Order! Before I call upon an hon. member to speak, I must inform the Committee that the hon. member for Yeoville has made representations to Mr. Speaker in respect of the application of the sub judice rule to the discussion of matters arising from the events in the Seychelles in November 1981. Mr. Speaker is considering those representations and will give a considered ruling at the commencement of proceedings tomorrow.

Consequently, during the sitting of this Committee today I shall strictly apply the ruling which Mr. Speaker gave on 1 February and I shall not allow any discussion of matters which have a bearing on the above mentioned events.

I put the question.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask for the privilege of the half-hour.

I want to start by expressing my condolences to the families of those members of the South African Defence Force who have laid down their lives in the past year and also express our wishes for their rapid recovery to those that have been wounded or injured. May I also be permitted to express my personal thanks and the thanks of those of us sitting on this side of the House to the Chief of the Defence Force, to the Heads of the various branches of the Defence Force and to all the officers and men of the Defence Force for the service that they have rendered to the Republic in the period that lies immediately behind us. I would particularly like to include in that not only the men of the Permanent Force, but also the National Servicemen, the Citizen Force and the Commandos and a special word of appreciation to those persons who have volunteered for service which they were not by law required to do. At the beginning I should also like to express our appreciation to General De Wächter and his staff, Brigadier Verster and the good ladies who assist there, as well as the persons in the office of the Minister and the Chief of the Defence Force, as well as Brigadier Bosman of the Press liaison office for the co-operation that they have shown not only to ourselves, but I think to all the members of this House in respect of the various problems that members have from time to time. Lastly, may I say that we are appreciative of the White Paper we received this year. It will no doubt receive much attention during the course of this debate and it always provides a good basis for the debate. I think we should establish right at the beginning what the pattern should be in the future in respect of White Papers so that we know when we will get them and whether they will be delayed. If we are told that we are going to get them every two years, it means just that, because in accordance with Army, Navy and Air Force parlance two years means two years. In political terms among members of the National Party, it might mean something else. To us, however, who are concerned with Defence matters, two means two and not three. We would perhaps like to get them even more frequently but, jokes aside, we are appreciative of the White Paper and the fullness with which it seeks to cover a whole variety of topics.

It would not be appropriate if one were not to start the debate by immediately referring to the present incursions that have taken place into South West Africa/Namibia by Swapo. I also think it is not inappropriate to draw attention to the fact that there is considerable concern in the public in regard to this particular incursion, particularly, because we have been told the following in the White Paper and I quote from it: “The tranquillity following across border operations in areas in SWA that had suffered heavy terrorist attacks is conclusive proof that offensive defence is indispensable for internal stability”. A little further in the same White Paper it says: “As a result of Security Force successes the morale of Swapo terrorists is low at present and they are concentrating on activities such as mine-laying, sabotage and intimidation which do not bring them into contact with the Security Forces”. Generally speaking, the atmosphere has been created that a high degree of tranquillity is to be expected. There is concern, without doubt, about the incursion which has taken place, the number of groups which are involved, the actual physical numbers of members of Swapo, the depth of the penetration and obviously there is serious concern at the casualties suffered by the Defence Force and the civilian population. There is also concern that this incursion is taking place at a time of year when it is to be expected and also, as I have indicated, there is concern at the fact— and it has been said—that this is being done by Swapo in order to project its so called “sterkmanbeeld” when we ourselves have gone out of our way to seek to project that “sterkmanbeeld” as being the picture of the South African Defence Force. I think it is very important that the hon. the Minister should in this debate, at the earliest opportunity, deal with that particular situation. Perhaps it is not inappropriate that I should express our comments with regard to it. Firstly, we are obviously disturbed at the casualties that have occurred but I think they have to be seen in the perspective of what a war is. Whereas every death is regretted, I think we have to see the numbers in their true perspective. Secondly, I think we must also see the incursion itself not out of context and see it for what it is rather than to be influenced by what are exaggerated accounts of them. Because, by exaggerating the extent of the incursion by Swapo into South West Africa, those who exaggerate are playing the Swapo game because that is precisely what they want us to do. I therefore think they have to be seen in their correct perspective. Thirdly, I think it has to be accepted that when you are fighting a terrorist war, it is virtually impossible to stop any kind of penetration and when people for instance talk about the erection of fences such as we have in East Germany, those are not practical possibilities. One has to accept that terrorists can penetrate in this kind of situation and one also has to accept that even though one may hit the bases of Swapo and seize their arms, the reality is that there is a replenishment of weapons by Eastern Bloc countries as fast as we can destroy them. Secondly, there is a replacement of manpower by means of abduction which one finds very difficult to control in that particular type of area. What I think is important and what I think has to be understood, is that however strong we are and however many victories we may have, the real issue is that there is not a military solution in the long term, but there has to be a political solution. There can never be a completely sole military solution in regard to that particular matter. Having expressed a few of my own views on the matter and having put it in perspective, I hope that the hon. the Minister will deal with this in some detail when he replies in due course—and as early as possible.

The second matter I would like to deal with is also in the news. It is something that may perhaps be a little away from us, but which is actually quite important to us. I am referring to the potential of conflict in the South Atlantic and the Falkland Islands incident and what may flow from it. The official policy, as has been announced by the Government, is that there is a question of non-participation and a question of neutrality. I think that is a policy, whatever one’s sentiments in regard to a particular aspect may be, which we will support from this side of the House and I think we can accept that it will be supported by other parties in this House as well, in other words, that we do not participate but that we adopt a policy of neutrality. I think there are some lessons to be learned from it and somethings to which we have to pay attention. Firstly, by taking particular action, as has been done by the Argentine in this particular situation, a de facto situation can be created which is very difficult to change as a result of subsequent events. Whatever happens in regard to that conflict, certain vested interests will have been created as a result of that de facto action in the part of the Argentine forces. That is something which we have seen in other circumstances as well. The second thing which I think has to be borne in mind is that there is an ever-pending threat of Soviet intervention in any kind of trouble situation in the world, irrespective of what the politics of the situation are, because the Soviets will interfere wherever they stand to gain. In these particular circumstances and despite the policies of the Argentine military regime, there is little doubt that the Soviets have chosen sides as to what will suit them. The third point that I want to make is that there is a danger of any form of limited conflict expanding. We should regard the South Atlantic as a peace zone and we should play our role in ensuring that the South Atlantic remains a peaceful area. A further point that arises, is that the moment any form of conflict seems to arise anywhere in the globe today, there is a threat of an introduction of nuclear weapons. That has already happened in this particular type of conflict and it is something we have to bear in mind in regard to what may or may not happen in South Africa in the future. The other point which is important in respect of our own situation, is that I do not think the Western powers have appreciated how serious the loss of bases has been to them all over the world and in particular in the South Atlantic region where they now have to deal with actions from a very long way away because they have deprived themselves of the ability to have bases from which to operate. I think that has become very, very apparent because in this case there is virtually no reasonable base for reconnaissance in the South Atlantic, whether by sea or by air available to the Western Powers. In fact, to some extent the South Atlantic, if it were not for satellite reconnaissance which takes place, would be an area where they would not know what is going on at all. Lastly, I want to say that as far as the political consequences of this matter are concerned, we ourselves should be concerned about what would happen in Britain if the Falklands Islands situation were to turn out to be a fiasco because I think the fall of the Conservative Government in Britain could have very serious implications for South Africa, for the South West African situation and for the exercise of vetoes in so far as South Africa is concerned. These are to my mind matters which we should debate and which we should concern ourselves about at this time.

The real question that has to be asked is What the real enemy is that South Africa has to face and what is the way in which to win the war in which we are involved at the present moment. The reality is that we are involved here, not in any kind of conventional struggle in the true sense of the word, but in a revolutionary war which you fight not only by gun against gun, but which you have to fight by idea against idea. If we were to forget that and that this is a conflict of ideology as well as a conflict of arms, I think we would make a very, very grave mistake. I think we also make a grave mistake when we seek to identify the danger to which the Republic is exposed as being a conflict purely between ourselves on the one hand and Marxist-Leninist communists on the other. I think the problem here is that we have to see the conflict, in the first instance, as a conflict on a world basis and how we fit into that conflict, and, secondly, to see the conflict as it is here in Southern Africa. In so far as the world conflict is concerned, there is no doubt that the conflict is between the United States and the Western Allies on the one hand and the USSR and her satellites and her allies on the other hand and that the potential for conflict arises not only as a result of the ideological drive of the Soviets, but also as a result of imperialistic ambitions which are often designed as ideological obligations in terms of what they say is the communist doctrine. It also arises as a result of a series of mutual fears, of questions of wealth gaps, of technology gaps and of historical fears which have existed where different groups of people have come to fear each other. There is a very real risk of conflict on an international scale and it is probably only the consequences of a major conflict and a possible atomic war and the maintenance of a delicate balance of power to which President Reagan now attaches far greater importance than other Western leaders have for some time, that has actually helped to preserve the peace. The other issue that I think is also wrong, is the suggestion that the conflict is between communism and capitalism, because the reality is that no country in the Western camp in fact practices pure capitalism. One of the most effective weapons which the West has had, is that the effort of private industry, business and other activities has created the wealth in those countries in order to pay the taxes to provide for the social services of a level which a less productive communist system cannot provide. Communism in its pure form is also not seen anywhere in the Eastern Bloc. There is a great variety of it. The real issue that exists, as we see it and as I see it, is that on the one hand there is a system of democratic government where people are given a choice of what kind of economic or political system they want and where, if they find that one system is wrong, they are entitled to change their minds and by means of an election can change the system of government. On the other hand, once you have chosen communism, there is no second chance. You do not get a chance of replacing it and that is the real difference and that is what we have to understand. In the reality of Southern African politics one of the things we have to bear in mind is that if we make a mistake, we may not get a second chance to put it right. We cannot afford to make that kind of mistake. If we look at the situation of Southern Africa, we see a situation where we get conflicting ideologies, imperialistic aspirations and we see the rising and falling of different civilizations in the world, we see conflicting spheres of influence and we see a have and have not nation. If we look at ourselves here, to see how we fit into this, we realize that the tragedy is that Southern Africa now seems to find itself at the vortex of many of these conflicts. That is why, whether we like it or not, we have to take sides in this world conflict. There is no doubt that whether the West wants us or not, our future and our hope lies with the success of the West in the world and we will go down if the communist powers and the USSR were to triumph in this conflict. If we look at this situation, we ourselves in South Africa have to look at the present moment at what I believe is an unprecedented arms build-up. It is an arms build-up which is caused by the desire of these Eastern Bloc countries to extend their sphere of influence by the creation of artificial fear in respect of the alleged aggressive intentions on the part of the Republic, the destabilisation consequences of the establishment of bases for terror against the Republic and against South West Africa/Namibia and the escalation in arms deliveries, both to Swapo and to the neighbouring States, by these Eastern Bloc States. All of these things are creating an arms build-up in Southern Africa which I believe Southern Africa cannot afford, because this means that we also have to arm ourselves. The reality is that Southern Africa could rather spend the money that it is spending on arms, on improving the living conditions of the people of Southern Africa as a whole. They can see to it that there is an improvement in the life of all the people in Southern Africa instead of spending it on the unproductive form on which we have to spend it by reason of this arms build-up. I believe that the time is here—and that is why I welcome the fact that there will be a high level meeting between the Prime Minister and one of the leaders of the frontline states—that people of moderate and reasonable views will come to understand that the arms build-up is in nobody’s interest in Southern Africa.

If we talk—and I want to turn to some other matters that arise—specifically about Defence matters for a moment, I believe there are many matters which require review. A statement was issued by the Leader of my party today regarding conscientious objectors which I think requires attention. Other matters which require attention is the question of immigrants, the administration of the Defence Force, the question of how to deal with a multiracial army, how to encourage more volunteers, the question of women and the role that they have to play and the question of the other race groups. We recently had a visit from members of the Armed Services Committee of the US House of Representatives. I would like to commend, as I and others have done before, that example. We should have an armed services committee. I believe that such a committee should review the whole Defence Act because I think it is time that this Act is reviewed. Some of the matters require to be debated in public and this Vote serves a very important purpose in that regard, but there are other matters which require to be worked out in committee. The need for an armed services committee is fundamental and important.

In the budget itself there are a few things to which I would like to draw attention. Time does not allow me to give an analysis of what each item of expenditure is, but one thing is clear. That is that the talk of the great proportion of the gross national product which is spent on defence in South Africa, is grossly exaggerated. By world standards, and even though we face a fundamental threat and even though we spend some 20% of our budget on Defence matters, the percentage of the gross national product or the gross domestic product, whichever you care to choose, is relatively small.

There are however some things that do concern me. Firstly, I want to refer to the Navy. I believe that the need for larger vessels, particularly in view of the tragedy that befell us, is more pressing than ever. I think that somewhere along the line somebody has to say loud and clear to the Western powers that if anything has been proved in the South Atlantic, it is that there is a need for larger vessels to be available to the Republic of South Africa. Any argument that they could use to say that those vessels would be used for purposes of internal oppression is of course absolute nonsense. I believe the United States should be persuaded to make those larger vessels available to us. We do not want them for nothing, but we will have to build them ourselves if we cannot buy them, but believe they should make them available to us. The same applies to the long-range reconnaissance aircraft. There is no doubt that it is in the interest of the West as a whole that somebody should be patrolling the South Atlantic and there is also no doubt that the Shackletons, which have given us marvellous service, are getting fairly close to the end of the road. I believe that we should ask for greater assistance in this regard. Again, it could be done without any suggestion that it could be used for internal means. What is interesting, is that the long-range Russian reconnaissance aircraft can operate over the South Atlantic, but there are no pro-Western long-range reconnaissance aircraft that can actually operate over those areas. I think we have a tremendous strong case to advance in that regard.

There are two other matters I should like to draw attention to. The first is that I think we should concentrate more on the acquisition of helicopters. Our helicopter strength should be increased. The other point is that I am not sure that we are spending enough on research. I would particularly like to see more research being done in South Africa as to how to deal with mines and the threat thereof, because that is one of the major problems that you have to face in a terrorist war and in a terrorist situation. I should also like to draw attention to the question of civil defence. I want to express my disappointment at the fact that it is not as effective as should be. I think it is correct to say that some local authorities are doing their job, but it is equally correct to say that many others are not and that civil defence is not in the state that it should be. I think something should be done in that regard. I should also like to deal with the question of the volunteer as against the conscript as a person to serve South Africa. One of the things that has always disappointed me over the last few years, is the problem in regard to volunteers. I listened to the Chief of the Defence Force on television give examples with regard to volunteers in areas where I would have imagined there would be masses of volunteers and where people would come forward to do duty. I have repeatedly raised the question of motivation and believe we have to do more in regard to motivation. We have to motivate our people more and they have to understand it. I think a volunteer soldier is a much better soldier than a conscript and have always believed it and we have done it before. I think there is something wrong with the motivation of our people. When it comes to the question of women in the Defence Force, I must say that I do not believe in the conscription of women. I want to make that quite clear. I think they should be brought in voluntarily and more civilian women should be brought into the picture and I think we will make a mistake if we have a conscription of women in South Africa. I would commend it to the hon. the Minister that he should not do so. I really think that it would be wrong to do it. As regards the conscription of other races, I want to repeat our attitude that we have stated before. As far as we are concerned, the question of citizenship and military service go hand in hand. You cannot conscript a person who has not got full rights in a country which he is asked to defend. I must ask the hon. the Minister that he must take no steps to seek to introduce any form of conscription in respect of any person in South Africa that does not have full citizenship rights. I say it with great responsibility, because I think if he were to take those steps, it would not be in the interests of the country as such. I want to make the simple point that we have White immigrants in South Africa who are not South African citizens but who have the right of ownership of property, the right to move where they like, to go where they like and to do anything they want and they do not have to serve. There are other people who are born here and who belong here and who do not have those rights. I think, with great respect, to conscript them in those circumstances would be wrong.

I think the question of immigrants needs our attention, and it needs very urgent attention, especially in the circumstances we find ourselves in. I appreciate that we need the skills, but I want to make this simple point: A person who has been here long enough to become a citizen, a person who has all the benefits and advantages of living here, who chooses of his own accord not to become a citizen but who wants to continue to enjoy the privileges of this country has got some obligations to this country. Perhaps, what we might consider—and the hon. the Minister might discuss it with the hon. the Minister of Internal Affairs—is whether we should not relax the laws relating to dual citizenship so that they can have the two citizenships as is the case with many people already in South Africa. They should, if they are here and if they want the benefits of the country, make some contribution in regard to the defence of South Africa. I do not want to frighten away immigrants and I do not want to lose their skills, but I think we must pay attention to this and I think immigrants in South Africa have to understand this.

There are many other things that I would like to talk about, but I would like to end with just two things.

The first is that I want to express my concern about the looseness of the control of the arms in South Africa, about the fact that there are too many people carrying arms and are in possession of illegal equipment. In the same way as people might take them as souvenirs, the real danger exists that those arms can get into the wrong hands and can cause danger to the community as a whole. I would like to appeal to the Defence authorities to take far greater precautions in regard to the control of arms than they have until now, particularly in regard to captured equipment, because I do not want to see every Tom, Dick and Harry, for that matter, walking around with an AK47. I think that is just not on.

Lastly, I want to say just one thing which I think is fundamental to the whole thing. It has been demonstrated now in South West Africa and it has been demonstrated in South Africa as a whole that we can defend ourselves. We have a powerful Defence Force with skilled leadership and a sound armaments industry, but if we do not solve the political problems of South Africa, you are letting those soldiers, sailors and airmen down because the reality is that they can hold it while we have the responsibility to solve the problems. I sometimes despair whether there is really a willingness of people to get to grips with the political problems of South Africa and whether we are not really sheltering behind the Defence Force and saying that they have to look after us and that we do not have to worry. The truth is that every single person who serves in the Defence Force is owed a debt by us and if we as politicians do not solve South Africa’s problems, we are letting down the South African Defence Force.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the attitude with which the hon. member for Yeoville started his speech and which he maintained throughout. I should also like to associate myself with the sympathy he conveyed to the families of those who have died on the border. I also wish to thank those people who are serving at the moment, and those who are on pension, for what they have done.

The hon. member spoke about general matters, but also touched on specific points. In the course of my speech I shall try to deal with certain points, but I do want to assure him that there are several hon. members on this side of the Committee who will reply to arguments he advanced. As hon. members are aware, an investigation is in progress in the Defence Force at present relating to immigrants and persons with conscientious objections to national service. I do not wish to elaborate on that but, as the hon. member said, it is undoubtedly a matter which must be given attention.

I want to begin by wholeheartedly congratulating the South African Defence Force on the successful operations it has undertaken. I call to mind Operation Super, which was completed a month ago. It was very successful. I also wish to congratulate the Defence Force on the successful follow-up operations at present in progress in South West Africa. I shall come back to this later. I also wish to congratulate the Chief of the South African Defence Force on his appearance on television on Sunday evening. I am told that it was very well received and that it was imperative that that should have been done. I should like to congratulate and thank the hon. the Minister for the very comprehensive White Paper on defence matters that we have received. This White Paper appeared in April and was therefore in time for the discussion of this Vote. Because it appeared so recently the information it contains is fresh and gives us a profound insight into the Defence Force. It can therefore be fruitfully used here.

It is very clear, looking at the preface of this White Paper, that the hon. the Minister also said we could expect a conventional struggle. I think that this evaluation of the situation is 100% accurate, because the fact is that there is a Red line from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. I quote from page 28 of the White Paper—

We must realize that in these times we are at the focal point of this struggle in Africa. Accordingly I regard the following statement in the White Paper as correct—and I quote again from page 28—

I want to say to the hon. the Minister that this in-depth study and these winged words will serve as encouragement for our people and enable them to form an accurate idea of what the problems are. During the discussion of the Post Office budget last year, the hon. the Minister drew our attention to a few matters on 24 September 1981. One of the matters to which the hon. the Minister drew our attention was the fact that a propaganda campaign was being waged against South Africa. In this regard I refer to column 4683 of Hansard, 24 September 1981. He said that the theme of this onslaught— and this is important—was the charge that we were training soldiers to destabilize our northern neighbours. This theme is an infamous lie. To tell the truth, it is 180° from the truth because if there is a stabilizing factor in Southern Africa then it is South Africa. With our Defence Force, our economy and our whole attitude, we are a stabilizing factor. I want to say that in the future we can expect still more of this kind of onslaught. By implication those who are waging the campaign against us say that we must continue to be a soft target and we must not train people, but we shall not be misled by that. I believe that the CP, the NRP and members of the PFP, too, like us on this side of the House, will not be misled by that.

In that same speech the hon. the Minister spelt out a security policy to us. I urge hon. members to go and read it. In the first place, he said that the South African Defence Force had a peaceful task, viz. a stabilizing task; in the second place, that we had to counter any revolution; in the third place, that all population groups should be involved and in the fourth place, that the civilian infrastructure had to be preserved. This means that the economy must be kept strong. We are engaged in this. Finally, he said that we should be self-sufficient as far as armaments were concerned. I thank the hon. the Minister, because this is the kind of information we want and which inspires confidence in us.

Our enemy is very well-known to us. As recently as 22 March Dr. Chester Crocker said the following—

We should have no doubt about the intention of the Soviets. I consider them to be the most dangerous entity facing South Africa. That being so, I should like to remind hon. members of what Clausewitz once said, namely—

I think this is very apposite. We cannot expect to fight sabres with mere dress swords.

In this regard I want to quote what an hon. member of the PFP said the other day. He said the following—

This was said by an hon. member on that side of the House. Can one really believe that an hon. member in this House has such a faith in Mother Russia’s compassion that he is prepared to say a thing like this? In this regard one can only behold what is happening in Afghanistan and other places.

Whose quotation is that?

I shall give you the column reference later on. I would say that this is absolute drivel. This approach can obviously not be condoned. One of those hon. members said: “Our major objection is to the extension of the call-up system”, and somebody else said that they were opposed in principle to a massive extension of mobilization, while the hon. member for Yeoville said—and I agree with him and appreciate what he said—that the PFP supported the concept of national service, which is at least one thing he thinks is positive. I want to thank him for that.

[Inaudible.]

I do not have the time to go into that.

I think it is unfortunate that certain hon. members of the PFP sometimes become loquacious and say things that they should not say. [Interjections.] I will give the hon. member another quotation with which I am sure he will not agree. An hon. member of the PFP said—and I quote—

These are strong words—

He said this during the Second Reading debate of the Defence Amendment Bill. He said that we were whipping up panaroia.

Paranoia.

Thank you. The hon. member of Constantia at least recalls the words he himself has used. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I rise to give the hon. member an opportunity to complete his speech.

I thank the hon. Whip.

*For the edification of the hon. member I sketched the unrealities of the situation, unrealities that are put forward by that side of the House. I now wish to deal with the realities.

In the first place, the reality of the matter is that South Africa is becoming increasingly important in the world context. That is a fact. The Falklands issue illustrates the fact that we are becoming more important. It is true that the Bear’s whelps in Africa have increased in size and number. It is important that we realize that there are leaders in Africa who realize this, and I hope that when discussions take place they will lead to peace and prosperity.

I should now like to discuss the success achieved by the South African Defence Force. This is a pleasant subject, and all of us are enthusiastic about it. In the first place, I want to say that the South African Defence Force looks after its people physically and spiritually. This is an important thing to remember.

†However, it is so that there are people who have a conscientious objection to military service. I know that there is a committee which is busy investigating matters.

In this regard I want to quote from a little booklet entitled “Christianity and military service in the context of South Africa”, by Lt.-Col. Rev. Dick Begbie, O.B.E. He said the following—

I want to leave it at that.

*The second sphere in which the Defence Force is achieving great success is the spiritual care of our people by the chaplain service of the Defence Force. I wish to convey my sincere thanks to this service and wish it everything of the best with the good work that is being done. Other hon. members on this side of the House will elaborate on this further.

An important aspect to bear in mind is that the South African Defence Force is very conservative in its utilization of manpower and finance. I agree with the hon. member for Yeoville in this regard. As far as finance is concerned, I wish to quote the White Paper again. I quote from page 23—

This clearly shows that we are not engaged in mobilization. How can one mobilize if there is no money? I ask certain hon. members, in the light of these facts, to refrain from advancing the argument of a so-called total mobilization, because that is in conflict with the facts.

