I move, as an unopposed motion and pursuant to notice—

seconded.

I move, as an amendment—

In the first line, to omit “petition” and to substitute “petitions”; in the second line, after “Union,” to insert “and of C. P. Cloete and 42 others, inhabitants of Wolseley,”; in the third line, after “27th” to insert “and 28th”; and in the same line, after “1930,” to insert “respectively,”.

seconded.

Agreed to.

Motion, as amended, put and agreed to, viz.:

That the petitions of J. P. Maree and 145 others, residents of the Union, and of C. P. Cloete and 42 others, inhabitants of Wolseley, praying for certain amendments to the Liquor Act, 1928, presented to this House on the 27th and 28th January, 1930, respectively, be referred to the Government for consideration.

At the request of the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick), I beg to move a motion standing in his name. As the House knows, the hon. member is incapacitated from carrying on his parliamentary duties, and I feel that I am an inadequate substitute to deal with so vital and important a subject which the hon. member has made peculiarly his own. The motion reads as follows—

Why do you omit sugar from the motion ?

Sugar, of course, should be included as well as all other agricultural and pastoral products. I therefore beg to amend the motion to read—

Now, this motion emphasises two things. First the depression through which the whole agricultural industry is passing and, secondly, that some relief can be obtained by the machinery suggested. If we are working in co-operation with the empire as an economic whole there will be no such depression. Our goods are in demand. They are still being bought in the markets to-day as they have been in the past and the lower prices from which our primary producers are suffering are largely within the control of the Government. It always seems to me strange that we should organize our farmers, introducing Bills into this House, dealing with co-operation, marketing and packing your products, and then allow them to drop into a chaotic market absolutely unorganised. We have spent hundreds of thousands on grain elevators. We charter ships to convey our produce overseas; we do everything to see that our goods are placed on the world’s markets in the best possible condition, for our consumers, and at the market end, where organization is essential, we do nothing. We take no steps to eliminate speculation or to ensure that we are in close contact with our customers; all is left to chance; and the consequence is we suffer from depression of prices and our producers in this country are ever at their wits’ end to find a profit on their goods. All for lack of that co-operation in marketing which we legislate for in production and packing and transportation. How far this carries us may be judged from an extract from a speech made by Mr. Bruce, the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia, at the Imperial Conference, I think, in 1920—

This is the chaotic condition under which the products of South Africa are dealt with overseas, and it seems to me, in the interests of the producer of this country, that much more attention ought to be paid to efficient marketing. There are two kinds of preference which we can receive in those, our chief, markets. One is a fiscal preference given by the customs and the other is a voluntary preference given by the consumers in those countries who prefer to buy such goods in preference to purchasing anybody else’s. It is repeatedly said that there is no sentiment in business. That, is not true. There is sentiment in all business. There is the sentiment of relatives to deal with each other, and there is the sentiment of friends also to deal with each other in preference to dealing with strangers. It is not only the price of commodities which governs this sale, but also the friendly relations which are established between the producer and the consumer. We in South Africa do not show a desire to benefit by our British voluntary preference. We do not show our best customers that we wish to co-operate with them in any way whatsoever. It is an extraordinary fact that we have in this country an economic branch of the Agricultural Department which issues a report at stated intervals, which never in any circumstances mentions the existence in fact of the Empire Marketing Board. It does not know that the Board exists. So far as I can see, speaking honestly and straightly, the Government does not appear indeed to have any desire to benefit by the operations of the Empire Marketing Board. Yet as hon. members will remember, who went on tour through Canada last year, that one Canadian statesman said in the House of Commons at Ottawa, that the Empire Marketing Board had done more in one year for the primary producers of the empire than had been done in a generation before. I cannot understand why we in South Africa should have such a distaste, if we are considering these matters on a business basis, to assist and co-operate with the Empire Marketing Board in the sale of our own products and in the sale of British products in South Africa. Has anyone ever heard of the Government or any single Minister of the Crown stating in this Parliament or on a public platform that he wished to co-operate with the Empire Marketing Board ?

Not one.

Has there ever been a single word uttered by a Minister in this country on behalf of the present Government to induce the public of this country to buy empire goods? Yet we have the astounding instance in Great Britain of every Minister of the Crown, and not only Ministers of the Crown, but from the King downwards, of every person in authority in Great Britain joining in the campaign, in the crusade to buy empire goods, to buy dominion goods, to buy our South African fruit and our tobacco or anything at all which it is possible to get on to the market. I see the Minister smiles at the reference to tobacco. I say this to the Minister of Agriculture that Rhodesia was in great trouble over its tobacco. They would have been in an infinitely worse difficulty, in a difficulty almost as great as the Minister is in to-day if they had merely sat down and had done what he has done. Rhodesia sends its Minister of Agriculture to Great Britain to explore the markets for tobacco and in conjunction with the Empire Marketing Board and in co-operation with the manufacturers of tobacco there, he was able to find a market for 5,000,000 lbs. of tobacco whilst he was in Great Britain, and a taste for Rhodesian cigarettes and tobacco is being created overseas by this organization which the Minister does not appear to favour. That should be an object lesson for us in South Africa. It is certainly a fact which every primary producer in this country must deplore that for some reason or other, the Government does not favour co-operation with the Empire Marketing Board. Two or three years ago I reminded the Minister of Finance that Great Britain was providing money for the purpose of advertising our commodities, and he said he would rather have the money. After all, reciprocity is the foundation of trade. If we are going to sell our products in other countries we must show a desire to buy their products. My hon. friend who was president of the Boeren Ko-operasie in this country realized it is pretty bad business to send wool to England and sell it there, and then get paid for it by American motor-cars. I think that roundabout method of getting payment for our goods which is in favour to-day is not to the best interests of the South African producer. There are too many agencies dealing with the disposal of our goods. What the primary producer requires is to dispense with a number of these agencies and get full benefit for what he sells. I ask that there should not be a mere negative attitude adopted in this matter. We should show a more friendly attitude by the Minister giving a kick-off to the movement for the sale of empire goods. What a splendid advertisement it would be for the sale of empire goods if the combined Cabinet would stand on the Town Hall platform in Cape Town and put up their hands and say: “We are in favour of empire goods.” That would give an impetus to the sale of our products, and would furnish assistance and sympathy for the sale of those products in our best markets which would not otherwise be obtained. I submit that thought to the Minister for his consideration. There are other factors in this matter, and those who have followed the speeches that Lord Melchett is making, must realize a good deal of the sound business sense in what he has said. My hon. friend over there is laughing. Probably he attended the meeting the other day and heard what Lord Melchett said. It is really sound business to deal with such a tremendous but very loose organization such as the British Empire with its millions of people everywhere, introducing most of the commodities of the world; its conglomeration of peoples, if they joined together in an economic entity, would make for the benefit of everyone of us. Sound statesmanship should work towards that ideal. This principle was recognized at various Imperial Conferences, and we were a party to the Economic Conference of 1923, which gave effect to that principle in the following terms—

The committee was composed of four representatives from Great Britain, two from each of the dominions, two from India and one from the colonies. The extraordinary thing is, however, that we elect members to these bodies and then forget all about them. The economic committee was appointed with the following terms of reference—

