratulate the hon. member, too, on this.

The hon. member also made a praiseworthy contribution relating to postal matters in the operational area. In this regard I want to say to the hon. member for Bezuidenhout that although my department is not involved in South West Africa, we are involved in postal affairs at certain points in the operational area. However, these points are not manned by the department itself but—hon. members will be surprised at this—by the department’s own national service unit, named 11 Field Post Office Unit. It is the men of this unit that deal with the post, because they are geared to doing so. However, the department itself is not involved because unfortunately there are no local links.

If I have omitted to reply adequately to hon. members’ queries I shall react to them tomorrow during the Third Reading or by letter at a later stage.

House Resumed:

Bill reported.

Third Reading

Mr. Speaker, I move, subject to Standing Order No. 56—

Mr. Speaker, this is now the last opportunity for members of the official Opposition to deal with the very important issue of voting money for the Post Office. I advised the hon. the Minister that I would use the opportunity to respond to some of his challenges and also to get a few things off my chest.

Firstly he asked me where I got the figure of R4 from. I got it from a person who received it from the Postmaster in Cape Town. The letter is dated 1 May 1981 and concerns an article that was posted from Cape Town to Keetmanshoop. It reads as follows—

The hon. the Minister also said that he told the National Consultative Committee for Post Office Affairs on 30 November …

It was not I, it was the Postmaster-General.

… and that this was adequate notice. In view of what the hon. the Minister said today, it seems to me that he regards the National Consultative Committee for Post Office Affairs as more important than Parliament … [Interjections.] … and that once he has told that committee he has discharged all his obligations. I have a copy of his announcement which he was good enough to send me. Nowhere does he say, however, that the tariff increases he announced with effect from 1 April will be referred to or discussed by Parliament. The whole issue was a fait accompli. In fact, it was gazetted.

But do you not know the provisions of the Act?

As I was saying, it was gazetted on 26 February 1982. So if that is not a fait accompli, I should like to know what is. From the hon. the Minister’s statement it is very clear that the Minister was announcing his intention to increase Post Office rates with effect from 1 April 1982. Is it therefore not true to say that he has rendered sterile any possible debate in this House?

He spoke, furthermore, about the legal powers he has. As the hon. member for Sunnyside also said, however, the issue has to be referred to Parliament. Surely the hon. the Minister also knows the provisions of the Act. Let me refer him to section 2B of the Act, which states—

1. (e) by notice in the Gazette determine and from time alter, the fees, rates or charges to be demanded or received in respect of postal, telecommunications, savings, money transfer or other public services rendered by the department.

So he has the power to act, via the Postmaster-General, to increase or reduce tariffs outside this House. Quite clearly such extraneous announcements, even when gazetted, do mean that Parliament is being by-passed and, with the greatest respect in the world, I say the hon. the Minister is then doing the very thing he accuses me of doing, and that is making statements outside Parliament. [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon. the Minister also challenged me on the capital programme. As I have said, the hon. the Minister does have the right to reduce tariffs that are an extremely heavy burden on the consumers of South Africa. The hon. the Minister wants to know where he can reduce tariffs. He asked me to show him where, on page 5 of the estimates, the capital programme could be reduced. Just look at item 2.1—Telecommunications—for which the amount is R627 503 000 out of a grand total of R757 002 000. Then look at item 2.2— Land, Buildings and Official Housing—for which the amount is R84 500 000. Then what about item 2.3—Vehicles—for which the amount is R19 958 000. There is, of course, also item 2.4—Office, Data Processing, Mail Handling and Stores Equipment— with an amount of R25 041 000. If one ignores completely all the telecommunications items, for which an amount of R627 503 000 is earmarked, this still leaves approximately R130 million that can be pruned without touching actual telephone equipment. So his arguments in this regard are not relevant at all.

