Mr Chairman, I move without notice:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, I move:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, various hon members have expressed their appreciation for the achievements of the Post Office during the past financial year. Various hon members also showed a clear understanding of the reasons for having to effect tariff adjustments. All the hon members involved also expressed their thanks for the dedicated service rendered by the officials of the Post Office, and mention was also made of the exceptional contribution made by the Post Office during the recent election, for example by providing election telephones and other special services. I appreciate these fine words that were addressed to the officials of the Post Office, and I shall convey them to these people.

Then there were other members who were critical. There were hon members who hinted at poor financial control, injudicious planning and so on. That is of course what we are here for, Mr Chairman. It is a good thing that we weigh up and assess all the arguments and counter-arguments. Before the adjournment of the House yesterday evening I quoted from the provisions of the Post Office Act as to how the Post Office should be managed. It is a statutory requirement that the Post Office shall be administered in accordance with business principles. At the same time, however, the Act states a further requirement, namely that this shall be done having due regard to the promotion of commerce, industry and agriculture, in all parts of the Republic. In our far-flung and sparsely populated country, with its limited capital resources this second requirement is not only difficult to implement but also difficult to reconcile with the requirements of business principles.

When one looks back over a large number of years at what has happened in the Post Office, it is clear that in general these divergent requirements have been well implemented in practice. Nothing stands still; the development of this country entails that new circumstances, new opportunities and new challenges arise, and one has to keep pace with them. The process of adjustment to these changes is an ongoing process, and this is what the Post Office has done.

The statement that to effect changes proves that matters are not healthy, as the hon member for Overvaal said inter alia, really says nothing but that they would rather prefer stagnation.

I think it is more likely to be a lack of adaptations that would demonstrate that matters were not on a healthy footing. I should like to mention an example in this connection. An example of changes which came with time is a change in the pattern of the demand for the telephone service. Analyses and investigations carried out in this connection recently indicated that over the past few years there has been a shift in demand from business to residential services. This is still taking place, particularly in the Black residential areas.

It goes without saying that business services produce more revenue than residential services. The shift in the demand consequently means that more capital has to be invested in the less profitable services, and that is the dilemma in which the Post Office finds itself.

As I said in my Budget Speech, it was clear that considerable adjustments to telephone subscriptions were necessary. The subsidisation of rentals by means of call charges is becoming excessive. The fact that rentals are too low also results in an artificial demand for services that are insufficiently used, and it is essential to adjust tariffs to this situation. If one is to take business principles into consideration at all, one has to address this problem.

The Post Office has to reconcile a few matters, including the fact that it has to render an increasing number of additional services at tariffs that are too low; it has to invest large amounts of scarce capital without a good return from it; and tariffs have been kept low for many years, particularly to keep the inflation rate in check as much as possible, but the point is now being reached at which the tariff pattern itself is becoming inflationary. I shall explain this: If the moneys received for telephone calls have to subsidise the rentals, it means that the cost structure of business enterprises—that make the most calls—and therefore their prices, are forced upwards; higher than they ought to be.

Attention will simply have to be given to this cross-subsidisation so as to eliminate the inflationary effect. I do not think that hon members on the opposite side of this House really have any objection to this logic. I sympathise with the hon member who acknowledged plaintively that it was necessary to reconcile tariffs with business principles, but asked why it was only the tariffs of all business undertakings that always had to be increased. I want to tell him that all of us would like the reply to that question.

There are still one or two little matters in connection with tariff increases to which I want to refer. I expected a reference to be made to the tariff increases which were only announced after the election. The reply to the question why we waited with the increases until after the election is easy. Firstly there was in fact an increase prior to the election, namely in the tariff for standard letters. At the time I indicated clearly why this was urgently necessary at that stage. In addition I just want to point out that the election meant that the Budget had to be postponed. For a healthy assessment of the true financial needs—based on the latest figures, of course—it was desirable to wait with general tariff increases as well. Consequently there is a very simple reason why we are only announcing the general tariff increases now.

Another question that was raised was whether Post Office tariffs would be increased again during the present financial year. I do not know where that idea comes from. Possibly those hon members are confusing the Post Office Budget with the Transport Services Budget. I should like to give hon members the assurance that it was not, and is not, the idea to introduce further tariff increases during the present financial year. [Interjections.] I am certain the Official Opposition will honour the undertaking given by the hon member for Overvaal, and now support the Bill. [Interjections.]

I support it.

Thank you very much.

I should like to reply briefly to various points hon members made. Naturally it is not possible to deal with each one of them, because there was a wide-ranging discussion, and I want to thank hon members for the general standard that was set, as well as for the interest they obviously have in the affairs of the Post Office.

The hon member for Overvaal said inter alia that not enough was being done as far as training was concerned. He said training ought to receive greater priority in order to increase productivity. Those were good, sound statements the hon member made. He also asked how many of the students undergoing training were Whites. There are 5 000 students undergoing training, of whom 3 270 are Whites, and the annual expenditure of R150 million, to which I referred in my Budget Speech, relates only to technical training. In addition there are 1 492 officers who attended internal management courses during the previous financial year. This year, for example, 1 350 clerks are being trained. Training and higher academic qualifications are accorded a high priority in the Post Office, and no deserving application for a bursary is refused. Therefore I am pleased to be able to inform the hon member that 453 bursaries were again allocated in 1987, at a cost of more than R1 million.

The hon member also referred to the new, interesting card-operated telephones, and asked where the field tests were taking place. I have been informed that they will take place at places such as military camps, where cards can easily be sold in large numbers, and the observation of results can easily take place.

As regards the waiting applicants for ordinary telephones, an estimated 31 000 Whites, 12 000 Coloureds, 8 000 Asians and 117 000 Blacks were waiting for telephones on 30 April 1987. This brings us to the total of 168 000 waiting applicants, to which I referred earlier. These applicants are scattered all over the country. Although many of them will be provided with telephones during this financial year, the figure is expected to rise. The position next year will be determined according to the demand. I want to point out specifically that the Post Office is finding that applications for residential telephones at present represent a large number of the total. The figure I am furnishing here includes only residential telephones.

I thank the hon member for Boksburg for his pithy contribution. The hon member was doing my work of course when he exposed the ulterior political motives of the hon member for Overvaal in respect of the tariff increases, and by pointing out the contrasting favourable reaction to the tariff adjustments observed in the private sector. The department has great appreciation for the understanding commerce and industry is displaying in this matter, particularly if one takes into account that they are being hit the hardest by the tariff increases. The hon member for Boksburg did well to present the matter in its correct perspective. I thank him for doing so. He also made the very valid observation that there was usually a great deal of criticism of tariff increases, but that no one had come forward with other acceptable solutions.

The hon member also referred to the way in which the Post Office was supporting the electronics industry. I want to assure him that the Post Office, as in the past, will judiciously continue its support for the local electronics industry. To derive from this the greatest benefit for the country, increasing emphasis will be placed on local design in order to create export possibilities—as in the case of the new BTS100 for example.

†I also have something to say to the hon member for Greytown.

Good speech!

I want to start with the positive contribution the hon member made to the debate, the good part of his speech. [Interjections.] His suggestion was that the department should, together with its budget documents, make available for discussion a working document, generally giving more information on and background to the proposals and the assumptions which have been made. I am told that we in fact have been considering ways and means of doing just that. I do not at this stage want to give a firm undertaking, but we most certainly will follow the suggestion that the hon member made, in order to assist hon members of the House.

As far as the rest of the hon member’s speech is concerned, I am sorry to say that I am disappointed at his cynical approach to the Budget. I say this in all fairness to the hon member.

His readiness to picture every fluctuation in the department’s financing, and every deviation from the Budget, as evidence of bad financial management or lack of control— there was also a suggestion that there is a lack of good faith on my part—surprises me. To put it mildly, I do not think the facts merit the sharp criticism that he levelled. I do not propose dealing with all the statements he made in detail but I will try to deal with some of them in the time allowed.

Firstly, he seems to resent my making any claim that economy measures and discipline played a part in the improvement of the department’s finances during the past financial year. The fact is that economy measures and financial discipline played a large part. I emphasised this in my Budget Speech because I thought the staff deserved some praise for what they had done in order to improve the situation.

As regards the improvement of R26 million under the heading, “International Commitments”, which he says was one of those I kept quiet about, I want to say that this was obviously due to the improvement of the rand. I mentioned this improvement in my speech.

As regards the heading “Financing Costs”— according to him it is an item that measures financial control and is an example of bad financial management—he referred to the variation of R24 million under item 1.11.1, “Cost of loans, stock and bonds”. What happened there was not that the estimate was bad but that the discount on local stock was transferred to item 1.11.3 under the same heading. It is considered more proper to have it there. An enquiry about this would have elicited the facts about this innocuous change but he preferred to jump to the conclusion that it was bad estimating.

He also queried the reason for spending R25 million more than the estimate on the payment of interest on savings bank certificates and called it “a poor effort as far as financial control is concerned”. The fact is that we were fortunate in attracting far more funds in savings bank certificates than we had anticipated. Of course, we had to pay additional interest on those extra funds. I therefore fail to see what “bad control” had to do with this.

I now want to turn to the hon member’s complaint about the department’s “financing long-term assets with short-term funds”— that is how I think he put it. I can only say that it is wishful thinking to imagine that we shall be able to do borrowing mainly on 20 or 25 year terms. It is true that many of the assets for which we borrow money have long life spans; it is also desirable to try to bring redemption periods into line with the depreciation periods as far as may be reasonable. However, the relationship between redemption and depreciation periods is no sacred cow. First and foremost we must do what is practical as far as borrowing is concerned.

A further point I wish to mention is the hon member’s reference to our practice of providing for the higher replacement costs of assets in our general depreciation policy. This is not something the department thought up for itself. It is something insisted upon in the recommendations of the Franzsen Committee on Post Office financing. I think such a provision is obviously justified particularly under our present depreciation rates. However, this is one of the matters we are examining and will also tie up with the investigation into various financial matters that is now under way. I want to assure the hon member that I shall deal with that as soon as I am in a position to do so.

Mr Chairman, the hon member did make some other positive remarks. I do not want him to get despondent. The fact is that I have much hope for him to make a considerable contribution in this field as an engineer, but his accountancy ability is perhaps suspect.

Better than that of the former Minister.

Current planning allows for the replacement of existing electro-mechanical exchanges by the year 2010. [Interjections.] While earlier replacement is desirable from many points of view the costs would be beyond the means of the Post Office. The cost of replacement at present-day prices of the switching equipment alone is estimated at R2 billion. To this will need to be added the cost of existing analogues with digital transmission systems. This amount could easily equal or even exceed the cost of the switching equipment.

Two billion rands for switching equipment?

Yes. Much of the existing electro-mechanical equipment is relatively new and provides a satisfactory service. Almost all other administrations I am told have opted for a phased replacement of existing equipment because of the enormous costs involved.

*In reply to the hon member’s statements, the hon member for Primrose has already asked this valid question: Who will have to pay for the early replacement of the equipment, particularly during a time when capital is no longer readily available abroad. It is also not clear how the Post Office will be able to finance this expenditure single-handedly if tariffs had to be fixed, as the hon member for Greytown proposed.

†Mr Chairman, I have the replies to other queries by the hon member. Perhaps he could raise these again at the Committee Stage because I have to hurry along; otherwise I shall write to him in that regard.

*The hon member for Primrose made a good speech. With reference to Posmed, the medical association, the hon member was concerned about the increasing medical costs and asked for the position to be monitored so that Posmed did not find itself in difficulties, as another medical association did. It is a good thing the hon member drew attention to this, but I can tell him that according to all indications the affairs of Posmed are being well managed and the organisation is essentially sound. Nevertheless the department is watching the position closely.

The hon member for Primrose also argued for the further expansion of Telebank. This was a very good proposal. It is true that the department scaled down the marketing of Telebank slightly during the past few months. This was necessary so that attention could be given to expanding the capacity of the system and so that negotiations for an amalgamation with Saswitch could be finalised. In the meantime a research project has also been carried out to determine the profile of Telebank users, and everything is ready now for the further development of the system.

The hon member also mentioned the low profit margins on the agency services rendered by the Post Office. I can give him the assurance that the tariff on these services is regularly adjusted, but there is always a long time-lapse before amended agreements are entered into. However, I shall take note of the hon member’s observation. I think he is quite correct, and we are giving attention to the matter.

The hon member also asked whether the Post Office could not arrange for a further issue of national savings certificates. Of course this is a matter which will have to be considered in close co-operation with the hon the Minister of Finance. The Post Office will of course welcome such an issue, depending on the circumstances, but we shall give urgent attention to this matter as well.

†The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis who has a most interesting background and should be the best qualified of all of us to speak about Post Office affairs …

Hear, hear!

I said: “should be”! [Interjections.]

The hon member referred to the severe economic recession experienced by the country in the recent past and the large number of bankruptcies, especially among smaller concerns, all of which make extensive use of telecommunications services. He queried the cause of the bad debt and asked whether it was not due to integration. Did I understand the hon member correctly?

No, I asked whether it was not due to the extension of the services that the department had had to make a larger provision for bad debts.

Yes, that is correct. I think the hon member is quite correct. I did not follow that query very well and I could not contact the hon member earlier. He is quite correct, however. It is due to the fact that the services were extended.

The hon member also referred to the problems experienced with the Disa telephones. The initial stocks of Disa telephones were equipped with gold and silver alloy pushbutton contacts and no problems were experienced with these ’phones. To reduce costs the contact material was changed to a silver palladium alloy in line with overseas practice. This material proved unstable under various environmental conditions and the telephones had to be modified. We reverted to the use of the old reliable material and there should be no problems in the future.

The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis also wanted to know whether narrowing the wage gap had contributed to the tariff increases announced, and if so, to what extent. I would like to point out to the hon member that full wage parity exists in respect of White, Coloured and Indian personnel, while there are 14 of the lower grades where Black workers still do not receive the same salaries as the other race groups. The funds presently earmarked to narrow the wage gap in respect of these Blacks are such that they had no effect on the tariff increases. They are negligible.

*The hon member for Umlazi referred to the high costs involved in the technical training of personnel and said that training was not being neglected by the Post Office. I am pleased the hon member said that. I hope the hon member for Overvaal was listening. In reality, however, the Post Office serves as a training school for the private sector and loses millions of rands in the process, owing to the high training costs. The hon member set out the problem very skilfully, and also suggested certain solutions. I should like to give the hon member the assurance that the matter he raised is a source of great concern to the department as well, and that attention is already being given to the possibility of utilising the technical training facilities of the Post Office in the interests of the wider economic spectrum, but at an appropriate remuneration.

†The hon member for Durban North referred to the rapidly increasing cost of training which already stands at R150 million per year and to the department’s inability to retain trained staff. He also mentioned the apparent imbalance between the number of employees from the various race groups, and alleged that the ratios had not changed over the years. He said that there were disparities as far as training and the allocation of bursaries were concerned. I want to reply very firmly to the hon member. Training costs have increased rapidly, as already stated. To put the matter in the right perspective I should like to point out that the R150 million includes the salaries of the trainees. The department applies the system of job differentiation to ensure that its staff members are paid market-related salaries.

At the end of October 1986 45% of the total staff were other than white, including six engineers and an appreciable number of persons in the chief and senior technician as well as senior postmaster grades. All staff members receive the same standard of training and qualify for bursaries strictly on merit. The Post Office has done more than any other employer, including those in the private sector, to give persons in all population groups advanced technical training. I wonder whether any other single employer can claim to have assisted six persons in groups other than whites to obtain professional engineer status.

The hon member for South Coast ably referred to the cost of providing a telephone, and it is clear that he is very much aware of the plight of the pensioner. I want to tell the hon member that the Post Office is keenly aware of the plight of social pensioners and other underprivileged citizens to whom the telephone service means a great deal. For this reason, and many others, a means of assisting them in an acceptable manner without undue risk of wide-scale abuse will receive attention. I give the hon member the undertaking that we will consider this matter carefully.

*The hon member for Bethal raised quite a number of points. I cannot deal with all of them. He stated his case very well. He referred inter alia to the appointment of a chaplain. This chaplain does not minister to members of any particular church denomination or population group. He acts interdenominationally, together with other officebearers of the Christian Association of the Post Office, who also do spiritual work among staff members. The appointment of the chaplain as from October 1986 is a new undertaking, and we shall first have to try it out thoroughly. At this stage the chaplain meets the needs of the Post Office, but we shall keep an eye on the position in future.

The hon member also had something to say about the strike. Unfortunately the service regulation stipulating that a worker cannot receive a salary if he stays away from work did not make provision for sit-down strikes. In order to place the situation beyond any doubt, legal advice was sought from a senior advocate. The result was that the regulation had to be amended and that salaries had to be paid to the strikers up to the day on which the amendment to the regulation was promulgated in the Gazette. However we gave urgent attention to the matter, and everything took place within a period of 14 days. After that, after the regulation was promulgated, not one of the strikers was paid.

It is difficult to determine the number of man-hours lost, since the number of strikers varied from day to day. According to estimates, however, it must be in the region of 750 000 hours. The 5 000 workers who went on strike at the end of April all returned to service on 4 May.

The hon member asked whether the loyal workers who did the work during the strike did not deserve a bonus. The workers were all thanked in a suitable manner for their sacrifice, and received overtime pay for the extra work. I have been informed that there was general satisfaction with this arrangement.

In the time at his disposal—which was a long time—the hon member for Hercules held his own in a very competent way. He made a competent plea for the street mail deliveries to be continued, and for the services of postmen to be retained. He may rest assured that the department, as a responsible employer, looks after the interests of all its personnel, as well as the needs of its clients.

The hon member also referred to the constantly rising costs of the postal service, especially labour and transportation, and suggested that mail handling should be mechanised in order to cut costs. This aspect is receiving constant attention from the department, regard being had of course, as the hon member will know, to the high cost of mechanisation, which we have to weigh up against the necessity of providing employment and the cost of labour. I thank the hon member for his valuable contribution.

I want to thank the hon member for Roodeplaat sincerely on his maiden speech and on the very effective way in which he continued the tradition in this House. I know that his forefathers—his grandfather and his father— would have been proud to listen to him in this House, and we have no doubt that he will continue that proud tradition with great honour in this House. He chose a very interesting theme, namely channels and structures of communication, which are so appropriate in the times in which we are living, and I want to give the hon member the assurance that there was great appreciation for his contribution.

He also referred to the provision of telephones in his constituency. So far I have not been able to trace any deficiencies there, although we did make enquiries. Perhaps the hon member could refer to specific problems during the Committee Stage, after which we shall gladly look into them.

The last speaker was the hon member for Heilbron, who singled out the mission of the Post Office as a business institution and mentioned the life cycle of its services. These are very important aspects pertaining to the activities of the Post Office, and I am sorry the hon member did not have time to complete his speech. I am certain, however, that he will still make many valuable contributions to the discussion of the Budgets of this department.

I think I have dealt with all the matters that were raised, and I just want to thank hon members for their contributions.

Question put: That all the words after “That” stand part of the Question.

Question agreed to and amendments dropped (Official Opposition and Progressive Federal Party dissenting).

Bill read a second time.

Motion for House to go into Committee

Mr Chairman, I move:

Agreed to.

Committee Stage

Schedule:

Mr Chairman, at this stage I want to tell the hon the Minister that it was really interesting and pleasant to listen to his reply. The Post Office is the friend of all of us and we should all like to serve its interests. I want to thank the hon the Minister for the way in which he has dealt with the matter so far. The hon members for Primrose, Umlazi and South Coast also made interesting contributions. As far as the hon Minister is concerned, though, I think that a breath of fresh air has entered into the debate. We find the phenomenon arises in other debates that an hon Minister does not always reply to all the questions, or if he does reply, he does not do so in as dignified a way as this hon Minister. He put his case across well and cleared up many things for us that were not clear. I want to thank him for the worthy example he has set.