Further successes have been achieved by the South African Defence Force. I think the successes of the Defence Force can also be explained on the basis of the fact that an economic climate has been created in which growth takes place. When we consider the economy of South Africa we take insufficient account of the fact that the favourable economic climate is directly ascribable to the successes achieved by the South African Defence Force on the borders. This inspires confidence in investors, entrepreneurs and our own people, a feeling that our future is safe. For that reason I want to express my profound thanks for an operation like Operation Protea. After Operation Protea the economic climate in South Africa improved considerably. From an economic point of view, I trust that the successes of the South African Defence Force will continue.

The next success story to which I can refer is Armscor, the task of which is to develop armaments. Other hon. members will also be able to discuss this. As a former artilleryman I can say that the G5 cannon is far better than the old 25 pounder. I want to express my congratulations and thanks in this regard.

I now wish to deal with matters of a more purely military nature and discuss the operations which have in fact taken place on land. The first to which I want to refer is Operation Super. In the case of a conventional onslaught one usually attacks with a force of three attackers for every defender. Do hon. members know what happened in the case of Operation Super? During this operation, 45 South African soldiers shot and killed 201 Swapo members—not only attacked, but shot dead. Is this not a success to inspire confidence in entrepreneurs, and one which can make us proud of our Defence Force? To me it is indeed significant.

I now wish to discuss a second matter. As far as insurgency in South West Africa is concerned I agree with the hon. member for Yeoville. Swapo members infiltrate South West Africa yearly. How do they get in? They do not enter South West Africa as an organized force, because they are too afraid of the South African Defence Force. They infiltrate into South West Africa one by one or in groups of two or three at a time, and come together again within the country. These people infiltrate the country in the rainy season. This proves that their logistics are poor. They lack water and have to live off the land. Every year they lose, because when they are obliged to seek food from the local population, information on their movements is provided to the Security Forces on whose side the local population is. The fact that the local population is on the side of the Security Forces counts strongly in the favour of the South African Defence Force.

However, I want to go a little further than that. This question of the recent infiltration into South West Africa is barely a week old. Expressed in hours, it has been in progress for approximately 150 hours now, and already approximately 28 terrorists have been shot and killed. Twenty-eight terrorists, approximately 25% of the total force, have been shot and killed in that vicinity in a matter of 150 hours. To realize how outstanding that is, we must use a norm. I want to ask hon. members of the Committee to use what happened in Malaysia as a norm. In Malaysia the English fought a similar struggle which they regarded as very successful. What were the statistics of that struggle? Statistics showed that it took one man on patrol an average of a thousand hours to see one terrorist. To shoot one, took 10 000 hours, if memory serves. It took one man lying in ambush, 300 hours to see one terrorist. In South West Africa we shot and killed 28 terrorists in 150 hours. This gives hon. members some idea of the effectiveness of the Defence Force. Another aspect that is most evident is that this kind of warfare is time-consuming. When one is out on patrol or is standing guard one is actively occupied. To be actively occupied in the Defence Force is different to being actively occupied in civil life, and therefore I should appreciate it if people would put an end to the story that people are not properly utilized in the Defence Force. That is nonsense, because different norms apply in this regard. I think that the Committee will want to join me in congratulating the Chief of the Defence Force.

I wish to conclude by saying that our men in the Defence Force must realize that we are on their side. We are with them. The officers of the Defence Force must know that we are with them. They ensure our freedom so that we can maintain more civilized standards here. We thank them. I want to tell our enemies that they must bear in mind the courageous South African soldiers and this phrase in the Transvaal anthem—

That is the question they must ask themselves. This is a people filled with heroism. One reads in the newspapers that Operation Protea yielded its quota of heroes. This is a fact, and we can be proud of our people and our Defence Force. We can be proud to be a soldier. We can rely on our soldiers. This reminds me of the concluding verses of the Transvaal anthem, namely—

With the help of Providence the South African Defence Force will ensure that we preserve our liberty.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask for the privilege of the half hour.

On this occasion I should like to join in the congratulations expressed by the hon. members for Yeoville and Pretoria West, and on behalf of the Conservative Party, convey my congratulations and thanks to the South African Defence Force for the successes it has achieved, particularly in the operational area, and for the White Paper. With regard to the successes in the operational area, I also want to thank and congratulate Armscor. I also want to congratulate all the soldiers who have been promoted or honoured or who have been successful in one way or another in their military careers. I want to express my sympathy to the wounded and to the families of those who perished. I want to thank those persons who have retired and honour the memory of those persons who made the highest sacrifice for their Fatherland. The Conservative Party would like to express the greatest appreciation for this person—the Unknown Soldier of the South African Defence Force.

I want to assure the hon. member for Yeoville that as far as the Falkland issue is concerned we also support the principle of non-alignment.

The hon. member also referred to the question of immigrants. I should like to make my standpoint in this connection very clear. I agree with the hon. member for Yeoville to a certain extent. If someone comes to South Africa, has the necessary residential qualifications, is entitled to become a citizen but after a period of say five years, has not yet exercised his right to become a citizen, I do not think it can be taken amiss of the South African Government if it involves that person in military operations. As far as the question of dual citizenship is concerned, I want to tell the hon. member for Yeoville that this is an extremely sensitive issue which should perhaps be debated during the discussion of the Vote of the hon. the Minister of Internal Affairs.

I agree in principle with everything the hon. member for Pretoria West said and in particular with his statements about South Africa being the stabilizing factor in Southern Africa and about the realities of the day making the RSA increasingly important.

I should like to take this opportunity to state the general standpoint of the CP with regard to the South African Defence Force.

The CP agrees that the S.A. Defence Force should not become a commonplace political football and should not be misused to score meaningless points in debates either. The CP sees the South African Defence Force as a symbol of the RSA’s resistance to onslaughts on its established way of life and values. The CP is in favour of maximum co-operation between political parties and population groups in the RSA in order to establish a prepared and efficient Defence Force. The CP supports the S.A. Defence Force and assures the Government that in times of crisis it can depend on the wholehearted co-operation of the CP.

I should now like to make a few observations on the South African Defence Force and the political arena. It has become the fashion to keep the South African Defence Force outside the political arena. In other words, the South African Defence Force is not politicized. However, this concept causes certain practical problems, because there is uncertainty as to exactly what this means. I therefore ask the hon. the Minister, with all due respect, to give us his interpretation of this concept. My interpretation is that in the final analysis the South African Defence Force is a Government Department which must answer to Parliament for its actions. However, this statement must be seen in the light of the CP’s standpoint that the S.A. Defence Force must not become a political football. As a matter of fact, the CP would very much like to do everything in its power to give maximum co-operation with regard to matters affecting the South African Defence Force.

However, under normal circumstances it would be asking a great deal and would possibly even be naive to expect one’s political opponents to co-operate almost blindly with a Government Department. It would be an extraordinary political demand on the Opposition if the so-called non-politicizing of the South African Defence Force were to mean that there must be almost total confidence and co-operation between the Government and the opposition parties in handling the defence of the country, but as far as the defence of the fatherland is concerned we are in any case prepared to co-operate to the maximum with the Government. However, there are certain requirements—in my opinion reasonable requirements—with which such an extraordinary political request must comply.

The first requirement is proof of co-operation. Allow me to say in this regard that there are extremely encouraging signs of maximum co-operation between the hon. the Minister and members of the opposition. I am now referring to the situation when I was still a member of the NP caucus. We feel that the Government would prove its bona fides if it were to treat members of the CP in the same way as members of its own caucus—as far as defence matters are concerned. This simply means that the hon. the Minister must give the CP the assurance that members of the CP will be given the same information, communications and opportunities for military visits and the like, as its own caucus members have access to. As far as extremely sensitive and confidential matters are concerned, we feel it would be quite in order if only our leader is informed.

There is a further requirement for an ideal form of co-operation. This requirement is that politicians must trust the Government as far as the handling of the defence of the country is concerned. In this connection a problem could in fact arise. We hope it is not an insurmountable problem, but that will depend on the hon. the Minister. The hon. the Minister must place us in a position to trust him and the Government. I want to say immediately that the CP accepts the honesty, good word and good faith of the hon. the Minister. It should therefore not be difficult for the hon. the Minister to gain our confidence and our co-operation.

[Inaudible.]

Cannot the hon. member keep his mouth shut? As far as the aspect of confidentiality is concerned, however, the CP would like to mention certain practical problems to the hon. the Minister. The first negative factor concerns the constant rumours of a possible coup in the RSA by the Defence Force or the Government. [Interjections.] These rumours sometimes appear in the Press and then spread like wildfire through South Africa. Hon. members may laugh if they wish. The joke of the year has just tried to make an interjection here from the front benches. Voters are uneasy about this extremely sensitive matter. At a public meeting a specific question on this matter was even put to me. Allow me to make it clear at this stage that I do not think the Government would be so stupid as to plan a coup. [Interjections.] Is it your turn now, Marius?

We, as the CP, reject such rumours as unfounded. However, we cannot argue away the fact that these rumours could lead to a lack of confidence in the Government among the electorate. I am asking the hon. the Minister to react to this matter in detail.

The CP wants the unqualified assurance of the hon. the Minister that no coup is being considered by the Government or the S.A. Defence Force and that there is in fact no question of this happening. It is necessary that the hon. the Minister react to this. In this way a factor that has an adverse effect on the creating of confidence will be eliminated.

There is a further negative factor which you ruled sub judice at the beginning of this session this afternoon. This is another factor contributing to this lack of confidence.

The other negative factor I want to mention is the fact that in the past the S.A. Defence Force was manipulated by the Government. The integrity of the S.A. Defence Force may never again be assailed as it was under this Government. I am referring to a letter the hon. the Minister …

[Inaudible.]

Order!

Just give me a chance. I am referring to a letter the hon. the Minister wrote to Dr. Rhoodie on 4 July 1977.

That was prior to the 1977 concept.

The hon. the Minister was at that stage Chief of the S.A. Defence Force. His letter reads as follows and I am quoting from para. 11.408 of the English version of the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Alleged Irregularities in the former Department of Information—

The Judge then quotes from the letter of Gen. Malan, the present Minister—

This is what the hon. the Minister said—

This letter actually has two facets. The first facet reflects the fact that at that stage the Defence Force was being manipulated. The other facet of the letter contains the plain language of a soldier who says: Thus far and …

You are too stupid to understand it.

What did you say, Piet?

Order! The hon. member must continue his speech. I shall maintain order in the Committee.

The second aspect of the letter is the plain language of a soldier who says: Thus far and no further. I now ask the hon. the Minister: Do you stand by that undertaking and that spirit?

By way of summarizing the question of the non-politicizing of the Defence Force I want to say the following: If the hon. the Minister co-operates with the CP, as he mentioned in his own speech, and co-operates to restore confidence—which no longer exists to the extent to which it should—it is easy to gain the maximum co-operation of the CP as far as the affairs of the Defence Force are concerned, that is, if the hon. the Minister is interested in doing this. I should like to know whether the hon. the Minister and those hon. members are interested in gaining the co-operation of the CP as far as Defence Force matters are concerned.

There are also other aspects I should like to mention. The first is the total onslaught. I think it is necessary for the hon. the Minister to keep Parliament informed on this matter on a regular basis and also to furnish details of the total counter-strategy. It is necessary that the entire country be effectively involved in the total counter-strategy and that is why we desire guidance from the hon. the Minister in this connection, because the CP would like to offer its co-operation as far as the total counter-strategy is concerned. A question I have been asked is whether we do not over-react on the military level and under-react on other levels. A matter troubling me is the possibility that politicians could over-play the total onslaught, perhaps even for political gain. This will surely lead to a blunting of the appreciation of the real danger and will result in allegations that we are crying wolf. Politicians should handle the matter of the total onslaught with great care. Another aspect is information during crises. I find it disappointing that the hon. the Minister has not yet informed Parliament confidentially on the Falkland issue, but perhaps he has good reasons for not doing so.

Another question put to me by voters concerns the transportation of politicians in military vehicles for political purposes. I should appreciate it if the hon. the Minister would state his policy in this connection and would also say whether politicians make use of military vehicles for the political purposes of their specific political parties.

Another matter I have been asked to explain and on which I should like clarity concerns the creation of the fourth arm of the Defence Force, namely, the Medical Services. In the past we only had the Army, the Air Force and the Navy. If the hon. the Minister is interested he can motivate the establishment of the fourth arm of the Defence Force. I have spoken to many people who are dissatisfied about this. The possibility of a fifth or even a sixth component of the Defence Force has been mentioned. There is a rumour that the chaplain services—or other supportive services—may also become arms of the Defence Force. Personally I am not enthusiastic about this. As far as I am concerned the original division worked well enough and I see no reason why we should have more Defence Force arms.

[Inaudible.]

I think that hon. member should rather concern himself with his constituency, because he only had a majority of 467.

As far as staff matters are concerned, it has been reported to me that certain members of the S.A. Defence Force resigned because there were too many delays in their promotion. One example of this is that of a senior officer who resigned from the South African Defence Force and was then called in and offered a promotion, but did not accept it. I should like to know whether this problem has been overcome. I should also like to know whether the backlog that has built up in connection with the paying out of salaries and the issuing of medals has been eliminated.

As far as training is concerned, the functioning of citizen force and commando units still troubles me. When members meet regularly—for example once a week—there are still doubts as to whether they are being well utilized. I think it would serve a good purpose if two junior Permanent Force officers recruited from a specific unit, could be placed in each such unit possibly with a number of national servicemen as well. Under the command of the local commander they could see to it that there was continuity of planning and action.

I should like to refer to the discussions of Votes which take place every year and I want to ask whether we are not all speaking into a bottomless Hansard pit. Are we in fact achieving anything by making speeches here? Today, for example, it seemed to me as though there was very little interest in the standpoints of the CP or in the party’s co-operation. This will depend on the follow-up work that the hon. the Minister does. In the future the CP will take note of whether any follow-up work was done in this connection.

The CP wishes the hon. the Minister and the S.A. Defence Force an extremely successful year, with the slogan of the Seventh Infantry Division and General Webster— “Goya”.

Mr. Chairman, it is the normal practice in this Committee that when a new main speaker for a party is appointed or when a new party enters the debate, the senior speaker is congratulated and welcomed. In this good tradition I welcome the hon. member for Jeppe as the CP’s main speaker on Defence matters in this Committee which deals with this.

The hon. member started off with a few statements on which he would like the hon. the Minister to do follow-up work, as he put it. He started off with immigrants and citizenship which is obviously a very sensitive matter and I want to agree with the hon. member in this connection. The hon. member then went on to state the policy of the CP in the Committee and I think it is a good thing for the other parties and the Government to take cognizance of the policy of the CP in connection with the Defence Force. The hon. member claimed quite a lot for himself. He started off by saying that it would be a good thing for the hon. the Minister to realize that if he wanted the co-operation of those hon. members in this Committee, he must satisfy the following conditions. The first condition is that the members of that party—or the members of the Defence Committee of the party—must be treated like members of the caucus of the hon. the Minister. I think that one must expect certain demands and conditions from certain people, and I do not think that there is an hon. member on this side of this House who expected anything else. I do not think it came as a shock to us, but I want to tell the hon. member something: The hon. member is being a little presumptuous—not very presumptuous but a little—if he wants to break away from the party by walking out of the caucus and saying that he no longer wants to hear what we say in the caucus, but that he must be informed of this afterwards and that he must then be treated in exactly the same way. The hon. member must accept the fact that he is no longer on this side of the House.

I am very glad about that.

So are we. The hon. member is now on that side, between the PFP and the NRP. He must make himself comfortable there. He must now be at peace because it is unnecessary to become objectionable. The hon. member must now consult the Opposition and speak to his colleagues on either side of him. They will give him good advice, and perhaps the hon. member for Yeoville and the hon. member for Durban Point will look after him well.

The hon. member also said that the hon. the Minister should scotch certain rumours. He said that this rumour of coups should now come to an end. Mr. Chairman, you forbade us to talk about certain things, but I do not even want to mention coups. However, I want to ask the hon. member whether the cultural arm of the CP, the AWB, are actually the people who are pestering him about coups? The hon. member must tell me this because I find what the hon. member said here in jest today to be far-fetched. Who of us are thinking of a coup? I suspect that that hon. member and his leader thought they were involved in a hijack the morning they walked out. They also attempted a further hijack in the Transvaal. The hon. member should ignore all the coups slogans which are being bandied about. There was also the blunder of resorting to Connie Mulder politics here by reading from the report of Mr. Justice Erasmus. This is now clear to me because here in the Defence debates the way is being paved for a new leader for the CP. The man’s flag is already flying and I do not know what niche is going to be found for the former secretary, but he could probably become a liaison officer for the party. Before we know where we are he will be raising funds, but not in Jeppe.

I want to assure the hon. member that we are interested in everyone who is a friend of the Defence Force and is prepared to co-operate with the Defence Force unconditionally, and that we as friends of the Defence Force are interested in everyone who is not an underminer.

On more than one occasion the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Prime Minister have mentioned with appreciation the good work done by the women in the Defence Force. They have also made mention of the work of people of colour, particularly in Armscor’s factories and in the Navy. In spite of this there is an ever-increasing shortage of trained and particularly permanent staff in almost every sector of the Defence Force. We concede that there is probably a shortage of manpower throughout South Africa in certain sectors. However, this is beginning to assume drastic proportions in the Defence Force and it is a matter to which we shall have to give intensive attention. People forget that over the past 10 years the Defence Force has changed almost beyond recognition. Not only its composition has changed but also its size. We must remember that as a result of this we had to acquire far larger quantities of armaments and supplies. One of the problems we do not consider every day is that these things have to be controlled. Stocktaking must be done every year and there must be a report on these things. We should therefore not be surprised when errors creep in or when certain reports are not submitted or are not submitted on time because this sort of thing happens when a few senior permanent members have to make do with a great many junior staff members. I am referring to people who may have received six months of training, but by the time they can be used in a store or warehouse their two years of military service are over and they have to return to civilian life. I think it is essential for the security of South Africa that serious attention be given to the staff position.

I had a look at the material used in recruiting drives and I came across a few attractive brochures used for this purpose in the Defence Force. They are very professionally and neatly compiled. In all of them I found a few special conditions of service and I should like to refer to them briefly. The following is referred to: Security, ample opportunities for promotion, vacation and sick leave, an excellent pension scheme, uniform, free medical services, a medical continuation fund, sports facilities, a service bonus and a railway concession. The one thing I noticed is that there are no plane tickets to cocktail parties. That is out.

If all these benefits are so attractive why is it that we cannot attract the people. Is it merely a shortage of manpower or is there something else? I think there is; I think it is the salary. Do hon. members know what is the first benefit referred to in the brochure? I did not read it but it is a competitive salary. I have had a great deal to do with staff, etc., but what the term “competitive” means here, and, in fact, means in practice in the Defence Force, is beyond my comprehension. I am well aware that we only have a limited amount of money. As a matter of fact, all of us serving here on this Committee today are aware of this. This money has to be distributed. If one adds money at one specific place, one must deduct it from another sphere. However, I think the time has now come for the hon. the Minister and the Chief of the S A. Defence Force to consider not only the conditions of service and the structure but also the salary, in other words what these people will take home, because it is important. One brochure reads “from apprentice to artisan in the Permanent Force”. I think the time has now come for the Defence Force, as one of the largest employers of artisans and particularly of apprentices, mainly at Armscor, to move away from this archaic concept of “apprentice to artisan”. The time has been ripe for some time now for us to progress in the training sphere from apprentice to technician at the very least and to get away from the out-dated concept of “I am a goldsmith and this is my apprentice”. We must get away from this concept. I should be glad if we could give a little attention to this.

Mr. Chairman. I want to refer very briefly to matters raised by previous speakers and I shall begin with the hon. member for Jeppe. I welcome him as chief spokesman on Defence of his party. I do think, however, that it is a pity that he raised some of the matters which he did raise because when one speaks of military coups one creates a feeling among the public that they are a real possibility. I think we should know our Defence Force well enough to know that something like that is totally impossible. It is unthinkable, for they are not those kind of people. In any case, our Defence Force consists of members of all political parties and of members of all language groups, for it is a Defence Force composed of members of the whole nation. Therefore I think that an idea of that kind is not something which we ought to discuss in a debate or which needs to be taken seriously. As far as the manipulation of the Defence Force through the misuse of its funds is concerned—something we all know by now as a result of the Information scandal—it belongs to the past and I think that we should rather look to the future. The future holds enough problems without us having to look back to the past.

†I want to come to the first matter raised by the chief spokesman of the Official Opposition. He started by referring to a statement issued by his leader. I do not have the time nor do I wish to debate it in detail today. It is a statement on conscientious objection which accepts that there is a need in South Africa, and I quote—

It recommends the establishment of a statutory tribunal comprising representatives of the churches, the Defence Force and the judiciary, and I quote again—

If these people are found to be sincere and genuine they should then be able to do a longer period of service in a non-military capacity. This has been an issue on which there are differences of long standing in South Africa between political parties and, as the hon. member for Yeoville knows, within his own party. This seems to be in line with the decision taken by his own congress. However, that is a matter for him to sort out. I merely want to say that we in this party have never accepted the viewpoint that it is possible to judge the sincerity of an allegation that someone has a conscientious objection. If one belongs to a church one can prove your membership of that church. It is something that can be established.

Will you read the previous paragraph which you did not quote about religious conscientious objection?

Yes, I have read it all. I have read the whole statement.

You did not deal with the religious aspect. Read it out aloud.

No, Mr. Chairman, I do not have time, I have ten minutes and I do not know what the hon. member is getting at. The statement said that some individuals may fabricate problems of conscience in order to avoid …

Does it mention religious conscientious objectors?

Yes, it mentions religious conscientious objectors but it also mentions non-militarists.

You are very confused.

But, Mr. Chairman, …

If you read, you must read clearly.

Mr. Chairman, I will read—

The bodies serving on the tribunal I have named:

Yes, but the previous paragraph …

I continue—

This is the recommendation. What appeared previously was the argument:

It states that a way must be found to distinguish between religious conscientious objectors …

Order!

The hon. member had a full opportunity. It is his party’s statement, not mine.

Yes, but you are misquoting.

All I am saying is [Interjections] that is not true. It is absolutely untrue and that hon. member knows it. I have read the recommendation and all I want to say is that this party disagrees with the finding of that party. Let them fight about it. I do not want to fight with them. They have enough fighting in their own ranks. However, they must not accuse me of misquoting. [Interjections.] I have read the recommendation exactly but I have not read all the argument before it.

Order!

Mr. Chairman, I have already wasted enough time. I only wanted to establish our view clearly namely that we believe that religious affiliations of objectors can be established and can be proven and that the present Act provides for that.

That is what the statement says.

Order!

I want to say, as other hon. members have said that this has been …

[Inaudible.]

Order! I want to point out to the hon. member for Yeoville that he should not make running commentary. The hon. member may proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would very much like to. As other spokesmen have said this has been a proud year for the Defence Force and I want to congratulate them on some of their tremendously successful operations such as Protea, Daisy, Super, etc., which were carried out over the last year. I think all South Africans shared and reflected the pride of the country with those who were involved in them, particularly those of us who are associated with military affairs and particularly those of us who are concerned with Defence matters. The Forces have earned the admiration and respect of the peoples of South Africa and with the other speakers I want to record our appreciation and thanks to the leaders and the men, not only those who carried it out but those who planned and those who prepared the logistics for those operations. With others I also wish to say that this is also a time to remember the heart-break and grief of the families of those who have lost loved ones in the fight and the suffering of those who have been wounded and possibly disabled. Those of use who were there will think of the memorial service which was held for those lost on the SAS President Kruger. I was certainly deeply touched. When I read an article by the hon. member for Yeoville it touched me too. It was very well written and I want to congratulate him on it. I do not know whose wife he saw but I certainly saw my wife with tears running down her face on that occasion. I think that feeling of sharing grief is something very real to South Africans and this is the feeling amongst us when people are killed as they have been during this last week. One thinks of the families of all races who have been affected by that loss.

As far as our Forces are concerned, I believe we “owe them”. We owe them more than simply thanks and appreciation expressed in words and discussion of the threat and the sacrifice that it entails. This Vote is the occasion where we as political leaders can in a practical way do something to express our appreciation and that is to look for the unnecessary factors which make the task unnecessarily harder for those who serve in our forces and which cause resentment and difficulties. I make no apology, Mr. Chairman, for raising some of these matters again.