I have had a little experience of these matters, though perhaps not as much as the hon. the Minister. I did, however, spend 12 years trying to balance the budget of a city with a budget twice as big as that of the whole of Natal and the whole of the Free State combined. So I know, as the hon. the Minister must know, that heads of departments come along with recommendations for their specific departments. When one sits down to do the budget, however, one has to prune down each recommendation made by each section head so that one can bring the overall budget within reasonable limits. He cannot tell me that that cannot happen here. He cannot tell me that he cannot find sufficient areas in which to reduce capital expenditure without reducing the capital for telecommunications services. For example, I have been told that R1 million at 5% interest was loaned by the Department of Posts and Telecommunications some two years ago to the West Rand Administration Board. Is that correct? The department lends that amount at 5% and, to replace it, has to borrow money at between 16% and 17%. So there one has R1 million. Then the hon. the Minister has embarked upon a housing programme in terms of which he has bought housing. For example, he bought St. Hillier in Durban for R1 035 000 consisting of 63 flats. He bought Silver Waters in Florida for R1 200 000 consisting of 33 flats. He bought Leamington Court in Gresswold for R1 016 000 consisting of 27 flats. He bought Kirstenbosch in Dundalk Road, Parkview, for R1 450 000 consisting of 50 flats. That is capital expenditure.

Are you opposed to that?

I can tell the hon. the Minister that the Post Office is subsidizing the rental of Post Office employees. In the case of Silver Waters, for example, they are paying R65 per month as against R215 per month. If he instead subsidized the employees by just giving them the difference between R65 per month and R215 per month, he would be paying R4 950 per month instead of having to buy a building for R1 200 000. He could effectively pay that amount of R4 950 per month for 242 years. Is his building going to last for 242 years? Then he would not have to raise R1 million to pay for the building. There are also other methods of reducing capital expenditure. So the hon. the Minister must not tell me that he cannot reduce capital expenditure.

There are some other matters I want to raise. I dealt before with the question of pensioners. As the hon. the Minister has said, this is the Year of the Aged. That being the case, I think it is time that he gave consideration to the pensioners who retired before July 1973. Those are people who helped build the Post Office into the giant it has become and who helped build the cities into the giants they have become. These people are now suffering under the high cost of living. They are suffering in their efforts to make ends meet and to pay their rent, etc. They are being deserted by the Minister. I am quite aware, as I have said, that these people fall under the Pensions (Government Service) Act, No. 57 of 1973. I therefore ask the Government, not the Minister, to do something about these pensioners.

If the Transport Services can do something for them, the hon. the Minister can do something for them as well. Since this is the Year of the Aged, I believe that the Post Office can also do a little more for its pensioners. The Post Office is the agent for the paying out of pensions through the various post offices. I think that at a post office where there are steps a handrail could at least be provided. The pensioners who are physically handicapped should be assisted in some way to enable them to collect their pensions. The pensioners stand in long queues waiting for their turn. I think a simple solution would be to hand a number to each person as he comes in. They can then sit down and wait for their number to be called to collect their pensions instead of having to wait in long queues. Giving them a cup of tea would not do any harm either. [Interjections.]

I also want to refer to the Giro service. The Telebank is welcome as it is an improvement. As regards a Giro bank, I know that there is a subcommittee in the Department of Finance investigating that. In the Scandinavian countries the Giro system is used fairly universally between countries. What we have to do is establish a link between all the financial institutions in the country, the Post Office, the banks, the building societies, etc. We should consider integrating these. I do not know what role the Telebank will play in this, but I believe that the hon. the Minister should be very interested in the Giro system, which eliminates cheque books, the signing of cheques and cheque frauds and makes it very easy for payments to be made at all times. I believe that this should be done as soon as possible.

As far as the staff position is concerned, let me pay tribute to Mr. Bester and Mr. Raath and his staff. They have been most helpful. I include, of course, the 75 000 other employees in the Post Office, who work long hours and serve the public to the best of their ability. Many divisions are short staffed, particularly the technical division. They often work overtime, and I should like to express our gratitude to them in this regard. We are concerned about their salaries as we realize that they find it difficult to make ends meet. The hon. the Minister said that Post Office employees do not want their salaries to be discussed in this House.

I did not say that. I said that they did not want their salary increases disclosed … [Interjections.]

When employees of the State are not satisfied with their salaries, I believe this should be discussed in this House. If Post Office employees feel that their salaries are inadequate, I believe this is the place to discuss it because Parliament has to vote the money to pay them. Surely we have a say in regard to their salaries?

How do you know what their salary increases are?

I believe that where possible representations for an increase in their salaries should be made. In so far as females are concerned, I believe that there is now no distinction drawn between male and female employees in regard to salaries. There is, however, still a salary gap in regard to non-Whites. I believe that the gap should be closed as soon as possible, and I would welcome an undertaking to this effect from the hon. the Minister.