We are very satisfied with the question of training, if I may refer to it. We have the assurance that the maximum is being done with regard to training, not only of technical personnel, but also of other personnel studying at technicons and universities. I am particularly pleased about the assurance which we have received that if there is a student in the post office who displays merit he will be a certain choice as as candidate for further studies so as to equip himself further and that his training will not be curtailed because of financial or other reasons.

The field tests which were referred to are now going to take place at military camps. It will be very interesting to find out from time to time how these are progressing because it seems to me to be a very interesting system to carry one’s card with one and use it when one wants to make a call.

As far as the Blacks are concerned, the waiting list seems to be a very long one. I do not know how the post office envisages dealing with this long waiting list but if we take a look at the country-wide backlog of 117 000 telephones for Blacks it seems to be a formidable task, but we are sure that with good long-term planning it will be possible to do something about this.

I want to come back to the hon member for Boksburg and congratulate him in the first place on his election as chief spokesman on Post Office matters. I want to tell him that I trust we shall co-operate very well, and do so in the interests of the post office. In general his contribution to the debate was good except that he made four statements to which I should very much like to react.

I am a little upset about a few things he said; I do not think they were carefully considered. Firstly, he said that the Official Opposition was not concerned about what was in the interests of the Post Office or of South Africa. I want to ask the hon member if he stands by that.

Yes!

He says “yes”. He says that he adheres to the view that the Official Opposition is not concerned about the interests of South Africa. The hon Minister of Communications was very appreciative of the role the Official Opposition is playing, but here we have the hon member for Boksburg saying that the CP is not concerned about South Africa’s interests.

That is a very dangerous and mistaken tendency the hon member is revealing. We should not drag one another’s loyalty to South Africa into debates. I want to tell the hon member that my loyalty to my country is in no way inferior to his loyalty to South Africa. I do not think there is a single hon member in this House whose loyalty to South Africa is greater or less than mine. We should keep such things outside the party political arena, otherwise it is nothing but politicisation. I want to tell the hon member candidly that neither he nor anyone else has the right to cast doubt on the loyalty of any hon member of the CP to South Africa. I think he made a very big mistake and did not give the matter careful thought. I think the least he could do is to offer us an apology. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Bellville is having a good laugh about it but I want to ask him whether he shares the standpoint of the hon member for Boksburg that the CP does not put South Africa’s interests first.

Make your speech and say what you want to say!

I am making my speech, and anyway, that hon member is not the chairman. He preached to the new hon members to such an extent that I think he should stand in front of a mirror and preach to himself.

Secondly, the hon member criticised the fact that I thanked the post office personnel. I am keeping to important aspects of the debate and dealing with relevant matters which we want to clear up.

Order! I request the hon member to confine himself to the items in the Schedule. I cannot allow another second reading debate during the committee stage.

I understand, Sir. Before I came to increases which were specifically relevant I merely, as the first speaker during the Committee Stage, wanted to refer to certain things which required clarification.

The hon member for Boksburg criticised the fact that we thanked the post office personnel. I want to tell him that that was another example of bad taste. If we want to thank the Post Office personnel the hon member does not have to comment on it, as he has done. I am now coming to the last point I should like to refer to in the hon member’s speech, before I leave this subject and go on to the next. He said that I had spoken disparagingly about the post office personnel. Where in my Press statements or in my Second Reading speech did I disparage the post office personnel? The hon member must stand up and indicate where I did it, because it is absolutely untrue. [Interjections.] It is simply not so; it is a politicisation of the debate.

Our standpoint is very clear: When we criticise the hon Minister on this Vote, we criticise him because he is the political head of the Post Office. We draw a distinction between the hon the Minister in his role as our political opponent and the personnel of the Post Office. We have no axe to grind with the members of the Post Office personnel nor do we have any problems with them; we are satisfied with their contribution. We do draw a distinction as far as the hon Minister is concerned because he is its political head.

We criticise him because of the tariff increases. It remains a sore point and I think the hon the Minister realises it. If we take into consideration that the units for coin-operated telephones have been increased from 10 to 20 cents it is a huge increase. Primarily it is going to place a heavy burden on students, senior citizens and soldiers. Of course it would be interesting to hear—the next Government speaker will perhaps be able to furnish us with the particulars, if he has them—who in fact uses coin-operated telephones. Has an investigation perhaps been carried out? We would have liked to have had more particulars about it so that one could determine what the saving was in this regard.

I also think that an increase in the telephone rental from R3 to R5,50 per month is a little excessive. The question is also: Precisely how much is being saved? I know that some of the figures are available, but perhaps the hon the Minister could just mention them. The costs of telegrams have not been moderately increased, they have been drastically increased. An increase of R1,30 to R2,50 for handling costs and from 8 cents to 12 cents per word is drastic. The installation cost has been increased from R90 to R125. That, too, is not a moderate increase.

I want to be appreciative as far as the increase in the telephone installation fee is concerned because the position of senior citizens remains protected; they only pay R25. I also want to put in a good word for the Post Office as far as telephones used during the election were concerned. As a political party we not only received a very low tariff of a mere R9 to pay for a line instead of R90, we also received very good and impartial service from the Post Office. The low tariff was in itself a remarkable concession because if one wanted ten lines it only cost one R90 instead R900. I should like to end my contribution by telling the hon the Minister once again that we have much appreciation for the good things the hon the Minister himself and the Post Office personnel have done for the Post Office and for the country.

Mr Chairman, I must warn the hon Minister that one should be careful once the opposition starts bestowing praise on one.

The Post Office is administered in accordance with business principles, and to be able to do that the Post Office must excel in certain areas. Under the guidance of the Postmaster General and his four deputies, namely: Finance, Telecommunications, Marketing and Auxiliary Services and Personnel and Postal Services, they have with the help of the Post Office personnel this year ensured a particularly good Budget. In the present economic climate there are few private firms that can pride themselves on results such as the Post Office has obtained this year.

For many years now a spirit of responsibility and of service has prevailed among the personnel of the Post Office. I should like to refer, by way of example, to the recent strike when assistance was volunteered by the personnel who were not on strike, and what is more without extra remuneration. They ensure that the services provided were not interrupted.

Since the Post Office has the sole right in connection with the rendering of postal services, it was pointed out that the ongoing basis is one of looking after clients and their needs, and at all times rendering the most effective and adequate service. In this regard for example the need for longer postal hours was pointed out. In certain large post offices in the large centres, post offices have since last year been open during lunch hours so that people could also utilise the service during lunch hours. Subsequently, this service has been expanded to more than 100 post offices in the large urban areas. Furthermore, permission has also been given for post offices to remain open until six in the evening at our holiday resorts such as Durban, so that holidaymakers can also be afforded the opportunity of utilising the service. In addition to that, a service until six in the evening is also being rendered in large shopping centres such as the Eastgate Centre on the East Rand.

The Post Office maintains very good labour relations with its staff and that is why the department strives to establish good and positive channels of communication between employer and employees. In fact they consider it to be a cornerstone of healthy labour relations and do everything possible in order to utilise them effectively.

In striving for this goal the Post Office has given approval to the appointment of six labour relations officers in the Northern Transvaal, the Witwatersrand, Natal, the Free State, the South-Eastern Transvaal as well as in the Eastern Cape. The duties of these labour relations officials are inter alia to pay attention to the problems with which the Post Office has to deal in the working situation. The expansion of this system will depend upon the results which are achieved.

Despite the levelling off in the economy during the past few years there has been sustained growth in the Post Office’s operations, especially in the field of telecommunications. As a result it became necessary to reinforce the personnel fund in order to ensure quick and satisfactory service.

Over the past ten years there has been an average growth in personnel of 4,1% per annum. By means of training and increased productivity the Post Office was able to limit its personnel expansion to the minimum. On the other hand the Post Office ensures that staff members who excel receive the necessary acknowledgement in the form of service bonuses, merit bonuses and incentive bonuses.

The pensioners of the Post Office are also being cared for. In 1986 at Derdepoort in Pretoria, the first retirement resort for Post Office pensioners was opened. Provision is being made there for the aged who are able to look after themselves as well as those who are not able to do so. This scheme is also being run as a business concern. An individual can purchase such a living unit for R49 000 and live there for as long as he or she wants to. Should he decide to move, the amount is paid back to him without interest, or in the case of his death it is paid into his estate.

I maintain that the successes and achievements of the Post Office over the past year can be attributed mainly to the fine cooperation between its personnel and its strong management team.

Mr Chairman, I have two matters that I want to raise with the hon the Minister in the short time at my disposal.

The other day I asked the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning what the population of Greater Soweto was as at 31 December 1986. The reply I received was 1 474 000 people which I think is somewhat nearer the mark than the answer I received last year when the figure that was given was 951 726 people. However, I believe the recent figure is also an underestimate and that there are probably well over 2 million people living in Greater Soweto today.

The point of mentioning that statistic is that although there are 26 individual townships like Diepkloof, Meadowlands etc in Greater Soweto and about 20 township offices, there are, I believe, only four post-offices in Greater Soweto—four post offices to serve nearly one and a half million people, which is below the estimate of the population that I have given!

It goes without saying that postal facilities are extensively used by the people of Soweto many of whom have ties with people living in the rural homelands. It is clear, therefore, that the four post offices must be totally inadequate. I want to ask the new hon Minister of Communications what he intends doing about this matter and whether fie has any plans to build more post offices in Greater Soweto.

Secondly, once he has done that, I want to know from the hon the Minister whether he will then consider—indeed sooner than that, if possible—opening postal facilities to Black pensioners. I understand that there about 40 000 Black pensioners living in Greater Soweto and the present arrangements with respect to them are nothing but inhuman.

These are old people, many of them crippled, who have to queue for hours to get their meagre pension of R194 every two months at payout points in the townships. I understand that many of them get up at 04h00 in order to get there and they sometimes wait eight hours in the queue in the most inclement weather before they are finally able to get their pensions. As I said, many of them are old and crippled.

Social workers have commented frequently on the racist distinction in the services offered to pensioners of other races and the services offered to Black pensioners. If one is a White, Coloured or Indian old-age pensioner one is able to collect one’s pension at the post offices—at any time, incidentally; not just at one particular time where one has to queue for hours, but at any time convenient to one. One can also ask the pensions department to pay one’s pension into a post office or building society savings account.

This system would be fine if Black old age pensioners had any savings to put into savings accounts, but they obviously have not. These are very poor people; the means test is set at a very low level to enable them to get a pension and it is highly unlikely that during their working lives any of them has managed to save enough money to start a savings account. This therefore is no solution and in any case I do not believe that we can leave it to the private sector to try to solve this problem. This is essentially a problem that the State should resolve.

I know that for the past six months or so an investigation, initiated by The Sowetan, has been under way to test the feasibility of various schemes and I hope that the newly appointed hon Minister is going to take this matter quite seriously.

Not only do people have to wait in long queues—sometimes for eight hours—to get paid out, but because information on the main payout points and their times of operation are common knowledge, these people are subject to exploitation of all kinds. They are old people who are unprotected and vendors of all sorts of goods congregate there and press their wares on them. As a result they often get into serious trouble with their families when they return home and it is found that they have spent their pensions on all sorts of goods regarded by their families as unnecessary. They also fall prey to robbers.

The existing system for paying out pensions to those people is therefore totally unsatisfactory whichever way one looks at it and I very much hope that the hon the Minister will do something about this matter.

Mr Chairman, I am sure that since she has put very specific points to the hon the Minister, the hon member for Houghton will pardon me if I do not follow directly on her speech.

*During the Second Reading debate in particular, various members referred to and expressed their thanks to the Post Office for its contribution during the election campaign. Not only do I want to associate myself with these expressions of thanks, but I should like to address a few specific matters, and make a few requests to the hon the Minister.

By way of background, I think it is a general feature of urban and semi-urban constituencies in particular that there has in recent times been a drastic increase in the number of voters on the voters’ roll. Constituencies with well over 20 000 voters are no longer an unusual occurrence. One of the consequences of this situation is that modern communication techniques have to be used to an increasing extent in order to liaise with voters. This is particularly the case when one takes note of the nature of the demands being made on political organisations as far as their manpower requirements are concerned. Calculations indicate that a voters’ list of approximately 20 000 voters represents approximately 9 000 visiting points. Calculated at a minimum average expenditure of time …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Could the hon member for Springs please inform us under what item the specific voters’s lists fall?

Order! The hon member for Springs may proceed. I trust that he will soon indicate what item of the Schedule he is discussing.

Mr Chairman, as I said at the outset, I am trying to sketch the background against which I wish to address my specific requests. [Interjections.]

You learn quickly, don’t you?

At an average of five minutes time spent per visiting point, it means that 750 man-hours are required to visit all the visiting points, and then fruitless visits to voters who are not at home, as well as follow-up visits, are not even being taken into account. Since modern mass commuication techniques, such as media advertisements, are also beginning to play an increasingly important role in election campaigns, the role of the Post Office services is also becoming increasingly important. In some cases the services of the Post Office have begun to play a central function in election campaigns. As it becomes increasingly more difficult, particularly in urban and semi-urban constituencies, to contact every voter personally, the personal letter and telelphone call are becoming a very good second best …

Did you not have any help, Piet?

Mr chairman, it was very clear that the Conservative Party in Springs did not master these techniques. That is why the National Party is in possession of that seat. [Interjections.]

It was because the Progs voted for you! [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, in any case it is very clear that I communicate with the majority of the voters better than my opponents. [Interjections.]

As I have said, the personal letter and telephone call are developing into a very good second best, and in some cases even the best, alternative to personal contact with a view to conveying information to the voters. I am also convinced—in this respect I want to associate myself with the hon member for Overvaal who expressed thanks for the low tariff charged for installing telephones—that we also owe the hon the Minister and the department thanks for the special low tariff which applied in regard to postal articles relating specifically to the election. With that, I think, an exceptional contribution was made to the overall election campaign.

In a lighter vein, Mr Chairman, I want to add that this concession was perhaps granted to all political workers on compassionate grounds. You see, Sir, we do have something in common with some Post Office workers when we visit private homes. In 1986, for example, 286 cases were reported of Post Office officials being attacked by privately-owned dogs in the performance of their official duties.

Apart from this rebate on postal tariffs and the cheaper installation costs, I think there is another aspect which perhaps deserves attention. In numerous constituencies—in fact I think in most constituencies—the cost of telephone calls made in accordance with the special cheaper services provided still runs into astronomical amounts. It would be interesting if the hon the Minister could have a calculation or estimate made of what the total amount was that was spent during the past general election by political parties on calls, in spite of the cheaper telephone services. What is more important, however, is the request I want to make to the hon the Minister and the Post Office, namely to institute an investigation with a view to the future into the possibility of introducing special election tariffs, or a special rebate on telephone calls, when such services are installed with a special view to an election. With that no new principle will be established. The principle I think has already been established with the cheaper installation fee. The issue, however, is how practicable it is to expand this principle to the tariff for calls as well. The fact of the matter is that if it is practicable, such a lower tariff or rebate could make an important contribution to counteracting the disquieting increase in the cost of elections.

I should also like to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the staff of the Post Office, specifically in my constituency, for the services they render.

In mine as well.

Yes, I think it applies to all constituencies. What impressed me particularly was that Post Office technical staff were on permanent standby on polling day at all polling stations to ensure that there were no delays in the services.

There is one other matter which I think also deserves attention, and which we encountered specifically in Springs, and that was a measure of sabotage of our telephone service. Perhaps it was because some people could not master the techniques. For example, a call would be made to one of your key telephone services, and then the receiver would not be replaced on the other side. One experience we had was that the receiver was left dangling next to a radio all night, and the service was effectively cut off. During the course of the campaign we made enquiries, and it appeared that it was rather difficult to trace the point from which that call was being made, if it was in a different exchange area and had a different dialling code. By simply breaking the contact, however, our service was restored. It also appeared that the normal procedure, if a guilty person is traced here or there, is simply to warn or admonish that person. I want to ask whether consideration cannot be given to this procedure so that a subscriber who misuses his telephone service in this way …

Was it not the blonde spy?

They have been hurt badly; that much is very clear. [Interjections.] The procedure for establishing from which subscriber’s instrument that call was made should be examined. Consideration must also be given to far stricter measures than a mere warning if such a subscriber is traced.

In conclusion I should like to ask the Minister to request the Post Office to investigate possible ways of assisting the Department of Home Affairs to update voters’ lists. (Time expired.)

Mr Chairman, it seems to me that just after the election it is the fashion in this House for everyone to begin by thanking the Post Office for its contribution. I do not want to follow suit, but I merely want to say that I think that every state department involved in an election is obliged to assist in the democratic dispensation of our country to the best of its ability. I therefore want to pay tribute to the Post Office for the exceptional contribution which it made, because as a department it in particular falls into the category of departments that can in fact provide services, as do the Department of Justice and others. This is the spirit in which I want to deal with the matter.

Today I actually want to ask for two things only. I want to lodge an appeal on behalf of the constituency of Randfontein, but firstly I want to thank the hon the Minister and his department for the pulling down and rebuilding at the Main Post Office. It was high time for this to be done, and it has resulted in a fine extension. I want to thank my predecessor who pleaded for this and saw to it’s being carried through. [Interjections.]

And his predecessor! [Interjections.]

I think representations were made long enough ago for me perhaps also to be able to claim credit for it, but the post office has been beautifully extended in Randfontein, and this now creates much more space.

I also want to say thank you for something else. I see there are benches in the post office now, and that is a tremendous improvement, particularly for pensioners who come to fetch their pensions. Some of them are old and struggle a little and so they can sit and wait there. I think it is a great improvement and the Postmaster General and the hon the Minister can in my opinion give a lot of attention to this with a view to the future. In the nature of things our elderly can only receive their pensions on certain days and they then have to stand and wait in queues for a long time. In such circumstances it is essential for the necessary facilities to be made available to them.

I want to lodge a very special appeal for a new post office in the suburb Randgate in the constituency of Randfontein. I know that it is customary for the post office to rent buildings to house post offices. I understand that this encourages private initiative and that it supports the private sector and that it is often more advantageous and cheaper to rent a post office than to erect a building. I also accept that there is apparently quite a backlog in the erection of buildings and that time can be lost while a building is being erected. This specific post office to which I am referring, has probably been rented for the past 40 or 45 years. When I arrived in Randfontein as a young man, the post office was already being rented and it is still in that same building. As far as I am concerned, the building has now become completely too small and inefficient.

I obtained a few details. There are 800 post offices boxes at this little post office, and I have been informed that there is a tremendously long waiting list. This post office not only serves the suburb of Randgate, but all the surrounding agricultural holdings as well. Many of them have post office boxes in this post office and come there for their postal services. The building has therefore in reality become too small. In any case it is closed in and cannot be extended. Extension is unfortunately impossible due to its situation.

This post office handles 585 000 postal articles per annum and I have established that more than 430 pensioners per month receive their pensions at this post office. Now one can imagine that such a small building—and it is really small—to which this large number of people comes to receive their pensions really creates problems for them. There is no place to sit either and the church has already gone to help people there and made arrangements in connection with seating and refreshments etc. I greatly appreciate this.

The turnover at that post office is more than R3 million per annum, according to my information. I was pleasantly surprised and amazed at the tremendously high figure. I did not think that it would be so high. It is a difficult figure to determine, but it is estimated that between 200 and 300 clients per day visit the post office.

The post office of Randgate is stuck between the main street and one of the side streets. It is known that there are in fact stands belonging to the State in the immediate vicinity that were set aside many years ago by the State for State purposes. I do not know if they were specifically meant for a post office, but it is land which does belong to the State. I know it would probably take a little time, but my request is that we do in fact erect a post office there which will be worthy of the place and suited to the conditions there, and which will have enough space for the residents of the area and to provide the necessary services.

