as chairman, brought up a special report of the Select Committee on the subject of the Insolvency (Further Amendment) Bill, as follows—

On the motion that the report be considered,

I object. We ought to have the report printed so that we can see what its contents are.

May I appeal to the hon. member to withdraw his objection? The report only asks for leave to insert something that was not in the Bill referred to the select committee.

In view of that explanation I will withdraw my objection.

Report considered and adopted.

I move—

I want to point out to the Minister of Finance that we were under the impression that we would not proceed with the estimates this afternoon, and that the next order on the paper would be proceeded with. I do not know whether there is a special reason why we should go on with the estimates.

We have been taken entirely by surprise this afternoon. We saw on the order paper that the first order was for the House to resume in committee of supply on the Mines and Industries Vote. For some reason—no doubt good—that vote cannot be taken this afternoon, and we come to something without hon. members having had the slightest warning that they would come to it— the Posts and Telegraphs Vote. There are a number who, when that comes on, expect to take part in the debate, and to raise points, but they are not prepared this afternoon. We prepare our discussions in advance. I hope the Prime Minister will move that progress be reported and leave asked to sit again. Take the hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Madeley), he did not know. I suggest we go on wtih the Dairy Industry Control Bill, which, I understand, hon. members are prepared to discuss.

I want to point out that it is not at all unusual when the House is in committee on the estimates that a vote should stand over. I understand that certain hon. members were informed that Vote 35 would stand over, but apparently there was a misunderstanding, and hon. members were under the impression that the order would stand over. Hon. members will see that if we do that then towards evening we shall not have enough work. When we are in committee on the budget hon. members must be prepared to debate any vote. I am sorry that apparently a misunderstanding arose, out if we comply with hon. members’ request we shall get into a greater difficulty than by going on with the next vote on the estimates.

It is perfectly true we sometimes pass over one vote, but the vote we are passing over is Mines and Industries, the debate on which might be expected in the ordinary way to last for several hours, and it is certainly one of the most important votes. It is a question only of a misunderstanding. We did not know the Posts and Telegraphs Vote was coming on. I was reading through the report of the Postmaster General. The danger is if that vote is taken now it will not be amply debated. I would suggest, if the committee will agree, that the Prime Minister will move accordingly, and that we proceed with the Dairy Industry Control Bill.

I must confess I have a good deal of sympathy with the point of view expressed by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell). It is not right, but it is a fact, that we live from hand to mouth nowadays, and we are kept going with our noses to the grindstone from morning to night, and to such an extent that we prepare for the day, and not the next day. Although we have the material ready, I know I have, we have not had it ready marshalled; for that reason I support the hon. member, so as to get something like a prepared debate on this, that or the other question. After all, there is nothing gained. If the Prime Minister will be agreeable to take some of these Bills now we can proceed again with the estimates to-morrow. That is the fact. We come along prepared to-day for the mines vote, and we have got that material ready. Now you suddenly spring upon us something for which we are not ready.

The position is that I was informed this morning that Order No. 1 would be discharged, and Order No. 2 would be taken. We are prepared for Order No. 2. It is quite a bona fide mistake, I am sure, on the part of the Minister’s office.

Motion put and agreed to.

Vote 35, on “Posts, Telegraphs and Telephones”, £3,324,000.

If it is quite clear there will be no change in the procedure. I want to move a reduction.

I move—

Motion put and negatived.

I move—

I wish to draw attention to a fairly large number of matters which I think constitute the policy of the department.

Will the hon. member mention the point he wished to raise?

General charges in the department, telegrams, telephones and postal. There is no intention whatever to reflect upon the Minister, or upon the department. One appreciates that he is new to office. This point has been raised for years, and so far we have not succeeded in impressing upon the Government that a change in their policy is desirable. We observe that the total turnover in the department for the year 1928-’29 is £4,072,220. It shows a gross profit of £681,858, and, after deducting the cost of loans, pensions and contributions to various other funds, it leaves a net profit on the whole of the department of £99,168. When we dissect this it is at least interesting, and the Postmaster General in his report points out that they have had considerable extension, and that he regards the result as satisfactory. Of course we do not look upon this department as a money-making one. It is regarded, and I think rightly, as one of the service departments. No taxpayer would look for this profit of £100,000. But when we come to analyse this report we do not find that it is quite as represented. The increase over the previous year, the increase in the total turnover, is £130,683. In order to secure this increase the additional cost has been £112,700. or pretty nearly 90 per cent, of the increased revenue. For this increased expenditure no sound reason can be shown. There can be no sound reason why the expenditure should have gone up by £112,000. There is another feature in this report. We do not find sufficient details. We do not find a comparison with the previous year’s report, and that is a very great weakness in any report, because if you are going to look at the position of any year there is no comparison so valuable as that of the previous year. Apart from the increased expenditure for this small increased turnover, when we come to the personnel employed in this service, we find that in the previous year we employed 12,805 persons, but in 1928-’29 we employed 13,182 persons. So I think this goes to show that the increase in the work was not commensurate with the increased expenditure, and it is consequently bad business to show such a large increase in the personnel. We can understand that a certain amount of the increased expenditure will be caused by ordinary increments, but that would not account for the large amount of the increase. When we see this increase in the personnel we are justified in asking what all these new people are doing. There is no increase of work that warrants any increase in personnel, because a department of this character can well do this small amount of increased turnover without increasing the personnel at all and to increase it to this extent is unquestionably absurd. When we come to the results of the Posts and Telegraphs service we find that their total revenue is £2,500,000. This shows a remarkable position, in view of a loss of £330, and although the income has increased, there is a natural loss shown which I cannot trace in previous years. Consequently there seems to be no justification at all for pointing out to the country that the extension and trading of the department is satisfactory. The point I want to make is that the charges throughout the service are too high. We have traces of war charges that should have disappeared long ago. It is not as the Minister mentioned some time ago, a case of a penny here and threepence there.

Is there any business that has come down to pre-war rates?

At any rate I know of no business that is deliberately maintaining rates. It is only a policy of reduced prices that will develop a department such as this, and I maintain that the usefulness of the department is being checked by maintaining these charges which are for the most part war-charges. There is another section of the department which I want to deal with. We have a big investment in telegraphs and telephones and it is remarkable that although you have only £1,500.000 income you show a nett profit of £99,958. If you are right in your principle that this is a service department, which is not run to show a profit, is not this profit unwarranted. Of £2,500,000 revenue in the posts and telegraphs department a loss of £330 is shown, but where only 1½ millions revenue from telephones, etc., there is a profit of £99,958. I want to give some reasons for suggesting a reduction in prices to support my contention that if the charges to the public had been less there would have been a more satisfactory development. Attention has been drawn to this matter year after year. I refer to the immense increase in telegrams and overseas messages in the past year. On Christmas Eve the number of messages sent from Johannesburg was 60,000 and from Durban 30,000. All the other large towns have had a corresponding increase. Fifteen per cent. of these were Christmas greetings, of which the cost was reduced, I think from 1s. 3d. to either 1s. or ninepence. I submit to the Minister that but for this reduced cost, you would not have had this increase in telegrams in every large town. The increase works out at 22 per cent, which is a very large increase. But to what is it due? I do not think it could be claimed to be due to the normal expansion of the department. It is an increase in the country which one expects the department will benefit by. I submit that that increase is brought about entirely by more reasonable charges. I submit further, that if these reductions of charges were effected right through this great service department there would be a corresponding increase in business. It is an easy matter to drive away business and to drive away the development of the department by retaining charges such as we have. Another reason why I have brought this forward is because the country is up against a stone wall in this department. We get the same replies from the department in 1929 as we got in 1926. They have got into a stereotyped reply, having, apparently, made up their minds to retain these charges and not give the department reductions or the public better value. I have another point I wish to make. When I go into Natal into a telephone box I am charged 1d. for a call. But when I step over the border into the Cape Province I have to pay 3d. It has been suggested that this is because one is under the control of the municipality, and the other under the control of the Government. I cannot accept that. I am informed, not officially, because I could not get it officially, by responsible people in Natal, that this is the best paying part of the service. If the hon. Minister is able to get that confirmed officially I think he will agree that the department wants looking over, at any rate, in this particular connection. There should be no delay in giving the reduced price that they have in Natal throughout the service throughout the Union. It is distinctly wrong that because one is a municipal service and the other a Government service that there should be a difference of 200 per cent. A further point I want to put before the Government is this. The Minister of Finance will agree that there has been a request from time to time for an Imperial penny postage. I have not advocated it, but I do see a way out. The reply from the Government indicates that there is no desire not to give this penny postage save that it will cost some £30,000 to £40,000 a year. The Government is apparently in agreement on the principle. In this increase in telegraphs, I think you will find there is an increase of 22 per cent, which must be because the price is lower. If you extend this right throughout the service you will not want an increase of 22 per cent., but if you get an increase of 5 per cent, you will get more money and extra profit which I submit will pay for the cost of the penny postage. If you get down to reasonable charges and go into the matter seriously and bring about an increase in the turnover of five per cent., that is less than a quarter of the reduction in telegraphs, then I submit you have the means of giving the country Imperial penny postage. It may not be practical politics at the present time, but it will mean a tremendous lot in sentiment and sentiment does count in these days. I want to show how the Government have treated the people in this country in their demands from time to time for a reduction in these charges. The Associated Chambers of Commerce have honestly tried to help the Government and to encourage them to reduce their charges and develop their department in order to make it more satisfactory both to the department and to the public. Resolutions which were passed in 1926, and 1927, 1928 and 1929 were on precisely all fours. They drew attention to the extraordinary anomaly in Government telephone charges at 3d. and the municipal charges at 1d. The Government in their reply said—

I do not believe there is a country on the earth where you get a call for a 1d. in one province and where you have to pay 3d. in another. I do not think it exists.

