laid upon the Table:

1. (1) Regional Services Councils Amendment Bill [B 91—87 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Constitutional Development).
2. (2) Co-operatives Amendment Bill [B 92—87 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Agriculture and Water Affairs).

as Chairman, presented the Second Report of the Standing Select Committee on Health and Welfare, dated 22 June 1987, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

as Chairman, presented the First Report of the Standing Select Committee on Agriculture and Water Affairs, dated 24 June 1987, as follows:

Bill to be read a second time.

as Chairman, presented the Second Report of the Standing Select Committee on Agriculture and Water Affairs, relative to a Report of the Director-General: Water Affairs, dated 24 June 1987, as follows:

1. (a) the Stompneus Reservoir;
2. (b) a 375 mm pipeline of 2 700 m;
3. (c) a 375 mm pipeline of 8 400 m;
4. (d) a 300 mm pipeline of 391 m;
5. (e) a 225 mm pipeline of 7 170 m;
6. (f) a 150 mm pipeline of 830 m;
7. (g) a 150 mm pipeline of 1 230 m;
8. (h) a 125 mm pipeline of 1 660 m; and
9. (i) a 75 mm pipeline of 3 500 m,

1. (a) The purchase price is R333 400, which represents the book value thereof as at 1 April 1987.
2. (b) Ownership of, and all risks connected with the Stompneus Reservoir and the accompanying pipelines, shall be deemed to have passed to the Municipality on 1 April 1987.
3. (c) The purchase price, together with interest at a rate of 8,2%, shall be redeemed by means of 58 half-yearly instalments of R15 142 each, the first instalment being payable on 30 September 1987.

Report to be considered.

Mr Chairman, many questions were asked during the discussion of the two Votes under consideration. Some good questions were asked …

Just forget about what kind of questions were asked. Give us the answers! [Interjections.]

Order!

Some sensible question were asked. Many rhetorical questions were asked. Of course a number of unnecessary questions were also asked. [Interjections.] A question during a speech can, of course, serve a very good purpose. It may serve to illustrate a particular point. It may drive a particular argument home. However, it can also be entirely unproductive. During the course of this debate various speakers asked questions to which I do not have the time to reply. I should therefore like to extend an invitation to those hon members to contact the department or myself if there is a particular reason why they desire certain items of information. We will be pleased to furnish them with the information.

However, simply to ask questions in order to obtain information which is also obtainable in other ways, questions which therefore do not contribute to the debate, is in all truth non-productive. A few questions did stand over, however, to which I should still like to give a brief reply this afternoon.

The hon member for Yeoville asked why I had given guarantees for several million rands in my capacity as Minister of the Budget, and to what end those guarantees had been given. Those guarantees are being given to universities and technical colleges for loan purposes in order to satisfy their capital requirements. I am giving those guarantees as the authorised representative of the hon the Minister of Finance, and this is being done in consultation with the Treasury. The hon member for Yeoville went on to ask why the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply had ploughed back an amount of R25 million into the Revenue Account. He wanted to know, in other words, why the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply had spent less than it was to have spent in a difficult economic year, one which was particularly difficult for the agricultural sector, and why it had not made use of an amount of R25 million.

Before any simplistic and hasty conclusions are drawn and any incorrect stories are bandied about regarding this amount of R25 million, I should like to explain to hon members why this happened. The Department of Agriculture and Water Supply informs me that an amount of R430 million—I shall keep to round figures—was made available for assistance in the form of loans and subsidies during the 1985-86 financial year. The amount that was made available during that particular financial year was R42 million more than the amount of R388 million for the previous financial year, 1984-85. The money was ploughed back as a result of reduced demand, firstly because Land Bank interest rates had decreased and a smaller amount was required in the way of subsidies and, secondly, because it had rained in certain districts of the country and certain areas could be withdrawn from the existing scheme. Fewer stock-feed loans were therefore granted, which resulted in a reduced amount being required.

The hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply explained to the House in a previous debate how difficult it was to stay exactly on target with an agricultural budget. There are many fluctuations which have to be taken into account and I believe it is still quite an achievement, under such circumstances, to have adhered so closely to the amounts that were budgeted for the various Votes.

The hon members for Kuruman and Roodepoort asked why an amount of R38 million was being provided to supplement various subsidies, grants and financial assistance to State-aided institutions under the Improvement of Conditions of Service Vote. This represents the transfer of funds in respect of improved conditions of service at universities, technikons and other higher or tertiary educational institutions subsidised by the State.

The hon member for Roodepoort also asked a few questions with regard to which I do not have all the pertinent information to hand, detailed questions in respect of which I shall be pleased to furnish the hon member with the relevant information if he still requires it. As far as the issue of the transferring of staff is concerned, an issue to which the hon member referred, I can inform him that in reality no large-scale movement of staff took place upon the transfer of greater administrative autonomy to the two departments concerned in the Administration: House of Assembly. Rather, it amounted to a transfer of functions—people as well, but mainly functions—within a central economic component. The problems the hon member foresaw in this regard were therefore not as serious as he thought.

The hon member asked certain questions about livestock. The farmer in our midst is the hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, and I advise the hon member to put that question to the hon the Minister during the discussion of the Vote in question.

The hon member for Parktown also asked quite a few questions about transfers. He asked, inter alia, whether more transfers were to take place. We do, in fact, foresee more transfers taking place because it is the policy of the Ministers’ Council to afford the other departments greater autonomy, and that will result in a certain number of transfers. There are also various functions which are to be transferred to the Administration: House of Assembly in the process. The transfer of these functions is a reasonably laborious and complicated process. The Commission for Administration is conducting an investigation into whether a project team could be appointed to conduct such an inquiry in order to determine whether that particular function should be transferred to the Administration: House of Assembly and other administrations, and for what reasons this should be done.

Once that particular function has been identified, the report of the commission will be submitted to the various administrations, consultation will take place and the matter will be debated. Ultimately, certain decisions will be taken by the Ministers’ Councils and the Cabinet and their recommendation will be submitted to the hon the State President who, in terms of the Constitution, determines in the final analysis whether a matter is a general or an own affair.

To my mind the hon member spoilt the rest of his speech a little by arguing here, with reference to marriage officers, that the whole question of general and own affairs was a ludicrous affair. The hon member asked how many marriage officers we had appointed. We have appointed 580 of them from various churches during the past year. They were nominated by the churches, and for the information of the hon member they may solemnize any kind of marriage. [Interjections.]

In all earnest, I want to put forward the argument that if hon members such as the hon members for Parktown and Losberg have to make use of arguments involving marriage officers and the financing of the FAK from a general account as proof of their statement that own and general affairs do not work, let me say that that is the best possible proof of the fact that they do work. If that is the weight of the arguments they are able to advance in order to shoot this dispensation down in flames, they do not have any arguments to back them up. [Interjections ]

I should like to thank the other hon members who took part in the debate. It was clear to me that hon members did not have any real need to talk about the Budgetary and Auxiliary Services Vote. Hon members did have a need, however, to speak about certain overlapping issues relating to the Ministers’ Council, as well as the policy of the Ministers’ Council and its task, its terms of reference and its functions. There did, in fact, appear to be a need for that.

If this really is a fundamental need and cannot be satisfied by means of the sweeping, general discussions which take place during the Second Reading debate of the Appropriation Bill, I believe consideration could be given to instituting a separate Vote, possibly under the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, to provide for a more general debate on these matters. The institution of such a Vote would also make it possible for the discussion of this Vote to be used for the purpose for which it was included in the Appropriation.

Order! I am sure the Chairman will be permitted to say that he would welcome that. It would also facilitate his task.

Votes agreed to.

Vote No 7—“Welfare”:

Mr Chairman, to begin with I just want to make one or two remarks before hon members take part in this debate.

Firstly, I should like to thank the hon member for Pietersburg for the words of welcome he extended to me, in my capacity as Minister of Welfare, during a previous debate. I want to explain to him that the welfare and budgetary aspects are not the function of one department. I do, in fact, have two responsibilities, firstly in respect of the Budget and secondly in respect of welfare. The Department of Health Services and Welfare, however, remains one department with one departmental head. That department has two distinct arms, namely that of welfare and that of health.

A general arm and an own arm! [Interjections.]

No, both of them are wholly own arms within one own affairs department in respect of which there is one department head within the Administration: House of Assembly. At the regional level, too, the functions are performed by one regional head within one department.