After this appeal I want to conclude by just touching on one more matter. This is perhaps a less pleasant matter. In other departments we learnt—we know about it—that in some Black townships massive sums are owing on rentals in arrears etc. Inevitably various questions arise regarding the post office and telephone services in Black cities such as Soweto and other Black townships. Are there also Post Office monies in arrears? Is the same action taken there as with normal telephone services? Are the telephones cut off after a period if they are not paid? What is the exact amount outstanding, if any? Is the telephone removed later on or does it simply remain there? What is the policy of the post office in regard to such services if the necessary money is not paid on a regular basis? I should like to receive guidance in this matter.

In conclusion, I want to express one idea regarding the post office as a whole. Before I became a Minister in 1968, I was chairman of the then Post Office Study Group. Of course it was a pleasure to make a thorough study of the Post Office with all its different facilities. I still remember very well that it was Minister Basie van Rensburg, the then Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, who in 1968 first applied to the Cabinet, and received permission, for the Post Office to be run as a business undertaking in future and to receive its own appropriation.

As the hon the Minister yesterday correctly stated in his speech, beforehand the funds were drawn from the Treasury and all the income from the Post Office also went to the Treasury. After all these years, I want to pay tribute to the officials of the Post Office because they were able to work on a business basis since 1968 and to run the Post Office on a business basis. This of course results in tariffs having to be increased from time to time to be able to keep pace with the situation. However, at the same time we provide a service to the public, based on scientific and business principles. I think this is a sound basis on which to do it, rather than simply always depending on the Treasury and continuously drawing money from it when there is a shortage. I think we are now on a sound basis, and it is a pleasure after all these years to be able to look back and to realize that the Post Office has done its share and still continues to make its full contribution.

Mr Chairman, as a backbencher it is an exceptional honour for me to be able to stand here in this Chamber in Parliament today. Since the first day that I arrived here, I have been aware of the atmosphere in this building. I am aware of the history that has been played out here during all the years, and I am also aware of the responsibility that rests on the shoulders of all the hon members who are sitting here to take only the right decisions that should be to the advantage of our wonderful country and all its people.

Henry Clay, an American politician, said in 1829:

I should also like to pay tribute to all our predecessors, all the men and women who made their mark here and laid the foundations on which we can proudly continue to build today.

When the hon the Minister of Communications delivered his Budget speech here the other day, I was acutely aware of the diversity of the postal service, and of the extensive service that is provided here in South Africa and enjoyed by us. We are only a telephone call away from any place in the world, and consequently today the telephone is also regarded as one of the most important means of communication. Hon members will agree with me that many of the difficulties and problems which we experience in the world today, are there as a result of a lack in communication.

The twentieth century, which is fast approaching its end, will go down in history as the century during which the most and greatest changes took place in the area of technology. In our country the composition and diversity of the telecommunication system is of the utmost importance and it is very important that we keep pace with developments in the technological sphere if South Africa wants to remain on a par with its foreign partners. I think the objectives of the Department of Posts and Telecommunications should be to operate the different services through one network. I make bold to say that we are proud of this department and of what they do for our country.

This afternoon I should like to reflect on the history of the postal service in our country. We do not always realise that the postal service had its origin in 1501 in Mossel Bay. It was a Portuguese ship’s captain called Peiro de Alteida who placed a letter in his shoe and hung it from a milkwood tree. In it he related all the adventures of the Portuguese fleet. It is strange that the shoe was in fact found three months later by another ship which in turn was on its way home to Portugal from India. That milkwood tree is still to be found in Mossel Bay today and in September 1938 it was also declared an historical monument.

It was only a century later than 1501 that the postal services in the Cape itself came into existence. Post and letters were then wrapped in thick canvas, reinforced with lead and left under flat stones. The ships which called there, would then take the post back to Holland or India, whichever the case may be. Jan van Riebeeck depended on ships’ officers to convey his official documents.

It was only in March 1792, however, that the first official post office was established here in Cape Town at the Castle. The first postmaster was a Dutch official called Adriaan Vincent Bergh. It is interesting to know that in those days it cost six stivers to send a letter from Cape Town to Great Britain or Europe. The postage stamp—the gummed variety—which we take for granted today, was used for the first time on 1 September 1853 in Cape Town. When the triangular stamp of the Cape of Good Hope—that is the orange one which is so valuable today—was issued the Cape became the first place in the world to make use of such a triangular stamp.

Since then the postal service has developed tremendously. We had stage coaches that conveyed passengers as well as post to the interior. In those days it took 114 days to convey one piece of post from the Cape to Holland. People probably thought it was better to receive old news than no news at all. The telecommunications system in South Africa came into existence in 1860, and the first telegraph connection was between Cape Town and Simon’s Town. It was established by a private company called “The Cape of Good Hope Telegraph Company”.

Our first telephone exchange was actually first built in Port Elizabeth and that was in the year 1822. It always amazes me when one compares the equipment of that time to the sophisticated equipment of today. It really is a miracle that they could nevertheless provide people with a good service in those days.

We are proud of our Department of Posts and Telecommunications. It was repeated here yesterday and today by various hon members that ours is among the best in the world and also among the cheapest. The Beitel service was launched for the first time last year on 2 June in Ellis Park in Johannesburg. It is an exciting service, because if one is linked up to it one can see what the Stock Exchange looks like, one can make flight and theatre reservations, one can see what the temperature in any part of the world is, but what is the most exciting—we are all waiting for this, particularly the housewife who still has an outside job as well—is the day when one can sit in the privacy of one’s home and by means of Beitel can see exactly where one can do one’s shopping, in which supermarket and then also order through Beitel. One’s goods will then be delivered to one without one leaving one’s house, and that account would then be debited against one’s bank account.

We are living in a technological age. We are actually living in the computer age. We are so inclined always to expect more and better service. Yesterday the hon member for Boksburg correctly stated that we could continue to ask for more efficient and sophisticated service, but we should then be prepared to pay for it. I agree with that.

We have our technologists and engineers who are being trained. It is also encouraging to hear that the postmen who still deliver our post by foot or use bicycles are also still being taken into account and that our postal services are focussed on creating posts for our people here in South Africa. Even though we are computerised and are approaching the 21st century with all its challenges, the person, the human being, is still the most important facet in our society. He is still the axis around which everything turns. It is still his expertise and brain development which is going to take us into the future.

I therefore want to conclude by quoting John F Kennedy, because it was he who said:

Mr Chairman, it is a very great privilege for me to congratulate the hon member for Edenvale on her outstanding maiden speech. It was a responsible speech, and I am sure that hon member will still make many speeches of that quality in this House.

†I have only a short while to say a few words, but I want to deal particularly with certain rural problems that exist within my constituency and which possibly flow over into other rural areas.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the department is experiencing certain difficulties in the manning of certain post offices in the rural areas. I want to suggest that post offices, which have traditionally been manned by White staff and where these are now experiencing staff problems, they should not be closed summarily, nor should consideration be given to their closure, but rather the aspect of dealing with staff problems should be considered in a different way. I would like to suggest that when staff problems arise consideration should be given to the employment of staff of other race groups who could be trained to take over the responsibility of running certain rural post offices. I would like to leave that as a suggestion with the hon the Minister in order to try to circumvent any suggestion that certain rural post offices should be closed.

I want to deal with the question of post office deliveries in a certain area of my constituency. At this stage of our history I find it most regrettable that the public is now actually experiencing a postal service that is inferior to what it was many years ago. I refer particularly to the postal service which is being experienced by the public at Eston and Mid-Illovo. I realise that the problems that have given rise to the present situation are due to the fact that the railway is no longer operative between Umlaas Road and Mid-Illovo. I cannot accept, however, any explanation that tries to justify the delivery of post three times per week as being a satisfactory service when in actual fact this situation is vastly inferior to that enjoyed some 25 to 30 years ago. I would ask the hon the Minister to give immediate consideration to the re-introduction of the daily delivery of post to these two centres.

I too want to express my appreciation to the postal department for the manner in which they serviced the eight offices that I established during the course of my election campaign in the Mooi River constituency. The service that they rendered can only be described as being very efficient, and I want to make a particular point of expressing my appreciation in this House.

I wish to deal with yet another point. This is a matter that I raised last year, namely the inadequacy of telephone services in certain Black areas that fall within the boundaries of my constituency. I refer particularly to some of the areas that fall under the control of the South African Development Trust as well as those under the control of the KwaZulu Government. One can only describe the postal and telephone facilities in these areas as completely and utterly inadequate. I know that in certain areas that I mentioned to the hon the Minister last year there has been an improvement in the services provided, but may I just say that in spite of that, they fall very short of complying with the present requirements of the public in those areas.

I also want to deal with the question of the remaining manual telephone exchanges in my constituency. Here again I want to place on record my very great appreciation to the staff who manage these manual exchanges. They play a very important role in the communities they serve. In the immediate area in which I reside, the service offered by these staff members is something which one admires and appreciates very much indeed.

Notwithstanding that, I would like to ask the hon the Minister if he will give me an indication as to when the automatic exchange at Mooi River will be finally completed. We know that this has gone on for a year longer than was planned originally. I understand that there is now hope that this service might be completed by the end of September. I now want to refer to the telephone services in the Ixopo, Donnybrook, Creighton, Bulwer, Underberg and Himeville areas. I wish to make a special request to the hon the Minister to expedite the installation of automatic exchanges in these areas. These are important strategic areas and they require modern and up-to-date telecommunications services.

Finally, Mr Chairman, I also want to express a particular word of thanks to the maintenance staff who keep party lines operative in those areas which are served by manual exchanges. It is particularly pleasing to note that even on public holidays and over weekends the maintenance staff is prepared to rectify any faults that may occur.

Mr Chairman, it is also a privilege for me to be in this august meeting, more so because my presence here in fact represents a gain for the party on this side of the House. This fills me with great joy.

I also became involved with the telephone service and the post office during the recent election, in a way which I would not have thought possible. I am therefore not surprised that so many of the hon members referred here to the satisfactory telephone services and the excellence of the postal service. Without wanting to mention controversial topics in my maiden speech, I just want to say that if some of my colleagues had done their work as well as the Post Office did its work, we would perhaps have had a slightly larger majority from postal votes.

It is interesting that posts and telecommunications, that is to say this department in particular, is progressing in leaps and bounds in line with the progress in the sphere of electronics. When one speaks of communication instruments today, one is also speaking of complicated electronic systems at the same time. The upgrading of existing systems and the provision of new facilities have also created an extensive market—this is according to the information available to me—for the manufacturing industry—particularly for the manufacturing of ready-made basic electronic components.

As far as telephones are concerned, this results in that kind of manufacturing activity that can be labelled as mass production. In this regard our local content amounts to more than 85%, and this really provides a market in which one can manufacture certain readymade components on a large scale. This is linked to the sophistication, if one wants to give it a greater local content. It is also linked to the possibility of the production of large quantities of the same kind of component, and through that it becomes possible to produce the products in a reasonably profitable way and to be able to compete with imported components.

I want to tell hon members that it was as a result of the vision of some of the officials of the Post Office in the past that a facility such as Sames came into existence. Sarnes came into existence in 1979. It initially made use of imported designs in the manufacturing of the so-called chip. In 1980 the Post Office bought R2 million worth of components from Sames. In the 1985-86 financial year the Post Office’s purchases from Sames amounted to R28 million. During the present financial year the sales of Sames will amount to an estimated R35,5 million, of which the Post Office’s share will be an estimated R32 million.

This of course was a difficult undertaking. It was an attempt to launch a specific kind of business which is in fact unknown in this country, and the Post Office had to give it considerable assistance. It gave assistance by means of annual subsidies which by 1985 amounted to approximately R20 million.

In 1985 this debt to the Post Office was discharged by restructuring, by converting it into preference shares. At present the Post Office pays Sames a premium, which represents the difference between the production costs and the world price. It is estimated that this year it will amount to approximately R12 million with the larger purchases that are being made by the Post Office.

When this kind of undertaking becomes established, of course it means far more than just a Service that is being provided to the Post Office by a particular undertaking, and there are a whole number of fringe benefits, if one may call them that, that are attached to the establishment of this undertaking.

In the first instance, the establishment of an electronics industry in South Africa, in which imported designs are no longer used, but there is sufficient expertise to develop the chip ourselves, naturally means a great deal to us strategically, not merely in the military sense, but also in the wider sense of the word.

In the second instance it does of course create jobs, particularly in regard to technologists. Facilities for training have to be created and as a consequence there is also an increase in the level of training of the people who are employed. It of course also provides job opportunities for trained people from universities and technikons, and I had an interest in that until recently. It means there is a market for these people’s services. At the same time it stimulates the training at universities and technikons at the tertiary in level that there is a demand for specific goal-orientated training that can be provided by these institutions. More than that, it stimulates research at universities and technikons—I am now referring specifically to universities—particularly in regard to fixed state physics, which emphasizes semi-and super conductors. Today this is of course a matter which is very real in the developing technology.

I just want to continue illustrating that this change-over to electronic systems at the same time also has other advantages, for example, the provision for the upgrading of manual exchanges and the conversion and establishment of new exchanges. Last year the Post Office was in fact obliged to purchase equipment to the value of R449 million. The local content of that equipment was 65%, and 77% of the installation was done by private contractors.

When one travels along the main roads between the big centres, one sees all kinds of machinery on the side of the road which is used to dig ditches to lay pipes for optical cables. This means that a great many job opportunities are also being created.

In conclusion I just want to illustrate the Post Office’s share in this electronic industry. According to a survey the turnover for electronic equipment in the RSA last year was R6,200 million. The purchases of the Department of Posts and Telecommunications amounted to 21% of this total. The Post Office has therefore not only brought about an improvement in services through this change-over, but has to a great extent benefited many sectors in our society in this country.

I was called from the tranquility of retirement and sent here by a constituency. By virtue of my training and interest I was a philosopher. I then read Plato again, because he who wishes to be a philosopher and does not read Plato, is not a philosopher. Plato was actually a politician, although this is not commonly known. He was in fact the leader of the Party of the Plains and the great, classical work which he wrote is a political manifesto rather than a piece of philosophy. He made such an impression with it that he then went to the south of Greece at the invitation of a potentate of a southern Greek state where he then had to put this idea of his, this constitutional model, to the test or had to realise it in practice. After a year he had to flee from the sticks and stones, because it was such a mess. This is alarming. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I listened attentively to the hon member for Walmer’s speech and I enjoyed it. Sir, I also want to welcome you to the post of Deputy Chairman of Committees. I promise to give you as few problems as I did on the school benches in your craft classes.

†I want to come back to the hon the Minister and his reply. I want to thank him very sincerely for considering my suggestion that we have a working document. I think it will certainly enhance the standard of debate. The hon the Minister says that I am cynical in my approach. Yes, one tends to become cynical when one is sitting on this side of the House and has to deal with that Government!

The hon the Minister gave some replies to the many questions that I put to him and I can understand his not having replied fully to all of them. I understand that certain items related to transfers, etc. However, I must say that the one item that he did not do justice to was the whole business of financial management, especially with regard to items in connection with which foreign dealings come into the equation. That is the non-operating revenue.

The hon the Minister still ascribes this improvement in business to the improved position of the rand. I must say that I do not quite understand this as the rand really only improved in terms of the dollar. As far as I am aware the hon the Minister and his department do not deal mainly with the USA but with Eastern countries and West Germany in regard to which there was a reduction.

I also want to refer to the question of the higher interest on income. I have just received a document from the hon the Minister of Finance titled “Statistical/Economic Review in Connection with the Budget Speech 1987/88”.

*In his review of economic conditions, the hon the Minister said that notwithstanding the high inflation rate, interest rates had decreased. It seems to me as if the hon the Minister of Communications and the hon the Minister of Finance do not have precisely the same information about last year.

On page 14 of this review the hon the Minister of Finance says that the prices of exports increased by an average of 15%. He went on to say:

The hon the Minister of Communications speaks of an improved exchange rate, whilst the hon the Minister of Finance speaks of a poorer one. I think the two hon Ministers should get together so that the hon the Minister of Communications can inform the hon the Minister of Finance about the parts of the world in which he does business. If that had happened, we would perhaps have had an even better budget today.

The hon the Minister also referred to the Franzsen Commission. I think that using the Franzsen Commission at this stage to explain one specific set of relationships is not exactly the best policy, because what must then happen to all the other ratios? Here I am thinking of the internal financing ratio in regard to which we have long since abandoned the Franzsen Commission report.

†I come now to the question of the replacement of electro-mechanical switchgear by the year 2010. The hon the Minister asked who would pay if he were to replace this equipment sooner. My whole argument was that if he replaced it sooner, people would not have to pay more, but instead would actually save. This is possible provided one could obtain the necessary funds over a slightly longer term than what we are used to at the moment. Be that as it may, I can already predict that by the year 2000—this is 10 years earlier than the hon the Minister’s assessment—there will be as many electro-mechanical switching stations as one will find model T Fords in peak hour traffic!

*Let us look at a few of the specific amounts budgeted for this financial year. There are a few figures involving personnel expenditure about which we must obtain clarity.

When it comes to the overall personnel expenditure as against salaries and wages, the ratio in the past was approximately 54%. What I am referring to here are additional costs involving bonuses, etc. Last year the figure was 57% above that of ordinary salaries and wages. The explanation for this given by the previous Minister of Communications, was that this involved bonuses which were held back and which then had to be paid out. He said that involved an amount of R34 million. If I subtract this R34 million from last year’s overall personnel expenditure, I again find that the overall personnel expenditure is approximately 53% above that of salaries and wages.

If I project this figure, I get approximately R57 million less than the hon the Minister indicates in his budget. I am just asking how the hon the Minister explains the difference. Last year I was right on target; that is why I am just asking the hon the Minister to explain this to us. Perhaps the explanation involves improved benefits, eg for people at the very bottom of the scale, etc. When we come back next year and I then say that he over budgeted this year to the tune of R57 million, we must just remember what I have been saying now.

Taking a further look at salaries and wages, and speaking of a projected figure for salaries and wages alone, I obtain an amount of R43 million less than the amount budgeted for, if one does not allow for any increase in personnel. The cost of increasing the personnel by 1% is approximately R10 million. What I now want to tell the hon the Minister is that if we now had that working document, I would have known what his growth in personnel was to have been. I do not know this, however, and that is why I am asking him what it is. If it is 4%, then our figures agree, but for anything less than that, he over budgeted by R10 million for every 1% in personnel growth.

In the past bonuses constituted approximately 5,7% or 5,8% of the total amount for salaries and wages. Last year the figure was 7,6%. One can again explain this on the strength of bonuses which were held back and then had to be paid out. This year the hon the Minister is again budgeting for bonuses amounting to approximately 7,7% of the amount for salaries and wages. That is approximately R20 million more than it would have been in terms of the previous ratio. Could we possibly just have an explanation for this? On that overall amount—I am saying it is R57 million—we have here a probable amount of R20 million. Next year we shall again see who was right!

When we come to losses, I see that this year losses are not recorded under exchange rate adjustments. I take it this is because we expect an improvement in the exchange rate. If it is not a loss, I just want to know if it is recorded elsewhere as a profit, and where it is recorded as such.

If, as far as the revenue side is concerned, one takes into consideration the tariff increase which was announced …

Order! I am sorry, but the hon member’s time has expired.

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

I thank the hon member for Boksburg.

Yes, our Whips are getting a little soft in the head. [Interjections.]

Yes, we can put the hon the Minister into the same boat.

If there are 4,4% more telephones, I would say that the revenue had been underestimated by approximately R7 million, because the hon the Minister expected no increase in traffic. If one adds an increase in traffic of a mere 2%, then according to my calculations the hon the Minister has underbudgeted for revenue by approximately R40 million on telephone services. Next year we shall again see who was closest to the mark.

