Mr. Chairman, there are two matters to which I wish to refer briefly. A question which was put to me yesterday and to which I have not yet replied, was concerned with the so-called Brown Commission report which has not yet been tabled. Hon. members will realize that this commission is engaged on a very extensive investigation. Possibly its terms of reference were too wide. In any event, the commission appointed four subcommittees. The one is investigating pharmaceutical matters, the second is investigating hospital and Government health services, the third is investigating professional matters and the fourth is investigating matters pertaining to tariffs. According to my information, all four committees are hard at work. I expect to be able to receive the reports of the committee investigating pharmaceutical matters within a month or two. I recently had discussions on the committee investigating hospital and Government health service matters, and I requested that they expedite that section of their investigation dealing with community health services. In addition matters pertaining to tariffs are constantly being discussed. In the meantime I am in any event engaged in discussing this matter with medical practitioners as well as dentists and the medical schemes. We hope to receive a report on this matter before the end of the year. After that we can discuss this matter further.

There is a further announcement I wish to make. We have terrible problems in the pensions section of the department, of which hon. members are perhaps not always aware. If I tell hon. members that in the pensions section of the department we receive approximately 5 700 inquiries per day—I am mentioning an average figure now—they will realize the magnitude of the problem. I realize that every hon. member is constantly receiving inquiries from their voters on pension matters. Working full-time in this pension section are eight women who do nothing else but answer telephones. And then no replies have been furnished to the inquiries. All these people who make inquiries have to be provided with a reply. Hon. members will therefore realize that we shall have to do something.

We decided that the only thing we could do was to see whether these inquiries could not be kept away from this department. Since the department is now dealing with a total of approximately 900 000 pensions and if one bears in mind that once one has retired on pension, most of these elderly people do not have much else to do except make inquiries about their pensions—I have the greatest appreciation for the fact that people do this—it is plain that something will have to be done.

This morning it was my privilege to commission a terminal in the welfare offices in Victoria Street, Cape Town, which is connected to the computer in Pretoria. Here pensioners, social as well as civil, will be able to make local inquiries about their pensions. Provided they have their pension number they can obtain particulars as to whether their pensions have been paid in, where they have been paid in and how much has been paid in. Three such terminals have already been installed: One in Cape Town, one in Port Elizabeth and one in Durban. Within the next two months we will install eight terminals at all the regional offices in the country, where pensioners and MPs can make inquiries in connection with the payment of pensions. It is not yet possible to establish a complete facility, but the facility which is now being established will be expanded in future so that it will also be possible to make inquiries concerning new pensions at these terminals. We have not reached that stage yet, but we will reach the stage where, if a form has been properly completed, it will be possible to read the data directly into the terminal, which will then feed it through to the computer, and the applicant will then be able to receive his reply immediately at the terminal. He will then know what his pension will be and where it will be paid out. Hon. members will realize that this is an exceptional facility and I wish to express the confidence that everyone will be able to make very beneficial use of it, and that in future it will provide an exceptional service for civil as well as social pensioners. It brings the entire country into close contact with all these particulars. A magistrate at Kenhardt will be able to pick up the telephone and contact Kimberley, and if he is able to furnish the pension number of the person concerned, he will be able to ask where that person’s pension is and ought then to receive an immediate reply. This ought to bring tremendous relief to the pensions office and should also improve the service which the department renders considerably.

Before I resume my seat, I wish to speak with great appreciation of the services which the officials are rendering in this connection. This was for the most part the task of senior officials who, during the past few years, have had to work 12 to 17 hours a day, seven days of the week. I am grateful that we are able to bring them this relief.

Mr. Chairman, right at the outset and before reacting to what the hon. the Minister actually said, I want to say that this is in fact the first opportunity I have had to welcome him as the Minister responsible for health, welfare and pensions. I am sure the hon. the Minister knows that my interest is more on the welfare and pensions side. My colleague the hon. member for Parktown, fights with him over health. I hope he will enjoy this post and we wish him everything of the best in it.

While the officials of the department are here, I should like to take this opportunity to thank them for the way in which they handle inquiries. The hon. the Minister spoke about the quantity of the inquiries that they receive. I have sympathy with these officials because my constituency secretary in 1981 actually worked out that I received 1 000 inquiries on social old age pensions. I know that these inquiries are time-consuming. I should like to take this opportunity to thank the department for the way in which they handle my inquiries. I have said before and I am not afraid to say again that I think that this particular department—I deal essentially with the welfare and pension side—has set a standard that other Government departments could well try and measure up to. I have found that my inquiries have always been speedily and very courteously handled. I should like to thank the officials publicly for the way in which they have done that.

The hon. the Minister made an announcement about the improvements to the system. We welcome these. This will certainly help to lighten the load of the officials. It is certainly good news. There is, however, one point I should like to make. From my experience it seems to me that one of the problems with which people have particular difficulty is the application of the means test. I must be perfectly honest and say that I sympathize with them because if you have a combination of pensions, fixed income and so forth and you then have to apply the means test, you have difficulties. The means test is not the easiest thing to understand. It will be interesting to know how many MPs actually understand how the means test works, let alone pensioners. You have to be something of an actuarial genius to understand the means test. I should like to suggest to the department that if we could get some sort of guide on the means test available to people it will be of great help because I find that a tremendous number of the inquiries that I receive are from people who do not qualify for social old age pension. You can tell them that immediately because they are disqualified by the means test. If we can have a pamphlet so that people can see whether they actually qualify or not it will eliminate a lot of the inquiries that are received.

Before I get to my main theme, I should just like to welcome the improvements that have been announced for social workers. I think this is needed. If one looks at social welfare, the most important aspect is not the buildings or the establishment, but the people that work in them. I hope the improvement in the salary structure will encourage those people who have left the profession to come back because those are the people we would really like to get back. Surely, we want people to join the profession as new recruits, but at the same time it is essential that we try and get people back.

In a Vote like this it is actually fairly easy to concentrate one’s time on saying we should improve the means test or improve the amount paid to social old age pensioners or that we should spend more money here or that we should spend more money there, but I should like to tackle the problem somewhat differently today. Let me tell this Committee what I believe to be the ideal for South Africa. I believe the ideal for South Africa would be to eventually reach the situation where the social old age pension as we know it was no longer necessary. It might seem a strange thing to say, but we can actually measure the success of how we plan financially for the aged by how little money we spend on social old age pensions. I leave this at that for the moment, but will return to it.

There are certain factors that are cardinal to South Africa and which will determine the future of South Africa. There was a report of the Science Committee of the President’s Council on demographic trends in South Africa. This I believe is a very important report. I want to have a look at that report and at some of the implications it holds for us on the welfare and pensions side. There are three features of the report that struck me. Firstly, South Africa is a country whose population is expanding at a remarkable rate. We actually have one of the highest rates of population growth in the world. However, if one actually looks at the distribution within that population, it is very interesting, because two factors emerge. The first is that a tremendous number of the people of our population are in the very young age group. If one looks at the age group 0 to 14 years one will notice that of the Black population 40,2% fall within that age group. If one looks at the projections, it is suggested that later on nearly one half of the Black population group is going to be in that age group of 0 to 14. If one looks at the Coloureds and the Asians, it is 38,3%, and if one looks at the Whites, it is 27,2%. That is one factor of the population of South Africa: Not only is it expanding rapidly but there are an awful lot of young people. This is an important factor because it means that money which we have available will have to be spent on education. There is going to be an increasing amount spent on education.

The second point is that the life expectancy of South Africans is increasing. On page 34 of the report I read something which I found quite fascinating. I think it is something that is very seldom mentioned and we are not aware of the implications of it.

In the period 1945 to 1950 an Asian male had a life expectancy of 50 at birth. In other words, when he was born he could anticipate living for 50 years. By 1980 that had increased to 62. As far as Asian females are concerned, in 1945 to 1947 they had a life expectancy of 49,75 years and in 1980 this had increased to 67,5.

One can go through all the population groups in this manner. In the case of Whites the increase in life expectancy from the period 1945 to 1947 to 1980 was from 63,77 years to 66,8 years. And in the case of White females the corresponding figures are 68,31 to 73,8. The one thing that is common is that the woman might not be the deadlier of the species, but she is certainly the hardier of the species, because without exception women live longer than men. The pattern also appears that people appear to live increasingly longer. The implications for this particular department and for this particular Vote is that we are going to be faced with more and more people in the aged category, more and more people who will be claiming social old-age pensions and more and more people who are going to require financial assistance. [Time expired.]

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

Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the hon. Whip for the opportunity to complete my speech. We are going to be faced with a situation in the year 2000 where we will have to provide some sort of financial assistance to the aged, in fact, for approximately five million people. We also have other problems. I asked the Human Sciences Research Council to provide some figures. I am going to quote figures for the Whites only. In 1980 roughly 8% of the White population was 65 years or older. By the year 2020 it is going to be 14,55%. In other words, the number of aged Whites in the next 40 years is going to double. There is another point which relates to the people over the age of 65. In terms of our law women age faster than men. They live longer but they actually age faster. An aged male is someone of 65 years or older and an aged female is someone of 60 years or older. I am still waiting for someone to explain the logic of this to me but it has never been done. If one takes the 60 plus group for women and the 65 plus group for men, one out of every 10 South Africans fall within the aged category. By the year 2000 it will be just under one out of five. We also have other factors. We have increasing urbanization, and we know what that brings about. That brings about the breakdown of what is commonly called the extended family unit where people instead of keeping the aged with them in the household, tend to shunt them out to old-age homes or to someone else to look after. I want to look at the implications of this. If one looks at the first report of the interdepartmental committee of inquiry in to certain specific pension matters, it appears that in 1973 the social old-age pension system in South Africa cost us R87,8 million. The hon. Minister of Finance in this budget debate actually said that if one takes the full cost for 1984 it will cost us R1 123 million, which represents a thirteen-fold increase over a period of 10 years. If that trend continues it will cost us R14 500 million by the year 1995-’96 to provide for social old-age pensions. We are not talking about something that can happen but rather about people who have been born already and are living. They are going to age. My own figures show that just the cost of the old-age pension system could be R17 000 million by the year 2000. These figures might seem to be astronomical but the same trend has appeared overseas. In the USA today the American social security system is paying out R24 million more per day than it is getting in. In other words, it is becoming insolvent to the tune of R1 million per hour. In Holland, a country which prides itself on its social security system, the social security bill last year was equal to 42% of Holland’s national income.

Mr. Chairman, I mentioned earlier that a tremendous percentage of South Africa’s population is young and will continue to be young. The implications of this are that if one has an increasing proportion of one’s population in the young category and the number of people in the aged category is increasing as well—both are areas which require high expenditure on the part of the Government—the result will be that fewer and fewer people are going to have to pay more and more. This is what killed the American social security system because when they started that system the ratio of dependants to workers was approximately one to 13. Now it is getting close to one to three.

The question that I would like to ask of the Government is what we are going to do about this problem. Mr. Chairman, I will tell you what the PFP believes we should do. The first thing that I believe we should do is to implement the recommendations of the first report of this committee. I have studied it very carefully and I am in total agreement with the general principles although there are one or two details that one could argue about. I think this was a very important report. It dealt with the transferability and the vesting of pensions and I believe it should be implemented. I think that is the first criterion. This report, however, ran into difficulties, not because of what is contained in it but because of problems with the trade unions. If people cannot exercise political rights they are going to use any opportunity and excuse they can to exercise their political might. I think this report should be implemented by getting a committee together of representatives of the pension industry, the Government, employers, employees and trade unions. It should also include Black people. I think in this way we should get down to implementing this report. I must be perfectly honest and say that I would be prepared to implement it even if others disagreed but that is purely a personal point of view. This is so important because we waste so much money in South Africa when people resign. If one looks at the report of the Registrar of Pension Funds for 1980 one will note that the amount of money paid out on resignations in 1980 was R249 million. I am certain that of that amount very little was invested, if any. That money was used to purchase motor cars and to go on overseas trips and so forth. That is step one of the problem because it will only cover slightly less than half of the working population because we have less than five million people who belong to pension funds.

We believe the second thing that we must do is that it should be made compulsory for every employer to provide a pension fund for this employees and for every employee to belong to a pension fund. I want to make it quite clear that we are not saying that one should create a national pension fund because if one states that everyone should belong to a pension fund suddenly everyone thinks that one is thinking in terms of a national pension fund. That is not so. In South Africa we have more than 11 000 pension funds in existence according to this report and that should give everyone more than an adequate choice to decide to which pension fund he wants to belong. In other words, Mr. Chairman, while we believe that it should be compulsory for every working South African to belong to a pension scheme we would not prescribe that it must be a national pension fund, or indeed any particular pension fund. The situation, in fact, would be very similar to that of third party motor vehicle insurance. It is compulsory to have third party motor car insurance but one is free to choose with which company one wishes to be insured.

If we look at the situation, I believe we should take action quickly. This is something which by nature is slow-moving. If one wants people to start providing for their retirement, it is not something one can do over two or three years. It is something that could be done over a period of 20 to 30 years. In other words, even if we begin to tackle the problem now, we are still going to have the same problems we have with people who have not provided for their retirement for the next 20 years at least. However, I think it is important that we should start taking those steps now, because if we do not the question arises where the money is going to come from. If people do not provide for their own old age then someone else has to provide for it. The people who end up providing for it are the tax-payers of the future. It is as simple as that. In 1980-’81 individuals paid tax to the amount of R2 090 million. If one looks at this year’s budget this amount is budgeted to increase to R5 300 million. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want very much to associate myself with what the hon. member for Edenvale said when he reacted to the announcement the hon. the Minister had just made. I should like to thank the hon. the Minister most sincerely for this vast improvement in connection with inquiries regarding pensions. I do not think any of us realized that such a tremendous number of inquiries were received every day, but any hon. member will probably know that this is the department where one’s inquiries are dealt with as quickly as possible, and the effective and friendly way in which inquiries are dealt with is really outstanding. I should like to thank the staff of this department for the wonderful service they render.

Mr. Chairman, I want to refer to the Annual Report of the Department of Health and Welfare for 1982. It is a wonderful report containing a host of information which one can fruitfully study and about which one can say a great deal. I want to thank the hon. the Minister, the Director-General and everyone involved in the compilation of the report and for the information thus made available to us. Many aspects are dealt with that one can discuss, and I should like to refer to a few of the aspects of the report. It is very enlightening to look at all the statistics. It is then that one is impressed by everything that is being done and what is being spent, inter alia, on rehabilitation, and one gains some impression of the dedicated service rendered to that section of the population that is caught up in a situation from which it cannot extricate itself without the necessary outside help. A great deal is also being done in the field of child and family care, places of care, children’s homes and homes for unmarried mothers, the adoption of children, the placing of children in places of safety, the care of the aged, institutions for the aged and social pensions. In this connection I also want to thank the hon. the Minister for what has been negotiated for our senior citizens in this year’s budget. The increase in social pensions, parental allowances, settlement allowances and maintenance grants paid to persons under individual care or in licensed institutions, is most welcome. In these inflationary times I want to welcome the raising of the means test in particular. I am sure we cannot overemphasize the need for the means test to be raised for the granting of social pensions. The raising of the means test will make it possible for many people to qualify for a pension. It affects particularly those who fell just outside the old means test and who therefore found it very difficult to make ends meet. The raising of the means test has also resulted in more people qualifying for hospitalization and district surgeon services.

