When this debate was adjourned last evening I had indicated that we on this side of the House intended supporting this Bill and that we would move certain amendments in the Committee Stage, amendments which we believe necessary in order to improve this Bill

We realize that this is a Bill which is based on the original Act of 1947 which Act has achieved a great deal in regard to the control and registration of welfare organizations. Certain amendments were effected to that Act in 1961. At that time we stated certain points of view and we still hold those points of view in regard to this Bill.

The whole essence of the Welfare Organizations Act is the establishment of the National Welfare Board and we wish to pass some comments in this regard. The original board consisted of 24 members and that number is now to be reduced to 15. We agree that it is necessary to streamline the functioning of that board. I know from personal experience that it has and does sometimes take two to three years before the necessary formalities are met, before registration takes place and before the organization that is being formed can start functioning as a welfare organization, appeal to the public for funds and so forth. An organization is invariably formed to meet a specific need which has arisen at the time. It is important, therefore, that such an organization should be registered as soon as possible so that it can start functioning. It is gratifying to note that one of the commissions to be appointed by the hon. the Minister will be a commission to deal with the registration of welfare organizations.

The National Welfare Board is to be the controlling board of all facets and aspects of welfare work which is part of the functions of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions and certainly a most important part of the functions of the over 2,000 registered welfare organizations. It is felt that we should have, as far as possible, a cross-section of the interested persons, bodies and organizations represented on this board.

When you look at the composition of the old board, which is now to be reconstituted on a regional basis of nine representatives from the regions plus one from the Department of Social Welfare and five others to be appointed by the Minister, we find that, in terms of Clause 15 of the Bill, a nomination list will be required to be submitted by the various regional areas from which the hon. the Minister will appoint his regional boards and his various commissions.

When one studies the list of members of the existing board of 24 members one finds that there is some imbalance as far as the representation of the universities on that board is concerned. This board has vast powers and those powers are being extended in this Bill in regard to the registration of social workers and so forth. It is a pity to find that there is this imbalance and I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to ensure, if at all possible, that there is a better balance between the English-speaking and Afrikaans-speaking universities as far as representation on the board is concerned. I believe the best suited, the best qualified and the best man for the job should be appointed. There are universities which play a very important part in the training of social workers who take a degree in Social Science. However, when we look at the composition of the present board we find that there are two members of the University of Pretoria, one from the University of the Orange Free State, and one from the University of Stellenbosch. That gives you a total of four to represent the universities. Sir. The Natal University, the University of Cape Town and the University of the Witwatersrand have not a single member on the existing I board. So it does appear that there is an imbalance as far as the representation on the present board is concerned and I sincerely hope that the hon. the Minister, when replying to this debate, will give this House some assurance that this matter will receive consideration as there are persons who feel that it is rather a slight upon some of these universities for them to believe that there is not a person of sufficient standing on their staff to warrant appointment to the board. I think this is an important aspect. The universities are carrying out a good deal of research at the present time in regard to welfare work and I think one of the objects of this Bill is to encourage the advancement of social science. Just as all the sciences have shown advancement in recent years social science has shown great advancement in that methods of rehabilitation and reconstruction have been greatly improved. Field services have improved and research is continually being carried out throughout the world. It is important, therefore. that we in South Africa should encourage those institutions and those persons who are carrying out that research work which will benefit the community and which will be of great benefit and assistance to the Department of Social Welfare and to the hon. the Minister himself.

The main purpose of this Welfare Board is to advise the hon. the Minister in various matters affecting field services and the general welfare services in the country. The Minister has power under this Bill to appoint further commissions over and above the four to be appointed. The White Paper indicates that these four commissions are going to cover almost every aspect of our welfare services and it is very important that the Minister get the cooperation of all the training institutions that are carrying out the research and also training the social workers who, in terms of this Bill, will gain professional status and become registered social workers.

The important functions of this board are set out in the Bill. The White Paper highlights certain aspects of the functions of the beard, particularly the work of these proposed commissions. In dealing with the importance of this board we find that it will only be necessary for it to report once during its period of office. In terms of this Bill the period of office is five years. If I remember correctly I think we moved an amendment in this regard in 1961. We believe this is a very long period of time for such an important board. It is a board which is going to be responsible for almost the entire social welfare field in South Africa, and it is only going to be required to submit a report once in five years. The changes which take place in research, in methods, in the reconstruction of families and so forth, are all important matters about which I believe this House should be kept fully informed. I think a period of five years is too long for such an important body.

In terms of this Bill the commissions which are going to be appointed are required to report once a year to the welfare board and similarly the regional boards that are to be appointed are required to report once a year. The National Welfare Board is required to meet at least twice a year. I therefore don’t think it is unreasonable to ask the hon. the Minister to give consideration to stipulating that the board should meet at least twice during its period of office, in other words, to submit an interim report at the end of a period of two and a half years. The Bill makes provision for the hon. the Minister to call for reports from the National Welfare Board prior to its termination of office or at any other time during its period of office of five years, but the Bill clearly stipulates that it is only necessary for them to report once during their period of office.

That is once during the lifetime of Parliament.

As my hon. friend says that is once in the lifetime of Parliament and it does happen that Parliament is dissolved before five years have elapsed so you can have the position where Parliament will not have the benefit at all, during its period of office, to study a report by the National Welfare Board which has vast powers and functions affecting the lives of many thousands of persons who are affected by the field and other work by the Department of Social Welfare as affected by the National Welfare Board in its particular functions.

I believe that, although on the surface it appears that this board will have a great deal of work in that it has to receive reports from the regional boards and to appoint these four commissions, it will achieve the object of channelling and allowing for more specialist concentration on certain aspects of welfare work.

A very important new power this board will have is the power to register social workers. This is perhaps one of the most important new principles involved in this Bill. I listened with a great deal of interest to the hon. the Minister when he introduced the Bill. He covered the history of the registration of social workers. I have had an opportunity of studying the working group’s report in which they recommend the registration of social workers. The working group submitted their report to the various universities and other interested organizations which have made representations to the hon. the Minister. I don’t intend dealing in great detail with the representations made by certain universities and other organizations. The Minister is naturally aware of these representations. It would appear that this step to register social workers is one in the right direction in that it is the initial step in recognizing social workers as a professional body of persons and granting them a degree of professional status. Organizations who are connected with social work and who employ social workers have expressed the view that it is perhaps a little premature at this stage to proceed with the registration of these social workers and that it would have been wiser to have waited a little longer, say for two or three years, and then introduced a separate Bill which would grant them full professional status so that they could establish their own council similar to the Nursing Council. In terms of this Bill the position is that the board is granted all these powers in regard to the registration, the conduct of and the administration of these social workers. Clauses 33 to 42 incorporate the provisions whereby the Minister. in consultation with the National Welfare Board, will draw up these regulations governing every aspect concerning the social workers. During the Committee Stage and also during the course of this debate other speakers on this side will deal more explicitly with this particular aspect.

The principle involved is one which requires a great deal of thought, and I must say that we on this side of the House were dubious as to the wisdom of proceedings, at this stage and on this basis, with the registration of social workers along these lines. The social workers who number just over 1,000 also made representations. They believe that it will be better to have their profession established in a separate Bill and that they should be allowed the necessary time to draw up their code of ethics, to consider the question of disciplinary action against social workers and other matters affecting registration. One of the main causes of concern amongst these people is that their very existence and livelihood are placed in the hands of the National Welfare Board. One of their main causes of concern is that it could happen that persons serving on that National Welfare Board are not registered social workers themselves, but that their very existence and livelihood will be placed in the hands of those persons in terms of the provisions of Clauses 33 to 42. We on this side of the House have given very careful consideration to this aspect and, on studying the Bill, it would appear that one of the ways of meeting this difficulty would be to give greater responsibility to the Social Work Commission. Clause 7 of the Bill provides for the setting up of these commissions, and it states specifically that the Social Work Commission and all the other commissions will consist of five ordinary members plus two additional members. It states that of the five ordinary members of the Social Work Commission, one will be a member of the board, but the other four will be persons registered under Section 33, i.e. registered social workers. The registered social workers will, therefore, have four members on that commission. In other words, they will have a majority on that commission, and it is felt that, in regard to the drawing up of all these regulations, the necessary qualifications, the training of these people, the disciplinary action that can be taken against them in certain instances and so forth, that commission which will have a majority of registered social workers should be the most important body as far as the National Welfare Board is concerned. It is felt that all these regulations and matters affecting the registration of these social workers should be channelled through the Social Work Commission to the National Welfare Board. I realize that the Bill provides that the National Welfare Board shall be the registering body. This is a new power this board will be assuming, and we must ensure that the recognition of social workers is commenced on the right footing. We must ensure that the position develops along the correct lines where it may perhaps be possible for the Minister, at a later stage, to provide these people with their own Bill setting out their own code of ethics when they are ready to attain full professional status. There is little doubt that that professional status should be granted to these people.