We have an explanation for that, and the hon. member has heard it very often.

I should be glad to have the explanation. I am informed there is more profit at 1d. charges by the municipalities than the Government makes out of a charge of 3d. This leaves one bewildered.

The 3d. is only charged in call boxes.

It does not matter whether you charge 3d. to a man in his office or in his house, but you should charge the man in the street 1d. The man who goes to a call box can least afford to pay the 3d. This is the continuation of the Government’s reply—

These are arguments which can only be met by further arguments. Then with regard to overseas postage, this is the reply of the Government and I am reading it because I want to show the nature of the Government’s reply and the stone wall attitude of the Government—

Of course, you cannot, so long as you tie up the department as it is. The reply goes on to say—

We have to bear in mind that when a letter weighs more than an ounce the postage to Great Britain is higher than it is to foreign countries. The last resolution states that the regulations relating to book post require revision. The department might concede these requests very gracefully without any loss of revenue, but with considerable benefit to the commercial community. I have never known the price of an ordinary commodity being decreased without a resultant increased demand, and I take it that the same rule would apply to the post office. For instance, if the cost of sending a telegram were reduced from 1s. 3d. to 1s. the department would probably make more money. So I plead for reasonable reductions in the belief that they would lead to an extension of business. I see no reason whatever why the department cannot extend its great sphere of usefulness. As it is, it is one of the great service departments of the state, and is of considerable credit to the country.

I find it incumbent on me rather to increase the amount of the proposed reduction in the Minister’s salary, not that I want to lower the Minister’s standard of living, for a moment, but in order to enable me to draw attention to certain items of his policy which react rather disadvantageously to the general condition of things in the country, and incidentally that more particularly applies to his own department. I move—

In order to draw attention (a) to the intensive unemployment caused by the general introduction of the automatic telephones; (b) his failure to increase the number of postmen to cope with the work; (c) the increase in the hours of female duties to 9 p.m.; (d) the discharge of artisans from the Public Works Department when unemployment is rife and increasing and (e) in order to call attention to the Minister’s surrender to the Wireless Company of South Africa by issuing it a licence to operate at a terminal rate of one penny per word, and by decreasing efficiency by degrading the engineering branch. [After consulting Deputy-Chairman.] I understand from the Deputy-Chairman that my efforts to reduce the Minister’s salary do not quite meet with his approval in the extensive form in which I have moved it, and that the Deputy-Chairman suggests that the motion is somewhat discursive. However, I hope that in the course of my remarks the Deputy-Chairman will allow me to make some reference to these points. The Deputy-Chairman has confined the terms of my reduction to the Minister’s determination to introduce automatic telephones, as a general policy. I have consistently opposed the introduction of automatic telephones, not because I have any great objection to them as such, and not that I have said they have proved a failure, but owing to the peculiar circumstances of the country where you cannot provide alternate employment for those either displaced by or being prevented from obtaining employment by the introduction of automatic telephones. We have no right to introduce automatic telephones unless it can be shown that they are far superior to the best class of manual telephone exchanges. Let me urge this upon the commercial community who are in this House, that if they think for one moment, as I have heard commercial men who advocate the introduction of automatic telephones say they believe, they are likely to get their telephones very cheaply, all I can say is they are making a very big mistake indeed.

More reliable.

Without contesting that for a moment, if they are not so superior as to warrant men and girls being thrown on to the street, you have no right to urge the introduction of automatic telephones. All the reports I have had from England, particularly where, during the last two or three years in the London areas they are introducing automatic telephones, state that there have been numerous complaints, and that they are very unreliable. The “Daily Mirror,” which stands, I understand, very high in the opinion of England as a news distributing agency, has constantly drawn attention to their unreliability, and compared them unfavourably with the manually-operated ones. Those who think they are going to get their telephones more cheaply when they become automatic are living in a fool’s paradise. In no country in the world has the cost been reduced as a result of their introduction. Whatever argument may be used when the country is prosperous, surely that argument cannot be used now. In addition to that it must be remembered you do not get your automatic installation as cheaply as your manual. The Minister will no doubt tell us that the capital cost is at least twice that of manual telephones, and I have yet to learn that the period of activity of the automatic telephones is any longer. My engineering experience tells me their life will probably be shorter. In answer to the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan), the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs intimated that the tenders they have accepted for the installations of Cape Town and Johannesburg would be approximately £750,000. The interest on that would be more than double our interest commitment on the capital cost of manual installations at both places of an equal service, and assuming, as has been argued, that you must save at least 50 per cent, of your personnel at the exchange, you still have 50 per cent, of that interest left which you are paying out as dead money. Taking £750,000 at 4½ per cent., the annual interest is £33,750, one-half of which is more than sufficient to pay the year’s salaries of the whole of the telephone staff of either one of those telephone exchanges. The net result is not an increase in efficiency to the commercial man or anybody else. The only advantage they get, and it is a doubtful one, is instantaneous release, and that you are open at once to another call. Demonstrations were given to show how you got connection in half the time of automatics with the manual. I tested it myself. In a number of three figures you cannot dial in three seconds, which is the average service on manuals, and you yourself are liable to make mistakes. The Minister may argue that as to the Port Elizabeth system—and he may be reinforced by the hon. members who represent that constituency— that community is perfectly satisfied. That is very natural, because they are making their comparisons, or rather their contrasts, with their experience of the old manual installation they had there, which was, admittedly, one of the most unsound ones it was possible to have —it was old and water-logged—and the whole service was wrong. But I make bold to state that if they had an up-to-date manual system there, instead of an automatic, they would be just as pleased, and they would have a large number of people earning a decent living engaged in operating it. You have the service growing, and it would take anything from three to five years to introduce the automatic. The estimates of to-day reflect the system on the terms of girls and men. May I say a word about an item of information which reached me, which astounded me? When I was in the post in which the Minister is now, I was fortunate enough to be able to bring about a reduction in the hours, and a state of affairs where no girl in the post office was to work after 6 o’clock. I want hon. members to try to imagine a Labour man boasting of making it impossible for girls to work after 6 o’clock.

The hon. member must confine himself to what he has introduced—automatic telephones.

Is that not the natural corollary of what I am discussing? I found that they were working till nine, and on the principle of having to tread very gingerly indeed, I reduced their hours to 6 o’clock. It did not mean a reduction of three hours a day, but their shifts were so arranged that they worked until 6 o’clock. Now, I understand that the Minister has re-introduced the 9 o’clock arrangement. I think it is most undesirable for a girl to be working in these places until 9 o’clock, especially in the case of the small exchanges, where there is one man and one girl. There is also the general distaste one has for girls to be working at a time when they should be off duty. I did without it, and this work after 6 o’clock could be done without as far as the employment of girls is concerned. And the way in which the Minister brought it about, if my information is correct, is worse still, because I understand that the cupidity of the girls was appealed to, and that they were put on overtime. Hon. members know that the salaries which these girls get are not overwhelmingly good. They got used to working till 9 o’clock by being paid overtime, and after they had got used to this shift, it was instituted as an ordinary shift. I want the Minister to deny this, because I should hate for a Minister, who claims to be Labour, though he cannot establish the claim, to have done such a thing as to introduce a 9 o’clock rule for girls after another Minister had abolished it.