As far as overseas telex services are concerned, we see that the hon the Minister is apparently still estimating a decrease, because my amount for revenue from these services is again R18 million more than the hon the Minister’s figures.

Let me skip some of the figures I have here and simply table them. Yes, I shall also be “Tabling my budget”! [Interjections.]

When it comes to ordinary telephones, if there were an account of say R41 per month, as a result of the tariff increases a person would have to pay R49 per month. This amounts to 19% per month more which the user, the average householder, is being asked to pay.

Hon members opposite always amaze me, because for years they believed in the Westminster system until the Blacks said they also believed in it. Now hon members are saying it is no longer good enough. The same applies to domestic telephones. For years it was realised that domestic telephones were not profitable in comparison, for example, with business telephones. One realised, however, that telephones were the poor man’s means of transportation, because having a telephone was as good as paying a visit to one’s children or one’s parents. It is also the poor man’s security, because a doctor or policeman is then only a few seconds away. For farmers, their neighbours are only one minute away and not 50 kilometers. That economic benefit one cannot really calculate and deal with in the Post Office Appropriation, because the number of unnecessary trips which are eliminated when people are planning their lives cannot be converted into money for the Post Office. A telephone for the home is therefore no longer a luxury; it is as essential as fresh air.

So domestic telephones have for a long time now been known to be non-profitable, but now suddenly there is talk of business principles. One wonders if this cannot be ascribed to the fact that Black people will now have to be subsidised. At this stage 83% or 84% of White households have a telephone, but only 38% of Black households— which in my view is actually an overestimate as far as the metropolitan areas are concerned, because this does not include, for example, the large Black spots round Durban.

Can one say that business undertakings subsidise those telephones? No, business undertakings never subsidise anyone. They merely add the cost to their costs and in the long run there is only one person who pays for everything, and that is the man in the street. So we are not talking about cross-subsidisation or of any subsidisation, but rather of redistribution. Nor is redistribution all that strange, because the hon the Minister of Finance has spent the whole afternoon on a redistribution!

Mr Chairman, I should like to begin by congratulating the hon member for Greytown on his appointment as the PFP chief spokesman on posts and telecommunications. The hon member must pardon me for not reacting to his speech but I undertake to read in due course the rest of his speech that he did not deliver but is going to lay upon the Table.

In the past in the discussion of this budget I have spoken about the post office in Port Elizabeth, specifically the one in Newton Park. I do not have much to say today except that Newton Park is now NP and the Department of Posts and Telecommunications is one of the best departments in the country.

I should like to congratulate the new hon members like the hon member for Edenvale and the hon member for Walmer—an old neighbour of mine—on their maiden speeches. In my opinion they were really of outstanding quality and I hope that they will continue in that way. I also want to convey my sincere thanks to the hon the Minister and his staff for another year’s outstanding service to the people of this country and particularly for the new developments on the horizon. I venture to say that the Department of Posts and Telecommunications is a treasure which really deserves the support of everyone in this country. We should like to give them that support. Then, too, there is one specific man whom I have always referred behind his back as “Mr Post Office”. I am referring to Mr Jurie Swart. I should also like to thank Mr Jurie Swart for always having time to listen to complaints and problems and for always reacting promptly to assist one when one has problems. Many thanks to him.

Hear, hear!

However it is true that in the Post Office one will also encounter the less good ones—those who do not contribute their share as everyone ought to do. However we do not complain about that because in every community we have those who kick up a big fuss and do little. Even in this House we have to be content with the Conservative Party, that has now become the Official Opposition. Therefore this is by no means an unusual phenomenon; it is merely part and parcel of the human condition and of life itself.

Then too I should like to congratulate the hon member for Overvaal on his appointment as shadow Minister of Communication. [Interjections.] We have come to know this hon member as a person with a good sense of humour. Sometimes he gets a little angry but I must say that I am very fond of the hon member for Overvaal and I should therefore like to congratulate him on his appointment. I am quite sure of the shadow. The Minister, however, I am not so sure about. [Interjections.] Nevertheless we wish him everything of the best. We hope and trust that he will be happy in that post.

It is true that during this debate—of course, we cannot blame the hon member for Overvaal for this—a shadow was cast on a certain aspect of the activities of the Department of Posts and Telecommunications. I refer to the statements made yesterday by the hon member for Bethal which constituted flagrant discrimination, particularly against the poor White Afrikaner in the employ of the department. [Interjections.] I am left speechless when I think that that hon member wants to replace the people who deliver the letters with postboxes. I want to ask the hon member for Overvaal to speak to the hon member for Bethal in that regard. I merely mention this in passing. It is, after all, sometimes a pleasure to cross swords with the Conservative Party in the political arena.

The hon member for Springs referred specifically to the achievements of the Department during the past election, with special reference to various aspects of the election. I should like to confirm that. As far as the Port Elizabeth area is concerned I want to inform the hon the Minister that the quality of the service was outstanding. The work done there by the staff of the Post Office was truly heartening. In some instances they even had to instal more telephones than there were workers at some of the polling booths for specific political parties. They still did not complain, however.

However, not one of the hon members also referred to the other aspects of the activities of the Post Office that are used to liven up the election for us a little. I refer to the telegraph poles. When we were children in the old North West we called them telegram poles. What I found so gratifying was that wherever one went, even up in the Transvaal, there were posters attached to the telegraph poles. Nevertheless the Post Office equipment was quite patient and those poles remained solidly rooted there despite slogans such as “Die Natte weer vertrou? Nooit!” and “Bly Blank, my volk! Stem HNP!” Many posters attached to the telegraph poles in Port Elizabeth displayed the slogan “Werk saam en wen saam”. However practical jokers changed these posters to “Werk saam en swem saam”. [Interjections.]

After all, you do swim together!

Therefore, Mr Chairman, the Post Office is part of the election struggle in South Africa today. Nevertheless they are always as patient as can be and simply carry on doing their own thing.

It is also the case, Mr Chairman, that I personally am missing some people here today. Looking at the opposition benches, I miss the former member for Bezuidenhout, Maj Sive. He was a very pleasant person and I should like to wish him everything of the best and a peaceful time of rest, since he is no longer a member of this House. Then, too, I recall a former member for Nigel. We always spoke of him as Oom Uiltjie—a lovable, friendly and sound member who is also enjoying his retirement now. I really miss them, particularly when I experience the peace and quiet that prevails in this House while we discuss this budget.

However, Mr Chairman, there are two things troubling me which I should just like to bring to the attention of the hon the Minister. One of these things is that I believe that in general there is far too much talking on the telephone in our country. Do you know, Sir, that it is sometimes a dreadful thing to receive a telephone call from someone who simply cannot stop talking. I want to ask the hon the Minister and the department today—and this, of course, also goes for the hon member for Overvaal, who could probably make an important contribution in this regard— whether it could not be arranged for a telephone to make a sound after three minutes which could at least enable one to tell the person on the other side: “Three minutes up; I shall speak to you again another day”. [Interjections.] I am really very serious when I say this … [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, could the hon member just repeat his interjection? Unfortunately I did not hear it.

Beep, beep!

Sir, we shall arrange for the hon member to sing to us again after the next election.

I ask whether it would not be possible for the hon the Minister to have the possibility investigated of a sound being produced after three minutes so that the other person can understand that he has now spoken for long enough and should put the telephone down, because in any event he is merely wasting one’s time.

Then there is another aspect which I wish to bring to the hon the Minister’s attention, but I should first like to thank the department for having made a start on the new post office complex ahead of time. Considerable progress has already been made with the building of the post office and tenders have been called for for the further development and finalisation of this project. I shall be pardoned for saying that in our area experience has taught us that unemployment is one of the biggest problems in Port Elizabeth and its environs.

The tenders for this project have been closed and it is evident that the firm that tendered lowest is not from Port Elizabeth. We are now concerned that this firm will bring a large number of its employees and labourers with it, and this will be to the detriment of our labour situation in Port Elizabeth.

I have nothing against other firms but I should like to ask whether it would not be possible, if the second tender—which is indeed a local tender—is not too far above the lowest tender, to consider awarding that tender to that particular Port Elizabeth firm for the sake of the labour situation in our area. They have all the infrastructure, they have the labour there and it will help us tremendously.

Finally, I wish to say that I no longer serve on the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications, but it was a privilege to do so and I trust that the hon members who now serve on that standing committee will derive the same joy from the co-operation and from sharing the weal and woe of the officials and the ministry of this department which renders outstanding service and which we are all proud of.

Mr Chairman, I listened with appreciation to the hon member for Newton Park and took cognisance of the criticism he levelled at me. Yesterday I also took cognisance of the criticism levelled at me by the hon member for Hercules and I was able to understand it because that was the logic of a man who thought he had a majority, whereas in fact he was elected to Parliament by a large minority.

However, that is not the case with the hon member for Newton Park and when he says that I am pleading for postmen to be left unemployed through the introduction of postboxes, I must differ with the hon member because that is not what I asked. What I did suggest to the hon the Minister was that we examine the Budget with a view to establishing where possible savings could still be effected. The Postmaster-General and his staff intimated that this was a sphere in which savings could possibly be effected.

With reference to that I have been told that it has been the policy of the Post Office over the past number of years that in new township developments, for example, postmen are no longer used; instead, postboxes are provided there. I also asked that if it was envisaged that the same be done in urban areas, notice be given of this in good time but nowhere did I ask that it should in fact be done. Nevertheless a great fuss was made of the point that this would promote unemployment, whereas the hon member for Hercules also asked for mechanisation, a step that would also result in people being eliminated and would lead to unemployment.

That’s right, Chris, let them have it!

It is simply illogical to attack a speaker about something one advocates oneself. It is also evident from the hon the Minister’s speech that posts that fall vacant are not being filled. I quote:

There, too, unemployed people could in fact have been employed if it had been the norm that the Post Office should be merely a service bureau. [Interjections.] When hon members on this side of the House rightly advance the same arguments or proposals as those of the hon the Minister, are they different? Those arguments as to how savings are to be effected are valid because after all, as the hon member for Greytown said, increases are ultimately borne solely by the man in the street. We are trying to give the man in the street a cheaper service and it is for that reason that we ask that this possibility be considered.

Mention was also made of the fact that 286 postmen had apparently been attacked by dogs. If there had been postboxes, I think this damage would also have been limited unless an adder got into the postbox!

It is also with some nostalgia that one hears that the old manual telephone exchanges as we knew them are to be closed down. Those people, too, may become unemployed. When we think of this we recall the days when one could ring the exchange to ask where the speed trap had been set on the road from the farm to the town; one could then adapt one’s speed accordingly so as not to get into trouble. That source of information is going to disappear.

One also recalls the days of eavesdropping on the party-lines without any need for the Postmaster-General’s permission! That phenomenon, too, has disappeared because nowadays farm-lines are for the most part also private lines.

One also recalls how, on Christmas Eve, there was one long ring, at which all the farmers picked up their receivers. Then followed a long conversation in which the whole party-line family could wish one another a merry Christmas. Unfortunately this, too, is being eliminated by modern technology. Gone are the friendly chats permitted by the old party-lines.

We should also like to pay tribute to the manual exchange operators who manned these posts alone through the long nights in the small rural post offices, and who were so helpful if advice or information had to be obtained promptly, such as where the doctor could be traced.

Where is he? He is here!

I am pleased about that. I think that that hon member’s practice was probably assisted a great deal by the telephone exchange which could refer patients to him, to such an extent that he can now afford to live in Parktown. [Interjections.]

I want to thank the hon the Minister for the clear answers he gave to our questions and assure him that we understand the problems he faced with regard to the strike, for example. We are pleased that that strike could be resolved so promptly. Apparently the negotiations that took place were successful and he and the staff of the Post Office are to be congratulated on the way they ended the strike.

Mr Chairman, it is truly a great privilege to stand here today in this hallowed Chamber with its beautiful stinkwood panels. It is also a privilege to represent 17 800 voters in this highest Chamber.

It is my privilege on this occasion to pay tribute to my predecessor Mr Hendrik Coetzer, who, in the long years that he served in the NP, left many landmarks in the Border area. For the sake of the record I should like to state that he was an exceptional man. In 1965 he won the Queenstown seat, and in 1977 King William’s Town, from the old UP. In 1981 he won East London North from the old NRP and in this way scored his hat-trick. I wish him a peaceful retirement. It is just a pity that his wife, Anna, has been so gravely ill for the past three years, because this has been a burden to him. I think that I am not only speaking on my own behalf when I say that I hope that things will go well with her.

He was an intrepid fighter, but he stood firm for the things he believed in. I think that even his greatest enemies respected him.

I should like to come back to the Budget. New hon members in this House do not realise how privileged we are to be able to make trunk calls from our offices. I can recall from the times that I used to visit Mr Coetzer here that when he wanted to put a call through to his constituency or elsewhere he first had to complete an application form and then send it to the exchange to enable them to put him through to the specific number.

There is a story that on one occasion, either at an NP caucus meeting or in the committee that looks after the privileges of members of this House—he also served on that select committee—he addressed the committee about this outdated system. Those hon members who were at home in Parliament, for reasons only they will understand, turned down his appeal that the system be changed with the words: “We cannot break with tradition like that.” Perhaps we should also, to an extent, pay tribute to him when we consider how easy it is to speak to our voters nowadays. He was an unusual man in the sense that he then said to those enlightened gentlemen that if they had to retain the old system, they should also get rid of the modern toilet facilities and go back to the older system. I think I have now said enough about my predecessor.

†Mr Chairman, there is something else that is perhaps more important that I want to communicate to you. I would like to make use of this opportunity to enlighten hon members on the growth that has taken place in my constituency over the past couple of years.

Longer serving hon members might have taken note of speeches by various Ministers responsible for commerce and industry on the tremendous growth that has taken place in terms of the concessions that were granted to industries since the announcement of the industrial decentralisation incentives for our area. I must add that as far as telecommunication infrastructure is concerned, the Department of Posts and Telecommunications was always able to comply with the unexpected demand in this respect.

I must, however, point out that the department is battling to meet its obligations in regard to the provision of telephone services owing to the current upsurge in domestic applications as a result of the development in the industrial field. In this respect I would like to know whether there is not perhaps a communications gap between the town planners of the East London City Council and the planning section of this department. If so, cannot something be done about it? In comparing the voters’ rolls for the 1981 election with those for 1987, one finds a growth of 13 700 in the White voter population in the greater East London area. This implies that new homes have been built. Does that not further support my assumption that there is a lack of co-ordination between the local and central governments?

In this regard I want to plead especially for my voters living in Vincent Heights and Dorchester Heights. It will be appreciated if the Cambridge exchange upgrading programme can be expedited.

*I also decided to break a lance for the postmen today. It is not so important to me whether or not it is an uneconomic service. If it is necessary to subsidize it then we shall have to do so in some way. They play an important part in the community such as the one in the constituency that I represent. As a result of our wonderful climate we have many elderly people whom the postmen are in many instances the only daily contact with the outside world. They are people who live more healthily than we who sit in this House because they live outside in the sunlight, although they sometimes have to work in the rain. I think that they are people who do their work with conviction.

I want to say to the hon member for Overvaal that in my part of the world the postmen learn how to deal with the dogs. I think that in our division they also undergo a course for postmen—it reminds one of the lady who spoke about “walkies” on TV—in which they are apparently given training because not so many postmen are bitten by dogs in our area. I think that this is an appropriate programme that could be introduced more widely by the Post Office to good effect. One appreciates the work they are doing.

I should also mention that over the past year to eighteen months the Post Office has changed its delivery system in our area. When a parcel is waiting for one at the post office and the parcel is not too big—this happens not only with me, but with all the people in our street—the postman brings it to one’s home. He makes it convenient, and our elderly people appreciate that. Let us keep the postmen, these friendly people who always smile. My dogs bark at everyone who comes in at the front gate, but they do not bark at the postman. I wonder why that is so. Perhaps it is because they know that these people usually bring good news. It is true that they are sometimes a little naughty because they also bring us these little window envelopes but probably we have to accept that. I am very pleased to have had the privilege of speaking here for the first time.

Mr Chairman, I should like to congratulate the previous speaker, the hon member for East London North, most warmly on his maiden speech. If one listened to him carefully, one would not have said that it was a maiden speech. I am going to try to do the same.

It is also a great privilege and an honour for me to be able to participate this afternoon in the business of this House, particularly because it is the first time for me and I have the opportunity to make a short speech before this august House. For me it is also a great privilege just as it is for the previous speaker, to be able to represent a constituency in this House. I am now speaking of the constituency of De Aar. It is a proud constituency and its representative is once again sitting where he belongs, on this side, the correct side of the House.

It is mainly farmers who are concentrated in this constituency and the activities in the constituency notably revolve around farming. To the west of our constituency lies the Smartt irrigation scheme, which is the oldest irrigation scheme in the RSA. To the east lies the beautiful area of Colesberg, which is known there as the Hantam. In the north of the constituency we find intensive irrigation and in the south we come across that old dependable, the sheep, and wool and meat farming which is associated with this region.

In De Aar itself, and in Noupoort, there is a strong contingent of SATS personnel. There is also a strong element of the SA Defence Force stationed at De Aar. These people inject strength into this constituency, particularly in regard to the economy of the region.

There are approximately 10 000 White voters distributed throughout this constituency. They are mainly concentrated in a few larger centers. Our people are strong and healthy. They are used to adapting and to cooperating against circumstances beyond their control, as they do during the disastrous droughts, such as the one we are now struggling through again.

One cannot deny that when people are struggling, they take a look at what is happening around them. In the constituency of De Aar this is not necessarily true. In our region, the people live there because they want to live there and they work there because they want to work there. But in difficult times such as these the interest of the Government, as we are now experiencing it, is really of decisive importance to us.

The rural areas are not becoming depopulated. According to a study carried out in 1984, it is clear that the urban population in De Aar rose by 51,4% from 1960 to 1980. If we look at the figure for the population per teiphone according to the same study for the same region, it is interesting to note that in 1960 the towns were better off than the country’s average. In 1980, however, the position changed. The regional average did drop to 16,9 people per telephone, but the average for the country dropped to 14,4 people per telephone. The conclusion we can draw from this—and this is also backed up by the figures for the consumption of water and electricity against the population increase—is that the relative backlog of the region in terms of infrastructure is continuing to grow. A fundamental economic decision follows on from this, ie the costs of services and infrastructure per capita. Because the rural areas are relatively sparsely populated by Whites, there is of necessity a cost implication and this is emphasised more heavily by the influence the great distances has. Posts and Telecommunications is probably one of the few departments which, as a result of its infrastructure, can render a personal service to people in the remote corners of the country. Surely there cannot be many no farms today, even remote farms, in the Republic that are not connected telephonically to their community and other essential services, such as the South African Police and the South African Defence Force. Post Office services, including the receipt as well as the delivery of postal articles, telegraph services, the transfer of funds from Post Office Savings Bank accounts, the payment of pensions and all the other services that are so frequently underestimated, are available on the basis of an almost front-door service to virtually the entire population.

It has been found that rural communities also request automated services, and I have no problem with that, but one should also bear in mind that this also implies a loss of job opportunities. We all know that in small rural communities, such as I also have in my constituency, a negative ripple-effect in regard to other services, such as schools, takes place when there is a loss of job opportunities. It is therefore very encouraging to us to know that the Department of Posts and Telecommunications, in spite of restricted finances and the heavy demand for services in the urban areas, constantly strives for the improvement of telephone services in particular in the rural areas.

Since 1980 a noticeable improvement has been made in the automation of these telephone services.

When one examines the number of manual connections in 1980, ie 224 714, one finds that it represents a percentage of 13,77% of the total of that service. In 1987 this amount dropped to 138 271, which means that the percentage of manual connections only comprises 5,46% of the service.