The training of social workers is another very important factor, and some of the universities have expressed a little concern in this regard. The universities are anxious to have some representation on this board, so that they can assist in the formulation of the necessary regulations that are provided for in Clause 42 of this Bill. Some of the people, speaking on behalf of the universities, feel that they should have some definite status in regard to this important aspect of this Bill.

A sub-section of Clause 15 which deals with the nomination lists does state that the universities are entitled to submit names for election to that National Welfare Board. The training of these people is naturally a responsibility which falls on the shoulders of the universities. They have lecturers on their staff who will not become registered social workers in terms of this Bill but they are persons who are specialists in this particular field and persons whose views are respected by the hon. the Minister and the social workers. I believe the training of social workers is vitally important in order to maintain an efficient field service as far as our welfare services are concerned. These people are taught at the universities; they have the benefit of receiving the very latest information in regard to rehabilitation and reconstruction which is a very important aspect of the social worker’s activities and duties. I therefore think the universities have a justifiable claim to representation on the National Welfare Board. Similarly, I believe that the association of social workers should be given confidence that their interests will be well looked after by ensuring that the Social Work Commission is more fully utilized by the National Welfare Board when it comes to drawing up regulations and the implementation of the very vast powers accorded to the National Welfare Board.

I think the appointment of these four commissions will bring about an improvement in our welfare services in that the field services will be improved in regard to the necessary work that has to be undertaken in all the aspects of welfare work. The first commission to be appointed in terms of this Bill is Welfare Organizations Registration Commission. According to the White Paper that commission will be mainly concerned with the approval or rejection of applications for registration; the co-ordination of registered welfare organizations; guidance to regional welfare boards in respect of matters relating to registration. That, too, I believe, is a very important matter, as these welfare organizations sometimes tend to do a great deal of overlapping. I know of cases where there are persons who have sought assistance from various welfare organizations. Fortunately, I must say this type of person is very much in the minority, as the vast majority of the cases are genuine cases; but unfortunately you do occasionally get these individuals who will tend to visit every single welfare organization they can find to achieve assistance and to gain some form of assistance. In one particular instance I know of a case where this particular person was receiving assistance from four different organizations at the same time. The importance of the co-ordination of registered welfare organizations is evident, and it will be an important task of this Welfare Organization Registration Commission that is to be appointed and naturally it must work in close co-operation with the regional welfare boards who are conversant with the local conditions pertaining in that regional area. However, this overlapping does exist, and it is a pity sometimes that some organizations are registered when in fact they are going to perform exactly the same task as existing organizations. I think this is one of the aspects which the Welfare Organization Administration Commission can give a great deal of attention to. The National Welfare Board in the past considered these matters on the basis of reports from the department and from the regional areas and regional boards. In spite of that, we still do have from time to time the lack of co-ordination between the various welfare organizations and there is a waste of time as far as these organizations are concerned in attending to cases which are already being dealt with by another organization or organizations. I believe an important task of both the regional welfare board and the Welfare Organizations Registration Commission is to ensure that there should be established in each regional area a case register whereby when a person approaches an organization for assistance, the persons concerned can then check with the case register to ensure that their case is not already being dealt with and in that way prevent assistance by another organization which might have similar aims and objects and is fulfilling the purpose. The co-ordination of these organizations is a matter which can arise from time to time. As I mentioned earlier, circumstances might suddenly arise in a regional area: A group of well-meaning people decide that they would like to form an organization and become a registered welfare organization in order to try and fulfil a need immediately, but invariably some of these people are not aware that there is already an existing organization, in fact, performing a similar aim and object, and they would quite easily divert and direct their energy, enthusiasm and attention to this particular problem to an existing organization, which is already well-established and a well-proved organization fulfilling the same task.

The other important commission that is to be appointed, the Social Work Commission, which I referred to earlier in regard to the registration of social workers, is a commission which will be entrusted with a great deal of responsibility in that it will form the link with the universities in connection with training and the requirements of the profession, it will give guidance in regard to research into the methods and techniques of social work and problems arising therefrom, and the promotion of social work as a profession, publicizing the profession and dealing with matters relating to the registration of social workers. You know, Mr. Speaker, that nearly every registered welfare organization can improve its present service to the community in its particular field. We know that one of the biggest restricting factors is the recruitment of sufficiently dedicated staff and sufficiently qualified staff who can perform that necessary task. Here I know that in the past the social worker, who is a professional worker, has often been looked upon as a person who is following a philanthropic form of vocation. However, we have to face realities and today there are a number of persons who are dedicated to their work, but because of various commitments they find that they are unable to partake in that particular vocation due to financial stringencies and the realities of the increase in the cost-of-living, increase in cost of rent, food and clothing, and then they sometimes decide that they cannot continue in that particular field of work and they seek employment elsewhere. Some good workers have been lost to organizations which are endeavouring to recruit the necessary qualified workers as best as they can, but they have to struggle, and we do hope that the Social Work Commission will achieve an object in the publicizing of the profession, and also perhaps bring about an improvement as far as these conditions are concerned for persons who are involved in that profession. I was reading a recent report of a child welfare organization which is one of the biggest organizations in the Republic, and here too I was struck by the fact that these people are having a great deal of difficulty in performing their allotted task to the best of their satisfaction, and in their latest annual report they state, in dealing with the social work staff—

Then they go on to deal with the question of family life and the reconstruction of family life, and dealing with the question of case work the say—

This I think is a problem which is not peculiar to this particular welfare society, but is a matter which is common to many welfare organizations who are having difficulty in finding suitable staff. I know that the hon. Minister himself and his department experience difficulties in finding the necessary staff to carry on this very important work that affects the very livelihood of many thousands of people who are affected by welfare services.

While dealing with the question of the Social Work Commission, there is another suggestion which I would like to put to the hon. Minister. This Social Work Commission in terms of the White Paper deals mainly with the question of the profession of the social worker and deals with matters pertaining to the profession of social workers. However, no mention is made of making cognizance of the voluntary worker. I feel that the voluntary worker must also be brought into the picture in regard to our welfare services. They play a very important part indeed and the voluntary worker is an essential part of the welfare services that are provided in the country. The National Council of Child Welfare met last year, in 1964, and one of the discussions that took place at that National Council meeting was in regard to the question of voluntary work. Therefore I do hope that the Social Work Commission will give attention to the limited amount of training that could be afforded to voluntary workers, so that they as well can play a fuller part in the reconstruction of family life and in the field work that is necessary in welfare services. Sir, I believe that the voluntary worker can be specially trained and perform a special task in an organization, but being a purely voluntary dedicated worker, it will give them some degree of experience and give them some degree of qualification. We know that the important task of removing children from homes, the drawing up of reports, are all matters which naturally must remain in the hands of the highly specialized and qualified professional social worker who is attached to a welfare organization or who is in the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. But the voluntary worker can play a very important part indeed, and I do hope that this aspect will also receive the attention of the Social Work Commission. The voluntary worker can be given a limited form of training, he can be informed of all the latest methods of reconstruction and rehabilitation that takes place, rehabilitation work, and after all, I think, in any democracy we have got to look upon every individual as a potential voluntary worker in welfare services.

Sir, the question of the part-time training of voluntary workers is a matter which I believe is an important aspect that could be incorporated in the task of the Social Work Commission. When you look at the social services in other parts of the world, you find that in the United States of America, for instance, they run summer schools at certain universities and university colleges, which are for the benefit of voluntary social workers, and there is no reason why we should not develop that in this country where there is this enormous potential that is required as far as workers are concerned, and while there is still a shortage, and possibly always will be a shortage, of professional social welfare workers. These people, as in the case of England and America, where they can follow a part-time training course to enable them to play a fuller part in the necessary service of welfare organizations, can also play a bigger pant here.

Another aspect is the one which affects the social workers in regard to the recruitment, in regard to making it an attractive profession. These are all matters which will undoubtedly receive the attention of this proposed Social Work Commission, as shown in the White Paper that has been submitted.