I should like now to discuss civil pensions. I agree with the report that the 1982 financial year will be remembered by civil pensioners for a long time, particularly those who retired years ago as well as the widows of such people. The increase of 10% plus 1% for every completed year calculated from the date of the coming into operation of the pension up to and including 31 March 1982, is generally welcomed. Civil pensioners not belonging to a medical aid fund could become members of the Public Service Medical Aid Association from 1 October 1982. Their membership is paid in full from State funds. The increase in civil pensions in 1982 also forms a basis on which the 5% increase for 1983 can be favourably calculated. Although we are grateful for what is being done for pensioners I want to take this opportunity to appeal once again for those pensioners who retired prior to 1960. I know that the matter I am raising now is a very difficult one. Many of them are still alive. There are also many widows of such people. They served the community at a time when money was scarce and their salaries were very low. Very few of them were able to build up funds of their own at that stage. The savings of those who could do so are worth very little nowadays owing to inflation. They belonged to pension funds which offered few benefits. In spite of last year’s wonderful increase and the introduction of a medical aid scheme for them, the pensions of these people are still inadequate in many cases. I want to ask that these people be re-considered. There are very few of them but there are still some. There are also some of them in my constituency. As their numbers diminish, the amount budgeted for them will decrease and eventually disappear. These pensioners have been used to good average standard of living but, as inflation erodes their means, they are becoming steadily poorer. A sympathetic approach from the Treasury will make them feel that life is still worth living. It will also prove to them that the services they rendered under very difficult circumstances did not pass unnoticed. After all, we know these people. They do not grumble but are touched if one takes notice of them. Without wishing to become sentimental, I want to appeal urgently to the hon. the Minister to re-consider the pensions of these people.

There is another matter I should like to discuss. I am referring to the time when the increase in social pensions comes into effect. I am certain there is not a single hon. member on this Committee who has not been asked repeatedly why social pensions are only increased from 1 October each year. We understand this and we know how it works. We know that that increases can only take place once a year but it is sometimes difficult to get people to understand why this is the case. I can also understand people’s problems. It is also only human when the increase in announced during the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill for pensioners to forget that it has only been six months since their last increase came into operation and that a year will only have elapsed in October. If one patiently explains to them the details how this works, they will eventually say that they understand it, but one still gains the impression that there is a feeling of uncertainty among these people. I want to ask whether it is not possible to establish a formula in terms of which the date of increase of social pensions can be changed to 1 April without effecting the amount disbursed. I am convinced that if this can be done, those pensioners will feel far more satisfied.

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to follow the hon. member for Middelburg who made a good speech. He referred to certain points which are of great importance.

In the first place I want to thank the hon. the Minister for the announcement he made in connection with more terminals for information on pensions. We are glad to hear that one has been opened here in Cape Town now and that in all probability more will be opened in other parts of South Africa in the near future. This will make the obtaining of information much easier for everyone. We want to express our sincere thanks and appreciation for this.

Since I became a member of the House of Assembly I have made an appeal for pensioners and underprivileged persons every year. Although I have been making these appeals for over four years now, they remain a very important matter to me, and I shall continue to make such appeals in the future because they are of the utmost importance to me. I know a pension is not a right but a privilege. We should however be realistic about this. As the hon. member for Middelburg also stated, there is impoverishment and as impoverishment takes place, an increasing number of people will look to the State for aid. That is inevitable. These systematic impoverishment of the Whites is a matter which will have to receive consideration in the future. I shall return to this point later.

When one thinks of civilization, one always notices that a nation looks after its less privileged members. This brings civilization to the fore. This is also done here in our country and we are very grateful. The amount spent on old-age pensions is enormous, but when we consider that it is being spent on people who were in the front line before we were even born or while we were still children, we realize that these people have to be taken care of with deep gratitude and appreciation. We have to take care of these senior citizens. It is a good thing that this is being done.

The latest increase will only come into effect in October this year. In this connection I want to agree with the hon. member for Middelburg who said that it is very important for this increase not to come into operation from October but to come into operation with retrospective effect from April of this year. I shall explain in a moment why I feel this should be the case. The old-age pension is currently R138 per month. This is being increased by R14 so that it will total R152 from 1 October. We are very grateful for that R14. In his budget speech this year—I refer to Hansard, column 4185—the hon. the Minister of Finance said the following—

The increase in the inflation rate during this period was 14,9% and one wonders what the increase will be from the time the hon. the Minister made his budget speech to October this year when these increased pensions will become payable. The percentage increase the aged will receive in their pensions in respect of this additional R14 is approximately 10,6%. They will therefore receive 4,6% less than the increase in the inflation rate and, in the meanwhile, the cost of living is still rising. Let us work out how much more they will actually receive. If they were to receive an increase to meet the total rise in the inflation rate, they would have to receive R20,50 more. They are therefore getting R6,56 per month less than they should be getting. Let us consider the bonuses. This year the bonuses amounted to R36. In May last year a bonus of R30 was paid to them and in November last year a further R30 was paid to them. As far as I know there has not yet been an announcement as to whether they will again be paid a bonus in November. I would therefore appreciate it if the hon. the Minister would tell us whether a bonus can be expected in November or not.

As far as military pensions are concerned, an increase of 10% from 1 April was announced by the hon. the Minister of Finance in his budget speech. I refer to Hansard, column 4209. In this connection I want to make an earnest appeal for this 10% to be increased if possible. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he cannot appeal to his colleague, the hon. the Minister of Finance, for these people to be treated more generously because these are people who when our country was in trouble were in the front line and were not ashamed to defend their country which it beloves every decent person who loves his people and his fatherland to do. As far as civil pensions are concerned, an increase of 5% was announced. I refer to Hansard, column 4029. I want to ask whether this increase could not also be reconsidered because many former officials who served the State for many years and who retired with a smaller income, are now experiencing many problems, as is also the case with many other people. I know the question of inflation is something which is not only causing problems for South Africa. It is a world-wide problem. I realize the problems facing us but in spite of these problems I want to ask whether we cannot give further attention to these people. We do not expect the hon. the Minister to give us a reply today. As a matter of fact, I know he will not give us a reply today. However, I would appreciate it if he could just give us the assurance that he will discuss this matter with his colleague, the hon. the Minister of Finance.

As I have said, we are grateful for every increase and we are glad that those people can be assisted amply, but when increases in the salaries of officials are announced, it usually happens that certain businesses immediately put up their prices. This is a fact. We know it. For that reason I feel the hon. member for Middelburg probably also had this in mind when asking the same question I am now asking. Whenever increases are announced for public servants, prices rise so tremendously that the pensioners, who only receive their increase in October, find themselves far worse off than they were. This is unfortunately a fact. When one considers human needs, one realizes that the first need everyone has is food. The second need is clothing. The third need is a roof over one’s head. Then there are also other needs which depend upon circumstances such as, for example, health services. Not everyone is equally unwell when they retire. Many places put up the price of food in an uncontrolled manner when salary increases for public servants are announced. I realize the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Deputy Minister cannot do anything about this. This falls under another Ministery. However, there are certain cases I feel we should reconsider. I also want to ask whether the hon. the Minister cannot help in this connection by trying to prevent the prices of certain foodstuffs which rise in an uncontrolled manner in certain chain stores, from rising so rapidly. I know of a case where the price of a carton of a certain product rose by 8 cents and the dealer then increased his price by 8 cents a tin. The people simply have to pay this price. We also know that pensioners, particularly widows, usually have no transport and therefore have to rely on the nearest shop. There are people who act absolutely recklessly as far as price increases are concerned. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have no argument with the hon. member for Nigel. In fact, I will be supporting two of his requests.

I should just like to say to the hon. the Minister that the announcement of the new terminals has been well received because they will be of great help to a lot of people. However, as far as I am concerned, the queries I have put to the Department have been handled very quickly and to everybody’s satisfaction.

I should like to bring to the attention of this Committee a relatively new concept, i.e. a relatively new concept in South Africa, of care. It is called Hospice. Many members may not have heard of the word “hospice” and I should therefore just like to elaborate on the meaning of this concept. The reason why I am raising this subject is to educate the public and also to try and interest the Department of Health and Welfare as well as the Department of Community Development. In America there are approximately 200 hospices and patients are not only cared for as in-patients, but the hospice team which is part of the Public Health Department also offers physical and emotional support to families who wish to take care of their own terminally ill at home. In England the hospice and its programme of support to families as well established and recognized by the State as an essential service. Mediaeval pilgrims on their journey to the Holy Land were welcomed overnight in hospices, places of hospitality. In the 19th century Irish sisters of charity called a hospital for the dying a hospis which they saw as a resting place for those on their final journey. A hospice is best described as a living, caring community incorporating a whole programme of care for the dying, their families and the bereaved. One could ask: What could one expect in a modern day hospice? Without going into too much detail I think it can be summed up as spiritual, emotional and physical assistance to the terminally ill and his family. I believe this course has merit and deserves the Department’s favourable attention. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to seriously consider assistance to this association.

I think it is generally accepted that alcoholism is a disease and that those who suffer from it can be cured with the right care and treatment. I raise this issue because I believe the Transport Services are not assisting the Department of Health and Welfare in so far as their own pensioners are concerned. Numerous cases have come to my attention of Transport Services employees having been dismissed because of alcoholism. I believe they do not get a square deal. I want to quote the case of a gentleman who had 27 years service with the South African Transport Services and was dismissed at the age of 55. After 27 years of service all he received was his contribution to his pension scheme plus interest. That interest he had to fight for. His application for a part of the annuity was turned down notwithstanding the fact that the South African Transport Services may pay a percentage of this annuity in a case like this. What happened? A man was thrown to the outside world at the age of 55 with little or no chance of employment and he now had to wait until he reached the age of 65 before he could apply for an old age pension. What it really boils down to is that the South African Transport Services are not looking after their own people and are passing the buck to the Department of Health and Welfare and ultimately to the taxpayer. This person had to wait approximately ten years before he could obtain an old age pension.

I can quote another case of a gentleman who was dismissed. When he was dismissed his salary was approximately R13 000 per annum. If he had received his half annuity it would have amounted to about R250 per month. However, all he was paid was the lump sum of his pension contribution plus interest which amounted to R15 000 odd. If he invests that R15 000 at 15% per annum, which is a high interest rate today, it will give him R192 per month. This precludes him from obtaining any other pension. I accept that circumstances are different in each case, but I believe the hon. the Minister should discuss the situation with the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs because in my opinion there is no reason why the South African Transport Services, in view of the fact that they are entitled to provide pro rata payments from their annuity fund, should not provide such pro rata payments.

I now come to the aged or senior citizens in our community. We are most grateful for the increases that have been announced and also for the bonus which is to be paid this month. However, we should like to have some assurance from the hon. the Minister that this will not preclude a further bonus being paid sometime later in the year. I must again raise the issue of why our social pensioners should have to wait until October for their increments to take effect. I believe with some planning they could have the same increment date as our war veteran pensioners. Speaking of war veteran pensioners, I should once again like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to consider seriously lifting the means test for the war veterans pensioners. It is they who volunteered to fight for our country, some at great hardship to their families. I think it behoves the State to reconsider their position as regards the means test.

A further point as regards pensions is that I think the means test should be adjusted so as to lower the age from 70 to 65 years in respect of remuneration that is not taken into consideration for the purposes of that test. Senior citizens must be encouraged to stay active for as long as possible. We seem to lack vision in this regard. We lose sight of the fact that these retired people can be of tremendous value to our society. The longer they can remain in some type of useful employment the better for them as well as for our society. There are many active and skilled pensioners who can still make a valuable contribution in all spheres of our community. What they need is encouragement, organization and, I believe, tax incentives. Income from employment should be tax free for all those over 65 years of age. This can only encourage the active pensioner to extend his or her working life. How often do we hear that we are so short of skilled manpower but in the same breath people are told: You are 65 and you now have to go on pension. I believe this is a complete waste of our national assets and a silly attitude towards our senior citizens. When one thinks of our present tax situation, one finds that when a person is over 70 years of age, he is taxed on income above R6 000 per annum. Therefore, if that person has planned financially so as not to be a burden on the State, and his income is R12 000 per annum or R1 000 per month and he is an unmarried person, he pays R1 074 in tax, more than a month’s income, and if he is married he pays R790 in tax, more than three quarters of a month’s income. I believe there is no justice in this situation. Those people are in fact being penalized for being thrifty and for planning for their retirement. I would respectfully suggest to the hon. the Minister that he should consider approaching the Treasury to increase the R6 000 tax-free limit to at least R6 000 plus what is being paid to the social pensioner and which will be ±R1 900. It should therefore be raised to at least R7 900. What I should like to see happen is that the tax-free limit should be raised to R10 000 for those over 70 years of age. I believe a complete new approach must be adopted in respect of our older citizens who are not a burden on the State like so many are.

Lack of time prevents me from referring to a further subject which needs serious attention. I am referring to the transferability and preservation of pension schemes, a matter that was raised by the hon. member for Edenvale. I fully support his remarks in this regard. Needless to say, we on this side of the House again urge the Government to introduce the system of transferability of pensions because failure to do so is only creating a more onerous burden on the State in so far as pension and social services are concerned. I reiterate what I said in the Budget Debate, namely that the Government should not succumb to pressures from certain groups. The last draft Bill was misread by some and was misused by others. To my mind it cannot be introduced soon enough in the interests of the State itself and of those who will be going on pension sometime in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I find myself in a rather unusual position today because I have to agree with an hon. member of the Progressive Federal Party.