This committee accepts the need for the Population Development Programme in the Republic of South Africa to succeed. Raising the quality of life of people, particularly in the remote areas, goes hand in hand with the provision of services. Through that the educational level of people is increased and the opportunity for acquiring knowledge is improved. The Department of Posts and Telecommunications provides services, such as savings facilities, where individuals can save amounts as small as R1 at a time without paying ledger fees. According to the latest annual report of the department, this service is being utilised to an increasing extent. During the six months from April to September 1986, R39 608 651 was saved in this way, as opposed to R31 503 804 in the previous financial year.

Pension payments, which are provided on an agency basis by the department, rose from R541 165 818 in 1981-82 to R813 701 350 in the 1985-86 financial year. I am mentioning the figures, particularly in regard to the saving services and the payment of pensions, because I realise what a very important service it is to us in the rural areas. If along with this we take into account that the money order and postal order service is also provided to enable some inhabitants to complete their financial business and obligations, it is a relevation to many people that the Department of Posts and Telecommunications manages an infrastructure of service without which the development and the continuation of social programmes and actions would come to a halt.

Mr Speaker, may I just congratulate the hon member for De Aar on the neat way in which he made his maiden speech. It is clear that he can play a positive role in this House. Since he mentioned that De Aar is once again on the right side of the House, I just want to say that I hope he enjoys the two years during which he is going to represent De Aar.

I also want to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister for the replies he furnished to the questions I asked.

†There are, however, certain other items on which I require clarification, and I refer to items numbers 2.1 to 2.1.11 regarding the capital expenditure budget on telecommunications. I observe that with the exception of expenditure on exchange cables where the budgeted amount is increased, all the other items actually reflect a decrease in expenditure. I would like to have the assurance from the hon the Minister that these decreases are going to be as a result of streamlining and economies effected via better equipment rather than a deterioration in the standard of services which can be operated as a result of the reduction in capital expenditure.

I want to carry on to the items under the expected tariff increases as announced by the hon the Minister. Before I do, though, I want to mention that the hon the Minister actually did not answer two of my questions. One was the question regarding the possible effect on the efficiency of the installation department, in this instance. I may not have made it clear enough when I put the question. As far as installations are concerned, we heard the hon member for South Coast mention that it costs an average of R206 to install a telephone.

My personal experience can actually explain why it costs so much to install a telephone. Over the past 18 months I have had occasion to have three new telephones installed. On each occasion it took three visits by the technicians concerned to ensure an efficient operation of the service. These technicians were members of other racial groups and the point that I want to make is that possibly there is something wrong with our training system in that the R38 000 which is being spent, as mentioned by the hon member for Umlazi, is perhaps being spent incorrectly. Maybe the difference in communication on a language level is not sufficiently being taken into consideration, which results in this inefficiency or perhaps lack of knowledge. It was most embarrassing for me to have to keep on calling these people back, and I am sure it was just as embarrassing for the technicians concerned to have to come back on a number of occasions. What was further embarrassing was that the service had finally to be rectified by a White technician.

I have another example of a strange occurrence. It took place on the day after the election on 6 May. The CP’s regional office telephone service just stopped functioning. On calling in the technicians I was informed that the reason why the service was not functioning was that somebody had been fiddling with some sort of a box on the telephone pole. When they had removed whatever was on the pole, they did not connect the wires up correctly. I do not know whether this is possible. I have heard all sorts of stories about telephones being tapped, but they are treated with great derision from that side of the House so maybe there is another explanation for what happened.

The other question which I raised concerns the anticipated increase in revenue of 8,8%, or if we have to express it in terms of the remaining nine months of the year, 11,7%. When we look at the tariff increases we see that they range from 12% to 100%. The figures are very interesting to note. In respect of telephone rentals, for example, the budgeted increase amounts to 20% on the previous year’s figure, a total of R104,2 million. The tariff increase announced, however, is 36%. If we take it as actually being 36%, it amounts to an additional R83,36 million in revenue.

Let us look at the budget for installation fees. The increase in money terms is 20% or R16 million, where in fact the tariff increase announced is 38%, which would give us an additional R16,4 million over and above the R16 million.

The pay-phone budgeted increase, expressed in figures, is 70%, which could possibly correspond to the tariff increase announced which is between 50% and 100%. The budgeted increase on telephone calls in money terms is 12,7%, as opposed to the 12,5% increase announced as the tariff increase. If one relates this to one year it gives one an additional amount of R99,76 million. If we only allow for the nine month period the amount is reduced to R75 million.

If we look at the postage rate—we know that a tariff increase was announced earlier—we can expect an increase of R73 million over and above the figure which is budgeted for in money terms. This then gives us a figure of R148 million, which is quite a useful nest-egg. It would cover the cost of a salary increase to all the officials equal to the one which was recently announced.

While on that subject I would like to talk about the question of privatisation. I am convinced that the Post Office is one of the departments where privatisation would not improve the standard of the service. In fact, I think the only degree of privatisation required as far as the Post Office is concerned, is that the salaries should be privatised to raise them to the standard of the salaries in the private sector.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr Chairman, when business was suspended for dinner I was making a plea for privatisation in respect of public servant salaries, and specifically in this case in regard to the Post Office.

I have pleaded for this in the past and during the election I once again gave my voters the following undertaking, and I am quoting from my election manifesto:

My appeal to the hon the Minister is therefore that if it is the case that there is going to be a handsome surplus, as the figures which I furnished indicated, this surplus should be utilised for this purpose.

Mr Chairman, this has been quite an interesting Committee Stage debate. I think it was exceptional because there were no fewer than four maiden speeches, and I am very glad that those hon members took the opportunity of delivering them during the Post Office debate, because it was a great honour they bestowed upon us. In a moment I shall be addressing each of them in turn.

I just want to reply briefly to the various hon members who spoke, and firstly I want to come to the hon member for Overvaal. He referred to payphones, for which the unit charge for a three minute call has been increased from 10c to 20c. I just want to focus his attention on the fact that the tariff for trunk-line calls is, of course, between 15c and 16c, which will afford some relief for the people he has in mind.

As I have previously indicated, this new tariff is still less than the cost of providing the payphones, but of course there will be some people who will be adversely affected by this. I nevertheless believe that we should stick to the very sound principle of making our tariffs more cost-related.

The hon member also asked how much additional money the higher rental would furnish. I am informed that the amount will be R96 million.

The hon member also asked who actually made use of the payphones. I have been informed that the user-pattern differs from one area to another. In the central urban areas it has been observed, for example, that the majority of users are non-Whites. In White residential areas, on the other hand, the major users are Whites.

The hon member for Alberton referred, in particular, to the sound labour relations the Post Office maintains with its personnel. I can indeed attest to that fact because I have met most of the management boards of the various staff associations of the Post Office, having spoken and negotiated with them. I can attest to the fact that they do indeed act in a responsible way. They did so, for example, in the representations they made for salary adjustments. They also acted in a responsible manner in getting down to dealing with the strikes—I mean those who did not participate in the strikes.

I have also met them and can agree with what the hon member for Alberton said, and that is that the positive attitude, the goodwill prevailing amongst them—I was here in the Cape recently when they held their annual sport and recreation week—and the team spirit which is inculcated in their ranks is a truly refreshing experience. I also want to pay tribute to the Postmaster General and the top management who do so much to motivate and help people in the course of their daily activities.

†The hon member for Houghton apologised for not being able to be here this evening. She referred to the fact that there are only four post offices in Greater Soweto. I must inform the hon member that there are more than four post offices in Greater Soweto. During the recent strike eight post offices in the Soweto area were affected. Nevertheless the position is being watched carefully and additional facilities will be provided whenever this becomes necessary. I have noted her appeal in that regard.

The hon member also referred to the payment of Black social pensions at post offices and the payment of pensions into savings accounts. I want to state that the Post Office is already experiencing serious difficulties with the payment of pensions in terms of accommodation, available staff, the handling of large sums of money and various other circumstances. The Post Office unfortunately does not have the facilities to undertake the payment of pensions to the additional thousands of Black pensioners. As for the depositing of pensions into savings accounts, it must be mentioned that it would serve no useful purpose to transfer the payment of pensions from one counter to another—from the pensions counter to the savings bank counter—since most pensioners would not leave their money in their savings accounts, but would still draw it on the day of payment. However, I have noted her views in this regard.

*The hon member for Springs raised several matters and I just want to refer to a few of them. He referred to the possible decrease in charges for telephone calls from election telephones. Let me tell him that the Post Office has already contributed its share in regard to the low tariffs for bulk mail, something for which he has expressed his gratitude, but I do not think this decrease would be possible. There are so many other deserving cases, the Post Office from time to time receiving representations, for example, from pensioners and various needy individuals, that I do not think we could justify such a request for election purposes.

The hon member also referred to the sabotaging of main election telephones by using incoming calls to cause an engaged signal. The technical people tell me there is unfortunately nothing that can be done about that. It is a problem, but technological progress is such that I do believe that in time a solution could be found for this. It is with concern that we took note of this, however, and we shall be keeping a close watch on any such manifestations.

At the end of his speech the hon member also referred to possible assistance the Post Office could render in updating voters’ lists. That help should be granted to the Department of Home Affairs.

The Committee is probably aware of the fact that last year I appointed a joint parliamentary committee specifically to investigate the whole Electoral Act, bring it up to date and make new proposals. Their deliberations, which amongst other things included the updating of voters’ lists, were well advanced before being interrupted by the recent election. I believe, however, that soon the committee will again resume its business, and the hon member’s proposal will then be referred to it.

As far as the hon member for Randfontein is concerned, I am very glad he is satisfied with the main post office in his town, or is it city? One no longer knows whether it is a town or a city. I have noted his representations for a possible new post office at Randgate. The officials and I have made notes of the representations he made in that regard and will definitely be examining the situation.

As regards his question on possible arrears on Post Office services, I have made enquiries. The hon member referred to the arrears payments on telephone accounts in Black areas. He asked whether this was, in fact, the case or not. My information is that there is no significant difference in the pattern of payment of arrears on telephone accounts in Black areas. Uniform rules apply to all telephone subscribers when it comes to the suspension or termination of the service as a result of accounts in arrears, and no problems are being experienced with the implementation of these rules in Black areas. Telephone instruments are also removed when a service is terminated.

Then came the first maiden speech. It was delivered in the clear, dulcet tones of the hon member for Edenvale. [Interjections.] I must say that the hon member indicated that she was an experienced debater and that she must have been a good member of the provincial council. Even at this early stage she has acquired an excellent knowledge of the history, scope and activities of the Post Office. I believe that in the future she will be making more good contributions.

†I now come to the hon member for Mooi River. He asked a number of questions and also referred to the poor postal delivery service in his area. No doubt the hon member wants his voters to know that he is working for them and they will be quite right to think that.

That is why I am back here!

Yes, that is quite right. [Interjections.]

The Post Office is experiencing problems as a result of the withdrawal of certain train services. The Post Office has had to make use of its own vehicles as well as private contractors to improve matters. The situation is being carefully monitored and an effort will be made to normalise the postal delivery arrangements in the hon member’s area as soon as possible. The hon member deserves it and we will do our very best to arrange it for him. [Interjections.]

The hon member also referred to inadequate facilities in certain Black areas. The Post Office is doing its best to render a satisfactory service within its financial means. We will investigate any specific case that the hon member may bring to our attention.

The hon member also referred to problems with regard to postal and telecommunications services.

I referred to the file and found that full written replies in this regard were furnished to the hon member on 10 November 1986 and again on 27 April 1987. I trust that that will satisfy the hon member.

The hon member also referred to problems in manning post offices in rural areas and suggested that post offices should not be closed on this account. We have at present very few problems with regard to the manning of post offices in rural areas. I have been informed that no post offices have been closed on account of the unavailability of staff.

*Then there was another very interesting speech by another newcomer, the hon member for Walmer. It is a privilege to have a former rector of a university here in our midst. We already have a few here and they are not doing too badly. [Interjections.] This House will appreciate their experience and expertise. It also appears that the hon member is an expert in the field of philosophy, and we have particular need of him to transport hon members of this House, every now and then, to the realms of slightly higher spiritual values.

Hear, hear!

I want to congratulate him on the fact that he has apparently made an intensive study of the electronics field in which the Post Office conducts its daily activities, and he made an interesting speech about that. I wish him well for the future. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Greytown spoke Afrikaans this time—my notes are in Afrikaans and that is what leads me to deduce this.

We are completely bilingual!

Not the hon member who made the interjection! Bilingualism, however, is an asset as far as the hon member for Greytown is concerned. It is one of those assets emerge every now and again—much more then than now.

The hon member must really “Table” his budget, because he rattles off so many figures that it is really, with the best will in the world, impossible for me to refer to them. I really must ask the hon member to try, when the next Appropriation is being dealt with, to give me an advance copy of his budget; then I could reply to him and we would be on an equal footing. I do want to reply to him, however, in so far as it is possible and in so far as I have been able to follow his argument.

With regard to the percentage calculations used by the hon member to arrive at his budget figures, it is difficult, in this short time, to make any meaningful comments about them. In regard to the differences between the amounts under “Allowances and bonuses” and the amounts under simply “Salaries and wages” let me perhaps just mention that the earlier salary adjustment which, only last year, was indicated by way of a pensionable allowance under “Allowances and bonuses”, has since then been consolidated with “Salaries and wages”. [Interjections.] I had hoped that this would assist in explaining the difference between my budget and that of the hon member, but apparently that is not the case.

As far as the growth in personnel is concerned, let me mention that the hon member should also look at statement 6 on page 13 of the document on the Estimates. It is indicated that the number of personnel at the end of March 1986 was 95 758 as against 97 392 at the end of March 1987.

[Inaudible.]

Did the hon member also refer to that? I am just trying to help him.

As regards the change in respect of “Exchange rate adjustments” under the subhead “Losses” let me refer the hon member to my memorandum—which he has probably seen—on page 1 of the Estimates document. In the fourth paragraph it is explained that the provision for exchange rate adjustments in regard to loans was diverted to the subhead “Financing costs”. The position in regard to profit and loss has not changed as far as this expenditure is concerned. I wonder whether the hon member made use of this document, which is also, to a certain extent, a working document. If I let him have the other document he requested next year, he must just promise me that he will make proper use of it.

I shall make use of everything, don’t worry about that.

I am not going to react to the rest of the hon member’s speech now, but I shall analyse his figures and send him a letter.

The hon member for Newton Park referred to the granting of a tender for the main post office in Port Elizabeth. The department is fully aware of the particular case and is going out of its way in an effort to create jobs in that area. I do believe, however, that the hon member knows that the granting of a tender for that specific building ultimately rests with the State Tender Board which, of course, takes several factors into consideration.

The hon member also asked for a warning tone after every three minutes on local calls. I have been told that expensive additional apparatus would be necessary for that purpose. I do, however, want to inform the hon member that good progress has been made in efforts at measuring the length of local calls with a view to levying a tariff. The present position is that with local calls one pays only for one call unit, regardless of the duration of the call. I think that a great deal of money is lost in the process. This is greatly abused. At the beginning of next year a start will be made on the installation of apparatus to measure the length of local calls in the PWV area. Such apparatus will simultaneously be introduced throughout the area and it is expected that it will be in operation by 1989. Thereafter other urban areas, and at a later stage rural areas, will be included.

The hon member for Bethal referred to the old rural exchanges and spoke with nostalgia about one’s experiences with those exchanges. Those of us who have lived on farms still remember all that—the listening in, all the news one heard, the messages one gave, etc. It is true that this will leave a great void in future.

The hon member for East London North also made his maiden speech. I thank him sincerely, and also for his interest in the Post Office. The hon member is a competent and hard worker; the fact that he is here in the House this evening attests to that fact. I also want to congratulate him on that. I know that owing to his experience he will be making many positive contributions here. The hon member referred to the co-ordination between urban planners and the Post Office when it came to predictions concerning telephone needs. It is specifically that coordination on which the Post Office relies in its forecasts. I want to assure the hon member that there is no lack of co-ordination in this context. Our inability to provide timely services in all areas is not due to a lack of co-ordination, but is virtually exclusively due to financial limitations imposed on us as a department. I nevertheless thank the hon member for his contribution.

The hon member for De Aar also made his maiden speech. I think he made a very good job of it. One simply feels that the hon member is a farmer who loves his area, that he knows it like the palm of his hand and that he will always have the interests of his people at heart.

That is why he is here!

I think that the experience the hon member for De Aar gained in the President’s Council will stand him in good stead here. His speech also attested to a thorough investigation of the activities and functions of the department in his area. I wish him every success in his new career here in this House.

Business interrupted in accordance with Rule 47 (3) (a).

Schedule, Clauses and Title agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

Mr Speaker, subject to Standing Order No 52 I move:

Mr Chairman, at the beginning of the Third Reading stage, as we are now approaching the end of this year’s Post Office Appropriation debate, I must emphasise once again how we see our duty as the Official Opposition, a duty that we also tried to fulfil in the Second Reading debate and during the Committee Stage. It is our duty that when we are of the opinion that appreciation should be shown, this should be done. When, however, we feel that it is our duty to criticise, then we shall criticise as well.

Now is is heartening to be able to say that until now during this discussion it was necesssary for us to express our appreciation and to hand out compliments for 95% of the time. Where criticism was in fact expressed it was only directed at the hon the Minister. We isolated the problem areas and this mainly concerned tariff increases. I just want to emphasise that we most certainly have no criticism against the Post Office and its officials, and that as far as they were concerned, we expressed praise and appreciation, and that the only criticism that we had was mainly centred around the hon the Minister’s tariff increases.

This was a debate in which many new personalities participated. I myself had to begin here as chief spokesman on Post Office affairs, as was the case for the hon member for Boksburg on the other side as well as the hon member for Greytown. The hon the Minister himself has not been occupying this position for very long. As a consequence we are a new team, and I think that we have made a very good beginning.

I just want to repeat what I said in the Committee Stage, that we were really impressed by the dignified manner in which the hon the Minister replied to our questions and how he really tried to maintain a high level in this debate. We trust that amongst other things he will see his way clear to opening a post office in Randfontein as soon as possible, and we gladly await more information in this connection.

The only jarring note in the entire debate was the allegations made by the hon member for Boksburg. I think the hon member did not think before he spoke and I want to repeat the two things we feel unhappy about.

In the first place the hon member said in his Second Reading speech: “They are not concerned about …” That is the Conservative Party. “… what is in the interests of the Post Office or of South Africa”. We take exception to this. I have enlarged on this in the Committee Stage, and I think the onus is on him to perpetuate the good relationship that we have established in this debate, and it depends on him whether or not he is going to withdraw that allegation. He also referred to me as someone who, as he put it, castigated the Post Office personnel down, which of course …

But surely you did; now you surely cannot say you did not.

The hon the Deputy Minister should rather worry about the fact that he said in Rustenburg that we would have a Black government within three to five years. That is what he should worry about, and he should perhaps also just ask for a turn to speak so that he can speak openly and put his case and not just sit there making senseless interjections.

Order! The hon member must return to the Third Reading.

I gladly do so, Sir. As you know, I gladly abide by your rulings. [Interjections.]

Order!

I just want to ask the hon member for Boksburg—a while ago I said to him: “Here is my Second Reading speech and my Press statement”— where did I castigate the Post Office personnel? Where did I try to curry favour with them because I had castigated them? My only criticism was aimed at the hon the Minister.

Let me say that the hon member now has the opportunity to correct those two little mistakes he made, and we also grant him that opportunity.

To summarise, I think it was a reasonable Budget. We were not very enthusiastic, because we are still unhappy about the price increases. We are unhappy about the fact that to our minds the Government is just not succeeding in working out and coming forward with an adequate long-term plan to fight inflation and price increases properly. It is simply a fact that there are price increases year after year, that the inflation spiral continues and we are waiting for the Government to come up with something constructive to crack down on inflation. If this happens, price increases will start to drop.