I merely wanted to know whether the Minister was in a position to make a statement in connection with the wireless broadcasting service in South Africa. I mentioned the matter under this vote last year, and he promised to make further enquiries during the recess. I dealt with the financial aspect of the undertaking, and some people who are interested in the service are afraid that the broadcasting would be stopped. As the Minister knows, there are also many complaints that the service is not answering its purpose, or, at any rate, that the promises originally made have not been fulfilled to a great extent. I felt that it was very undesirable that the monopoly for broadcasting in this country should be in the hands of a company which, to a great extent, also has a monopoly with regard to places of amusement. The fear exists that it will be so manipulated that they will give the public the service which will not conflict or injure the amusements which they provide for the public in other places. Another grievance which is felt by the Afrikaans-speaking public is the little Afrikaans in the broadcasting service, a great portion of which amounts to Afrikaans. The way in which announcements are made is often in such poor Afrikaans that one prefers to close down the instrument. All the Afrikaans that there is, is, moreover, given when the people are tired of listening in; then a small bit of Afrikaans is added at the most inconvenient time of the evening. As the Minister is, to a certain extent, responsible and collects the money, I want again to ask him to go into the matter fully. It will be said that there are more English-speaking subscribers in the towns, but I do not believe that they know how many Afrikaans-speaking ones there are. In any case, a much greater use could be made of it on the countryside if the news were properly announced. I have met many people who say that they will buy a set when the broadcasting of the Afrikaans section is more satisfactory. Will the Minister enquire if we cannot have a kind of national broadcasting service? There is great need in South Africa of an efficient service, and perhaps it is possible on the lines of the broadcasting service in England. There you have the British Broadcasting Corporation which has done a tremendous amount to make it a national matter of great educational value. A good service here may also be of great importance to the children and adults of the countryside. I would suggest that the Minister considers a possibility of making a semi-national service of it, like, e.g., the electricity commission, which is cheap enough to enable the farmers to make use of the service for educational purposes.

I want to bring up a matter in connection with the automatic telephone installations, but not on the same lines as the hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Madeley), because I think his objection is very similar to the objection raised to the introduction of railways, that they did away with primitive methods of transport. I want to raise an important matter. I asked a question in the House the other day as to whether it was a fact that the Government has entered into an agreement for the installation of automatic telephones in Johannesburg and Cape Town, without calling for public tenders, and the answer I got was that the Government had made an agreement with certain firms for the installation, over a period of five years, of automatic telephones in Cape Town and Johannesburg, at a cost of £750,000, without calling for public tenders. The explanation which the Minister offered was that, although they had not called for public tenders, yet they had asked for quotations from the only firms who could supply this particular kind of plant, and the Minister offered to show me the agreement. I am sorry I have not been able to see the agreement, but every morning all one’s time here is occupied in select committee, and one has not the time to attend to anything else. But it is not the agreement that I want to attack. What I want to attack is that a contract of this magnitude should be entered into without calling for public tenders. I thought there was a regulation that contracts over a certain figure have to be submitted to tender, but apparently in a contract of this magnitude, it is possible to dispense with the usual formality. The Minister told me that he had asked various firms to quote, and that these firms were the only firms who could supply this particular plant. Well, I am informed by the Johannesburg Chamber of Commerce—who should know something about this matter—that this is not the case; that, in addition to those manufacturers who were asked for quotations, there are three other well-known manufacturers, whose names I am prepared to give to the committee. I do not see why it should be a matter of secrecy. The names are, The Peel Connor Telephones, represented by the British General Electric Company; the Standard Telephone Manufacturing Company; and Ericsson’s Telephone Company of England and Sweden, represented by a certain other company. My information is that there are several other telephone companies who have not been asked for quotations. I ask the Minister, what harm would it have done to give these other people an opportunity to tender? If they were not in a position to supply this plant, I take it they would have replied to that effect, and if they were in a position to compete, their tenders would be rejected. This is a contract for £750,000 extending over five years. Until this question was brought up, I do not think anybody knew a word about it. It was done in the dark. I am not saying that there was anything wrong or improper, but I am criticizing the fact that the Government should be committed to a contract of this size without tenders being called for. Apart from giving these other people an opportunity of saying what they can do, it is a breach of treasury regulations, and I want to ask the Minister why it was done.

We have heard a good deal this afternoon about the automatic telephones, and we wonder whether those people who are getting the automatic service have not already received many things. The hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Madeley), moreover, says that those people will not get their telephones a penny cheaper. We should like the Minister to tell us whether automatic telephones will be cheaper than the present system. But my point is that I want to appeal to the Minister to bear in mind those thousands of farmers who have applied for telephones, and whose applications have now, for years, been delayed in the postmaster-general’s office. I want to say at once that we appreciate what the Government has already done, viz., that thousands of lines have already been built during the past five years, but this does not detract from their great interest in the telephone and its development of the country, and, consequently, many more applications are being made. This is one of the things on which the farmer will never ask for any writing off, or in connection with which he will be in arrear with his payments, because the farmer knows that the telephone will be removed if he does not fulfil his obligations. It is, however, so valuable to the farmer to-day that he will never let it go that length. I understand that during the past five years about £500,000 has been spent on telephone lines in the Union, and if my information is correct— I speak under correction—then about £125,000 was spent on farm telephones, i.e., about one-quarter of the whole amount. All other money was used for the urban lines and main lines. We noticed in a photograph a few weeks ago how the Minister and the postmaster-general sat in the post office in Cape Town talking to Port Elizabeth. This was the first time that a through conversion took place with Port Elizabeth, and we observed that both were very much pleased with the connection. I should like to have a farmer photographed when he gets the telephone in his house for the first time, and I think if the Minister saw that photograph he would immediately comply with all the applications for farm telephones. I want to make an earnest appeal to the Minister to meet the farmers in this. Telephones are no longer a luxury to-day, they are just as necessary as motor-cars. I want to point out that the farmers, in many cases, only get their post once or twice a week, and that they live far away from the village and from the doctor, and if the Minister will try and put himself in that position, then he will certainly devote the greatest part of the £500,000 for those people.

I want to support the hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Henderson) in his appeal to the Minister to consider the reduction of charges. I think he has made out a strong case. You can post a letter in London to South Africa for l½d. but for the same service you have to pay 2d. in South Africa. I do not know if there is any sound reason for it. Perhaps the Minister would explain the matter. In regard to telephones, in Natal for many years past, people have paid 1d. whereas in other parts of the Union we have to pay 3d. I put this question to the Minister in January last with regard to both these charges. We ascertained then, and we know that a commercial man in Johannesburg pays £9 for 900 calls. For any calls thereafter he pays l½d. per call. The private individual pays £7 for 600 calls. That, in itself, appears to be very strange, why a man who has a store should pay £9 for 900 calls, and a man in a private house should pay £7 for 600 calls. Then we got an explanation of it which has puzzled me ever since I have had it. It points out that the calls are, as I have stated, £9 for a business man and £7 for a private house. Then the Minister goes on to explain—

Let us go to school for a moment, and examine that. I am told that because I live in my house on the hill I pay £7 for 600 calls. Whether I exhaust them or not, the charge is still £7. The man in town pays £9, but not until he has exhausted 900 calls does he pay any extra amount. The Minister endeavoured to show me that the man in a private house pays less, and that he is not at a disadvantage contrasted with a man in business. That is one of the things which no one can understand. I have endeavoured to find out what was working in the mind of the Minister or of the gentleman who subtly supplied him with the information. I ask the Minister, and hon. members, to look at it this way. If a man goes into a store and buys something for £9, and another man buys something for £7, you are trying to convince me that the man who paid £7 for his calls gets off less than the business man. That is beyond my comprehension. I do not understand it. I do not see why a man should pay for his first 100, £1 3s. 4d. as against the man in an office who pays only £1. There is another matter to which I would draw attention. We find there is a figure set down in the estimates, a new item of £36,000 subsidy towards the Transcontinental Imperial Airway. If we refer to the item on page 192 of the estimates, we find an explanatory footnote which says that this £36,000—

I do not see where the other £64,000 for the first year’s subsidy finds its place. It does not tell us here. It does not tell us where it is coming from. The first £60,000 is only portion of the first year’s payment of £120,000. I think we should have a full explanation what the Minister means by a subsidy towards the Trans-Continental Imperial Airways. We have now an airway service every week from Cape Town, and vice versa to Cape Town, in order to meet the mailboat on its arrival, and in order also to get away mails by the Friday’s boat. This is a very expensive service. Perhaps the hon. Minister will tell us how many letters or parcels, or whatever they are, are taken away on Monday on the arrival of the boat, to Port Elizabeth, East London, the Transvaal and other places, and what the cost of it is. Then I should like to ask what revenue we derive from it in return. Likewise, I should like similar information in regard to mails coming from the north to Cape Town. It seems to me from the little information I have got on the subject, that it is a very costly affair. Some people will get their letters in Johannesburg, it is true, late on Monday night or early on Tuesday morning, whereas the ordinary individual gets his letters and papers on Tuesday night. When the country embarks upon an expenditure of this nature, there must be some quid pro quo, some advantage to the country. This present arrangement, apparently, is only to the advantage of a few individuals, and this country has to pay this enormous sum in order to permit a few people to get their letters earlier than the ordinary individual. Of course, anybody can avail himself of the service by paying an extra fee, but is the country itself getting full advantage of the money spent? I hope the Minister will give us the fullest possible information when he replies.