Only the member who spoke in his private capacity.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. Chief Whip of the official Opposition must really not think I am referring to him. I am referring to the hon. member for Edenvale. I should like to associate myself with the plea he lodged this morning. Just in passing I want to say that, though he speaks of a compulsory pension scheme, I shall be referring to it as a national pension scheme, a term he specifically asks us to avoid. In speaking of a national pension scheme, however, I do not mean a scheme which must become the responsibility of the State. I agree with the hon. member that it should actually be a scheme which is administered by the private sector as far as possible. I understand that other hon. members, and particularly the hon. member for Witbank, are also going to associate themselves with this plea. I think that this is a matter of fundamental importance to us in South Africa. I did some background research and found that years ago a request had been made here in Parliament for the introduction of a national pension scheme. It was not always the idea that it should be a contributory scheme but, as thinking on the subject developed, particularly since 1964, the idea has begun to take root that it should be a contributory pension scheme. One also finds that the then Minister of Finance appointed a committee in 1964, i.e. nearly 20 years ago, to investigate the preservation of pensions. That is, of course, what the hon. member for Edenvale asked for in the first place. I am not going to discuss the report of that committee in detail, but I would just like to mention its terms of reference, which were to consider and to make recommendations on the question as to whether the Government should take steps, and if so, what steps, to promote the transferability of members’ rights between and liabilities of pension funds, to avoid persons acquiring, in whatever manner, the right to dispose of their accumulated pension savings before they reach retiring age, in pursuance of the foregoing to take into account pension funds established in terms of industrial agreements or which are subject to a measure of control issuing from a department of State including the Railways and provincial administrations. Incidentally, hon. members will also find the terms of reference of this committee on page 11 of the report of the departmental commission. That committee issued its report approximately two years later, on 26 May 1966. For the purposes of what I want to say here today, it is important for us just to look at one of the recommendations of the committee, i.e. that the pension fund movement would only operate satisfactorily in all respects when all employers had instituted pension funds. It actually goes without saying that if one wanted pension savings to be made transferable from one employer to another, that could only be done if all employers instituted pension funds. The position today is that almost all large employers do have pension funds. It is the smaller employers, however, who do not have pension funds. There I must agree with the hon. member for Edenvale. It seems to me that the only way of achieving the desired results is to pass legislation making it compulsory for people to institute a pension fund for employees, or in some cases a single employee. Shortly after this report, which was published in 1966, was submitted, the then Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions, together with a senior official of the department, went in 1967 to investigate existing systems in the USA and Canada. Those systems were actually selected because the point of departure was that it would not promote a welfare State. I think that the hon. member for Edenvale and I are ad idem on this. We do not want to advocate a welfare State. I think that the hon. Chief Whip of the Official Opposition also agrees with us.

Yes, definitely.

Mr. Chairman, during the debate in the House of Assembly on 18 August 1970 the relevant Minister announced that the Government was not at that stage—and I want to emphasize this—prepared to institute a contributory pension scheme. He advanced reasons for that. In spite of the reasons advanced, however, the appointment of the departmental committee was announced on 10 October 1974 and really for the first time the possibility was investigated of creating such a compulsory national—in this respect—and generally applicable pension scheme. This committee issued a report, and its recommendation was that such a scheme would be advantageous to South Africa and could indeed be instituted. There was tremendous criticism levelled at that report, particularly by the insurance industry. Some also sang its praises. One was struck, however, by the fact that it was precisely the insurance industry, which in my view would benefit most from such a scheme, which objected most to it. During the 1977 session of Parliament the then Minister summed up the criticism levelled at the proposed scheme as follows (Hansard, 4 May 1977, col. 6876)—

Mr. Chairman, one can analyse each of these objections but, in doing so, one does not find any one of them to have any substance. Not one of these objections is well-founded, and I say this with the utmost respect for the critics who lodged these objections. Consider, for instance, the last objection, viz. that the inflation rate will be pushed up. How can it push up the inflation rate if, throughout his life, a person is expected to make provision for his old age? It would be more inflationary to pay a gratis old-age pension, without the person concerned having made provision for it, than it would be if, during one’s productive life, one made provision for one’s unproductive life. Consider for example the objection that the scheme would be socialistic in nature. In the first instance it is, after all, a scheme in terms of which a person makes provision for himself, and that provision he makes for himself will finally determine the benefits he will enjoy. How can that be socialistic? How can one therefore argue that that is socialistic? In the same way I can analyse each of these arguments, and hon. members will find that not one of them holds water.

In connection with this departmental investigation, the position in various European countries is also interesting. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am not going to discuss the subject with which the hon. member for Port Elizabeth North dealt. In the vein in which he followed up on what my colleague, the hon. member for Edenvale, said I should also just like to say that in the main I agree with most of the points he raised.

I should just like to focus attention on the position of the aged in the community, particularly on those who find themselves in old-age homes. It is, of course, the modern approach—an approach which is indeed supported by the department—that as far as possible the aged must continue to live in their own homes in the community, at least as long as their health and capabilities allow them to obtain food for themselves, to prepare it, to clothe themselves, etc. In general, I have no fault to find with this approach; I think it is a healthy approach. Under certain circumstances, however, there are realities which sometimes conflict with this approach. In my opinion this approach is, of course, based on the assumption that the problems attached to growing old, problems which are part and parcel of the lives of the aged, are primarily health problems which progressively manifest themselves and which are also problems involving the inability to feed oneself, to buy food, to prepare it and to look after oneself in such a way that one’s health is not impaired. If, generally, these two aspects, namely the question of nutrition and the question of health, were the main problems affecting the aged, I am of the opinion that the system of service centres whereby people are fed at home and routinely receive home-based health care would provide a solution for the majority of our problems.

These days housing, the mere restrictive factor of housing, is unfortunately often an even greater problem for the aged than problems involving nutrition and health. That is, of course, largely due to the fact that rentals for flats and room accommodation in private boarding houses, particularly in certain urban areas, have got completely out of hand, not to mention the purchase price of flats and houses, because I assume that the category of old people of whom I am speaking could not even think of buying something for themselves. The rentals alone have often got completely out of hand.

Mr. Chairman, in my own constituency of Green Point—and this also very definitely applies to other constituencies in the Peninsula and in other urban areas—it is not unusual for the rental for a flat to be doubled over a period of two years. In the past few years this has happened in a very large number of cases. For the aged person living in such a flat his expenditure on housing is becoming a nightmare for him, in fact to such an extent that it completely overshadows all the other problems in his life. The cost of renting a flat has become so exorbitant that he is often forced to cut down on his expenditure on food, medical care and clothing, and here I am not talking of luxuries. I am merely talking of cases of the aged sometimes being forced to feed themselves so inadequately that their health is impaired. Then doctors’ fees sometimes become a problem for them. They are sometimes also inadequately clothed in the prevailing weather conditions. Such people are forced to go to old-age homes merely because that is the only type of housing they can afford at that particular time. They do not go for reasons of poor health. Some of these people go to old-age homes when, in truth, they do not yet have any health or nutritional problems. They go to old-age homes when, strictly speaking, they can still afford the two items, i.e. medical costs and the cost of feeding themselves. They then merely see the old-age home as an alternative form of accommodation, which is often also their only way out of difficulty. So although the department adopts the point of view that it is a good thing for people to stay in their own homes as long as possible, as long as they are physically able to look after themselves, let me just say that this attitude must be tempered by the reality of the high cost of housing, which these days is unfortunately becoming an unpleasant reality for many of the aged.

Generally speaking, inflation and rising costs have even influenced the position of people who are already in old-age homes. Here in the Peninsula we have an organization, the Cape Peninsula Welfare Organization for the Aged, which over many years has done very good work and which controls a large number of old-age homes which they also established in the first instance. Unfortunately this organization has recently, since a month or two ago, of necessity had to increase, in some cases tremendously, the rentals it charges the inmates. In respect of certain of the aged this organization has had to double the rental. There are now people paying R500 to live in an old-age home. In some cases there were exorbitant increases. Some of my hon. colleagues and I went to see the management of that organization and tried to establish in what areas difficulties were being experienced. It is again the old story of increased costs, the cost of food and particularly the question of salaries for nurses which has also become a problem for them. They have indeed, over the years, built up a burden of debt which they must now discharge. The increases were therefore not merely introduced in an effort to keep pace with high costs in the future, but indeed to settle accumulated debts of the past. The result is that the aged now living in those homes are being hard hit. After carefully having studied the figures they provided, it became quite clear to me that the subsidies paid in respect of those people do, at this stage, leave much to be desired. I do not say that lightly.

What subsidies?

The subsidies paid in respect of sub-economic inmates of old-age homes. I am referring to the subsidies paid to the management of such old-age homes. Let me make one thing clear: That organization does, of course, control old-age homes for the economic and sub-economic categories. I think that at this stage the subsidies in respect of the sub-economic old-age homes definitely deserve a larger adjustment than the normal annual adjustment. In 1982 there were adjustments in both of those categories, but in the case of urban areas, like this one in any event, I think that the position of the sub-economic category again deserves serious reconsideration by the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Deputy Minister at this stage. In so far as the level of these subsidies is perhaps determined with a view to ensuring that the aged, as far as possible, live in their own homes, let me say that I think it deserves to be reviewed. Perhaps it was thought that it would to some extent discourage the aged from prematurely moving from their own homes to old-age homes. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should very much like to associate myself with the previous speaker, the hon. member for Green Point, and also with the hon. member for South Coast. I think this is a very important question, and it is very important that in these times we should take very good care of our aged. Before proceeding with that, however, I just want to say that we are very grateful for the higher salaries which are going to be paid to social workers. These are people who do work of inestimable value in our community, particularly in the present time. They work under very difficult conditions and are confronted with very difficult cases. That is why I find it essential, with the onslaught time is making on the people of today, when considering these people, to whose care children and older people with their problems are entrusted, that we adopt a very generous view when it comes to salaries and to the praise due to those people.

The tempo of life today allows one little time for contemplation and planning in working out one’s future. I think it is fitting for us to consider how this rapidly developing technological world affects the aged, persons who started life at a calmer tempo, but whose tempo of living increases progressively as their strength diminishes. They must adjust to this hectic tempo and to the severe demand life makes on them today. It is certainly also fitting for us to consider what these people can offer and what they require. Today people are subjected to onslaughts in many fields. There is for example, the onslaught against the Christian religion, the onslaught against marriage and family life and the onslaught against our culture and traditions. The ever more prevalent phenomenon of the breakdown of family life affects not only the child, but also the parent and the elderly. The aged are subjected to the lovelessness prevailing in the world, to maltreatment and to the absence of security, not to mention the uncertainty in the world in which they must live. Therefore the aged are affected as much by the breakdown of family life as the child is. Where the surviving spouse usually moved in with his children, he now finds that he is in the way, and that because the family unit has broken down and no longer exists. What is important in the life of the aged are the questions that present themselves to him. The first question is: Do I still have a role to play? For the aged it is very important indeed to know if they still have a role to play in life. The second question is: Am I still needed? In reassuring the aged in connection with their problems, spiritual care is worth much more to them than being cared for financially. I think each one of us can make a contribution in this field. The assurance that they still have a role to play is important if not essential. We can engage the aged and allow them to play a role in the church and in the environment, for example as security guards and porters in hospitals or various institutions. That is indeed being done. I think that the fact that these people are employed in this way is greatly appreciated. However, I think that we, the public, should make it known to these people, when we are with them, that we very much appreciate the fact that they, after retiring, still see their way clear to providing a service for the public in this country. A smile is the only gesture understood in every language in the world, and we would do well to smile more often when in the company of old people. I think that meetings should be organized for the aged in order to give one the opportunity to tell them what needs exist and how they can contribute to the welfare of our country. I think that if we did that, if that were our approach, they would also feel themselves able to contribute far more positively and with far more motivation.

Mr. Chairman, now I should very much like to turn to our Parliamentary service officers.

Hear, hear!

I have great appreciation for these people who make things so much easier for us here. I am very pleased that I can take up the cudgels for them in this way because they streamline and facilitate our work considerably as representatives of the people. With their experience and knowledge they can help us a great deal. They are a great asset because they can obtain things for us much more easily. What would happen if we first had to go and find out everything for ourselves? I want to say that these people deserve to be handed a very special garland of praise today. I feel that the smile with which they do this work for us means a lot to each and every one of us.

The downward trend in the economy, the price increases and the higher cost of living hit pensioners and the aged the hardest. We do say that each person must provide for his own future, and that is probably a good thing. In the light of these increases, however, I want to tell hon. members that the provision they have made for themselves in years gone by amounts to less than a drop in the bucket. Our people must be educated and encouraged to justly appreciate these aged who have done their share and brought us to the point where we can now take over. They, the people of a bygone era, are still trying today to secure a place for themselves in this bustling life. I should just like to quote to hon. members a short passage, which captures so beautifully the supplication of those who are growing old. I think it is fitting for us to reflect on this a moment. I quote—

Mr. Chairman, I think that this gives one a glimpse into the life of each one of us as we move towards a ripe old age. I thought the idea expressed by the hon. member for South Coast was such a beautiful one. The idea of a hospice is such a beautiful one, and I think that if we could grant assistance in any spiritual crisis the aged, their families and the people in their lives might have, we would be doing more for them than money could ever buy.

Mr. Chairman, one cannot find fault with the contribution made by the hon. member for Germiston District. One does not expect such a charming young hon. member to be able to speak about the aged with so much compassion! I thank her most sincerely for doing so.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Edenvale made a very important contribution to this debate. In his speech he supported representations which have been made repeatedly over the years by hon. members on this side of the House in this specific debate, namely that we have to exercise care in regard to the increasing welfare services we are rendering so that the costs involved will not eventually be so high that our economy will not be able to afford it.

This brings me to a lesson my grandmother Van Vuuren taught me. She was a formidable lady, and she taught me that it was a man’s duty to see to it throughout his life that neither he nor his family would ever be dependent on the State or the Church. Throughout his life he has to see to it that, when he is no longer alive, his widow or his children will not be dependent on the State or the Church. I think this is the message we should bring home to our people, and particularly the younger people, to a much greater extent.

Mr. Chairman, this is the year of the aged, but you will forgive me if I discuss a completely different topic in this debate today. I want to talk about children, a very special aspect of children, in fact.

A great deal has been said about the parent-child relationship. We have heard so much about it in radio talks and read so much about it in magazine articles, newspaper articles and books that we have to an extent become tired of this topic. What is more, as far as child care, education, training, married life and family life are concerned, there are as many authoritative opinions as there are on politics.

However, what causes us grave concern, is the tremendous rise in the number of cases of child abuse which are reported. Time and again one is struck by the number of cases of child abuse dealt with by the courts. However, one only reads about those cases of child abuse, the physical ill-treatment of children, which are reported. One never hears about those cases of physical ill-treatment which are not reported. And I make so bold as to say that there must be numerous such cases. Any person who ill-treats a child physically and is exposed, is taken to court and punished.

It is common knowledge that the child retains mental scars of physical ill-treatment for many years or for the rest of his life. This brings me to a term which for lack of a better word, I want to call the mental ill-treatment of children. When one reads law reports, one finds that many juvenile delinquents and criminals who are not that young, tell the courts about their unhappy childhood and use that as a plea for mitigation of the sentence the courts have to impose.

As far as I could ascertain, nothing has as yet been written on the mental ill-treatment of children. I am not, however, suggesting that nothing has as yet been written on this topic. However, I think we all agree that the mental ill-treatment of children is a fairly topical matter, and I feel it deserves more attention. I am referring to the mental scars left by the physical ill-treatment the child suffers.

Other forms of mental ill-treatment include discrimination by the parent against the child, at the expense of another child; in other words, favouritism. Certain children are favoured at the expense of other children. Regular physical bullying of children, which constitutes assault in legal terms, but which is not bad enough to be regarded as ill-treatment, must leave mental scars on that child. Another aspect is lack of confidence in a child. Then there is also a lack of discipline or cases of excessive discipline being applied. Surely, absolutely ignoring a child and his needs and views or ignoring the opinions and standpoints of certain children in a family must leave mental scars on that child; surely, these are forms of mental ill-treatment of that child. I venture to say that case where parents expect their children to do better than they themselves did and then pressurize those children into doing better academically and particularly in the field of sport than they themselves did, constitute yet another significant form of mental ill-treatment. Thus one finds that children do very well at school, during which time parents can bring pressure to bear on them, but as soon as they leave school one never hears of those athletes or rugby players again. After completing their schooling, those children escape the pressure and mental cruelty they suffered merely to please their parents. Then there are also problems caused by broken homes.