The next commission that is to be appointed, is the Family Life Commission, and here the White Paper states that one of the tasks of this commission will be to deal more particularly with the normal family. So it would appear that this is rather the preventive type of organizational commission that is to be established, to prevent families becoming maladjusted and then requiring the specialized services and attention of the voluntary welfare organizations, or of the Department of Social Welfare. This Family Life Commission will be some new concept in welfare work in South Africa, and I might say that we on this side of the House certainly welcome this new innovation. I had the privilege of serving on a committee at the time of the Family Year, and we know the work that was achieved, and one of the greatest achievements of all, which perhaps has influenced the Minister in setting up this commission at the very inception of this Act, is that this family life commission saw the necessity to establish such a national body, and was perhaps the only resolution that was taken by the Family Congress, and a resolution that was taken unanimously. A programme of functions was arranged in all the major cities in the various regional areas, consisting of lectures, film shows, addresses and so forth, and it was felt at that time, which is now some four years ago, that this work of the Family Year and the Family Congress, could not just be allowed to fall away and say it has achieved an object for the time being, but that it should be continued and carried on, and obviously it appears that this Family Life Commission will set out with the object of encouraging and maintaining the normal family life. Sir, the work of this Family Year was incorporated in a publication The Lantern, a journal of knowledge and culture, and in 1960, this publication was made available, covering a very vast field and almost every aspect of family life, and I believe it is a pity, Sir, that this publication has perhaps not been more widely circulated, and perhaps at certain intervals of five years, similar publications can be circulated and can be made available to the public. This is a great fountain of knowledge in that there are articles written by qualified persons on all aspects of welfare work, and also all particular aspects affecting family life. So I believe this Family Life Commission can achieve a great deal in respect of the publicizing of the various services and the necessary guidance that is required in regard to family life.

The hon. member for Kimberley (South) (Dr. W. L. D. M. Venter) introduced a private motion dealing with family life, we also had the Piek Commission on Family Allowances. and they produced a very important document which covers a very wide field in regard to those aspects and terms of reference, so that we believe that this Family Life Commission is the first step towards the aim of improving the family structure and in regard to preventive work that is necessary, so as to prevent these families becoming maladjusted, and then necessitating highly costly rehabilitation and re-adjustment of such a family. I think the motto during that period of the Family Year was “The unity of the family is the strength of the nation”. That is a very important aspect as far as our preventive work is concerned, and it is believed that the formation of this Family Life Commission will be able to promote the normal healthy family life and so play a very important part and certainly a rather new part in regard to welfare services in South Africa.

The other commission that is to be appointed is a commission called the “Welfare Policy Commission”.

The other commission that is to be appointed is a commission called the “Welfare Policy Commission”. At the outset I should like to say that in my opinion this is a rather unfortunate name for this particular commission. It is generally accepted that it is the prerogative of the Minister of Social Welfare to be responsible for policy matters in connection with welfare work. When the Minister’s Vote comes up for discussion in Committee of Supply we have an opportunity of discussing the policy of his Department in addition to all aspects of welfare work. Consequently I do not think the hon. the Minister should name this commission in the way it is proposed because the proposed name could lead to misunderstanding. In my opinion it is better and more appropriate to call this commission a welfare planning commission. It will under that name also carry out those functions set out in this White Paper.

Now, this commission will deal with the maladjusted family in so far as social deviations, the protection of children, the planning and co-ordination of welfare work and social research are concerned. In this connection it is pleasing to note that specific reference is made in the terms of reference of the commission to social research. Social research is a very important part of social welfare services being provided in the country. The function of this commission will also be to co-ordinate the work of the various organizations operating in the field of social welfare. It will in reality be dealing with the real problems facing the Department of Social Welfare, problems such as social deviation and the carrying out of field work. In this connection I cannot over-stress the importance of field work. This requires special attention. At present the amount of field work being carried is of a very limited nature due to the fact that many of the social workers are tied to their desks and have to perform a great deal of their tasks and their duties at their desks. I have on occasions been present when probation officers have interviewed persons on probation, and the interview lasted but a few minutes before the next person came in to be interviewed. Because of the fact that he was pressed for time, the probation officer had no alternative but to limit the length of each interview. He was carrying a large case load. As far as field work is concerned. I submit that more people should be recruited to do this important work. We know. Mr. Speaker, that the Department of Social Welfare has to deal not only with instances of social deviation but also with the other aspects going with it. There is, for instance, the formation of youth clubs—something of which I have had experience—and I know how valuable the assistance and guidance rendered by the officials of the Minister’s Department are in the establishment of such organizations. These clubs can play a very important part in preventing delinquency and other forms of maladjustment. Because, Mr. Speaker, it is far easier to take preventive steps than to try to effect a cure, which invariably takes a long time. We know that a maladjusted boy who perhaps has to be removed from his family environment and placed in an institution for, say, two years, more often than not finds it difficult to readjust himself to his normal social life. It can be a very difficult period for him, a period during which he requires a great deal of attention and aftercare from the Welfare Department.

We find, Sir, that field work which should be carried out is restricted owing to many factors, e.g. the shortage of staff and the heavy case loads. However, Mr. Speaker, I should like to pay a compliment to the staff of the Department of Social Welfare. I know they are dedicated people, doing a tremendous job, a difficult job, and a very trying one at times. I know there is a shortage of staff, and the shortage of qualified personnel does present a problem. It is, of course a problem that is not peculiar to South Africa, because this type of manpower problem exists also in other parts of the world. Steps have been taken to try and improve the position in this respect. I read a report recently wherein it is stated that in the United States of America the field services are being extended tremendously, not only through that country’s social welfare department but also through the agencies, through the welfare organizations who receive a 100 per cent subsidy in respect of the salaries paid to welfare workers doing very important field work.

However, Sir, notwithstanding these difficulties, our probation officers have achieved a great deal as far as combating the various social problems that arise from time to time is concerned. We know that some three or four years ago we were faced with a difficult juvenile problem in South Africa. There was an increase in juvenile delinquency and the so-called ducktail problem had to be combated. I know that various youth clubs and organizations had no alternative but to close down, or operate under police protection, because of the misbehaviour of maladjusted youths at various functions. To-day we find a marked decrease in juvenile delinquency, and I think part of the credit for that must go to a number of welfare organizations as well as to the welfare and probation officers of the Department of Social Welfare.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the four commissions could result in the channelization, the speeding up of the present tempo of dealing with problems. I like to see matters dealt with expeditiously. However, I realize that as far as welfare work is concerned, it is necessary for many matters to receive very careful and long consideration before any action is taken. Mr. Speaker, I regard this Bill as a step forward in the right direction of bringing into line the South African system of welfare work. It is a system of which all South Africans can justifiably be proud. There is no doubt that the Republic has a very fine social service rendered to the people. This Bill is a further step forward along the road of improvements, along the road of improving the welfare services, along the road of improving the very lives of those persons who require assistance and guidance in times of need.

In these circumstances, Sir, this side of the House supports this Bill. We believe that a great deal can be achieved. The foundations are being laid for the creation of four new commissions which could play a very important part in advising the hon. the Minister of developments taking place. The National Welfare Board will be reduced in size, and this I think will be an improvement, in that it will perhaps be able to deal with matters more expeditiously. The members of the Board will represent all nine regional areas. Clause 15 of the Bill provides for the submission of nomination lists, and I am sure the hot:, the Minister will have a large number of names submitted to him, a large number of dedicated and highly qualified people who are prepared to come forward and serve on this Board.

The other important aspects of this Bill are matters which can be dealt with at the Committee Stage. We should like to have clarification on certain matters, we seek further details regarding various clauses in the Bill. We should like to know more about the aims and objects of some of the provisions.

All in all, Mr. Speaker, the overall picture appears to be that this Bill will improve the present position; it is a step forward in bringing about a greater degree of efficiency in the field of Social Welfare; it should lead to the co-ordination of our welfare services. We can thus continue to live up to the motto of the Family Year of a year or two ago, namely that “The Unity of the Family is the Strength of the Nation.”

Mr. Speaker it is pleasing to see that both sides of the House are unanimous in welcoming this Bill. The previous speaker, the hon. member for Durban (Umbilo) (Mr. Oldfield), said that it was a step in the right direction. But I want to say that it is very much more than simply this. In my opinion we have reached an extremely important milestone because there is something special in the formulation of this Bill. The hon. member raised no objections to this Bill but he did express certain doubts. Sir, those doubts will disappear once this measure comes into operation and then the hon. member and others, who may perhaps have certain doubts about this matter, will realize that there is no danger of those things happening which they fear will happen. I say that we have reached a very important milestone, Sir. In the first edition of Social Work, a professional periodical for social workers which was recently published, the editrix writes as follows (translation)—

I want to say that in this one paragraph the names are mentioned of the various persons who will always be remembered gratefully at a later stage when we see what is achieved by means of this measure. The hon. the Minister has been mentioned. We all know the amount of patience and devotion he has shown in giving all possible bodies the opportunity to comment on this Bill. This Bill should actually have been introduced last year but, out of consideration for all the bodies which wanted to reconsider this matter, the hon. the Minister delayed its introduction. He did not summarily push it through, Sir. No. He allowed an additional period to elapse, and we thank him for it.

The names of the officials of the Department who have also been concerned in this measure are also mentioned. The editrix refers to their hard work in this connection and we should like to subscribe to what she says.