Surely that ought to meet with the approval of every primary producer in this country. The committee provided the machinery for giving preference to dominion products before foreign products in the markets of Great Britain. Following that, we come to the evolution of the Empire Marketing Board. At the 1923 Imperial Conference the Prime Minister of Great Britain had agreed that he would extend further preferences to certain specified food products if it were possible, and the dominion delegates went away believing that he would be authorized to do that. Unfortunately the political situation in Great Britain prevented the ratification of that agreement, but the British Government did what they considered the next best thing. They said “we will grant up to the total amount represented by these proposed extended preferences, and we will hand it to the Empire Marketing Board for the express purpose of selling empire products in Great Britain.” So they voted a million a year for the purpose of opening up entirely new and untried ways of developing trade within the empire, trade which will bring in empire goods in lieu of foreign goods and be of greater benefit to the dominions than the duties which had been originally contemplated. Does anyone disagree with that object—the introduction of dominion products into Great Britain in lieu of foreign products? The Empire Marketing Board has been in existence for two or three years, and one statesman recently declared that it had done more work in twelve months in finding new channels for empire producers than had been done in many years. One of the functions of the Empire Marketing Board is to give endowments for the carrying on of research work to enable producers to produce their goods more scientifically and more cheaply. It has made research grants all over the world. Among the grants are £10,000 for five years for the development of biological and agricultural sciences; £21,000 for tropical and subtropical research—that should interest South Africa; £6,000 per annum for three years towards the cost of maintenance of the Amani Institute, Tanganyika; £25,000 for the establishment of a tropical research station in northern Australia; £22,000 a year for five years towards the cost of the organization and establishment of a colonial agricultural service; £35,000 for the establishment of low temperature research work, and £8,000 a year for five years for maintenance; £45,000 for the erection of a new station at East Mailing for cold storage experiments on a semi-commercial scale, which should have a particular application to South Africa. Then there are also grants for enquiries into forestry, horticulture, plant breeding, plant pathology, poultry, dairy research, fisheries research; £10,000 for research into fundamental problems of sheep breeding and the determination of effective standards of raw wools; survey of empire wools, supply of wool packs for trials in South Africa, Australia and New Zealand; zoological research and enquiries into agricultural meteorology. Then there are grants for colonial development, economic investigations and co-operative marketing There are several grants for animal husbandry, research on the mineral content of natural pastures, with special reference to certain deficiencies in the soil and their effect on the growth and strength of livestock. Many thousands of pounds are spent annually in research alone, all with the object of improving the production of the commodities of the primary producers of the empire, and also to cheapen that production. Some of the results of these researches are shown in books and pamphlets issued by the board for the information of the public. Here is an economic study of tobacco; its growth, production and marketing, all issued for the benefit of the tobacco producers in the empire. Another booklet deals with butter and eggs, and a third with timber research. Yet another covering the whole of the empire is concerned with dairy produce, while a further booklet relates to fruit in which are given details of fruit growing conditions in South Africa. Another phase of the Empire Marketing Board is their advertising, creating in the minds of the people of Great Britain the will to buy empire produce. I wish hon. members opposite would go to some of the great manufacturing centres of Great Britain and see that when we give an order for an engine in Great Britain, the board get to work—and plaster the whole of the walls with advertisements to buy South African oranges and other products, and by buying these, it is stated, South Africa is buying their engines and giving them work. That is the kind of reciprocity that is going on. Booklets are being written for the instruction of children in schools and to give them a real bias towards empire productions from their childhood days. The whole population of Great Britain is being brought into a condition of mind in favour of buying empire productions, even though it costs a little more than productions from elsewhere. That is a condition of mind that we ought to cultivate. During our tour through Canada we had with us a member of the present Labour Government in Great Britain, who is one of the principal men on this board, and he said he was not satisfied with the board confining its work merely to research and advertising, He said that research—perfectly truly—becomes known to the whole world; sooner or later the knowledge becomes universal, so that the empire does not get much benefit from that except an immediate benefit. He wanted to go much further along the direction of actual marketing, but saw that it is simple lunacy for us in South Africa to grow maize and, because it is a favourable season in the Argentine, we see a sagging of prices. Why should empire producers be penalized because they have a good season elsewhere? The U.S.A. does not allow a glut in one part of the world to affect the producers of their own country. It takes measures to prevent it. What we did in the great war would do a great deal to afford protection to the producers of to-day. Mr. Johnson said—

That is what I am pleading for—for South Africa to give a favourable expression of opinion towards the Empire Marketing Board and the objects for which it is aiming. Mr. Johnson also said—

In reply to what actually was meant and what the British Government’s policy would be on this matter, if they came back to power—they were in opposition at the time—he said—

Dealing with fruit, he said that from the report of the commission—

Tables are given, and they say that there are cases where the producer who sends to a distant market gets no return. The profits of 60 intermediaries may be imposed between the producer and the consumer. He also said that he came over to Canada on a Canadian-Pacific ship—

It is to overcome that state of affairs that the hon. member is pleading for in this motion. I sincerely believe that if South Africa cares to take its courage in its hands, and to set up a board—I do not mind whether the word empire is used in describing it or not—to cooperate with the Empire Marketing Board in Britain, to co-operate with our consumers overseas, we shall lift this country from the agricultural depression it is suffering from to-day and make provision for the future welfare of the Union.

I second the motion. May I say that I feel sure that everyone in this House deplores the fact that the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick) is so incapacitated that he is unable to attend to his public duties in Parliament. It is particularly regrettable that he is unable to be here to-day because the subject we are debating is one he has essentially made his own. No man has devoted more work and gathered together a greater amount of information in connection with empire marketing and the development of inter-imperial trade, that is, not only finding markets for our own goods, but also assisting those of our sister dominions to find markets for theirs, than the hon. member for Illovo. It was only last night that I was asked to second this motion, and when the voluminous mass of correspondence and documents was placed in my hands to look through, I found the task so overwhelming that I was utterly unable in the short time at my disposal to assimilate the matter which he had collected. Therefore, in seconding this motion, I shall have to fall back on such arguments as are well-known to every member in this House, and on the condition of affairs in which we find ourselves placed to-day. The general condition of this country at the present moment, and more particularly of those engaged on the land, is so parlous that it calls for immediate and courageous action, but I am aware that if action is to be taken, and taken in the direction indicated by my colleague, there must first come over the governing powers of this country a completely new outlook, a change in mentality, or, as a Nationalist speaker during the last general election said, a complete change of heart. How are we going to get that change of heart? Is there anything that one can say that is likely to bring it about? It would be useless, I know, to appeal for a change of heart on sentimental grounds, and I do not propose to attempt anything of the kind. But it has been said that, after all, the nearest way to a man’s heart is through his pocket, and there may be something in that; but, if the pocket is well-lined, to approach the heart from that direction is to approach it through an armour-plated shield, so I appeal to those whose pockets are not so well-lined, and when I say that I am appealing to every farmer in South Africa to-day. The time for holding out false hopes to people whose position is one of dire necessity has passed; the time for bluffing has passed. It is futile to close our eyes to the fact that South Africa to-day is up against stern realities, losing its markets, losing its trade or at best remaining stagnant, and in this crisis which has come so suddenly upon us it is the farmer, as usual, who is the first to suffer. He is the man who produces the raw materials, and those materials are useless to the consumer until they pass through the hands of the middlemen, the merchants or the manufacturers, and the moment a slump sets in these people immediately stop their orders, or purchase at such restricted prices and quantities as will enable them to continue their business without loss. The farmer is always the person to suffer in a reaction. On the other hand, should a wave of prosperity pass over the country he is the very last to participate in that prosperity. The middle man or the merchant or the manufacturer, as the case may be, always has his line of retreat, he curtails his purchases, he restricts his output. The farmers expenses go on as before. He has to meet the interest on his bonds, his bankers call upon him to reduce his overdraft, and merchants request him to pay their bills. This is what is happening to-day, and it is perfectly legitimate. These people have to carry on their businesses, they have to live, but what is the position of the farmer who has these demands made upon him at the present time? He has either to pay or become a defaulter, and there is no section of the community less inclined to avoid their responsibilities than the farming population, so what does he do? He follows the only course open to him and takes, say, £100 worth of stock or produce to the market for which he gets £25 in return; but the more often he does this the more hopeless his position becomes, for there is nothing that he produces to-day for which there is an adequate demand. In all previous times during the 45 years I have farmed in this country, I have never before known one which did not hold out some grain of hope for the man on the land. If the price of corn or maize or wheat happened to be down, then wool, mutton or beef might be reckoned upon to carry you through, or vice versa. There has always been some side of the farmer’s business which has enabled him to carry on, and the part of his business which, for the moment, was not very profitable could rest on other branches which were doing better. There is no department in the farmer’s business as farmer, planter or grower, without a ray of hope. But we are told there is no life in the market. What is the reason? It is said to be due to a world’s crisis, to a financial stringency which has spread throughout the whole world and has now extended to us, and so our markets have for the time being dried up. That is true no doubt, but only in part, for so far as South Africa is concerned, I shall endeavour to show that the stress which the farmer is suffering under could have been much relieved to-day had a different course of policy been pursued in the past. It is due to having no market within or without the empire, and who has assisted in bringing this about? During the last five years we have followed the disastrous policy of isolation, and that policy is now coming back on us with equally disastrous consequences. For instance, when the present Government took office, we were building up an increasingly profitable trade in maize in Australia. It had not reached large proportions in 1923, but by 1926 we were exporting 500,000 bags per annum. South African maize is very popular in Australia with the millers, and the patent food product manufacturers, and they were always prepared to pay us 1s. 6d. a bag more ex-elevators, than maize from the Argentine or, for the matter of that, any other part of the world. It was at this time that the Government brought in their new policy of isolation, and for the first time in our history we heard the cry of “South Africa alone.” To-day it is South Africa all alone. The 3 per cent, tariff allowance by Australia was cancelled. This raised a bitter feeling in Australia, and they countered by warning South Africa that as our maize was being grown by black labour they must put on a duty of 7s. 6d. a bag. That destroyed the trade in one night, and in the following year not a single bag went to Australia. We then turned our eyes towards New Zealand, and we were just beginning to export maize there when that country imposed a duty which completely stopped the trade. We then tried to develop the dried fruit and jam trade, which reached 700,000 tins exported to New Zealand. But New Zealand has countered by developing her own jam trade, and she has placed a duty on jams, and a dumping duty at that, on the trade, so that that market is likewise gone. These are a few illustrations of the price the South African farmer has had to pay for the policy of “South Africa alone,” But the position is still not yet hopeless if only we can bring about that change of heart. Today we are standing practically a stranger in our own empire. I think those who have followed the history of this country must say we have richly deserved what we have got. A leading financial authority in this country has recently said it is likely that within twelve months from now the Minister of Finance will, most likely, be budgetting for a deficiency of £3,000,000. That deficiency is based on our increasing expenditure which has been extremely large and unproductive, and a rapidly falling revenue. These markets which we have deliberately sacrificed for an idea, a worthless sentiment, would have made all the difference to the farmer; not only could we have sold our maize at good prices, but our other goods would have been disposed of in countries which have now closed their doors. If that policy had not been adopted, the position, so far as the farmers are concerned to-day, would not be anything like so serious. Before we can get relief or get back to the position from which we should never have departed, we have to break through this cast-iron prejudice. I do not know what I can describe it as but cast-iron prejudice. If it is called the Empire Marketing Board, that is something that must be cursed with bell, book and candle. If it is something that will bring us into closer union with any part of the British empire that must be destroyed and stifled at its birth. It is not a question of argument; it is a question of pyschology. The intelligent cannot understand it; it is simply here. In this connection I should like to draw attention to what Lord Melchett said the other day—