Another aspect which should receive attention and which may possibly leave mental scars on a child, concerns children of unmarried mothers. In recent years it has become fashionable for unmarried mothers to keep their children and raise them themselves. One has appreciation for a mother who is so humanistic and willing to make sacrifices in order as to raise her child by herself. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to the hon. member for Hercules that I found his speech very interesting indeed and I think it was a very good speech. I agree with most of the things he said. I think one of the most onerous responsibilities a person can have is to be a good parent. The Jesuits used to say if you gave them a child for the first five years of his life, they would have him for the rest of his life. I think people who are parents do not realize the responsibility that they have. In those first five years we are actually forming the citizens of the future. One thing which the hon. member mentioned, and which struck me particularly, is that when one goes to any school sports game one sees that the people who are really getting excited are not the children, but the parents. They actually live out their own inadequacies and their lack of prestige and lack of accomplishment through their children and they actually put tremendous pressure on their children.

I forgot to welcome the hon. the Deputy Minister. I am sure we will have a very pleasant relationship with him as we have known him before in other posts and I look forward to working with him.

We have had a very interesting debate and it seems to me we are reaching a consensus which is perhaps unique in this present Parliament. I am in agreement with the hon. member for Port Elizabeth North. I want to make the point that it seems to me if one looks at the long term, there is a recognition that we cannot continue as we are now. Eventually somebody has to pay. That is the critical question—who has to pay? It is all very well to ask for an increase here and an increase there; that is a legitimate thing to do as an MP. Eventually, however, each increase we ask for will have to come from somewhere else or taxes will have to be increased. This is the important point because we can increase taxes to such an extent as to actually kill the motivation of people to work. This is part of the fallacy of free enterprise in South Africa. If we have any problems, we mouth the words “free enterprise” and we believe that free enterprise must look after the problems. This cannot happen. If you actually believe in free enterprise, and your philosophy is to be a 100% free-enterpriser and capitalist, you would actually say, if you have not provided for yourself in your old age, you must suffer. I challenge anybody in this House to actually say that because there is no free ride. This is one of the problems with pensions as you can actually promise people tremendous futures because it depends on your actuarial valuations and the way you use them. Eventually, however, you get out what you have put in and it is as simple as that. If you want more, you have to put in more. What has encouraged me about this debate so far, is that we are beginning to investigate the problem rather than the symptoms of the problem because the means test and the other questions, whether the pensions are adequate or not, are the symptoms of the problem. They will not solve the problem. What we in this House should start looking at is how we are going to solve that problem. We should realize that the solution will take time and it is a long-term problem.

I want to mention some things we can do in the short term to improve the situation. If you are to retire in 20 years’ time, you have to start providing now. Tax concessions, although they are good, are not enough. If one looks at retirement annuities, one sees who actually uses these retirement annuities. It is used by the wealthy as a tax shelter, in other words by the people who do not need it and who have in most cases adequate funds to provide for their retirement. They are using the retirement annuities because they are tax concessions. We are not tackling the person who will actually be a burden on the State. If somebody is contributing R3 500 to a retirement annuity, I give you a categorical assurance that he will not be applying for a social old-age pension. MPs cannot afford to contribute R3 500 to retirement annuities, but that is a different question which we can tackle some other time.

One of the problems is that people only start to worry about their retirement five years before they retire. Of course, at that stage it is too late to do anything. The question I want to raise is that at the present moment we are treating the symptoms. I would like the hon. the Minister or the hon. the Deputy Minister to look into the question of educating the people of South Africa about providing for their retirement. Before I became an MP, it was actually my job to counsel people, either before they retired or after they retired. In a period of five years I saw approximately 2 000 people. The percentage that had adequately provided for their retirement, could not have been more than 3%. In fact, the figures show that approximately 90% of the population will not provide adequately for their retirement. We have to start this education when people are young and that is something we should look at. I had a case of a gentleman whom I asked if he did not think of providing for himself because he had moved from pension fund to pension fund. He told me that he had enjoyed his life. I then asked him what he would do now as he received a pension of only R40 per month. He said that the Government would look after him. That is one thing we can do. I also think that we should change our attitude towards the aged. When life expectancies were low, people were retired at the age of 60 or 65. I do not know if that is still valid. If one looks at Parliament, what would happen—and I do not want to ask the ladies their ages because that would be rude—if we retired everybody in Parliament at the age of 60 if they were female and 65 if they were male? It would be very interesting. Are we actually saying that those who are over 65…

You will lose a lot of friends.

I am glad the hon. the Minister said that. Does this only apply to Parliament and is there something unique about politics that when you are over the age of 65 you can cope with politics but you cannot cope with anything else? We should look at this problem because we have a shortage of skilled labour. I can tell you what happens to people who are retired at 60 or 65 who have really enjoyed their work. They die 18 months or two years afterwards because they are bored and have nothing else to do. The final point that I want to make is that we can look at the financial arrangements, which are important, but we must also look very carefully, and this is something that applies to all of us, at the attitude to the aged. In a country which has a shortage of skilled labour, I honestly do not believe that when a person reaches the age of 60, when they are female, or the age of 65, if they are male, that they can still not be of benefit to society.

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Mr. Chairman, this morning the hon. member for Germiston District expressed her appreciation for our service officers, and I have no fault to find with that. My first speech in the House of Assembly was about the aged and if it so happens that my last speech should also be on this subject, you will realize how I feel deep down about these people who have made their mark indelibly in our country. This afternoon I am going to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister, and if it meets with his approval and I should have a share in improving the lot of our aged—including those working in this building, one of whom is being buried this afternoon, having died on a train on his way to work one cold morning earlier this week at the age of 79—then I shall be happy.

Right at the outset, bearing in mind everything that has been said in this debate in connection with the welfare of our people, I should like to request the hon. the Minister to appoint a select committee to investigate all aspects of pensions in our country. This is a very wide field, but it has to be done, inter alia, with a view to the possible phasing out of social pensions—whether this takes 20, 30 or 40 years, it has to be done. A second point is that we should investigate the retirement age of our people. More and more of our people are living longer and although I do not want to bore you with all the statistics, it is even possible that at present we have more people over the age of 90 than we had over the age of 70 three decades ago. Our people are therefore living longer; consequently we must consider these aspects and ensure that we keep those people in service as long as possible in view of the tremendous shortage of trained manpower in our country. One of the hon. members mentioned this fact, and I can personally attest to the truth of this, because I used to be an undertaker for many years. Thousands of people are being buried only a year or two after going on pension. The reason for this is that they used to be active and that sitting at home and being inactive contributed to their early deaths. I feel that we have to prepare people for retirement, and I know there are many organizations giving attention to this. However, I feel that people should not retire summarily; they should retire gradually over a period of time. They can, for example, work half-days, or three days a week or start later or return home earlier in the afternoon so that they do not have to travel during rush hours. These are the things we have to look into. This is the reason for my urgent request for a select committee to be appointed to investigate this matter as a whole.

If we look back at the history of pensions, we find that there was a select committee which investigated the Pension Funds Act in the ’fifties. This gave rise to Act No. 24 of 1956. What happened subsequently? In 1964 an inter-departmental committee was appointed, i.e. the Cillié Committee, but since then almost two decades elapsed during which time very little else happened. I am therefore of the opinion that this matter should receive urgent attention. On 10 September 1978 another inter-departmental committee was appointed, and I have the highest appreciation for what was done by the people serving on that committee. I see in one of their reports that they sat for 41 days. Two of the three instructions given to this committee have already been carried out. As far as the third instruction is concerned, which is very important, no report has yet been made. This concerns the provision of satisfactory pension benefits for that part of the community which at present does not have cover in any form. We have to give this our urgent attention.

It is a fact that during every session of Parliament—and today was no exception—we ask that pensions be increased. I myself have made requests in this connection. However, if any government has really gone out of its way to care for our aged with the funds at its disposal, then it is the present National Party Government. In 1953 social pensions totalled R18 a month; in 1963 they totalled R27 a month; in 1973 they were R47 a month and in 1983, R152 a month. The holder of a pension book also enjoys other benefits. These pensioners receive certain concessions as regards telephone services, as well as radio and television licences. The South African Transport Services also make concessions for the aged. There are also benefits in connection with hospital services and public resorts where these people can relax. In cities and towns persons with pension books can make use of transport free of charge. Benefits are also available as far as purchase at large shopping centres are concerned. Local authorities also make concessions in connection with rates and taxes, pensioners being allowed a rebate of up to 40%. I greatly appreciate these concessions. However, there is one thing that worries me, and that is that one still comes across quite a number of people who say, “When I can no longer work, the State will take care of me.” In the past people did not have all these facilities for belonging to pension funds. However, in a few decades’ time we shall no longer be able to say that.

The problem we are grappling with arose in the days when industrialized communities did not exist and people flocked to our cities and towns. In the past it was the responsibility of the child to care for his parents and the parent to care for his children. This was not unusual. I myself grew up in a house where three generations lived together. One simply does not see this nowadays. The responsibility of the individual is to a large extent being transferred to the State. The advent of mining, industrialism, commerce and service industries resulted in our being saddled with this problem today. We should also take a look at how pension funds have increased in number. In 1959 there were 3 267 pension funds, and in 1978 there were 10 664. Membership of pension funds totalled 1 103 590 in 1959 and 4 441 177 in 1978. As I see it, pension funds should form a ring-wall of an area into which capital can flow. However, before such capital can be withdrawn and the unfreezing process takes place, there must be ways in which this can be done. I should like to mention a few. In the first place this is done on the attainment of the retirement age. In the second place this is done on the member’s death. In the third place it is done when a person is declared medically unfit, and in the fourth place when the member emigrates. I have only mentioned a few ways, but what I find alarming is that over a period of four years an amount of R60 million was withdrawn and paid out for reasons other than those I have mentioned to you. This is what is worrying me. In 1980 there were 11 111 pension funds with 5 324 770 members of whom 301 892 were pensioners. This sounds fine. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it gives me great pleasure to follow on the hon. member for Witbank in this debate. In the course of my speech I will refer again to the subject which he holds dear, namely care of the aged, and therefore I do not want to react now to what he has said other than to say that in the main I am in agreement with him.

At the outset I want to express a few thoughts about the professional welfare services in operation in South Africa today. I want to say that the professional social services, whether provided by the State, church organizations or private organizations, have reached a high standard of professionalism and definitely compare favourably with social work done in any other country in the world. What is done in South Africa by way of professional social services is in no way inferior to the welfare services provided overseas. That is because this discipline has outgrown its infancy, its initial phase, and reached the stage where one can definitely speak of a professional service rendered by professional people. For that reason it gives me pleasure to welcome the hon. the Minister’s announcement in connection with the improved salary scales, particularly in so far as they relate to the ordinary social workers, the chief social welfare officer and the assistant-director. I do not want to express an opinion on whether enough has been done; that time will tell. Personally, I am not sure whether enough has been done, but I think it is a big step forward to give recognition on the actual level of remuneration to the fact that in the field of social work we are dealing with a professional service rendered by professional people. This is, in other words, a fully fledged profession which should receive the remuneration it deserves. As regards the people rendering these services, namely the welfare officers or the probation officers, as they are called by the State, I want to say that over the past few years their field of study has not only been broadened but also definitely deepened. I want to tell you, Sir, that care of the individual, in which I also want to include family care, has been the subject of an in-depth study and that, in view of the other human sciences such as sociology, psychology and criminology having been brought within the scope, it has now reached a standard which can at any time be compared with the best services of this kind in the world. Also in our work with groups—whether it be on the level of care of the aged or whether it concerns the handicapped or any other group in the community—I believe we in South Africa have definitely achieved a professional standard. In the third instance I am of opinion that this is also true of organization at community level. Whilst it is true that the organization of the provision of services at community level has not yet fully matured, I believe that the research done and the resulting literature are of such a standard that the aspect of organization at community level has in fact also reached a peak. One can but trust that the State and particularly the private welfare organizations, in which I include church organizations, will in due course concentrate more and more on this work to enable it to develop and come into its own. We must ascertain within the community itself what it has to offer to combat certain existing problems so that we can provide what is required.

I also want to tell hon. members that the social workers are today orientated to undergoing advanced training—the course has been extended at undergraduate level—to qualify themselves fully to meet every demand this important professional service in our community might make on them. This service is as all-embracing as is the community as a whole. Just about every aspect of community life, of society as such, in one way or another impinges on the discipline of social work as an element of the welfare services.

In this connection I would merely say—my time is limited—that in respect of care of the aged I believe that the welfare services are also reaching a standard of proficiency which is of the greatest importance for us in this country. We have reached a phase—and here I want to associate myself with the hon. member for Witbank—where the number of aged persons in the community is increasing. That is a fact. Various factors have brought this about. Better medical services, etc., have increased the lifespan of the aged. I agree with the hon. member for Witbank that these people should remain as productive as possible. Eventually one reaches the stage, however, where these people can no longer be productive. Then they must sit back. They must, as it were, withdraw themselves from the community. I have a problem, however: The old approach of the aged being looked after by their families is no longer the general norm and, in fact, does not apply any more. We find increasingly that these people have to be looked after by the State or by welfare organizations. In this connection I have a problem, namely that we still do not have enough old-age homes in which elderly people can be looked after. In the report before us mention is made of merely 400-plus old-age homes. Those old-age homes are full to overflowing and the waiting list for each is as long as one’s arm. There are a few of these old-age homes in my own constituency, and the problems I have with the waiting lists are endless. People want to be admitted and must be admitted but there is no room for them. In the report reference is made, inter alia, to the fact that provision has been made for 281 projects which have been approved and to which the Department of Community Development must give attention. In the year under review dealt within this report 46 have been approved and they will provide accommodation for 1 254 people. That means a mere 27,3 aged persons per project. The need is, in fact, far greater than that. In this connection it is true, however, that State welfare organizations and private welfare organizations can obtain a substantial support from the State to build such homes. The problem is, however, to get suitable sites. In Pretoria, to put it frankly, the stage has been reached where, in conflict with the whole community’s attitude to open spaces such as parks, the latter must now be utilized for the erection of old-age homes. At the moment, for instance, a major battle is raging in Pretoria in regard to Struben Park. In my own constituency a park had to make way for an old-age home. At the moment a battle is being waged in my constituency with the town council to have another public park rezoned so that an old-age home can be built there. The availability of suitable sites will require our urgent attention in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I can tell the hon. member for Koedoespoort that it is not only the problem of finding open spaces for the aged, but that Pretoria seems to have trouble with its parks too. It seems to be something special to Pretoria. I will say, however, that I agree with most of what the hon. member for Koedoespoort said about the improvement of the quality of welfare services and that a lot remains to be done. I agree with him about the need for providing more accommodation for the aged.