In presenting the Budget this year we have, for the first time, drawn a clear distinction between the Health Services Vote on the one band and Welfare and Pensions on the other. This separation of the two Votes makes it possible to make a more meaningful division of the Budget into programmes and hon members will note that the programmes also correspond with the fields of service within which social workers function.

Before the debate on the Welfare Vote takes place today, I deem it essential to inform hon members briefly about the major constraint being experienced in the field of welfare, and that is the availability of funds. The affordability of welfare services is the point of departure in any discussion about welfare. Unfortunately, the primary concern is not what needs can be identified or what priorities should be allocated to those needs—what is of primary concern is the available funding and the question of what we can afford.

†I recently discussed the question concerning the affordability of welfare services with representatives of all the major welfare organisations from the private sector and the churches. The fact is that the fundamental problem we face concerns the escalating demands made on the State for welfare subsidisation. The Government’s expenditure on welfare has increased substantially over the years. However, equally rapidly increasing demands for subsidisation have exceeded the means of the Exchequer. We have now reached a point where urgent reconsideration of the present norms and methods governing applications for subsidisation is necessary.

I would like to draw hon members’ attention to the expenditure pattern of the Department of Health Services and Welfare in respect of subsidies for the various welfare services for Whites over the past years.

Firstly, the total expenditure in respect of subsidies increased from R18,3 million during 1977-78 to R155,6 million during 1986-87. This represents an increase of 750% over this period of 10 years.

Secondly, it is also worth mentioning that the greatest portion of the total amount is taken up by subsidies for aged persons. During 1977-78 it comprised 49% of the total expenditure. This increased to 59% during 1986-87.

However, when speaking about State expenditure of any sort, it is most important to consider whether such expenditure can be afforded. Consequently it is necessary to estimate what funds are likely to be allocated during future years. We in the department made a projection to determine the estimated allocation of funds. The projection was based on the following conservative presumptions:

Firstly, there will an annual increase of 3% on staff expenditure to allow for normal salary increments to staff in the employ of welfare organisations.

Secondly, there will be an annual increase of 10% on operational costs to compensate welfare organisations for the rise in the consumer price index.

Thirdly, there will be an annual growth in welfare expenditure of 2,3% in real terms. This percentage represents a higher growth rate than projected for most of the other categories of State expenditure over the next five years. By means of the average annual increase in expenditure of each of the various subsidy schemes over the previous five financial years, it was possible for us to make a projection in connection with the future expenditure of the department.

According to our estimates the department will be experiencing a shortfall in the following financial year and in every subsequent financial year, culminating in a shortfall of R236,3 million in the financial year 1991-92. This obviously reflects a totally unacceptable situation. I would be guilty of gross irresponsibility if I were to allow the budget of the department to run out of control in such a way. Urgent remedial steps to correct this tendency are imperative.

This totally unacceptable situation will come about:

1. (a) if the department continues to subsidise at the same rate as in the past;
2. (b) if the department continues to approve new schemes at the present rate; and
3. (c) if funds are allocated in accordance with existing formulae.

The escalation in expenditure over the past financial years can mainly be attributed to the subsidisation of additional welfare projects and extensions to existing projects.

As a financial guideline the department should base its budgetary projections on a maximum growth in real terms of 2,3% per annum. Based on this assumption, the 2,3% in real terms will be the only additional funds available for the extension of welfare services. If we consider the numerous urgent requests presently awaiting approval from the department, in relation to the funds that will become available according to our budgetary projections, it will take up to eight years to meet the needs of only those projects presently on the priority list.

This applies only if the increase in subsidies is kept within the projected 10% and 3% limits. Welfare subsidization is therefore facing a major problem. Increasing demands have exceeded the ability of the Exchequer, and hence of the State, to provide sufficient funds.

It must be obvious that we can no longer continue on this basis. As far as I am concerned a completely new approach is required. This was also the substance of the discussion I had with the representatives of the various welfare organizations earlier this year.

In the light of this grave situation I have directed the department not to consider any new applications until a more meaningful and efficient approach to welfare subsidization has been established. In this regard there are a number of points to be considered and I would like to refer to three of them.

Firstly, an application cannot be approved merely because a need has been demonstrated. The South African economy has a limited capacity. There are many more needs in our society than can be met. If we were to sit down and identify all the needs that we are aware of, I am sure the list would be endless. The availability of funds, rather than the identification of needs, will have to be the determining factor when projects are considered in future.

Secondly, in future the ministerial representatives will determine priorities. In this regard, they will be advised by the regional welfare boards. To assist them a financial guideline regarding the available funds will be furnished annually. An application will only be approved if and when funds are available.

The present procedure whereby a project is approved on the grounds that a need has been demonstrated but implementation has to be delayed until funds become available, is most unsatisfactory.

There are projects that have been on the waiting list for a number of years—up to seven and eight years—which is a very unsatisfactory situation. In future all applications will be considered annually and, once approved, a definite time-scale for funding will be announced.

Thirdly, a set of practical policy criteria will in future be used as a basis for the evaluation of projects and the determination of priorities. I have discussed these criteria with the representatives of the welfare organisations. We have received meaningful and valuable contributions from them and I envisage that these criteria will be implemented in the near future.

*I just want to say a few words about ministerial representatives. I have already referred in previous debates to the important role the ministerial representatives will henceforth play. They will, in future, play a very crucial role in welfare matters. In fact, I can inform the House that I have delegated most of the responsibilities relating to welfare matters to ministerial representatives. Welfare lends itself to an effective transfer of power to the regional and provincial levels. As Minister I shall still perform the coordinating and policy-making functions, but the implementation of policy will be the task of the department, under the direction of the ministerial representatives in the various regions.

I should like to point out to hon members that representations in respect of regional welfare matters will henceforth be dealt with by the ministerial representatives. Welfare organisations will have to do their planning, determine their priorities and discuss their problems at the operational level in consultation with ministerial representatives. The ministerial representatives, together with the regional welfare advisory boards, will also be responsible for the determination of priorities within that specific region.

All representations from welfare organisations, churches, hon colleagues in Parliament and so on, in regard to the construction of new or the expansion of existing institutions and other welfare activities within their regions, will have to be made through the ministerial representatives. Naturally, I should also like to be of assistance to my hon colleagues in that respect. As far as welfare is concerned, the ministerial representatives may be regarded as the Government in the regional context. I am convinced that this new dispensation holds great advantages for the supportive role which the State plays in respect of welfare organisations.

All over the world, foster-care is regarded as the most important form of substitute care. The reasons for this are easy to understand. Firstly, foster-care places the child in a home and in a family context, which is far better than placing the child in an institution. Secondly, a foster-child is given more personal attention and love in an intimate family context than in an institution. Thirdly, often foster-care also holds many great advantages for the family. The involvement of the family—the parents and the children in the home—in the joys and sorrows of a child in need has an enriching influence on a family. Fourthly, there are also some financial aspects of this care which we should not lose sight of. Foster-care does not require a capital outlay, as does the construction of an institution, and therefore represents a relatively cheaper service than institutionalised care. There are 7 000 White children in foster-care in South Africa today.

There are, however, some trends in fostercare which give cause for concern. It is clear that there are some deficiencies which ought to be rectified. In this regard I can quote some facts. Firstly, a significant number of foster-care placements fail. Secondly, too many natural parents have reason to feel dissatisfied about the attitude of foster-parents towards them as the natural parents. Thirdly, there is an apparent resistance among social workers to promoting family foster-care placements.

Many reasons may be advanced for these deficiencies and I do not want to make use of this debate to elaborate on them. It is possible, however, that the following aspects may be responsible for these deficiencies: The inefficient selection and preparation of the foster-parents; incorrect placement methods in that the right child is not sensibly being placed with the right foster-parents; and irregular and inefficient supervisory services. Unsatisfactory supervisory services which do not provide the foster-parents with adequate support, also contribute to the fact that the restructuring of the family set-up and the broken home is not progressing as desired. In fact, the Child Care Act contains certain clear provisions in this regard.

In the light of these and various other problems in this regard, I have decided to appoint a committee of inquiry into fostercare. The committee has been instructed to investigate and report on:

1. 1. The nature and efficiency of—
   1. (a) recruitment and selection methods in respect of foster-parents;
   2. (b) the criteria according to which a child is selected for foster-care placement with specific foster-parents; and
   3. (c) the selection of family members to act as foster-parents.
2. 2. The content of supervisory services and the extent to which these services link up with restructuring services; and
3. 3. The financial compensation of foster-parents and related matters.