That is the position he found in this country when you talk practical business. Now what is this friendly avenue that has been opened, this Empire Marketing Board, this corporation which has been expending its millions in advertising your goods without any return It is only last month that the Empire Marketing Board devoted one week’s advertising in Glasgow to the advertising of South African products in every one of their lines. No other dominion was mentioned. No other goods were included. The public halls and hoardings of Glasgow were placarded, speakers were engaged, and we had nothing but advertising of the goods of your country for which they did not charge you one single penny. Have we had one word of gratitude from the Ministry, or has any member of the Government ever expressed his appreciation and sympathy with the work that has been done gratuitously for the people of this country? Can you show me one publication by any public department which has ever mentioned the Empire Marketing Board except the one which refers to the fact that £10,000 had been captured to be spent in this country? That is the attitude of a small-minded people. It is the attitude of people who have no reason to be proud of themselves. We say that the time has come when this attitude of mind shall cease, and when we should take advantage of these opportunities which are in our hands for doing the best we possibly can for our people in all our products, irrespective of whether it is in the empire or outside the empire. I say the time has come for action. I pray that there is going to be this change of outlook. Let us be manly and broad-minded. We have South Africa. It is all ours and all yours, and we should take advantage of every opportunity that the empire has to offer us, bearing always in mind that the privileges of empire have also their obligations. I beg to second the motion.

The hon. gentleman who has just spoken has built a house of his own imagination, and he immediately started by breaking it down. He has charged us on this side of the House, and I presume he has charged all my hon. friends on this side of the House, with being a small-minded people. He has told us that we follow a policy of isolation, that we stand for South Africa alone.

That is right. That is one of your slogans.

We are told that we stand for South Africa alone. The hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel) agrees with what has been said. He agrees with the charges levelled against us.

I will get up just now.

I want to know exactly where we stand. The hon. gentleman has built this house of his own imagination, and he has levelled direct charges against us that we seek to stand alone, that we are isolating ourselves in the markets of the world or of the empire. What does he stand for? What does he ask for? He immediately asks us to confine our business to that group which is called the empire.

No, you are mistaken.

What else did he say? Did he mention one single word about finding a market in any other part of the world ?

He said: “Not to jeopardize empire trade.”

Perhaps he is not as careful as the hon. gentleman is. I know the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (South West) is going to be far more careful in future.

No, no. I always tell you what I think.

I think the boot is on the other foot. I think this policy of isolation which the hon. gentleman has complained about is rather on that side of the House. I think that policy of “empire alone” is on that side.

Who suggested it?

It was suggested here this afternoon, in so many words, by both the mover and the seconder. That was the impression, that was the atmosphere which was being created this afternoon. That was the whole atmosphere. That was the gist of the argument of the hon. member who moved this motion and the hon. member who seconded it, who went one better and definitely charged us with being a small-minded people. Does he really mean to charge us with being a small-minded people? Does he mean to convey that we are so exceedingly foolish that we are not endeavouring or attempting to go outside of South Africa to find a market for our products? Does he mean to convey that we mean to sell whatever we have to sell inside the limits of South Africa alone? What does he mean by that parrot-cry of “South Africa alone”? I cannot understand what he means to convey, if it is not to create the impression in the country of some sort that we are against trading inside the empire and trading outside the empire. I would like some hon. member who agrees with him to tell us exactly what is really meant by the charge directed against us that we are for South Africa alone. We have wool and we know we cannot use it all in South Africa, and have to sell it in the markets of the world. We are not so foolish as to say if we cannot sell it inside South Africa it will have to rot in South Africa.

The phrase “South Africa alone” was invented by your side of the House. It is your parrot cry.

If you do not know what the term means, do not be so foolish as to use it. It is dangerous to use a word or term which you do not understand. I would like to go a little further, for it is better to have it out this afternoon. What does the hon. member mean by charging us with following a narrow policy of “South Africa alone” in dealing with our markets. Of course, they do not know themselves.

Tell us what you mean.

We never said “South Africa alone,” we are not so foolish. But we have certainly never said “the empire alone.” We are not so foolish. We certainly appreciate whatever business we can do inside the empire, and this Government does show that it is anxious to extend that trade inside the British Commonwealth of Nations as much as it is possible for them to do. But do we get recognition from gentlemen over there

What have you done?

We should have to extend this session considerably if I were to enumerate what we have done, even in connection with the Empire Marketing Board. I have not finished yet with this charge of small-mindedness; I cannot allow that to be dismissed with these few remarks. When this term “South Africa alone” was mentioned by me just now there were several cheers on the opposite side. I am trying to examine what hon. members mean. We are anxious, and we are doing whatever we possibly can, to sell our produce inside the empire, and I ask hon. gentlemen what we have done during the five years we have been in office to endanger the trade inside the empire.

You have done nothing.

Do you want us to endanger that trade ?

What about the German treaty ?