As far as the Post Office is concerned, we have a great deal to be proud of. It is most certainly the best Post Office in the entire Africa. I do not want to repeat what I had said in my previous speech, but with the basic services which they provide we are very proud of the Post Office.

In the light of the fact that the hon the Minister gave us the assurance that price increases or tariff increases are not being considered this year, if we had that assurance and were convinced of it, we would not have moved our motion in the Second Reading. Under the circumstances we are satisfied that the appropriation, excepting for the price increases, is reasonable.

In conclusion, I want to use the opportunity to wish the hon the Minister and the personnel of the Post Office a very successful year, and I hope that we are not going to exceed the budget and that we shall all be able to come here next year and be proud of the Post Office’s excellent year.

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in following the hon member for Jeppe. I should like…

Overvaal!

Former member for Jeppe. [Interjections.]

Order!

I beg your pardon, it is the former member for Jeppe. I forgot the caravan had moved on. The hon member for Overvaal mentioned a few false notes sounded in this debate and I agree; there were certainly a few false notes here but will the hon member for Jeppe tell me … [Interjections.]

Overvaal!

And also for Jeppe!

Permit me to try again, Sir. I merely want to know of the hon member for Overvaal whether he is aware that postal services are operated as a business undertaking. [Interjections.]

Go and play outside!

I wonder whether the hon member would not kick a door open for us; I heard him say I should go and play.

Order! We have to proceed with the debate on the Third Reading. I shall take a slightly stricter view of this matter from now on. The hon member may proceed.

I want to point out the following to the hon member for Overvaal: In judging a business enterprise, one cannot criticise the chairman of the board and then praise the officials and management. It does not work like that. A business is either a success or a failure. If one praises one section and not the other, one has a fundamental problem.

This is a problem of integrity and honesty; this is what it involves. One cannot praise the officials of an undertaking and denigrate its operating leader. How can the hon member claim to praise postal services but condemn the hon the Minister?

I have another question and I wish to put it to the hon members over there and the hon the Minister: Who proposed the tariff increases? Was it the hon the Minister or was it postal officials? The matter is as simple as that.

Yes, as you are!

Order! The hon member for Overvaal must withdraw that comment.

I withdraw it, Sir. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

If one examines an undertaking and criticism has to be expressed, one criticises the enterprise. One cannot attack only the chairman of the board. The fact is the tariff increases necessary to maintain an effective postal system were proposed by the officials, that is by the Postmaster General based on figures submitted to him by his financial advisers which he in turn presented to the hon the Minister. The hon the Minister’s only function in this entire affair was to evaluate the political impact of such increases and then to give the Cabinet reasons for them. Surely that is how it works.

How do the hon member’s thought processes function? Before the election he said he was speaking only on behalf of Whites, after the election he thanked all postal workers and now we have this new attitude. I want to tell the hon member that in speaking of false notes one should really not tinkle on grandma’s old piano which has never been tuned.

Yesterday I was discussing external factors influencing the activities of the Post Office and I pointed out that there were three such factors one should note at this stage. The first was our slack economy—we are grateful it is improving—in consequence of which a rationalisation in railway activities followed. The second external factor was the nationwide reform which had an enormous impact especially on our Black people and their communities. The third external factor was the technological progress made in telecommunications recently.

I wish to revert to the first factor—the rationalisation of railway activities.

Order! I cannot quite follow how the hon member links railway activities to the Third Reading of the Post Office Appropriation. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, it is a fact that postal services are closely allied to the rationalisation of the railways. [Interjections.] If trains run less regularly, post is also conveyed less regularly. This creates the fundamental problem that in constituencies where railway traffic has been halved the post will now arrive a day later because the trains run only every second day. We have found, however, that the delay in the case of the post is not only a day or two but frequently far more. It can even be a week late and it is therefore clear that the delay in handling postal articles by Transport Services is out of all proportion. It is an enormous problem to us that postal deliveries in our areas suffer such delays and are so irregular.

At the moment we cannot use alternative means of conveyance for our post in rural areas because a law forbids this. Transport Services legislation provides that Transport Services be the sole postal carrier. With this new appropriation in mind, I wish to request that an interim committee be appointed to inquire into the problem between the Post Office and the SATS because it is creating such enormous difficulties in country districts.

Secondly, I should like to refer to the general reform in the country which also exercises an important influence on the Post Office as an undertaking. Constitutional reform is not at issue here but reform in the field of literacy for instance results in Black communities making increasing use of means of communication available in the country. If we take this in conjunction with the urbanisation of a large part of the Black communities from country districts, it emerges clearly that a very great need exists for communication between those remaining in country districts and their relatives who have moved to urban areas.

Because the Black people are the least affluent in the country, they are also those who make the greatest use of the cheapest means of communication—the letter. It is imperative that the Post Office attend to the siting of post offices because at the moment rural post offices are not easily accessible to people who make most use of them. I wish to request the hon the Minister to turn his mind to this in future.

The second statement which goes hand in hand with this is that reform has had a great effect on the economic progress of Black people and they are starting to make increasing use of the second level of communication—the telephone. This is the second cheapest means of communication.

Under normal circumstances a public telephone should be a better proposition costwise than a private telephone in a home. Yet we find in the Budget that call tariffs for public telephones are now higher than for private ones. I have to accept that there is a problem regarding vandalism at public telephones. This increases maintenance costs and may be the reason for the rise in public telephone tariffs.

My experience of public telephones is that they give rise to vandalism when they are not working. If a telephone is out of order, it is bashed, thumped, the buttons are broken, it is pulled and also kicked by people taking karate. Our greatest problem here is therefore …

Was the telephone working …

That hon member has been kicked by an Nkomati rooster. [Interjections.]

The fact is that there are two essential factors to ensure the security and effectiveness of public telephones. Firstly, it is necessary to monitor continuously whether telephones are in order. When I was staying at Jeffreys Bay during the December holidays, I had an experience of this nature. I considered the connection fee of R90 and decided to take the trouble of making calls from a public telephone at the post office. Those telephones worked without any problem and they were never broken. The reason for this was that the Jeffreys Bay technician visited the telephones each morning to ensure they were in working order. I think this provides us with a very important objective because we can safeguard our telephones in this way.

Secondly, there is something else we should bear in mind. As I now appear to be an authority on vandalism, I wish to tell the hon the Minister the easiest way of protecting telephones is not by means of the booth in which one stands but by erecting a smaller screen around the instrument. The instrument itself should be screened so that one has to press the buttons behind the screen and it is impossible to press them without any impediment in front. Neither should it be possible to insert the money directly in front of one but behind a transparent perspex screen. This will solve the problem because, if the vandal shakes something, he will not be shaking the equipment itself but a screen.

The next influence we have to examine is that of the development of technology. Here I particularly wish to compare the new telefax machine with the telex machine. This new equipment makes it possible to photograph a document in one place, transmit the information electronically and to have a copy of the same document available immediately somewhere else. Everybody had to keep the old telex machine in his office. There he typed his entire message, letter or document on his own telex machine and it was subsequently received by someone at the other end on his telex machine. The telefax machine, however, simply photographs the document within seconds, this is transmitted electronically by telephone line, received electronically by another telefax machine at the other end and developed to make the document immediately available. This shows the great difference between the two machines. In the case of the telex machine the information has to be punched in but in the case of the telefax machine the document is processed and transmitted almost instantaneously.

My question now is whether it is not the task of Posts and Telecommunications to make telefax services available at post offices. I am thinking for instance of towns like Frankfort or Heilbron in my constituency with a very limited number of inhabitants—about 2 000. In such a case it does not pay attorneys and other people working with such documents each to have his own telefax machine. If the service were furnished at post offices and Posts and Telecommunications charged service fees, just as other fees are levied for services, I wish to assure hon members the Post Office would make a profit and the public would benefit even more. This would also overcome the problems of the erratic nature of the post to a great extent.

Mr Chairman, I wholeheartedly agree with the few engineering proposals made by my engineer friend on the other side, the hon member for Heilbron. I particularly agree that there is a good opportunity for the Post Office to make money out of the telefax machines.

The hon member apparently does not yet quite understand what the whole question of political responsibility involves.

Good, tell him …

The officials simply have to act within a political milieu, and that political milieu is created by the Government and the hon members of the Cabinet who are sitting over there.

I want to refer to one example quickly. Last year, while our Government was losing more and more of our friends abroad, there was, for example, a decrease of 23% in our overseas telex service.

Supposing that after the election, with the Government back in the saddle again, this hon Minister and his other Cabinet colleagues could create a political milieu so that people would like to talk to us again and that we can talk to them again, and we only go back to what we had in 1985, then we shall have 23% more telex traffic overseas and that would earn us an income of another R19 million. The officials would not then have to include that increase as well. What the hon member therefore does not understand, is that when one speaks of responsibility, one is speaking to the Ministers and not to the officials. I hope he understands that.

I also just want to link up with what other hon members said in connection with the payphones. If I said that a normal telephone served as the wheels of poor people, this is even more true of the payphone. Who are the people who are dependent on payphones? If one really finds that one cannot even afford a normal telephone or if one finds oneself in a situation where one is not close to a telephone, one is dependent on that telephone. Now the hon the Minister states that the tariff of 10 cents is totally inadequate to cover the costs of payphones.

I think it is generally recognised that it is very easy to allocate revenue, but that one cannot really allocate costs to something, like a payphone. Usually a payphone is in any case installed in an existing network. Therefore, if one speaks of a payphone, it is notably a service to a community of people who need it badly, or people who cannot afford a telephone, or people who on occasion do not find themselves near their own telephones. It is therefore a service and when one speaks of cost allocation, I would say that one must particularly make use of marginal costs. The network exists in any case. One simply adds the payphone to the network and existing telecommunication system, and I would say that when one speaks of the cost of a payphone, one can only allocate the cost of the apparatus to the real costs of the payphone and no other cost at all. Even then one still feels that for the kind of people who are dependent on it, one could meet them halfway in that case.

In the Second Reading debate when I started speaking, an hon member on the other side said something along the lines of: “Have you paid your account yet?” He was referring to a certain incident that took place earlier this year. A certain rag which is published here in Cape Town, took cognisance of it yesterday and published it. I would just like to set this matter straight for once and for always, because I do not mind at all if the hon member for Primrose for example refers to a certain photograph of me. It is after all the truth. When one refers to things that are not true, however, then one should set it straight so that they can stop doing it. I am referring to the incident when according to my allegation someone was listening in on my telephone. In May 1986 it happened for the first time. That was shortly after I addressed a meeting on security legislation together with a small group of other people.

Was that before or after you gave the sign?

I shall come to that now.

Then it happened again in September, shortly after I was at another function where a certain photograph was taken. It was cut off again. The last time it happened was on 12 December shortly after I was in contact with certain trade unions about certain problems. The third time that it happened I wrote to the Postmaster telling him that he did not have to investigate my telephone, because it was working, but the so-called technician who arrived there said that he wanted to see whether the telephone was working.

The Regional Director replied to my letter and in one of the paragraphs in his letter he stated:

However, I said that there was in any case no problem. Funnily enough, in the last paragraph he wrote:

Now it is interesting to ask how the devil they could know who to telephone if they did not know that there was such a gadget attached to the telephone. Fine, I think that is one point I have now cleared up.

A few months after I had received the letter, I was informed that I would now have to pay the account which would be included monthly with my telephone account. I fully agree with this, but what is the procedure? If one wants one’s alarm connected to one’s telephone, one asks the people who install the alarm to do so, and it is their duty to receive approval for this from the Post Office and to connect the alarm. After that one pays one’s monthly account to them. Now I again ask whether it is standard procedure for the Post Office to find out three times, with periods of approximately four months in between that there is an unauthorised gadget connected to one’s telephone and then to remove it—just to come back four months later, again to find an unauthorised gadget and just to disconnect it once again. Then it honestly happens again four months later, and only after I wrote to them was the matter put right.

I just want to make it clear that I do not mind at all if people make interjections, or refer to photographs of me where I am holding my hand in a certain way, as if I had caught a fly. [Interjections.] I just want to set the matter straight, so that hon members can really forget about it now.

The hon the Minister has replied to this specific question of mine before, and I really do not expect him to mention it again, because every time he does so, it just makes matters worse. The previous time when he replied to a question, he said:

After that he gave his facts.

He was speaking of Ron Miller, surely you know.

Then he said:

I shall accept it completely if the hon the Minister regards me as unimportant, but now I wonder just why the hon the Minister and his party, as I am so unimportant, spent about R2 million on advertisements to make me so popular throughout the country. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, arising from the hon member for Greytown’s address on the so-called bugging, I want to say that Shakespeare said somewhere, “The lady doth protest too much.”

You said that last time too.

It is the only Shakespearean quotation he knows. [Interjections.]

In reply to a query from the hon member for Primrose on Telebank, the hon the Minister said:

We are all aware that there are two automatic bank systems: Multinet and Saswitch. These two systems are operated by the telecommunications infrastructure created by the Post Office. Telebank was linked up with the Multinet system; it is now being connected to the Saswitch system too. Financial institutions have now been linked up with both these systems. This opens an entire new world for financial transactions because it is possible for an amount of money to be deposited in a person’s account at any bank. The person may also use his card to draw his money at any other bank or financial institution.

The hon member for Randfontein’s problems can be circumvented by this to a great extent. An amount is paid monthly to the Post Office by the Department of National Welfare and various others for payment by Post Office personnel to hundreds of thousands of pensioners in the country. At present these pensioners have to queue to receive their monthly pensions from a Post Office clerk. If the pensioner could be supplied with a card bearing a secret number and the pension paid into Telebank or any other bank—but we are concentrating on Telebank now as it is the Post Office which pays pensions—all pensioners could use their cards to draw their monthly pensions from the automated bank of any financial institution.

He has to pay for it.

Yes, he has to pay a paltry amount for the service.

An enormous saving will be effected in this way.

What about unemployment?

To a large extent the Minister of Finance countered the problem of unemployment in his Budget today.

An enormous saving in working hours will be effected by this. I am referring not only to working hours of the officials of our department but also the hours thousands of pensioners have to queue up. Nevertheless I hear it is also somewhat of a social occasion and especially in Randfontein the member of Parliament contributes to making it such an occasion. Obviously the pensioners enjoy it. A great deal of time is wasted on this, however, and I think it could very easily take place in this way. It will effect a huge saving in costs in many respects.

A further advantage of this is its security aspect. I venture to state that it is much safer for the pensioner to use his card to draw his pension at whatever institution whenever it suits him than to join thousands of other people in a queue on a specific day and become the prey of unscrupulous rogues. I believe this holds great possibilities.

The entire system can be expanded much further. While discussing social pensioners, the same may be done with the pensions of civil pensioners. If one wishes to take it still further, the same may be done with the salaries of all officials employed by the State.

Can hon members imagine what an enormous change this would bring about in the entire payment and administration of salaries as well as the payment of cheques, cash and so on?

I believe this development in the technological sphere will open a whole new world to us which may be of enormous benefit to many of our people and which has been made possible only because the Post Office established the telecommunications infrastructure making this development possible.

Jaap would have done better than you!

Oh, Sir, I have doused brighter lights than that hon member … [Interjections.] … and I doused two; not only one!

Is Jaap a brighter light than Chris Ballot? [Interjections.]

The hon member for Edenvale raised an interesting debating point when she foresaw that it could perhaps be possible one day to order groceries from home by telephone or by automat and effect the financial transfer directly without ever handling cash or a cheque-book. I merely wish to say that day is far closer than any of us realises.

I make so bold as to say that in my opinion we would all have found it much easier if we had been much younger than we really are because children of six appear to handle this new technological development better than people the age of hon members of this House.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Hercules will no doubt pardon me for not reacting to what he had to say.

There is nothing to react to!

I just want to say that he will go down in history as the man who won an election with the biggest minority. [Interjections.] I think that everyone will agree with me that he is only in this House temporarily. [Interjections.]

I wish to say on this occasion that I personally am grateful that the first debate in which I could participate concerned the Post Office. I want to thank the hon the Minister for that and congratulate him on the way he dealt with the debate and also for the replies he gave this side, particularly to me.

†We all have a responsibility to the voters of South Africa and I would like to pay tribute to everyone who participated. All were, like the hon the Minister, obviously aware of the responsibility resting on their shoulders. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear the comments of the hon member for Heilbron. He too tried to connect the running of the department by the officials to the political leadership of the department, and therefore to politicise the officialdom. Perhaps the hon the Minister would in his reply care to comment on this matter. I think that he was totally off the track.

I am sorry that the hon the Minister was unable, due to a shortage of time, to provide me with the answers to some of my questions. I was hoping that I could arrive at certain conclusions, depending on the replies provided. However, I understand how difficult it is to reply to all the questions in the time allocated and I look forward to receiving written replies in due course.

I agree with the views expressed on the extension of the Telefax service. I am sure that the Post Office is better qualified to operate such a service, although the service is already available from the private sector. In the same vein I would like to say that perhaps it is advisable to cut the losses experienced in respect of money transfer services already heavily subsidised by other divisions of the department, by offering this function to the banking sector, which I believe is better suited to fulfil this function. Perhaps the hon the Minister would be prepared to consider this.

In conclusion I would like to give the hon the Minister the assurance—and I know that I express the feelings of my colleagues on this side of the House when I say this—that I will always endeavour to maintain a high degree of responsibility when participating in the Post Office Budget debate and in other matters relating to the management of the Post Office. We all have a lot to learn and South Africa as a whole, and the Department of Posts and Telecommunications in particular, will surely benefit from our efforts in this process.

Mr Chairman, we have reached the end of the debate on the Post Office Appropriation of 1987. Perhaps this is a suitable time to thank the hon the Minister, the Postmaster General and his deputies and personnel again for a well-administered department. It is a department which inclines one to be its champion because of its good organisation and the high esteem it enjoys.

This year sees the first time that the standing committees of two departments have amalgamated, that is those of Communications and of Transport Services under the capable direction of the hon member for Primrose and the deputy chairmanship of the hon member for Boksburg. It is also the first standing committee up to the present which has tackled and completed its activities this year. We owe a debt of gratitude to the two gentlemen under whose capable leadership these discussions could take place.

The motions of the two Opposition parties did not contain much substance. The CP moved that the House refuse to agree to the Second Reading of the Post Office Appropriation unless and until the Minister gave the assurance that he would announce no further tariff increases during the financial year. On the other hand the PFP moved that a study group involving the private sector be appointed to investigate the feasibility of a programme for the rapid replacement of all telecommunications equipment with modern apparatus.

Order! There is too much noise from my left.

The hon the Minister announced Dr Wim de Villiers’s inquiry in his Second Reading speech in the Additional Appropriation in February. He also announced in his current Second Reading speech that the report would soon be available but in the meantime he would apply the good suggestions which had come up in the report to his department.

The Official Opposition predicted that the leader of the CP would be the new State President in 1989. He was not identified but, if such a disaster should strike South Africa that the CP took over in 1989 …

I expressly named Dr Treurnicht—just listen!

We on this side of the House are scrutinising the leadership of the opposite side of the Chamber very carefully and I want to venture the prediction that, if the day were to dawn that the CP took over, the State President would not be the hon member for Waterberg but the hon member for Randfontein. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member must come back to the Post Office Appropriation now.

Very well, Sir.

We on this side of the House stated two years ago and recommended to the hon the Minister that annual tariff adjustments would be preferable. It does not help to be spoilt in some years because no increases are announced, only to be faced by steep rises two years later.

If we compare departmental costs with overseas tariffs, we come out of that comparison very well. A new tariff of R125 has been proposed for the installation of a telephone in our country. This accounts to R203 in Australia; R73 in West Germany; R313 in the United Kingdom and R209 in the Netherlands. We also compare favourably regarding rentals. The proposed tariff in South Africa is R15; it is R13,54 in Australia; R25,92 in West Germany; R43,72 in the United Kingdom and R22,93 in the Netherlands. Our tariffs therefore compare favourably with and are a great improvement on those of foreign countries.