I shall shortly make some further announcements in this regard. At a later stage during this debate I shall mention some further aspects I should like to discuss.

Mr Chairman, this debate actually started the day before yesterday. After a certain amount of confusion regarding what the discussion of this Vote, which had actually been completed, involved, the Chairman eventually ruled that we could go ahead with the Welfare Vote. I then learned that the hon the Minister had not listened to me and that I would have to remake my speech, but fortunately the hon the Minister announced yesterday that he would reply to what I had already said. I can therefore continue with my speech now.

I am therefore continuing with disability pensions which was what I was in the process of discussing. If one looks at Programme 3, one sees that an amount of R85 629 000 has been voted for disability pensioners for whom the House of Assembly is responsible. The hon the Minister’s counterpart in the House of Delegates voted an amount of R120 025 000 for the same purpose. This is a difference of almost R35 million. If one takes the demographic facts into account, this does not really make sense.

Last year, when the difference was approximately R27 million, we also pointed this out. I asked the hon the Minister why the appropriation for these pensions had increased so much and why there was such a big difference between the appropriations of the two Houses. He then replied to my question and I am quoting (Hansard: House of Assembly, 22 May 1986, col 6228):

I should like to know from the hon the Minister whether he agrees with that explanation. If so, this therefore means that disability is being used here for a recession in the economy and that people who are being discharged qualify for a disability pension even if they are not really unable to work owing to physical disability.

As far as I am concerned the same problem exists with regard to child-care allowances. Mr Chairman, you will remember that we pointed out in this House in 1983 that there was a tremendously big difference between the child-care allowances paid by the House of Assembly and those paid by the House of Representatives. At that stage it was approximately as follows: Child-care allowances for Whites, R21 million, compared with R77 million for the Coloured population and R27 million for the Asian population. It then, in fact, came to light that there was really an unacceptable utilisation of these finances, in the sense that unmarried mothers could sometimes claim allowances for two, three or four children, and therefore could also provide other people with a livelihood, whereas the contributions they were receiving were actually intended for specific cases.

In September of that year the department introduced an administrative arrangement in terms of which a contribution would only be paid with regard to the first illegitimate child. At the same time more stringent steps were taken with a view to forcing the responsible father to pay maintenance. But what do we find now, Mr Chairman? At the moment we have no information at our disposal with regard to these measures.

Now we find that this hon Minister has voted an amount of R64 million for child-care. In the House of Representatives an amount of R127,077 million has been voted for the same purpose. A very big difference, Mr Chairman. A difference of virtually R57 million. The allocation of these funds is surely a general affair affecting all three Houses, and the taxpayer of South Africa would like to know—how are we to ascertain this after all?—whether funds are again being spent in an unacceptable manner, particularly in view of this tremendous difference between the amount for which this hon Minister has budgeted and the amount for which his counterpart in the House of Representatives has budgeted. I should like to hear what the hon the Minister has to say about this.

In addition, Sir, I referred the day before yesterday to the absurdity which had arisen because politics was being dragged into welfare. We saw this particularly during the past election. In Innesdal and elsewhere elderly people were being maltreated in that they were being told that they had to vote for the Government otherwise their pensions and even their accommodation would be jeopardised. [Interjections.]

Order!

Now the hon the Minister is denying this.

I came across this frequently. I am listening to you. I shall react to what you are saying.

Very well. While the hon the Minister is reacting, I should like to read out a letter I have here. This letter was written by the NP candidate for Piketberg and signed by Dr D J de Villiers. What did the hon the Minister write? I am quoting him:

Mr Chairman, this is being done with the State’s money. [Interjections.]

They do not know the difference between the State and the Government! [Interjections.]

Disgraceful, Dawie!

I shall quote further, Sir:

Mr Chairman, I maintain that the hon the Minister is flagrantly leading those poor old people to believe that the National Party is giving them those increases and rendering those welfare services to them. [Interjections.]

Order!

In his Second Reading speech the hon the Minister referred to the availability of State funds. I am glad he spoke specifically about State funds. It is indeed State funds that the hon the Minister utilises in his capacity as executive official. It is not NP funds …[Interjections.] The hon the Minister also made mention of the shortage he foresaw would arise, particularly in the ’nineties. Applications for subsidies would then be dealt with in a special way.

He also referred to the ministerial representatives who would function at regional level, but whom we on this side of the House consider to be appointed representatives. We say that as far as the executive and legislative authorities are concerned, they must be representatives of the people and they must not be appointed by the authorities.

I just want to point out to hon members that pension increases only coming into effect in October is unacceptable. Pensions have only been increased by approximately 18% during the past two years, while the inflation rate was approximately 30% to 40%. I again want to appeal to the hon the Minister to cause those increases to take place earlier by means of computerisation.

As regards the means test, I want to quote a paragraph appearing on page 18 of the report of the Joint Committee on Pension Benefits:

Graphs to illustrate this are then furnished. The entire matter of a means test, particularly in this connection, merits thorough investigation. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pietersburg must pardon me if I do not react to what he said.

Another investigation was recently instituted into the death of an infant who had been assaulted by his parents. Child battering or abuse is a very emotional question, and this particular case encouraged many people to indicate their undoubted abhorrence of such conduct. Even newspapers damned the parents in their main reports and suggested preventative measures. In this specific case a newspaper even proposed sterilizing the parents to prevent their brutality from being continued at a later stage. The writer of a letter to a newspaper pleaded that battering a child to death should be a capital offence.

Child battering is not a new phenomenon. It has occurred for centuries and unfortunately there is no simple solution to this social aberration. The abuse of children can be physical and/or mental. It can also be sexual, which usually leaves the victim with serious physical as well as mental scars.

Recent investigations by the Human Sciences Research Council show an increase in the number of cases of assaults on children. There is also a world-wide increase in the reported number of cases of child abuse. This tendency is reflected in the HSRC’s finding that there is an increase in the number of single-parent families and that the head of such a family has to contend with an exceptional problem.

It is estimated that one out of every 10 children who are assaulted dies as a result of his injuries. This is alarming, especially when one considers that there is a world-wide increase in this kind of crime.

Unfortunately it is not possible to identify potential child abusers or, as they were described in a newspaper headline, babybatterers. There are indications that certain parents may abuse their children in certain circumstances. The HSRC also found that the single-parent family of which a woman is the head is at greater risk, and that these families need special services. The investigation also showed that most single parents are not capable of providing all the childrens’s needs.

In some Western countries, up to 45% of the children under the age of 18 years can sooner or later expect to become members of a single-parent family. Financial pressure, concern about medical fees, the increasingly expensive requirements of the children and the fear of unemployment are only a few factors that can break the single parent and make him act irrationally. Unmarried mothers usually experience the same problems and their frustration can lead to a panicstricken solution.

A recent random test showed that more than 20% of the families involved in this test have had one or more children placed elsewhere for financial reasons.

Children who are abused by their parents do not progress as one would wish at school, and some of the long-term effects are a disturbed personality development and deficient parental skills. Because the abused child does not learn the necessary parental skills, such a child can also become a child abuser in later life.

Sexual assaults on children usually leave scars which create serious problems for the child when he or she gets older. Although I have no sympathy with a child abuser, I can appreciate the tension and the frustration experienced by a parent who is not equal to the task of responsible parenthood in certain circumstances, and I would not readily condemn such a parent.

It is apparent from the annual report that was tabled that the department is addressing the problem of child battering effectively, and I cannot suggest any better ways of combating the problem. I am of the opinion, however, that ways should be found to assist parents who experience the impulse to harm their children before they do so.

It appears that when it comes to child care, most people regard the Department of Welfare as a body which takes action once the abuse of a child has come to light. Consequently the parent who abuses his child does not approach the department for help. However parodoxical this may sound, the parent is afraid to seek help for fear that the child will be taken away from him.

I should like to see more volunteers in the community who are willing to assist parents and children who are experiencing problems. These volunteers should be trained and advised by the department, however. There is the possibility of a walk-in clinic which can be manned by volunteers who are accepted by the parents and the children as advisers. The hon member for Bezuidenhout will give further details of the need for such a service in his speech.

Another aspect which struck me is that the man in the street does not report cases of child abuse which come to his attention to the SA Police. I appeal to these people to report immediately any case of abuse that comes to their attention.