I am very glad that the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) has raised the question of automatic telephones. I knew nothing of the intention of instituting an automatic system. I so far agree with him as to say that I am in favour of calling for tenders. If the Government departments make more use of the tender system they will often save the state much money. What I feel, however, is that £300,000 is being here voted for automatic telephones in the towns while on the countryside there is a very great need for telephonic communication. I cannot see why this £300,000 should be spent in the towns while there are so many farmers who are not able to get a telephone, moreover, there are to-day hundreds of persons who work in the telephone exchanges, and they will of course have to be discharged if the automatic system is introduced. A number of them will be unemployed. I think this matter can stand over a few years longer, and I hope that the Minister instead of it will see that the farmers get better facilities from the Government. They do not want them gratis, and the state will get a good revenue from the lines that are built. I know of a case where a short line has to be constructed to connect a farmer with an existing line; he has been worrying for years, but he cannot get it. I hope the Minister will give attention to the matter of the farmers getting their rights.

I understand a notice has been served for the closing down of the post office at Thibet, district of Tarkastad, which is in my constituency. Although it has been there for very nearly 70 years. It serves one of the most progressive and up-to-date farming communities that we have in South Africa, and serious inconvenience would be caused if it were closed. I sincerely hope the Minister will cancel the order for its closing. At Queenstown, we have one of the best landing places for aeroplanes in the country, and we should like it to be made an official aerodrome for the aerial post. Its situation is unique and it would serve a very large area including Cathcart, Sterkstroom, Steynsburg, Molteno and Woodhouse, as well as a very large portion of the Transkeian territories. I thank the Minister on behalf of the population for erecting additional telephone lines in the Sterkstroom district. I want the Minister to do a little more and that is to have a linesman at Sterkstroom. At present if any of these telephone lines go wrong they have to send for a man to Queenstown, a distance of anywhere from 35 to 50 miles. This, I hope, the Minister will see will cause a considerable amount of unnecessary inconvenience.

The hon. member for Somerset (Mr. Vosloo) spoke about house telephones, but I want to talk about telephones in my district. I have been doing so for years, and I have got one connection, and yet the state of affairs is still the same, that between Vryburg and Kuruman, two neighbouring villages, and Vryburg, and Schweizer Reneke there is as yet no direct telephonic connection. There is a connection by a detour, but no direct connection. My great complaint, however, is with regard to the countryside. Bechuanaland is a large, and extended area, and it can no longer be said that it is not occupied. It is fairly thickly populated to-day, and there are farmers who live 100 to 150 miles from the nearest village. What is the position of such a man and his family in the case of serious illness? I believe that Bechuanaland is good enough for any man to live in and to make a living there, but the people are frightened away by bad communication. It has occurred there that a man has been seriously ill and sent for the doctor, but he has recovered or was buried when the doctor arrived. I admit that the Postmaster-General and his department are kindly disposed, and when I insist I get a few miles, but they should also bear the other districts in mind. When I get ten miles the district of Somerset, e.g., where there is already an extended telephone network, also has to get ten miles. I want to ask whether it is not fair for districts which have practically no communication to-day to be prepared a little. Let a little more be spent on those districts. The position with us is so serious that I appeal to the Government if they have to economize to start last on this vote. Telephonic connections throughout the Union are indispensable, but with us it is a matter of life or death. We must have them. Bechuanaland is still a few years in arrear of all other districts, and it ought not to be so. It is a magnificent country and I appeal to the Minister to help us.

The hon. member for Heidelberg (Mr. S. D. de Wet) raised another very important feature with regard to the expenditure of public money on automatic telephone installations. His point was that the post office is allowed only a limited amount for capital expenditure, and obviously if an unduly large proportion of that amount is expended on automatic telephones, it is bound to react adversely on the countryside, as a smaller sum would be available for telephone extensions in the country. The hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) rather did me an injustice in suggesting that I was trying to be a reactionary in regard to telephones, but there is this to be said that all over the world this question of the wholesale introduction of labour-saving machinery is becoming a problem which is having a tremendous effect on labour. America, in fact, has opened an enquiry into the subject because it has been alarmed to find that no fewer than 3,000,000 people have been thrown out of work in consequence of the extended Introduction of labour-saving machinery. Personally I do not object to labour-saving machinery so long as it is used not to deprive people of employment, but to reduce the toil of people in work by reducing the number of their hours of labour. An agreement has been reached between representative employers and employees, in Cleveland, I think it is, so that in order to cope with the situation, to make the best use of labour-saving machinery and prevent people from being thrown out of work, they will reduce the hours of labour to five a day and have five working days a week. If they agree to that as a principle, they are going to work to that end. I want to use labour-saving machinery in the interests of the whole of the people, and not of a few. There is another matter with which I wish to deal, and that is the failure of the Minister to increase the number of the men engaged in postal delivery. The Minister may correct me, if I am wrong, but I am told that these had a longer round of delivery; instead of, as the work increases, making a few more do the work, they are worked harder. From my own personal observations—and I took the opportunity of doing so when I was in office—the postman’s job is a very hard one indeed. He starts off with a haversack on his back of a tremendous weight, I think it is 30 pounds, and he has to climb up hills, footsore, weary, working all the day long delivering letters and often having to meet with the impertinence of some members of the public; he has a thousand and one difficulties, and is paid insufficiently at any time. I hope the Minister can reassure me on that point. If it is true that there are too few to do the work. I hope he will see the Public Service Commission and impress on them the necessity of their realizing that a Government department should at least have some claim to being humanitarian; that he will at once see that more are being employed. Another thing was the statement made by the Minister which alarmed me very much indeed in which he said he had entered into an agreement for seven and a half years to come with the Wireless Company of South Africa at one penny per word for telegrams—the very thing about which I instituted arbitration proceedings. I wanted to recover £25,000—a year’s recovery at one penny per word—which the department was losing through what I call, “this iniquitous arrangement.” The Minister has gone one further to make it considerably worse and to put the country under the disability of being £25,000 per annum to the bad. It is wrong and bad, and not looking after the interests of the public of South Africa. Whereas the average person has to pay a minimum of 1s. 3d. for every telegram of 12 words, the wireless company pays anything from 5d. to 1s., depending on the number of words of a telegram. We have to pay 1s. 3d. whether it is only three or four words, including the address. I am credibly informed the average message of the company is six words. The Minister has argued and may argue that you cannot have differential rates as between the Beam Company and the Cable Company. It is a fallacious argument, and all the more fallacious because of the merger which has taken place between the Cable and the Wireless people; it is to the detriment not only of South Africa, but to the whole British Commonwealth of Nations, which is in the grip of this merger. It has guaranteed a return to them which will make the mouth of every business man water if he could only see such a return on his business, big as it is. I want both sides of the committee to be cognizant of our being prevented from getting a revenue of at least £25,000 per annum—which is constantly growing because of the increase of business. I want also to draw attention to the situation which is growing in the engineering branch. I find the Minister has so impregnated that branch with men who are not technical, not fully and properly qualified that he is making it a perfect, farce. Openings for our lads to be trained are becoming fewer and fewer, and they are being filled by clerical men. [Time limit.]

I just want to draw the Minister’s attention to page 188, to postmasters and their salaries. It has been represented to me that five postmasters ranging from £700 to £900 per annum are in the larger cities, and they are very much underpaid, considering the large amount of business being done. I understand their salaries have been practically at a standstill since 1923, notwithstanding the fact that the revenue of the department has increased just about £1,000,000. On top of this the administration of old age pensions has been placed in their hands, and they are responsible. I want to suggest to the Minister that he might take this up with the Public Service Commission and see that the scale might be increased

I want to ask the Minister what his policy is with regard to the telephone system in Durban, the press of which is full of reports which go to show that the Minister has raised a feeling of uncertainty as to what his policy is. The telephone system in Durban is a municipal one, and so efficiently administered that not only are its charges less than in any other big centre in the Union, but it actually shows a profit. I make no claim for the accuracy of these reports, but I believe they are substantially correct; if they are wrong, the Minister can show where they are wrong. According to these reports the Minister has taken objection to the principle of municipal telephones, on the ground that they show a profit. Will the Minister let us know what his policy is in this regard? I hope he has no intention of taking over the administration of the Durban telephone system as long as it can be shown that it is administered more economically than it could be by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs.