The name of Professor Cronje, the chairman of the National Welfare Board, has also been mentioned and he also deserves thanks and recognition in this regard.

At the same time we feel that the National Welfare Board as a whole has also contributed a great deal towards this Bill. They have considered and reconsidered it; they planned it, considered it and discussed it before they informed the hon. the Minister that the Bill had their approval.

I as a layman feel almost hesitant to comment on this Bill because it is the product of experts who have harnessed all their energies and talents in its preparation.

Mr. Speaker, the old Act of 1947 has served an important purpose but it leaves a great deal to be desired When one considers the circumstances in which we are living to-day. The old Act made provision for the establishment of a national board, a welfare board of 24 members. When we look at the composition of the old board we must conclude that it was a balanced body. On this board we had academicians, people who were trained, people with expert knowledge. There were also those who did a great deal in the field of practical social work, people who merit particular mention in this respect. They all served on that board. It was therefore not a one-sided body; it was a board on which English and Afrikaans-speaking people, training institutions and practical workers of both sexes were all represented. I feel that on this occasion, where we are taking leave of the old board, it is no more than right that we should speak of the work of that board with the greatest acknowledgment, gratitude and appreciation. From this Bill before us which is so wonderfully balanced and which covers the entire field, one can see the fruits which we are enjoying because of the work of that board. The competency of that board is reflected in this comprehensive Bill which covers every portion of the welfare field. The functions of the old board were to advise the Minister and to co-ordinate and register welfare services and to supervise existing welfare organizations. This board carried out those functions in a very efficient and thorough manner. It also achieved a great deal thereby. When we consider the problems connected with the coordination of welfare services we can say that that board took the lead; it gave guidance to communities by means of the regional boards and it ensured the elimination of a great deal of overlapping. The hon. the Minister said yesterday that more than 5,000 welfare organizations had applied for registration. If we had not had a careful screening body in the shape of the old board, this enormous number of organizations would all have been operating to-day and there would have been a great deal of overlapping. But as a result of the thorough work of the old board in regard to the selection of organizations and its aim to eliminate the duplication of work, we find that about 3,000 organizations were not permitted to register. In this respect alone the board rendered a great service to welfare work in this country. But through the medium of its working group this board was also responsible for the great work which resulted in this Bill. Some of the most prominent members of the board served on this group, after which the board as a whole analysed and shaped and moulded the Bill in the form in which we have it to-day. But the old board also did a great deal towards ensuring that welfare services achieved their purpose. The result was that public confidence in welfare work was greatly strengthened because the public knew that this was a competent board which watched everything with an eagle eye and Which was prepared to take action where necessary to combat misuse. I say that the period of office of the old board has now expired. We must have a new formula which has become necessary as a result of changed conditions. We are experiencing a period of revolutionary development in the technical, educational and other spheres, and the result is that we have a far more complex society than ever before. Furthermore, this development has resulted in the fact that the adjustment of the individual to these circumstances has become very involved. Many individuals and other bodies do not succeed in becoming adjusted if they do not have the necessary expert help and guidance to indicate to them how to weather this transition period. There are many who fall in that process of adjustment; there are those who have fallen in the struggle and who have not been able to make the adjustment. Let us take the question of social sciences alone. When we compare them with those of a few years ago, we are amazed to see the great progress that has been made in this sphere both as regards the approach to social problems or the answers Which have to be found to them and the various techniques of treatment Which are suggested. All this makes for a complete revolution in this science. We find that sociological and social work has become work of the greatest importance in modern society. There is large-scale development in every sphere and it is necessary for the Department to keep pace with this development and for the hon. the Minister to ensure that justice is done to this country as regards all these problems which arise from a complex society. But it is physically impossible for the hon. the Minister continually to remain abreast of every modern train of thought. It is simply impossible for him to sift all the material himself and to give guidance to the country. What he needs is a body of experts to do that work for him, who can analyse the work and advise him in regard to its essential details, and that is what this new Bill has in mind. That is why we find that the new Bill makes provision for the composition of a new board.

The new board is far smaller than the old one. We are grateful to the hon. the Minister in this regard because we know that it was originally suggested that the board consists of nine members, but after careful consideration the hon. the Minister decided to increase it to 15. That board has the opportunity of being constituted from the best available brainpower in this sphere. When we consider how the nomination lists are drawn up, how the regional boards are appointed and how the various regions are represented, and that the hon. the Minister has the opportunity to select from the vast number of names which will be submitted to him of people who are all experts in this sphere, to select the best of these, then we must say that it is very good. Here I should just like to say that the hon. member for Umbilo said that he was afraid that the board was rather one-sided. He said that the universities which he mentioned were not represented on the board while other universities were. But it is not the intention that this board should be representative of all the welfare organizations and training institutions in the country. The intention is that the Minister must have an advisory body consisting of the most qualified persons, and if the most qualified persons are all at Cape Town University then I say that they must be appointed. It is not intended to give representation to all the various bodies. If the hon. the Minister has to start giving this representation, where will it end? He must then give representation to all the welfare organizations and all the universities and this body will then become a representative board on which there will be a struggle for power. But the hon. the Minister does not need this. He needs 15 qualified people who are competent to cover the whole field of welfare work and to say to him: You will not be making a mistake if you adopt this or that attitude in your legislation. He needs an advisory body. There are many other occasions on which these other bodies can make themselves felt. The advisory board will make provision for this itself by convening national conferences on welfare matters from time to time at which all the various bodies will be able to express their opinions. The task of the board is not to be representative but to give advice, and all the other bodies working under it will have sufficient opportunity to be represented on the regional boards.

When we go further we see that this Bill contains a very important principle. While the old board was to a large extent static, this new board is immediately given a dynamic character. The emphasis is now placed on planning and research and advice to the Minister. I have heard nobody say that these four commissions can be improved upon or that there should be a fifth or sixth commission. Indeed, the Bill makes provision whereby, besides these four commissions, the Minister can at any time appoint a further commission if he feels that there is a specific sphere which has not yet been covered. If he feels that there is a particular problem for which another commission is required, he may appoint it, and Clause 7 makes provision in this regard.

When we look at the four commissions we find that they cover virtually the entire field. There is the commission for the registration of welfare organizations; in other words, this time-consuming work to which the board had in the past to give almost all its attention will now be referred to this commission and it will be competent enough to do that work. But what is more, that commission can delegate some of its duties to the regional boards, and who is more capable of deciding whether a particular welfare organization, which seeks registration, complies with the requirements than the regional board? We find further that that commission has the important job of co-ordination. The old board tried to do a great deal in this regard. The regional board held seminars in this regard from time to time. This idea of co-ordination is of growing importance because by coordination we mean not only liaison between the various welfare organizations but a careful study of the whole field in order to discover whether we are meeting all the requirements of the community, whether there are still certain shortcomings or whether there are certain organizations which should be brought into being. These must be co-ordinated, not only mutually but also with the board and the Department. This is a very important function which is being given increasing attention by all the various regional boards.

There is also the commission for social work. Here the emphasis is placed on professional knowledge. We have an enormous amount of knowledge at present and this knowledge is increasing steadily. It is the task of this commission to keep itself acquainted with these matters and further, to liaise with all the training institutions in order to ensure that the standard of training is the correct one and that the latest scientific facts are noted. It is the task of this commission to do this great work and one of its most important tasks will be to advise the Minister.

The commission for family life will have the task of making provision for the normal family. Earlier this year we had a very detailed discussion by way of a private motion on the question of the size of families and we said that the time had come for us in South Africa to ascertain whether it was not necessary to stimulate larger families by means of the payment of family allowances. What was the hon. Minister’s reply in this regard? He gave us the sensible reply that the task of this commission would be to investigate this matter carefully and, cost what it might, if this were to be the solution offered in regard to the increasing of the White population, to advise the Minister to introduce legislation in that regard. This commission will be able to formulate a proper family code for us; to create the correct outlook on life for the maintenance of a sound family life by means of marriage guidance and so forth. This commission will have an extremely important task

The commission dealing with welfare policy has to deal with the question of social aberrations, the question of the family which has been shipwrecked, the family whose father has perhaps become an alcoholic and whose mother has perhaps fallen into prostitution. It will have to deal with the question of children who have to be sent to institutions. The whole question of institutional care will fall under this commission. It is a commission which will have its hands full if it wants to see justice done to the people who have fallen out of the community; it will have to do research and ensure that the Minister is kept informed so as to be able to judge whether the rehabilitation schemes are adequate.

The new board will be a dynamic one; it is an advisory body and no attempt is being made to make it representative. The best brains in this sphere will be selected for the board because in this fact will lie the strength of the board that it is composed of the best talent in this country.