On behalf of this side of the House I want to thank all the teachers, clergymen, welfare workers, policemen and volunteers who assist the Department of Welfare in putting an end to the battering of children, for their unselfish service to the community. I should also like to thank the hon the Minister, the Executive Director and his staff and the many volunteers who assisted in taking care of and protecting children.

Mr Chairman, I want to ask the hon member for Maraisburg to pardon me for not reacting to his speech. My colleague the hon member for Pinetown will deal with a similar matter. I agree, of course, that child care is also very important.

I think the hon the Minister made a very important announcement this afternoon. I find much of it disturbing because at a time when there is an increased need for welfare he tells us that there are not enough funds. When one reads this afternoon’s The Argus, which I will show to the hon the Minister, one sees a heading such as “Food queues for city’s poor”. In the report one reads:

That is a disgrace!

The first part of the hon the Minister’s announcement about subsidies for welfare was an ominous prelude to his department’s and the Government’s warped and confused ideas on the privatisation of welfare. I want to warn him that if that is their first shot at the privatisation of welfare I can see an unbelievable number of problems for South Africa. I would also like to ask him whether this announcement of today has been made simultaneously by the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development and the hon Ministers of Health Services and Welfare in the other two Houses.

It was not an announcement; it was a statement of fact.

Were these facts stated in all the Houses today? [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister also dealt with the ministerial representatives and foster care. Time will not allow us to go into any detail on these matters but I am sure that during my speech and those of my colleagues we will deal with some of them.

The aim of Vote 7 is:

At this point I would like to interrupt myself and apologize to the hon the Minister for the fact that we have not yet welcomed him. We would like to welcome and congratulate him as well and we want to ask him to thank his department for its report. I would just like them, when they talk about manhours and the employment figures, to give us more details about the various posts. If they could do that we would have an idea of, for instance, how many social workers they have and how many vacancies there are. It would be of great help to us.

The department of the hon the Minister therefore has two functions. The first is to regulate social welfare services by legislation, and the second to render social welfare services. I will try not to be political and make an issue of this today. The hon the Minister knows my feelings about own affairs but I promise that I will not make it an issue under this Vote. However, this is for Whites only, and the hon the Minister indicated that his announcement today was for his department alone.

The hon the Minister has asked for an amount of approximately R769,936 million. I would like to ask him firstly who determines the amount budgeted for and, secondly, how this amount is arrived at. What I really want to know is whether he as the Minister of an own affairs department has any say in the determination of, for example, the monthly pension of R280 for White social pensioners? This amount I believe is too small but I will deal with that a bit later in my speech. Is the amount of the pension received determined by the hon Ministers of Finance and of National Health and Population Development, with the hon the Minister of the Budget and Welfare just saying thank you for the slice of the cake handed to him? Must he, in accordance with his aims, then just deal with the amount he has received and distribute it among the various programmes of his department?

In Programme 1—Administration—we read that the policy is determined by the hon the Minister, the Director-General and other members of his department. I would be very grateful if the hon the Minister can tell us early on in this debate exactly what is meant by this statement so that we can have a meaningful debate and avoid the hon the Minister’s referring us to other hon Ministers’ departments when he replies at the end of this debate. This is what he did yesterday and again this afternoon.

When one listened to the hon the Minister’s introduction, it was obvious that the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development could have made the same introduction because it concerns welfare for Blacks as much as welfare for Whites.

A careful study of the aims and programme description of this Vote is necessary, because it appears that the hon the Minister and his department are only agents for the hon the Minister of Finance to regulate and administer the money budgeted for White welfare.

Sir, before I discuss a few welfare problems in more detail, allow me to express a few general remarks. The World Health Organisation defines health as “a state of physical and mental well-being”, not only an absence of disease. Welfare is therefore a very important factor in providing health for a nation as it gives that state of physical and mental well-being to a particular group of our population who find it impossible to provide it for themselves. So the hon the Minister’s introduction about subsidies is of even greater concern when one sees that it will affect the state of mental and physical health of our people.

These people are firstly the aged—we talk about the care of the aged—and secondly the handicapped—we talk about the care of the handicapped. Just in passing I should like to say how much we support the Year of the Disabled, and I should like the hon the Minister and his department, as they did last year, to promote this very important programme of looking after the handicapped. Thirdly and finally there are the young—the care of children. I believe it is a duty of compassion. I prefer the Afrikaans word—“barmhartigheid”. That is not only the responsibility of the State but also that of the private sector, of each individual who is privileged to look after the welfare of the nation.

Today I appeal to all South Africans to support the State and private organisations in their continued struggle to provide money for food, facilities, work and warmth for this very worthwhile cause, especially during this period when our economy is so depressed, when people are out of work, have no clothing or warmth and when the prices of our foodstuffs are escalating. I think I have to appeal to the State today as well to increase their “barmhartigheid” to the people of South Africa. I agree that we are not a welfare state, but hon members will also agree that we cannot do without welfare, because, like the poor, there will always be the aged, the handicapped and the children in need of care among us.

I also want to urge this hon Minister and his department to see to it that the necessary personnel are not only trained to deal with this important task but that they are also suitably rewarded for their dedication and hard work. I refer in particular to social welfare workers, physiotherapists and occupational therapists. I would like to suggest to the hon the Minister that we have a year dedicated to these people who do this essential welfare work.

The care of the aged, the handicapped, the mentally retarded children, to name but a few, will never be successful without these people. It is therefore of great concern to me to read daily about their heavy work-load, the posts that cannot be filled and the difficulty experienced in recruiting qualified personnel. I have visited institutions with more that 500 inmates, desperately needing the attentions of physiotherapists and occupational therapists. There are posts available but they have been vacant for years.

I would like to refer the hon the Minister to an article I have here. Under the heading, “Welfare”s needs in child care to be put to Govt”, the following is reported:

The hon member for Maraisburg spoke about his concern for battered children—

The report continues with the spokesman saying:

Order! I regret having to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I am rising merely to give the hon member the opportunity to complete his speech.

I thank the hon Whip.

It is obvious that the conditions of service of these professionals must be looked at continuously and that their various associations must be taken seriously when they ask for higher salaries.

South Africa”s population is an ageing one, and it is obvious that there will be rapidly increasing demands for welfare services, in spite of what the hon the Minister says. Within the next 30 to 40 years the number of aged people—that is, people over the age of 65—will increase by 200%, which, as I have said, will lead to an increasing demand for welfare and financing for these people.

South Africa faces another problem at the same time—I am talking about White South Africa—namely that while we are ageing, there is a decrease in the number of young people, due to our diminishing birth rate which is basically zero or even negative at the moment. Therefore fewer people will become available to pay taxes and thereby provide the money for our increasing aged population.

In spite of what the hon the Minister has said today about the lack of subsidies, I would like to point out that if the hon the Minister and his department and the Government cannot provide the money, he will have to make special arrangements for people to provide for themselves for their future and their retirement. Therefore the Government must take urgent steps to encourage all South Africans to provide for their old age.

I do not think this is the appropriate Vote under which to discuss the recommendations of the Meiring Commission on pensions. However, I do want to say that we welcome the sensitive manner in which this commission handled a very difficult problem. Secondly, we support the freeze on pension pay-outs and the appointment of a representative committee to work out a general pensions plan for our country. I do believe, however, that we cannot simply wait for this plan. The Government must do everything in its power to encourage individuals to make provision for their own retirement, for example by increasing the non-taxable part of their income. I will try to raise this issue again under the Vote of the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development.

Not only do I believe that the Government must encourage private individuals to make provision for their old age; they should also be encouraged to make provision for their medical care. The hon the Minister stated today that there is a drain on the Government which it cannot afford. It is essential, however, that the hon the Minister and the hon the Minister of Finance provide the stimulation and the need for these people to look after themselves when they are old and sick. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I do not know whether this is a plot of the Whips or whether it is fate, but the first time I spoke in this House I was followed by the hon member, the charming doctor for Parktown, and this time it is my turn to follow him up. This is a very daunting task considering that he is such an expert in this field and I am really a novice. I would, however, like to say a few words about a subject which is very close to my heart, namely child welfare.

I would like to refer in particular to the role of the private institutions and the private sector in providing welfare services to the children of our community, and in particular to children’s homes which fall under programme 4 of the Vote. The hon member for Parktown also made mention of this.