I am sorry that I cannot agree with hon. members who are so strongly opposed to the introduction of automatic telephones, which, in their opinion, would be injurious to the erection of telephones on the countryside. My view is that when automatic telephones have once been established in the towns it will mean such a great saving that the countryside will be all the sooner supplied with telephones. That is a fact because we take a second place to other countries in the establishment of automatic telephones. Other countries introduced it because it led to a saving. I want to congratulate the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs on this step, but now I want to bring my own requirements to his notice. I have already, for several years, applied for certain telephone lines in the district of Laingsburg. Laingsburg is just as nice a country as Bechuanaland, only the people live closer together, but there are very few telephone lines. In some parts the people live a long way from a large village, and they are practically cut off entirely from the world. The lines which are particularly necessary are, e.g., from Danslaagte to Koringplaas, and another line from Anysberg to Sewefontein via Plathuis. Then the line from Muiskraal to Platriver is very necessary. I have repeatedly called the Minister’s attention to this and promises are always made, but the matter is constantly postponed. I admit that my district has been very fairly treated on the whole, but these few lines are very necessary, and I want to bring them again to the Minister’s notice.

I hope that the position of the Minister this afternoon, unsupported by his colleagues, is not an indication of his isolation in the party which he adorns. I want to refer to the ministerial telephones. It is somewhat difficult to follow the method which is adopted in the Minister’s department, in recording Ministers’ telephones in the telephone directory. The first one is that of the Minister himself. In the private section of the telephone book he is described as the Hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs. When I turn to the Prime Minister he is simply Gen. J. B. M. Hertzog. I notice that Gen. Kemp is styled in the same way, but the Minister of Lands is P. Grobler with no title at all, and the same applies to the Minister of Justice, who is simply called O. Pirow. When I turn to the Minister of Finance, he is styled the Hon. H. C. Havenga, and it is also repeated in Afrikaans. He is the only Minister treated in that way. When I come to the Minister of Railways and Harbours I see that he is down as the Hon. C. W. Malan, but his distinguished cousin is simply down as Dr. D. F. Malan. It is somewhat difficult to know why the whole title is not given to other Ministers as well as to the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs. A question was put to the Minister the other day asking what post is held by Mr. J. D. Renecke, and whether he is entitled to take an active part in politics, or in the work of a political party. The Minister said that J. D. Renecke is the chief inspector of postmen, and that he is not entitled to take an active part in politics. I have a pamphlet here, headed “National Party, Pretoria West Provincial Council Election.” It is addressed to the electorate of Pretoria West, and gives the main reason why Mr. de Vries was nominated, but I see that this pamphlet is signed " J. D. Renecke, Chairman of the National Party, Pretoria West branch.” It is also signed by a second person who is a railway servant. What I want to ask the Minister, since he stated very definitely that this gentleman was not entitled to take part in politics at all, is, as to what steps the Minister has taken to see that this gentleman complies with the public service rules and regulations.

Have you ever sent that complaint along?

This gentleman’s name has been published all over the Pretoria West constituency, and the question was asked the other day as to whether he was entitled to take a prominent part in politics. This official has been well-known for the part he is playing in the political life of Pretoria West for many years.

Have you recorded it?

No, but it is well known, and when attention was drawn to it the other day, it should have been sufficient to arouse the Minister’s suspicion that there was something behind it. He should have instituted enquiries to see what was behind it, and he could have found out what part this gentleman has taken. We know it is laid down very definitely that public servants shall not take part in politics, and I think it is a very wise provision indeed. The regulations are very stringent, and I venture to say an action like this—a document signed as chairman of the branch—has never been taken before, and if this gentleman had signed himself as chairman of a branch of the South African party, the Minister would have found that out, and steps would have been taken a long time ago. There is a feeling created that so long as you belong to a certain party you can take any steps you like knowing that no action will be taken by your superiors. It is a matter which has caused grave concern to a large section of the voters in Pretoria, and it seems to me that the Minister should not have waited for the matter to be raised in the House before taking action. That action should have been taken a long time ago.

I hope the Minister and his staff think more clearly than they express themselves. We have listened to a very confused answer to the question put by the hon. member for Von Brandis (Mr. Nathan), who asked the reason for the differentiation between telephone charges in connection with a business office and a private house. The Minister said that there was this differentiation, but that does not answer the question. I do not know whether the Minister’s answer was ‘intended to confuse the issue. I want to refer to the subsidy towards the Transcontinental Imperial Airways Mail and Passenger Service, Alexandria to Cape Town, £36,000. Then there is the convincing footnote that this represents the initial payment of 30 per cent, of first year’s subsidy of £120,000. I want to ask the Minister, when did the service year commence? There is a very large sum involved, and it is a new departure, and in view of the interest in this movement I hope the Minister will give us the fullest information at his disposal in regard to this new service. What proportion is South Africa paying of the total cost?

That has been explained already.

Then I ask what proportion will the other countries pay, when will it definitely commence, and what service will it be, weekly, fortnightly or monthly? We would also like to know the rates of postage it is proposed to charge, what will be the passenger fares, and the approximate time occupied on the journey? I suggest to the Minister that the time has come for a reduction in the cost of telegrams. I think the position might well be examined to see if a revised tariff can be introduced. Why not follow the example of the railways and allow a reduction on reply-paid telegrams in the same way as the railways make a reduction for a double journey. It would probably be found that revenue would not suffer.

I want to refer to the question of the Imperial Airways subsidy. I want the Minister to understand that my remarks are not intended to be in opposition to the project, but I want information in order to be able to convince my constituents and other taxpayers who will ask questions about this matter. The sum on the estimates is only the initial charge, and the total reaches £400,000. I ask the Minister what will be the precise advantages to be derived by the Union in regard to the carriage of postal matter, etc. What control will the Government have in regard to the management of the company, and the application of the moneys voted? Is the Union to have any representation on the board; is the Union a shareholder? We are very anxious not to lag behind where developments of great importance are taking place; but would like to be very convincingly assured that the advantages we are to receive will outweigh the use we might have of the same sum spent on telephone expansion and increased postal facilities. The need is very great on our borders along the Kalahari, and people keenly realize the advantages other areas reap from telephone communication. When we cannot reply to that I personally will be less able to reply to the next question put to me as to why the Government subsidized these international imperial airways.

I want to draw the hon. Minister’s attention to the question of the construction of telephone lines in the country. We know that the system which has been adopted by the Government is to send big gangs into one area to clean up the application for telephones in that particular area. That is a sound and desirable method of procedure. I want to put in a plea for the individual man. We have got cases where these men are far away from any others, and it is not possible for the Government to send out these big gangs. It is hopeless for these men to think that the department can give them the service they want. I have an application which was made by a man 10 years ago. I would bring the whole thing out, but I am rather too shy. I would only like to point out that if the Minister was kept waiting for 10 minutes on the telephone there would be a row. But this man has been ringing up for 10 years, and has not got any reply yet. I think these cases should be treated on a different basis from what is the accepted method of the department to-day. I have put the suggestion to the House before, and I hope the Minister will now give it his most serious attention. That is to send one individual man with his assistants—and war pensioners are eminently suitable for the purpose—to clean up these individual applications all over the country. If this is not done, I can see no hope for these men. I take this opportunity of saying that I am not making any remarks which may be taken as a reflection against the officers of the department. I think, however, that the regulations of the department should be more elastic and adaptable to changing conditions than they are to-day. We have had the most earnest attention from the officers of the department, and we have to give consideration to these men in that they are struggling against difficulties over which, at the present time, they have no control at all. We appreciate the fact that there is an enquiry being made at the present time with a view to assisting farmers where distances are too wide. Some of us have near-by neighbours, and we have the advantage of paying a rental that is reasonable and not too heavy, but in other parts of the country farmers live from 10 to 20 miles apart, and I suggest that the department should assist them with a reduced rate per mile, so that they can have the advantage of a telephone. It is all very well for the man in the town, or the man who lives in a more favoured part of the country. He can get satisfactory service, but where you are living away in the back region without any communications, it is a decided advantage to be able to get into communication with the nearest town in order to secure medical assistance or any other aid that may be badly wanted at any time. If the department can arrange some method whereby a reduction of the charges would not apply to the more thickly-populated parts of the country, so that reductions could be made in the other parts I refer to, I am certain that the farmers in those thickly-populated parts would raise no objections if their rentals were not reduced in order to enable the department to give extra facilities to the farmers situated in the more widely-separated parts of the country. I will illustrate the unfortunate position of some of these officers. I put in an application in the case of a man who had a telegraph line passing alongside of his house. It only wanted one post to enable the line to be carried to his house. The department told me that I would have to have a public call office there. I agreed to that. Then I was told I would have to sign a guarantee that I would get £10 in wires sent through that office by the travelling public. I explained that it would be impossible to do that, but I was prepared to pay the £10 myself. The man told me that under the regulations of the department it was impossible for them to consider such a scheme. That gave me a pain in my side. I asked why that was, and they said that if they did it they would have applications from all over the country. I said that if they could run it as a business concern and get a man to part with £10 a year here and there, they should scoop it in. Why not? It seems to me that half the time of some of the officers is spent building up obstacles and the other half in trying to get round them. We have the same trouble with small towns rated as third-rate post offices where there is no night service. By dint of importunities we got a service eventually, and quite a number of smaller towns elsewhere are now receiving a night service on this particular line. There are individual cases where officers of the department should have a freer hand in order to meet the wishes of the public. Where you can get revenue for the department you should get it, but do not let these men be tied up with red tape. Give them freer action to a certain extent and a little elasticity where you can give service. I mention that in Rhodesia they carried a line through a forest without a single pole, They chopped down the trees and used the branches as poles, and they carried the line over 60 miles in that way. That is what we want here. We should adapt ourselves to the conditions of the country, and give service to the farmers as far as it is humanly possible to do so.