I want to acknowledge—and the hon. the Minister will be pleased to hear this—the major improvement in the pay chaos which we have suffered in recent times. The hon. Minister made a promise and I acknowledge that he has kept that promise. As far as I am concerned it has been a six year long fight since I first started fighting over pay and there has at last been a real reduction in the number of complaints.

Order! The hon. member’s time has expired.

Mr. Chairman, I merely rise to afford the hon. member the opportunity to complete his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. Whip for the opportunity to complete my speech.

†I am now referring to the real reduction in the number of complaints and not the reduction which was experienced when the men were warned off “not to write to that Vause Raw so-and-so or you will be in trouble”. There has been a reduction in the number of real complaints. I specially want to express appreciation to the officers in the hon. the Minister’s office and in the office of the Chief of the S.A. Defence Force who, in all cases I have taken up, immediately, quickly and efficiently found the answers and solved the problems which I raised. Let me say that there have been some lulus. Last month there was one case where a man had been trying since 1978 to get his pay and he was paid out finally on the 4th of March this year. In another case the person had to wait since November 1980 to December 1981 and was only paid out on the 19th of March this year. However, once these cases were brought to the attention of the office of the Chief of the S.A. Defence Force it was dealt with quickly and efficiently, the answer was obtained and the men were paid out. I want to pay tribute and to express appreciation for that. I mentioned only those two cases for this purpose: I think there is something wrong in the normal channels which exist for complaints. In the one case—and I am not going to quote from the letter—the complaint goes on for nearly two pages mentioning the people seen, written to, the dates on which phone calls were made, the fact that the parent involved drove all the way from Durban to Phalaborwa to try to sort things out and the telexes sent to Chief Pay. It was only when I finally took the matter up that it was solved. There must be something wrong in the normal channels for dealing with complaints. There is a section which deals with complaints but the queries are somehow not getting through to that section. They go to Chief Pay and they do not get through to the query section. The Chief of the SADF has the details of the one case of exactly who was seen, who was telephoned, who was written to, for example registered letters to Chief Pay and the fact that for nearly two years an answer could not be had. I think this has to be looked at and that that special action has to be taken to clear the channels of communication so that when there are complaints they get through to the section which is going to deal with it.

I also wish to express appreciation for the progress that has been made—I am now speaking specifically about the Durban area—with the establishment and equipping of unit headquarters. I believe that a unit headquarters is tremendously important, not only for efficient administration of a regiment, but for creating a regimental spirit and for building up the morale of a unit. Wherever I have seen units, which have suddenly, after scrounging around and sharing with other units, get their own headquarters, have their own messes and parade grounds, the spirit of those units has improved. I am very grateful that the view of the Department is to try to bring this about. I am very grateful for what has been done to try to establish a number of headquarters in Durban.

While I am expressing appreciation—I have no time to deal with it here—I also wish, on behalf of the New Republic Party, to express appreciation of Armscor for the growing self-sufficiency which we are achieving in relation to our weaponry in South Africa. Another thing which I have appreciated is the detailed written replies from the hon. the Minister on matters raised in the debate last year. It has been a very good public relations exercise and I just want to say that it does far more to disarm the Opposition when you get rid of its complaints and do something about them than it does to try to “neutralize the Opposition” or try to soften them up before the budget. I think a very good lesson has been learnt in this respect. Here I can, for example, refer to the question of public telephones. That was one of the slickest reactions I have seen to a matter raised in debate. Within a matter of months new telephones were being installed. I must say that I rather questioned the term used, namely that “the present situation is not unduly disquieting!” I do not like a thing to be “not unduly disquieting” because it means that it is disquieting. I prefer it to be “unsatisfactory”. There is therefore probably still some room for improvement there.

Another matter which I do not think has been satisfactorily cleared up, is the question of equipment control and stock control, but I do not want to deal with that again because it is an involved matter. However, I do think that although steps have been taken—I appreciate all these steps that have been taken—I do think that there is still room for improvement in the field of control over equipment and stores. The problem is far from solved and we have to give that matter more attention.

There has been a great deal of talk about manpower requirements, a matter which is now before a Select Committee so that I can obviously not deal with it in this debate. However, I believe that another in-depth investigation is required, namely into manpower utilization. The hon. member for Umhlanga is going to deal with this and I am not going to go into detail save to say that there is nothing worse for morale, nothing more damaging to a force, than a feeling by men that they are wasting their time, the “stompie” collecting syndrome. In operations there is obviously a tremendous amount of waiting for things to happen. I am thus not talking about actual operations in the field, but of base camps where people are taken out of their businesses and homes for thirty days and where it is essential that they be fully occupied. The feeling of being there and not being properly used is, I believe, very dangerous. I want to quote from just one matter which I have been dealing with, namely that of using air instead of rail travel. I noticed particularly one sentence used in calculating the comparable financial cost. The difference of costing one day away from base or four days away omitted the pay of the officer or man concerned. It was stated frankly that he would have to be paid anyway and that the difference, therefore, does not matter. I think this is the wrong attitude, because it treats a man as a cypher. It is not a question of having to pay him anyway, but a question of that man not making any contribution for four days. He is not doing his normal job, he is not making a positive contribution. It indicates that you think of him not as a productive unit, but simply as a unit who has to be paid. I think it is the wrong attitude to regard people merely as units. You need a number of units and you make provision for them. I think you have to look at the productivity and utilization of those units and get the maximum out of them. I am convinced that we could save a great deal of the need for manpower by simply better utilizing the manpower we have.

Mr. Chairman, I have very little time to deal with the other matters. As regards apprentices I think that the question of employers applying for deferment without the consent of the member is wrong. I hope the hon. the Minister can tell us something about the new air and rail concessions, because it was a shambles at Easter. I am worried about the responsibility which has been placed on Defence Force unit commanders to make the bookings and all the arrangements in that respect. It certainly did not work over Easter. I hope the hon. the Minister can tell us that it is now sorted out and how it has been sorted out. I hope that I will later in the debate be able to return to some other matters which I would like to raise as well.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Point always has a very positive approach to this debate and we on this side of the House wish to express appreciation for his contribution. I am sure that the hon. the Minister will reply in full to the various matters which he raised.

I find myself in a bit of a fix today. I should like to comment further on points raised by the hon. member for Jeppe, but I have such a fine subject to talk about that I do not even know whether I should first use my sling and five stones against that large Philistine opposite. However, I think that I should rather talk about the subject, the chaplain service of the South African Defence Force.

In my hand I have a small Bible, the same as the one which each serviceman on the border receives. 50 000 of these little gems are distributed annually. There is a short message from the hon. the Prime Minister as a foreword in each Bible. Everyone has a copy in his pocket when he goes to fight for our country on the border. I should like to read the first sentence of this message—

The last sentence of the message reads—

I believe that this sentence speaks to all our sons and men on the border. Those men of ours, as soldiers in the field, have the power of a Christian. After all, a Christian is not a weakling. However, these people are in need of a deeper sense of caring. I recall that on occasion, a young man who was with my son on the border was visiting us. They were home on seven days’ humanitarian leave. When he returned to his people on the Rand, my wife drove him a little way out along the road so that he could get a lift. He then asked her: “Please, when you pray for your son, pray for me too, because I do not have a mother.” The needs of our men are epitomized in these words.

The hon. member for Durban Point referred to the tragedy of the frigate, the President Kruger. One of the men involved in that tragedy was a chaplain. He was able to encourage his shipmates in those circumstances. This three-fold combination of the serviceman, his Bible and his weapon, forms the front-line of civilization, of the continued existence of Christianity, freedom of religion and freedom of worship in this country.

Despite the objections of the World Council of Churches and the South African Council of Churches, despite their financial contributions to Swapo and regardless of the conscientious objection of others, a Christian has a duty and a noble task to retain that enveloping cocoon of security so that his church may exist freely, so that he, his church and his people may live in freedom to worship in freedom.

I just wish to say in passing that if Bishop Tutu, Secretary of the South African Council of Churches, according to his assertion, represents the Black churches, then there are other church leaders such as Bishop Makoena of another church group, Rica, who have produced indisputable proof that they are the leaders of a greater number of Black people, of 5 million over the age of 15 years who are members of their denominations. There are the Zionists of Bishop Lekgenyane of Pietersburg who themselves number 2 million people. These are not warlike people, but they understand the struggle of our men on the border. They understand that we have to go and fight. They are not opposed to members of their population group going to the front to fight for Christianity.

Let us consider a few other aspects of the chaplain services. Since 1979, the numerical strength has been increased to 1 359 chaplains in the service of the Permanent Force, the Citizen Force and the Commandos. They represent 107 churches and religions. To sketch the full picture—one is pleased to be able to say this—I must point out that there are two full-time Coloured chaplains who do border service together with their men. There are also two full-time Black chaplains. There are 20 Coloured and Black chaplains who do part-time service. There are also three Indian chaplains who do service among the members of that community in our Defence Force.

When one looks at the budgets of the various departments, one notices that this department is the only one which makes specific provision in its budget, in programme 7 in fact, for a section such as a chaplain service. I wish to thank the hon. the Minister for the fact that the appropriation for the chaplain service has been increased from R3,3 to R3,4 million. However, I do think that the increase could have been a little more.

Apart from the service which the chaplains perform, I can also furnish the following interesting statistic. During the past five years, Bibles in 14 different languages have been distributed on the border and in the operational area. Since our involvement in the operational area and Angola, more Bibles have been distributed in Angola than in the preceding century by all church denominations. If we take cognizance of this, we become aware that it is once again a small group of men who are spreading the word and the light to areas where they may bear fruit, where the word may be read and where the spreading of the word is so essential.

This Committee must thank the Defence Force and its chaplain services for conveying the word to people who find themselves in darkness, for bringing the word to the hearts of our young men. It is striking that these chaplains themselves go about in the frontlines among our men. They make the S.A. Defence Force a force pledged to the Word of God, a force which does not fight as heathens, but is a force fighting for lasting and eternal values.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to differ at all with the contribution of the previous speaker, the hon. member for Standerton, but I think it is necessary to remind that hon. member—I do so in a good spirit—that we do not only have young Christians fighting on the borders of South Africa. We have, I should imagine, Moslems, probably Hindus and Jewish young people as well and they are all there together with the one common denominator, namely they are fighting for South Africa. Perhaps that is the one aspect of the hon. member’s speech which I missed and which he could perhaps have dealt with.

I want to talk about something else today, namely the activities over the last few days in the vicinity of Tsumeb. I believe that some of the advantages of the commando system have been well demonstrated in that area. I believe that we have a well-disciplined, well-organized and well-motivated commando system, which had it not been for their presence and deployment could have resulted in the situation there being much worse than it is today.

To take the matter slightly further, I want to say that the fact that the commando there is fully representative of all the people who live in that area, in other words, the fact that the commando is fully multiracial, has, I believe, contributed largely to its success. It is against that background that I thought that I would like to spend my time today in discussion of the commando system and to see whether in this debate we cannot come to some kind of understanding as to what the true role of the commando units will be in future.

I believe that the truth is that the commando system, with a few exceptions, has not worked well up to now and I believe the failure can be largely ascribed to perhaps the hon. the Minister’s lack of direction and the lack of direction that came from his Department. When one looks at the White Paper on page 13, the following is stated in paragraph 78—

The point is that not only is there and has there been a shortage of human material, but far more important as the White Paper puts it, the number of volunteers has actually decreased considerably and the manpower element can no longer be guaranteed. In other words, the White Paper says that we cannot rely on those who are members of a commando to reply when duty calls. Only last Sunday the Chief of the Defence Force, when he discussed this over television, gave us two examples of the kind of shortages which we have to cope with. At Thabazimbi, if I remember correctly, only something like three per cent of the total available manpower are part of the commando and in the Soutpansberg area it is only something like ten per cent. This is therefore a real problem.

I believe that the statement that people cannot be relied upon to do their duty is a terrible indictment directed at the South African volunteer by whoever was responsible for this document. Perhaps that was not the intention, but that is how it reads. It would have been far better if rather than having left the criticism hanging in the air the hon. the Minister would have tried to analyse the situation and would have given the readers of this document reasons for the decrease in the number of volunteers. As I said earlier, I believe the problem can be found in the Minister’s Department rather than with the public.

Until recently the public has not been told in uncomplicated language just what the function of an urban commando is or what the function of a rural commando really is. In this regard the interview over SATV by Gen. Viljoen should be welcomed and I want to congratulate him on his performance that evening. I believe that the interview has helped considerably to put the question which I raised into a better perspective. However, I ask the question: Why is it only now that legislation is brought before Parliament that the most senior member of the Defence Force has found it necessary to explain in detail what the functions of commandos would be. In the meantime there was, of course, all the anxiety that flowed from the publication of this legislation. If the whole matter of commando service had been handled properly it may not even have been necessary to pass legislation in this regard. If the matter had been handled correctly over the years the number of volunteers who would have in fact stayed and made their contribution would have been considerably larger.

How would you handle that?

Allow me to give some examples of my own experience as a member of a commando. Some few years ago I also, together with a few of my neighbours and fellow farmers, joined a commando in Paarl on the understanding that our operation would be that of an area-bound one and that to a large extent we would be called upon to assist the elements of law and order in the area. That was our understanding of the job which was offered us. On that understanding something like 80%—I wish I had the accurate figure—of the farmers in the Muldersvlei/Klapmuts/Agter-Paarl area joined the local commando. Having done so, within a very short time, the greater percentage of those farmers soon lost interest. In that respect, I think that the reasons for them having lost interest were quite simple. The South African Defence Force and the officers in charge at that time, I believe, did not know truly what their prime function was and what the commando was really supposed to do. They did not clearly know what the role of the commando was and therefore ended up by playing a game of soldiers— “left right, left right.”

I want to tell the Committee what happened. At great expense in terms of time, because time is of value to people, all those farmers and the few businessmen who made themselves available were issued with complete and expensive uniforms. We were all brought to the Castle and spent a lot of time there going through the whole rigmarole. Then, again at great expense in time, the uniforms were donned by those members and people between the age of nineteen and some as old as sixty were marched relentlessly up and down some dismal training ground. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the latest events in South West Africa have shown that the Kremlin’s whip has once again cracked loudly to provide Swapo with the impetus it needs to expand its military activities in South West Africa. Of course, Swapo has to convince Russia that it is capable of conquering South West Africa. Sam Nujoma has claimed that he has bases within the borders of South West Africa. The latest effort at infiltration is of course, a propaganda move, since he has to prove to the world that Swapo terrorists are capable of infiltrating deep into South West Africa. That is why the farms of Whites are being attacked in an effort to drive them out. At the beginning of the week, six terrorists were shot dead ten kilometres from Tsumeb.

Until now, Swapo has mainly been active in Ovambo, but it is quite clear that they are doing the groundwork, that they are trying to intimidate the other inhabitants of South West Africa. These increased attempts at intimidation are therefore the precursors to a possible election in South West Africa. While the RSA is in the process of seeking a peaceful solution for South West Africa, Swapo is stepping up its activities, and intimidation and violence continue. It is a fact that Swapo terrorists are given orders from communist headquarters which are aimed at intimidating the people of South West Africa and to subjecting them to that power which emerges from the barrel of a gun. The setbacks which Swapo suffers time and again at the hands of the South African Defence Force, are avenged in a cruel way on the civilian population of South West Africa. This organization, which enters into negotiations in the international conference halls with much pomp and ceremony, supposedly in order to reach a peaceful settlement, merrily continues with its atrocities in South West Africa. Since the beginning of last year, 166 members of the South West African population have been murdered in cold blood. Terrorists in civilian clothing, sometimes even in the uniform of the S.A. Defence Force, seek out people in authority and local leaders with the intention of murdering them. They hope to gain control over the population of South West Africa through attempts at intimidation. In the process, kraals are burnt down, personal property is stolen and abductions take place on a large scale among the Ovambos. Youths are abducted to be trained as terrorists. Often traditional leaders are abducted, thereby removing their moderating influence from society and leaving behind an uncertain and frightened group, without a leader, whose resistance is sometimes lowered. As a result, a power crisis situation could develop in such a community. Swapo is continually focusing attention on its presence by abducting people from every community, who even become associated with Swapo at a later stage. Therefore Swapo has succeeded in attaining a reasonable level of psychological warfare under their Marxist mentors. More and more communist propaganda material is being distributed among the civilian population, especially now. Children are being adbucted, and mothers wait in vain for their return. The atrocities perpetrated by Swapo are far more than the physical pain and sorrow, for Swapo is committing genocide in Ovambo. However, these things are not mentioned in the highest international council chambers. Evidence concerning these atrocities which was recently given, inter alia, by ex-members of Swapo before a Senate Committee in the USA, took place without being covered in any way by the foreign media. The foreign media took no notice of this, for it was after all South West Africa and South Africa that were in issue. There was a deafening silence from the United Nations Council for Namibia. Perhaps the Council was at that stage planning the next smear campaign against the South African Defence Force. It has already made a number of attempts to try and portray the South African Defence Force as the monster which perpetrates atrocities in Ovambo.

Another reprehensible method used by Swapo is the laying of landmines along the roads in Ovambo. They cannot get at the military vehicles that travel those roads because they are immune to landmines. Since January last year, 85 civilians have been killed and more than 200 seriously injured. Swapo is therefore concentrating on the civilians.

Furthermore, Swapo is aiming at sabotaging the infrastructure of South West Africa. Water pipelines, power lines and so on are being destroyed. But this, too, is to no avail, since the security forces have the ability to cope with these attacks. Who is suffering as a result of these activities? Only the local population. Swapo is unwilling to engage the South African Defence Force and the South West African territorial force, or the Police Force. Operations such as Protea and Super dealt them a crippling blow. Swapo acts in this way towards the civilian population because it wishes to create a fear psychosis.

The South West issue is not as simple as people try to imply. We are not engaged here in a mere regional campaign; we are engaged in a fight against Russian expansionism. It would be foolish to reason that the Orange River would be a better border than the Kunene. We have already experienced too many elections in Africa where the barrel of a gun has dictated the choice on the ballot paper. That is why the South African Defence Force will perform its task in South West Africa and elsewhere as long as it is in the interests of the Republic of South Africa and as long as it is in the interests of the people of South West Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for De Aar made a very solid contribution, as we have come to expect of him.

In his preface to the White Paper on Defence and Armaments Supply, the hon. the Minister says the following, and I quote—

Without the slightest doubt this is the profoundest wish and endeavour of every patriot, and it is for us to make a contribution towards building up that preparedness of the South African Defence Force and helping to strengthen it so that the Republic may continue to be a haven of safety for its inhabitants and may continue to be a stronghold and a bastion of Christian civilization.

As I also said during the discussion of the Defence Amendment Bill in the House of Assembly, the hon. the Minister must not have the slightest doubt as to where he stands with the Conservative Party in this regard. He need not look over his shoulder. We shall be there. However, I fear that the same cannot be said of the Progressive Party. The hon. the Minister may still be reasonably certain of a considerable degree of support from the hon. member for Yeoville, but where does he stand with the hon. members for Pinelands, Sandton and Constantia, that leftist wing of the PFP?

The hon. member for Constantia must tell us where he stands.

For example, we have had the experience that an hon. member opposite made negative and derogatory statements during that unforgettable visit to the border after operation Protea. Where does this country stand with them? Can the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, for example, stand up here and unreservedly give his party’s wholehearted support to the South African Defence Force? I do not believe he can do so.

Having said that, I also wish to say to the hon. the Minister that if we express criticism on occasion, the aim will be constructive. If we ask penetrating questions, they will probably concern difficulties which have been brought to our attention by our electorate and which we should like to pass on to the hon. the Minister in the best interests of the South African Defence Force.

Particularly since we are now striving to do justice to the idea of a people’s defence force, we shall have to keep our ears to the ground in order to be aware of and interpret the finer nuances of the national will. It is only then that we shall succeed in building up the Defence Force out of the people for the people.

It is true that we shall have to build up the South African Defence Force out of all the peoples of South Africa to an increasing extent. That is something we cannot escape. We realize that. One realizes it only too well. The Whites will not be able to bear this burden in perpetuity. That is true. However, it is also true that the practical implementation of this will have to be in accordance with Government policy, without promoting integration. This is just where our problem sometimes lies. Our problem lies with our national servicemen who come back and say that the policy of the South African Defence Force is a policy of integration. I myself have had that experience. They tell one these things. I can assure the hon. the Minister that these are not stories. I experienced this with my own eyes and ears during the 1981 election.

I do not know whether there is a corps of officers in the Defence Force that has been so enchanted by the fashionable slogans of reform and change and mixing that they perhaps think that this is now the policy of the Government. During the election campaign last year I stated the Government’s policy as follows, and I just wish to make sure whether this is still what it is: The policy of the South African Defence Force as regards people of colour, including the utilization of people of colour in the commandos of the South African Defence Force, is in accordance with Government policy, without promoting integration. The existing infrastructure in the South African Defence Force and in the Army in particular, is for the most part based on dealing with Whites and people of colour as separate national groups, and grouping them together is avoided where practicable. However, where separate training for the various population groups is impossible due to numerical strength, operational requirements, shortage of instructors and the lack of adequate facilities, the people of colour may be trained and utilized together with Whites at existing institutions. Nevertheless these cases occur by way of exception. It is declared policy that an effort is being made to make training facilities available for the various population groups. I just wish to determine whether this is still the policy. It ought to be so. I can assure the hon. the Minister that this is the feeling of the vast majority of our voters in this country. Let us be jointly responsible for the defence of this country, but not on a mixed basis. [Interjections.] Joint responsibility, that is not joint decision-making.

This brings me to the organization of the most important Defence Force element, namely our commandos, which will undoubtedly undergo the most wide-ranging transformation after the implementation of the new Defence Amendment Act. Since the broad population will become involved and as many as ten times the number of people, including other population groups, will necessarily become involved, all I want is a clear indication from the hon. the Minister. I know my people, and I take the liberty of giving the hon. the Minister certain guidelines concerning what would and would not be acceptable to them.

A commando develops into a closely-knit unit. A degree of pride and cameraderie which in my opinion is only possible among members of the same population group, develops. We cannot get away from that.

[Inaudible.]

Just give me a chance. That hon. member can state his case in a moment. They develop that team spirit, that feeling of belonging. One simply cannot get away from that. In other words, in my opinion, people of various population groups ought not to become members of the same unit, with its distinctive insignia and shoulder flashes. A separate unit alongside the existing one ought therefore to be established. Training and utilization should therefore take place on a separate basis which therefore makes it totally unnecessary, in general, for mixed social intercourse, for example, to take place. The leadership element, such as section leaders and platoon leaders are prepared to carry out the necessary training until these other peoples have people who can take over.

The second aspect I wish to touch on is the degree of representation which this part time force will have in the top policy-making body of the South African Defence Force. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he would not consider giving representation fo the part-time forces in the Defence Force Staff Council. There is a feeling among these part-time forces that they are not represented in the very highest command structure of the Defence Force, in other words, that their message, their difficulties and things that trouble them, are not properly aired at the highest level of the Defence Force where policy is in fact determined.

In the third instance, just before my time expires I wish to make an appeal for greater involvement of White women in the South African Defence Force. According to the White Paper before us, the expansion of the Permanent Force is being concentrated on the short-term while in the medium and long-term there is planning for a greater intake of female recruits for national service. I appreciate this, but I ask that this greater involvement of the mothers and daughters of our people should not be delayed for too long. Traditionally they have contributed their share, together with their men, in the struggle for the freedom of this country. This tremendous resource of womanpower that we have among our people must not be underestimated. We can use it in the best interests of the Defence Force and in the best interests of the defence of South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am not going to react to the speech by the hon. member for Pietersburg. The hon. the Minister will answer his questions.

Mr. Chairman, I want to refer to the Chinese philosopher Mao Tse Tung, a leader who said that nowadays there is no difference between war and peace. Formerly there was a specific battlefield, a conventional struggle was waged and peace was concluded. Nowadays, however, every person is a battlefield and every individual is engaged in a personal war. Eighty per cent of the threat is directed at the hearts and minds of people. Not just the soldier, but the entire Southern African population is involved. Accordingly, the onslaught is not limited to our borders, but is also, and in particular, waged on our homefront and in every imaginable sphere. In a subtle way the sowing of suspicion, lies, drugs, the Yellow Press—in other words, Satan in all his forms—are utilized by the powers of chaos to attack and undermine the youth, women, the family, the leaders in our political institutions and the church and its leaders on every imaginable front. This is the nature of the struggle being fought against our people in its totality.