On examining the annual report, it appears that the greatest capital expenditure and capital investment was on telecommunications equipment, that is the amount of R6,74 million. The department realises that the future lies in this section, which is why the South African system is one of the best in the world.

It emerges from the discussion of the Budget that, if South Africa desires an increasingly improved, efficient and modern telephone and postal service, the onus does not rest on Opposition parties but on the NP. We support the Third Reading strongly.

Mr Chairman, I believe the end of the debate is a fitting time for me to participate. In the first place I wish to refer to certain comments made by the hon member for Overvaal. He really held certain of my statements against me. I looked up my speech in Hansard and agree with him. I believe I should exercise a little care at times in the position to which I have been appointed and I may have expressed my thoughts too drastically.

Nevertheless I meant what I meant. I said the hon member for Overvaal first castigated the officials and subsequently curried favour with them. I agree this was perhaps not the language one should use but the perception created by the hon member remains.

Which one?

The perception that for political reasons the hon member wanted certain things brought about and then used the Budget for this purpose. Who is responsible for the Budget? It is compiled for what has to be done. It refers to certain installations and constructions which have to come; it alludes to certain matters which have to be concluded. For the past five years we have been involved in a modernisation programme of telecommunications networks and I hold it against the hon member that he was not even aware of certain facts mentioned in the reports.

How do you know that?

It emerged very clearly from his speech that he was not aware of what was in the report. The hon member held this against me but one could draw that conclusion from the type of questions he put to the hon the Minister.

I therefore want to say to the hon member I shall withdraw the word “castigate” (“af-kraak”) but the perception created by the hon member was that the officialdom is badly administered. He said so himself.

By the Minister!

He told the hon the Minister that the latter had said in his Budget speech the administration was on a weak footing and it should be placed on a sounder one. The hon member enlarged on this and blew up the story of what supposedly was wrong and how it would increase inflation.

He embroidered on this further so I am telling the hon member that, if I used too drastic a word, I am prepared to withdraw only that word but I am still asking hon members on that side of the House not to politicise this department. Why not?

All the hon members on that side of the House said this department should be operated on a business footing. If they are convinced that this department should be run like a business undertaking, I must say I know of no enterprise anywhere in the world which permits politics. We saw recently how problems beset a bank through reference to a single person so I believe all hon members agree with me. All on that side of the House will then agree with me to keep politics out of this sound department, this business undertaking belonging to South Africa because we should not forget …

The hon the Minister is not a businessman, he is a politician!

Order! The hon member for Overvaal may not make any further interjections during this debate. The hon member may proceed.

I said during the Second Reading debate that this department was not operated on tax funds. If this hon member in the years he has been sitting here had listened only a little to the debates on the Post Office and had taken a modicum of interest, he would have known there was a time when the Franzsen Commission was appointed. According to the recommendations of the Franzsen Commission we had to ensure that we could pay our expenditure from income and for a considerable period an argument raged between this side of the House and the opposite side on precisely what the proportion should be, whether 50:50 or on whatever basis we had to do it. Year after year we had the problem that, when this side of the House came up with certain proposals, for instance that the proportion be 40:60, we were attacked because it was “too high”.

For that reason I say the hon the Minister now has a very good policy strategy. If all of us in this Chamber would agree that we should run this department as a business undertaking, by looking at where we should subsidise and where not, we could operate it as a business enterprise. We would then be able to examine the rest of these aspects.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member whether he still maintains he said they—that is the CP— were not concerned about the interests of Post Office or of South Africa. Does the hon member still maintain that we in the CP are not concerned about the interests of South Africa?

Mr Chairman, if that hon member can convince us—I honestly hope hon members of the CP feel in their hearts as we do on this side of the House— that we should regard the Post Office as one of South Africa’s treasures, I shall be prepared to say they feel the same about South Africa as we do, but then the CP should not keep on dragging this department into politics and election issues.

I want to tell the hon member that as early as the beginning of May he had Telpos, the departmental publication, in his hands and that could have informed him of this tariff increase. If he had wanted to use this then, he should have told people this from the department’s own monthly paper but he only wishes to make political capital out of it when there is an election. In consequence, I wish to tell the hon member that, if he feels about this department as I do, I shall withdraw what I said and state that I do not believe that is the CP attitude toward the Post Office. I should be glad of this.

It appears to me we have curbed the hon member a little in this debate. For the first time in a very long while we have succeeded in cutting the hon member down to size. [Interjections.]

I wish to proceed to what I want to say at the end of this debate. Since this Budget has now been agreed to, I believe we should take a look at what its effect will be. I think that is the crux of a Third Reading debate. We should examine what effect this Budget will have on the existing telecommunications systems of our country. I think sufficient provision has been made in this Budget to expand and perfect to the systems we have. The report mentioned that the analogue systems would be phased out but one cannot do this immediately and then expect there should be no equipment to replace what you still have in service.

In my opinion sufficient provision has been made for the maintenance of the system which is now to be replaced by a digital system until we shall ultimately have to replace it completely with a digital system. It is stated somewhere in one of the Post Office publications that a developing country should be careful not to buy old systems which are being phased out. Postel warns African countries to be careful not to buy obsolescent systems such as an analogue system from European countries. I agree with that and want to tell the hon the Minister that we should preferably acquire digital systems. One should examine what effect this appropriation will have on the telecommunications industry. Over the past two or three years we have already seen a continual increase in turnovers among our own companies involved in manufacturing. One is grateful to see one of one’s own industries developing into one of the multinationals. I believe the Budget will also contribute in this field.

One should also look at the effect the Budget will have on the South African economy. To my mind it will have a very salutary effect on it.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon member?

Mr Chairman, unfortunately my time is running out so I cannot answer a question.

One of the hon members on the other side asked whether there was really an economic revival or not. This afternoon we heard from the hon the Minister of Finance that there had been a gradual recovery which was now accelerating. When one is changing and improving the telecommunications system of one’s country, one cannot immediately instal the most luxurious items; one has to take into account what the economy can afford.

As regards the manpower situation, we are fast reaching the point of having 100 000 people in service with the Post Office. I believe we shall reach that figure within the next year or two so we are creating employment opportunities.

A hundred thousand next year?

Yes, that is what is stated in the report. Owing to automation of the communications industry, we are even creating employment opportunities beyond the Post Office. I support this appropriation.

Business interrupted in accordance with Rule 47 (3) (a).

Mr Chairman, the Third Reading debate which has just been concluded produced interesting points. It is as well that we have a little light relief occasionally because a debate on the Post Office Appropriation is sometimes inclined to become too technical. One can always rely, however, on people like the hon member for Hercules, the hon member for Overvaal and the hon member for Boksburg to ensure that those who are not listening too attentively actually remain awake. They see to the addition of a bit of salt and pepper to the diet.

I believe every member participating in the debate and all the parties in this House value the good faith of and the good work done by the Post Office. This is a very important department because in the times in which we live we have to become increasingly conversant with new technological developments. The most splendid aspect of this department, however, is that the old is frequently retained and takes its place beside the new. The postman, to whom the hon member for East London North referred, and the latest electronic apparatus go side by side and each provides a service in its specific sphere. This is something each of us should guard closely. It places an exceptionally great responsibility on this House to ensure that the communications system which is the life-giving artery of South Africa, Southern Africa and the entire world is meticulously maintained, effectively operated and well handled and safeguarded. I retain the impression from this debate that we shall succeed in this and that we shall make progress.

I do not believe much remains to be said at this stage. I shall reply in writing to the hon member for Heilbron and the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis whom I was unable to answer on other occasions. My grateful thanks to the hon members who took part in this debate. I thank the Postmaster General and his deputies very heartily for their excellent support of me in what was actually the first full debate on the Post Office Appropriation. I think it would only have been expert members—here I am not including people like the hon member for Greytown; he is too professional for that—who would have thought I knew nothing about the Post Office and for this I am indebted largely to the excellent advice I received from the Postmaster General and his deputies and I thank them heartily for it.

I am also looking forward to the further inquiry which is currently taking place and in which the Post Office itself is participating. This financial investigation is taking place into all matters surrounding financial structures and their policy aspects. This is a very interesting inquiry which has produced much intriguing information already. It is proceeding and good progress is being made. We expect the results to become available in the course of the year and I undertake to keep hon members of the Opposition parties informed on progress made. I believe we shall receive further clarification during the year on the course and direction we shall have to take in future.

The Post Office and telecommunications are an interesting industry affecting each of us. I believe they are in good hands.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

Mr Chairman, I move:

The Government has on different occasions expressed itself in favour of the privatisation of public functions. I am, therefore, in my capacity as Deputy Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, particularly grateful that I can make a contribution to implementing this policy in so far as those functions for which I am responsible are concerned.

I do not regard it necessary to go into the merits of the privatisation of public functions today, since this is a matter which has been debated widely and of which hon members should already be convinced. As hon members are aware, the Government intends to publish a White Paper on privatisation and deregulation soon. What is of great importance, however, is the potential effect of privatisation on the Black communities and on the staff employed in industry.

First of all, it is important that I should mention that the money which the State will acquire from the sale of the industry will be utilised for Black development. The Amendment Bill specifically provides that the income shall be paid into a revolving fund which has been established in terms of the Black Communities Development Act, No 4 of 1984.

It is therefore necessary that everything possible be done to ensure that the highest price possible is obtained from the sale of the industry. On the other hand, it should be remembered that the sorghum beer industry has its roots in Black culture, and that the industry should not be separated from it after privatisation and thus become alienated from the Black communities in our country. A proper balance should be maintained in order to ensure that the highest price is obtained, but at the same time Black communities are enabled to participate in the sorghum beer industry.

In order to succeed in this regard, the intention is to sell the outlets in the Black towns to Blacks. Of the approximately 260 outlets which are presently controlled by the provincial administrations, 230 are situated in Black towns and will be available to Black businessmen. Outlets outside these areas may also be acquired by them if the necessary legal requirements are met.

I am therefore convinced that the privatisation process will open new avenues for those Black people with the initiative to come forward as small business entrepreneurs.

The mass production of sorghum beer is a sophisticated and capital-intensive industry which comprises assets valued at millions of rand. There are at present 22 breweries throughout the country which were erected at great cost. The funds for the erection of these breweries were generated from the Black communities by means of a levy included in the selling price of sorghum beer. I therefore regard it as proper that the proceeds of the sale of these assets be appropriated by the Government for Black development, and that Black entrepreneurs be given the opportunity to enter the industry. Brochures will be issued in due course to enable potential buyers with the necessary capital to make accurate assessments for the purpose of submitting tenders. Mr Chairman, I am also aware of the fact that there is some concern among the staff in the industry. Let me say immediately that I have great understanding for their situation. It is understandable that the breadwinner of a household will want security for himself and his family.

However, the decision to privatise the sorghum beer industry was taken during 1982. Planning and preparation has been going on for a considerable time and it is therefore not the case that the Government now wants to privatise at all costs. These are the final steps of preparation which are now being finalised.

The Government will do everything in its power to arrange the best possible dispensation for the staff with the advent of privatisation. This, as well as all other related matters, is being attended to by an interdepartmental project team which advises the Government on matters in this regard. Privatisation will most definitely have an effect on the position of the staff, but I wish to give the assurance that in the final instance the position of the staff will be closely considered, and that a prosperous future for the more than 5 000 staff members in the industry is a matter of great concern to the Government.

I wish to emphasise that the Government will honour its undertaking to privatise public functions wherever possible. The sorghum beer industry not only lends itself to privatisation, but also offers development opportunities for Black businessmen to enter an industry which grew from their own culture. I trust that they will make use of this opportunity, and by so doing make a further contribution to the development of Black communities.

I also want to express my appreciation for the thoroughness with which the Standing Committee on Constitutional Development and Planning performed its task when considering the Bill. I want to give the assurance that I have taken note of the guidelines compiled by the committee, and that these will be considered seriously when privatisation is carried out. The aim of this Bill, however, is not to prescribe a specific method of privatisation, but rather to make it possible for the private sector to enter the industry in an orderly fashion after all the preparations have been completed.

Second Reading resumed

Mr Chairman, when I decided to take an interest in and make a study of the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning, I never considered the possibility that sorghum beer would fall under it, and it so happens that the first Bill of this department which we must discuss in this session, concerns this topic.

The principle embodied in the Bill is the privatisation of public functions; in this case the sorghum beer industry. At this stage I do not want to express an opinion on the entire matter of privatisation, except to say that in principle we have no objection to it, but that one must certainly decide with great care what should and should not be privatised, and must weigh up all the advantages and disadvantages in all circumstances against one another before one decides to privatise.

There are, however, a few matters at issue here which I should like to discuss with the relevant hon Deputy Minister, and I would be glad if he would react to them in his reply to this Second Reading debate. The first question which we obviously ask ourselves is the following: Is it wise to privatise this specific industry, namely the sorghum beer industry? I know that there are different standpoints on this matter.

From my former experience as the Minister of Plural Relations, I know that large sums of money from the profits accruing from this beer were used at that stage to improve the lot of the Black man in South Africa. He does not necessarily consider sorghum beer just as liquor, it is part of his daily diet, and according to dieticians this is the form in which he consumes a large part of his proteins. It is, therefore, something special to him, which is part of his routine, his tradition and his way of life. Because the alcohol content of sorghum beer is not as tremendously high as in the case of many other kinds of liquor, large quantities of this beer can be drunk, that a large profit can be made and that, over the years the profit was used to the benefit of the Black people. I am referring specifically to sports fields which were laid out at that stage, pavilions, halls and recreational facilities which were erected, and far more which the department achieved at that stage with the profits from sorghum beer.

Now that the industry is being privatised, the important question is: Who is going to pocket the profits now and who is going to utilize them in his own interests? Are the profits still going to be used to improve the position of those people for whom this beer is a way of life, or are we going to enrich other people, who are merely going to consider it as an asset and a business transaction?

The first matter I want to touch on is the question of sales points. According to the legislation in front of us and according to the Second Reading speech of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, there are a total of 260 outlets for sorghum beer, of which 230 are situated in the Black residential areas. According to the Second Reading speech of the hon the Minister the intention is to sell the outlets situated in Black towns—in this case therefore 230 of the 260 out points—to Black people. This is a wonderful intention, but I would very much like to see an assurance of it in the legislation. Although I looked for it, I did not find a provision anywhere in the legislation that they had to be sold to Black people; on the contrary, quite the opposite appears in the legislation. I am only reading the last part of clause 5 of this specific Bill to make it clear what I mean:

It can therefore be sold to “any person”. The so-called intention of the hon the Minister, no matter how well meant it may be and how clearly it may be stated in his Second Reading speech, is therefore in no way laid down in the legislation. Whenever there has to be an interpretation of an act in a court or elsewhere, unfortunately it is not the Minister’s Second Reading speech which is taken into consideration, but the wording, verbatim, that appears in the legislation. There is therefore no suggestion that they must go to the Black man; this is only a wish or actually an intention expressed by the hon the Minister to make the outlets in Black areas available to Black people. We would want more certainty and clarity on the matter and the assurance that this industry will go to the Black small businessman. He could make a profit from it, increase his standard of living and render a service to his community. But this must be stated more clearly in the legislation, because at the moment there is no sign of it.

We are also aware of the fact that the system still exists that the so-called sale to a Black man could by implication also include a partnership situation. In that case 49% of the shares could go to a White and 51% to a Black man. My question is what will prevent large White undertakings and capital at present in the liquor industry from negotiating with a number of individuals in various Black towns and residential areas and purchasing 49% of the shares in any case. In this way they will virtually gain a monopoly owing to the fact that they will hold 49% of the shares of all the outlets throughout the country. They may well use Black individuals here and there as managers or to hold other posts. In each separate case there will therefore be a Black man who will make a profit because he will hold 51% of the relevant shares, but a White company would be able to make a big profit if it could get hold of 49% of the shares of all 230 outlets. In this way a White company could therefore come into the picture and take from the Black man the money which should accrue to him, be spent on him and be referred back to him. I do not think that the Bill was carefully considered.

Does it serve the purpose of giving the small businessman in the Black community an opportunity? Then I say at once that there is no assurance of any kind, because it is possible for big capital to gain a monopoly again in terms of these provisions regarding the outlets as such. The 30 remaining outlets can be sold to anyone, possibly also to Black people, but that is a slight possibility. My main argument concerns those 230 Black outlets inside Black residential areas where one would think that provision should be made in the legislation that these must be sold to Black people. The small Black entrepreneur must be given that opportunity to use the profit he can make from his traditional drink, to improve his quality of life. In that regard the Bill is weaker than the previous Act, when the profits were ploughed back into the Black community and when they were fully utilized to uplift the people and improve their facilities.

The next matter I want to touch on is the breweries as such. According to the Second Reading speech of the hon the Minister there are 22 breweries spread throughout the country, where this sorghum beer is brewed. The hon the Minister made it clear in his speech that these breweries were erected at great expense and that only the prospective entrepreneurs who had the necessary capital resources would be allowed to tender for this industry. Then the possibility is mentioned of enabling the people to take an interest in this matter by means of pamphlets which would be made available. But anyone who knows about the sorghum beer industry knows that these 22 breweries as such, and even one of these breweries, are worth several hundred thousand rands. The immediate question is, in all honesty and fairness, to what extent does this take the effectiveness and the realities of our Black community into consideration? How many Black people really have the millions or hundreds or thousands of rands to become involved in these industries, or to acquire them.

This becomes a absolutely impossible situation. The question is then in any case precisely how the breweries are going to be privatised. It is clear from the speech of the hon the Minister that the interdepartmental project team is still co-ordinating these aspects. The exact method of the privatisation of the 22 breweries is therefore still being investigated by the project team.

In all fairness I maintain that the Government is putting the cart before the horse. We do not even know how the 22 breweries are going to be privatised yet. The Government itself has no idea how this is going to be done; on the contrary, it has now been referred to a project team which is still investigating it and must co-ordinate it. But we must agree to the legislation now, in advance, so that they have a blank cheque to carry on with this.

Is it not wise, for the sake of the decency and the status of this House too, for the investigation to be finalised and for it to be determined exactly how the breweries are going to be privatised first? There is a lot of money at stake. When we have the complete picture, we can come back to this House and say what our plan is and how we are going to undertake the privatisation. Then we can ask the permission of the House for legislation to privatise the breweries. But to ask us for a blank cheque I maintain shows contempt for this House as a legislative body. It makes a farce of the whole of Parliament to come and tell us we must give the Government a blank cheque and they will investigate later on how to do this.

Everyone know that a great deal of money is needed to privatise these breweries, and a few liquor monopolies can again be enriched by this, from a permanent source of revenue which totals millions of rands annually, and in this way the profits are taken from the Black community and paid out to the large White liquor industry of South Africa. Is this a service to the Black community? Is it fair to the Black community? Is it in the interests of the Black community? Those profits are not going back to the Black community and they are not going to benefit from it. They are going to benefit from it once, yes. It is stated very nicely and clearly here that the highest possible price must be realised for these breweries, and with very fine noble feelings it was decided that the return from the sale of these breweries would be paid into the revolving fund, which would obviously go back to the Black man. On the sale of the assets as such that amount of money is paid back into the revolving fund once, from where it will obviously go back to the Black man. The regular, continual and annual profit accumulating from the industry as such can, however, according to this Bill, fall into the hands of the White private sector, and not a cent need go back to the Black man—in any way. I do not think the Government is in any way promoting the interests of the Black man here. In the first place we will have to have clarity on this.

Racists!

In the second place my standpoint is quite clear. I maintain that the cart is being put before the horse. I would say that the project team should first complete its investigation so that we can know precisely how privatisation will work; so that the Government and the Minister will also know. They can then come back to this House and ask for legislation to condone this or not. It is asking too much of us this evening to request a blank cheque to continue with this task.