I just want to bring a few things to the Minister’s notice. The first is that at Riversdale the old age pensions are paid out in the post office. They are paid to about 400 people, and it causes great inconvenience, because on that particular day hardly anybody from the countryside can get into the post office. The office is very small, and the clerk cannot attend to the rest of the public. I shall be very glad if the old age pension can be paid out elsewhere. I specially refer to a place in my constituency near Wijdersriver, where there is a great need of public telephones. When we ask for the telephone exchange to be kept open two hours later the Minister tells us that it cannot be done, because it will mean £30 more expenditure. When, however, we look at the estimates, then we see that about £400,000 is being spent on airships. I should very much like to know what we get for that, because, as the hon. member for Hopetown (Dr. Stals) has said, the farmers will ask us to give an account of it, and I shall be very glad if the Minister will tell me what I am to say when asked why the expenditure of £30 is too much in the case of the farmers. I should like to know whether we shall get value for that money.

When I sat down I was referring to the Minister impregnating the engineering department with the clerics. I wish to emphasize that by referring to the views of the South African Telephone and Telegraph Association, as expressed through their organ, “The Live Wire.” Incidentally, they take the Minister to task for saying that there is no longer any friction in the department. The paper states—

When I first tried to divorce the engineering from the clerical side I was met with considerable opposition by this very society, but as the result of experience, they have come to the conclusion that I was right. Continuing, the “Live Wire” says—

No words of mine could convey so clearly and emphatically the position as it is being brought about by the Minister to-day. I do not say the Minister is to blame, for he knows so little about the department, but I think he ought to make the closest enquiry and stop the importation of clerks into the engineering side to do engineering work. I understand they are being sent into the department to learn engineering work, and they are thus depriving the engineers who have a legitimate claim to promotion. That reflects itself in another way in regard to apprentices. We have apprentices in the engineering side of the post office who serve for five years, during which they receive the finest possible training, but under the regulations they are required to work at least 12 months longer as improvers. The result is that when they ought to be regarded—and paid—as journeymen, they get only £210 per annum, which is less than that laid down by the Wage Board as the pay of a competent shop assistant. Let us abolish that indefinite period of improvership; the very most they can get is £240 a year. When they do draw £210 a year, men outside occupying similar positions receive £285. I heartily endorse the request that immediately they have finished their training, they shall receive £285. They are about 25 years of age when their training is concluded, and I am prepared to back them against anybody in the world in their own sphere. At 25 they are of marriageable age, and yet we expect them to work for the miserable wage of £210. It is not right. Both sides of the House will support any improvement in the status of our own trained engineers. Then do not place clerical people into the engineering side, thus blocking the promotion of the engineering staff. Executive officers in the engineering section should be drawn only from the ranks of competent engineers, the state has trained. As to the imperial airways, we are committed to pay them a subsidy of £400,000. I believe the Government has the impression by some peculiar twist that because this company calls itself “Imperial Airways” it is a state concern. It is nothing of the sort. When I was endeavouring to instil air-consciousness into the Cabinet and the country, my idea was that we should build up our own South African air service with a South African personnel—and the latter point is laid down in the contract with the Union Airways— and that our service should link up with the air services of other great countries.

I want the Minister to give an expression of sympathy to a section of the community which deserves well at everybody’s hands. I understand that a broadcasting licence costs 25s., the Government’s share being 2s. 6d. The blind section is the one on whose behalf I make this claim. In England it has received practical sympathy by the enactment of a Bill which makes it possible for every blind person in England, Wales and Scotland to receive a free listening-in licence. We know very well that one of the most popular appeals in the Union was that on behalf of sufferers in our state hospitals for wireless sets, and the public responded extraordinarily generously. In every bed, in every general hospital, there is a wireless set. The Government is receiving nothing for this, and I do not think it wants anything. It costs nothing for the instalment and for the arrangements. There are the blind people in their homes who have had no opportunity for real education in the past, and it was not possible for them usefully to occupy themselves. Wireless installation has afforded them the most wonderful opportunity, not only of being educated, but occupying themselves as well. In all big centres the public respond to appeals made to the various radio societies has been extremely generous, and they have provided very large numbers of listening-in sets, and placed them at the disposal of the welfare societies for the blind. They have asked them to establish them in the homes of blind people. I know the Broadcasting Society is sympathetic to the remission of all expenses of blind listeners-in. If the Minister would make an announcement that he is prepared to consider this sympathetically, the Broadcasting Company will see that they want nothing. All the blind person has to do is to erect an aerial, and the service is provided free. Most of our blind are normally not wealthy, and they would have to go without, as they cannot afford to pay. I ask the Minister, without laying any stress on his imagination and that of the Government, to visualize the difference that the service makes in a blind man’s day. I know one has only to mention this to the Minister to receive his full accord. It will be giving to the blind something they very much appreciate.

Early in the session I raised the question of the tariff of telephone charges made to European traders in the Transkei, and the Minister replied that the rental was £94 per annum to each at a distance of, say, 15 miles from the exchange. There is grave dissatisfaction right throughout the Transkei amongst the traders at this exorbitant charge —practically £8 per month, and very possibly the highest throughout the country. The Minister evidently thought the charge of £94 per annum looked very high, and the Minister’s reply to my questions reminded me very much of the auctioneer who sold a horse. He asked the owner whether he could give any guarantee, and he said it did not look so well. The horse was sold and the purchaser found it was blind. He wanted to get out of his bargain, and the seller replied: “I told you it did not look so well.” The Minister, in his reply, suggested that if only three traders were to apply to come on to the same party line the telephone charge would be £31 6s. 8d. each. I imagine three men in competition being on the same party line! The thing is preposterous. I wish the Minister would give this committee some idea as to the basis on which he arrives at this tariff. These people render public services. The police are able to get into contact with them through their telephones, and if there is any disturbance in their neighbourhood the traders are in a position to get immediately into contact with the police. At 6 per cent, this rental represents a capital of practically £1,600. These materials utilized in the construction of the lines are not going to run away, and the telephone is still the property of the department, so that one would not describe it as a wasting asset. The Minister ought to take this into consideration with a view to reducing the charge. Representations have been made over and over again to the department, and the answer is “plenty of sympathy,” but we know the old saying: “You can get a ton of sympathy, but not half-a-crown in hard cash.” The traders, therefore, do not ask for sympathy, but something more substantial, and that is a substantial reduction in the annual rental.

I want to raise a couple of points and get information from the Minister. I am glad to see the Minister of Agriculture here. Earlier in the session, in answer to a question, the Minister said that the rates for export maize had been reduced up to next month, and after that, they would revert to the normal figure. The answer may have been given by some other Minister. I want to make use of this opportunity of urging upon the Government looking upon this as one of the matters to be dealt with if we have to come to the relief of our maize farmers, who are in a difficult position indeed. At the moment, maize farming is non-remunerative, and it is almost impossible to expect people to continue maize farming. The margin is such that there is very little left. Under those circumstances, the Government and the public will naturally try and see in what direction relief can be found. One direction, undoubtedly, is the cheapening of railway rates and shipping rates on the export of our maize, and I would ask the Minister whether use cannot be made of this opportunity, whilst the farmers are in this distress, to maintain the low rate. There is a low rate for export maize up to June. I am speaking of the mail contract, and, therefore, I am quite within my rights in raising the point here. I raise it to get information, to see whether it is not possible to secure the continuance of the low rate on maize, not only on the past crop, but also on the crop which is coming now. If our farmers are to be charged a higher rate, then it is sure to be a severe handicap upon them. In view of the situation in the country, which is very grave indeed, I would ask the Government whether they cannot move the conference lines to maintain the lowest rates possible. I do not know whether it is possible to reduce the railway rates. I cannot raise that point at this stage. No doubt it will be raised when we get to the railway estimates, but the proper place to raise the question of shipping rates is here. The rates upon maize, years ago, were less than they are to-day. The Minister knows that originally when the old Transvaal Government arranged rates, both railway rates and the shipping rates were very low indeed, and the shipping rates were lower than they are today. The emergency which has arisen is a national emergency.