I thought if I pressed the point a little further, we would get to that German treaty. There, again, we are not so small-minded or, to use the term of an hon. member opposite, we have not that “cast-iron prejudice”, as not to deal with any nation outside the Commonwealth of Nations. We certainly have not that cast-iron prejudice against Germany, France or any other country when it comes to the sale of our produce, just as hon. members over there have no cast-iron prejudice against buying the manufactures of any other country when it suits their pockets, and Natal is no exception. I really thought when I saw the motion on the paper that there was going to be some genuine attempt on the part of those interested—and we are as much interested in the articles of produce mentioned in the motion as are the hon. members over there. I thought there was going to be a genuine attempt by members on both sides of the House to discuss our problems and the products of this country in a fair, calm, business-like spirit. It was with that attitude of mind that I listened to the hon. gentleman, but instead of dealing with the business of the country, he immediately attacked us and charged us with being antagonistic to the Empire Marketing Board.

Your predecessor admitted it.

Is that the gentleman who is charged.

Your predecessor said he would rather have the money.

Is it believed that we are opposed to the good work done by the Empire Marketing Board? I again say that we on this side of the House have a little more sense than to quarrel with our markets, situated wherever they may be. We would rather leave that attitude to our friends over there— the hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel.) We are not going to quarrel with our markets in whatever part of the world they are situated, whether Great Britain, Canada, inside the Commonwealth of Nations, or whether it is Germany or whether it is Japan.

Take what is given to you and give nothing in return.

I seem to hear the Empire Milners and not the voice of South Africa— a man who is more concerned about the business of other countries than his own. We know that attitude too well; we have had it just recently again. Hon. members over there are entirely wrong if they think we are so foolish to quarrel with our markets or to say “the empire alone”.

Who says that ?

We say we are going to live on the very best footing with every portion of the empire, and whatever hon. gentlemen over there may say, whether they like it or don’t like it for political purposes, we are going to adhere to that policy, which the Government has persistently followed ever since it came into office even in regard to preference. Let me remind my hon. friends that other countries say it is not worth while trading with us because we have given all the preferences to Great Britain. We are not quarreling with that. We have given it, and given it gladly. It is not a quid pro quo. We are giving more. There is still room for Great Britain to make up some leeway. Whatever we have given we have given gladly.

When ?

Is the hon. member asleep; does he not know that it was done by this Parliament in 1925? Coming from Natal I suppose he had never heard of it. We gave preference to a long list of articles to Great Britain.

How many did you take away?

Six or seven, but we gave 22. We did it with the goodwill of Great Britain, who realized that we in South Africa could not follow the policy of the empire alone and that we must deal with other countries when they take our produce. Take a staple production such as our wool, which is one of our main productions. No, the hon. gentleman does not mention wool. We have to find a market for it, and we cannot do it in Great Britain alone nor the British Commonwealth alone. The hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Mr. Hockly) will agree with me. We will be in a sorry mess and in a far more difficult position than we are in to-day if we endeavoured to sell our wool for consumption inside the British Commonwealth only. Do hon. members want the old system of business which was followed years ago and this afternoon was condemned by the hon. member over there, who agreed that we have too many agencies? That is quite right. In the past we had far too many agencies for our products. Our wool principally went to London, and England took very little of it; the bulk of it was sold on the Continent; yet we had to pay agents’ fees, commissions, landing charges, storage, and so on. We agree; there were too many agencies, which was not good for the producers, and certainly not good for South Africa. We want to find a market for our wool where we can find it. We can find a market in Germany, France and other countries, and who is going to stop it? [Interruption.] Would the empire take our whole output of wool? Control is not going to be much good for the farmer when he has bills to meet. He wants to sell his wool. How much does the British commonwealth buy? Silence. Very little.

How much is it?

In 1928 we exported to Great Britain £6,790,000 of wool, to France £3,608,000 and to Germany £3,900,000. This is raw wool. Of the total exported from the Union about 40 per cent, goes to Great Britain, 60 per cent, going elsewhere, and of the 40 per cent., although I have not the definite figures, at least 20 per cent, is re-exported to the Continent.

made an interruption.

The hon. gentleman is not going to get me or this side to say anything disparaging about the British commonwealth of nations because we have nothing disparaging to say, and if I could give hon. gentlemen any advice in my humble way, the sooner they stop talking that nonsense the better for South Africa. They did not succeed in stirring up South Africa with the German trade treaty because those who wanted the markets were beyond that sort of, I should not say, nonsense. The sooner we can co-operate in finding markets for our produce both inside and outside the empire, the better it will be for South Africa. In my humble way, I would like to extend an invitation to hon. members over there to let us immediately set about co-operating for that purpose.

Accept this motion.

I will endeavour to show that we could co-operate without accepting this motion, because I would like to examine what is really proposed here. As a matter of fact, coming to the motion itself, I have listened very carefully to what the hon. gentleman had to say, and he certainly extolled the virtues of the Empire Marketing Board. So far as this board and the work it is doing, in order to advertise the productions of the empire and advancing money for research work goes, I certainly acclaim what they are doing. We have no fault to find with the Empire Marketing Board in pursuing that line of action, but the Empire Marketing Board does not sell our produce. They advertise and they give publicity, but they do not sell. They are not a selling agency for the dominions. They are not brokers. The business has got to be done by those who are engaged in the business. What does the hon. member want us to do? He wants us to set up a similar organization to co-operate with the Empire Marketing Board; that is, we are also to do research work here, and we are also to advertise. Advertise in South Africa or where?

Here.

I do not see the necessity for establishing in South Africa an organization of that nature. If the Empire Marketing Board is what its name signifies it to be, and if we accept the term “empire” as meaning the different nations of the commonwealth, then you have got one board which now deals with the business of the whole of the empire.

Why not have a board here ?

I am not aware that we have been asked to establish a similar organization here. The hon. gentleman asks us to establish a similar organization in South Africa. What for? To find markets? Are we going to sell our maize in South Africa? Do we need an organization such as this to sell maize in the Union? I would like to know where I am.

Will you read the motion through to the end? It will tell you.

I will go right through it. I am now dealing with the first part of the motion. I will come to the second part. What I ask the hon. mover is, what does he mean by such an organization. He says that we need one in South Africa to advertise empire goods in South Africa. His motion is hopelessly wrong. It deals with the disposal of South African products. He does not mention empire products. I will read the motion. [Motion read.] Is it not clear that the hon. gentleman intended by this motion nothing more and nothing less than the disposal of South African products. That is the whole object. Now that I ask him what such an organization is to be established for in South Africa, he answers me across the floor of the House: “To sell empire products in South Africa.” I cannot understand that. If that is the object, the disposal of South African products, then I say that the Empire Marketing Board is there for the purpose, and we are very pleased that it is there. I can tell the hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel) how far we can co-operate. We actually have a representative on the Empire Marketing Board, paid by the Union. What more cooperation do you want? I am genuinely pleased that we have spent a few hours this afternoon, even if it has taken some time, in disillusioning hon. members opposite.

What is the gentleman’s name ?

Does the hon. gentleman doubt my statement? I will give him the name. Our trades commissioner in London is personally a member of the Empire Marketing Board and his name is Mr. Dymond. I do not see what further complaint my friend over there has. I do not see the necessity for another board. We have several organizations in existence which deal with the marketing of South African produce both in this country and overseas. The division of Economics and Markets deal with the question of supply, and they also work in close contact with the various co-operative societies responsible for the distribution of a large portion of the country’s products. The Intelligence Department of the Board of Trade and Industries does a large amount of work in disseminating market intelligence with regard to prospective buyers and sellers not only in South Africa but also overseas. The Board of Trade in addition, is in constant communication with the trades commissioner in London. The latter again— that is the trades commissioner—is a member of the Empire Marketing Board. Now citrus and deciduous fruits are already marketed through the board so that although I do not in the least minimize all that has been done by the Empire Marketing Board—I greatly appreciate it—I do not feel that we need any further organization than what we already have. We have our Division of Markets and Economics, our Board of Trade, our trades commissioner; and all that is required is that we should make the fullest possible use of the organizations we already have; and remember, we shall no longer continue to follow that foolish policy of “empire alone”,

I am sorry the Minister is trying to throw cold water on the motion. No one on this side has ever talked of the empire alone, but the Minister draws a red rag into the debate to divert attention from the actual matter.