There is, of course, a positive side to the budget, and I would be failing in my duty if I did not mention it. Although it is our duty to criticize as constructively as we can to make this a better department in its service to the public, which is our main objective, I would nevertheless be faling in my duty if I did not refer firstly to the installation of 270 584 new telephones and, secondly, to the French and German exchange systems that were installed in Pretoria and at Sunninghill, Johannesburg, respectively. I wish to pay tribute to Mr. Rive for his foresight in this connection seven years ago, because it enabled his successor to introduce a system that is a world leader. Not knowing what the outcome was going to be, he put his head on the chopping block, because had those systems been a failure we would have lost millions. Luckily for all of us they have turned out to be a success, and we look forward to the 20 new installations that will serve the other central cities of South Africa. These will be electro-mechanical exchanges of the EDS type. I am happy to say that both the hon. member for Bezuidenhout and I were fortunate enough to take part in a tour of the Johannesburg and Pretoria post offices on 23 October and 4 November, respectively, where we witnessed the very important opening and putting into operation of these installations.

I am also aware of the continued interest taken by the Post Office in the modernization of letter-sorting, generally improving equipment and modernizing exchanges by replacing manual exchanges with the latest devices available. The Protea telephone is certainly an improvement and I think we all appreciate this fact. We are also looking forward to the Disa telephone which I think will be introduced during October and we trust that that will operate effectively as well. Perhaps the hon. the Minister can tell us something more about the optical character reading equipment used for the processing of large volumes of business mail in Johannesburg, Cape Town and Pretoria, where this equipment has been installed to supplement the existing letter-sorting systems. There have been complaints that letters are being delayed. Recently an hon. member’s wife posted her rental cheque here in Cape Town on the 4th and by the 14th it had not yet arrived at its destination. The payment of one’s rental is very important as one could lose one’s flat if it is not paid in time. In these difficult times it is hard to get accommodation and one can be ejected for nonpayment of rent. I know that the policy is to deliver letters within 48 hours and I think we must try to maintain that. I am also upset when my priority mail is not available at the counter on a Saturday morning because we need those important documents here. Although I have every assistance from the postmaster in this regard I nevertheless feel that we should investigate this system carefully. If an express letter posted on the Wednesday in Johannesburg has not arrived in Cape Town by the following Wednesday, then something is radically wrong. Complaints of this nature have been made to me by attorneys and I think they should be investigated more carefully and not merely brushed aside.

In conclusion I wish the department well in its future undertakings and we look forward to a period of prosperity for the Post Office.

Mr. Speaker, I listened attentively to the speech by the hon. member for Hillbrow, who is the chief spokesman of the PFP on posts and telecommunications. However, I want to put it to him that he ought to get his priorities straight before attacking the Post Office so unnecessarily here. I believe he owes this House an explanation for certain statements he has just made here, particularly his allegations in connection with the housing of Post Office staff. He was opposed to the Post Office making certain investments to ensure that its staff is properly housed. Is the hon. member opposed to this?

Now he does not answer. [Interjections.] He gave certain examples here, and I now want to know whether he considers them to be proof of futile attempts or improper investments. After all, the hon. member for Hillbrow ought to be conversant with matters concerning the Post Office. However, I believe it is high time he came back to earth, and learnt what the practical set-up of the Post Office is.

He referred to pensioners queueing up to receive their pensions. I do not know what the hon. member was trying to achieve with that argument. It would seem that he was only trying to score political points off us here. I challenge the hon. member to accompany me to the main Post Office here in Cape Town. Then he can show me those alleged long queues of pensioners waiting for their pensions every month. Has the hon. member never heard of a mobile post office? Does he now know about certain facilities provided for pensioners at old age homes to facilitate the payment of their pensions? Is he unaware of this? [Interjections.]

Order!

Is the hon. member for Hillbrow unaware of this? However, he went further and pointed out that this year was the Year of the Aged. Who was it, however, that initiated the idea of a Year of the Aged? Who took the lead in this regard as well? It was the Government, was it not? It is the Government that takes care of the aged. It was the Government that decided that this year should be the Year of the Aged. However, all the hon. member for Hillbrow does is try to score political points off us here. Of course, all this is only aimed at trying to win the votes of the aged for his party.

The hon. member went on to ask about the staff position in the Post Office. He made certain allegations regarding the hon. the Minister and also the Post Office staff in connection with salary structures. Is the hon. member, as a business man, as a professional man, prepared to state in this House what his staff earns? Is he prepared to tell us how much his typist or secretary earns? Surely that is a personal matter. It is their business what they earn. Why, then, must people’s salaries be bandied about in this House? Why does the hon. member not tell the whole world how much he earns? Why does he not tell the whole world how much his staff earns? [Interjections.] Why not? Why must he bring the staff of the Post Office into the matter?