In my view we can talk in this House about constitutional solutions until we are blue in the face, but unless we get out there and spend the time, money and effort necessary for the rapid socio-economic upliftment of our whole society, our efforts will count for nothing.

Political reform will not succeed in South Africa unless it goes hand in hand with socio-economic reform. In this regard I should like to quote my illustrious predecessor, Dr Rina Venter, who said:

A major part in this process of socioeconomic reform will be played by health and welfare services.

We should be able to say to ourselves in this Chamber with a clear conscience that there is not a single child in South Africa who is going hungry or is not properly clothed; that every child has access to education and training; and that if those who are responsible for that child do not fulfil their obligations, the State is in a position to step in and protect the child’s interests. Unfortunately, we cannot yet even say that about all White children, and this specific debate is about welfare services for the White community.

The reason for this is, of course, as previous speakers have mentioned, that we are still a developing country and we do not have the financial resources to provide the fully-fledged services of a welfare state. The provision of child welfare is heavily dependent upon private initiative and private, independent non-government welfare institutions founded and run by the community and by churches, women’s organisations and other welfare groups.

The provision of welfare services for children is dependent upon these groups and in this connection this budget is chiefly based on subsidies for the various organisations to assist them to get on with their work. Child welfare could not exist in South Africa without these private organisations.

The churches, voluntary groups and women’s organisations control some 74 children’s homes caring for 5 775 children at the present time. All of these children were placed in these homes as a result of the Children’s Court’s decision that they were children in need of care.

Two of these homes are in my constituency. One is called the President Kruger-tehuis and is sponsored by the Dopperkerk, with 90 children, and the other is the St Mary’s Children’s Home with 60 children, sponsored by the Anglican Church.

I am very well aware of the outstanding work done by these two institutions and I have had the privilege of visiting the President Kruger home and speaking to the children on a number of occasions. It is clear to me that these children, most of whom come from broken homes as a result of drugs, divorce, drink and in some cases death, are given a wonderful start in life because of the kindly people and the generous donations that come from the private sector and, of course, the Government.

I have also had the privilege of being associated with the Johannesburg Child Welfare Society as the Johannesburg City Council’s representative on their committee for the past five years. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to this organisation. In terms of its budget, its manpower and its service to the community it is the largest single independent welfare organisation in South Africa.

A striking thing about the Johannesburg Child Welfare Society, and indeed about all the other child welfare societies, is the wonderful service rendered to the organisation by voluntary workers, most of whom are women. In the case of the Johannesburg Child Welfare Society there are some 400 women who put in long hours of work without pay, helping to run the children’s homes operated by the society and to collect funds. In my view they deserve our unstinting admiration.

In every community, though, there are literally hundreds of volunteers who give their time, talents and money to the welfare organisations caring for children without any thought of reward in order to place these organisations in a position to provide the services that they do. I believe that all these volunteers should receive more recognition and thanks than they do. For my part, I should like to place on record my admiration and gratitude for the work that they do.

For example, the Johannesburg Child Welfare Society is currently attending to some 5 600 cases, approximately 780 of which relate to child abuse. Interestingly enough, half of those cases have been reported this year, possibly due to all the publicity which this matter has been given in the Press. The society’s operating budget is some R4 million per annum and it is funded 40% by the Government and, as to the rest, chiefly by small contributions—and I mean small contributions, regular contributions from individuals in the private sector. Every now and then they are assisted, as I understand it from the society, by the multinational corporations and even foreign governments.

The society tells me that the main limitation on its effective operation is lack of qualified social workers. Why is that? It is because the private sector competes unfairly in terms of the salaries and working conditions it offers, and many of these people who are trained land up in the personnel departments of large companies. It seemed to me, when I asked the society, that their attitude is that Government financing is really up to scratch. In a sense it fulfils the society’s expectations of what Government should contribute. As hon members can see from programme 4, the contribution of Government to children’s homes has gone up by 20%. In fact, the per capita increase in the subsidy, I understand, increased from R274 to R344.

On the other hand, the society tells me that it feels that although Government makes its contribution the private sector and particularly local South African owned companies could do a lot more for child welfare in this country. With some exceptions too often these companies are takers rather than givers to the communities in which they operate. The attitude of the society is that South African companies could make a far greater contribution to child welfare than they do. There is so much they could do as employers of women in respect of the provision of, for instance, day-care centres, but very few of these companies do anything. It is the society’s view that the private sector should come aboard the child welfare effort to a greater degree, particularly in this area of supporting and providing day-care centres for the children of its female staff.

I feel that the private sector should take note of this attitude of a responsible child welfare organisation, and no doubt other child welfare societies feel the same way. The private sector should make a greater contribution to the child welfare effort in the community in which they operate. After all, this must be enlightened self-interest. They are making a worthwhile investment in the South Africa of tomorrow and I certainly appeal to them to do so.

Mr Chairman, may I refer at the outset to the excellent contribution the hon member for Roset-tenville has made to this debate, I wish to compliment her.

Those of us who listened to the hon the Minister’s opening address were somewhat mystified at the somewhat dismal and sombre warnings he made. The hon the Minister obviously had very good reason to sound those warnings, but there can surely be absolutely no question of the State abrogating its responsibilities in regard to the care of the aged.

As the hon member for Parktown has said, one has to realize that the demands of the aged will be ongoing. I was interested to hear the hon the Minister indicate that the norm applicable in respect of assistance or grants to the aged will be reconsidered. One hopes therefore that this is an indication that there is going to be far greater flexibility in the assessment of applications for financial assistance.

One of the worrying aspects—however, and this is an issue that has also been raised—is, of course, the question of the shortage of social workers. I would ask that the hon the Minister to give urgent consideration to this particular problem. Great difficulty is being experienced in the rural areas in particular because of a shortage of qualified social workers.

I want now to deal briefly with the whole question of welfare in the rural areas. In doing so I want to point out to the hon the Minister that considerable problems are being experienced in the smaller towns in regard to accommodation for the aged. It is interesting to note—and here I associate myself with the comments made by the hon member for Rosettenville—that the care of the aged is now tending to pass into the hands of the private sector. One should realize from this that there is a feeling that the Government may be falling short carrying out its obligations. You know, Sir, when one looks at the basis of accommodating the aged, particularly the frail aged, and one sees the contribution that is being made by local organizations and local committees in rural areas in particular, one appreciates that they are doing sterling work—The function on a voluntary basis, and are very conscious of their responsibilities towards the aged.

It is quite obvious that one of the problems being experienced in the rural areas is the ability to accommodate elderly people within an environment to which they have become accustomed even though friends and relatives are invariably meeting their obligations in this regard.

I want to deal briefly with an aspect—it relates to my constituency—which will probably typify to a great degree the welfare problems that are being experienced in many of the smaller towns throughout the country.

I would like to refer briefly to the question of the East Griqualand home for the Frail Aged. I have already referred this matter to the hon the Minister. An enthusiastic committee has been formed in Kokstad and has been functioning for a period of some two years and members of the Committee have even arranged for monthly stop-orders to be made in favour of their organisation. They have collected funds to the extent of some R60 000—and this in a relatively small area. However, the important point here is that East Griqualand, forms part of a somewhat cut-off area. It borders on Transkei, it has a portion of Transkei falling within its perimeters. Consequently it is imperative that special assistance be granted to such areas in that they are affected to an even greater degree by the problems that are created the increasing numbers of aged people.

In the case of Kokstad, application was made for financial assistance to erect facilities for 20 frail aged people. I presume, as I stated earlier, that similar cases have occurred in other small towns. Sadly, however, owing to the rigid regulations of the department, this application was rejected on the grounds that no assistance could be granted unless 40 people were involved. In the case of Kokstad this has been a severe setback to the whole project.

This is a matter to which I hope the hon the Minister will give his urgent attention. I again wish to suggest to him that greater flexibility be applied when consideration is being given to applications of this nature so that each case can be judged on its merits and I would further urge that the formula according to which loans and subsidies are granted, be reviewed.

It is so important that, where local communities involve themselves on programmes directed towards accommodating their elderly people, they be given every encouragement to continue with the responsibility to which they have voluntarily committed themselves.

Mr Chairman, I should like to support this Welfare Vote because, to paraphrase Samuel Johnson “a decent provision for those in need is the true test of civilisation”. The quality of a society is determined by the concern for those in need, the poor, the near-poor, the handicapped, the aged, children in need of care, those going through the crises of life, divorcees, the victims of child abuse, the alcoholic and the drug addict. This budget amply reflects our concern since we are our brother’s keeper.