You talk of “South Africa alone”,

Will the Minister deny that that has been the slogan of his party in the past ?

We said “South Africa first”.

The Minister will remember surely that the late Minister of Justice always used that slogan.

You are wrong again.

We are glad to hear that that slogan has now been abandoned. We do not speak of “South Africa alone” or the “empire alone”. The matter before the House in this motion directly brings up the Empire Marketing Board, and no hon. member has spoken about markets outside the empire, but we do not suffer from such want of sense or patriotism as to think that we can only sell our produce inside the empire. As our farming population is at present in a very difficult position, every straw to improve matters should be grasped, and with that honourable motive the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) has proposed the motion. I had experience of the work of the Empire Marketing Board when I was in England 18 months ago, and studied the matter fully. Let me tell the Minister that the board has become a national institution in England; is supported by all parties, and perhaps most of all by the party now in office there. The board is doing brilliant work in the interests of our produce, and that of the other dominions, gratuitously. When one goes into the schools at the time our oranges are ripe here, you find that the children are encouraged to influence their parents to buy South African oranges. Propaganda is being made on behalf of our produce right through the country. I go so far as to say, that it is possibly desirable to appoint an independent member on the Empire Marketing Board, inasmuch is the time of a man like Mr. Dymond is so much occupied in general trade matters. If we have an official or send a special man who does nothing else but be a member of the board, and studying the best marketing methods it will do us much good. He can encourage the buying of our produce in England. On the day I left England a man from Wales came and asked me to tell the farmers of South Africa that they were poor in Wales, but were all fruit eaters. There are millions of fruit eaters, but they have no opportunity of getting hold of South African fruit. Such an independent man on the board could do a tremendous lot. The Minister implied that we were only raising the interests of the empire.

I did not say that.

The Minister said, that we only wanted the empire. Cannot we, however, expect more support from members of our own family with whom strong bonds of friendship exist, than from people outside. We must Cooperate as much as possible with that body. The British Government gives £1,000,000 annually especially for research work, and the results are at our disposal. Let us work together as harmoniously as possible. What my hon. friend behind me is asking for is for an organization in South Africa, not to sell the produce of other countries but to sell our own produce, and to have a Government organization here to get into closer touch with the body overseas. I think this is quite a fair request, and I do not know why the Minister of Mines and Industries refuses it. I think it will do nothing but good. Take, e.g., the present economic position of the wheat farmers; the Minister has given notice of a motion, and I think the announcement will be much welcomed by the farmers. You, Mr. Speaker, and other hon. members who represent grain districts, know that the farmers to-day have a surplus of almost 2,000,000 bags of oats, not to speak of the barley farmers, who are perhaps in a still much worse position. I do not say that this is a chance of making use of the English marketing board for the sale of those products, but the Government must try to find means to export the surplus, so that the farmer can get an economic price for his produce. This is a very serious matter; the wheat, oats, and barley farmers should all hang together, and if something can be done by reductions of freight or a subsidy, or some other method, it must be tried. I am not here to suggest a means, because the Minister has all means at his disposal, but if possible something must be done. The motion contains a very good principle, and I think that the discussion this afternoon has done nothing but good, and, as the Minister has said, we must, if we can, cooperate in this direction. For that reason I was a little disappointed with the Minister’s speech because it did not create the impression that he had much sympathy with the position of the farmers. The motion was introduced to ascertain whether such an organization could eventually lead to a better market for our produce, not only in England, but, of course, in all other lands throughout the world as well. We are not so unenlightened as the Minister wants to represent, but we say that in the first place that we must look for a market within the family because we shall find more sympathy there. How can we expect much sympathy in France, Japan, or Germany, as they have a large production of their own? We cannot expect them to establish a marketing board to push the sale of South African produce. As long as the family of British states exists and there is a marketing board it will be to our advantage to make as much use of it as possible, because we can always expect more sympathy from friends. We see that other countries are surrounded by high tariff walls, and the farmer finds not only that he has to compete on the world market against producers of the whole world, but that he is also faced by tariffs imposed in other countries, and when he has got over them then he still has to compete in those countries against the whole world. This is not a party matter, and we ask for our trade to be pushed in every way and especially in this way. Even if the Minister does not see his way now to establish such an organization, he ought surely to be prepared to consider the establishment of such an organization. I do not think the Minister can take up the attitude that he will not consider the motion. He can consider it, and see whether it becomes possible later on to carry it out, but in any case he cannot refuse to consider the matter.

I am very thankful to have heard such a sensible and moderate speech by the hon. member for Caledon (Mr. Krige) in connection with the marketing of our produce in England and elsewhere. I agree with him that there is a large market for our produce in England, and also that that market is only used to a very small extent now. I must say that there is already Considerable progress noticeable. There is an improvement in the sale of oranges, and also we find that we are making better use of the market in Great Britain for eggs. An improvement has been noticed in many respects, also in the case of other produce, but everyone will admit that further improvement is always possible. I therefore agree with the Minister of Mines and Industries that speeches like these can do nothing but good, provided they are made or sensible lines. I, however, do not understand one point in the speech of the hon. member for Caledon, and that is where he wants to lay hold of a straw.

I said that the farmers felt like that in the circumstances.

Of course, but I think the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) did not intend his motion as such. He thinks the motion is the salvation of South Africa and the empire, but if the hon. member for Caledon wishes to cling to the British straw, what about the big German tree? He is wrong if he thinks that there is no market for our produce on the Continent. In October, 1925, three-quarters of our maize was sold not in England, but in Holland, i.e., on the Continent. I want to add that I was very glad to learn that our maize at that time had a good name, and was more popular than maize from other countries. The only complaint was that the pips of one consignment of our yellow mealies were a little bit broken. That was on the Continent. If he wants to cling to a straw, why does he object to the strong German and continental tree? Is it that this motion has been introduced for a political purpose? Does the hon. member know that in various parts of the Transvaal suggestions are being made that the depression has been caused because this Government assists in selling our produce, and not only to England? I know the hon. member will say that that is misleading, but yet these yarns are spread about by his party. Although the hon. member is above that, the hon. member for Bethal (Mr. Jooste) would be able to tell us quite a lot more about it. I want to make a few remarks on the motion. What is at the base of the institution of this Empire Marketing Board? What is the actual object of the investment by the British Government of £1,000,000 in it? Is it because the British Government loves us, Canada, or Australia so much? Certainly not. What then is really at the bottom of it? The first report of the Empire Marketing Board appeared in 1925; it referred to the import and sale of meat in Great Britain. Now I want to call to mind that we all know that with regard to meat the English people eat practically nothing else but fresh meat. Cooled meat or frozen meat is not appreciated there. Practically only fresh meat is consumed. I mention meat because it is referred to in the motion. What was the position? The Empire Marketing Board made enquiry, and in its report of October, 1925, about the subject, the board stated that there were difficulties in connection with the importation of fresh meat from the dominion. Hon. members probably know that the importation of livestock into Great Britain is restricted in various ways. This is done by means of the Stock Diseases Act.

No.

The hon. member says no. I will prove to him that it is so. With regard to the importation of livestock for slaughter purposes, the position is that all possible restrictions are imposed there; of course in favour of the English producers. The Argentine slaughter stock first go to Belgium, are slaughtered there, and then taken over to England. Stock coming from other countries can only enter at two ports, and must then be slaughtered immediately. The so-called “store cattle” are not admitted except from Canada. Stock from South Africa may not be kept on English farms to be fed up again there. During the sea voyage the animals become poor, and it is desirable to feed them up a bit before they are offered for slaughter purposes. Why is that not permitted? Because the English farmer wants to retain his own market for himself.

That is quite right.