Of course, he gets a sucking pig as a present every weekend. [Interjections.]

The hon. member referred to a few problems involving postal items that were delayed. [Interjections.]

Order!

Let us take a closer look at those delays in the delivery of certain items of mail. The hon. member for Hillbrow based his allegations on a few exceptional cases. However, is this House the place to mention these things? Should he mention them here? Does it really contribute towards constructive debate when he makes such allegations, which are based on a few exceptional cases? Did he, perhaps, bring those exceptional cases to the attention of the hon. the Minister? However, since the hon. member levelled accusations at the hon. the Minister and his staff in connection with the delay in delivering certain items of mail, I want to point out to him that there is preferential mail that must, in the first place, be given priority. In the first place the hon. member should ask himself whether those specific items of mail met the requirements set by the Post Office? Did those postal items meet the prescribed standardized requirements? Were they properly stamped? I challenge the hon. member to show us those items of mail. He must come and tackle them in this House. He must do what the hon. member for Umhlanga did yesterday. That hon. member showed us an envelope to substantiate the complaints he made. The hon. member must prove to us that those items of mail he referred to in fact met the prescribed standardized requirements.

The hon. member went on to accuse the Post Office of inefficiency in regard to certain problem cases and made an appeal for more services and more automation. Of course we agree that this is necessary, but the hon. member must tell us where the money is to come from. The hon. member should realize that the Post Office, like every other business undertaking in South Africa today, is faced with two problems, money and labour. That hon. member and the official Opposition must tell us where the money is to come from and where the labour is to come from. Mr. Speaker, you will agree that the Post Office has certain sources of finance for capital expenditure. What are those sources? Hon. members must listen carefully. These sources are, in the first place, the operating surplus; in the second place, provision for depreciation; in the third place, provision for higher replacement costs of assets; in the fourth place, Post Office Savings Bank and National Savings Certificate moneys; and finally, money on call and loans. These are the sources of finance of the Post Office. How else can it obtain money? Yesterday and again today the hon. member asked that loans be negotiated overseas. Does he realize what the rate of interest is? Does he know what is going on overseas? Does he know at what interest rates we must borrow money to finance the set-up he is requesting? Otherwise the hon. member must have the courage to get up and say that tariffs must be increased considerably.

The hon. member also asked for a narrowing of the wage gap. This is in fact the policy of the Government. The Government is narrowing the wage gap. Does the hon. member know how far the Post Office has progressed in this regard? Has he taken the trouble to make enquiries? Allow me to give the hon. member a few examples. I do not want to take up too much of the time of this House on this, but let us just take a look at this official document. With reference to “the narrowing of the wage gap”, the official document reads as follows—

Does the hon. member know about this? It begins with “Postmaster, Grade II” and it ends with “senior telephonist, male”. Does the hon. member agree with this? The document then goes on to deal with Black workers. It begins with a postmaster, Grade II, and ends with “chief inspector, uniformed staff’. The document goes on—

1. (b) Non-White grades based on E scale for Whites, but not yet on same salary scales.

We are working on this. But the document goes on to say—

1. (c) Non-White grades that have not yet been placed on E or salary scales for Whites, Coloureds, Indians, Blacks.

This starts with a typist and ends with a clerk. Has the hon. member ever taken the trouble to study this document? Yesterday the hon. member for Umhlanga Rocks … [Interjections.] Mr. Speaker, I apologize. I meant the hon. member for Umhlanga. I apologize for linking his intelligence to the name of his constituency. He and other members made a great fuss about the telegram service levy to be introduced, but did they take the trouble to go to the nearest post office to ascertain how many telegrams it sends? The nearest post office is here in Parliament.

Those hon. members claim that we want to make money by levying a service fee on telegrams. How many telegrams were sent from this Parliamentary building during February?—107. How many have been sent out thus far in March?—125. Hon. members will agree that here we have business people, politicians and people with outside interests, whether in their constituencies or business interests. A great many telegrams will therefore be sent from here. Yesterday, when I asked the hon. member for Umhlanga how many telegrams are sent from Soweto, he said I had Soweto on the brain. He has not yet told me how many Black people send telegrams.