You want a request made?

We have more than a right to make a friendly request. There is one other matter I want to raise, and that is the position with regard to the Imperial Airways. We are making contributions towards Imperial Airways, but the question is what stage has the matter reached, what progress has been made, and when can we expect this service to be in working order? Arrangements have to be made at this end. I believe a cable tower has to be erected, and that aerodromes have to be constructed. A good deal in the way of arrangements has to be done at this end to inaugurate this service, but so far as I am aware, nothing has been done. Some time ago the Air Minister in England made a statement which was not at all understood in this country. The Air Minister seemed to adumbrate that within a very short period these Imperial Airways would be in working order, and that a regular service would be established from England to South Africa. Everybody here was astonished to see the statement, but no doubt the Minister will be able to tell us what stage this matter has reached, how far their efforts have gone, and when, more or less, we can look forward to this service making a beginning. I hope the Minister will be able to give information on both these points, which, I submit, are of very great importance.

The hon. member for Standerton (Gen. Smuts) brought up the question of the position of the export of maize. When he made his statement and said that, according to a statement by me, the freights on maize would be increased again after the middle of June, I immediately denied it. I never said such a thing, and I cherish the hope that the freights will not only remain as they are, but that the Conference Lines will consider the position of the farmers and still further reduce their tariffs. As hon. members know, we have a shipping board which cooperates with the farmers, and I suggested to them to consult with the farmers and to make contracts with the shipping lines as soon as possible. I agree with the hon. member for Standerton that the position is serious on account of the low price of maize on the world market. The cause of that is that there has been large over-production in other countries, which is now being placed on the world market, and as we, ourselves have a surplus we have to sell our maize at the world price. For that reason it is our duty to assist the farmers as much as possible. During the course of the week there will be a deputation going to the Minister of Railways and Harbours in connection with the reduction of rates on the railways. I am sure the Minister will adopt a sympathetic attitude, but I cannot say, of course, whether it is possible to reduce the rates. As for the Government, however, I can say that everything possible will be done to assist the maize farmers, because if they cannot get a proper price for their produce, then the position will be very serious.

With regard to remissions of penalties to which contractors render themselves liable under contracts entered into with the postmaster-general, the auditor-general has called attention to the remissions made by the postmaster-general from time to time. In fact, every year we find him drawing attention in his report to the fact that penalties incurred are frequently remitted without good and sufficient reason. What are the considerations which influence these remissions? The auditor-general stated that in his opinion the considerations are not good and sufficient. These remissions are becoming very numerous, and I would like the Minister to look into this matter. The auditor-general says that the waiving of these penalties incurred by contractors is decided by the postmaster-general with Treasury approval. The Minister might tell me upon what grounds recommendations for waiving penalties are based, and who is responsible for making the recommendations. The auditor-general states as follows—

These reasons rather pointed to lack of efficiency on the part of officials of the department, which I think should be looked into. Now I come to the considerations under which contractors have secured remissions. Two of the reasons given are pressure of work and inability to secure materials. Are those good reasons why a contractor should be absolved from liability? These are matters as to which the Minister should safeguard himself in the contract and are not good and sufficient reasons for waiving penalties under a penalty clause. Abnormal weather conditions might be a good reason, but not the reasons given by the auditor-general. I have raised the matter before in this House. The auditor-general calls attention to this question very frequently, and I think the attention of the Minister should be called to it as he may alter his views, in regard to his department’s policy in the future in connection with the enforcement of penalty clauses.

There are a few matters which I would like to bring to the notice of the Minister. In various parts of the country districts there are certain local exchanges which exist for the purpose of connecting farmers with one central exchange, and these local or country exchanges have very few subscribers. In some cases there are only one or two party lines connected to them, and every time these people want to talk to their own village, they have to pay at the trunk call rate, 9d. a call. Can the Minister do anything for these people in the way of allowing them a certain limited number of calls to their nearest village free each month. I think in that way he would satisfy these people who are at present under a hardship. They use the telephone very infrequently while other people in the towns use the telephones all day and the department gets nothing out of it. I brought this matter before the Minister’s predecessor, but unfortunately he did not stick long enough to do anything about the question.

I want to refer to these tenders for automatic telephones. Surely the Government would not lose anything by calling for tenders. I do not agree that automatic telephones are unsatisfactory. At Port Elizabeth people are very pleased with them. The hon. member for Benoni said that we had very old-fashioned apparatus, but at any rate we do know to-day when the phones are engaged, while before we felt we were being imposed upon by some of the young people in charge at the exchanges. I would like to refer to the night service for outlying districts. It is a most unfair thing to ask private individuals to undertake this night work without payment. The users of the telephone cannot complain when the man says that he has to take a holiday sometimes, and was not in at the time of the call. That excuse does not help the subscriber, and it seems unfair to ask a private individual to do this work when we have a postmaster in the district and a railway stationmaster. Perhaps some arrangement could be made for co-operation between the Railway Administration and the post office. I would like to support the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Bowen) in what he said in regard to the blind, and I hope something can be done. I think also we have a just claim for reduction of telegram charges. Why not come back to 12 words for a shilling? You will get more telegrams and the public will be more satisfied. Then there is the question of postage between the United Kingdom and South Africa. Why should we pay 2d. when people can send a letter here for three half pence. The same steamers are used and we have to pay one-third more for the service. I hope that the Minister will see what can be done to relieve these little matters. From what was said by the hon. member who spoke before me, there is no doubt that if you get a satisfied public, you will get less complaints and you are going to give a good deal more satisfaction to your own men.

We appreciate the Government’s policy in endeavouring to extend our rural system of telephone lines. We have, however, the strongest objection to the type of instrument that they are using. I refer to the instrument which is attached to the wall, and at which a person has to stand while he speaks into the trumpet. Why cannot we have the type of machine that we used to have prior to this installation? If a farmer is prepared to pay for the type of machine that he requires, I think that it is up to the Government to try to supply him with something more suitable to his requirements. We want a machine to which one can draw a chair in the evening and sit down and have a comfortable chat to one’s neighbour. For that we are prepared to pay. I understand that there is little or no difference between the price of one type and the other. Yet the farmers are put to the inconvenience, without any reasonable cause, of using this unsuitable type of machine. I am quite sure that if the type I refer to was imposed upon the Minister, or upon the postmaster-general, and that every time they were rung up they had to jump up and stand up against the wall, they would very soon have all these instruments out in the street. I think it is a reasonable request to make that the department should discontinue installing this unsuitable instrument and give us something which is far more adaptable to the requirements of the country.

I was engaged in seeking information in regard to the Imperial Airways. The hon. member for Standerton (Gen. Smuts] tackled the matter from another angle. I want to know whether the country is getting value for its money. I was demonstrating that I had hoped, when I was in control, that we would have established our own South African service, operated by a South African personnel, and training our own South African lads. Then having established our South African service on a sound basis, we should launch out for ourselves and capture these trunk routes instead of allowing a foreign person, whether from Great Britain or anywhere else, to come in and capture that trade through the medium of the control of the trunk routes. There is here a sum of £400,000 of our money which we are paying them to put them on a sound, financial footing, and we are thus giving them the opportunity to capture the trade of South Africa, whereas it should be the other way round. I believe that the contract, or the conditions under which this sum of £400,000 is agreed upon, merely covers, so far as the South African personnel is concerned, the words “as far as possible.” We all know what that means. One individual is enough, or even none at all. Our Union Airways’ contract carries with it an obligatory clause that they shall employ a South African personnel. They are doing so. They have established themselves in the case of tremendous difficulties with a mere £8,000 subsidy, and they have carried our mails for the last nine months without any hitch. They have brought our mails regularly under the most difficult circumstances, and I say that we ought to be turning our consideration towards helping our own South African industry, rather than helping an industry which is capturing our trade. We should be capturing it from them. Sentiment should come into this thing, personal sentiment, in addition to patriotic sentiment. In addition, this lad who started our Union Airways is a lad who deserves well of South Africa. He is a lad who has always put the aeroplane service of the country before himself. He has made nothing out of it yet, and he is devoting his whole life and soul to furthering the objects of aviation in South Africa, because he loves it. South Africa will remember what Major Miller did during the war. He not only put South Africa on the map from an air point of view, but he instilled subsequently into the country that air-sense without which you cannot bring an air service along. I know that the agreement has been accomplished and that you are going to help a foreign enterprize to come into South Africa with their own personnel, and with their workshops overseas. The merest skeleton will be introduced in South Africa on their part. They will be running one or two planes a week, if that, and the service will not he of very great value to South Africa. However, we have agreed to give them £400,000. If that is so we have the right to say that the time has arrived to be a little more generous in our treatment of our own aviation company in South Africa. Whilst I do not suggest for a moment that you should break your word, you should give them the £400,000, I urge the Minister to consider very seriously the desirability of doing something more for our own local aviation service. There is one point that can be done in addition to helping them with capital expenditure or credit for extending their service, and heaven alone knows we have learnt the value of an aviation service, and that is that the extension will be looked upon with pleasure by the vast majority of the people of South Africa. There is the question of the surcharge on letters. I was never happy about it when I instituted it. I did it on the understanding that before very long it would come down. The union airways have filled the Bill. They have done everything they undertook to do. Their contract has been completely fulfilled. There is not a person, other than a South African, employed by the Union Airways. Is it not time for us to consider this question of the surcharge and attempt to make the service a little more popular? The hon. member who raised this point asked how people could afford it. He is quite right. We cannot afford the 4d. surcharge to carry a letter to Durban or to Port Elizabeth. It cannot be done. I suggest that it be a regular means of carriage; drop the surcharge altogether or reduce it considerably. I think the Government should go into the matter with the heads of the Union Airways with a view to helping them to finance themselves and be spreading this all over the country. Personally I would rather it was a state service but in preaching that in this House I am preaching to people who are prepared to laugh at the idea. As an alternative let us have something South African and not imported from abroad. Let us have a service run by South Africans born or by people who have lived here many years. Then let us have our own workshops and give financial assistance to South African aerial services. There is another matter; in other parts of the world, and particularly in England, portable flood lights are being installed at aerodromes to enable safe landings to be made at night. If the Government cannot do this itself, it should bring its influence to bear upon local authorities to provide flood lights. I understand the Government is going to erect a wireless station for Imperial Airways, but I would ask it first to turn its attention to South African air services and give them a little bit of help. As to broadcasting, I understand permission has been given to various churches to have their sermons broadcast. I also understand that the minister who was largely responsible for the introduction of this system is the very man who, singularly enough, has been deprived of having his services broadcast. I refer to the Rev. Mr. Balmforth, a brilliant, earnest and sincere man, and if anyone has the right to have his services broadcast, it is he Lots of people would very much like to hear his services and it is desirable that all churches should have a chance. [Time limit.]