The second important principle of the Bill is the registration of social workers. When we talk of the great field that has to be covered and when we talk of our complex society and all the problems which are met with in the social sphere, we find that it is a great pity that we only have about 1,000 workers of both sexes doing this work. Why is this so? Is one of the reasons not perhaps that this profession has not been given sufficient recognition and protection, that its status is not sufficiently elevated? I think we must express a word of hearty appreciation to-day to all our universities and training institutions which are training social workers. When one considers the courses which they are following, one feels that one must take off one’s hat to these people. They are people with outstanding technical knowledge who are able to handle these matters most authoritatively. We see this every day when we notice the capable way in which these people, the product of our universities, do their work. But we feel that their status is lacking something because we do not as yet have a proper registration of these people. Registraion will serve a very important purpose. It will give these people protection but it will also protect the public because the quack element will be eliminated, not the voluntary workers mentioned by the hon. member for Umbilo. The hon. the Minister said that he did not under any circumstances want to lose the services of these voluntary workers and the Bill provides that if in his eyes they qualify because of qualifications other than academic qualifications, they can be registered. But this does protect us against the quack element, people who make out that they can do this delicate work although they do not have the necessary background and knowledge for it. The Bill does not make it a compulsory registration; it is voluntary and that is why this Bill renders a great service to these people. The hon. member for Umbilo said that the social workers do not want it. There may be a small group of them who feel that way but I am prepared to say that the vast majority of them want it. Their great problem is that they cannot afford to set up the machinery for registration. How are a thousand people to do so on their own?

Have you read the memorandum?

My time is very limited. They will probably not be able to afford to set up the machinery for registration. We feel that we are dealing here with a profession which forms part of our welfare policy as a whole and so it is no more than right that the Bill should make provision for registration without these people having to bear the expense in this regard. When we read the Bill carefully, and the memorandum, and we compare it with the old Act, it is clear that we are dealing here with a Bill which has been very carefully considered by all interested bodies in this country. It was circulated to all bodies, universities and welfare organizations; it was also discussed and sufficient time was given for all the various aspects to be investigated. That is why this Bill bears witness of thorough study and great technical knowledge. This is a measure which can place social work on a level on which it can be compared favourably with the best in the world. I say therefore that this is a piece of legislation in which we see the hand of experts, and any layman must hesitate to criticize it. We accept it with great gratitude; we welcome this step and we foresee that our country will derive a great deal of good from it.

The Minister is about to embark on a very big undertaking in the social welfare field. He has undertaken to reorganize and co-ordinate a great deal of the work which was done in the past and which is lying, as it were, like a lot of loose pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, and it is now his task to put these pieces together and form a picture that will be satisfactory to all those people who are actually in that picture. It is, as I say, a great undertaking and I must compliment the Minister on the courage he shows when he undertakes this kind of work. At the same time I must compliment those people who are behind him in this and who have put so much into establishing this organization which it is envisaged will come into being when this Bill is passed. I would like to compliment the hon. member for Umbilo (Mr. Oldfield) for the very splendid survey he gave us this morning when he dealt with all the aspects of this Bill. I think he should be complimented by all of us on his understanding and his devotion to this type of work.

The Bill before us can be divided into two parts, the registration of social workers and the registration of social organizations and the work that each of these groups does. I feel that the registration of social workers is a difficult undertaking. I am divided in my opinion as to the advisability of undertaking that work at this stage. It is essential that it be done, but I just wonder whether we should not pause for a moment or two to see how the various organizations function and what the results of a year or two of the functioning of these organizations brings forth before we implement the legislation as it now stands. I should like to say to the House that the Social Workers’ Association of South Africa, people who are intimately connected with this registration, as the Minister knows, are also a little doubtful about he advisability of implementing immediate registration. They would like a separate Bill for this a little later when this Bill has had a chance to function. At one of their meetings they took a resolution in which they asked for a separate Bill to deal with the code of ethics and registration and disciplinary action. If we could just agree in principle that it is a good thing and it must come about that social workers must be registered, then I am sure the Minister will have second thoughts about the immediate registration of social workers. It is a difficult thing to decide, but I think we should be guided by the wishes of those people who are intimately associated with this type of work.

Now the training of the social workers will obviously take place in the universities and the teachers at the universities must guide the future social workers who will be the basis of all legislation in the future. It will be through their findings and their experience that this Act will be amended from time to time. They will be the people who will say that this or that part of the Act is not working well. This is a new profession which is coming into being and we do not want to be in a hurry with it because we may ruin the whole set-up if we are not very careful. In addition, we have the further complication that we have trained social workers of university standing now, and we have voluntary social workers. The trained workers are dependent to a great extent on the voluntary contributions of the other workers, and the one is really dependent on the other. The trained man teaches the voluntary worker what to do. The trained man cannot have the time to do the work himself, and if we take away the voluntary worker from this set-up it will break down quickly. So we are faced with the question at this stage of what we are going to do with the voluntary worker when it comes to registration. I would say that the first thing is for us to try our best to retain the help of the voluntary worker because his need is felt very badly. The hon. member for Umbilo touched on the point of teaching the voluntary worker. We are faced with a grave problem in this country to-day because of the necessity for people to go out to work to earn money. It is their desire to improve their status. We cannot depend on voluntary workers coming only from the rich. We have to have voluntary workers who come from all walks of life. The hon. the Minister knows that perhaps we have a greater percentage of workers from the middle classes than we have from the upper classes, but if we start to lose voluntary workers through economic circumstances, because the voluntary worker has to go out to work we are going to be placed in a very serious quandary. I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that firstly he should make the work as attractive as possible; that the places in which these people work should be places that he himself would be proud to establish. That is the first point. The conditions under which the voluntary workers work must be satisfactory. The voluntary workers must further be given an opportunity, whether they are matriculated or not, of attending university classes, classes which are arranged by the experts so that they can improve their knowledge. But I would like the Minister to make sure that these voluntary classes are free to the voluntary workers; there should be no charge whatsoever. In addition to that, they should be held at suitable times to enable voluntary workers to attend. It is no good having these classes in the mornings or in the afternoons. They will probably have to be held in the evenings when the voluntary workers will be able to attend these classes. The universities will have to co-operate in this connection. But in addition to the voluntary worker we have the trained social worker who works in the university. The student—and this is important—will have to do his practical work in the field. He cannot learn social welfare work from books; he has to have the practical experience and I think it is essential that every university student who takes a course in sociology, social welfare work, should be required to spend most of his time visiting the various establishments and seeing what is going on there. He should be doing all this pratical work in these establishments in the same way as a medical student would spend the greater part of his time at university in the hospital wards. That is what I would like to see for the social worker. The voluntary worker must be taken along, wherever possible, to these classes and clinics so that he or she will get a fair idea of what is going on.

Sir, the Minister has made provision in the Bill for the establishment of four commissions. I can find no fault with this, but like the hon. member for Umbilo (Mr. Oldfield) I am just a little afraid that he is going to find some difficulty in keeping each commission in a separate compartment. It is going to be very difficult to do that. There is bound to be overlapping from time to time. As a matter of fact in some cases there will be a linking up of the activities of one or more of these commissions. We know that reports will come in from regional boards to the commission and perhaps we might be able to obviate the overlapping in that way. Let us take the Family Life Commission, for instance. I would say that family life, firstly is intimately connected with education, and here I want to quote what I said during the debate on family life in this House when we discussed the motion moved by the hon. member for Kimberley South (Dr. W. L. D. M. Venter). I said on that occasion—

There immediately we see that the field of education comes into family life, and it is going to be difficult to keep these commissions in separate compartments and to prevent an overlapping of functions. What I do think will be valuable, as far as these commissions are concerned is that a university student, after getting his degrees, should be encouraged to specialize in one or other of the branches of social work. I would say that if a university student has a B.Sc. in social work, he should be given a further opportunity to specialize in social work per se, or he can become a specialist in family life or a specialist in welfare policy. That is the sort of thing that I would like to see. I would like to see these commissions being the basis of specialities in university courses. Perhaps we could work out something along those lines. I think it would be an incentive to social workers to study further. We might be able to get a whole system of research teams established at the universities in each of these branches, and if we do that, then we will be well on the way towards building up a sound social welfare system in this country. As I say, it is not going to be sufficient just to put the pieces of the jig-saw puzzle together and to make a pretty picture; we have to see that the colours in the picture are not blurred, the one overlapping into the other. Sir, the student will have to cover a very wide field and any person who has a knowledge of all four branches would be much like a general medical practitioner in the sense that we can only except him to have a moderate degree of knowledge of each of the four branches. He would know something about everything but would not be a specialist in any one of the branches. For further advice he would be able to go to another person who is a specialist in that particular branch.