We have before us a Welfare Vote in which the hon the Minister has taken into account the desperate needs of the community that we serve. It is unfortunate, however, that no democratic state can ever meet all its welfare needs on its own. We are not a welfare state which destroys the initiative of people and discourages the involvement of the community by regulating life from the cradle to the grave. South Africans are known for their generosity and concern and compassion for others, as well as for their independence of spirit where every community feels that it is entitled to participate in creating the type of services that its members require. It is this unique partnership of community involvement and State support which has provided the type of welfare services that South Africa enjoys. We have more than 1 600 voluntary welfare organisations which provide for the handicapped, the aged, children and many others in need of care.

Regarding the increase in psychological cripples in our modern-day society I want to say just briefly that those organisations which routinely prescribe anti-depressant tablets and tranquilisers should lend a listening and sympathetic ear and devote case-work support to those affected. The first step toward prevention is crisis intervention but I shall address this issue on another occasion.

The backbone of welfare services in this country is not the paid professional—however important his role is—but the unpaid volunteer. These men and women who devote their time and expertise, who give of themselves and carry most of the burden of caring for those in need are South Africa’s secret and silent strength—the resilience of its people. The essential element of voluntarism is the freedom to participate as individuals in order to promote those aspects of community service of one’s own choice. The present economic situation has highlighted the importance of the role of the voluntary workers. For years they have been providing services for the handicapped, feeding and dressing the frail and the aged, teaching skills to those who would otherwise never learn those skills, providing food to Meals on Wheels for the aged living alone, providing transport to and from hospital but most important of all, they fill gaps in every sphere of community service and this they do without remuneration for the love of their fellowman.

Here I must agree with the hon member for Parktown and other speakers who said that welfare workers—I presume they were referring to voluntary workers—need to be suitably rewarded. Surely the time has come for a special register to be drawn up for highly-trained volunteers in certain categories such as crisis and suicide prevention, marriage counselling, drug addiction and alcoholism. This register would not only be a practical recognition of the volunteers’ proficiency but would also enable them to have their expertise and contribution acknowledged.

Another kind of community service in which people with similar types of problems support each other is the self-help support group. Foremost among these is the Down’s Syndrome Association in which parents with mentally handicapped children assist one another in improving the quality of life of their mentally handicapped children and helping parents in similar situations to come to terms with their traumata. This plays a tremendous part in enhancing the role played by training centres, protective workshops and after-care services, the latter two items being provided for under this Vote.

This department deals with an exceedingly wide spectrum of supportive services in the promotion of welfare and the prevention of welfare related problems. It provides social work services to the courts and—these are especially welcome—to the mentally ill, as well as subsidising a host of private voluntary organisations in the community.

I should like to make an appeal to those who have the time and a love for others to come forward and assist those organisations needing volunteers. At the same time, volunteer organisations must provide the necessary training and supervision if the services of such volunteers are to be correctly chanelled. Community organisations will have to recognise the invaluable function of the volunteer if they are to provide cost-effective services in a time of increasing demand, limited State support and monetary help and spiralling costs.

The upliftment to be found in serving fellow mankind is best described by a noted philosopher who remarked: “Care for distress at home and care for distress elsewhere cannot but help each other if, working together, they wake men in sufficient numbers from their thoughtlessness and call into life a new spirit of humanity”.

The role for the professional in the services that this Vote provides for or subsidises cannot be adequately emphasised. It is not only the social worker who plays a pivotal role in these services but increasingly other professionals are also ensuring the efficient rendering of services.

This budget provides for several rehabilitation centres for drug and alcohol dependants, and we all know of the work of the Magaliesberg Rehabilitation Centre. Rehabilitation today requires not only social workers but doctors and nurses to detoxify the addict and treat the physical results of addiction, such as liver cirrhosis. We need psychiatrists and clinical psychologists to treat the emotional causes of drug addiction, as well as occupational therapists to return the patient back to full, productive employment.

Very often in the past, care of the handicapped amounted to custodial care, leaving a person to sit in a wheelchair or lie in bed until pneumonia claimed him. Today the very basis of caring for the handicapped means rehabilitation in order to improve the quality of their lives and bring them as close as possible to living a full, normal life, which means being able to care for oneself and, in many cases, even being economically active. Here I should like to pay tribute in particular to organisations such as Avlos. To do this we need nurses, physiotherapists, teachers, occupational therapists and all the other members of the multidisciplinary team.

Because this all costs money, the country is now training assistants to carry out the more routine tasks under the supervision of professionals. The result is that thousands of people who would have spent their lives without any hope can today resume their place in society.

The care of the handicapped is largely a welfare responsibility, but it cuts across the responsibilities of a large number of other disciplines and departments. To mention a few, the Department of Health Services in this administration provides many complementary services for the physically and mentally handicapped; the Department of Manpower provides sheltered employment; the Department of Education and Culture provides training centres and special education; and the Department of National Health and Population Development provides many rehabilitation services at its provincial hospitals.

As we all know, 1986 was the Year of the Handicapped. It became apparent that there was a need for better co-ordination in the field of the rehabilitation of the handicapped. During the year the laudable efforts that were made to focus on the plight and the needs of the handicapped and the measures taken to ameliorate their lot must not be dismissed; on the contrary, every year should, in fact, be a Year of the Handicapped. Has the time, perhaps, not come for a national strategy to be developed which takes into account the fact that welfare services are an own affairs matter? We cannot afford to spend a greater percentage of the Budget on the upliftment of the needy. We need to channel available funds towards those priorities which the regional welfare councils will now be able to deal with more adequately, such as improved co-ordination, greater utilisation of professional skills and volunteer involvement.

Good rehabilitation services do not come cheaply. It costs much more to provide a service that works than simply to provide a lot of ad hoc shelters which really in the long term are no more than a holding operation. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in the time at my disposal I should like to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to a few matters concerning the financing of children’s homes. At the moment there are 74 registered White children’s homes in the RSA. Approximately 5 775 children are being cared for in these children’s homes. During the 1986-87 financial year, an amount of R18 432 000 was paid out to these children’s homes in subsidies. Although, as the hon the Minister indicated, a considerable adjustment was made in the subsidies provided for these children’s homes, it is still a fact that there are children’s homes which are at present unable to make ends meet.

In the first place, children’s homes, like every family, have to contend with constantly increasing operating expenses. Secondly, the poor economic conditions in the country are affecting the contributions made to churches and welfare organisations for this work. Because of decreased contributions, these bodies are no longer able to discharge all their obligations.

To give only one example, in 1986 the Ned Geref Kerk took care of more than half of all White children in children’s homes, viz 3 266, in its 20 children’s homes. According to newspaper reports there are a number of congregations and even synods of this church that are struggling to discharge their financial obligations at present.

Without wanting to debate the possibility of a rift in the Ned Geref Kerk or the merits of such a rift, I want to say that a rift in that church can have tragic results, inter alia for the 20 children’s homes that are run by this church. Even a 20% decrease in financial contributions would seriously affect the work done by this church at children’s homes, old age homes and in other projects of this nature.

I believe that the solution to the problem of financing children’s homes lies not only in increased subsidies, but also—and especially—in the redistribution of existing subsidies. It is a fact that the unit cost for the running of children’s homes is not exactly the same in all cases. In fact, it differs from one children’s home to another, mainly because of three very important factors.

In the first place, with reference to the older and the newer children’s homes, there is a big difference in the capital and interest redemption as a result of the difference in building costs. This expense means little or nothing to the older kind of children’s home which was built years ago, since the annual repayment amounts to only a very small percentage of the total expenditure. The cost of building 10 to 30 years ago was relatively low in comparison with the present cost of building a modern children’s home.

In the case of the Abraham Kriel Children’s Home in Nylstroom, the annual instalment on capital and interest redemption, for example, amounts to only 0,6% of the annual operating costs. The capital and interest redemption on the new Abraham Kriel Children’s Home in Pretoria, on the other hand, amounts to R231 000 per annum, which is 14% of the annual operating cost. This makes a tremendous difference to whether or not this children’s home can make ends meet. I am aware, and grateful for this, that with reference to this children’s home the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works has made a concession as far as the repayment period of capital and interest is concerned. It was increased from 30 years to 40 years. At the subsidized interest rate of 1% per annum, this concession means a difference of almost R100 000 per annum on the interest and capital redemption.