I should like to raise another matter and it is actually with the hon. the Minister rather than with his Deputy. I have raised it with him before and he might be able to guess what it is all about. I wonder whether hon. members remember that in 1979 we had a little discussion about the rank discrimination against the men in this House. Members may be surprised to see me taking up the cudgels for men, for a change. Are the hon. members aware of the fact that when women members of Parliament die, their pensions unlike the pensions of male members who die do not go to their widowers. They get nothing, not a penny, although the women obviously pay exactly the same contributions to the pension fund. I think members in all fairness will agree that women MP’s do an equal amount of work in Parliament. I do not understand the basis of this discrimination. Not one penny goes to the widowers, the spouses, the relicts, whatever you want to call them, of women MP’s who die. In the case of male MP’s, three-quarters of their salaries go to the widows and thereafter, if the widow dies, that is handed on to dependent children of the deceased MP. The hon. the Minister did not have much of an argument about this when I raised it with him last time. He thought the matter was very complicated and needed investigation. He has had a few years in which to do some investigating. I hope he has applied his mind to this problem and that he perhaps has some solution for it, because it not only applies to women MP’s, but also to women judges. Although we only have one woman judge in South Africa, there is every reason to believe that this number will increase in the future. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that the argument that the male is the breadwinner in the family, no longer holds good. Women, in at least 30% of households, are the breadwinners. Therefore, there can be no argument advanced on that score. This is just a rank injustice and nothing more. I must also point out that there is no means test which is applied to the widows of male MP’s who die. If it is a case of what the family has got, then there ought to be a means test which applies to the widow of the male MP just as it ought to apply, of course, in the case of women. This does not only affect women MP’s and women judges who number three in toto at the present stage. Probably the same situation applies to MPCs and there are more female MPCs. It, however, does not only affect them, but if affects all women in State Service. I want the hon. the Minister to realize that he is now dealing with a very considerable number of people. Something must be done to make the Interpretation Act apply in terms of gender, male/female, to the Parliamentary Service Pensions Act, to the Judges’ Salaries and Pensions Act and also to the Pensions Act which applies to all the females in the civil service. There is no justification for this rank injustice. I very much hope that the hon. the Minister will come with an amending Bill, if not this session, then in the next session, at least in time for me before I die!

Mr. Chairman, let it be recorded in the annals that I have agreed with the hon. member for Houghton. I have only one minute’s injury time and would very briefly like to make a few points.

I discussed the question of the mental ill-treatment of children. At the beginning of my speech earlier today I said that as far as I could ascertain no study had as yet been made of this matter. Nothing has been written on it. No I should like to ask our department or, if not the department, the HSRC to investigate for us the question of the mental ill-treatment of children.

If, through such an inquiry, it were to become apparent that action could be taken against people who make themselves guilty of such mental ill-treatment that would be a good thing. Would that not be possible? I find it hard to believe that nowhere in our law provision is made for action to be taken against such people. The results of such research would also be instructive and could be used as a guide for parents.

Thanks to the NP Whip and, I presume, also the PFP Whip, I have been permitted to complete that part of my speech I was not able to complete earlier on, when I spoke earlier on I pointed out that the criticism levelled against the proposed scheme was not really of much significance. There were other investigations as well; for instance, the interdepartmental committee which was referred to by my colleague the hon. member for Witbank and which published its report in March 1980. That report dealth with a single aspect, namely the preservation of pensions. The committee’s terms of reference were in fact wider, but that was the first report and it dealt with that aspect. As a result of that report there was great dissatisfaction amongst Black people. In Durban and in our own city, Port Elizabeth, strikes resulted from those recommendations. I want to suggest that these people acted on the strength of insufficient information. If the benefits of the preservation of pensions had been properly explained to those employees, they would not have gone on strike. That brings me to the plea I should like to make—and here I associate myself with the hon. member for Witbank—namely that in this connection active steps must now be taken. The hon. member for Edenvale mentioned that from the time of the scheme’s inception it would take 20 years to bring it into operation. Experts have indicated to me that within a mere 10 years certain benefits could be paid out. Time is short, however. If we were to start with this today, it would mean that only after 10 years at the earliest benefits would flow from this scheme. The hon. member for Edenvale pointed out what the position would be in 20 years’ time. In 10 years’ time the position will be untenable. The interdepartmental committee of 1980 failed to carry out some of its terms of reference. Here I am referring to the terms of reference relating to the provision of satisfactory pension benefits for that part of the community which at present enjoys no cover in this respect. Consequently, I want to plead that a Select Committee, a committee of experts or an interdepartmental committee should give this matter urgent attention. Such a committee must be appointed at the earliest possible opportunity to devise ways and means of introducing a national contributory pension scheme as soon as possible. In my opinion each day’s delay is simply going to make it more difficult for us to derive eventually the benefits which could flow from this.

Mr. Chairman, I prepared a substantial body of notes, but there are so many questions to which I have to reply that it seems to me I am not going to get round to dealing with my notes.

†The hon. member for Edenvale started the debate this morning and set the tone for this debate. He has since set an example to the other members who were very keen to emulate him. They have not dabbled in petty politics the whole morning. There was not a single discordant note. I have been in Parliament many years and have listened to many speakers on pension matters. I want to pay tribute to the hon. member for Edenvale and say that I have never listened to a member who is more knowledgeable on the subject. It is a very responsible, a very constructive and positive contribution he is making to this debate. I thank the hon. member. He spoke very glowingly of the officials of this Department, about their courtesy and their efficiency. On behalf of the officials, I should like to thank him for the grateful thanks he expressed towards them. He said that the ideal for South Africa is that the time should arrive that we have no more old-age pensioners. That is an idea also expressed by the hon. member for Witbank. That will not happen in my lifetime but since he is a younger man than I am, I sincerely trust that it will be in his lifetime, but of course, we must work towards that ideal. The hon. member gave us some very mind-boggling projections of what the position would be by the turn of the century with the increased life expectancy of the aged. He mentioned a figure of some R14-R17 billion, if I understood him correctly, as being necessary for social pensions. I wonder whether his estimate was not too high; mine would have been half of that, but even that is mind-boggling and quite beyond our means. I agree with him that we cannot accept the status quo and that something positive, something drastic, must be done. He had two suggestions. He said that we should implement the proposal of the report about the transferability and retention of pensions. He also advocated compulsory employer contributions to a pension fund. Many other members spoke on this very same matter. As was mentioned by the hon. member for Witbank, there are presently over 11 000 of these private pension funds. There are more than 4 million contributors and presently there are some 162 000 pensioners. Actuarially those funds seem to be rather healthy, because the pensioners represent only about 4% of those who are contributing. We also have our civil service pension funds. There are eight of them. The total number of contributors is in the order of 656 000 of whom there are 92 000 pensioners. In addition, we have just over 180 000 social pensioners only amongst the White group. There are altogether, I should say, over 500 000 or 600 000 social pensioners of all racial groups. The hon. member asked that we now look into this matter. I want to assure the hon. member that we will look into this matter once more. We are constantly discussing this matter with the Department of Manpower. They are monitoring the situation.

*The hon. member for Port Elizabeth North, who comes from an area where there is labour unrest, believes that poor communication—I wonder whether this is not in actual fact the case—is the cause of the unrest. Perhaps we have not done a good enough job of marketing that system amongst Black workers. It is actually a function that rests with the Department of Manpower. We are busy holding discussions with them. I want to give hon. members the assurance that we shall, at the very earliest opportunity, be implementing those measures, and we are all unanimous on that aspect.

†I agree with the hon. member who said that we have consensus on this matter. We cannot delay the implementation of these proposals much longer.

The hon. member for Middelburg made a very fine speech. He expressed his thanks for the increase in the means test limit. The hon. member for Edenvale said the means test was very complicated. That is true. It is beyond the intellectual capabilities of the average man. About his suggestion that we issue a guide, let me just say that it would probably not be possible to issue such a guide to all prospective pensioners, but we could issue some of these guides to our MP’s, our welfare organizations and other organizations dealing with the aged. We do get a tremendous number of unnecessary applications. We get numerous requests from people who say that their income is only R700 or R800 per month and who ask whether we cannot do something about that. Those people’s incomes are far above the limit set for the means test. In regard to the fact that as far as assets are concerned, the limit set for the means test has now been increased to R42 000, the fact of the matter is that there are numerous people who are now going to qualify for a social pension who would previously not have been entitled to one. Someone who, for example, had assets totalling R35 000, without an income, would not have been able to qualify for a pension in terms of the present scheme. From 1 October a person with assets totalling R35 000 would, however, be able to qualify for an old-age pension of R110 per month. I was privileged, in the past few days, to have been able to write dozens of letters telling people that although they did not qualify for a pension at present, they should apply again in September. If their positions did not change, they would probably qualify then. Only yesterday I wrote a particularly interesting letter to a widow receiving a mines pension. This is a typical example. Her mines pension is R132 per month, and because the limit imposed by the means test is R116 per month, she does not qualify for a social pension. I had to write to her telling her that I could unfortunately not help her. I could, however, tell her to apply again in September, because then the limit imposed by the means test would be increased to R1 920 per annum, i.e. R160 per month. Because she received R132 per month and the limit imposed by the means test was to be R160 per month, from 1 October that lady, who receives a private pension of R132 per month at present, could also claim a social pension of R104. That would simply help to give her life a sightly more refined touch and make it a little more pleasant. It is not merely the extra R104 she would be getting. She would also be getting a pension booklet. That pension booklet opens many doors. It opens up doors to medical doctors, she gets a discount on her television licence, her telephone installation costs are cheaper, in many local authority areas transport services are cheaper for her to use. Many more doors are opened too, and it is a fact, as the hon. member has said, that we have helped many people.

He asked whether we did not want to have a look at the case of civil pensions who only received 5%, and here I am referring to those who retired before 1960. Anyone who retired in 1960 obtains, after last year’s budget, an increase of 32%, which is a generous increase. The provision made last year was indeed a wonderful move. These increases, however, are drawn from a stabilization fund, and it depends upon what this stabilization fund is able to manage, actuarially speaking. As hon. members know, this fund is built up out of contributions from Government officials who annually contribute 7% of their 13th cheque, their bonus, to the fund. It is then supplemented by a further 21% which the State contributes. There is consequently 28% of that 13th cheque that is paid into this stabilization fund. The increases are funded from that source. Because we had to provide such a considerable increase last year, it was not possible to grant more than 5% this year.

The hon. member and several other members spoke about the date of the increase and wanted to know whether we could not again make it 1 April. The date is really arbitrary. From an administrative point of view there are serious difficulties attached to 1 April, because if the Appropriation is at the end of March, it is very difficult to introduce the increased pension as early as the beginning of April. I wonder whether our aged do not prefer it just before Christmas. If I had to choose a date for an increase, I would also choose that time of the year, because then one’s expenditure is normally much higher than it would otherwise be. I can really not think of it as being so great a matter or principle. The date of commencement is, as I have said, arbitrary.

The hon. member for Nigel spoke about the increase in social pensions, which was slightly more than 10%, and the inflation rate of 14,9% over the past year. Yes, that is true. The hon. member should, however, view the matter over a longer period, for example ten years. In 1973 social pensions were R47 per month. On 1 October of this year they will be R152. This represents an increase of 229% over a period of 10 years. That is an average of 22,9%, %which is considerably higher than the inflation rate. The hon. member will understand that as a result of the burdensome financial position it was not possible to improve on this this year. Our old-age pensioners understand the situation too. The hon. member also asked whether we could not increase military pensions. That was also increased by a mere 10%. Social pensioners obtained an increase of 10% and civil pensioners 5%. The reason for this was, in both cases, the burdensome financial position. The 10% increase that military pensioners received does, at least, proceed from a considerably higher base than that of the social pensioners. For Whites it is, at present, in the vicinity of R425. They received an increase of R38, and from 1 April will be getting R425. That is quite a considerable figure, and the increase is costing the State a total of R2,4 million. In this connection I recently received a letter from a military pensioner that I should like to quote to you so that you can have some idea of the spirit in which these people accept the situation. The writer of the letter states—

I have quite a few of these letters. Here I have a letter signed by all the inhabitants of an old-age home. Here, too, I have a letter which should interest the hon. member for Houghton. It is from a Black woman who says—

I have quite a few of these letters. Here I have a letter from a civil pensioner—

†I am not claiming the plaudits for this. The hon. member for Edenvale praised the staff of this Department.

It is not quite so.

Here is another letter.

*Where is the hon. member for Heilbron? Here I have a beautiful letter written by an elderly lady in one of our old-age homes. She pays great tribute to what the hon. member for Heilbron did for her, in fact for all the inhabitants of that old-age home. She puts it in the following terms—

There are many of these letters that one could refer to. This week I spoke to a minister of religion who told me that as far as he was concerned there were three cardinal sins. The first was a lack of faith, the second an absence of love and the third ingratitude. Reading this letter, one sees the faith radiating…

And the hopelessness.

No, I have just said that we are conducting this debate at such a high level, and now that hon. member drags politics in again. That letter give evidence of love and of gratitude, and what a lovely person she is!

†I referred to most of the matters raised by the hon. member for South Coast. I have a great appreciation for the approach of the hon. member.

*Let me come now to the hon. member for Port Elizabeth North. In answering one of the hon. member for Edenvale’s questions a moment ago, I said that we were having a look at those matters. The hon. member for Green Point complained about the subsidies for these old-age homes being inadequate. I have the figures here, and I do not think they are bad at all. For the normal category, category A, it is R98,17 per month, for category B R152,32 and for category C R296,38 or nearly R300 per month. I think that two-thirds or three-quarters of their social pension is deducted, so that the State pays a very generous subsidy in regard to old-age homes. I think that we budgeted this year for an amount of R36 million for subsidies. We are busy reviewing this subsidy scheme, but it is going to cost a great deal of money, and hon. members know what our present financial position is. He also spoke about flat rent, in regard to which there has been such a tremendous increase. I do not have the time now, but I undertake to deal with this next week when discussing another Vote.

The hon. member for Germiston District spoke in very glowing terms of our service officers and paid tribute to them. I should like to associate myself with this. Like other hon. members, the hon. member for Wit-bank asked for our aged to remain, for as long as possible, as part and parcel of the vital, pulsating life of our society. He also referred to a service officer who died at the age of 79. These people set an example. This reminds me of my old friend, Oom Mentz, who was a very colourful person with 50 years’ service to Parliament. Years after his retirement, he still kept going. The hon. member for Witbank emphasized the fact that each day of our life is a working day. He said that the days of our lives were not days of frivolity or lamentation, but workdays on which to perform the tasks, allotted to one by Him, for as long as the day lasts, because the night comes in which no one can work any more. He said that he envied that old man of 79 who died in harness. I hope that I will also die in harness one day, because one does not retire. I had an old professor who, with the advent of each holiday period, said that we should treat each holiday as a working day, because he had an aversion to people not working.