Sir, if we are going to build up a new profession in social welfare, then we must see to it that it is a profession which the whole country will respect. I do not want to see what is happening to the teaching profession. The teaching profession has lost rather than gained stature over the years, and that is because teachers are not recognized as being at a very high professional level. That situation, of course, is due to their low salary scale. I would like to see the salary scale of social welfare workers brought up to the level that one finds in other professions. If we can do that from the start, then the Minister will know that he will not be short of workers. The salaries should be so high that they will provide an incentive for people to take up the courses that will be offered at the universities. What incentive is there to-day for a social worker, besides devotion, to take up this type of work. The salaries are extremely poor. We all know that social workers have to supplement their earnings by doing part-time work in the evenings; they write or take up part-time teaching, and in other ways they try to earn a little bit extra. They do all sorts of little jobs because they cannot make ends meet on their present salaries. I hope the Minister will see to it that the salaries of social welfare workers are fixed at a level which he would expect them to get if they were doing a service which this country cannot do without.

I come now to a few general things which I would like to see implemented and not left with loose ends. I am a little disturbed about the multiplicity of organizations doing the same type of work. I have in mind the organizations, for example, which look after retarded children. We know that the health aspect also comes into it, but the health aspect is also tied up with the education of the child. Not all but many of these children come from less-privileged class homes and they need help from the Social Welfare Department. What we are finding to-day in some towns is that there is a duplication of the same type of work and this is where the commissions come into the picture. They should start arranging a scheme which will be carried out by all institutions dealing with a particular problem. We find that one institution has its own ideas of developing, say, a retarded child; then we get another institution with its own ideas, and very often those ideas are poles apart. I would like to see better co-ordination. Let us take the question of treating the alcoholic through Social Welfare services. In various provinces to-day I find that different approaches are adopted. We have heard in this House that there are some members who say that alcoholism per se is a sickness. We know that there are others who say that it is not a sickness, that it is just a bad habit, and that they have no sympathy with the alcoholic. There are differences of opinion and it is going to take time to co-ordinate the treatment of alcoholics. It is the duty of the Minister of Social Welfare to provide not only homes for these people but to provide for their care. On the other hand, if it is a matter of health, it should be out of his hands and placed in the hands of the Department of Health. We therefore have social welfare problems being dealt with by the Minister of Health. Fortunately for us the Minister of Health is doing the job properly or at least to the best of his ability. I am pleased in one way that the Minister of Social Welfare is doing his job. That is one of the examples that I want to quote. One hears of different methods of treating drug addicts. There is a school of thought here in Cape Town which differs from the school of thought in Johannesburg. The hon. the Minister has these people to deal with as well, because the alcoholic and the drug addict break up family life; they are the home wreckers. Children coming from these homes have to be cared for and guided along the right channels. That is the job of the Minister of Social Welfare, but he also has to deal with the cause of the distraction of homes. It may not be his work but it is tied up so intimately with family life that there is no other Department that can do this job except Social Welfare.

Take the question of malnutrition and health, the storage of food during times of starvation, the delivery of food in drought-stricken areas. All that work is put on to the shoulders of this hon. Minister. He has to deal with the results of malnutrition, but the final result is the responsibility of another Department. Sir. we have spoken here about larger and better families; we have spoken about family allowances. These are all jobs for the Minister of Social Welfare, but the actual job of looking after the person who is going to produce the family, the mother, is taken away from him during the ante-natal period and dealt with by the Department of Health. That is where we find that these commissions for which provision is made in this Bill are too watertight; they will have to allow for a certain amount of overlapping. The personnel of the various commissions will always have to realize that they cannot pass the buck from one Department to another and say, “This is a health matter, I am not touching it”, or “This is a matter for the Family Life Commission, I am not touching it”. There may be a certain amount of overlapping and it will be the Minister’s duty to guide these people.

Lastly I just want to say something about the difficulties that come about as a result of the rising cost of living. This, of course, is an economic problem and falls directly upon the shoulders of the Minister of Social Welfare as well. I just want to read out a few extracts from a cutting from the Rand Daily Mail of the 10th of this month. This report appeared after the Minister had given notice that pensioners were to receive an extra R1 per month as from October from the Government. Sir, this is what is taking place in a very large institution that is helping to care for the pensioners. Three hundred Johannesburg pensioners will have their rent increased by R2 per month from 1 June. These are pensioners living in six homes for the aged belonging to the Rand Aid Association. This is what the speaker for the Rand Aid Association says—

Sir, that is very disturbing. The Minister gives them an increase of R1 and R2 per month is taken away from them by a Welfare Organization, the reason for it being the rising cost of living plus the fact that they have a deficit of R50,000. It would like to know from the Minister whether he knows about this and whether he has investigated why an association like the Rand Aid Association should be faced with a deficit of R50,000. There are hundreds and hundreds of people who from time to time have received aid from the Rand Aid Association and they are very grateful for the work that the Association is doing, but they must be very perturbed over the fact that they will now be required to pay an additional R2 per month when they have received an increase of only R1 per month in their pensions. I hope that the Minister will go into this matter in due course. The Secretary of the Association went on to say—

That is why I would like the hon. the Minister to investigate the position to see whether it is not possible for a larger grant to be given to these voluntary institutions or, alternatively, to find out whether or not they are not carrying out their work properly. I feel that they are and I feel that there must either be a falling off of donations from the public or otherwise that the subsidy that the Minister is giving them is not sufficient to offset the rising cost of living.

I will not comment now on what was said by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat or by previous speakers on his side. In the course of my speech, however, I shall deal with a few aspects of what they said. The history of the legislation we are dealing with to-day really goes back as far as 1945. In that year a Select Committee investigated and heard evidence in regard to certain aspects which were considered to be drastic new principles. The Bill which resulted from the work of that Select Committee was then introduced to this House in 1947, and it contained the following main principles: To make provision for the registration of welfare organizations; the control over the collection of funds and the co-ordination of voluntary welfare organizations. It is interesting to note that the legislation was introduced very tardily in 1947 because both sides of the House were evidently afraid of the fact that they were dealing with important principles and that those new principles which were then being introduced in the legislation had not been properly tested and that they could perhaps land in difficulties. It is really peculiar to us to-day to know that they hesitated to embody those principles in the legislation. But the Welfare Board which was established in 1947 has proved itself; we know of the excellent work which was done by that Board. However, the 1947 Act was not left unchanged and amendments were made, as in 1961. In fact it was necessary to amend it because times changed and certain circumstances made new demands. In welfare work particularly the approach must be subtle so that we can adapt ourselves to the demands of the times, to the demands of specific circumstances. Therefore, where we live in different times, when new circumstances develop, it is fitting that we should not, like our predecessors, come forward tardily and half afraid to introduce new principles, but that we should courageously tackle the new circumstances facing us. I am glad to note that there are not many doubts about the composition of the new Welfare Board. The function of the Board is to advise the Minister. The Board itself felt that it could not carry out that advisory function very well. Those people did not selfishly sit back and say: Here there are now 24 or 25 of us who have a post, who enjoy respect, and we are not going to allow our position to be affected. They said: We cannot properly carry out our functions as an advisory body, and we feel free to go to the Minister and to tell him to change our composition. One appreciates the attitude adopted by the members of the Board. We can also see why they adopted this attitude, because the new specialization with which we are busy to-day in this sphere also—broader planning and everything it entails—also made it necessary for them to carry out their functions more efficiently. The new composition of the Board also results in these various commissions which will be established in terms of this Bill. These commissions will assist the National Board in various spheres, as is set out in the memorandum.

The first commission, to which reference has already been made, is the one dealing with the registration of welfare organizations. The registration of welfare organizations is of course nothing new, because it was already provided for in the 1947 Act. But unfortunately there was such a volume of work in respect of the registrations the National Board had to do that the Board could not devote attention to other important work. I am very happy that we are now relieving the National Board of this great volume of work and shifting it to one of the commissions functioning under the National Board, so that the National Board can do other more important work such as research and co-ordination.

The next commission is the one which will mainly deal with the registration of social workers. That is provided for in Clause 33. I shall not deal with it in detail; I just want to refer to the objections the hon. members for Umbilo (Mr. Oldfield) and Rosettenville (Dr. Fisher) mentioned in this regard. The hon. member for Umbilo said .that we were perhaps in too much of a hurry in wanting to establish this registering body now; we should wait a few years before doing so.

Through its own Act.