These facts are made clear to us in several ways. In the first instance, they are made very clear in the White Paper on Defence and Armaments Supply for 1982, as made available to us by the hon. the Minister. The Commission of Inquiry into Reporting on Security Matters regarding the South African Defence Force and the South African Police Force also indicates very clearly to what extent that struggle is being fought against us. Moreover, it is also very clear from the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Press, RP 89-’81, and from the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Security Legislation, the Rabie Report, RP 90-’81. In addition, that definite image, which we must resist, has also been clear from recent events on the borders of our country and within South West Africa, and from time to time by way of the terrorist incidents within South Africa. The attitudes of some of the leaders of our frontline states and unambiguous statements they have made in this regard recently are also significant and indicate to what extent this total struggle is being fought against us. As the hon. the Minister indicated recently, the fact that terrorist activities increased by 200% during the first half of 1981 compared with the last half of 1980, provides further evidence of the gravity of this matter. The fact that between March 1981 and the beginning of 1982, Swapo and our neighbouring states have acquired armaments to the value of R11 250 million indicates to us the vast scale of their armaments effort. If we compare that figure with our present defence budget, and note that with our present defence budget we also have to pay for salaries, maintenance, expansion of facilities for training and several other essentials, the gravity of the situation for us and our population is evident.

In the light of all these facts and the result of expert appreciation of intelligence, it is necessary that we increase our level of strength. I do not think there ought to be any doubt among our people on this score. Although a responsible Government does not wish to cause panic among the public, nor ought it to, it is necessary that the population of the RSA should have a balanced appreciation of the danger and that this be instilled in them. At the same time it is necessary that the enemies of the Republic be made fully aware that South Africa is aware of the nature and also the extent of that threat and that we shall take timely and adequate precautions to counter the threat, by so doing maintaining the stability, economic and otherwise, of the Republic of South Africa and ensuring the security and peace of mind of its inhabitants.

The facts as spelt out by the hon. the Minister and by previous speakers in this debate emphasize that absolute optimum preparedness which is required not only from our Defence Force but also from every section of our national economy.

I should like to refer briefly to the growing role played by women in the present-day sustained total war. In the first instance, the women of our nation must realize that as long as they stand by and encourage the men in our Defence Force the men will perform their task with vigour and enthusiasm. It is the women and daughters of our nation that motivate the men to go forward and persist even beyond those high peaks we have already achieved. The task of the women, in the second instance, as educators and protectors of our children, since they are exposed to these things at every level of life, is more essential now than ever before and is of incalculable magnitude. To a large extent it is the women who, in the hurried and demanding life of today, instil the message of the gospel in the child of South Africa. Since there is a danger that a war such as the present one will make the general public war-weary and depressed, it is important that the women encourage the men and the boys and one another not to give in, either now or in the coining months or years, to that pressure on our freedom, but to fight for it. We may not become involved in settlements in South West or elsewhere on the basis that we are compelled to do so at the political level because we have become war-weary.

Apart from the above-mentioned cases, women are in addition already playing a very important role in our Permanent Force and in our Citizen Force as volunteers. In this regard the hon. the Minister states on page 12, paragraph 73, of the White Paper that efforts in the short term will be directed mainly at expanding the Permanent Force, and that in the medium term it is also envisaged to increase the intake of female recruits for voluntary national service. However, there can be no large-scale increase in the number of female recruits for national service before the Permanent Force has been expanded to such an extent that greater numbers may be dealt with. The military training for Permanent Force women in the South African Army was transferred at the beginning of this year to the staff service school at Voortrekkerhoogte. Initially the training of women was carried out at the South African Army College at George, and the transfer was effected because an increasing number of women are being utilized in the South African Army and because more accommodation facilities are available for women in the Pretoria region. This also causes less disruption for women who want to follow a career in the South African Army. Accordingly, the South African Army’s Women’s College at George will in future be able to enrol and train a larger number of Citizen Force volunteers. It is indicated in the April issue of Paratus that there are still several vacancies for volunteers at the Women’s College at George for the July intake this year. In this regard, too, our women can make a further contribution.

The policy of the Defence Force is that women in uniform will be utilized as a manpower resource on a maximum basis and will not merely be regarded as an auxiliary group. This is being done with due regard to the special nature of women and their limitations due to family and marriage obligations and physical capacities. Col. Coetzee, the commanding officer of the women’s training wing, was recently transferred to the staff service school, and in this regard she says that because women apply voluntarily, the quality of women in uniform is at present very high and there are no disciplinary or other problems. There is also a very stringent selection process. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have to begin by saying that I was shocked and disgusted by the speech made by the hon. member for Pietersburg a moment ago. I would say that his racist remarks if given wide publicity would be enough to turn thousands of young South Africans of all races into conscientious objectors instantaneously. That hon. member has the nerve to call himself a “vaderlander” and to question the patriotism of members on this side. I have nothing but contempt for his brand of patriotism. The fact that the hon. member for Roodeplaat did not immediately repudiate him, I think, raises questions about his attitude, too.

Your attitude also leaves much to be desired.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to touch in this debate on a number of rather sensitive matters. I should like to begin by discussing very briefly the question of English in the Defence Force. I have had a number of disturbing complaints emanating from young English speaking South Africans who have served and are serving in the Defence Force and who claim that they do not always receive fair and even-handed treatment while serving. I regret to raise this matter because it is a sensitive matter, but there are cases that have come to my attention and I think I would be failing in my duty if I did not raise them. I believe that although there are genuine cases—I applaud them—of members of the force and units who make an effort in this regard, there are unfortunately instances which are to the contrary.

The general complaint divides into four categories of complaint. The first is that English is severely under-used on a number of occasions. Although I believe it is official policy to have alternate days for the two languages and to have documents in both languages, there are many instances where the actual usage appears to be overwhelmingly unfavourable. I just raise it to get reassurance from the hon. the Minister that this matter is monitored and, if so, how and with what results.

The second matter is that young English servicemen complain that they are routinely subjected to abusive names such as “rooinek’’ and “soutie” and others which are not printable. [Interjections.] Unfortunately, the line between jest and abuse is a fine one, as hon. members will appreciate, if one starts using names like “rock”. I believe it should be official policy that such epithets be prohibited.

The third matter—this is a very serious one—is that the patriotism of English speaking South Africans, particularly those who are opposition-minded, is reflected upon in a number of direct and indirect ways. This comes back to the PFP. I am going to refer just now to an article which I found in the magazine Paratus, the official periodical of the Defence Force. We have had this type of complaint for a very long time. In the last election we had pleas from national servicemen in some of our constituencies not to send them postal votes with any Progressive Federal Party markings on the envelopes because they would get into trouble or be embarrassed in their units. This is a serious matter. [Interjections.]

[Inaudible.]

I could go on quoting examples for a long time, and the hon. the Minister of Law and Order should also look to his own department. Another aspect is the question of promotion. Let me again ask the hon. the Minister to assure the English-speaking members of the Defence Force that there is no question of unfairness. It is terribly important that one does not create any suspicion, that one does not give any grounds whatever for suspecting that there is any kind of language discrimination. I think that when this kind of feeling crops up, one has to meet it with hard facts so that it can be laid to rest. It is vital for the overall morale and effectiveness of the forces that this should be so. Certainly the Afrikaans-speaking members of Parliament will know the importance of evenhandedness and fairness in this regard.

This brings me to the next question, a controversial matter that I raised last year in this debate and which I want to raise again. I am referring to the question of the importance of a politically neutral Defence Force. Hon. members know my party’s attitude about the Defence Force being a shield, but we have said that our support for the shield concept depends upon the political neutrality of the Defence Force. We have said that we would be on the look-out for any transgressions that might indicate a lack of political neutrality in the Defence Force and that we would come down on every small transgression to avoid large transgressions taking root.

I want to mention some that have arisen since the last session of Parliament. The first we heard about was the Ohatla Combat School being renamed the P. W. Botha Combat School.

What is wrong with that?

There is a lot wrong with it. There is a lot wrong with taking the name of an active, serving politician who is in the firing line, in the heat of public controversy. It could possibly be offensive to those members of the Defence Force who do not support the views of that particular politician. By definition a party-politician has a sectional appeal. [Interjections.] It is therefore wrong to give offence to those members who do not agree with the man, who may have very strongly opposing views to his. [Interjections.] The answer to a question I tabled in Parliament last year indicates that there is only one other example in the Defence Force of a presently serving politician having a Defence Force institution named after him. I am referring, of course, to the S.A.S. P. W. Botha, a name which was bestowed in July 1980. Here we therefore have a case of the same person being honoured twice. I think it is a terribly bad precedent that any serving politician should be recognized in this way by the Defence Force. [Interjections.] I therefore appeal to the Defence Force to reconsider this question. No matter how well-intentioned it might be, it is an unwise precedent. It is not too late to go on referring to the battle school by its original name. By all means let us recognize people who have served in politics with distinction in the past, but not in the present.

I should now like to mention another example, and here I refer hon. members to this issue of Paratus that I have here. It is an issue that I picked up at random. It is, in fact, the latest issue of April 1982. In this publication I find an article on an organization called COSAWR. I totally dissociate myself from this organization and have nothing whatsoever to do with it. In the article, under a section headed “True Enemies”, there is the following phrase—

Further on … [Interjections.] … is the phrase—

[Interjections.] I regard that choice of words in an official publication of the Defence Force as a blatant use of what Senator Moynihan in the United States called “weazel words” for sinister propaganda purposes. What does a young Progressive serviceman think when he reads an article like that?

Persecution complex, my boy.

What he reads is that there is some sort of connection between Progressive Whites and true enemies. [Interjections.] I think it is a scandalous and quite unacceptable use of words … [Interjections.] … and I think that the only way that this can be corrected would be to have an article correcting the situation in this publication. [Interjections.]

Then you shall have to dissociate yourselves from those people.

Another example is an interview, on a wide range of matters— mostly matters of military assessment—on 15 January in the Financial Mail by the present head of the Defence Force. One obviously has no objection to a discussion of matters of military assessment, but unfortunately the person concerned strayed into the political arena, a most unfortunate occurrence. There were comments such as the following—

I am not alone in criticizing this matter. The Cape Times, for example, wrote an extensive editorial entitled “Not a soldier’s job”. There are large sectors of the public who take a diametrically opposed view to that which advocates that the hon. the Prime Minister’s initiatives can work and are going to bring peace in this country. [Interjections.] What do people serving in the Defence Force think when they see the head of the Defence Force appearing, in a comment such as that, to align himself with a particular party’s point of view.

There is a further example in that very same interview. I am referring to the statement that Russian expansionism is a bigger problem than Black nationalism. This is a highly contentious statement. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the attitude displayed by the hon. member for Constantia does not surprise me or any other hon. members of this Committee. Those of us who went with that hon. gentleman to the border will be aware of his deep concern for the Swapo terrorists as evidenced by his attitude to the poster that was displayed in one of the Army messes. In our presence he was heard to object strongly to a Swapo terrorist being depicted as a particularly ferocious kind of terrorist on the poster. He wondered whether that was not promoting racial ill-will!

You are putting words in my mouth.

His attitude is not, however, unfamiliar to us.

Use your own words.

That is not all, however, because I think the hon. member is also on record as having said, in another Place, that he would be reluctant to have his children or his friends’ children go to the border to defend the South African society. [Interjections.]

That is right, but I did not use those words.

This brings me to his specific complaints today …

I said apartheid, not the South African society. If you are going to quote me, quote me correctly.

He says that English is under-utilized in the Defence Force. If that is so, the remedy is quite easy. His remedy would be to go to the hon. the Minister of Defence, or to the commander of the particular unit, and make proper representations. To bring forward this sort of accusation across the floor of this Chamber, however, is to do the South African Defence Force no good at all. [Interjections.]

The fact that you are speaking in this debate is doing the Defence Force no good at all.

This brings me to the insinuation about there being bias as far as promotions are concerned. There has been greater South African unity in the South African Defence Force during the last five or six years than there has ever been in the history of South Africa.

Very, very true.

I think that any members who are closely associated with any arm of the Defence Force would be able to testify to the fact that there is no discrimination between English-speaking and Afrikaans-speaking people in the Defence Force. Indeed, there is a better spirit of unity than ever before. [Interjections.]

As to the use of abusive names I would like the hon. member for Constantia to get up and make his voice heard on the campuses of the University of Cape Town, the University of the Witwatersrand, Natal University and Rhodes University about the language used to describe Afrikaans-speaking South Africans and also, the tone of columns in the newspapers he so slavishly follows. These descriptions are just as deplorable as are any of the descriptions of English-speaking South Africans to which he referred.

We deplore them both. You did not listen to me.

Let me just say that the patriotism of the average English speaking South African is above any form of suspicion, but if there is ever any reflection on the patriotism of English-speaking South Africans, it is due entirely to the activities, actions and speeches of hon. members opposite and the newspapers that support them. [Interjections.]

Back to normal, back to normal!

I now wish to refer to a very tragic event, and that is the loss of the President Kruger. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister if he would use an appropriate occasion to make a statement on the commission of inquiry, but I also want to say something this afternoon about my own experience in connection with the loss of that ship and the action taken by the Navy following the loss of that ship.

Like most other members of Parliament, I think, I heard that the President Kruger had gone down at about 9 o’clock in the morning. I got in touch with the commanding officer at Simon’s Town and the commanding officer at Silvermine. It was heartening to know that those people were already in control of the situation, that they were already making plans for every contingency, in preparation for a long and hard day that obviously lay ahead for all of them. I went down to Simon’s Town at lunch time to find that the Simonsberg had been turned into some form of operational headquarters. There was a specially seconded senior officer, sent from Silvermine, in charge of directing operations at Simonsberg. There were naval wives assisting with the serving of refreshments and there were calls amongst naval personnel for the supply of blankets for any possible survivors. The overall impression I obtained, therefore, was one of remarkable efficiency under very difficult circumstances and at very short notice. The Chaplains were out notifying some of the kith and kin of those who were missing, even before lunch on that particular day. Extra telephones had been installed in a matter of hours to reply to enquiries from all over the Republic. By about 5 o’clock in the afternoon the various families gathered to see whether members of their families were amongst the survivors. At about 7.30 the President Pretorius came in, and it was as if that ship were on parade, such was the efficiency and discipline of all the survivors and the men on that particular vessel. At about 8.30 the Tafelberg came in and the same disciplined conduct was observed. Every seaman was given, shortly after his arrival at the reception centre at Simonsberg, an amount of R50 in cash. They were given the necessary facilities to phone their families, and to send telegrams to their families. They were given 10 days’ leave. They were also given rail warrants to wherever they wished to go in the Republic during that leave period of 10 days. Something like 170 people were rescued in that sea operation, and about 16 were lost. It is a tribute to the efficiency of the Navy, and those in command of navy training, that South Africa did not suffer a very much greater loss. Within a week a thanksgiving service was arranged, and those who were present at that thanksgiving service will testify to the good taste with which that service was conducted by all those responsible. Within a week of that, there was a funeral service, carried out with dignity and precision. I pay tribute to all those responsible for these proceedings. Assistance was given to families. Senior officers of the Navy and the Defence Force called to see individual members’ families who had lost kith and kin. The whole operation was one of quite remarkable efficiency and a quite excellent exercise in public relations. All I can say is that South Africa can be very proud of the naval arm of its armed forces. If the same thing were to have happened in the Air Force or the Army, I could well imagine that the same sense of discipline and efficiency would also have been displayed.

With the crisis in the Falklands we have once again seen the importance of Simon’s Town underscored, the importance Simon’s Town could have for the West if the West had not chosen to disregard Simon’s Town. We have seen illustrated Simon’s Town’s strategic situation in the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans. I imagine that if the Simon’s Town agreement had not been abrogated by Britain. Simon’s Town could well have been of great use to the British forces. I am glad that we do not, in fact, have a Simon’s Town agreement in existence at the moment, because it would have placed us before a very difficult situation indeed, i.e. whether to bear in mind the close friendships that have been built up with the South American nations by South Africa, which has been spumed by the Western countries …

After that last rugby test, it would serve them right.

… or whether to remember the importance of South Africa to the former allies we used to have in the West. The point I want to make this afternoon is that Simon’s Town is no longer available to the West on a plate.

The hon. member for Constantia’s newspaper here, of course, rushed into print only a few days ago, saying that South Africa should immediately offer Simon’s Town to Britain on a plate, with no strings attached. That is typical. I am only surprised that some of the political adherents or supporters of that newspaper have not expressed similar sentiments in this House. Simon’s Town’s facilities are second to none on the African continent. In ship-repairing facilities, bunkering facilities and other supply facilities we are head and shoulders above anything else that the West or any other nation might require in an emergency and could get elsewhere on the African continent. So much for the position in Simon’s Town.

I should like to make one further point, in the light of the loss of the President Kruger and the situation in the Falklands. We have two frigates left. To recommission those frigates would cost only a fraction of what a new frigate would cost. I have advanced an argument before in this House for the retention of the frigates. There are all sorts of reasons why frigates should be very carefully considered before they are discarded. The head of the Navy recently said, on television, that it is going to take ten years to build corvettes. Just think, however, of events that could take place in the Indian Ocean or in the South Atlantic, when strike craft and submarines would be wholly unsuited to any form of rescue operation, whilst the frigates on the other hand are ideally suited. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of hon. members on this side of the House I should also like to associate myself with the remarks made by the hon. member for Simon’s Town about the personnel of the President Kruger and their families. As one who attended that particular funeral ceremony, I know that if the hon. member for Pietersburg had been there, he would have been more than ever struck by the fact that the Navy is an organization in which colour made no difference. If he had seen the people who went up to put wreaths on the gun carriage, he would have seen that they were not only Whites, but also people of colour, because it was also people of colour who sacrificed their lives for their country.

I think he would have been horrified to see that.

Yes, he might well have been horrified to see that, but he certainly would have been surprised. [Interjections.] I just want to add one other thing to that … [Interjections.] The hon. member for Pietersburg talks about the great patriotism on his side of the House… [Interjections.] … but I should like to bring to his attention the fact that in his hon. leader’s constituency, in the magisterial area of Thabazimbi, only three out of every 100 who are available to fight on his border area, have actually volunteered for service. Does he expect the rest of South Africa to fight on his behalf, when he himself is not prepared to see to it that his own people join the commandos? [Interjections.]

The White Paper on Defence and Armament Supply of 1982 is a very illuminating document, even though, because of the secret nature of defence matters, it can only be couched in the broadest terms.

However important the problem of manpower may be—and it is being dealt with by a Select Committee of this House—there is another aspect of the armed forces which is just as important, because without it the bravest and most highly trained soldiers, of whatever service, could not survive. I am referring to the question of logistics. I find the definition in the White Paper far too laborious. Simply defined, “logistics is the practical art of moving armies and keeping them supplied”. I could do no better than refer to that great soldier, Gen. Wavell, who said—

Surely the hon. the Minister must know of other scenarios for which planning has been carried out.

The Chief of the Defence Force referred, on Sunday evening, to three scenarios for South Africa. He said there was the possibility of a conventional attack on South Africa from across its northern and eastern borders, including Angola. There was also the possibility of urban and rural attacks and the possibility of industrial sabotage. There are also probably several other scenarios that should be considered. As I said in my speech during the Second Reading debate on the Defence Bill, South Africa is in business on its own. One can assume that in Africa south of the Sahara, South Africa has no allies like the ones it had in World War II to supply it with the requirements this country itself cannot produce. As has been said, war is an extension of politics. Should altered political circumstances so demand, could a South African army of two divisions, one armoured and one motorized, proceeding at 50 km per day for 20 days, be sustained by our present planned logistics? The strategy to be employed in the future must not only be determined by the numerical strengths of formation, by intelligence, arms and tactics, but indeed by the hard realities I have mentioned, i.e. the requirements for an armed force to be effective, namely the supplies available, when and where they can be expected, the organization and administration necessary to ensure that the weapons, ammunition, food, clothing and fuel and various services are freely available. Then, of course, one also has to bear in mind the necessary transportation and arteries of communication.

Reuben, that is elementary.

It is not elementary.

I think he is.

The first prerequisite of any logistics system is the exact definition of requirements. Secondly, the fact that “ons boere sal altyd ’n plan maak” is a very important aspect in logistics, because circumstances never occur in accordance with even the best developed plans. The ability to judge requirements in the context of changing circumstances is imperative to any commander and his staff. This is because the logistic aspect of all wars is nothing but an endless series of difficulties succeeding each other. Everything always seems to be going wrong. Clausewitz refers to this as the friction of war, and fortunately it is also happening to the enemy at one and the same time.

This brings me to the next aspect. Whatever system of supply is used, the first requirement of a well-organized army is invariably money. History shows that many of the world’s richest powers have been bankrupted long before their troops lost on the battlefield. The hon. member for Yeoville referred to the question of obtaining ships and aircraft from other countries, but I should like to refer to a book called “The Anatomy of the Israeli Army” in which the writer says that there were problems about getting equipment, and I quote—

We must be very careful to see to it that we are always in a position to pay. Logistics does not require strategic genius either, but what it does require is plain hard work and calculation by highly skilled and experienced people whose knowledge must cover every field of human endeavour to ensure that the commanding officer can carry out his task effectively.

When the hon. the Minister examines the available manpower in South Africa he may find, amongst the national reserve, many highly experienced executives above the age of 40, with a wealth of knowledge, who could prove of invaluable service to the South African Defence Force in a part-time capacity to help draw up the logistic plans for the future.

Commandos should not only be involved in physical defence on an area basis. Commandos of specialists should also be formed, commandos that can be assembled over weekends and at other times to help with a large number of jobs that the Army needs to have done.

Let me just mention one, although I do not have much time to discuss the matter in detail. I am referring to the question of stock-taking. Stock-taking is a tremendous task in the logistics programme. This could be one of the tasks allotted to the specialized commandos, particularly area bound persons in smaller businesses. There are very many skilled and experienced people in private enterprise who, in a part-time capacity, could help to solve this very difficult problem.

Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that all of us in this Chamber can associate ourselves with the sentiments expressed by both previous speakers in connection with the loss of the President Kruger. The hon. member for Simon’s Town also referred to the importance of Simon’s Town and said that Simon’s Town was no longer available to the West on a plate. This also happens to be the year in which we celebrate the 25th anniversary of the unilateral termination of the Simon’s Town agreement. This is therefore, in effect, the 25th year that the South African Navy has been completely autonomous, in other words has stood completely on its own feet. After 25 years, I think that we all agree, in South Africa, that the termination of that agreement has been more of a blessing than a bane to South Africa. It has added to the efforts spurring us on to become more self sufficient in terms of our naval defence and has also saved us from involvement in the current threatened combat between two of South Africa’s friends.

With a coastline of some 1 500 nautical miles and 300 000 square nautical miles of territorial waters, the protection of our coastline is of the utmost importance. The necessity to safeguard our rights and also to protect our maritime assets have shown themselves to be of extreme importance over the past 25 years.

Coming as I do from Durban, I am very happy to note that over this period of 25 years Durban, and the Natal coast in general, has steadily increased in importance in the naval defence set-up of our country. Increasing Russian activity in the Indian Ocean and other developments to the north-east of Africa have heightened this importance. I think that the important role that Durban and its environs are playing in naval defence is illustrated, I would say, mainly in three respects.

First of all it was illustrated by the reopening of the naval base at Salisbury Island and its re-equipment after its earlier closure. It is gratifying to learn that this base is now in the process of being enlarged. It will shortly be equipped with a synchro-lift dry-dock facility similar to the one in use in Simon’s Town at present. In connection with the enlargement and improved equipment of Salisbury Island, I think it is important to note that this expansion is being seriously hampered by the critical shortage of adequate staff-housing in Durban. I am aware of the efforts of the Defence Force to procure suitable accommodation for various parts of the Defence Force. Recently the Defence Force acquired the extensive grounds and buildings of a private school in my constituency on a long-term lease basis. This will mainly be used for two commando units, but I do think that it is an example of the sort of development that we can only welcome in Durban. I therefore urge the hon. the Minister to purchase as much of this particular land, and any other available land in the vicinity of the naval base, in order to provide suitable accommodation for members of the South African Navy.

A second illustration of the importance of Durban in our naval defence was the establishment some years ago of Jalsina, the Indian volunteer naval training establishment. This establishment will also in the coming years play an increasingly important role in the greater involvement of the Indian community in particularly the naval defence of our country.