The hon. member for Hercules made a very moving speech about the injuries suffered by these small children. It puts me in mind of His saying that it would be better if the one who caused such little children’s feet to stumble had a millstone hung around his neck and were cast into the depths of the sea. He asked for the HSRC to institute an investigation. The hon. member will notice that in the schedule to our report there is a long and impressive list of research projects launched annually by the department, and I am sure that we could also look at the kind of project he suggested.

†The hon. member for Edenvale spoke again and referred to the matter of preparation for retirement. That, of course, is a matter which is handled by the Department of National Education but our department has also published literature on that subject in conjunction with that department. It should be disseminated better and we should get welfare organizations, especially the service clubs, to arrange symposia to divulge this knowledge in those brochures. The hon. member said that he has spoken to many persons about preparing for retirement. I also have spoken to many such people but there is no person more unprepared for retirement than I am.

*The hon. member for Witbank made a fine speech to which I have, for the most part, already replied. The hon. member for Koedoespoort referred to the three methods of treatment in the field of social care. He spoke of the individual method of treatment and the high level of scientific practice in our country, including the sphere of group care. I agree with him that the major shortcoming lies in the fact that community development has not yet come into its own. A while ago I had the privilege of addressing the Council for Social and Associated Workers, and at the time I made a specific appeal to them to ensure that community development came very much more into its own in our universities, in our training and also in the practical sphere. I wish I had the time to tell hon. members of a visit I had yesterday morning from one of the most inspiring of people. He spoke of a community development project, and community development, in effect, means no more than it actually says, i.e. the development of a community. One must identify the needs in a community and one must identify the resources in that community. Those two aspects then have to be reconciled. If the resources are inadequate, one must create new ones. Yesterday morning he came to discuss with me the Coloured Township of Zoar where they want to launch this community development project. He identified the prime needs in Zoar as being housing and job opportunities. He then told me of the sources that Zoar had available, and it seems as if the prime source lies in the retired aged who still want to be part and parcel of the teeming social life of their area. Amongst those people there are bricklayers, cabinet makers, cartage contractors and labourers, people who still want to make a contribution and who want to be involved. He came to discuss a source with which I am involved in another department, because he had heard that we gave loans, for the purpose of buying material, to people who wanted to build their own homes. When I told him that the maximum amount was R3 000, he said that he did not need that much. He said he did not need more than R1 500, because locally they could get material cheaply. He is going to mobilize those aged to build the houses themselves. He did not try to adopt the easier course of asking me for an old-age home. I am surprised at the hon. member for Koedoespoort having spoken about old-age homes, because he spoilt a very good speech by asking for many more old-age homes. This is not the time to talk about that, because next week I hope to say a bit more about it. I am of the opinion, however, that we have exaggerated the whole question of institutional care in this country. That was actually the whole theme of the speech which I wanted to make but which I cannot make now. The person I was referring to did, however, also identify other resources in that community. He referred to the farms that wanted to employ seasonal workers, and he is busy organizing a whole job pool to do seasonal work on the farms. He said that the demand actually exceeded the supply, and now there are more aged moving to Zoar. That is community development, and I think that more emphasis must be placed on this in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry I cannot get around to the other matters I had wanted to raise, but it has been a privilege for me to take part in this first debate of mine. It is also privilege for me to perform this task under the guidance of the hon. the Minister. On this occasion I should like to furnish you with my credo by telling you what my philosophy in connection with social work is. Possibly I can summarize it by saying that the help one furnishes, the love one gives and the service one performs must never be at the expense of the independence of others or their feeling of independence. Central to this whole approach there is, as far as I am concerned, the concept of the family. I am disturbed at the functional breakdown of the family, and if our institutional care—which we have exaggerated in many respects—has made an additional contribution to this functional breakdown in family life, we shall have to take another look at it.

What about the widowers?

The hon. member mentioned the question of widowers. As the hon. member is aware, an Act was passed in the course of last year where an exception was made in the case of a judge’s widower. I think if we had conceded the principle, it is only correct that we should expand this within the limits of the available funds. If we allow a lady judge to enable her widower to draw her pension I cannot see in principle why the husband of the hon. member for Germiston District, should the worst happen, not be the beneficiary of her pension.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to continue this constructive debate on what I hope will also be a constructive note. I should like to discuss interstate co-operation in the sphere of health. Health is probably the one matter in respect of which various States can work together even if their political ideologies differ. If this is not done, it is to the disadvantage of both States. Unfortunately, epidemics know no bounds owing to the movement of people and animals across borders, and borders are not intended to prevent the spreading of diseases. The basis of interstate co-operation has to be mutual advice and the exchange of knowledge. In South Africa and the self-governing States everyone belongs to RHOSA, the Regional Health Organization of South Africa, and a major task faces this organization. I can, for example, refer to training and advice on matters such as the level of nutrition of a community and simple practical guides in this connection. A successful working conference on epidemiology was presented in March 1982 in the media centre of the department and this could lead to annual conferences at which very valuable inputs and recommendations can be made from the ranks of the organization by practising epidemiologists. This can be of great value to the health services of our country. Where health functions are transferred to the national States, White staff of the department are seconded to the Department of Co-operation and Development. In the case of kwaNdebele a regional office was opened to prepare for independence and the taking over health services. About 7 000 outpatients are already being treated at the 16 health service centres every month. A direct result of the November 1982 conference with the independent States was the establishment of a multilateral health committee with the object of mutual assistance and the exchange of epidemiological reports. The Director-General of the department is also the chairman of the committee, and the secretariat is provided by the Department of Foreign Affairs. Our neighbouring State Lesotho is visited and assisted by the medical faculty of the University of Stellenbosch. They are known as Harry’s Angels. Assistance of a more specialized nature was given to Swaziland particularly during the cholera epidemic. Our experts even assist Malawi as far as training is concerned in co-operation with the local College of Medicine. Although there is no formal agreement with Botswana, the officials perform a major task by maintaining contact at official level. In the case of Mozambique too we were able to achieve the best results by exchanging weekly information by telex. The South African Medical Research Council is also doing very good work in this connection. Some of the aims of this council are, inter alia, to promote co-operation in research at home and abroad so as to minimize duplication and ensure concentration of effort; and to gather and make available to others scientific and technical information relating to the medical and related sciences both in the Republic and abroad.

The amendment to the 1982 Act in terms of which the Medical Research Council may now only undertake research abroad with ministerial approval has also made a great contribution towards interstate research. I note from the annual report that negotiations have been entered into with the Republic of China and that an agreement similar to that concluded with Israel has been concluded with them. There are great expectations in this connection, particularly as regards the prevention of cancer of the liver. I also note that during this year 72 South African scientists were assisted by the Medical Research Council to attend international scientific gatherings abroad, to study there or to pay visits there to learn new techniques. At the same time approval was given for assistance to 28 foreign scientists to come to South Africa and share their knowledge with us here. As I have already mentioned, interstate co-operation in the field of health has resulted in better understanding. In no other sphere can this be better achieved than in the field of health. The exchange of information etc. in this field holds far greater possibilities than in any other field. I would imagine that this is also appreciated far more in this sphere than in any other sphere where the accent is more on reciprocal benefits. I foresee great prospects for better relations and better co-operation in this regard. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Nelspruit will excuse me if I do not react to his speech because I should like to come back to a theme which was raised by the hon. member for Parktown yesterday, and that is the grave problem of malnutrition which goes hand in hand with the drought that our country is experiencing at the moment.

The hon. member for Parktown put a few pertinent questions to the hon. the Minister, questions which relate to the programme which the department envisages at the moment for containing this problem as far as possible. We hope the hon. the Minister will be able to give us an indication of what his department intends to do in this field for this specific period. It is about this very field of malnutrition that I, too, want to exchange a few thoughts, specifically the malnutrition of infants and young children. It is a theme which has been taken up by the Medical Association of South Africa and I am referring to their monthly journal South African Medical News, Vol 3.1 of this year in which they indicate that they are very worried about this problem of the malnutrition of children. The prevailing drought greatly aggravates the problem, of course, but malnutrition in our country—specificially in the homelands areas—has always been a problem that was growing worse and not something which has always been tied up with the drought. The article refers to studies carried out in this field by various hospitals and universities and I quote—

Mr. Chairman, this gives one an idea—though very few statistics are available—of what the position really is. The Medical Association also warns that only timeous action can prevent a future crisis. One of the proposals which the association received was that a food and feeding policy be adopted by the Government. I support such a concept and it is precisely in respect of such a feeding programme or feeding policy that I want to raise two points particularly as far as infants and young children are concerned. It is my viewpoint that the Government is not doing enough to promote breastfeeding.

†It also does not do sufficient to implement the code worked out by the World Health Organization as far as the marketing of breastfeeding substitutes are concerned. I am aware of the fact that the department realizes that breastfeeding should be an important component of the feeding of young children. I suggest, however, that the importance of promoting breastfeeding has not been fully realized and is not receiving the necessary attention which it ought to receive particularly if it is taken into account that in many respects we regard ourselves as a Third World country and the people who suffer as a result of infant food marketing processes have to have the protection of the Government with counter measures. Marasmus is often caused—and we know that—by weak artificial milk feeds. In many parts of the developing world the incidence of infant malnutrition and diarrhoea can be directly linked with the decline in breastfeeding and its replacement by wrong and unhygienically constituted bottle formulas. Infant food manufacturers have through their strategies succeeded in attaching to bottle feeding the symbol of progress. Very often mothers, also in the poorest parts of our country, see in bottle feeding an element of the modern upbringing of children and a progressive approach towards feeding. This is an impression which is implanted by successful marketing strategies which the Government, I believe, has not as yet succeeded in neutralizing, mainly in the interests of the children who suffer as a result. Infant food manufacturers publicize so-called breast milk substitutes and this reinforces the idea that it is the “in” thing to use bottles. However, there is no such thing as a substitute for breast milk. Breast milk is freely available, it is always sterile, it contains antibodies to combat disease and as a protein food it also contains all the other nutrients necessary for an infant’s survival particularly for the first six months.

And it is supplied in very cute little containers.

Mr. Chairman, I am talking about breasfeeding and not breast feeling. The problem with bottles is that many parents, particularly in undeveloped areas, cannot read the instructions on the tins in which the milk powder is supplied. They can often not afford enough and therefore over-dilute it. The water which is used, particularly in drought conditions, is very often not pure and it is unsafe and the bottle that is used is often not sterilized. This often causes diarrhoea and all the other conditions that could follow if the proper procedures are not applied.

I am aware that the industry which markets and produces infant formulas has endeavoured to produce a code which it applies to the marketing of its products. That code is a sophisticated attempt to satisfy Government authorities, not only in this country, but all over the world, that they care about the marketing approach which they have. It was found not only by the World Health Organization, but also by many other institutions and bodies that that code does not prevent the marketing of the product which has detrimental effects. If one goes to any rural shop in the bundu in South Africa one will find shelves stacked with infant formula products with fantastic pictures of fat smiling little babies on the tin giving the impression that the key to a nice healthy baby is this tin with the powder. In a survey that was done in Natal amongst Zulu women—both educated and uneducated women—it was surprising to find that upon questioning as to whether or not they know a specific milk product, their response was the following. In the case of Klim baby food products, 95% immediately knew what it was, in the case of Lactogen 99% knew what it was, Nespray, 93%, Perlogon 84%, SMA 97%, Nan 38%, Nestum 83%, Cerelac 56%, etc. The code which the Government at this moment goes along with as drawn up by the manufacturers does not prevent the local store owner, the media and the industry from continuing to promote these products at the expense of thousands of infants who are being fed these products when their mothers could well have breastfed them. There are those cases—although they are few and far between—where breast milk substitutes have to be used but that is in a very small proportion of the cases. There has been a decline in breastfeeding amongst women in South Africa and in developing countries as a whole. That decline must be countered by a specific strategy by the department and by the Government. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat will forgive me if I do not follow him. We Bolanders are not used to drinking milk; we prefer a little wine!

I should like to refer to a topic the hon. the Minister has already touched on, namely the new Rural Community Development Foundation. It deals with the welfare of our rural population, and I should like to say something about it. As a matter of fact, I am sure one cannot say enough about this. The Republic of South Africa is a microcosm; it is a country of peoples and of population groups and it is a country of prosperity and of poverty. It is a country of colour groups. It is therefore a difficult country to govern. It is really a major task to satisfy as many people as possible and keep them satisfied. Unfortunately, the task is made even more difficult because this poverty is so frequently linked to skin colour, which really should not be so.

Sir, we can dream up all manner of political dispensations for our country; on the one hand we can dream of one man one vote; we can dream about homelands and new dispensations, and we can even dream about gleaming rifles, but none of this will mean anything if we do not try to improve the quality of life of all the people in this country. Through this rural foundation—I am shortening its name for convenience—we want to try to give every inhabitant of this country something which is worthwile retaining. The first thing we want to try to achieve is to give everyone a quality of life which is far above the Africa norms. In this country we can allocate votes as we please; we can introduce political dispensations that are supported by the majority of the people, but then all we shall have done is give people the vote, and Africa also has a vote. Some parts of Africa did have a vote. However, Africa was given a fish and that fish has now been eaten. With this effort of ours we want to give our people a fishing rod so that they can catch a fish for themselves every day. We want to try to do something for our less privileged people in the socio-economic sphere. In order to be able to do these things it is logical that we have to begin by uplifting people. Now I must tell you that this rural foundation gives me great pleasure because for many years we have been closely involved in efforts to establish something like this. Approximately 12 years ago the farmers in the Western Cape took the initiative and began appointing community workers. However, this was uncoordinated and sporadic. We did things in a “hit and miss” way. As interest in this increased among the farmers and within the communities so the need for planned development increased. That is why this Rural Community Development Foundation was established as a utility company. Three parties are involved in this; in the first place, logically enough, agriculture, in its organized form as well; in the second place, the private sector for whom it is most important that this sector of our people be uplifted; and in the third place, the State, the public sector. The hon. the Minister has already referred to the people involved and I do not want to repeat it, but the philosophy behind this, which we have already partially spelled out, is that while the farmer as employer holds the key to virtually every aspect of the lives of his employees, he lacks the expertise to do something for these people in the social sphere. Of course, it costs money to acquire this expertise. Now I want to point out at once that the farmer is willing—and this is already being done—to pay for these services. Logically enough, however, the State had also to be involved in this. I should like now to thank the hon. the Minister and his department most sincerely on behalf of the farmers. I want to thank them not only for the assistance, the financial aid and the expertise which are so necessary but also and above all for the enthusiasm they have shown in this regard. I repeat: The quality of life of our people at all levels is of cardinal importance to our country’s future.

Sir, I want to say this to you: If this effort is successful—and I am utterly convinced that it will succeed—all of us, these three sectors, will strike what is probably the most telling blow for our rural population, for its upliftment, and logically enough, also for South Africa as a whole.