Next I want to look at the matter of staff. The hon the Minister stated the following in his Second Reading Speech, and I am quoting:

The hon the Minister talked about some concern. If there was ever an understatement, this is it. There is not some concern; there is great anxiety among these people. There are 5 000 staff members employed in this industry. Many of them are specialised and specifically equipped to work in this industry only. They have made this their life’s work. They went on courses to enter this industry as beer brewers. They are breadwinners there. Now the industry is suddenly being privatised, and they are at the mercy of the private sector, which will decide whether to retain them or discharge them or what to do with them. I have many of those people in my constituency, who prior to the election came to me with their concerns and asked me precisely what was going to become of them. These are people with a number of children, who now suddenly finds themselves in the position that their industry is being privatised. The State, which has accepted the responsibility, is suddenly throwing in the towel, and now they are dependent on the capitalists—whoever they may be—to retain their services or not.

The hon the Minister’s feeble assurance, which he gave later in his speech, namely that the Government would do everything in its power to arrange the best possible dispensation for the staff when privatisation took place, was simply not good enough. These are fine words, but I want to ask the hon the Minister: Would the hon the Minister be satisfied if with regard to the post he fills today, he were to be told that his post was being privatised, but that everything possible would be done not to leave him in the lurch?

I feel that we are leaving in the lurch a group of people who in the difficult times when this industry had to get on its feet, made a career of it; made a specific study of it; attended special courses to make a success of it, and eventually did make a success of it. Most of them are not elderly people; they are people in the prime of their lives who are now being thrown out into the street without anywhere to go and without any assurance for the future. Their pension funds and everything else have suddenly come to a halt, and they do not know what to do. They do not have the vaguest idea. [Interjections.] To say “we will try to find the best dispensation for you” is simply not good enough.

Mr Chairman, I am quite sure that the hon the Deputy Minister will deal with some of the technical aspects raised by the hon member for Randfontein.

After hearing the ideas expressed by the hon member I was astonished to hear at the conclusion of his speech that they want to oppose this Bill because at one stage it sounded to me a little like crocodile tears in view of the conclusion he drew. He spoke specifically about two aspects. The one was the whole issue of profits that the Black communities were now supposedly being deprived of.

Unfortunately the hon member for Randfontein does not have the benefit of the knowledge of those proceedings that the former member for Kuruman had—he was his party’s representative on that committee and in the meantime has quietly departed. In that committee, however, very clear guidelines were laid down with the aim that the profits should specifically accrue to the benefit of the Black communities, and not by way of charity but through private enterprise within those Black communities. It should not be case of artificial subsidisation by the Government with limitations, as it were, but should rather be placed in the hands of Black entrepreneurs.

The point that was made that the cart was being put before the horse because a project team still had to consider the implementation of this aspect indicates, in my opinion, that the primary purpose of this legislation has eluded the hon member completely. The purpose is specifically to pave the way for the privatisation of this industry and to authorise a buyer of sorghum beer interests to make, purchase or deliver sorghum beer, and the specific aim, therefore, is that it should be an enabling measure for a major and very important project.

I feel it is important that this House should know that the Standing Committee on Constitutional Development and Planning that dealt with this considered this matter very carefully and from all points of view and heard very valuable evidence from very diverse and representative series of bodies, inter alia Black bodies such as UCASA, Nafcoc and the Ugamba Liquor Association. Very thorough spadework was also done over a long period by the project team to which reference has been made. That project team under the leadership of Dr C Scheepers of this department consisted inter alia of representatives of these bodies and of a total of 10 bodies that were directly concerned with this matter.

Before this standing committee was prepared to approve this Bill, much attention was given to guidelines which in its opinion ought to be adopted when a start was made with the implementation of this privatisation programme. As the hon the Deputy Minister said in his Second Reading speech it is most important that careful consideration be given to the effect on the Black communities. This was certainly done by the Standing Committee.

The keynote of the authoritative evidence was that this industry was characteristic of the Black culture and that it should not be separate from the Black communities. The intention to which reference was made, namely that the 200 outlets be sold to Black people and that the full proceeds from the sales of the industry be used for the exclusive benefit of Black people was concrete evidence of the Government’s attitude in this regard. However, this is such an extremely complex matter that if an effort had to be made to contain a privatisation programme of this extent and complexity in a Bill, it would have been totally impracticable.

Having said all this, another major problem remains: The manufacture in bulk of this product imposes very heavy demands as regards capital and managerial skills. The challenge that will be faced by this project team and those who will assist them is how this industry can be privatised against the background I have mentioned without detracting from its profitability.

†I am glad that the hon the Deputy Minister in his speech acknowledged the importance of the guidelines that were accepted by that standing committee because, whilst dealing with the complexity of the project, those guidelines clearly point out the many potential pitfalls which await the unwary on the road to the privatisation of this particular industry. The guidelines accepted by the committee on 13 November 1986, which will be dealt with by other hon members on this side, make clear reference—I am sure the hon member for Randfontein will be glad to hear this in the light of what he said earlier— to maximum participation of individuals with preference to members of the Black community. Interestingly enough, very recently— less than two weeks ago—even the Chief Minister of kwaZulu expressed a similar view when he said:

I am sure there is much sympathy for that view.

Finally, it is necessary that this Bill be approved so that a greater measure of certainty can return to this industry. The decision to privatise this industry had already been taken in 1982 but, wisely, the Government has been proceeding carefully and cautiously with the matter. However, it is now clearly time for action so that the necessary steps can be taken to bring the private sector into this industry in an orderly fashion to the benefit of all. I have pleasure in supporting the Bill.

Mr Chairman, I just want to say that the PFP gives its support to this Bill.

Here we are dealing with the first concrete implementation of the policy of privatisation on this scale. We are also dealing with a very large undertaking. In 1986 the various consortia of beer brewers brewed a total of 726 million litres of beer. The revenue from the sale of the beer totalled R257 million. The gross profit after the brewing costs and the packaging costs and the costs of the material had been deducted, was R104 million and the net profit was R39 million. This is indeed a very large undertaking and in that regard the hon member for Randfontein was quite right.

I want to make it clear—the hon member for Umhlanga referred to this—that the standing committee considered all the implications of this Bill very carefully. As far as I know, the approval of the Bill and the amendments agreed to, received the unanimous support of all the members of the standing committee, including the former member for Kuruman. [Interjections.] As far as I remember, that was the case.

Be that as it may, the standing committee went into all the implications very thoroughly and the various points raised by the hon member for Randfontein were definitely investigated properly.

The hon member for Umhlanga referred to the recommendations of the guide committee. Quite a number of bodies very closely involved in the entire sorghum beer industry appeared before the standing committee. The chairman and the executive director of the consortia of the various beer breweries as well as the Secretary for Privatisation, a member of the board of the Commission for Administration, officials of the department, the chairman of the Lliquor Board, representatives of Ucasa, of Nafcoc and of the Black liquor association Ucamba, as well as the commercial bank Volkskas—which was asked by the Government to give it technical advice on how the privatisation should take place—all appeared before the committee.

The standing committee had a long meeting on this matter. It was not considered over hastily and it was decided to appoint a subcommittee which would draw up guidelines for the implementation of the process of privatisation, as the hon member for Umhlanga indicated. In all honesty I want to tell the hon member for Randfontein that it was quite clear to us that what that committee had been asked to do, and what it could in fact do, was to decide in principle on the question of privatisation and lay down the general principles.

Is that in the Act?

The hon member for Randfontein talked about the outlets. Now I want to remind him that the outlets in the Black areas selling so-called “White” liquor, have to a great extent already been privatised in the Black areas. In addition I want to say that I feel that the hon member should know that in terms of the existing legislation there are certain other restrictions on people who are not Black to acquire the right to sell liquor in Black residential areas. In other words, technically it is not as easy as I understand the hon member for Randfontein thinks it is for a person who is not Black to acquire those rights.

Forty-nine percent!

Mr Chairman, in all existing legislation, whether it be the Group Areas Act or any other Act, what is at issue is a controlling interest, and 49% is not a controlling interest.

If we want to insert another criterion, this means that all legislation in which reference is made to a controlling interest in companies, will have to be re-written, because the nature and character of a company is determined in all that legislation by who has the controlling interest in such a company, and an interest of 49% is not a controlling interest. [Interjections.] It is not a controlling interest. When we talk about companies and not about individuals, only an interest of more than 49% is at issue.

Of course you can also enter into contracts. [Interjections.]

We can of course do many other things, but I do not want to pursue this matter now … [Interjections.

Order! The hon member for Soutpansberg is making too many interjections. The hon member Prof Olivier may proceed.

There are other provisions in other legislation which show the fears expressed here by the hon member for Randfontein—I am now referring to those private outlets and his fear that they can now simply be taken over by Whites with private capital—to be unfounded, because such a take-over is not in accordance with these existing provisions regarding the acquisition of rights on land and interests in Black residential areas.

In the second place the hon member for Randfontein made mention here of his fear that White big business could possibly gain control over the beer breweries. I just want to say that the standing committee was well aware of this possibility, and warned against it. The committee also very clearly got an assurance from the Government that this was not the Government’s intention. What I therefore actually want to say is that a subcommittee has been appointed in order to implement the overriding feeling of the standing committee—the hon member for Randburg was the chairman of that committee and quite a number of members of the respective Houses served on it—and that subcommittee drew up guidelines for the privatisation which was to take place. The guidelines had to give the Government guidance with regard to privatisation, and the principles contained in them made thorough provision for the dangers pointed out by the hon member for Randfontein.

It is quite clear when one looks at this Bill that it makes provision for the hon the Minister to transfer the interests vested in the administrators of the respective provinces at the moment. In terms of the Abolition of Development Bodies Act these interests can be transferred to any body which complies with the definition of authority, namely any other body established by or in terms of legislation and approved by the hon the Minister. It was made quite clear to us that the intention was that this body would be the Industrial Development Corporation.

According to the sober facts presented to us, it is impossible to allow that entire industry to be taken over. As a matter of fact, as was made clear to us, the industry as it is operated at the moment is not differentiated into the normal branches one would usually find in an undertaking. This means that the production costs, the packaging costs and the sales costs are not on separate accounts.

The recommendation of the subcommittee of the standing committee is therefore that the process of negotiation with and transfer to the Industrial Development Corporation will have to take at least two years, so that this body can convert the various beer breweries into saleable elements, such as the brewery itself, distribution and the outlet in the Black residential areas. In terms of the principles I mentioned earlier, these will obviously be allocated to Blacks. For the information of the House I want to quote some of the recommendations of the subcomittee of the standing committee:

I just want to say that I am a little alarmed owing to the statement of the hon the Minister in his Second Reading Speech when he said that they wanted to sell the industry at the highest price and to the highest bidder. But obviously the industry must be sold as a profitable undertaking otherwise no one will have any interest in it.

The quotation goes on:

It is therefore absolutely impossible to submit a complete Bill here and provide all the particulars. A long process of negotiation must still take place in order to organise these undertakings, the beer breweries with all their branches, in such a way that they are saleable. In their present form they cannot be sold to anyone, unless this is done in the way against which the hon member for Randfontein rightly warned. This can, therefore, only be done if the industry is simply transferred to large White capital undertakings. Then it can be done, but not if the intention is to convert those undertakings into separate saleable parts and in addition to leave open the possibility that Blacks will actually acquire the controlling interest.

The quotation goes on:

That is the reason for the provision in the Bill that the hon the Minister has the power to continue to exercise the right to provide that certain people are excluded from brewing beer, in order to provide that certainty to people who are going to take over that undertaking from the IDC. This was done in order to prevent precisely what the hon member is afraid of, namely that White capital can step in and gain a foothold there. Mr Chairman, I just want to say that all those movements were really investigated in depth and intensively by the standing committee. The hon member for Randfontein must take this from me.

The subcommittee goes on to say:

It is of no avail to sell an undertaking, whether it be to Blacks or to anyone else, if it is inter alia possible that within a year a competing undertaken can be established by, for example, one of the White companies, through which that capital investment made by Blacks or whoever the case may be is placed in jeopardy.

The quotation goes on:

This is stated clearly enough.

It is not in the legislation; it is in the guidelines.

I want to make this quite clear. That standing committee did not neglect its duty also to give proper attention to the form of this legislation in order to make privatization possible. I really want to tell hon members that intensive attention was given to this entire matter. I convinced myself of the merits as did my colleague who served with me on that standing committee and who is no longer in politics, adv Bamford, the former Chief Whip of PFP. We felt that this measure was the proper way in which we could undertake privatization in that industry.

I do not want to pursue this matter, and on this occasion I want to express my personal thanks and appreciation to those persons who appeared before that standing committee and in particular to those whose names I have mentioned. It would also be wrong of me not to make mention of the tremendous contribution made by the officials of the department in this connection. They assisted that committee in every possible way. There were no specific guidelines from the hon the Minister to the standing committee through the members of the NP or anyone else to prescribe what had to be done. I want to say in all honesty that the standing committee had a free hand, and that is why the members also came forward with quite a number of amendments to find ways to improve the Bill. But as far as I am concerned, there is no other way in which the privatization of this enormous industry with the big contribution it has made can take place than according to the principles embodied in this Bill.

In conclusion I want to say that here we are not only experiencing the start of a very interesting era in the application of the principles of privatization, but we have also eventually come to the end of another era, namely the era of the monopoly of what we can call the essentially White administration of the beer breweries.

This matter has a long history. Sorghum beer is a natural product of the Black people, as the hon member for Randfontein also indicated. It was one of the great tragedies that we interfered in that entire system. It started in Natal in 1908, when the principle of municipal monopoly was introduced. After that the Blacks (Urban Areas) Act of 1923 made provision for the continuation of that monopoly—as did the Urban Areas Act of 1945. It was only later that this special Sorghum Beer Act was passed in 1962. That principle of a monopoly by the municipality— the local authority—has been in force since 1908.

The monopoly which existed and the restrictions on Blacks in the Liquor Act, caused suffering and elicited resistance on the part of the Blacks. Until fairly recently it was still impossible for Blacks to own so-called “White liquor” without the necessary permits. The fact that Blacks were not allowed to brew sorghum beer themselves and the restrictions imposed by the Liquor Act, led to a tremendous number of concoctions being brewed—Barberton, isishimiyane, skokiaan and so on, and all manner of things were added. The ingenuity of the Blacks’ efforts to hide these brews so that they would not be found, became proverbial. I sometimes accompanied the police when they raided Black residential areas to unearth those brews and mixtures. They were buried under the pavement so that the person who was responsible for the making of that mixture could not be found. If he was found, he could say: “It is not mine”. This was a tragic period in our history. I admit freely that the brewing of beer …

Mr Chairman, I want to ask the hon member whether he realizes that the Blacks he is now referring to in his argument are going to be allowed through privatization to make their own beer.

Certainly. What I was doing was recounting the history of this matter and showing the evil which resulted from the legislation.

Obviously I assume that the entire situation has improved greatly during the past few years. I believe this will certainly be the first step in the return to the normal position in which the Black woman, as was customary in traditional life, was actually the person who brewed the beer for her family. This is quite possible; it can even be done in terms of the present legislation.

I just want to say that I am glad that in that sense we are entering a new era in which that municipal monopoly on the brewing, the supply, and the sale of sorghum beer, which in spite of the financial benefits which resulted, in many respects created a great wrong, is eventually being ended. In that sense I strongly welcome these developments, which can lead to the ending of the kind of control there was.

An important point discussed by both the hon the Minister and the hon member for Randfontein, was how the finance would be used when the assets were sold. We cannot be in favour of privatization and at the same time say that we want to retain the current profits, because then it is not privatization. If you privatize this means that the assets are sold. As far as current profit is concerned, the person who acquires those assets is obviously entitled to the running profit. We cannot be in favour of privatization and at the same time say that we object to the fact that those non-recurrent profits are going to be used in the interest of the Blacks. I want to add that on the recommendation of the standing committee it was decided that the capital obtained from the sale of those undertakings would be paid into the revolving fund established in terms of the Black Communities Development Act.

In conclusion I want to repeat that as regards myself and all the hon members, with the possible exception of the former hon member for Kuruman, the standing committee was unanimous on this matter, and that this was deemed to be the best way of privatizing this undertaking. I am satisfied that this is the only way in which it can be negotiated. We on this side of the House support the Bill.

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon member Prof Olivier for his support. He was a member of the standing committee and it is very clear that that committee scrutinised this legislation and considered it very fully, as would appear from his contribution in this House. The committee also went further and laid down guidelines, as the hon member has also put on record, and the hon the Minister accepted the guidelines in his Second Reading speech. The hon member for Randfontein mentioned the three objections which probably have to be considered in all cases of privatization. They are as follows: The profits of the State fall away, a monopoly could possibly be created and there is the problem of accommodation of personnel.

The hon the Minister said in his Second Reading speech that he was not going to go into the reasons for privatization, considering that it should already be an accepted policy. However, it seems to me as if this is not the case, therefore I would like to address the House on the advantages and the objectives of privatization.

The most important objective of privatization is to reduce State activities and to increase performance by creating competition. This ties up with our national goal of advancing private enterprise and effective competition. The most important advantages of privatization is of course the reduction of the activities of the State and of the Public Service. Also, the tax base is increased and the pressure on the individual taxpayer reduced. The private sector can enter new fields and broaden its activities in such fields.

It is a fact that in most cases a monopoly was created in the fields entered by the State because at that stage there were no private enterprises that were interested. In the case of sorghum beer it gives the Black entrepeneur an opportunity to enter the market. Although this industry as such is a very large industry, it is nevertheless clear that it can be divided up into different components. It is therefore very possible for the small businessmen to enter this area.

But in turn it should obviate the danger of creating monopolies, because as the previous speaker said: “It can be sold as separate going concerns”.

I am pleased that this Bill is the first enabling legislation of such scope, precisely because we are dealing here with a controlled industry, and precisely because the Liquor Board will still have jurisdiction over the distribution points and the industry. We are therefore not dealing with the possibility of the uncontrolled creation of monopolies to the disadvantage of, in this case, the consumer.

There is also the question of personnel. The personnel are of course accommodated in the Abolition of Development Bodies Act—and must be and will be accommodated. The hon member for Randfontein is, however, concerned about speciality personnel. These are precisely the people who should welcome this trend, because as I have indicated, privatization will result in greater competition. This competition could bring about a much better dispensation in commerce for these specialized people in particular. There will also be a shortage of these highly specialized specialists and there will be a tremendous demand for their services. If that person were worth his salt, he could negotiate a very good deal for himself in this industry.

We are dealing here with what is merely enabling legislation, and it is not possible to set out in this legislation what action has to be taken in every case, because there are many different ways in which privatization can take place. It is therefore not possible to specify in this legislation whether it should take place through tendering, who the purchasers should be, etc. Open procuration—as the hon member for Randfontein said—is really not being requested here either, because the hon the Minister has already appointed the Industrial Development Corporation to take control of this industry. The hon the Minister has also committed himself to the guidelines as laid down by the standing committee. I should like to congratulate the standing committee on this piece of work, because it is very clear that they had to listen to a great deal of evidence and had to consider every facet of it. They must also have come to the conclusion that we are really dealing here with an industry that lends itself very well to privatization and that the State’s interest in it can in time be phased out very successfully. I am therefore very pleased to be able to support the legislation.

Mr Chairman, in the time granted to me I shall react to a few of the statements hon members made earlier.

I interpret the Bill as an example of the hon the Minister’s view that he wants to privatise wherever he possibly can. He is doing so in the present case regardless of whether in our circumstances it is desirable to do so. I therefore say that he is privatising for the sake of privatising.

There is no particular reason for this step, such as that the administration was perhaps weak, that the industry was not profitable, that there was a shortage of staff, or that it would be at all possible for the private sector to administer the industry more effectively.