Yes. Hence this report recommended that the restriction on the “store cattle” should be removed. The report in short says that the restrictions to prevent the introduction of disease should be carried out, but that it is undesirable to apply them to cattle which are taken to England for slaughter purposes, and which are being fed there for a short time; as also that it is undesirable to make a distinction between Canada and the other dominions. Hence it is recommended that the Act should be amended in connection with this matter. The whole object of the recommendation, therefore, is to enable us to export our slaughter animals to Great Britain. But what happened? On the same day as this report appeared, Mr. Baldwin, at that time Prime Minister, stated publicly that he could not adopt the recommendation of that report. That was the same morning that the report appeared. According to the London Times, the British Prime Minister said that he could never accept that recommendation. In that case it was a question for the English people of “England alone.” And now there are hon. members opposite who object to Nationalist members talking of “South Africa alone.” That is the reproach they throw at us. Here I have quoted the recommendation and also the statement Mr. Baldwin made in which the policy of “England alone” is definitely announced, and not the policy of the dominions together with England.

Did he use those words ?

No, he is not stupid enough for that. The matter is, however, perfectly clear, and it was, moreover, quite a reasonable attitude for him to take up. I do not blame him for it. His object was nothing else but to improve conditions in England itself. I do not find fault with him for that. We say, however, that it is also our first duty to look after South Africa. The hon. members for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) and Caledon (Mr. Krige) say that they also adopt that point of view. If that is their intention, why then do they object to the explanation that the Minister of Mines and Industries made here this afternoon? He stated that we were cooperating with the Empire Marketing Board and that Mr. Dimond was a member of the Board. Do they want another man? I hope the hon. member for Caledon bases his objection on the grounds that the person who represents us there, ought not to be an English-speaking person. He must probably have another reason. He has not, however, explained it to us, and I must, therefore, conclude that he does not exactly know what the position is. Who can represent us better in England than our trade commissioner, who is completely au fait with our trade? He is paid for it. The Minister has also pointed out that Mr. Dimond is constantly in touch with the Board of Trade and Industries, who enlighten him as to our requirements. The Minister also mentioned the organization that already exists to push our trade. Let me add a few more considerations. There is the export of eggs. I have already said that there is a notable advance in connection with the export of eggs. I think; however, that still greater progress can be made. I want to mention a matter, viz., that we should consider whether we ought not to export white and brown eggs mixed. Hon. members will ask why. I understand there is a special reason for it in England. If the eggs are mixed, then they are sold as English eggs, and fetch high prices. I hope the associations concerned will still further improve the export of eggs. As a full-blooded Natalian, the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls), ought to know that in his own province attempts are being made to export a shipload of cattle to the English market. Under the guidance of the Minister of Agriculture an attempt is also being made to export a shipload of lambs to Great Britain. What does the hon. member mean by his reference to an organization for increasing the maize export? We already have our organization here. The Railway Department has its organization, and we have grain elevators. What more does the hon. member want to do? Butter has been mentioned; well, he ought to know that an organization was established last year, and that legislation has been introduced in this connection. It is not necessary to refer to fruit, because we all know the position. The whole matter comes down to this: that what is here proposed is unnecessary. I want to suggest that we should not create a body like the Empire Marketing Board, because that also exists for us if it is true to its name, but we must create something which can give a lead to the various organizations which already exist for the export of our produce. I feel that a central body should be created, so that the various organizations engaged in exporting produce can jointly get advice, not only in England, but also in Holland, Germany and other countries. We know that Holland already takes a large part of our citrus fruit. Rotterdam is the centre of the citrus market, not only for Holland, but also for Scandinavia, and even for Germany and Belgium. I cannot go into all the points mentioned by the hon. members for Zululand and Durban (Greyville) (Maj. Richards). The statements of the latter made us think of the old kind of politician, who is more at home in a museum. His attitude is possibly in line with that of other obsolete Imperialists who come to the dominions to preach the Imperialistic ideas, but to a young and powerful state like the Union they are quite out of date.

Like the last speaker, I hope this debate will do some good, but there are some disappointing features about it. As usual, when anything of importance to agriculture and agricultural production emanates from this side of the House, there is a general exodus from the opposite side. It is really astonishing in a situation like the present that so little interest can be taken in the marketing of agricultural produce by those hon. members opposite who represent rural constituencies. It is only within the last few minutes that there has been a quorum on that side, which is very disappointing indeed. Usually the curse of South Africa is drought, restricting production; of late we have had abundant rains and good seasons, and a production so embarrassing that we are unable to dispose of it with advantage. Surely, if there was ever a time to take serious stock of the situation and any means to dispose of our production, this is the time. There is another very grave disappointment in this debate, and that is the speech of the Minister of Mines and Industries. I was amazed to hear that speech, sorry and disappointed. I know that it is sometimes the custom of Ministers and others to make speeches of that sort in the backveld when no reporters are present, but I was very disappointed to hear the Minister address the House in those terms; surely the situation is much too serious for the Minister to descend to the methods he employed; first of all, in side-tracking the issue and drawing a red herring across the trail, and then appealing to the racial passions of his supporters, rather than discussing the merits of the motion; because this motion has many simple benefits. The Minister was reluctant to discuss the motion, and discussed almost everything else except the clear terms of the motion. Surely it is unworthy of the Minister to interpolate what he did. What was his object except that he knew it would have the effect of misleading his followers, directing their attention from the main issue, and so that this motion would not be discussed on its merits. I think hon. members who stayed away from this debate missed a great deal, and they would have been furnished with a good deal of useful matter had they been present. I am sure they are very tired of this old racial strife, and they ought to get down to the economic situation, which is serious enough. Why did not the Minister set them a good example, and they could follow his lead.

Talk to your own friends.

I am talking to the Minister on this matter. My friends are proud to belong to a party which by practice and principle is non-racial; can you say as much ?

Are you in earnest?

Very much in earnest.

What was the racialism?

That you dragged in “the empire alone”; another hon. member spoke of “England alone.”

Where does race come in ?

You are exciting the race prejudice of your followers, so that their attention would be districted from the merits of the motion.

Is that racialism

it is the common practice of the Minister to bring down discussion to a racial issue. The Minister read a portion of the motion, and interpolated a long speech between the first and second part, so long that I doubt whether he ever got to the crux of the motion, which is in the last line. This is a motion for the promotion of the better marketing of these products which have been mentioned.

Where?

Seeing there is an organization in existence rendering very important service already to our markets, we think it is desirable that we should fake notice of this organization and further their efforts at the producing end. I wish the Minister and his friends would go back to their constituents and say what a favourable market we have in the United Kingdom. I want them to go further and explain to their people that good markets depend upon goodwill. I wonder how many of those who sit behind the Minister, representing producers of agricultural products, have represented that an essential for good markets is goodwill.

Have you shown goodwill

Yes.

The German treaty?

We will discuss the German treaty another time; it is not in the motion. The Minister asked: “What have we done in the last five years to endanger the trade of South Africa in the empire.” I will give him one instance. I am prepared to give the Minister the names of all concerned. It is not, perhaps, advisable to do so here. Recently, I was speaking to a citrus grower, who told me that he happened to be in London when his produce was being marketed at Covent Garden. He saw an individual who bought a portion of his oranges, and, being very interested, he thought he would follow them up. Part of these oranges were put on a barrow. He introduced himself to the vendor, and said: “I am the man who grew these oranges.” The vendor said: “Come along with me.” He went along. The vendor said, in his cry: “Here you are, beautiful, sweet South African oranges, and here is the man who grew them. If you don’t like them you can throw them at him, but you will find that they are sweet.” He went with this vendor to one of the biggest establishments in London to ask the foreman of that place if he would allow him to sell his oranges near by. The foreman said: “Oh, you come from South Africa, do you?” “Yes,” he replied. “Yes,” said the foreman, “and you grew these oranges?” The grower again answered in the affirmative, “And,” continued the foreman, “South Africa is the country where you have been talking about abolishing our king and making insulting remarks about our flag and talking secession. You can take your oranges to a hotter place than South Africa.” Here is an example where ill will was developed through the words of members of the Government, and where it has prejudiced the sale of a South African product. After all, it is the consumer who has the final word as to whether a purchase will take place or not.

So our own flag is a token of ill-will to Great Britain ?