The problem, however, is that at the moment this is only a temporary relief measure, which can be discontinued at any time, resulting in grave financial problems for that particular children’s home. In view of the great difference in the repayment of interest and capital—it varies from 0,6% to 14% of the annual operating cost—I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to consider the following proposal. I suggest that he subsidise the annual capital and interest redemption of children’s homes separately from the operating costs of the children’s homes involved. At the moment the burden the new children’s homes have to bear in this respect is so great that their working capital is completely insufficient.

In the second place the unit cost of running a children’s home also differs as a result of the new policy applied by the department. Only children’s homes in which the structure provides for family units are approved for subsidies. These family units consist of detached or semi-detached houses, each of which accommodates ten children and the house parents. The older kind of children’s home, which was built according to the hostel concept, is being encouraged to change over to the family unit system as well. A few of the older hostels have already done so.

We should like to welcome the department’s new policy. The child cannot receive better care than it does in the family circle. If, because of circumstances, this is no longer possible in the child’s own family circle, one must try to effect a system of children’s home care which can realise the potential of the family circle as far as possible. Children who end up in children’s homes usually have serious problems, and they need even more attention and love than a normal child does. In a children’s home which operates according to the hostel concept and in which up to 30 and more children are in the care of one home parents, it is impossible to give each child the attention he deserves. Ten children is the maximum number such home parents can do justice to.

This new policy, which is a good policy, also causes great financial problems for children’s homes, however. Obviously there is a big difference between the operating cost of the hostel system and that of the home system. In the case of staff expenditure, the cost in the case of a children’s home with ten children per residential unit is three times as high as in the case of a children’s home with 30 children per unit, for example. The department’s present system of subsidising does not make proper provision for this difference in expenditure. The subsidy is determined in terms of the average unit cost of all the children’s homes country-wide, irrespective of whether they are ran according to a hostel or a home system.

I request the attention of the hon the Minister in respect of this serious problem as well. The formula for subsidising children’s homes should be adjusted in such a way that it correlates with the number of children per unit or per home parent couple. The present policy of subsidisation is to the detriment of the new children’s homes and makes it almost impossible for the hostel type of children’s home to change over to the more effective system of 10 children per unit.

In the third place the unit cost of children’s homes differs as a result of the difference in the standard of the service rendered. Children’s homes which offer an effective service with the assistance of sufficient and expert staff are experiencing problems in financing those services with the present system of subsidisation. The solution may reside in the subsidising of certain services and programmes, retaining the character of each individual children’s home, instead of the allocation of a global subsidy on the basis of the average unit cost.

In view of what the hon the Minister has said this afternoon, I do not want to appeal in the first place for an increased subsidisation of children’s homes—that too, if it is possible—but I appeal, because of the great difference in unit cost per children’s home, for positive consideration to be given to a possible reallocation of the existing subsidies.

Mr Chairman, it is a great pleasure to speak after the hon member for Brits. I think he made a very balanced and positive speech. I am not going to discuss the same subject, but I congratulate him on this speech.

He almost took the wind out of my sails. All Members of Parliament, but specifically the members of this House, are people who cannot be bribed. I am convinced of that, but I discovered a very strange syndrome in myself. Sometimes I have a slight hearing problem, but I have found—as a doctor, I cannot explain this—that when I start chewing a piece of biltong, especially fat beef biltong, my ears open up immediately. I cannot be bribed, but it is a good thing if the voters know that eating biltong opens my ears. I have wondered whether or not I should ask the hon members of the CP whether they experience this kind of syndrome. Perhaps there is some way in which one can open their ears to impress something upon their minds. [Interjections.]

As far as that hon member is concerned, I must honestly say that every time I have listened to him, he has made a good, well-balanced speech—much better than before. I hope he continues in that way. I shall have to ask some other hon CP member how we are going to open their ears.

Put salmonella in their biltong.

I can refer to the hon member for Brits in another respect as well, because I succeeded the former member for Brits as deputy chairman of the Standing Committee on Health and Welfare. Since this is the first time I have taken part in this debate in that capacity, I do not want to deal with only a single subject. I want to take a bird’s eye view and broach a whole number of subjects which may seem unrelated.

The subjects I want to broach are linked together by three matters. In the first place all these matters deal specifically with welfare. I once said in lighter vein in this House that one day I would address the people and make a “volkstoespraak”. That speech will deal with level-headedness and maintaining a balance in life. When I broach these different subjects, I want to ask once again for a balance to be maintained. In the third place, these loose subjects are linked together by the fact that most of them deal with policy and decision-making on policy.

The hon member for Pietersburg also referred to the hon the Minister who is the Minister of Welfare now and said that he was no longer the same Minister as the Minister of Health Services. I remember that in one of my first speeches in this House I made an appeal for welfare to be linked to health services. As the hon the Minister said, that is indeed the case now, because health services and welfare are still one department.

I do not know how we managed to participate in politics in the past when we were not as familiar with the word “perception” as we are now. The incorrect perception that welfare is somewhat subordinate and a mere adjunct to health, began to take root. That is quite incorrect, and I found it very interesting that when those of us in the NP ranks requested turns to speak in the discussion of this Vote, so many members asked for turns to speak that many more members than there were group members, in fact many members who were not group members, requested turns to speak.

This proves what an extremely important subject welfare is. Possibly the fact that the same Minister is no longer responsible for both Health Services and Welfare will help us to set aside that incorrect perception that welfare is a mere adjunct.

There is an organogram in Annexure 3 of the Department of Health Services and Welfare’s annual report for 1986 which indicates the structure of the department. Hon members will see that there is a Chief Directorate: Health Services as well as a Directorate: Welfare Services and a Directorate: Social Auxiliary Services. Of course, pensions fall under the latter. I want to appeal, as a matter of policy, for serious consideration to be given to upgrading welfare, so that, in brief, the subdivisions to which I have referred can also fall under a chief director. After all, the Budget comprises an amount of R769 million and that proves how important this subdepartment is.

I also want to mention in passing that when a separate Minister had to be appointed for the welfare aspect of the Department of Health Services and Welfare, I do not think the hon the State President and his advisers could have made a better choice than they did in appointing the present Minister. He is eminently suited to this task, and has the intelligence, the correct disposition and the correct approach; his only fault is that as far as rugby is concerned, he supports the wrong province. I shall not hold that against him, however. Since there has to be a separate Minister for welfare matters, the present hon Minister is definitely the correct one.

Talking about the annual report, I want to convey my sincere thanks and congratulations to Dr Slabber, the Chief Executive Director, and his people. There was a time when this report was issued only later, a year later. This time we received the most recent report during the first part of the following year. We really appreciate that; it is an excellent report.

I want to refer to page 1 which concerns the aspect mentioned by the hon member for Pietersburg in reference to the difference in amounts allocated for the same matters in each House. One cannot simply make comparisons with information of that kind. The respective population groups’ conditions differ so much that one really cannot simply make this kind of comparison. On page 1 I want to refer to the micro-computer which is being used for data and research data by means of fact sheets. The first fact sheet concerned “Deprived Children”. It gives statistics in connection with child neglect, child battering, children in places of safety, and so on. In this connection I want to quote the following important paragraph:

This was a figure of almost 64 000 children! This brings me to the argument of balance. In 1985 the NP lost a by-election in Sasolburg because of the question of where a mixed couple was to live.

Order!

Sir, I do not think you can rule me out of order if I am talking about 63 808 children who experienced trauma as a result of divorce.

The hon member may proceed.

I want to say that we should take another look at ourselves. Is it worth while losing an election and having the newspapers making a fuss about where one little mixed couple would live? One would think this was of earth-shattering importance! I do not say where they live is of no importance; I merely think we are overdoing things. We make such a fuss of one mixed couple, but in the meantime the 63 808 children who are experiencing trauma as a result of divorce are hardly mentioned. We barely see anything about them in the newspapers, we do not hear about them on the political platforms, and we do not hear people making a fuss about this problem. I think we should forget about where that couple is going to live, and rather apply our time and attention to this kind of problem. That is what I mean when I talk about maintaining balance. I take myself to task on this point, and not only other people who will, of course, feel more guilty about it than I do. I say we should maintain a balance.