Thirdly—I think this is the most important—Durban has become the most important centre of our growing naval strike craft building programme. In this respect one can only congratulate Armscor on the progress it has made and be thankful that Durban has been selected to become a major building centre for naval craft. We all know that we already have a locally built fleet of surface strike craft capable of firing Surface to surface missiles comparable to the best systems at sea. Not only is the programme to continue, but in building up a balanced naval force our sea-mine and our anti-submarine capability should also be improved. In both these respects I think Durban can play a vital role. For anti-submarine warfare a larger vessel than the strike craft that we presently use is needed. I am glad that the hon. member for Simonstown referred to this. It is indeed gratifying to learn that the Durban industry is now capable of building the Corvett type of vessel that we need for this purpose and that these craft are now in the process of being planned. It is especially pleasing that we will in the foreseeable future be engaged in building Corvett type vessels in the light of the earlier Western refusal to deliver the Corvetts we had on order. It is pleasing to know that the arms embargo could only delay but could certainly not stop or seriously hinder our acquisition of these craft. I for one have little doubt that in the longer term we will probably have to start thinking of building our own submarines and I have as little doubt that the Durban shipbuilding industry will also be equal to this task.

The Durban shipbuilders can also play a big role in sea-mine warfare. Some or our coastal minesweepers have already been converted into minehunters and others will have to be converted. Sea-mine warfare has become an extremely sophisticated and a very important part of naval warfare. In this respect I think a lot has still to be done to protect our harbours and to keep our trade flowing freely.

Lastly, as far as our naval defence is concerned, we must take into account the fact that with 300 000 sq nautical miles of territorial waters the question of sea-refuelling is of first importance. The supply-ship Tafelberg is nearing the end of its useful life. It will not for very much longer be possible to keep it equipped and to acquire spare parts for it at an economical price. The Durban shipyards are today, unlike some years ago, fully capable of building a replacement for our supply-ship. It is good to know that even in this respect the South African Navy is at an advanced stage of design.

If we look at the needs of the South African Navy in the 25 years we enter now, one is grateful that the Government is fully aware of the naval needs of the country in the next quarter century. We are very grateful that the port of Durban can play such a vital role in the supplying, in the supporting and in the servicing of these naval vessels.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umlazi and the hon. member for Simon’s Town spoke about the South African Navy. I hope they will forgive me if I do not follow them, but turn my attention to the fourth unit of the South African Defence Force, namely the Medical Services. It is my great pleasure and privilege today to pay tribute to the South African Defence Force Medical Services. The head of the medical services of the Defence Force is in Afrikaans referred to as the “Genees-heer-generaal” and in English he is referred to as the “Surgeon-General”. As a surgeon myself, I should like to pay tribute to the English language that recognizes the seniority of the surgeon in the military service. I should also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Surgeon-General Nieuwoudt and all the members of the medical services for the high standard of their work. I should like to refer the hon. the Minister and hon. members to page 9, paragraph 56, of the White Paper. It reads as follows—

I should like to repeat this—

What a record. I think all our medical services and even those in the private life can be very proud of this record. As a member of Parliament and also as a doctor I should like to say that this paragraph is evidence of the high standard of the South African Medical Services. It is a record of which all those attached to the South African Medical Services as well as all of us in Parliament can be proud.

We all know the enormous power of modern weapons to destroy, to kill, to injure and to maim. Despite this the individual soldier remains the most important factor in the defence of a country. Without man the most effective weapon cannot attain its goal nor can the specialized techniques be utilized without man’s scientific knowledge. It is therefore very important to realize that although the South African Defence Force consists of the South African Army, the South African Air Force and the South African Navy which supply the fighting men and their weapons, the South African Medical Services play an equally important part by providing the necessary medical and related support as a continuous base orientated service. I should like to tell the hon. member for Jeppe that to my mind it was a very good day for the soldiers in the South African Defence Force and their dependants when the South African Medical Services was formed into an individual unit on 1 July 1979. Medicine differs from other aspects of the Army. It serves a different field.

What about the chaplains.

I do not want to go into that matter. I am talking about medicine. If it is right that the Medical Services should be a separate unit it does not mean that it will necessarily be right for chaplains as well. I reject the hon. member’s argument totally. In fact, I reject his whole speech and also the speech of the hon. member for Pietersburg.

It is absolutely necessary to have a medical service running its own affairs and making its own planning where it is necessary.

Where is the support of the South African Medical Services needed? First of all—this may not necessarily be the most important area because medical services are needed all over—in the operational area. If we look back into history we find that in the wars before modern medicine became an integral part of military affairs more soldiers died as a result of disease than died in action. The Boer War is a very good example. Many more soldiers died of typhoid than from wounds and other military injuries sustained during that War. This is an important point. The place to treat soldiers and save lives is there where the injuries are sustained, in other words, in the operational area. The South African Medical Services provide this service. Unfortunately, I have not had a chance to visit these areas and I ask the hon. the Minister if it will not be possible for me to visit these areas because I am very deeply interested for more reasons than one. Where the patient is wounded and where the injury is sustained, that is where the treatment must be given. That is where we need the persons trained in first aid and also in emergency treatment. That person must have available to him the necessary equipment and especially fluids like plasma and blood. As soon as the wounded soldier has been given the initial medical treatment, the emergency medical treatment, he should be transported to a base camp. While being transported he should have with him the necessary equipment and the medical personnel to treat him. This is happening in the Medical Services. We have the necessary ambulances, helicopters and doctors and equipment and this should be so.

At the base camp the need is again for emergency work, for emergency attention to those things that can be done by doctors in field hospitals. Therefore, the next step is as important. The third place of importance is the military hospital where the soldier is sent for major surgery, for major medical treatment and for one of the most important things today, namely rehabilitation so that he can go back to his unit or if he is permanently disabled be returned to the society where he can be helped. I have only visited one military hospital and there again I saw things that I was very impressed with. The hospital I visited is not the newest hospital in South Africa, but new ones are being built. I would have liked to have addressed myself to the hon. member for Pietersburg, but fortunately the rest of the CP members are here. However, I should just like to say to the hon. member for Pietersburg that I saw in this hospital the wounds, injuries and illnesses of soldiers being treated. I want to stress the word “soldiers”, not Blacks, Whites, Coloureds or Asians, but soldiers, people who fought together and who were injured together and people who were thereafter treated together.

And they all have red blood.

I should like to pay tribute to the medical personnel who treat these soldiers because I believe that if you are prepared to fight together, if you are prepared to get wounded together, you should be allowed to get better together. I must support this. I want to ask the hon. members of the Conservative Party, if they were wounded in the operational area and needed blood and the only unit of blood that was available was the blood of a Black man, would they refuse that blood if their life depended on that?

You are naïve.

If you were brought back to the base camp and there was only one sister to look after you and she was Black, would you refuse it?

Have you been to the border?

Have you?

I have.

Are there such sisters?

If it is not the case, it will come, because we increasingly need people to help our soldiers on the border if those hon. members reject it then I will accept what one of my hon. colleagues said, namely that they show no patriotism and no concern for the health of the soldiers of South Africa.

Oh, rubbish Marius, you must go back to Groote Schuur.

If I had to go back to Groote Schuur I think that hon. member knows what type of transplant I would like to do on him.

That is your same old joke, try another one.

Mr. Chairman, the South African Medical Services consist of two groups. First of all there are the permanent doctors. I should like to address myself to the hon. the Minister in this regard. I think there is a great shortage amongst permanent staff. This shortage is perhaps not so great amongst doctors, but it certainly is amongst nurses, social workers, etc. I should like to refer him to the question of volunteers because I am still a bit sensitive about that. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to follow the hon. member for Parktown. I want to convey my sincere thanks to him for the tribute he paid to the South African Medical Services this afternoon. Coming from a noted doctor, it does one’s heart good and we thank him sincerely. I never thought I would make a plea on behalf of a Prog in Parliament, but I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give that hon. member an opportunity to go and inspect conditions on the border.

It has been very quiet here for some time now, but listening to the remarks that are made from time to time I want to say that it is the tragedy of our time, and that it is depressing, that here in this highest Council Chamber of our country, and, in recent times, from public platforms as well, we hear statements being made by politicians and other public figures which are not to the credit of the Defence Force and the men who serve in the Defence Force. I do not want to provide a string of quotations, but there are hon. members of the PFP as well as hon. members of the CP who are on record as having made petty statements in the course of engaging in sickly politicking merely to promote their own political aims. Merely for the sake of political expediency they parrot the enemies of South Africa and, I repeat, have a demoralizing effect on the men who have to defend our country.

Give an example.

May I ask a question?

I do not have the time to reply to it and that hon. member will have time to make his own speech. However, I am pleased to hear that he is at least awake.

It is on record that the hon. member for Constantia has made statements that demotivate our people. However, I want to put my case as follows: The hon. member for Yeoville and many other hon. members have said that we should motivate our people, but how does one motivate people if statements are made in this highest Council Chamber of our country such as: You are not fighting for South Africa, you are not defending this country against communism, you are not defending what is sacred to you or protecting your culture, you are defending the apartheid policy of this Government. That is what the hon. member for Constantia said and indeed, he has said it by implication on more than one occasion.

Rubbish! You put words into my mouth. Use my own words.

People like Jaap Marais and Connie Mulder have announced from a platform in Windhoek that the onslaught we refer to is merely a spectre conjured up by the National Party. Through the hon. member for Waterkloof, their kindred spirits, their members of the CP, said so in Northern Transvaal as well …

Where did you hear that? You do not know what I said.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member made a statement that the onslaught was not as bad as we were making it out to be.

That is absolute rubbish and I shall reply to that. Did you hear me?

Order! The hon. member for Waterkloof must refer to the hon. member as the hon. member.

Mr. Chairman, I want to say this evening that the hon. members on this side and the National Government want to say to the men of the South African Defence Force: We are proud of you. We want to tell them that we are proud of everyone who wears the uniform of the South African Defence Force. We are proud of every unit of the South African Defence Force. We are proud, as they are, of their achievements in recent times. We are proud of these men who defend our country on the borders. What is more, we want to say to these men that this Government will do everything in its power to make matters as easy for them as possible in the future. This Government will see to it that the national service that they perform will not be to their detriment at a later stage. We had clear evidence of this when the hon. the Minister of Manpower once again announced certain benefits for apprentices the other day. We want to tell them that we stand by them, we pray for them and we hope that things will go well with them, and that they will continue to defend this country in the way they are defending it at present, and that they will not take any notice of this sickly politicking of certain other people.

There are four parts of our Defence Force, namely the South African Navy, the South African Air Force, the South African Army and the South African Medical Services. On page 7 of the White Paper reference is made to the South African Air Force. If I had sufficient time at my disposal I should very much have liked to pay tribute to the South African Air Force, for their achievements in particular, as I hope other hon. members will in future also pay tribute to other branches of the Defence Force and other units, because it behoves us to discuss these people and their achievements in this place. However, time does not permit me to do so, and I should just like to associate myself with what the hon. member for Yeoville said this afternoon. I think the hon. member touched on a very important point when he referred to the reconnaissance of our coasts and the fact that we do not have long-distance reconnaissance aircraft available for the maritime wing of the South African Defence Force. I do not wish to weary the Committee with a lot of statistics, but I do just wish to mention a few statistics. Looking at the shipping around our coasts, it appears that between July 1981 and December 1981, viz. a period of six months, there was a total of 2 985 shipping movements around our coasts. In other words, 479 ships per month were observed. Forty-five per cent of this total number of ships were oil tankers. On the West Coast 179 ships were observed. The number of fishing ships—and I am not referring to smaller fishing boats—observed during this period totalled 779, 539 of which were communist ships. It is general knowledge that the Russian or communist fishing fleet are the eyes and ears of the Russian navy today. Warships, too, have been observed off our coasts. On 22 September 1981 a Russian task force passed our coast travelling from east to west. On 19 March 1980, Russian fleet replenishment vessels passed off our coast. I could continue in this vein.

The fact remains that we also have an enormous task to perform as regards search and rescue, and we have international obligations that we should comply with and would very much like to comply with. Since South Africa is in the frontline in the fight against communism today I hope that our Western friends, too, will now realize that this sea route must be protected and that these aircraft that we desperately need, primarily, it is true, for the defence of our country, but also for the sake of the defence of the West and for search and rescue operations in respect of international shipping off our coasts, must be made available to us so that we are able to meet our obligations in this regard.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat has raised a very important issue here this afternoon in that he has reinforced remarks made earlier by the hon. member for Yeoville which I feel are of the greatest importance, namely the need for the extension of our coastal defences through the medium of long-range coastal reconnaissance aircraft. I sincerely hope that the plea which the hon. member for Yeoville has made will not fall on deaf ears. I hope that the international community will realize the value to the entire Western World of a service which can be rendered to them here by the South African Air Force. I also believe that the hon. member for Simon’s Town was quite correct in what he had to say when he spoke of the retention of the services of those two vessels, the two frigates that are still in service. I believe these are ships that must be refitted and must be retained in the service of the South African Navy. I think events that are overtaking us at this moment prove the need for the retention of those ships.

During the discussion of the Defence Amendment Bill recently the hon. the Minister made a very significant remark. He said that there was an investigation being undertaken at this moment in time into productivity in the Defence Force. I believe that productivity in both the National Service and in the Civilian Force is of the utmost importance of this country of ours. I quote from the White Paper the heading of the chapter on page 5, the chapter on the Army, which reads as follows: “The instruments of battle are valuable only if one knows how to use them.” How true that is. I believe firmly that the most important instrument of battle is and always will be the man. That instrument of battle can be valuable only if properly used. It is not just the manpower in the operational zone, it is not just the man in the front line, it is the man that is used all the way through the entire structure of the South African Defence Force. We have to look all the time at the proper utilization of manpower, which has been discussed many times on previous occasions. I have raised it over the years that I have spoken on the Defence Vote. I am pleased to say it is something which has improved over the years—it has improved out of all recognition, but it is still far from perfect. I believe we have to look at something new now. We have to look now at proper utilization of manpower potential or of potential manpower.

I think we are giving attention to the aspects of the proper utilization of the graduate. We have done this. The graduate or the man who has had technical training or the man who has a trade of some sort, is a man trained in some art or trade or another. I ask the question whether sufficient attention is being given to the question of the lad coming straight from school into the armed services to do his two years national service. I wonder if we should not be looking at him and his chosen direction in life before we allocate him to a national service unit. I think young people should be assisted in the careers of their choice. I think young people should always be helped. I believe a young man who clearly indicates that he wants to do his national service first and then go to university to study medicine, accountancy or whatever, should be used in the correct field during the period of his national service. Every young man has got to do his basic three months. We know that. That is the lot that befalls every young man that goes into the Army. However, I think the young man considering a future in accountancy could well be used in that field during his two years after he has done his basics. I know that not all tastes can be catered for. I know that and I appreciate that. We all do. I know, too, that it is easy to criticize. However, I think we must look jointly for a possible solution. I believe that a department should be established with the specific aim of attempting to fulfil this objective. I think a department should be established that can work in close liaison with schools and colleges, because, after all, we do have the department that works at advising these young boys in their standard seven or standard eight year of the fact that they are going to be used, that they are going to have to come in to do their national service. They are allocated. I think in this modern day and age, in this day of the computer, we can certainly do something towards channelling them into the right type of usage during their period in the Defence Force. The consequences of doing this are all plus factors. They are plus factors to the Army, plus factors to the young men and, I think, most importantly plus factors to our country in later years. We all know that men are going to be called upon to do more and more in the armed forces. I think that if we and they know that they are going to be put to proper use during the time that they spend there it will achieve much all round.

Now, Sir, I should like to touch on another aspect, and that is the deep concern that I feel over the attitude of some companies in respect of military service. I am not talking here about the small businesses; I am talking about large organizations. I wonder, Sir, whether there is an awareness of the fact that certain organizations refuse to pay, or to grant leave at full pay, for compulsory military service or training over a period of thirty days per annum I know and understand that they cannot be compelled to do this, and I know it must be enormously difficult for small firms to have to foot the bill for that sort of thing, but I want to mention a specific case. I am prepared to give the details to the hon. the Minister. I am not going to bandy the name of this company across the floor of this House, but I assure you, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. the Minister is going to be shocked when he sees who it is. I refer here to the standard instructions for the granting of compulsory and voluntary military leave issued by a large organization. In the case of military training periods covered by this instruction, there are two sections which deal with compulsory military training for a period of up to thirty days per annum, and compulsory or voluntary military training in excess of thirty days per annum. In respect of annual service periods for national service, it states this—

It goes on a little later to say—

I think that is a shoddy attitude, Sir, particularly when we read at the end of this notice the following arrangements for the “prevention of hardship”. This is the company’s way of preventing hardship of employees. It says—

What a way to prevent hardship! It goes on to say—

What a thing to do to a young family man who has been called up to do ninety days on the border! This man is faced with either having to borrow 75% of sixty days’ pay during which he has to perform service, and to repay it over six months in equal instalments, or alternatively, he forgoes his leave, leave which is important not only for his health but also to his family. I believe that this is shoddy in the extreme.

While I am dealing with this, Sir, I think I should also look at this company’s attitude towards voluntary service in the commandos. It says this—

That is the sort of support and back-up that is being given to the military effort by a large industrial organization which, I am pleased to say, is not in my constitutency. It is, however, just outside my constituency. I shall be happy to pass this on to the Minister a little later for his attention. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to follow the hon. member for Umhlanga. He devoted the greater part of his speech to two points. In the first place he referred to the case of a young man who performs his national service after school and later has to choose a career, and asked that guidelines be provided in this regard to a greater extent. There is probably no one here who could find fault with that. We also wish to associate ourselves wholeheartedly with the last point he mentioned, relating to the payment by business undertakings of men who have to perform compulsory national service. I fully associate myself with what he said.

To a great extent the Defence Force stands on two legs, namely manpower and armaments. Instead of “armaments”, one could also say “finance”, because the one gives rise to the other. It is the manpower that has to undergo the training and must also be able to wage the war. As I have already mentioned, armaments and finance are almost synonomous. The times we are living in require of the South African Defence Force the optimum utilization of these components. It is a fact that the success of the most sophisticated weapon depends on the individual handling it. This depends on the expertise and physical disposition of the individual. A lack of strength, stamina and perseverance will limit the skilful use of arms, and it has repeatedly been confirmed that the success of even the most sophisticated arms is determined by the individual who handles them. In addition, the following statement is widely accepted: “Although wars may be fought with weapons, they are won by men.” Accordingly it is very clear and understandable from the above data that the South African Defence Force gives a high priority to physical training and sport in its training programmes. Therefore I should like to refer to the reference in the White Paper to the sporting achievements of the S.A. Defence Force of which we are all entitled to be proud. This also cultivates in the young man the confidence that he will be given spiritual and physical nourishment and will also master the necessary skills.

Mr. Chairman, the S.A. Defence Force has the task of keeping abreast of the latest arms technology, armaments supply and training, in the face of inflation and a recession in the economy. It also has to do so in the face of an onslaught of increased intensity against the Republic of South Africa. This is a difficult objective to aim for in the circumstances as set out, and therefore demands the utmost in discipline and planning, and the realization that although the S.A. Defence Force plays a vital role in the national life of the Republic of South Africa, it cannot be seen in isolation from the rest of the country, and an overall perspective must be retained in meeting all the needs of the country. Here I have in mind, for example, housing, education, etc.

For the S.A. Defence Force, the rate of inflation has had the effect that operating costs take an ever-increasing slice of the economy. Therefore it is necessarily the case that armaments supply programmes have had to be reduced to some extent. In the light of the above there is tremendous appreciation for the policy of the S.A. Defence Force, in co-operation with Armscor, of inspecting obsolete armaments and carrying out research in order to upgrade this obsolete and worn-out equipment with a view to renewing it, so that in many instances it is sometimes far more effective than ever before—and at what is sometimes a fraction of the cost of new supplies. This is something which the country ought to be proud of and grateful for, due to its cost-effectiveness in the present economic climate. It must also be borne in mind that the needs of the Defence Force are constantly escalating, due to the escalation of the threat to the Republic of South Africa.

I should like to refer to a few examples of the re-use of armaments. In the first place there is the Saracen troop carrier. This vehicle, which dates from the early ’fifties, was later withdrawn from service. A programme of upgrading is at present in progress which will result in its being recommissioned shortly with an expected life of at least 10 years. But, Sir, that is not all. This has been achieved at only a fraction of the cost of a new vehicle, but with increased combat effectiveness and reliability. Secondly, there is the case of the “Elephant” tank. These old tanks, which have been in use for approximately 30 years, have been upgraded and modernized to such an extent that their effectiveness as Elephant tanks is exceeded by only the most modern and advanced main battle tanks in the world, and will for many years form an essential part of our arsenal. Then there is the Eland armoured car, which dates from the early ’sixties and which, too, due to its renewed reliability and effectiveness, will be in service for many years yet. Due to a lack of time I shall probably not be able to deal with everything in detail, but I should just like to refer to the following examples. There is also the 140 mm or 5,5 inch medium gun which, due to sound maintenance and locally improved ammunition, has a longer range and increased effectiveness. Then we have the 88 mm or 25 pounder field gun. This weapon is somewhat old-fashioned but is still being kept in service for training purposes, and it is also regarded as suitable for counter-insurgency operations. Machine-guns such as the .303 Bren, the .30 Browning and the .303 Vickers have been modernized and modified to fire standard 7,62 mm ammunition. Spare parts for the armaments mentioned are all manufactured and maintained locally. Then there are the soft skinned vehicles. In this regard, only vehicles that are totally beyond economic repair are dismantled. Even then all usable spare parts are used. The mine-protected vehicles are nowadays built so that even after repeated exposure to mine explosions they can always be put back into service by the S.A. Defence Force. Nowadays all spare parts are reconditioned and re-used.

Mr. Chairman, when we realize the cost-saving effect that these efforts have on the S.A. Defence Force, every citizen of the country and we in this House, too, must realize that we owe a profound debt of thanks to the Defence Force and to Armscor. By means of this cost-savings campaign of theirs they have prominently succeeded in not sacrificing effectiveness.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Mr. Chairman, arising from what the hon. member for Jeppe said earlier today, I should like to give the hon. the Minister a piece of good advice. If he does try to pull off a coup in South Africa I want to suggest that he should not get “Mad Mike” Hoare to organize it for him again! If he does that it will not turn out well! [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate, that I, too, have to disagree with the chief spokesman of the PFP in regard to one of the statements he made about the fact that women should not be called up I would say that if women were called up to join our forces thousands upon thousands of young men would report for voluntary service. I am merely mentioning this for consideration by the hon. the Minister.

The hon. member for Pietersburg made certain statements about the approach of his party to service by various race groups in the South African Defence Force and other forces. I think that perhaps that affords the Minister an opportunity to spell out the policy of the Government in regard to service by other race groups in our Defence Force.

†I think, Mr. Chairman, it is very important indeed that the Minister, on behalf of the Government, should make a definitive statement of policy regarding the service of members of other races in the various armed forces of our country. The reason I say that is the following: If there should be any impression that the Government is to deviate from the policy that it has laid down, and that the concept of discrimination or separation between the races should be re-established or re-introduced in the South African armed forces, it would do untold harm to the morale of all the young people that are involved in the defence of our society, and I think that this opportunity which has been created by the statement by the hon. member for Pietersburg, in which he set out the attitude of his party, places a responsibility on the Minister once again to emphasize the attitude of his Department and of the Government. I want to add that I think the Government is by no means free of a degree of blame with regard to the treatment of members of other race groups who serve in our defence forces and on our borders. You see, Mr. Chairman, there is a disgraceful anomaly which exists here. When these people are defending South Africa, when they are prepared to sacrifice their lives to fight side by side with their White fellow South African citizens in the defence of this society, then they are considered equal citizens, and they get equal treatment; but the very moment that they return to their country, then they are once again subject to the disgraceful practices of apartheid and of discrimination and of a lower status of citizenship. South Africa’s time is becoming short in which to bring about fundamental reforms and changes. I want to say to this Minister that sitting, as he does, in the South African Cabinet, he has an unequalled opportunity of bringing home the absolutely essential nature of major reforms to bring about a just society in our country. His contribution is not just that of the most important person dealing with the maintenance and direction of our armed forces; his contribution is far more important in respect of the persuasion of the Government to bring about fundamental reforms.