Yes, even through its own Act. Sir, I cannot see what difference this will really make, because the number of social workers will not increase to such an extent within a year or two or three that it will become possible for them to have their own registering body. We must remember that they will be faced with difficulties if they want to establish and maintain their own registering body. To-day we have approximately 1,000 male and female social workers, who can hardly bear the financial burden of having their own registering body and keeping an office organization. Therefore in fact there will not be a great difference in regard to numbers. The request has been made that these people should be given the opportunity to draw up an ethical code in the meantime before we put this body into operation. I believe that an ethical code can only be established properly if it goes hand in hand with registration, because otherwise it will just exist on paper and there is nobody which can apply that code and impose sanctions. I do not believe that one can draw up such a code in an Act. I know of no other profession whose ethical code is established in legislation. Therefore we believe that as far as the registration of social workers is concerned, we should continue with it immediately. I think we have already postponed this important work for too long.

Then the fear was expressed, also by the hon. member for Rosettenville, that we would perhaps leave the voluntary social workers out in the cold; that not enough recognition was being given to them in this Bill. I believe that this fear is unfounded because these people are referred to in two clauses of this Bill. Clause 15 (4), which refers to nomination lists, for example, provides that any person who takes part voluntarily in social work may be registered. In Clause 33 (2) there is specific reference to the voluntary welfare worker. They are people who can be registered provisionally. It says—

then they can be registered provisionally. The importance of the work done by those people is therefore recognized and provision is made for them in this Bill. Hon. members have referred to the possible part-time training of voluntary welfare workers. I think it would be difficult to arrange for special classes at the universities or other institutions, but I want to suggest that the congresses which are arranged from time to time on a regional basis may perhaps be a forum for training these people. One finds voluntary workers in a particular area and I think those people should go to those congresses with those problems so that the trained people can solve their problems for them and give them guidance as to how to handle certain problems. Often they do not know how to solve a problem because they have not had the background of training. But if these people can receive guidance at the conferences as to how to handle the problems in a particular area, I believe that those conferences will be very useful.

If I feel happy about the position of the voluntary welfare worker in view of the fact that this Bill provides for them, and that their interests will be further taken care of by establishing this registering body, then I feel even happier about the other commissions which are to be established to deal with our family life. On various occasions requests have been made for the establishment of a body which can formulate a family policy. That was done, inter alia, by the Piek Commission; I will not go into that again because that matter has already been fully discussed in the House. The family congress held in Pretoria in 1961, where various churches and other organizations of both language groups were represented, also asked for it. On that occasion Professor Cronje of the University of Pretoria delivered a lecture in regard to the formulation of a family policy, and referring to the task of the State he said the following (translation)—

Therefore in 1961 already various spheres where indicated in which the State could give guidance and where the commission we are appointing here could begin with its activities. During this Session hon. members opposite asked that we should implement the recommendations of the Piek Commission, and one of its specific recommendations was that there should be a body which could formulate a family and population policy. We are therefore glad that they support this aspect of the Bill.

What is of importance, further, is that in this Bill we find the continuous thread of the co-ordination of the activities of voluntary welfare organizations. Without reading the clauses, I may just mention that Clause 4 clearly provides that this will be one of the functions of the National Board. Clause 11 provides that co-ordination will be the function of the Regional Welfare Board.

I want to come back to the registration of welfare workers. It is interesting to note that it was already clear from all the evidence given before the Select Committee of 1945 that there were people who considered that the professional status of the welfare workers should be raised. I just want to read this paragraph from the report of that Select Committee (translation)—-

Therefore in 1945 already there was a general feeling that we should organize our welfare workers into a body so that they could get professional status not only for their own sake but also in the eyes of the public with whom they dealt.

I believe that we are placing a really excellent bit of work on the statute book to-day. The eyes and ears of the Department itself, the existing National Board, the various national bodies, the universities and all the other organizations concerned with welfare work are open to the requirements of the changed circumstances and the changed times. I believe a tribute should be paid to the Department for the manner in which it summarized the views and objects of all those bodies and embodied them in a bit of legislation like this. The Department once again gave the lead and I believe that the words used by the Deputy Minister in 1961 in regard to this legislation will remain true. He said the following at the time (translation)—

(He was referring to certain amendments which were being made)—

Mr. Speaker, to me it is very important that those who do voluntary welfare work should give the State the opportunity, through its officials, to do the necessary planning—as I said a moment ago, the Department is wide awake to the needs that arise—and that they are willing to accept the guidance of the State. I believe that the State has again given guidance and I do not think there can be any objections from any welfare organization or from any training institution to once more accepting the guidance given by the State in these various spheres, and to giving the Department the necessary support.

This Bill marks a changing epoch in the outlook of this country. Most of us on this side of the House have pleaded with the Government to appreciate that the country is moving as a social unit from the pastoral group to the industrial group. This Bill is the first step which the hon. the Minister and his Department have taken on the road to show that they understand the important change which is taking place. It is evident that the Minister now sees that the days when there was always room for the poor and aged relative, when there was always the family to help, have passed. The grandma can no longer be sure of care in her old age. It also shows quite clearly that the hon. Minister’s Department realizes at last that they must take active steps, not only to relieve poverty or misfortune when it arises but to foresee it and attempt to prevent it.

It goes further; it is the first step to a welfare state. I think it is about two to three years ago that the hon. the Minister of Finance made a clear and definite statement in reply to me that we were not a welfare state. It is true that we are not a welfare state but this is the first step. The hon. the Minister went overseas last year and he obviously saw many things and he learnt many things. I believe he learnt a great deal of what he has incorporated in this Bill. He appreciates, as I say, that the whole motive of his Department must now be changed from a passive to an active form of helping the unfortunates of this country. I commend him for it. He has given a great deal of thought and attention to this Bill; it is a new approach; it is a new development; it is unfortunately due to modern life. It is not his fault that his Department now has to take active steps; it is not his fault that social life in this country has changed in character for the worse in this respect. He has at least realized that it is happening and he is taking what steps he can. For this I commend him.

There are certain difficulties and dangers in this Bill, however. I think one of them is the creation of an army of officials. I will not go so far as to say that we may have more officials than there will be humble people to be cared for. That will be going a little too far. But I do feel that there are going to be so many officials that a fair amount of the funds which is supplied by the State to this Department will be used to pay those officials rather than to assist those who are hungry. It is a Parkinsonian danger, Sir, which is possible in most departments. I trust the hon. the Minister will take care and will tell us at some later date what proportion of the funds at his disposal is used to pay workers, and how much is paid out as assistance to those who need it.

Now, Sir, I should like to refer to some of the problems facing the hon. the Minister. In the first place we have the development of this new profession. It is a profession which has, perhaps, advanced further in other countries than it has here, but then one must bear in mind that those other countries had to face these problems before we encountered them. We are only getting into our stride now. At the moment this profession has to rely entirely on the Minister and his Department. For practical purposes one has to assume that it is the hon. the Minister’s Department which is going to make or break this profession, for the time being at any rate, because the profession cannot be broken for ever. Something good cannot be kept down for ever. In his opening speech the Minister displayed commendable sympathy for and appreciation of the problems facing this particular kind of work. Compared to other professions, this profession has entered the public field rather late. It faces problems which other professions were able to deal with in different ways. In this particular case, as the profession is almost entirely dependent on a Department of State, it is, if I may use the word, encumbered by all the trappings, the rules and regulations of a State Department. It is subject to auditors’ inspections and financial control plus Parliamentary criticism. Under the circumstances, these things are unavoidable. All these control measures are particularly keenly applied in this Department, as it is, from a financial point of view, the most difficult Department to supervise. It must be extremely difficult to account for every sixpence that is distributed to those in need of assistance. I sympathize with the hon. the Minister in this respect. Nevertheless, as I said, this Department can help or it can hinder this profession. Therefore I want to put the thought into the hon. the Minister’s mind that he should deal more and more sympathetically with this group. I have made a study of how various professions came into being. My own profession was probably established first, after the church and the law. It started off by being an association of groups of people who had common talks and common means of working on common ideas. Thus the great colleges of medicine and surgery in the United Kingdom and Ireland were founded. They received no recognition at first, but gradually the public came to realize that mere membership of these colleges was to some extent a guarantee of knowledge and honesty, security and reliability. So these colleges became more and more what has been called “qualifying associations”. There were other colleges, but for the purpose of this debate I will confine my remarks to this particular group. So we find that somewhere in the region of 1855 in Great Britain it was decided to pass a Medical Act which limited the practice of medicine to certain qualified people, and it tried to encourage and control the education of these people. So it came to pass that these medical associations became the controlling bodies which gave the qualification to the practitioners. Later the universities came into the picture and since then to a large extent—but not altogether—the qualifications have been decided upon by the universities, by their teachers. They have undertaken this work. But the universities do no more than to qualify doctors. They do not, for instance, give them the right to practise. That right is conferred by a different body, a body which has been specially constituted for this purpose. The mere possession of a degree in medicine does not entitle the holder thereof to practise. A statutory body considers and decides the right to practise, it can grant the right and it can withdraw that right. A similar statutory body with a national charter should emerge to control and educate and develop this profession.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister to take the greatest care not to hinder the development of this new profession. I ask him to encourage it, to raise its standards, to define its standards, and to define the responsibility and the behaviour of those who are accepted into its ranks. It has been said, Sir, that a code of ethics must be laid down for this profession. It is in this Bill that a code of ethics—a code prescribing how people should behave—must be laid down. Reference is made to how they shall be tried, in cases of improper conduct.