The hon. member will pardon me if I do not follow up directly on his speech. I want to start by referring to the hon. member for Rustenburg who made an absolutely feeble attempt to get at me yesterday. If he does not know a great deal about this Vote, then I do not apologize to him. It is clear that he did not understand what I was talking about because he could not reply to a single argument in my speech. He also spoke about the thrashing I was supposed to have received from the previous Minister. Now I want to ask the hon. member: Where is that previous Minister? I am still here, where is he? It is as a result of what we said under this Vote that that hon. Minister has to learn something about postage stamps now and he no longer occupies this position. Sir, I believe the hon. member is frustrated because as a medical doctor he is not the leader of the medical group in that party. I also agree with the National Party—he is not suited to that post.

†I would like to tell the hon. the Minister that I listened very carefully to his speech in reply to the debate yesterday, and I was greatly disappointed. I do not say this in anger; I say it in sadness. Nowhere was the Minister able to make me feel that he had not failed in giving hope for an improvement in the miserable situation of the underprivileged with regard to health care. He announced no significant adaptation of health policy, health administration or health practice. Health remains White-dominated, favouring the Whites of the urban areas. The Minister can try and prove me wrong, but the Blacks still remain, as before, in a grossly health-neglected and health-deprived position. Basic health needs, prevention of disease, primary and community health care, are still grossly neglected. Western medicine for the minority First World inhabitants is still dominant. The medical needs of our developing Third World are not the Government’s priority. That is what I learned from the Minister’s speech.

I had hoped that, since he is a new Minister in this portfolio, we would hear a policy statement, because South African medicine is waiting for it. He must tell us about preventive medicine and about rehabilitation. We would expect him to give us a declaration of intent regarding malnutrition, infant mortality and infectious diseases. The Minister said much in general, but very little in particular.

We discussed the South African population explosion. According to that hon. Minister, that is South Africa’s number one priority. This is what he says—

*That is what the hon. the Minister said, and I conceded that he was right. What he wanted to say, was that if we did not succeed in dealing with that problem, the new constitution would not succeed either. That is what the hon. the Minister meant in that speech, and once again I concede that he was right.

†Sir, the Minister mentioned the lack of money. He gave us some figures regarding personnel, service points, the number of people protected, and so on. I find it very sad that we have to speak about family planning to a Minister of a government which destroys family life. How can you have family planning if you legislate against the upholding of family life? Therefore, Sir, how can the Government and the hon. the Minister succeed with family planning if there is no family? I think the Minister understands what I am trying to say.

Did anything this Minister said yesterday give us any confidence that the future would be any better? The Minister, in his speech, admitted that the Government’s past efforts in relation to family planning were a failure. He admitted that; he said it was the number one priority. Therefore he admitted that everything in the past had not succeeded. The President’s Council report, too, admits that the planning up to now has been a failure. If you read that report, you find that it is an indictment against the medical, social and educational policies of the Government. Every recommendation is in opposition to what this Government has done up to now.

That is not true.

Well, go and read the President’s Council report. Sir, we would expect the hon. the Minister to tell this Committee how he wants to correct this problem. He must not give us generalities and sympathy and feeling. I grant him that he has that, but I would like him to spell out this priority number one.

The second important statement that the Minister made in his speech was—

I discussed that with the hon. the Minister in my speech. He did not reply to me. He did not refer to that. We do not have enough White doctors, medical and paramedical people, to look after the problem. If you read this report, it proves what I say—that there is not enough staff, not only amongst Whites, but amongst Blacks, Coloureds and Asians as well, to satisfy the medical needs of South Africa. If the Government has failed up to now to provide the personnel, what is the Minister going to do in the future? What plans has he given this Committee in terms of which he aims to improve what he considers to be a very important matter? I am waiting for the Minister’s reply. He must spell it out and tell us what he is going to do. It is not only the numbers which are wrong; there is a totally unequal distribution of our work personnel in South Africa, and the hon. the Minister knows that. He knows that the urban White type of medicine is totally favoured with personnel at the cost of the rural areas. I do not need to give the hon. the Minister the figures in this regard, but more than half the doctors live in Cape Town and Johannesburg. Now, what incentive is the Minister giving medical personnel to work in other areas? At the moment I think that incentive is R750 a year. Would we be satisfied with R750 a year extra? I would like the hon. the Minister just to tell us where we are going to get and train these people and how we are going to encourage them to go into the areas where they are needed.

The Minister also discussed the high cost of medicine. I agree with him; but I have not heard anything from the Minister as to what he is going to do to try to change this. What is he going to do to try to bring the cost of medicine down to a level where we can afford it? There are many ways of doing this, Sir. We know that the private and Government sectors are competing with each other; we know that. We know that in the provincial hospitals private patients are treated. We know that we get many patients from overseas who go into these Government hospitals, at a cost that is subsidized, in millions, by the South African taxpayer. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to spell out what he is going to do.

In this Vote time does not permit me to discuss many other problems with the hon. the Minister. There is no doubt that I would have liked to say more on the subject of malnutrition because, as my hon. colleague said, the Minister refused to accept that yesterday. He said he would make a statement. I now ask him, for the sake of the starving people, to give us an answer as to what the Government is going to do to combat starvation, which we know is rife. I ask him to prove or disprove the figures of increasing signs of malnutrition.

Secondly, Sir, I would have liked to discuss with the hon. the Minister the medical treatment of detainees, and what he is going to do about MASA’s recommendations to him. I think it is very important, because we feel that something must be done.

I would have liked to discuss with the hon. the Minister the question of private medicine and public medicine, and how he sees the relationship between these two very important parts of our medical care in the future. I would have liked to raise the question of medical aid schemes, and why we need 300 medical aid schemes in South Africa. We keep asking for the Browne Report, but we get no answer. The Minister made a statement today, and I thank him for that, but why do we not have a compulsory medical aid scheme in South Africa for all employed South Africans? Why must the Government and the State carry the costs, usually at the cost of the underprivileged?

Sir, there are many other very important questions I would like to put to the hon. the Minister, but perhaps the hon. the Minister will allow me to discuss these issues with him in a television debate. [Interjections.] Maybe we can then discuss the population explosion, malnutrition, or infectious diseases. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a pity that the debate has taken this turn at this stage but I should also like to put a few questions to the hon. member for Parktown. He made such a fuss about the underprivileged. I assume the hon. member was referring to our Black population when he said this. I assume that, generally speaking, these are the people to whom he was referring. Why did the hon. member not tell this Committee how many Blacks are turned away when they arrive at our clinics? Why did the hon. member not tell this Committee that not a single Black is turned away when he arrives at the clinic? Why did he not say that not a single Black need sleep on the floor in a hospital or a clinic…

But they are sleeping on the floor!

… and that each one of them who arrives at a clinic is given the minimum of a three to four centimetre mattress and sufficient blankets? Why did he not mention that? Why did he not compare the position in other African countries with the position in South Africa? Why does he want to apply the White man’s customs and treatment in urban areas throughout Southern Africa? Why does he not compare apples with apples for a change? Why does he not compare a Third World area with another more or less Third World area?

Sir, I want to ask another question. The PFP are also like these “do-gooders” who wander about. They consort with those persons who bring people in to squat in this part of Cape Town. We have seen them wandering about there. If they are so concerned about malnutrition and under-nourishment why do they not rather use the money they have to pay for the buses to transport the squatters here to hire lorries instead to load up vegetables which may have to be rejected on our markets because there is no demand for them, as well as surplus bread which cannot be used, and transport these to areas where there is malnutrition, instead of bringing those people here so that they can squat here? Why do they not do that? Why do they not use that money to transport surplus food if they want to help? If they want to try to solve the problem, why do they not do that? Why do they bring busloads of people here when they know that there is no work for them here, that there are no health services for them and that these people have to squat here under dreadful conditions? They spend money on sheets of plastic and poles to erect shelters for these people and they spend money on primus stoves and 44 gallon drums in which food is prepared when these people arrive. Why do they not use those funds to provide transport so that surplus products can be transported from our markets to those people? Why do they not do that? What sort of people are they?

Mr. Chairman, I want to mention some statistics today which I find very interesting. We have said a great deal about pensions but I want to ask today whether you are aware that an MP—and this includes everyone sitting here—who is approximately 40 years old, who is to retire at the age of 65 and who receives a salary which rises by only 10% per annum to keep pace with the inflation rate, will qualify for a pension of a little over a quarter of a million rand a year. Sir, how many of us are aware of the fact that if I, who am now approximately 40 years old, remain in this House for 25 years and my salary is adjusted by 12,5% per annum, I shall qualify for a pension of virtually R600 000 per annum? These are the problems with which our pension funds are faced today. A man who remains here for only 15 years and whose salary is adjusted by only 10% per annum to keep pace with the rate of inflation, will receive a pension of approximately R125 000 per annum. If provision is made in this case for an inflation rate of 12,5% per annum his pension will be approximately R175 000 per annum—and that after only 15 years’ service.

Mr. Chairman, I know we should not socialize medicine and hospitalization and medical treatment in this country. However, there is unfortunately one small group of people we have not yet mentioned in this Committee, and they are those people who are receiving a private pension which is just above the income level at which they would qualify for an old-age pension—let us say about R250 per month. There are people today living far from provincial hospitals and who are receiving a monthly private pension in the vicinity of R220. These people do not therefore qualify for an old-age pension card.

Let me give a practical example. There are people living 25 kilometres away from provincial hospitals. These old people simply do not have the money to pay for taxis or other forms of transport to get to that provincial hospital. I want to make an appeal today—both of the departments are represented here—and ask whether there is not something we can do to give these people some token or other to enable them to make use of the services of a district surgeon. Sir, this is really a problem. I have come across old people who receive a monthly pension of about R220—that is all they have—and who cannot afford to pay for transport to a provincial hospital which is far away from where they live. There are quite a number of these people in my own constituency. Cannot we assist them?

I also want to mention a problem today about which not much has been said, and that is the extreme pressure on medical funds. Very few of us are aware of the fact that recently we had an increase of 35% in membership fees in our own Parmed scheme. This is due mainly to two factors. The first is the rapidly rising cost of medicines and the second is the rising cost of hospitalization. When we consider medicines, we find that the cost of medicines rose on average by 8,9% in 1979-’80. In 1980-’81 the increase was 19,9% and in 1981-’82 it was 25,5%—and medicines constitute a very large cost factor in the funding of medical aid funds. The increase in the first quarter of 1983 was greater than it was in the first quarter of 1982. When we discuss this with the Pharmaceutical Association they tell us: Yes, this is because of very heavy research expenses and the fact that only one product out of several thousand that are researched can be used. I really do not know whether there are so many hundreds of diseases they have to research, but this is the reason they give why these costs are so high. Sir, we are trying to influence people to treat themselves and to practice preventive treatment. However, owing to the cost of these patent medicines it is far cheaper to consult a medical practitioner, get a prescription from him and then only pay the R2 prescription fee at the chemist. In the meantime the burden of other medicines that have become so expensive is spread among the other members. This is a problem facing us which will result in heavy expense in the future.

I also want to address a word of warning to the pharmaceutical manufacturers. Generic medicines are becoming far cheaper in comparison with their products. There are generic equivalents which are up to a third cheaper or a third of the unit price of these medicines that are being marketed by the pharmaceutical people. We have cases where the moment the medicine has a trade name it can cost R27 for the same amount the generic equivalent of which can cost R9. Pharmaceutical manufacturers will have to think very carefully before they go much further in telling us that they want protection. Sir, I wonder how these unit costs are made up. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, since we have come to the end of this debate I feel a need to thank hon. members very much indeed for the way in which this debate has been conducted. As a person who has been sitting in this Parliament for years, I must be honest with you; recently I have sometimes become despondent at the way in which we bark at one another like dogs across the floor of the House. I do not wish to single out anyone—possibly I am guilty of this myself. Yet, Sir, one is grateful for having been able, with one exception, to conduct a debate here for two days on the problems we have to contend with in South Africa in some sections and departments—eminent problems, eminent debating. I say I am grateful for that, and I thank hon. members very sincerely from the bottom of my heart—if there is such a place! Certain things were left over from yesterday evening’s discussion.

In the first place I think I should deal with the hon. member for Hillbrow, who is not here at the moment.

He is coming now.

He discussed something which he was not really entitled to discuss, but I shall not let it go. I maintain that he was not entitled to discuss it because it is something which is already standing on the Order Paper for discussion, but I shall say nothing further about it. The hon. member has the right to campaign against smoking. I grant him that, but if we were to make laws against certain commodities, of whatever nature, we would eventually end in a maze in which we would not know whether we were coming or going. The hon. member for Durban Central, for example, could advocate that we should make laws against the people who are guilty of abuses in the manufacture of baby foods. Other people could try to persuade us to make laws against the abuse of liquor, which in any event is far worse than smoking, etc., etc. This department’s standpoint on smoking and the smoking habit is very clear. There is no doubt about it. We campaign against it at every possible opportunity. We have already reached an agreement with the tobacco companies—and this is being done—that the nicotine and tar content of every cigarette should be printed on the packet. It is there for every person to see, but the fellow who wants to smoke—this is my experience—has poor eyesight. He reads the big print only, he reads the “after action satisfaction”! So, if we will succeed in this matter with legislation… I shall leave it at that.

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to come to another matter which I touched on yesterday evening, and in regard to which the hon. member for Parktown has just reprimanded me again. What has gotten into him since yesterday evening, goodness only knows.

He had a chance to think about what you said yesterday.

Sir, never in my born days have I ever experienced anything like this before, that a man should rise to his feet here and become angry with me and rebuke me over things he wanted to discuss with me, and did not. That was the basis of what was said here. The hon. member rose to his feet here and enumerated 101 items and said that he still wanted to discuss certain things with me and rebuked me in that regard. I have never seen anything like that in my life before.

It is what you did not say yesterday that upset him.

Mr. Chairman, I shall leave it at that. This is a Parliament, Dr. Barnard; one cannot discuss the details of treatment here. One can only indicate the guidelines according to which the department operates.

That is what we are asking for.

Were you not here?

Yes, I was here.

Then you do not understand Afrikaans.

No.

You have no policy on malnutrition.

You do not understand anything about this, Brian. Just keep out of it.

Well, I have some important matters…

Yes, you are correct.

I am still not happy with the reply.

I accept that, but I am not here to make you happy. I have another job to do here.

No, it is no use joking about this.

I am not joking. If you say you are not happy with my reply, we can talk about that again later, but surely you cannot put a series of questions to me now, for which I need a day in order to reply, and then you are unhappy about something or other which you never mentioned.

Let us leave it at that. Next year it will be precisely the same as this year. The report will be the same.

Mr. Chairman, I shall pardon the hon. member if he wants to leave. No one was keeping him here in any case.

I must go to the Other Place.

No really, you may go, it makes no difference. You do not understand in any case. I am sorry that two fools came here this afternoon who, when four o’clock struck, were in a hurry to get out of this place.

†If you want to go, go. Just leave me alone.

We are in a hurry to get a decent answer from you.

Just get out and leave me alone.

You are earning a lot of money to do a job.

I am not getting any money from you in any case.

There are 2 million starving children out there.

Shut up, you do not know what is going on!

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon. the Minister allowed to tell me to shut up? [Interjections.]

The hon. the Minister may proceed.