The next point I should like to speak about is that even in this debate members of the Nationalist Party cannot restrain themselves from reflecting on the patriotism of members of the PFP. This is the case even in this debate, where traditionally there has always been a consensus, where we in fact attempt, sincerely and honestly, to make a contribution to the concept of the defence of our country. Even in this debate members on the other side of the House have the temerity to suggest that there is something wrong with our patriotism. I can understand that the National Party still suffers pangs of conscience when they think back to the 1939-1945 war, when they were not prepared to serve their country, when they were not prepared to defend their country, and when in fact Nationalists in South Africa were involved in terrorism, subversion and treason against their own country. Now let me tell you this, Mr. Chairman: We in the PFP are sick and tired of the constant reflections on our patriotism, and we reject that with utter contempt. We have only contempt for the party and the people who reflect on our patriotism. [Interjections.]

Order! Is the hon. member for Bryanston reflecting on any members of the Government party?

In saying what, Mr. Chairman?

When the hon. member said that they were guilty of treason.

No, Sir; I was referring to the Second World War, and to members of the Nationalist Party; I do not know whether any of these people were involved. I was not reflecting on them.

The hon. member may proceed.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: I do think that with his statement that the Nationalist Party was involved in high treason against the country the hon. member. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, I was referring to supporters of the Nationalist Party.

The hon. member may proceed.

Mr. Chairman, there are just two further points I should like to make in the short time left to me. I know that the hon. the Minister has already said that he will give attention to this matter, but I want to stress that urgent attention must be given to military service by people who are not South African citizens. Let me give you an example in my constituency. In many areas of my constituency 50% of the people are not South African citizens, in various capacities. This means that virtually every second house contains people who are not South African citizens. Now, what is the emotion of the mother of a South African citizen, serving on the border, with her fears, her tensions, her heartache, when right next door to her there is a home with young chaps of the same age, working and having gone to the same school, friends and acquaintances, working by day and enjoying entertainment by night and enjoying their sport on the weekends, whose lives are not threatened by service on the border? This is a very unhealthy and unsatisfactory state of affairs. It causes resentment and anger. It causes tension between neighbours and friends because the one mother’s son is in a situation where his life is endangered for twenty-four hours a day while the other mother’s son is in a position where he is enjoying the benefits of a good, sound and happy society. I think it is very important that attention should be given to this. This is also the case in the work place. You find that in businesses and in industry, wherever people work, particularly in our major urban areas, there are young fellows whose careers are constantly being interrupted, undermined and handicapped by the need to render military service, while they work next to and cheek-by-jowl with other young people who derive the benefits of South African citizenship and of the advantages of our society without being called upon to do military service. Because they are not called upon to do this service they benefit by promotion, by higher salaries and by advancement. This, too, causes resentment and anger. In fact, I think it is bad for the morale of our young people. It has been said that if we were to put all these people into the army and if we were to subject them all to military service, we would lose them and that they would leave South Africa. I do not think so, Mr. Chairman. We might lose a small percentage of them, but if they were to go overseas and take citizenship of other countries, they would be subject to military service there in any case. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I listened attentively to the hon. member for Bryanston. I honestly cannot say that his speech was beneficial to this House, although we have had very good contributions up to now. The hon. member said we should not doubt their patriotism. I just want to tell the hon. member that we do not doubt the patriotism of all hon. members of the Official Opposition. However, there are some of those hon. members who really do not know the meaning of patriotism. I am thinking for example of the hon. member for Constantia, who stated that thousands of South Africans were not prepared to fight for apartheid. Sir, is that patriotism? It is anything but patriotism.

Then, Sir, I should like to return to the hon. member for Wynberg. He stated here that in the past not enough was done to recruit volunteers for the commandos. I hope I understood him correctly.

Yes, you are quite correct.

I want to tell the hon. member that I was attached to the commandos for more than 24 years. I know the commandos like the back of my hand, and this evening I want to tell the hon. member that everything possible was done to recruit volunteers and to make them aware of the seriousness of the situation in our country. Over the years this was done. But, Sir, I want to tell the hon. member this: The hon. member for Bryanston said here a while ago that we played no part in the Second World War. I want to tell him that many Afrikaners fought in that war. He cannot deny this; it is the truth. [Interjections.] I also want to tell the hon. member the following: When this Government came into power in 1948, the Afrikaner had to carry the commandos.

No, that is not correct.

It may be that at that stage you were tired of war; I am not arguing with you about that.

That is not true. [Interjections.] It was Minister Erasmus who caused everything to collapse.

I want to tell you that everything possible was done to bring the seriousness of our situation to the attention of volunteers. I am in possession of a letter sent in 1980 by a certain commanding officer in my area to every employer and every employee, in which he appealed to people to do their share voluntarily. He held meetings in every town and he addressed every organization concerned, in all seriousness. Do you know how many people subsequently joined? Only two.

Why?

No, do not anticipate what I am going to say. I shall tell you what the reason is. The reason is that our people have become tired and are now saying: “Why should I sacrifice myself and my time while my neighbour is becoming rich?” Mr. Chairman, that is the crux of the matter, and that is why I want to say here this evening that I am grateful that we have now progressed so far that we can to a certain extent compel every member to do his duty so that we no longer have to hear these reproaches.

Mr. Chairman, I have now digressed from my speech. I want to use the few minutes I still have at my disposal to discuss the effectiveness of our armaments. Besides our human material, this is probably one of the most important components in the Defence Force. Our human material, in other words our soldiers, compare favourably with the best in the world, and I do not think anyone will argue with me about this. This has been proved time and again, if we consider the achievements of the South African soldier in all previous wars in which he participated, as well as now, with our direct involvement in South West Africa. Manpower is generally considered the most valuable component, and serves as an important point of departure to ensure efficiency and the resultant success in military actions. Mr. Chairman, we would expose our very good human material to the greatest dangers if the armaments we placed at their disposal did not comply with the necessary requirements of efficiency and effectiveness. Our present position of isolation and the arms embargo against South Africa makes overseas technology inaccessible, and for this reason research and development have become increasingly important. During the past year a Defence Research and Development Board came into existence to deal with all defence research and development activities, with a view to co-ordination and the elimination of duplication. A great deal of success was achieved with regard to co-operation between the South African Defence Force, Armscor and the private sector. Mr. Chairman, I note in the White Paper which has been tabled that 2% of the defence budget is at present spent on research and development. I feel that far more should be spent on this important aspect. In spite of this relatively small allocation, South African scientists have succeeded in making important breakthroughs. The proof of this lies in the success of the South African Air Force’s air-to-air missile, the South African Army’s ground-to-ground missile and the South African Navy’s surface-skimming missile. A large percentage of the weapons and equipment at present being used in trans-border operations are manufactured in South Africa. In the trans-border operations already carried out it has been clearly demonstrated that South African manufactured armaments are in no way inferior to their overseas equivalents. In many cases it was even confirmed that South African armaments and equipment manufactured for local purposes achieve superior results.

I can continue in this vein. As far as our small-arms armaments are concerned, the R1 has proved itself time and again to be an excellent weapon. The R4 has proved itself to be even more efficient and effective than the R1. Its size, weight, firing rate, stability and the large amount of ammunition which it carries, make it an ideal weapon. The distances over which the support weapons, of which the 60 millimetre and 81 millimetre mortars are examples, can be used, make them formidable weapons and the extremely effective ammunition and firing tubes have made telling contributions to the success of these operations.

Mr. Chairman, I could continue in this way to mention the various armaments manufactured in this country with the limited funds at our disposal. This really takes some doing.

In conclusion I want to say that the RSA realized that time and money would have to be spent on manufacturing good and effective armaments and that this would be of great value in the long term. The fruits of this early decision are now being reaped and the high quality of locally manufactured armaments is making a major contribution to the Defence Force’s operational successes.

Mr. Chairman, it is indeed a pleasure to follow the hon. member for Ladybrand. I agree wholeheartedly with the tenor of his entire speech, but I should also like to add my own comments to his remarks towards the hon. member for Bryanston.

I think you will do worse than the previous chap.

I should also like to say that there were in fact more members of the National Party who did support the war effort in the last war than those who did not. I also agree with the hon. member for Bryanston that those who refused to support the war effort and those who did resort to acts of terrorism were, to say the least, very misguided. However, two wrongs do not necessarily make a right. One can also sometimes not escape the feeling that there are also elements in the hon. member’s party today, as there were elements in our party at that time, who are with respect to defence matters, to say the least, misguided. Patriotism like justice must also be seen to be done and if we are not to draw the wrong conclusions about those elements that I referred to, then I think that those hon. members must prevail upon the Press that supports them not to give us the kind of report about their congresses and about their caucus discussions on the Defence Amendment Bill that can only lead us to the conclusion …

Were you in prison, do you know what you are talking about?

I am saying that those hon. members must prevail upon their Press not to print that kind of report that helps us to come to the inescapable conclusion that there are elements who are misguided. I refer to the Sunday Times which certainly supports their party and not mine. I do not question the patriotism of anybody present here. In fact I am sure that we all agree with the sentiments expressed in the White Paper that the defence of this country concerns everybody who lives in it, regardless of his race, colour, creed or political persuasion. Therefore, I am also sure that we all agree that the people in this country must appreciate that the ability of the Defence Force to defend the country directly enhances or endangers their own livelihood. Therefore, I think it is equally necessary that they must understand the nature of the threat against this country and also the needs of the Defence Force. Whilst I would agree with the general sentiments expressed by the hon. member for Yeoville that there naturally must be a balance between the material and the manpower needs of the economy on the one hand and the same needs of the Defence Force on the other, I would also submit that if there is any doubt as to what this balance should be the doubt should be weighted in favour of the Defence Force, because it stands to reason that if this country should be unable to defend itself properly, then the economy will of course not be able to exist and people will not be able to run their factories and businesses and make their own living.

If we have no economy we cannot finance a defence force.

Yes, it is a bit of a chicken and an egg situation, but the fact of the matter is that if one cannot defend the country and it is overrun by Marxists, then one cannot have a capitalist society in any event. [Interjections.] In this context I should therefore like to refer to a speech made by the hon. member for Yeoville during the Second Reading of the Defence Amendment Bill. He said inter alia, and I quote—

Mr. Chairman, far be it for me to quarrel with the hon. member for Yeoville. All of us on this side of the House and I also think the NRP know that he has a very positive attitude towards the defence of this country. However, having made that remark I think it is apposite to ask him the question what he and his party have done to assist the Government in motivating the public properly about the nature of the threat.

Have you not listened since 1974, since we have been in the House?

I have. However, the problem is that the hon. member’s party has not listened to the hon. the Minister of Defence …

He has not been here since 1974.

… or the hon. Prime Minister, nor have they read the two White Papers on Defence which have been published since then in which the nature of this threat as well as what is meant by the totality of the threat has been clearly defined. Therefore, it was not me that has not been listening, but those members on that side of the House who keep on poohpoohing and denigrating the totality of the threat. Nobody on this side of the House has ever suggested that the threat is total in intensity. The hon. the Minister has constantly pointed out that although there is a significant escalation in the number and quality of conventional military hardware in our neighbouring states, that the war as of now is a low-intensity terrorist struggle.

Tell it to the people of Tsumeb.

Totality does not he in the intensity, but in the extensiveness of the onslaught. The hon. the Minister has pointed out, and the Official Opposition is always quick to quote him on this, that the military component is 20% and that 80% of the solution of this country’s problems lies elsewhere, in the political field. That of course is obvious because the military component of the onslaught is only 20%. However, the other 80% constitutes the totality of the onslaught. It is total because it covers every field of human endeavour. It is spiritual in that churches are inveigled into the campaign of concerted disinformation and even malinformation that emanates from the Soviet Union, the United Nations and elsewhere. It is economic and psychological in that churches and other organizations actively take part in disinvestment programmes in the United States of America which are aimed at this country. It is total in the sense that there is an oil embargo against us, in that there is a total arms embargo against us, in that there are sports boycotts against us and that our own media contribute through overseas media to this campaign of disinformation. The effectiveness of this disinformation is evident every time foreign visitors come to this country who inform us that this is nothing like they thought it would be and nothing like what they saw overseas. The extent of the onslaught covers every field of human endeavour in this country and its aims are to destabilize society, ruin the economy and demoralize the population. It is evident in the refusal of trade unions to register. It is evident in the agitation behind wildcat strikes. It is evident in squatters in St. George’s Cathedral. All this is part of the total onslaught.

The biggest onslaught is apartheid.

Well, that is a matter of opinion. The hon. member has said that often. I do not agree with him and I do not intend to do so. In saying that, I should like to add that the hon. member must guard against becoming part of the total onslaught himself. [Interjections.]

What about the political problems?

Why do you not give everybody the opportunity to disagree?

Having stated what the nature of the totality of the onslaught is now once and for all, I do not think that hon. members on that side of the House have any right in future to conduct a dialogue that deals with the nature of the total onslaught. They understand it very well and have understood it very well in the past. However, if they want to assist the Government and the country in motivating the people to defend it properly they must change their attitude towards this kind of interpretation of the total onslaught that they have exercised in the past.

Why do you not try to help them instead of antagonizing everybody with these attacks on patriotism? Rather try and encourage us to help you.

We have always encouraged you to help us. [Interjections.] However, we are losing patience with people like the hon. member for Constantia who, for instance, after the hon. Prime Minister, when he was Minister of Defence, and the current hon. Minister of Defence did everything in their power to depoliticize the Defence Forces, a year ago in Parliament said, and I quote—

I could not agree more with him. But then he goes on to say … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to follow exactly on what the hon. member for Benoni has had to say. However, I should like to come back to one point that he made. I should like to make use of this opportunity to make one or two down-to-earth points which I believe are terribly important in relation to the serving man in our armed forces. They will probably be seen as minor pinpricks, administrative necessities and situations which may or may not in the bigger framework concern our general staff or our planners. However, it is important that the feelings of the troops and the people on the ground in relation to these things are known, and that they are voiced.

In this regard I should particularly like to refer to the use of certain troops in relation to duties which somehow free them from the necessity of doing their border stint during their initial training period. I particularly think in terms of the civic action programme. Without any shadow of doubt there are cases of personnel being drafted to civic action situations, who are not necessarily suited for this role. Having recently left school they are in any case too young. They are not mature enough and they do in fact not always have the specialized training for the area into which they are drafted. They are often used in a situation in which it is very difficult from a military administrative point of view to maintain the military discipline and military stamp. Therefore, they are a little slack in the situation in which they find themselves. They do not in fact complete a proper training programme thereafter and somehow they do not fit into the scheme of things once they have completed their initial period.

This can to a degree also be said of many of the students with degrees. I think that the application of professional personnel is all very well, but it must have a limit and a saturation point. It certainly is becoming a friction point when people are able to go to university first and then, when they report for duty do not have to do the rigorous training or be employed in a combative role and so do not have to go through the same hardships as those who do not go to university first. This is being looked upon as an escape route from doing the normal service that for instance an infantryman would do.

I think the situation which surrounds sport falls in the same category. I know that the South African Defence Force has a very proud tradition as far as sport is concerned and that sport and the physical wellbeing of troops, their fitness, pride and their desire to compete and maintain the pride of a unit is an essential aspect of military training. However, these things must be said and there is a feeling among troops that better sportsmen have an advantage and in many cases do not do the same duties that other troops do.

I think those three categories which I have mentioned must be well looked at and the friction must be totally eliminated. “Dit moet heeltemal uitgeskakel word.” I think “uitgeskakel” is the best word I can use.

In effect I would say that we should strive to achieve a situation where the maximum possible percentage of an intake does infantry training. Whether he is going to the personnel service corps, the administrative service corps or whatever other capacity he is going to be used in, let him go and do the rigorous infantry training, let him do his border stint and thereafter he should be used in whatever capacity he may possibly be needed. I think it would make the infantry and other arms of the service who in fact spend very long periods on the border feel a lot better if everybody were burdened with an equal degree of military service.

Having got that off my chest, may I say that I should link up with a remark made by the hon. member for Benoni with respect to the efforts made in recruiting the commando force. There is no question about it that anybody who has been involved in commandos will know that the commandos are completely related to and are under command of a geographic Command within the command structure of the South African Defence Force and that each of these Commands, over a period of several successive years, has conducted extensive, grinding and frustrating recruiting programmes through the unit commanders, local personalities, industry and commerce on an area basis. The last such attempt probably came about on a national basis on television and the national Press. The kind of response from it was so limited that the personnel in the commandos now really welcome the concept of everybody having to carry the burden equally. The units which have succeeded best in achieving a standard and have succeeded best in motivating people to become course qualified and in maintaining a certain degree of influence or image amongst the local population are those who aspire nearest to regimental type commandos. There is no question that there is a great deal of danger in this concept of a very loose situation in a commando unit where one is only going to be trained to take it to the ridiculous, in the bedroom or lounge type of operation. I see great danger in the idea of moving away from the possibility of a unit being able to build into its service within a given area a degree of succession, particularly if one considers that one is now going to get ex-citizen force personnel posted to the commandos, personnel who can create a great spirit of tradition within a regiment. If they are posted to a commando in which that spirit is not present, you really are going to give the personnel in that unit very little opportunity of building the commando unit up to the level to which it should be built up. I also think, without necessarily hurting people’s feelings, that the next step must be to take a very hard look at whether the commando as such, particularly in the urban areas, has not lived out its usefulness. Commandos in South Africa’s history and tradition relate to the rural areas. Their function in the urban situation, even now is very difficult to see, although I realize that we have the industrial commando and other commandos of that nature. However, I want to get back to the point that I have made, namely that we should keep the commandos together and that if we are to make them keen, well-trained people aspiring to a high standard of service you are going to have to go as near to a regiment as near as you can. In the rural areas very nearly the same thing will have to pertain on a more flexible basis. The existence of two forces has to a large extent bedevilled our Defence Force. The differences between two forces, the fact that one was subservient to the other, was second rate or had a poor image, very definitely bedevil the service of people.

Since we are looking again at the entire defence structure—and we will in my opinion be doing the right thing by spreading the burden across the entire population of the country as opposed to putting it on the shoulders of the young only—let us be big enough and flexible enough to look at systems which will bring out the best in all South Africans using the best traditions which we know inspires them to the best type of service. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I take pleasure in speaking after a very fine, positive and calm contribution by the hon. member for King William’s Town. I think he could make a fine contribution in the Eastern Province with regard to restoring and improving the prestige of the Defence Force in that particular area. I think we could take cognizance of his standpoints on this matter with appreciation.

I should like to comment on a standpoint of the hon. member for Yeoville, who does not feel very strongly in favour of the calling up of women to the Defence Force, and also on the remark, which was meant as a joke, by the hon. member for Bryanston, that if we should call up more women to the Defence Force, we would thereby have a greater willingness on the part of the men. This side of the House does not think of a woman as a decoy, in the spirit in which this was meant. I take no pleasure in that joke. To us on this side of the House a woman is a dignified being for whom we have great appreciation.

I prefer to associate myself in my speech with the positive contribution made by the hon. member for Roodepoort concerning the role of the woman in the Defence Force and more specifically, the contribution made by the welfare department of the Defence Force. Mr. Chairman, I wish to tell the hon. member for Yeoville that a woman, in the person of Brig. Lets Kok, is at the head of this department. At present she holds the rank of brigadier. What is the creed of these people? They say that they aim at promoting and maintaining the social functioning and stability of members of the South African Defence Force and their families by preventing, eliminating and dealing with social problems which impede the preparedness of the soldier, thereby prejudicing the general preparedness of the South African Defence Force. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not, however, wish to slight the men in this department. However, I very much doubt whether anyone else but a woman could fulfil this particular role better. Even at this stage, I wish to say to the hon. the Minister that Brig. Kok and her department deserve the heart-felt congratulations and greatest appreciation of this side of the House for the wonderful work they are doing in the Defence Force.

I should like to divide their task into three phases. They commence with preventive action, the early identification of problem cases. Then follows the pre-selection of pupils in a special school in order to ensure the training potential, as well as the differentiated training and application of these members during national service; and thereafter, the identification of role tension in the wives of members of the South African Defence Force and overcoming this by way of courses offered to these members and their wives. This ensures that the women will be able to deal with the particular demands made on them. They do this beforehand. However, they then move on simultaneously to a second facet of this work in the course of their welfare work. Because of the welfare officer’s particular involvement with and access to the homes of these unfortunate people, or alternatively, dissatisfied, aggrieved or uninformed people, they offer unique opportunities for the correct motivation, and interpretation of military systems and customs. They also travel and hold talks at a wide variety of women’s, welfare and service organizations. They motivate the soldier’s wife, which is a high priority with them. Often the wife’s attitude determines the husband’s attitude; this is their premise. These people are performing a fine task in respect of these families of ours.

Let us think for a moment of the position of these women whose husbands are away from home from three to six months. When they remain behind at home with their children, when they have to weather many of the storms and disappointments of life without their husbands to support them, this section of women in uniform comes forward and offers these people moral support. They contribute to relieving this tension and to cultivating a positive attitude. Despite this difficult life where these wives have to manage without their husbands, these women in uniform still bring the positive aspects in favour of the Defence Force to the fore. Surely this is a great task. This is a task which we cannot properly appreciate with a mere word of thanks.

However, there are even bigger traumas which these people experience. I wish to mention an example which I myself experienced. I am referring to a fine young man who played eighth man in and was captain of his school’s first rugby team and who was a member of the student council. In an accident on the border he lost both his eyes in a split second. This is the department of our Defence Force that went to fetch that young man there, that took him to the hospital and that cared for him there. When the bandages were taken from his eyes, there was only a suffocating darkness. They remained at his side. He still had the same two healthy arms and legs. He still had that pulsating heart. This was the young man who had chased a ball from one end of the rugby field to the other. Now he was enveloped in darkness, although he was only 21 years old. These women came forward in this situation to teach this young man to accept that there was a place for him in this life, that from then on he would have to feel with his fingertips what he wished to absorb when reading, would have to feel what he wished to absorb when he wanted to know more about life. He would have to find himself a job somewhere where he could make a meaningful contribution in a life, which for him, could still span many years. Are we aware of the role of this woman and the phases through which she has to take someone like this young man in order to teach him to adapt?

I am acquainted with some of these members of staff of the South African Defence Force, and I am infinitely grateful to the South African Defence Force which also provides these people with the opportunity of studying further. At the latest graduation ceremony at the University of Potchefstroom, one of these ladies obtained an MA degree for a thesis on this subject and the rehabilitation of people with this kind of war injury. This thesis is available in our library. It is a fine piece of work.

This is not the only work these women do. In this trauma, in experiencing this extreme situation, they have to deal with the family of this child. Many of them come from the Eastern Province and from the Cape. Transport has to be arranged for them to Voortrekkerhoogte. Accommodation has to be arranged for them. They have to be cared for in all respects. Morally, too, they have to be supported so that they may retain their positive attitude towards their country, their people and the Defence Force, while having to accept the trauma of a child and his blindness. I wish to reiterate that we cannot thank this department of our Defence Force enough for the tremendous contribution they are making to this section of our people.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to say something further about the woman. The woman I am talking about now, is not in uniform. Would there be a young woman who would be prepared to give her heart to this blind man who will be blind for the rest of his life, who will marry him, bear a child or children for him, thereby giving him love and a new interest in life? The time has come for us to see the South African woman through different eyes. I say with a great deal of compassion that when this nation went through crises in the past, it was the woman who captured the man’s heart. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I wish to associate myself with the tribute of the hon. member for Brentwood to women. I also wish to associate myself with his appreciation of the role they play in the Defence Force, but he will excuse me if I do not continue in that vein. I should like to broach another subject. I wish to speak about aspects of the work done by Armscor. I wish to say at once that, according to Hansard, the success story of Armscor has already been brought up here many times in previous debates. As a newcomer to this House, I do not wish to pretend that by discussing Armscor I can say anything new on this subject.

I myself worked as an engineer and mathematician on the uranium enrichment project more than 11 years. On the basis of my experience there, I have a great deal of appreciation for the problems which had to be overcome in building Armscor up from its foundations to become the second largest industrial undertaking in the country, within a period of approximately 15 years. This undertaking has total capital assets of approximately R1 300 000 000, and together with its subsidiaries, it has 29 000 employees in its service. These two projects have a great deal in common, and at the outset I just wish to mention a few of the common denominators. Firstly, there is the ideal of self-sufficiency in both projects. Secondly, we are dealing with high technology projects which have contributed a great deal to increasing the level of sophistication of our industry. Thirdly, in respect of both projects, expertise from abroad has been withheld from us due to the arms and nuclear embargoes, so that we have had to undertake a considerable amount of research and development in order to make a success of the projects. In the fourth place, I can mention that both projects were initiated by the State with maximum participation by the private sector. I noticed in the latest White Paper that in the case of Armscor, which has 29 000 people in its employ and in the employ of its subsidiaries, private contractors involved in the arms industry involve a further 76 000 people. Fifthly, not only must the product or products supplied comply with local standards, but it must also be possible to offer them on the international market as export products.