Well, Sir, this whole aspect is such a difficult one, that I ask the hon. the Minister to give this matter further thought. No-one knows, and indeed, no-one can know, what code these people must observe. It goes without saying, of course, that they must behave like ordinary, decent, educated people. But in this respect their position is no different from that of the ordinary citizen. Does the common law not affect each and every one of us in the same way? May I say that I am one with a wide experience, experience of a special ethical code, and special ethical conduct, one who has been a member of ethical courts. I say, Sir, for us, for this House, to define a code of ethics of a new profession is something quite beyond our capability and competence. The ethical conduct to be observed — what is right and what is wrong—will be decided by these people themselves with the passage of time. The code will evolve; it cannot be forced. While the hon. the Minister has assumed certain powers to say what is right and what is wrong, I want him to regard this as purely a temporary measure. I want him to view it as a matter which is unfortunately thrust upon him because of the position he occupies. As soon as sufficient numbers of members of this profession exist, as soon as the association of these people is large enough, responsible enough and knowledgeable enough to take over control from him, he should with the greatest of pleasure hand it to them. In work of this kind, Sir, a man must be tried by his peers. He must be tried and controlled and instructed by those people who themselves do work similar to that done by him. Do not try to set by regulation a standard which is impossible to define.

I want to deal with another aspect and that is again to draw a simile from my own experience. One of the results of this Bill, I am satisfied, will be that the voluntary field worker will disappear. Slowly but surely the supply will dry up, very much as happened in medicine. When the doctors first went out to see the sick they did not have nurses or chemists. They compounded (as is still done in this country in some areas) medicines themselves. When they had sick people in bed, they frequently had to stay with the patient themselves because they had no nurses whom they could call in to help. That was the pattern of the care of the sick from time immemorial, but then life progressed, and there were bigger concentrations of people and more doctors. The difficulty of earning a living prevented the relatives from looking after the sick. As that happened it was increasingly realized that ancillary services should be developed. As drugs increased we needed the chemists, and as illness became more complicated we needed the nurses. The Minister already has old-age homes and hospitals, but has he the workers? I want him to remember that the professional social worker is not going to do the donkey work for him. He must think in terms of developing ancillary services. He must try to develop someone to take the place occupied by the nurse in medicine, and that person, as was suggested by the hon. member for Rosettenville (Dr. Fisher) will have to be paid. No longer can he depend on the voluntary workers. They will be there for a time. There will always be do-gooders, but if this Bill is to succeed he will have to train a completely new team. His outlook must be that he must produce a team which will go out and seek the people who are needy and lonely.

I should like to put into the Minister’s mind another suggestion which was brought forward by my hon. friend Dr. Fisher, and that is that he must co-operate more and more with the Department of Health. Personally, I would go so far as to say that I would like to see his Department separated from the Department of Pensions and the Department of Social Welfare put into an improved Department of Health, because more and more do their paths tend to meet. Who finds the needy? Who goes to see them? The doctors go to see them because they are called when they are ill. Very often the social welfare worker goes out and finds people ill and they send for the district surgeon. More and more is the mental health department discharging its patients earlier and earlier. Patients who used to stay in mental hospitals for years, or even for one year, now go back within two months, and the hope is that they have not lost touch with their families. But if a patient has been in a mental hospital for a year, it is difficult to get him back in the family circle; their families have grown away from them and there is no room for them any longer. The mental health workers are trying to develop a community nurse who should be part of the field workers. The whole organization in the lower echelons, the whole organization of persons who go out to seek the needy, both in medicine and in social work, is something which is absent from this Bill. I hope the Minister will come to us next year with another Bill to encourage development of these workers which we will be able to support.

I do not want to become involved in the academic argument advanced by the hon. member—as to whether this measure is taking us in the direction of a welfare state. I do not think that this is the time to discuss a question of this nature, nor will you permit me to do so, Sir. The contention of the hon. member, which may be relevant but which is not correct, was that the hon. the Minister will have to have welfare workers on the same footing as that of nurses in medicine, but I suppose he does not know that that is precisely what the position is at present. They do what he calls the donkey work. The report of the Christian Social Council mentions the enormous number of visits which are paid by welfare workers in my own constituency. They visit families and they are not only nurses but they are also virtually psychologists. When one sees the number of people who are rehabilitated, some of whom are ex-convicts from our gaols, one is compelled to give the greatest praise to the Department of Social Welfare and to all the other voluntary welfare organizations doing this good work.

I have no doubts of any nature as far as this Bill is concerned. On the contrary, before notice for the introduction of this Bill was given I had doubts in regard to certain aspects which I would have felt compelled to raise in this House. One of these is this. I notice that a circular is sometimes issued by what is known as the Community Chest to businessmen who contribute large sums of money to this organization and in this circular there is a long list of bodies and organizations which apparently derive benefit from the Community Chest. But when one analyses the list one finds the same persons under different names. As I read the Bill this will now no longer happen. Why is this so? It is because the large contributors feel unhappy if they make a large annual contribution and then find, just as I did, that in the list of organizations which will derive benefit from their contributions, the list which is submitted to them, the same bodies or persons appearing under one name also appear under another name. That is not fair play. This fact has caused many people, who would otherwise have made contributions, to hesitate, because the moment one notices something of this nature one thinks that there is something wrong. This Bill will put an end to this sort of thing because all these organizations will now be properly registered and controlled. The board also has the power to withdraw registration and to exercise supervision over funds. This is one of the most important reasons why I am so much in favour of this Bill. There will be no duplication of work in the future and contributors will be happier in making their contributions because they will know that these funds will be used in a reasonable way and that some person will not obtain something through one organization and also through another organization. They will know that these funds have been allocated on a fair and reasonable basis instead of some persons succeeding in various sly ways in obtaining something through one organization and also through another organization. That is not fair; it has happened in the past and even if this Bill had not been introduced I should in any event have felt compelled to raise this matter in this House sooner or later. I hope that it is clear to the hon. gentlemen. A great deal has already been done and more can now be done in connection with family rehabilitation.

I wish that all hon. members in this House had the privilege of having in their constituencies as efficient an organization, an organization which co-operates so well with the Department of Social Welfare, as I have in my constituency. I do not know of one case of welfare work which has had to be done and which has not been done properly. I want to say here this afternoon that any voluntary worker who wants to offer his or her services and who is not connected with some or other religious body, cannot expect to enjoy the respect which is enjoyed by social workers connected with a religious body—I do not care what religious body it is. When voluntary workers function under some or other religious body they immediately have a personal contact which the Department of Social Welfare does not have. One immediately has contact between the individual in need of welfare work and the social welfare organization which functions under a religious body. This is very effective. It immediately ensures that no single person is passed over; it ensures that every person will receive the assistance to which he is entiled from the Department of Social Welfare. Fortunately and unfortunately, there is a very small percentage of people who need help but who do not belong to some or other religious organization. It is those people who may sometimes present a problem and it may well be in this sphere that one may receive complaints at some or other stage. We We must remember that it is physically impossible for the local representative of the Department to trace every case requiring assistance if he does not have the help of the local religious and other bodies. I think that the biggest problem is present by those people who apply individually for assistance, those cases in which there is no liaison between the Department and some or other religious body. That is why I should like to appeal to the Department to make it known that it is far easier for the Department to deal more efficiently with these matters if applications for assistance reach the Department via some or other registered welfare organization. The work of the Department is then made far more easy, far less arduous and far more efficient. Sir, I also just want to tell hon. members who are concerned lest we do not obtain the cooperation of voluntary workers in this regard that I do not believe that they have any reason to feel concerned in this connection. I think that the professional welfare workers go out of their way to obtain the services of as many voluntary welfare workers as possible to assist them to make contact with the various individuals who need help. I do not think that there are any grounds for hon. members’ fear in this connection. We know now that the future pattern will be as follows: The State Department will take the lead and will be followed by the registered welfare organizations which in their turn will be assisted by individuals. The policy as formulated will then be properly implemented with the assistance of these organizations. Sir, there is one thing which we must also admit here to-day and that is that there are few problems to-day which are tackled with as much determination as is this problem by means of this Bill. There is no question of half-heartedness; I think that the only sign of half-heartedness is the measure of doubt which has been expressed by a few hon. members opposite. I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his Department most heartily on the great work they are doing. I trust that everyone will welcome this Bill and that the organizations concerned will give more effective support to the Department in the future.