The Minister must exercise his intelligence. There were several expressions about the Union Jack and secession of which the Minister is aware made by very prominent politicians on his side of the House that were not welcome in England. I am putting it very mildly. I will give the Minister privately the expressions which were used, but I do not want to rub it in in this debate. The point I make is the difference between goodwill and ill-will in the marketing of our products, and when the Minister asks what has been done in the last five years to endanger the trade of South Africa, I am prepared to give him a formidable list of things that have been done calculated to endanger our trade.

Let ns have them. The flag is one. What next?

The Minister will not sidetrack me like that. When he goes home, if he will read Kipling’s “If” he will find a few cogent words about “hearing the words you’ve spoken twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools.” I do not want to go into details with regard to this matter, because I want to promote goodwill amongst ourselves. I think it is a pity that the Minister and his friends have not explained to their constituents what the marketing board is. Are they afraid of the word “empire”? Well, cut the word “empire” out, and put something else in. Call it the overseas marketing board. If the Minister would explain the work of this board to his constituents and in the country, he would do a great deal towards getting that sympathy with the objects and aims of the Empire Marketing Association, which is intended to be of great assistance to producers. He ought to tell them that the British Government is devoting £1,000,000 a year towards this board, towards which the dominions do not contribute a penny. They want to encourage the people of England to do empire buying. But charity begins at home. The selling was developed by most extensive advertising, coloured posters, advertisements in the newspapers, exhibitions and shopping weeks, etc. Take the case of oranges. Now oranges in England in summer are a comparatively recent introduction. In the northern portion of the empire oranges are not available at that season and people have to be educated to eat our oranges in the summer. Here is a little pamphlet about these oranges to induce people in England to eat South African oranges—

This is the sort of propaganda which sells goods. Advertising experts go to no end of trouble to put goods and products attractively before the consumer. I specially want to draw the attention of the Minister to the citrus industry. We have some 4,000,000 trees in bearing. Not only are we expanding our citrus orchards, but the whole world is doing so. The world is threatened with over-production of oranges. Now this pamphlet goes to no end of trouble to give recipes of ways in which orange products can be cooked and prepared. Now that is an important matter to us, because anything that helps to dispose of our oranges is to be cultivated to the utmost. There is no better means of doing that than the Empire Marketing Board. The United States of America and Spain produce oranges in almost similar quantities; many times the quantity produced by South Africa. England is our best market. Two-thirds of the world’s supply of oranges exported go there, and of England’s supply, 67 per cent, comes from Spain. How is England developing the trade with Spain? If England buys oranges from Spain, Spain buys coal from England. Some time ago when Spain proposed to place certain duties or restrictions on the import of coal from England, the coal producers said: “If you do that, it means that our production of coal will be less, our people will be unemployed, and we will not have the money to buy your oranges. These are luxuries, and would be the first thing to be cut down in the economy of the house. If our ships do not go out laden with coal and come back laden with oranges, it will add greatly to the cost and will spoil our mutual trade.” So the duties did not operate and the trade went on as before. Now 17 per cent, of England’s consumption of oranges come from Palestine. I believe the sweetest oranges in the world come from the neighbourhood of Jaffa. Palestine already produces five times what the Union does. Its production has increased and is increasing far more rapidly. So there is a market of goods of exceptional quality that we have to compete with. From the United States of America 6 per cent, of the consumption of England is imported, and the same amount, 6 per cent., is imported from South Africa. That leaves us to think very carefully. First of all, we have an unlimited possible market in the United Kingdom, and, under certain conditions, practically an unlimited market. We have this 6 per cent, only of citrus which has been exported from South Africa. That can be extended indefinitely under certain conditions. One of the conditions I may explain. In locomotive factories locomotive works and railway carriage factories, there is accasionally notices put up which read—

That is good business. If we can supplement their efforts on that side by our own organized efforts on this side it is worth doing. Do not let the Minister run away with the idea that we only desire to trade with the empire. That is not our position. There is an organization doing excellent work, and we desire to take the full benefit of that organization and work in with it in every possible way. Of course, the Empire Marketing Board is not a philanthropic institution. No one pretends that it is. It is a business institution. It is for the marketing of empire goods. It realizes that the exchange of commodities between the various parts of the empire is good for the whole. Therefore, it cultivates empire buying. Not only does England buy from the dominions, but naturally it is expected, and should follow that the dominions will, as far as possible, buy from England. We want an organization at this end to supplement the efforts of the empire marketing organization. I do not say it should be similar. One is a selling organization, and the other should be a producing organization. The Minister ought to explain to his people the splendid work that the Empire Marketing Board is doing with regard to production. The object is to help us to grow more and better produce, to grade and pack it better, to transport it safely and to put it on the counter or the slab in the most attractive form possible. They can assist us immensely in that. Therefore, we should have an organization to make a note of their recommendations. They know what the buyer wants, and they can give us tips as to how packages should be got up to suit the consumer. We want an organization to pass on that information to the producer. The main object of this motion is to take advantage of what is happening on the other side and use it to our advantage here. Again, the vast sums which the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) alluded to as being devoted to research, surely should be of deep interest to us. We are a small community, and we have done wonders in our way in the matter of research to the great admiration of the empire and other parts of the world. But we are a long way off perfection yet. The hon. Minister of Mines and Industries should be reminded that 10 per cent, of all crops are destroyed by insects, and nearly 20 per cent, in the tropics. The Empire Marketing Board is taking a note of that. They are undertaking research into it. We shall get the benefit of their money and the co-ordination of their efforts in various parts of the empire to bring about the end we seek, namely, the elimination or reduction of these pests. Again, the most important pastoral production in the world is grass. On that a great deal of money is being spent, and is to be spent. It has been found that the growth of animals, the thriving and fattening of animals depend upon the amount of certain mineral salts in the pasture. Certain forms of herbage have a greater power than others of collecting those salts and conveying them to the animals. Experiments are being made and all this is very useful. We should have an organization here to carry out what is being done on the other side, in order that we may produce what is wanted, and in the form in which it is wanted for disposal to the consumer. Surely there is nothing to which we can take exception in that. There is nothing political or of party significance in that. It is purely an economic question. Therefore, I regret all the more the introduction in this debate of party or racial matters.

Be fair; do not accuse me of it.

I am glad that the Minister shows that he is a little ashamed of himself. We are very earnest in our efforts to relieve the economic situation. Reference has been made to the question of the name. A good organization, even if the name does not appeal to you, is a good thing. Put the question of a name on one side.

Did I object to the words “Empire Marketing Board” ?

No, but slighting reference has been made. Let us see if we cannot supplement the efforts of the people on the other sode who are helping us so much already. It is a pity that the Minister should consider that he has to wait to be asked to do it. I suggest that he should look out for means to supplement these efforts instead of pouring cold water on the efforts of the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls). We have practically an unlimited market for anything we can produce, provided we can land it in the style, candition, quality and quantity that are wanted. We are now suffering badly from the wool slump. Well, England every year imports more pig flesh, bacon, pork and so on, than would cover the biggest wool cheque we have ever had three times over. It varies from £54,000,000 to £64,000,000 per annum. That is the value of importations. Of the imports about a half, or nearly one-half, that is, £24,000,000 worth come from Denmark alone. That represents from three to four times the value of our present wool cheque. I am pointing out that there is a market of almost an unlimited extent if we can take advantage of it by degrees and improve our position by growing products for which there is a market ever ready to absorb them. We are doing little or nothing in regard to it. When we consider too that New Zealand sends yearly to England £1,500,000 worth of cheese and £1,500,000 worth of dairy products, and in comparison we send little or nothing, it will be realized that the position needs attention. We require to be shown how to do it. When we have to sell our products in the markets of the world, we have to take note of what our consumers want and the style in which they want it. There is an unlimited market before us, and the whole object of this motion is to direct the attention of people to it, and to invite South Africa to co-operate to a greater extent than she is doing, with the Empire Marketing Board. Of course, we have a representative on the board, Mr. Dimond, our trades commissioner, but we are not dealing now with that end of it. We are dealing with the end in South Africa. I hope the Minister will see that he is wrong in opposing the motion, and that he will be good enough to accept it for the people of this country are probably not aware of the advantages offered by this board.