It is interesting to bear in mind that the development of Armscor coincided with a period in our country’s history when we evolved from a purely agricultural and mining country into an industrial country as well.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to say something about the training programme at Armscor. It is a fact that munitions are extremely important to the consumer. The one standard—and there are various standards— which could be adhered to, is that munitions may not fail on the battlefield. As a result, the quality requirements that munitions have to satisfy are extremely high, much higher than for any commercial products. Munitions therefore have to be subjected to extremely high quality requirements. An entirely new approach in the field of quality control has developed in recent years both internationally and in South Africa. The realization arose that quality control in manufacturing should, in the final instance, be the responsibility of the management. As a result, nowadays one often hears the term “quality management systems”. As a result of this realization, the South African Bureau of Standards, in co-operation with Government departments, statutory bodies and private enterprise, established a code of practice for quality management systems in South Africa. The application of this code affects the design, the manufacture, the inspection and other activities applicable to quality, and this promotes an economic manufacturing process.

In order to implement quality control systems effectively, one has to have manpower that has been properly trained. Training programmes in quality control are being conducted on a continuous basis for the Armscor group and the South African Defence Force. I wish to mention two examples which are extremely commendable: Firstly, it is true, and I say this in the recent White Paper that a complete educational programme up to the level of engineering technologist has been drawn up by Armscor for the technikons; secondly, there are two universities which are considering introducing a post-graduate course in quality engineering.

Mr. Chairman, the fact that Armscor and its subsidiaries produce engineering work of quality, is proved by its success with weapons, for example, the G5 cannon, the R4 rifle and other examples which have previously also been mentioned in this debate.

I wish to proceed to mention a few other aspects of Armscor’s training programmes. Hon. members will be aware that we in South Africa have the natural resources to ensure tremendous development until the end of the century. However, there is a great shortage of trained manpower of all kinds at all levels in this country. It is not possible for any organization today, as in years gone by, to simply lure technicians and artisans away from the Post Office, Iscor or a mining organization, since those organizations, too, no longer have any trained manpower that they are able to part with today. There has been widespread realization that every private organization has to do its share in respect of the training of manpower today. As a result we have the major training incentive measures introduced by the present Government to encourage the private sector. The question is: What is Armscor doing in this regard? I just wish to mention that at the lower levels, Armscor has approximately 1 000 apprentices in its employ today. The most important and best-known trade school is possibly the one at the Atlas Aircraft Corporation. A total of 15 000 people have already received technical training at various levels at Armscor and its subsidiaries.

Mr. Chairman, Armscor follows the accepted practice of first offering proficiency and aptitude tests before giving technical training so that people may be placed correctly with a view to a future career. This ensures economic and effective training.

In conclusion, I wish to mention a new course which is also being adopted by Armscor and of which I acquired considerable experience in the uranium enrichment project. As hon. members can imagine, Armscor is an extremely large organization, since it has 29 000 people in its employ all over the country. A tremendous amount of collective expertise exists in such an organization. One of the main problems of top management is to be able to utilize this collective expertise for all decision-making and for the determining of priorities, since general management does not possess all wisdom and knowledge. If one moves down from general management, one arrives at the middle and junior management levels, and these are the people who really possess the expertise in respect of the execution of the project. It is extremely important that the expertise of these people is carried through to the highest levels. Armscor, under the leadership of Mr. John Maree, called middle management together and invited them to take part, think, plan, and, with a view to the future, to determine priorities together. According to the information I have obtained, approximately 100 of the middle management people decided to take part, and the expertise which they conveyed to their seniors in this way, has already produced above-average results. At the moment, it seems as if the carrying out of these steps has resulted in the organization functioning more effectively at each level. With a view to the future, the goal is to extend this process to the lower ranks as well, so that they, in turn, will inform middle management, and these people will then all take part in determining priorities and they will identify themselves with the goals of the organization. This promotes team work and it mobilizes all the collective knowledge which exists in such an organization. I should like to congratulate Armscor on this effort.

The hon. member for Pretoria East will forgive me if I do not respond to some of the points which he has raised here this evening. I want to continue with what I was saying earlier this evening and I want to try to explain to the hon. the Minister why, in my view, the commandos have failed and why those who volunteered, in fact so soon fell out. Earlier on I said that one of the main reasons was the amount of timewasting that took place, mainly because there seemed to be a lack of direction by those members of the SADF and those officers who were put in charge of these newly formed commandos.

Mr. Chairman, it was pointed out to you earlier that at stages orders by young men in uniform to older men in uniform were issued with great enthusiasm. They were chased around parade grounds for no apparently good reason at all. Of course this was much to their embarrassment. What I am saying, is that those who volunteered, firstly, found themselves in a position of embarrassment and, secondly, could see no connection between the game of soldiers that they were playing and the need for protecting their farms, their workers and their investments. Naturally, the result of this was that the commandos gradually sunk and eventually sunk away into complete despair. The figures which have been talked about this evening and which were given over the television by the Chief of the Defence Force, in fact bears this out. It is my contention that this need not have been the case at all. Historically the term “commando” has a ring about it which is typically South African in flavour. The term “commando” appeals to most South Africans. What we have to do now, is to ensure that the service that the commandos will provide, will be seen to be in line with the requirements of a new evolving South African way of life. I think it is extremely important that these people are made to understand this. If I had the time, I would have liked to have expanded on the evolving way of South African life, but I do not think that I have the time for that.

The question is: now that legislation is about to be passed, how can we ensure that the commando system will work? Firstly, I believe that the commando members must know that they will operate exclusively or virtually exclusively in their area and that their prime responsibility will be the maintenance of law and order in that area. I think that is necessary. Secondly, I think it must be accepted that commando members will not be required to be at the peak of physical fitness, as the functions which they would perform, would be that of control of a preventative nature, rather than that of an offensive nature. I think that this is important, because if you are going to deal with a man of forty, fifty years old, this obviously makes sense. Thirdly, I believe that the commandos would have to work in very close co-operation with the agents of law and order, namely the South African Police Force. Right from the outset it must be clearly understood that there will be a very close relationship and understanding between the commando units and the South African Police Force. I believe that is necessary and, as the hon. member for Constantia has said, they will have to work very closely with local authorities as well. Fourthly, these people must understand that one of the important functions of the commando is to ensure localized economic continuity in times of crisis. In other words, they are not only there to keep law and order, but to ensure that the economy is kept going. They must understand that. This means that in the case of rural commandos emphasis and training must not only be placed on military action and policing duties, but I believe that it should go further and that members should understand the farming and business requirements of their colleagues who are also involved, so that there is an inter-related interest and it becomes a self-help, protective unit. Fifthly, I believe that, because of the protective role, with regard to both property and the local citizens, that has to be fulfilled by the commandos, they will have to include a very substantial number of members of all population groups. I believe this must not be tokenism, because, irrespective of what hon. members of the Conservative Party may say, our society is already completely integrated. Our farms and factories are run by both Black and White. The people who know the terrain best, and this does not only apply to the rural areas, but also to the industrial areas, are often the workers who work in that area and who are often Blacks.

I believe that, right in the last few days, experience in South West Africa has shown us that racially segregated commandos cannot do the job that is required of them. There is no doubt about that. We have seen it.

Finally, I want to say that the hon. the Minister must be prepared to play open cards with the community if he is to seek its full co-operation. When I say “play open cards”, I want to say that you should not use clichés. If you or some of your senior members can possibly get away with it, do not use the words “total onslaught” when you go to Klapmuts, Muldersvlei and Agter-Paarl to talk to those people about requirements that are going to be placed, because it does not mean much in the context of the area in which they live. They want to know why they must do it, what they must do in the area where they live and what is the best way to do it. Explain the problem in simple terms to them. If you do so, the job that is required, will be done. I have no doubt about that and as I have said earlier on, I think that, without legislation, even in the past, this would have been possible. However, we are going to have legislation and let us make sure that we do not botch it up again.

Mr. Chairman, one of the cardinal points that I have made in this address, was the need to involve all population groups. Earlier this evening we had the spectacle of hon. members of the CP spelling out a policy in which they very definitely want to exclude these people from co-operative defence mechanisms in this country. I want to say to you that, in this House tomorrow afternoon, it is up to you to very clearly spell out the NP’s policy with regard to the policy which the hon. members of the CP spelt out earlier. If you do not put them fairly and squarely in their place, I believe that what they have said, certainly is going to cause harm to the South African Defence Force in the short term.

*In the long run we shall definitely reap the bitter fruits of that kind of speech that is being made. I just want the hon. the Minister to deal with it. He cannot get away without doing it.

Then I should like to come to one last point and that is the interesting and half unexpected attack on me by the hon. member for Ladybrand. This hon. member came to light with an extraordinary new principle to night. He has now conceived the idea that if people are not by nature prepared to serve their country—I do not want to use the word “patriotism” over and over—we should force them to do so. In South Africa that is a new principle. It has never been necessary. I do not believe that it is necessary and I think the term “compulsory patriotism” is a term that should rather not be used in the language. The hon. member did not use it. [Time expired ]

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to say much about what the hon. member for Wynberg had to say. I do not know how much he knows about commandos, but if I understood him correctly at the start, then he is of the opinion that the commandos do not really have a function today.

You simply did not listen.

Were you here? I think you are confused.

I just wish to say to the hon. members—and this was said earlier too—that the commandos have a very important function. They have a tremendously important function.

Of course they have a function. It has to be spelt out.

The hon. member agrees with me, and I am very grateful to him for doing so. I just wish to tell him that if hon. members on that side of the House think that the commandos do not have a function they are making a very big mistake.

But you are the secretary of the group. You ought to know better.

Then I have won my case. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, to come back to this vote, I wish to venture a statement and say that some of our people are carrying on peacefully, calmly and almost unconcernedly, blissfully unaware that at this very moment, powers of revolution and terrorism are building up within and beyond our borders. Others, on the other hand, take little notice of timely warnings that we read about every day, particularly in recent weeks. I do not think there is a single newspaper in which warnings in this regard have not appeared. We see them on television. The programme on Sunday evening in which the Chief of the Defence Force and General Gleason appeared was an outstanding programme. I think that their performance, too, was excellent and we want to convey our sincere thanks to them for that and congratulate them on that fine performance. Then there are others who simply accept that the South African Defence Force has the situation under control at present and that there is not much cause for concern. I just want to say to that hon. member that he must stand up if he wants to ask a question, otherwise he should hold his tongue.

That is for the Chairman to decide.

Some hon. members of the Official Opposition, like the hon. member for Constantia, contend that there is no threat to South Africa.

Quote the exact words.

To these hon. members I want to say that if they have not taken cognizance of what has happened in our country over the past number of weeks, they will never learn a lesson. During the past week we had to deal with the biggest force hostile to South Africa even to cross our borders.

What about the battle of Blouberg? Are you not aware of that?

Those were in the days when you, too, were still dreaming.

The English were not your enemies, after all.

The hon. members are being facetious about this and it is typical of them to be facetious about what is a serious matter to us and what threatens us. I do not think we need take much notice of their remarks.

You are making the whole debate ridiculous.

You must stop being facetious, be more serious and come and throw your weight behind us and help us to defend this country in a sound and proper matter. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, this hostile force of well trained terrorists—some contend they could number more than 200—are equipped with the very best and most modern arms, and are also responsible for the death of a number of soldiers of our security forces, because a Ratel was destroyed by an RPG7 rocket. By saying this I am trying to indicate that there is a build-up of hostile forces across our borders and in the northern part of South West. Earlier this evening the hon. member for Yeoville said that he agreed with that. Not only is there a build-up of forces, there is also further training of terrorists across our borders. The hon. member agrees with that as well. Those terrorists are equipped with the very best arms from Moscow and undergo only the very best of training; that is a fact. There also are signs that Swapo will want to pin down the security forces in the territory of South West Africa for as long as possible until such time as the opportunity is created for other forces to open up new fronts against the RSA.

Mr. Chairman, if there are people who do not want to perceive these things, they are irresponsible, and that could also be dangerous.

Do you not think that Swapo is trying to take-over South West?

One thing is certain and this, too, has been said here this evening: our military leaders have gone out of their way to spell out the dangers to us. They have deemed it their duty to acquaint us with the situation in this House and also in public on various occasions and tell us precisely what are the dangers threatening South Africa. I do not think that in this regard we can point a finger at the hon. the Minister of Defence or officers of the Defence Force who have provided us with this information. Looking at our northern border we hear a definite rumbling from Zimbabwe and a possible threat from Mr. Mugabe. I should like to quote him: “Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister, Mr. Robert Mugabe, said yesterday that Zimbabwe should prepare for a South African attack and announced a national system of military training.” That means that he is establishing commandos and a defence force that could be a threat to us. He also made this disturbing statement—

He then went on to make this very important statement—

That can only mean that support is being given to the African National Congress and the PAC. I think that the people of South Africa should take cognizance of the fact that South Africa is an important target area that is high on Soviet Russia’s list of priorities. They regard the ANC as a far more powerful organization than Swapo and they want to make this organization more powerful, with the aim of eventually bringing the RSA to its knees. They—the ANC—will also eventually have to take over the function of Swapo in South West Africa. These are things we must realize and that we read about every day. The ANC has a seat in the UN. They receive a large sum of money and enjoy benefits such as printing, for example. The Freedom Charter of the ANC is printed by the UN and widely distributed at UN expense. I just wish to quote two or three extracts from this Freedom Charter of the UN that we do not find strange. The first is “We call on those who live on our blood to beware of the oncoming waves of the forces of freedom.” Secondly, “Looking back on the history of freedom, there is no nation who got freedom without bloodshed.” Thirdly: “We shall continue to teach our children that the Whites are the foreigners in this country and that they are our enemies.” With reference to what the hon. member for Constantia said this evening, it will be pointless putting your hands in the air, as happened during riots in Black areas, and saying “I am English”. A fourth extract reads as follows: “To fight for the overthrow of white domination and to destroy and liquidate white supremacy in whatever form it exists. We want a Black government by the Africans for the Africans” … etc.

The report of the Rabie Commission also refers to several of the objectives of the ANC.

Mr. Chairman, it was a great pleasure to follow the speech of the hon. member Mr. Vermeulen, and it was quite clear to me that in his speech he wanted to bring home the gravity of the onslaught on South Africa to hon. members of the Official Opposition, who gave the impression this evening, through their occasional frivolity, that they do not always realize the gravity of the situation.

In the debate conducted this afternoon and this evening, the structure of all aspects of the South African Defence Force was dealt with in general. However, I think we should also take cognizance of the fact that the Defence Force consists of individual units. This evening I should like to concentrate on one of these individual units and single out this unit. I have never in the past taken the opportunity to discuss the military unit 4 South African Infantry Battalion at Middelburg. I think that in singling out this individual unit, I am entitled to return to my own backyard and discuss that specific unit. It is with pleasure that I do so, and I do it for a specific reason. It is because during the recent short recess, we had the opportunity to celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the base together with the commanding officer and the men of 4 SAI Battalion. This was an occasion that was used by the present commanding officer to bring the existence and the function of the base to the attention of the public in an appropriate way. Accordingly, on this occasion I should like to place on record my wholehearted congratulations to the commanding officer and his men. During the 20 years of the existence of the base 4 SAI Battalion has played its part in a very striking fashion in the defence of the Republic, in the operational area in the first instance, but also, certainly, in other spheres and in the local community as well.

When I refer to the operational contributions of the unit I think it is also appropriate to associate myself with ideas mentioned earlier by other speakers. That is, to honour the memories of the men of 4 SAI Battalion who paid the highest price for the RSA. It is with profound gratitude that we remember those soldiers, and our hearts go out to their next of kin. I am aware that the community of Middelburg takes a special interest in the welfare of the people of the base, particularly in times when something has happened to cause great sorrow in the base, but also in general and at all times. This was proved once again during retreat ceremony, given by the commanding officer and a parade through the streets of Middelburg on 3 April, an occasion attended by large numbers of people. I am convinced that the commanding officer has been highly successful in his efforts to instil a fresh awareness of the existence of the base in the public mind. During the 20 years of the existence of the base there have been several commanding officers whose running and development of the base has been masterly, and the growth of the base has at all times been impressive. If, then, I may use the words of the recently tabled White Paper on Defence and Armaments Supply, I want to say that under the able leadership of the present commanding officer, 4 SAI Battalion, true to the aim of the South African Defence Force to build up and maintain a prepared, effective and balanced force, does its share in the interests of the security of the RSA. Due to the situation of Middelburg and the available site—with minor improvements—the siting of a base at Middelburg 20 years ago was in my opinion a very sound and wise decision. The buildings on the site at that stage—which were being used as an agricultural school—could be used in the beginning stages and eventually, additional buildings were constructed so that eventually the base was able to grow into a training base. Now, after 20 years, when the anniversary was celebrated, it was a very appropriate occasion to make the public aware of the conversion of the base to a mechanized unit with the aim of achieving greater mobility and preparedness.

During a visit I paid to the base three weeks ago shortly after the anniversary, it was very clear to me that the commanding officer was succeeding in a very able and purposeful fashion, with the limited manpower at his disposal, in effecting the conversion according to plan and carrying out the directive according to schedule.

As is the case with any undertaking, the commanding officer also encounters difficulties from time to time. My impression is that this young and energetic man likes dealing with challenges and he solves his problems and difficulties in an extremely able way.

However, there are a few difficulties I want to mention on this occasion. In the first instance I want to discuss the housing of the Permanent Force staff. At present they are accommodated in prefabricated units in the base. In my opinion it is appropriate that officers do not live in the base—apart from the fact that they are not the most suitable dwellings. I contend that for the families of the officers it is far better to be accommodated within the community—this is also true in times when the unit is in the operational area. From a social point of view it is better if the people can be involved in the community and move in a wide social sphere. At the moment 26 duplex flats are being built in the town away from the base, but this is still a bound unit. I suggest that an effort be made to provide the staff with accommodation in the future on a basis that will enable them to be well integrated with the community in the religious, social and other fields.

There is another aspect, too, that is of importance and that I should like to mention. It concerns the training area. The unit has a training area at a convenient distance from the base, but in view of the conversion to a mechanized unit and the use of high-trajectory projectile arms, the area is approximately two kilometres too small. This shortage of land is aggravated by the fact—and this is very important—that the airfield at Middelburg is now being moved and is at present so situated that the 10 kilometre circuit area takes up about 80% of the training area. This applies to the existing training area at Klein Doornkop. It is true that there is a farm of approximately 850 hectares that is situated close to the training area, namely the farm Doornkop, which was previously a black spot and which was subsequently allocated to the Defence Force. In my opinion this farm Doornkop is useless and unusable for military purposes specifically because it does not link up with the existing training area. I propose that the farm Doornkop be returned and made available to the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries so that Agricultural Credit can use it and can make it available for agriculture, for which it is suited, and that consideration be given to the possibility of purchasing land bordering on Klein Doornkop in the direction of the two kilometres which it is short of, and also in order to accommodate the circuit area of the airfield. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we listened with interest to what the hon. member for Middelburg told us in connection with 4 SAI Battalion, and I am convinced that the battalion concerned will take cognizance with appreciation of the contribution made here this evening by the hon. member for Middelburg in connection with the history and the set-up of that battalion.

Military service, in whatever country it may be, usually draws attention to two matters. One could say that two questions arise in this regard. The first relates to the effect it will have on the country’s economy, and the second is whether there is a threat. These two questions arise in connection with the subject of national service. This evening I want to begin by referring to the threat. We must recognize that there are at all times highly competent people in the Defence Force engaged in collecting information about hostile plans, preparations and activities. With the aid of this information that is collected, highly scientific intelligence appreciations are carried out and in this way the most probable course of action is determined. A prediction of operations is made and on that basis manpower needs, inter alia, are determined. The authorities, that is to say the Defence Force, cannot make all the information at its disposal available to the general public, because on the one hand this could lead to panic among the population, and on the other hand, the enemy may not know that his plans are known to us, because then he will tighten up his security measures and change his plans. Therefore the general public must trust the authorities in this matter. In this regard I wish to state that if the threat is real and serious, no wise authority would take expensive and unpopular steps to counter the threat if it was not absolutely essential to do so.

There is one remark I want to make about the effect of this threat on the economy. The authorities are fully aware that a strong defence force must be supported by a strong economy, and accordingly no wise government would allow its defence force to take any steps that would harm the country’s economy. However, to avert the threat effectively there must be a sound balance between a strong defence force and a strong and healthy economy. The conventional force of the South Africa Defence Force, as far as the army is concerned, comprises certain Permanent Force units, national service units and certain units of the citizen force. Apart from the senior staff leaders and the leadership element and certain supporting elements, this Force consists of young, fit and well-trained soldiers. The same applies to the counterinsurgency forces that have to lead offensive operations against terrorists. The number of young men allocated to these forces annually is simply no longer adequate to counter the future hostile threat. Apart from leaving the non-offensive tasks in safe areas to women and older people as far as possible in order to free the fit young men for offensive service, a way must be found of meeting the manpower needs of the Defence Force. Whatever steps are taken, stringent precautions must be taken to ensure that no one’s career, nor the economy of the country, is prejudiced or jeopardized.

However, there are still two realities that may not and cannot be overlooked. In the first place, it is imperative that there must be sufficient manpower to counter the threat, and in the second place, potential leaders must be found among the young men and trained to occupy senior leadership posts. Due to the chronic shortage of experienced and well-trained older men, it is often necessary to make use of young and inexperienced people, and you will agree with me that this could have a very detrimental effect on the effective striking power of the South African Defence Force.

I also wish to make a remark about the shortage of manpower in the rural commandos. Over the past few days and in this debate as well, a great deal has been said about this, but I, too, should like to point out that this is indeed a very serious matter. Farmers and owners of one-man businesses are severely prejudiced by long periods of absence on border duty, or else they have to apply repeatedly for postponement and are therefore unable to complete their service commitment. Therefore we can say that it is imperative that the commanding officers of commandos be assured of the availability of well-trained men who can be used as a reaction force to begin with a follow-up action immediately after an incident and keep the insurgent under pressure until a special force from elsewhere can take over the operation. Therefore the greater involvement of the commandos is a very important prerequisite.

I should also like to make a few remarks about the fact that there are so many of our people who have had no military training. I classify myself as one of those men. In the period when I grew up, I unfortunately did not have that privilege and I frankly admit today that this is certainly a major disadvantage for me, and I believe that there are many thousands of other men in our country who suffer this same lack. I believe and trust that it will be and become absolutely necessary—as the signs indicate to us—that we too, have a role to play and a task to perform, and that our training should be task oriented. When I say that, I believe that we should be trained on a task-oriented basis at many levels. I want to illustrate this statement by way of certain examples. For example, I have in mind a man working at a fuel depot. That man will have to be trained and set the task of protecting the fuel depot. A farmer will have to be trained to protect his home and his farm as well as the local infrastructure in his facility, for example, the school and the school bus and things of that nature—the teacher as well. Other members of the commando force must also be trained to assist the South African Police Force, as often occurs with the few volunteers we have, for example, with regard to road blocks. This is important work that is being done. A member living in a town will have a specific task to render service as a clerk, radio operator, etc. Accordingly, I think you will agree with me that training and effective utilization of our human material will only really become effective when there is a sufficient number of men. We are really concerned about this.

In conclusion, I should like to make a remark concerning something that an interested friend told me about our system of national service. On one occasion he raised a matter which I do think should be put to the hon. the Minister. His plea is that there should no longer be key posts, the occupants of which are granted total exemption from military services, as is the case at present. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman. I have no quarrel with the hon. member Mr. Theunissen. I agree wholeheartedly with everything he said. He gives me the impression that he will not be part of the coup d’état.

National service is an important component of the structure of the South African Defence Force. It is the only manpower element of the full-time force which can be obliged to perform service or undergo training. National servicemen are called up every year, while the services of other elements compete on an open labour market. National servicemen comprise 46% of the fulltime force, and in the deployment of the expanded force in 1987, comprise the greater part of the 30% under the head “Training” in the budget. It is also envisaged that the Permanent Force will be supplemented by White men from the ranks of the national servicemen, to be used for the most part as leaders and control personnel for other population groups. In this regard national servicemen will probably play the most important role in the system of manpower supply for the permanent force since the expansion of all the other elements in the force can only take place in proportion to the number of White leaders and control personnel available.