I regret that the department is slavishly wedded to connecting farmers to small telephone exchanges. Supposing a farmer who is ten or twelve miles away from a central exchange, applies for a telephonic connection, should there happen to be a railway station exchange near him, he must be content to be connected with that. The use of the telephone to the farmer is, therefore, considerably curtailed, and its utility materially reduced as the hours at a small railway exchange are only from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and for one hour a day, the railway exchange is closed during the luncheon interval. On the other hand, if a farmer is connected with the Caledon telephone exchange, he has the use of the telephone from 7 a.m. to 12 midnight without any breaks for meals. His neighbour is compelled to go to the small station or to the small new exchange away from the main exchange, and has the same financial responsibility as the other. The result is many farmers refuse to be connected up. I know of a case where the large majority of farmers are connected with the main telephone exchange in Caledon, but other farmers who come along are told they must connect up with the station. The result is they refuse to do so. There is no postmaster at the railway station, and people who use the telephone there have to do so at the convenience of the stationmaster, who is often engaged. Take another case personally brought to my notice—the seaside resort of Onrust River, four miles away from Hermanus, where an exchange was established at the hotel. People using the telephone have to go to this exchange, and the result is nobody connects up. Through force of circumstances I had to connect up, but could get nobody to speak to at Onrust River, which is a rising township. If I speak to Hermanus I have to pay my fee, and I have to pay from £7 to £10 for absolutely no service. That is not business. If you increase your staff it will be of great benefit to all the surrounding country. I hope the Minister will give this practice of the department his attention, and see that an alteration is brought about. It is one from which the department will not depart.

There is an item in the report of the postmaster-general I should like to draw attention to. It is under the heading of undeliverable mail matter. We find that there have been sales of undeliverable articles, which realized £264. Will the Minister say what steps are taken by the department to get into touch with the senders of the parcels? We have all had experience of parcels having gone astray. I cannot find any trace of what has become of this £264 in the general profit and loss account of the department. Is it included in miscellaneous revenue? We know that on the form filled in, giving the name of the addressee, the addressor, too, has to furnish his name and address. Surely it is possible for the department to get into touch with the sender of every parcel. The amount is very small, but there is a large principle at stake, and I hope the Minister will explain what is done in such cases. I want to associate myself very strongly with the appeal made by the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Bowen) with regard to the blind. I have always taken a very keen interest in the welfare of the blind. It is a small service that is asked for, but it will be very highly appreciated, and I hope the Minister will treat the representations made to him sympathetically.

There are a few places in my constituency that are particularly badly served with regard to telephones. For more than two years some people have been applying for telephone lines without success. We also have the same difficulty as that to which the hon. member for Caledon (Mr. Krige) referred. We have, e.g., a telephone connection six miles outside the village, and the duty hours are from 8.30 a.m. to 1 p.m., and 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., while other places, more or less in the same position, have the full service from 8 a.m. to late in the night, sometimes until midnight. We apply for connection with Robertson, so that we can have the full service, or, if that is impossible, for someone who can give his sole attention to the telephone service, so that everything is not left in the hands of the station-master who already has a very large amount of work. We applied to be joined up with Robertson after 5 p.m., but the answer was that it is not possible, because Swellendam is connected with Cape Town, and then we would conflict with them. I think the request is a fair one. I want to point out that Montagu in particular, a certain part of Swellendam, and Robertson are badly served with regard to telephones. People applied for them years ago, and some even deposited money which was repaid to them because the lines could not be constructed. I hope the Minister will give more attention to our requirements.

I want to call attention to the very serious position in regard to maize. Last year we exported some 6,000,000 bags, and had a surplus of 12,000,000 for consumption in this country. It is anticipated that there will he a 25,000,000 production, and if there is to be the same consumption, we shall have 19,000,000 bags in our hands. The consumption in this country may be even less, due to the fact that we have magnificent pastorage owing to the recent rains. The freight on maize to England is 22s. 6d. I remember the time when freight was 10s. per ton, and if freight can be reduced, there will be a better opportunity to compete on the world’s market. Only to-day maize was offered at 7s. a bag ex elevator. This is a price which my farmer friends will agree cannot pay the farmer. There are bag charges, transport and threshing, and what will the farmer get? Only 3s. or 4s. a bag. Can farmers produce at that price? I suggest that the Minister should try to make better terms with the shipping companies. The country is in a parlous condition in regard to the prices to be obtained, not only for maize but also for oats, barley and even lucerne seed, which is 3d. per lb.—an unheard of price. It is usually 5d. or 6d. Probably efforts are being made to get a reduction of freight rates, but I think that if stronger efforts are made the farmer will get relief. I want to associate myself with what was said by hon. members on the other side of the House in regard to telephones. I have had the honour of being in this House for seven years, and from the first year I have asked for several communications in my old constituency. I was told that they had been put down tentatively on the programme. It still remains tentative. That is not right. My old constituency and other districts are crying out for telephones, and they are prepared to pay for them. Here you have a huge province like the Western Province, which, I think, includes right up to the northwest, to Colesberg, and comes down to Oudtshoorn, and a paltry sum is put down on the estimates. That is not fair. Besides, I hold that the farmers should be acquainted with the various prices of produce. I, as a storekeeper, feel that if the farmer knows the prices at which produce is sold, it is conducive to him to get better prices. I agree with my hon. friends over there that something more must be done. It is a business concern, and I think it is about one of the only profitable concerns of a Government, There is every reason why money should be expended, and in any case, it will give a lot of employment to our own people in this country. I again appeal to the Minister that more determination should be shown by the members of the Government in regard to freight for our products.

The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Bowen) made a reference to the South African Broadcasting service. Quite a number of speakers this afternoon have approached this question forgetting, I think, that the question of the service is in the hands of a private company, and not in the hands of a broadcasting corporation as it exists in Great Britain where the Government, undoubtedly, have a very big say in the matter of the service given to the consumers. I want to point out to the hon. member and to other hon. members, that the Government did consider that matter when the Radio Act was passed in 1926. In sub-section (3) of section 8 they made provision in that Act by which “a licence may, in the discretion of the poet-master-general, be issued without charge to charitable and educational institutions and hospitals.” Provision is, therefore, made where a blind man happens to be in an institution, that the broadcasting company may waive the whole question of cost and give free service if they are so disposed. I know of instances where such services have been given at the present day, if not at a free cost, at least, at a nominal cost. If the hon. member means that the Government should instal a service for every blind man all I can say is, that that would be a very heavy financial liability upon the Government which they would have to consider very seriously. Arising out of the same matter, several hon. members have complained that the service is not given to the countryside to the extent they would like.

Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 8.5 p.m.