Mr. Chairman, is it your ruling that an hon. member may tell another hon. member to shut up?

I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister will withdraw that remark.

Mr. Chairman, I shall withdraw it, but I should also like to ask you to ask the hon. member to give me a chance to discuss what I have been appointed to discuss now. I am not here to please him. He is a person who cannot live in peace with other people. He is constantly trying to stir up unrest. He is participating in a debate here of which he understands nothing.

Please grant me the time to say something about the question on malnutrition which was put to me by the hon. member for Durban Central, and yesterday by the hon. member for Parktown. Yesterday I undertook to discuss the matter and indicate how we were dealing with the problem. As far as malnutrition is concerned, the department is very involved in the matter. One has to consider this in a very serious light. In South Africa there are various authorities that have to render various health services entrusted to them in terms of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act: There are the provinces, the independent States and the national States. The task of this department is in the first place to render assistance to those States wherever it is required. In addition it is the task of this department to render the necessary assistance in the territories of South Africa itself, as far as its jurisdiction extends. I should like, in a few sentences, to indicate the basis according to which we deal with malnutrition. In the first place, education is the important factor. The hon. member for Durban Central spelt it out, and I agree with him. People should be provided with information on the value of food. The hon. member spoke about the value of breast-feeding, and I want to thank him for doing so. The hon. member need not think that the department differs with him in any respect. The department is in complete agreement with him that there are members of the general public who do not agree on that score. This is most probably for two reasons. Among the Whites it is probably for reasons of convenience and for financial reasons. Woman have to go out to work and are consequently not able to breast feed. On the other hand, as the hon. member spelt out himself, there are people who allow themselves to be misled by advertisements. That is a pity. We hold regular talks with these food manufacturing companies and reach an agreement with them to the effect that they will not place certain advertisements. Up to now we have reached an agreement with the largest of these companies that they should state on their tins, on which they advertise all kinds of other things, that breast-feeding still remains the best method. I say again that people unfortunately prefer the easy way out. Education, which is provided in various ways, is therefore the most important factor. I do not have time to discuss all the details.

In the second place there is the assistance which is offered and talks which are being held by RHOSA. This is the Regional Health Organization of South Africa, which one of the hon. members mentioned. The department holds regular talks with officials of the independent States and the national States. At these talks problems are discussed and expertise is offered. There we try to help people who can be helped.

In the third place there is the subsidization of foodstuffs. Certain foodstuffs are subsidized by local authorities in the first place. Where local authorities do not exist, as in the three northern provinces, or in the rural areas, the department itself is, by law, responsible for the services of local authorities. There the department does these things itself.

Municipalities and other local authorities are being subsidized. Officials are being subsidized. Foodstuffs, in this case proteins, are also being subsidized. The main foodstuff which we subsidize is skimmed milk powder. The department subsidizes this milk powder up to an amount of 54% per kilogram. Recently it was subsidized by a further 50 cent per kilogram by the Dairy Control Board. This is also made available to members of the public that need it. If there are persons who cannot afford these things at all, they can get it in another was as well.

It is the Christian duty of the State, and we accept this duty, that people should as far as possible not suffer or die from malnutrition. I must make a few observations with reference to the report from which the hon. member for Durban Central quoted and which had been published in various newspapers. The statistics which he mentioned were hospital statistics. You will understand that hospital statistics unfortunately cannot be national statistics. To compare these with anthropometric figures from overseas cannot be done because our standards in South Africa are completely different. The department, together with other organizations, is carrying out intensive research into what the actual anthropometric figures for South Africa ought to be. During the past year the department has examined no fewer than 30 000 children in detail in order to establish in this way what these figures are. The statistics which we assemble in that way and which we also obtain from other organizations indicate that the actual malnutrition figures and microphasia as a result of malnutrition is in the region of 15%. The fact of the matter is that malnutrition still exists and is being aggravated by the drought and will continue to be aggravated because food supplies are dwindling as a result of it. The department is trying to influence families and households to cultivate vegetables to a certain extent, in the homelands as well as in the cities, but these crops are being destroyed by the drought and that food is not available. Consequently it is necessary, with this nutritional programme, to remain in very close contact with the drought assistance plan which is being implemented by other departments. I should therefore like to examine this aspect.

†The steps to be taken by the Department of Health and Welfare will have to be co-ordinated with the national anti-drought campaign. The following steps must be the most practical:

1. (a) An intensified nutritional education campaign that will concentrate on specific target groups.
2. (b) Expansion of the PVM and other food-enrichment schemes. PVM is an enrichment of mealie-meal by the addition of certain vitamins and certain protein substances. It was developed by the CSIR.
3. (c) To enlist all available primary care field staff of the department, clinics and hospitals for early diagnosis and active treatment.
4. (d) A specially designed epidemiological survey is immediately being started in certain hard-hit areas and it will be going on for the next 12 months or more. This will be a monitoring system to measure the effects of the drought on the nutritional status of high-risk people.
5. (e) All other preventative measures such as immunization and regular examination, as well as health education programmes, are to be expanded.
6. (f) Community development and related self-help projects will now receive very special assistance from the department—since 1982 special posts have been created for this purpose. At present no additional funds are being asked from the Treasury, but if need be, the Treasury will be approached for additional funds. It must again be emphasized that the position of the department in this case is that of assistance to other responsible bodies like local authorities, the provincial administrations or national or other States. It is the function of the department and we will carry on with it.

I think that we must realize that the education of people as far as proper feeding is concerned is a most important part of this whole scheme. This was also stressed by the hon. member for Durban Central. Responsible parenthood is the cliché that should be used. That is the way to which we should look to solve this problem. If I speak about responsible parenthood I do so with regard to every facet and meaning of the word.

*That is all as far as this matter is concerned. Yesterday evening the hon. member for Paarl and the hon. member for Wellington discussed the success which has been attained in the Paarl and Wellington areas with the help of local bodies and the activities of local doctors. I wish the hon. members for Paarl and Wellington would invite us to pay them a visit one day.

The KWV is there.

No, one need not go to the KWV; there are other things to see there as well. There one has an area in which the population has been stabilized by the community through their own resources, through their own actions and by providing their own education. In this respect those areas are an example to any other environment.

I should like to thank the hon. member for Edenvale for his very responsible speech. The hon. the Deputy Minister replied to it in detail.

The Bible talks about the flies in the ointment of the apothecary. I find it very strange that a wonderful debate should be spoiled here in the late hours of the afternoon by other people. They are not interested in matters which are going well. That is not what they are here for. They are here to be in opposition.

They did not make one suggestion.

There was only one suggestion and after that we spoke all day. So one can be constructive. I feel sorry for them.

Have you read the Hansard of 1947? Do you know what the Opposition did then?

Mr. Chairman, let the hon. member kick up a row on his own. No one is listening to him in any case. The Hansard of 1947 has nothing to do with this debate. [Interjections.] For God’s sake, Brian, can you not keep your mouth shut?

You are talking absolute rubbish.

Order! Give the hon. the Minister a chance to finish speaking.

Surely I was not talking to you, man. Decent people do not keep on interrupting. What is wrong with you?

I am speaking on behalf of my colleague.

Why did he leave?

He had to speak in the defence debate. He told you that.

Now you are still angry with me. When I have to start replying, he is not here. Now you are also wasting my time. What is wrong with you, man? Just give me a chance to complete the debate. Then you can go home, you can go anywhere you like.

I will not go home until I have an answer from you.

Mr. Chairman, he simply makes my mouth dry, that is all.

The hon. member for Edenvale identified a problem. It is the same problem as the one I discussed yesterday which the hon. member for Parktown did not understand. The problem of this department as far as health and welfare and pensions are concerned, which the hon. member referred to, is basically that we cannot carry on as we have been doing. We must devise another plan with the funds and possibilities at our disposal. The hon. member said that we should adopt the philosophy of “you can’t get out more than you put in”.

†That is the basic fact of his whole argument. You cannot get out more than you put in. If we apply that philosophy to the job that we are doing at present and the job that all the workers in South Africa are doing, namely that you cannot get out more than you put in, the problem of inflation will be solved. Without doing that the problem of inflation will not be solved. It is not the responsibility of the Government only and it cannot be done by the Government only.

*That hon. member stated a very serious case here today. Quite a number of members, the hon. member for Middelburg, the hon. member for Nigel, the hon. member for South Coast, the hon. member for Port Elizabeth North and the hon. members for Germiston District and Witbank, all spoke more or less along these lines. They also discussed other matters, but they discussed the issue that we should find a method to enable people to take care of themselves in their old age. “You cannot get out what you do not put in.” I thank the hon. member for that particular speech. The hon. the Deputy Minister said the same thing.

As I said yesterday, education is basically going the same way. We cannot keep on building health palaces. We must move in the direction of community health centres.

According to the time for this debate, I have five minutes left, and I shall only be able to say a few things. I shall skip what the hon. the Deputy Minister had to say.

The hon. member for Nigel once again advocated an increase in pensions, and other hon. members did the same. He and they have every right to do so. May the Heavenly Father ensure that we never stop pleading for our old people. The hon. member for Koedoespoort and the hon. member for Middelburg also pleaded their cause. So I can continue. An increase in pensions was advocated. One has the greatest sympathy for these cases, but one is limited by the funds one has at one’s disposal. The moment people ask for higher pensions, the question of funds arises. Those funds have to come from somewhere. I have never heard one member advocate that he should be taxed more so that we can give the elderly people bigger pensions. Or do hon. members assume that these funds are self-generating?

I must clear up one matter, in regard to which pleas are often made. This is in regard to those people who retired a long time ago. Last year special provision was made for them by adding an additional pension of 1% per annum for every year of retirement. This was a special contribution which was made for them last year. Unfortunately we are unable to continue with this, because this kind of concession eventually wrests the entire pension payment out of context. One must remember that. With a contributory pension fund it depends on how long a person has worked and what that person’s final salary was. That determines the pension he receives. I want to furnish hon. members with a few figures to indicate how pensions have improved. If a person retired from the Public Service in 1951—and I concede that that was a long time ago—and he was then earning R1 000 per annum, then he receives, with increments, an amount of R8 262 per annum this year, as from 1st April. During this period he has received an addition to his pension from the State of 726%. One does not think of these figures. The cost of living has gone up by 532%. They have been well looked after. I am going to mention one further example. A person who retired with a pension of R1 000 per annum in 1965, not many years ago, now receives R5 282 from the State. We readily put forward pleas for those elderly people who retired long ago, and one feels great sympathy for them, but one should also, if one begins to consider the figures, be grateful for what has been done for them.

My time has expired, but there is one further aspect I have to deal with. The abolition of the means test for military pensions is being advocated. The military pension does not have a means test. A military pension is paid according to the degree of disability of the person concerned. [Interjections.] There is no means test for that pension, nothing whatsoever.

I did not talk about that.

Then somebody else did.

I did.

The hon. member for South Coast did.

All I said was that the amount was relatively too small. It was fixed in 1976.

I accept it if the hon. member says that the amount which is being allocated is too small. The same argument can be applied to any other pensioner.

In this case the increase was 50%, and the inflation rate went up by more than 100%.

I want to tell you that inflation is not relevant here. Inflation is not relevant in regard to pensions, although we do try to make an input as far as social pensions are concerned.

If a person sustains a 100% disability on the border, he receives approximately R450 per month for the rest of his life.

If the hon. member wishes to rebuke me in this connection now, I want to tell him that he is complaining to the wrong department.

It is your department.

It is not my department.

Yes, I am certain it falls under the hon. the Minister’s department. Military pensions fall under the hon. the Minister’s department.

I just pay them out. We are just doing the administrative work and pay them out.

*Quite a number of matters were discussed and at this stage it is not possible for me to say something about all of them. Once again I want to thank all the hon. members. I can look at all of them.

The hon. member for Germiston District made a wonderful plea for the care of the aged. I have appreciation for that. That wonderful last passage she read out to us, really sounded like something with which most of us old MP’s could sleep on. We must seriously consider whether we are not complaining too much. I thank her for her exceptional contribution and also for her reference to the service officers, for whom I too have particular compassion. I still miss my old service officer, Oom Happy Coetzee, and I visit him regularly.

The hon. member for Hercules left particular problems concerning the spiritual assault, as he put it, on children in our midst. He also pointed out the problem of people who afflict their gifted children by pushing them so hard that it could be regarded as a full-scale onslaught on the children. The department is devoting particular attention to this problem. Last year a Children’s Committee was formed, which came up with a report. This report will soon be published. The committee went into the effects on these children of being driven so hard, and I am certain that the report will make very interesting reading matter. As soon as the report is available, we shall look into this matter again. It is also the task of psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and nurses to give attention to this problem, since many of them specialize in some or other form of spiritual assault on children. I think the hon. member raised a very important matter here, and that we shall have to give it very serious consideration.

I have already replied to the second speech of the hon. member for Edenvale. The hon. member for Witbank and other hon. members spoke about he preparations one should make for retirement. Last year in this debate the undertaking was given, and there has been reaction to this, that the Department of Health and Welfare would attempt in co-operation with the Department of National Education to prepare people for retirement. That committee was appointed and talks have been held. The Department of National Education will continue this programme and in future we shall again liaise with one another in this connection.

The hon. member for Koedoespoort is not present at the moment, and I accept that he has work to do elsewhere. He spoke about the professional calling of the social worker, and I think the hon. the Deputy Minister replied to this to a great extent. The hon. member for Houghton discussed a matter which was of great concern to her, namely the pensions of women which cannot be paid out to their widowers. I want to be honest and tell the hon. member that she has everything in her favour except the statistics. It is by way of exception that the husband lives longer than his wife. She will hold out, and I do not think that her husband will receive anything, even if she is entitled to a pension. However, I do think that the hon. member has a good case, and that we should look into it.

The hon. member for Nelspruit discussed inter-state co-operation. I appreciate his contribution, because I think it is important. South Africa has a message to convey to these people.

I have already discussed what the hon. member for Durban Central said. He can take my word for it that he need not convince the department of the importance of breast-feeding. We support him in every respect and are propagating all the things he mentioned.

The hon. member for Stilfontein referred once again to the problem of medical cost of various kinds which have soared and which we will have to take positive steps to deal with.

The problem as I have identified it during this two-day discussion as far as pensions in the first place, and as far as health services in the second place, are concerned, is that if we simply continue in this sophisticated way in respect of both pensions and of sophisticated health services, we are going to find ourselves in an absolutely impossible economic position; and we have to plan accordingly.

I therefore accept this Committee’s injunction that as far as both health services as well as social welfare services, which include pensions, are concerned, we must come forward with plans for South Africa which, with the means at our disposal, will be the best for all our inhabitants.

I thank hon. members once again for their contributions and for the pleasant discussion which we were able to have. The few altercations which we had here and there merely contributed to my realizing that Parliament is not the stadium I thought it had become, but remains what it always was.

In conclusion I want to thank all my officials sincerely for the exceptional service which they have rendered during the course of the year and during the past few months and which we expect to receive from them in the time which lies ahead.

Vote agreed to.