The Minister in charge of this business this afternoon made a very interesting statement and with much that he said I agree. I say that in no carping spirit. One statement he made we have heard for the first time in our history, is that the Union of South Africa is directly represented on the Empire Marketing Board. Whether the Minister likes the expression “empire” or not I am not very much concerned about. I do not care very much about it.

What is in a name?

I do not like the word myself. I do not like the word “empire” being associated with the name “British Commonwealth of Nations It connotes an overlawship of somebody or other and I do not like it. However, that is by the way. As one hon. member has said, what is in a name after all? There is nothing in it. If the name is the trouble we can very easily remove the name. The significant thing to me is that the Union of South Africa is directly represented on the Empire Marketing Board, a fact that we did not know before. I cannot appreciate an interjection that was made by one hon. member when he said, “Oh, but he is paid by the Union”. This member of the Empire Marketing Board is paid by the Union. He is the trade commissioner. I cannot appreciate any very fine distinction between a man on that board being paid by the Union or a man on the board who is not paid by the Union. I have vet to learn that he is going to serve South Africa any better or any worse by reason of the fact that he is being paid or not being paid by the Union. I am delighted to hear from the Minister that we are so closely associated with the Empire Marketing Board and that we have an official representative on it, but I do not think that quite fits the bill. The Minister and some of his followers have misunderstood the point sought to be made on this side. What you have to do in all this marketing business, so far as the British public is concerned, is to create good feeling. It is very easy to do that, but it is very easy indeed to create bad feeling. I think the idea at the back of the mover’s mind, which was rather badly shown by the seconder, was to have a board in South Africa of a similar character to the Empire Marketing Board acting in precisely the same way as that board and advertising British goods in South Africa.

Motor cars.

Why not? Motor cars or any other British product? I have yet to learn that South African feeling whether British or Dutch, is opposed to British manufactures. I hope the interjection does not mean that. You must be very careful not to militate against good feeling. The creation of a board of that description advertising British goods in South Africa, would not cost them very much.

That is not what is asked for.

When you have, by the creation of that board interlocking with the Empire Marketing Board, obtained reciprocity of advertisement, so to speak, you will create such a good feeling on the other side that you will more easily sell the goods produced in South Africa. That is as I understand it.

Why not move an amendment?

That is not necessary. I am coming to quite another aspect of the question altogether. You have a marketing board, operating solely in Great Britain, endeavouring to create an atmosphere. What is the use of creating an atmosphere if the people cannot buy, and if after you have transported your produce to the other side—being bled very heavily in the process—you hand them over to some market agency—a private association of individuals whose sole purpose it is to make money out of the transaction. There I agree with the Minister. After all the advertising of South African products that is done in England, when they reach London—I am now speaking of fruit—the produce is handed over to what is commonly known as the Big Five of Covent Garden, and they do jolly well as they please. Hon. members have not said a word about this important factor in the case although it is a factor which militates very greatly against the marketing of our produce in England. Why, how many times, hundreds and hundreds of occasions are on record where fruit farmers have produced the finest fruit the world can produce and have sent it to England, but by reason of the many charges in between, and chiefly by these people who are controlling the market, they have not come out with a profit but with a loss, and have had to pay actually out of their own pockets the difference. Take wool, the slump in whose prices is the chief concern of farmers of South Africa to-day, even those farmers who are not directly interested in wool. We are one of the few producers of wool, and yet we calmly send it oversea and there are all the charges, shipping, landing and other charges, and there are all, these processes and methods of being bled en route: the manufactured goods come back to South Africa, and we have to pay all those charges again. What an extraordinary state of affiairs! I have urged the Government, and one does not suppose or expect the Government or the Opposition, with the outlook they have on life and national development, to accept my suggestion, but I shall never be tired of insisting on this House considering it from my point of view. Private enterprise has broken down in South Africa as it has in other parts of the world, and if it will not constitute a wool manufactory to manufacture our wool it is up to the State to do it. We want an official board. We should not be selling raw wool, but we should manufacture wool and sell it and articles of attire to the world. Because people will not take hold of the question and because they are afraid of what it may develop into and are afraid of names, we are stopped from doing the right thing, and we leave the producer and the consumer in the hands of the middleman. You will never eliminate the middleman along the lines you are going today. As things are it is rather dangerous to endeavour to foster an export trade especially in fruit and meat. I do not know why citrus fruit alone should be mentioned in the motion. But is it not our experience that once an export trade is built up, the effort to keep a market is of such a character as to insist upon the best of your products going overseas, and the worst being kept for home consumption. Let me ask the Minister and the mover to consider the desirability of fostering a home market by making it possible for the people of South Africa to buy these commodities. There ought to be fruit on every table in South Africa. Can your railway labourer have oranges, apples, plums and fruit of that description at every meal on his table, or at any meal? How many of your lower paid state employees can afford meat? Will three shillings per day purchase meat? You would have no difficulty in getting rid of the produce of South Africa if there were a South African market, and the market in this country, as in every other, is the purchasing power of the people. The market of England is no better than the market of South Africa. Make your market in South Africa worth while. If you pay your people well, and don’t talk dismally about depression in a way that will create it you can make a good market in South Africa for South African produce. I would agree with the hon. member who moved this motion if he were to say that this marketing board has got to be a selling, as well as an advertising agency. It is well to go the whole hog, and have your own distributing centres in England. Germany and in other parts of the world where you desire to secure markets. Do not leave it to four or five big fruit sellers in Covent Garden, but control your own produce from the time you produce it until it reaches the consumer, wherever that consumer may be. Under those circumstances I would support the hon. gentleman, but the motion on its present lines is of very little use, and I must support the Minister.

I fear that hon. members opposite will not render any good service to the Empire Marketing Board with this motion. If I were convinced that this motion merely aimed at the improving of the marketing of South African produce, I would feel quite differently towards it, and be able to speak in a very different way about it, than I am now. It is very difficult not to believe that the motion debated in the House today is a part of the propaganda which especially during the past few weeks has been going on in the country. From all parts we are getting letters and even telegrams from farmers, and especially from wool farmers which say that there is a systematic propaganda being made by the South African Party to-day to make the farmers believe that the depression in trade and the low price of wool is due to nothing else than the attitude of the present Government, which has put a spoke in the wheel of England. It is said that the German Treaty is the cause of the collapse of the wool market There is, therefore, undoubtdly an attempt being made in every direction to persuade the people that the position to-day is so had because we have not the goodwill of England. According to them we ought to go out of our way to obtain goodwill of England. I want to ask what has South Africa done then to lose that goodwill. Has not South Africa hitherto tried and is she not still trying to give England a rebate in its export of produce which no other country gets? We give to no other country the rebate that England gets from us without a direct quid pro quo. The object of the motion before the House is that the Opposition want to persuade the public that we have offended the English people, and that we are hostile to England because we want to trade with other countries as well, and that for that reason we have such an unfavourable position in the wool market to-day. Time will not permit me to fully discuss the matter, but I want it clearly understood that the policy of the Government of friendship with other countries is not the cause of the bad state of affairs. The Government did not lose the friendship of England because they will not listen to the wish that they should turn their backs on all other countries. That is the policy which hon. members opposite recommend, and they want to make out that we will lose the friendship of England because we will not give up our trade with other countries. Information I have received, however, shows that the line adopted by the Government is not the cause of the collapse of the wool market. The information I have is that there is a new movement on foot to bring new life into the wool market, and that there is a possibility that the whole thing will come right, and that to a great extent it is due to the German buyers, who are now very active on the wool market. Therefore, if the German treaty means anything, then it has had the effect of the farmers being saved to-day. It is, however, so large a matter, and so much has been said by the opposite side that we still want to discuss, and are not afraid to discuss, that I think we should leave it to another opportunity.

On the motion of Dr. N. J. van der Merwe the debate was adjourned; to be resumed on 28th February.