The source of manpower for the citizen force comprises for the most part White national servicemen who have already carried out their initial training commitment. Without the system of national service our Defence Force would really be in trouble. National service creates the opportunity for essential intensive and thorough military training. At the same time, it comprises 46% of the full-time force after basic training, and after that it is the main source from which the citizen force draws its members after completion of the compulsory two years of national service. In fact, seen purely from the point of view of manpower, the extension of the present compulsory period of two years of national service would be greatly to the benefit of the Defence Force. It would solve many of the manpower problems and would probably mean that the citizen force would get off more lightly than is at present the case. A longer period of national service would leave more time for longer periods of national service on the border, and in this way immediately spare members of the citizen force to make their essential contribution to the country’s economy immediately. In the campaign to stimulate the provision of manpower—a campaign which is in progress in these times—I believe that strong consideration has been given to such a possibility. However, this is very much to the detriment for the young White man, since his post school entry into tertiary educational institutions or the labour market is delayed by another year or longer, and he is placed in a still poorer competitive position vis-à-vis members of other population groups and White women. To fall two years behind due to compulsory national service in a developing country with very good opportunities for promotion, chiefly due to limited manpower, is a major sacrifice to make, and I believe that the inhabitants of the country should be particularly appreciative of those who do it.

It is evident that for this and other reasons it is imperative that national service for Coloureds, Asians and White women be introduced as soon as possible so that there may be parity among the groups.

It is a wonderful opportunity to go to the operational area and move among strong and well-trained young men, to sense their patriotism, to hear about their enthusiasm for the country and the defence of the country and their motivation, and to know that the security of South Africa is sound because the young men on the borders are sound. They, our young men, from our towns, from our farms, left school yesterday, are today engaged in basic training and tomorrow they will be in the bush to perform the giant task. I think that we are unanimous in paying tribute to our national servicemen, who are performing a tremendous task for the defence of South Africa. It is imperative that one be motivated under such circumstances. Hon. members on the other side of the Committee have said a great deal about the motivation of people in this debate. It has been said that we must be motivated, and the opinion was also expressed that our motivation is too weak. Indeed, in this debate and in previous debates the Defence Force and the Government were attacked about the so-called poor motivation of people. I agree that motivation is the basis on which the entire success of the defence of the country must rest, but to that I wish to add that not only individuals, but everyone in the country, must be motivated and here I include the PFP and people who have thoughts of coups d’état. One is not motivated if one is going around wondering whether coups d’état are going to take place in South Africa.

[Inaudible.]

One is only motivated if one has only one aim in mind, and that is to stand together, united and powerful, against a common enemy.

Let us now consider what the hon. member for Yeoville said in this context. He said: “We have to take sides in the world conflict.” The “world conflict” to which he referred is that between the Western Bloc, which includes America, and the Eastern Bloc. I infer that he is on the side of the Western Bloc. However, the hon. member for Constantia left us in the vacuum and in a position of uncertainty and caused us to wonder whether he was not perhaps choosing the side of the ANC against South Africa. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: An hon. member on that side of the Committee has said that the hon. member for Constantia is a supporter of the East Bloc. I think he must withdraw that statement.

Order! The hon. member may proceed.

Mr. Chairman, I am honestly not making allegations simply because I feel like it. I think that the interests of South Africa and our duty to our fatherland is too important.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: It was not the hon. member for Swellendam who made that statement but his hon. colleague next to him. Must he not withdraw those words?

Order! Which hon. member made that statement?

Mr. Chairman, I want to explain it by saying that they are on the eastern side and we on the western side of the Committee. [Interjections.]

The hon. member said those words and he must withdraw them.

Will the hon. member repeat his words?

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw them.

The hon. member for Swellendam may proceed.

To give the debate direction again, I repeat that I do not say these things merely because I feel like it, but because I am in doubt due to the conduct of the official Opposition in this Committee. When one reads newspapers which appeared during the congress last year, one notes with concern that motions were submitted at that congress which advocated nothing less than that South Africa should be changed outside of the constitutional process. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to speak after the hon. member for Swellendam. He always makes a fine contribution and his speech today was really a credit to his constituency and the South African Defence Force. I thank him for a positive contribution.

Hon. members of the Opposition are very fond of saying that the onslaught against us is only 20% military. They like to speak about essential reform and so on. I want to dwell on this briefly before discussing the arms embargo that has been imposed on us.

Our survival in South Africa is important for the survival of the Free World, but nevertheless the West imposes an embargo on us as far as armaments are concerned. I shall come back to that later in my speech. The Soviet Union gives aid to militant movements like Swapo and the ANC with a view to enabling them to achieve destabilization and the eventual take-over of the Republic of South Africa. Russia wants control of the oil resources of the world, South Africa’s mineral wealth and the sea route around the Cape. The struggle in South Africa is a struggle against Russia, which seeks to extend Soviet domination at the expense of the West in South Africa. Our country and our Black States must be protected against this.

The onslaught on us is a carefully orchestrated military, psychological, political and economic onslaught. It is a propagandist battle which is also being waged by the media within and outside this country. Our reply to this onslaught is 1. A prepared defence force and an effective, wideawake police force. 2. We also maintain a sound economy. We must not always ask what the country can do for us, but also what each one of us can do for our country. 3. We must make ourselves indispensable in Africa and the Free World. 4. We believe in orderly coexistence. Our eventual aim is to form a confederation of states together with our Black States, a confederation which will be based on mutual respect, so that we may face this onslaught together. 5. Our preparedness to co-operate, deliberate and negotiate with others for the sake of peace and peaceful coexistence is not a sign of weakness but of realism. South Africa speaks from a position of strength. 6. South Africa does not commit aggression but strikes hard if attacked and threatened. All the inhabitants of South Africa must be motivated in this regard. 7. The Government has committed itself to bring about orderly reform on the basis of what is right, while preserving stability, progress, peace and the security of all. The times demand that ethnic relations be approached in a coolly reasoned and logical manner. This means that while necessary differentiation measures will be retained, discriminatory measures which serve no further purpose must be abolished. The hon. the Prime Minister dealt with this comprehensively during the discussion of his Vote. Opposition parties in this country must guard against complicating and even threatening the peaceful existence of everyone in this country by their actions. When steps are taken to bring about reform in this country, suspicion must not always be cast on them by left and right. It must not be said by the left that something is too little and too late, by so doing inciting Black people against the Whites in this country, nor must it be said by the right that the Whites are being sold out, something which is far from the truth. In this regard I refer to the HNP, the AWB, CP and the Kappiekommando, bodies that seek to cast suspicion on the Government at every possible opportunity in order to incite people in this country against each other.

Heine, are you still a Nazi? Do you still belong to the Nazi Party?

People who make this kind of propaganda within and outside the country are playing straight into the hands of our enemies. Actions and efforts to divide and destroy the nation and the church cause rejoicing in the ranks of our enemies. The ANC is an instrument in the hands of Soviet Russia. Such politicians, that sow division and confusion, are playing straight into the hands of our enemies, and the voters must pass judgment on these people with realism and understanding.

To whom are you referring now?

I am speaking to hon. members of the splinter party who are sitting there next to the hon. member for Durban Point.

Oh, I thought you were talking about us.

I appeal for responsibility in these difficult times. What we need now are responsible politicians, media, religious leaders and churches. It is a disgrace that internal action leads to moral support to terrorist organizations and consequently to the undermining of the South African Defence Force. Let us stand together in Southern Africa in order to counter the onslaught effectively.

The introduction of an arms embargo against the RSA by the West was in many respects to the advantage of this country and, generally speaking, failed totally in its aim of leaving the RSA defenceless. In the case of our country, with its tremendous resources, the embargo had exactly the opposite effect to what the enemies hoped for. Nowadays the South African Defence Force has equipment which is adapted to African conditions, equipment which we might otherwise have not yet had at this stage. The manufacturing capacity of some of Armscor’s subsidiaries and of private firms has been increased to such an extent that they do not only meet South Africa’s total needs but also have a reserve capacity with a view to a possible increase in demand. At certain levels self-sufficiency has not yet been achieved. As far as technology in these fields is concerned, it must be borne in mind that even in conditions where there is no embargo, access to overseas technology is still subject to provisions arising out of economic considerations and the sensitivity of the matter in the eyes of a specific country’s defence force. Therefore the availability of technology cannot be linked solely to the existence of the embargoes. In cases where such technology cannot easily be obtained due to the arms embargo, it is mastered with the aid of our own research and development. In the light of the irrevocable nature of the arms embargo, however, more funds will have to be voted for basic research.

The production capacity of all the manufacturing subsidiaries of Armscor has been increased by the expansion of existing facilities and by the construction of new plant. We are proud of the new developments in the field of armaments manufacture. In this regard I should like to refer to the new 155 mm canon. In comparison with similar systems it can be regarded as the best in the world.

I wish to pay tribute to the South African Defence Force, Armscor and its subsidiaries, and the private sector, which has built up a major defence industry in recent decades. The fact that the RSA is largely self-sufficient nowadays attests to the farsightedness of the Nationalist Government, the hon. the Prime Minister and the hon. the Minister of Defence and his department.

In conclusion, I wish to say that South Africa is the target of the total onslaught. To counter it will require the highest degree of physical and spiritual preparedness, motivation and morale. The will of the security forces may not be undermined. My answer is: Let us build up the will, the determination and the faith of our people.

Mr. Chairman, the remarks by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat and by the hon. member for Swellendam which were directed at this party on the subject of communism …

I did not use the word “communism”.

It is the thought that lies behind your words, nevertheless. This is exactly the sort of remark that would have been made in the Rhodesian Parliament in the early seventie.

The example we had to follow!

In Rhodesia the White population were told the real enemy was not the Black nationalists with grievances related to their situation in the country. They were told the enemy were puppets of Moscow and Peking. They were misled about the progress of the war. Finally, they blinded their own people to the real issues. They reached the situation where they missed every opportunity they might have had along the road of diminishing options until they had lost completely. The kind of debate that that hon. member and other hon. members here were conducting this evening is leading us down that same road.

You are bluffing yourself.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition during the hon. the Prime Minister’s Vote made the important observation that each Prime Minister we have had in recent years has brought with him a characteristic of his era. We had the characteristic of Bantu Administration which developed under Dr. Verwoerd; we had a heavy emphasis on police matters during the era of Mr. Vorster; and now the public is beginning to say that the era of Mr. P. W. Botha is the era of a militarized South Africa. There is a feeling at large among certain sections of the community, in fact, I would say large sections of the community and responsible sections, that the power and influence of the military establishment has grown dramatically in the general policy making of the country. It has reached unusual proportions, is the feeling, and the public is uneasy, very uneasy about the role that the military is playing behind the scenes.

Are you uneasy or is the public uneasy?

I share this uneasiness. There is uneasiness about the role that the military is playing behind the scenes in policy making in this country.

I want to make some references on this subject. I should like to refer the Committee to a documentary article which appeared in the magazine Now. I would be happy to furnish the hon. the Minister with a copy if he should be interested. This article is entitled “The Day of the Generals”. The article begins as follows—

The article goes on to say—

That is the discovery of the phone tapping—

Then in a long article—this is a surprisingly informed article …—[Interjections.] I am coming to my point. The Committee should be very interested in this. I refer to another section of this article. It says—

Where do you get that rubbish from?

An interesting thing about this article—I recommend it to the hon. member for Pretoria East—is that it was written in October 1979. The other day we had an article which was published in the Financial Mail which is not particularly a publication which is given to wild statements, not at all. In fact, it is a very responsible publication in South Africa—This article was published on 2 April 1982. It reads as follows—

They go on to say in the same article that according to the London International Institute for Strategic Studies “the role and influence of South Africa’s military establishment seems likely to continue to grow”. These published snippets reflect a mood, reflect a disquiet on the part of a number of people and I raise it in this debate to give the hon. the Minister the opportunity to react. It is an important matter which is of great concern to the public and it has given rise to certain wild deductions, some of which we have heard tonight. Arising out of this I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to answer two specific questions. Do military personnel routinely attend policy-making meetings of other departments more so than they did five years ago? If so, who attends what meetings and why? The public will be very interested. Secondly, does military intelligence undertake surveys on such matters as District Six and others? If so, why?

It is an absolute disgrace.

Another subject I should like to touch on is 32 Battalion, Buffalo Battalion. Some people have referred to it as South Africa’s Foreign Legion. As I understand it there are various views of this unit. It has been held to be a crack, highly effective, well disciplined part of the total defence effort in Namibia/South West Africa. On the other hand some very, very disturbing allegations about this particular battalion have been published. These allegations have been given publicity in our Press. I can refer to The Argus of 23 May 1981 and The Citizen of 25 May 1981. I am just referring to two articles but the matter has been well publicized. I do not think the opportunity has existed for the hon. the Minister to refute these specific allegations which appeared in these publications in Parliament although we did have a session last year. I should just like to pick out the high lights of what this unit is being accused of so that they can be refuted and it will be on the record. The suggestion here is that there was a certain lieutenant-corporal Trevor Edwards who was given world publicity on this matter …

Lieutenant-corporal?

Lance-corporal. [Interjections.] To cut a long story short, he makes the following allegations. [Laughter.] Hon. members over there can laugh about this matter. They can laugh about this matter, but what stands on the record about this unit of our Defence Force is that they enter Angola in unmarked camouflage uniforms. Secondly, they carry no documents. Thirdly, they use East European weapons. Fourthly, they kill livestock, cattle, goats and whatever is in their way. [Interjections.] Fifthly, they black their faces. Sixthly, they actually kill women and children on occasion. Seventhly, they contaminate waterholes. Eighthly, they destroy crops. Everything I am quoting is in The Argus and in The Citizen. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, you will pardon me for not replying to the allegations made by the hon. member for Constantia as I think the hon. the Minister is quite capable of answering all the questions he has put.

*On a more positive note I should like to examine the cadet section of the Defence Force. The cadet section is a full-fledged section of the South African Defence Force. The training of young people in military activities has always been highly valued by the hon. the Minister and his department. As a matter of fact the training of young people and their active participation in military matters runs like a thread through our country’s history. There are innumerable examples of young boys and girls who took up arms to protect their country.

The deeds of Piet Retief’s son, of the young Dirkie Uys and other Voortrekker children are well known. The deeds of the young Boer spy, Jack Hindon, are perhaps not as well known. The many youngsters who were on commando and were even taken prisoner during the Anglo-Boer war proved the value of military training at an early age. During the First World War the mounted rifle troops still made use of the so called drummer boys, who were barely 13 years old, to communicate orders by drum. At the start of the Second World War 17 year-olds were admitted to the Defence Force and trained in the special service bataillons until they were mature enough to do service in other units.

Young girls have also done their share in protecting hearth and home. At the youthful age of 15 a young girl of South West Africa took on a group of terrorists and drove them off.

The value of cadet training has therefore been proved and fortunately it is still considered an integral part of our Defence Force by the hon. the Minister and his department and everything is being done to promote it.

Cadet training in the South African Defence Force context serves as preparation for national service and helps to promote the cadet’s loyalty and fidelity to his country. A cadet’s character and leadership qualities are developed during training. This also makes him aware of specific needs and facets of civil defence and informs him of the nature and magnitude of the threat to the country and how to combat it.

The South African Defence Force is a partner in the training of young cadets. The other partners are the education departments. The Defence Force is responsible for the financial aspects and the infrastructure and also undertakes the training where possible. A cadet officer is a full-fledged member of the Defence Force and during his training he is equipped to handle the training of cadets. Boys are trained at our schools from standard six to standard ten. During 1980-’81, 164 889 cadets were trained at 650 schools in the Republic. Of these 650 schools, 512 also had cadet bands. Unfortunately there are a few schools on the Rand where the cadet sections are inactive. I want to make an appeal to the headmasters of those schools to activate the cadet sections and if necessary to ask the Defence Force for assistance in this regard. During this year 439 cadet camps were held at which about 17 000 cadets received training.

A standing interdepartmental committee meets at least once a year to ensure that goals are pursued. The College for Educational Technology of the South African Defence Force plays a very important role in the drawing up of curricula and guides. The present curriculum involves, inter alia, military discipline, civil defence, methods of warfare, intelligence and security, radio procedures, mapreading, navigation, drill, weapon firing techniques, rifle range procedures, fieldcraft, tracking, bushcraft, survival and temporary bases and shelters. At the annual camps it is brought home to cadets that fitness and hardiness as well as moral fortitude are needed to combat the present onslaught on the Republic. At these camps leadership qualities are noted and developed and there is an opportunity to improve field craft and survival techniques in practice.

Drill and cadet band competitions are organized annually within the command context. This also ensures the necessary motivation. With the necessary guidance and enthusiasm cadets at schools are given practical training and not only drill. Most headmasters see to it that the cadet training periods are properly utilized. Cadet training gives the young man a basis to build on and it has been proved that young men who receive cadet training tackle their national service with confidence. As a rule they realize that training can only improve their chances of survival. They also realize that discipline in the Defence Force is just as necessary as fitness and skill for ensuring survival. In 1978 a pilot committee investigated the training of Coloured and Indian boys within the framework of the cadet organization and recommended that such training facilities be established. Money was voted for this purpose, but certain pressure groups caused the entire attempt to fail and these people were denied the benefits which cadet training has in the development of a young man. It is a great pity that Coloured and Indian communities did not see this matter in the right perspective and did not overcome the pressure to deny their young men cadet training. Young men from these population groups did eventually enter the ranks of the Permanent Force and cadet training would have meant a great deal to them. One also wonders whether cadet training and the discipline associated with it could not have prevented a great deal of the undisciplined behaviour which occurred in the schools of these population groups. Because these people are also in a phase in which leadership qualities will have to be identified and developed in future, it was short-sighted of them not to use the opportunity which cadet training affords for this purpose. I sincerely hope that they will reconsider this matter and that the communities concerned will not allow themselves to be led in future by so-called leaders who, at the expense of their communities, take politically motivated decisions to the detriment of the population.

At present, in many schools in the Republic, girls are being trained within the framework of the existing cadet sections, during the youth preparedness period. There are also schools where girls are members of the cadet bands. This training is voluntary and has been enthusiastically received. I feel that the time has now come for the training of girls to be placed on the same basis as that of boys at our schools. There are no instructors at our schools, but opportunities can be used to train such instructors, for example at the Army College for Women at George. Female teachers can be sent there for in-service training by their education department. There is definitely no lack of enthusiasm among girls, female teachers and headmasters for such a movement. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by thanking most of the members of both sides of the Committee for the high quality of debating which took place here. Some excellent contributions were made. I was struck by the goodwill displayed almost throughout towards the S.A. Defence Force and Armscor. If in the course of my speech I refer to both the Defence Force and Armscor I shall refer to them as the Defence family. In addition the seriousness, positive attitude and enthusiasm displayed by almost all members with regard to the security of our country, was gratifying. There was the occasional speech which left a bad taste—and I shall return to this in a moment—but I want to say that we are all united over the security of our country. I therefore want to express my appreciation to all hon. members who expressed this goodwill.

There were discordant notes and we must not shy away from this fact. Perhaps they were a good thing because they enabled us to form a better judgment of the good debating which took place here. They enabled us at least to differentiate between what was positive and what was negative. Mr. Chairman, never in my life before have I heard such an irresponsible speech as the one made by the hon. member for Constantia this evening. I think it is a crying shame for any South African to make such a speech. I am very sorry that that hon. member is not here. He took that kind of report from a newspaper and proclaimed it as the truth with regard to South African Defence Force units whose soldiers are sacrificing their lives for that hon. member. I want to predict that that hon. member will cause everyone in this Committee to be united against him. It is the closest to high treason I have ever come across. I think what happened here was a crying shame. I think it is despicable and unheard of for a member of Parliament to disseminate disinformation in this way and I hope he will realize this. To think that people are laying down their lives for us while we, the representatives of the nation, sit in this responsible body and talk such nonsense. Mr. Chairman, I do not know what appeared in those newspapers, but if what he said appeared in the newspapers he—as a responsible person—had access to me at any time. I would have seen him and I would have rectified what had to be rectified. However, I would not have tried to blazon it abroad if it had not been correct. I consider this to be absolute disinformation and disloyalty to South Africa.

The hon. member for Parktown asked me whether he could pay a visit to the operational area and I shall invite him with pleasure. That is a promise. However, I can also promise him something else: The hon. member for Constantia will never pay another visit to the operational area. Our visit to Buffalo—the unit referred to—took place in September last year. It was towards the end of September and the beginning of October.

I am not sure when that report appeared, but I have an idea it was in August. Some of the hon. members of the Opposition slept in that camp. He could have gone to them and told them what the nature of the reporting was. He could have asked them whether it was true or not. I think it is a crying shame but let me return now to the positive aspects.

I want to congratulate the hon. member for Jeppe on his appointment as chief spokesman of the CP on defence matters. I should also like to refer to the 1982 White Paper on Defence and Armaments Supply which in my opinion is a very good document. It was published under difficult circumstances and I want to thank everyone who took part in this major operation most sincerely for their contributions and for their tremendously hard work. I think it is excellent material which we can use in future. I also want to convey my thanks to the printers who worked 24 hours a day for seven days a week to complete the document on time. I think it will promote far better understanding for our defence family. I also want to thank all the parties who complimented us on this document.

Mr. Chairman, you may perhaps have noticed that no mention is made in the White Paper of the exceptional contribution made by ex-servicemen organizations. The reason for this is that we are again considering where these organizations can be meaningfully located within the State structure, particularly with regard to the administrative and welfare dispensation. However, on behalf of the top structure of the S.A. Defence Force, i.e. the Defence Command Council, I want to pay tribute to these organizations for what they have achieved. I refer to the men and women who serve their country’s Defence Force in such a unique way. Various organizations are involved here. For example ex-servicemen of the Second World War and ex-servicemen with recent operational experience belong to these organizations. These are organizations that concentrate on the welfare of and rendering assistance to national servicemen, and the establishment of clubs and recreational facilities, housing projects, holiday projects, building up pride in our past by holding annual memorial services, and that were responsible for the erection of the Klapperkop monument and the new Krygsburger monument next to the Vrouemonument. I am also a member of organizations such as these and I can assure hon. members that I am extremely proud of them.

My responsibility to the Government lies in the fact that I must undertake the management of the defence family. This defence family stands on two legs, viz. the South African Defence Force and Armscor. These two legs are of equal value, they are equal in interest, status and in the importance of the task they must perform. It is of the utmost importance that these two organizations should co-operate well and harmoniously, that they must set themselves and strive for common goals and that there must therefore be team work. However, they are dependent on each other, particularly when it comes to efficient functioning to achieve success in the completion of their task. Both these organizations are doing extremely well as a team. The one leg, the S.A. Defence Force, as hon. members know, is responsible for the security of the country and for this reason it has certain operational tasks which must be carried out. In order to do so it must have adequate and suitable equipment, and it must also have manpower. I should not like to discuss the matter of manpower any further because last week we had a long debate on the manpower requirements. I should just like to mention that the hon. member for Wynberg made his second speech here this evening. However, I cannot understand why he is opposed to the legislation because his speech was completely in accordance with the proposals made by the Government. I want to compliment him on those proposals. [Interjections.]

I should like to proceed to the second leg, namely Armscor. Armscor has the important responsibility of providing armaments, in other words, the research into and development and manufacture of armaments and the supplying these armaments to the security forces according to the needs of those forces. This organization, Armscor, possibly does not receive the publicity and attention it ought to receive, and this may be because it is a less visible organization or it may be for other reasons. However, I want to assure hon. members that this organization is equally important. The relationship between the S.A. Defence Force and Armscor can be compared with the relationship between a hen and an egg. I intend during this debate to give far more attention to Armscor. I should like to deal with the management philosophy of Armscor. The activities of this organization are spread over various provinces. They are very proud of what is being supplied, for example, arms and ammunition. The S.A. Defence Force is probably even prouder of the efficiency and suitability of that equipment. If hon. members look at the White Paper they will see in paragraph 152 the tremendously large organization which is woven together in Armscor. The complexity of the organization and the amount of funds it spends is also apparent in that paragraph.

Before I discuss Armscor in detail I feel it is important that we take a look at the operational preview of the threat facing our country today. This may be advisable because it will create the right climate here. Today certain hon. members referred to this and I want to compliment them on this. As a result I am not going to make additions.