Unfortunately my time has almost expired, but I want to make a further comment on the percentage and quote the following:

This means that 35% fewer children were admitted to such places. Naturally we are grateful that this is the case. There is more community involvement. One can understand the problem of the hon member for Pietersburg, however, concerning why so much less is being spent in one case as opposed to another. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to say at the outset that I was looking forward very much indeed to participating in this debate today until the hon the Minister tried to spike my guns with his opening remarks with regard to the future funding of welfare projects. On reflection, however, I do believe that what I have to say today is still relevant and, despite his opening remarks I intend to push ahead with what I was going to say.

I must say that in many ways I was somewhat surprised by what the hon the Minister had to say with regard to the future provision of welfare services—that funds were no longer available for these to the same extent as they had perhaps been in the past. We accept that welfare is and always will be an important aspect of our society, and it is one of those things for which money simply has to be found. For the State to cut back on a number of projects without a great deal of due warning would be most unfortunate. Perhaps if we did not have the enormous duplication of services resulting from own affairs, more money would be available for welfare services.

Sir, I must add that I identify myself fully with the opening remarks made by the hon member for Parktown, my colleague on these benches, and also with the remarks made by the hon member for Mooi River, and what he had to say with regard to the care of the aged and the need for the State’s ongoing involvement in this regard. I also want to say that I identify myself fully with the remarks made by my colleagues on these benches during earlier debates on the Appropriation Bill for the Administration: House of Assembly when they made it absolutely clear just where this party stands on the issue of own affairs.

As I have said, despite what the hon the Minister had to say with regard to the whole issue of the funding of welfare services, I do want to pursue the issue of old-age housing and homes. I also want to make a particular request with regard to such services in the Durban North area. The issue of housing and homes has been much debated in this House over the years, obviously with much mixed reaction. Large sums of money have been set aside annually by the State and the issue has always been whether this money was sufficient. The hon the Minister seems to suggest that in some instances it may have been too much, and that we have to look very carefully at this in the future.

The point has been made—and I concede it—that in South Africa there is a higher percentage of people in old-age homes than in other countries. I must, however, presume this to be a statistic based on the White population, because certainly care of the aged in Black communities falls far short of what it should be. I believe it is the declared policy of the Department of Health Services and Welfare that elderly people be encouraged to remain as independent and active as possible, and to play a part in the community for as long as possible. It is important for them to play this important role in the community.

Thus, to encourage the elderly in this regard a number of services have been set up over the years, including, of course, old age pensions, health services, community centres etc. These services have been set up by the State. I notice too with interest that the SA National Council for the Aged seems to be working towards exactly the same goal as the Department of Health Services and Welfare.

The debate, however, continues as to whether there is adequate housing for the aged, and this debate seems to have been heightened over the past few years by the numerous criminal attacks that have occurred on elderly people who live alone in ordinary residential areas. The crime rate is on the increase—we have discussed this matter during the present session—and I am afraid the aged seem to be easy prey for the criminals. Thus there seems to be a greater need for the protection of the aged, and perhaps part of the answer lies in the establishment of housing schemes where protective services can be more easily provided. These housing schemes need not necessarily be financed entirely by the State. They could comprise a number of cottages, etc which are owned by the residents themselves. However, I do believe that the State should do all it can to encourage housing schemes by making land available and perhaps providing loans when and where necessary that will be more easily obtainable. We must accept too that the time does come when some people are no longer capable of caring for themselves and need to enter establishments where there is full-time care for them, and the State is always going to have to be involved in this particular issue.

I wish to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to my own constituency and in so doing raise one issue in particular which I now need more clarification on in the light of his opening remarks today.

There has been an ongoing effort on the part of a group of people in the Durban North area to establish a senior citizens village in the area to be known as Milldene Park. The hon the Minister may well know what I am referring to since the matter has been raised either with him or with the Department of Health Services and Welfare by the former MP for Durban North. [Interjections.] As my colleague says, he was a Deputy Minister as well.

Let me say at the outset that in the suburb of Durban North—I refer not necessarily to the constituency as a whole but to the suburb of Durban North—there are no old-age homes or complexes of any description. What therefore has been planned is a village which, when completed, will comprise 69 single storey cottages, 17 bedsitters, a 40-bed frail care centre and a clubhouse. The plans are in keeping with the demands of the Department of Health Services and Welfare which insists that any housing scheme for the aged should consist of a full range of facilities, including a frail care centre, and here again the number of beds—40—as laid down by the department has been adhered to.

The committee organising this village has gone through all the correct channels in trying to get this village built. A WO number has been obtained and suitable ground has been acquired for which very recently permission was granted to change the status from open space to institutional, and the committee has already had plans drawn up for this village and which have been approved. This was done several years ago.

One stumbling block remains and that is the question of the 1% loan from the State required for the frail aged care block and the community centre. In this regard the former MP for Durban North was apparently able to get a verbal agreement from the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works that the loan of R1,5 million required for the building of the frail aged care centre would be granted at an interest rate of 1%, as would the R1 million loan for the building of the community centre or clubhouse. I sincerely hope that this situation remains and that the organisers of the Milldene village will not now be told that the money is not available.

However, a great deal of uncertainty does lie with the question of the R0,5 million loan required for the equipping of the frail aged care centre and this is the matter which causes me the most concern, for it would affect not only the plans for Milldene Village, but also the plans for any other frail aged care centre in this country.

The organizing committee heard rumours that all money for such loans for the equipping of frail aged care centres has been frozen for eight years, and today the hon the Minister certainly appears to have confirmed this.

No frail aged care centre is worth anything unless it is properly equipped and is able to employ properly qualified staff. The sum of half a million rand is a large one for any organization to raise. Therefore the assistance of the Department of Health Services and Welfare is essential in granting that 1% loan.

Mr Chairman, I ask the hon the Minister to consider the case of the Milldene Village very carefully indeed. I look forward to receiving his reply, for it would seem inconceivable that a cause which has progressed so far, and has been on the drawing board for so long, and which appeared to have received approval through the efforts of the former hon Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, the former member of Parliament for Durban North, should suddenly be thwarted as a result of the hon the Minister’s statements today.

I stress that it will be the only housing scheme or home for senior citizens in the suburb of Durban North, and I can assure him that the senior citizens of Durban North play a very important role in the community. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, there are three matters I should like to mention. The first relates to something the hon member for Soutpansberg said the other day. I asked him to be here today. The other day he referred to an NP candidate whose wife had intimidated old people during the election campaign. I should just like to ask him to which candidate he was referring.

To your candidacy.

The hon member for Pietersburg used the following words in a speech the other day:

I want to state categorically to hon members of the CP that anyone who says that any member of the NP has ever, in any election campaign, used this technique of threatening old people about their pensions …

I am saying it.

… is being absolutely untruthful. It is dishonest, and it is a kind of political …

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

No, I do not have time. [Interjections.]

I should like to tell the hon members of the CP that an incident involving my wife took place during the election campaign at a certain old-age home in my constituency. I should like to protect my wife’s interests and honour in this House today. She became involved, in a public place with a number of people present, in an argument with a woman who had already voted. That sort of thing is quite normal during an election campaign. I do not wish to discuss what my wife said to the woman. [Interjections.] All I do want to say is that the CP then ran to the police with three affidavits in an effort to create the impression that my wife had threatened voters in an improper manner. The matter was referred to the Attorney-General within a day. The Attorney-General refused to institute any legal proceedings in terms of the Electoral Act.

Then why did you apologise?

In spite of the fact that the case had been thrown out by the Attorney-General, the hon members of the CP in my constituency distributed a pamphlet there. I am ashamed of the fact that a person who calls himself an Afrikaner Christian could distribute such a reprehensible, contemptible, detestable and filthy pamphlet in a constituency.

I know that the matter has no bearing on this Vote, but the election campaign which was fought on a personal level in my constituency would have been an absolute disgrace to any White person, any Afrikaner or any Christian. I cannot believe that it was a clergyman who stood in that election. [Interjections.]

I should like now to return to the allegation made by the hon member for Pietersburg. They issued this pamphlet the day before the election. In it they alleged the following:

It is I to whom they were referring in their defamatory pamphlet.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

No, Mr Chairman. This is the Vote under which we discuss the interests of old people, and the hon member for Pietersburg alleged here that we on this side of the House had employed improper techniques and threats to extort old people. I simply wish to say that it was scandalous of him to say that. [Interjections.] I repeat the quotation:

Then they say in brackets “met sy medewete”.

[Interjections.]

I sought legal advice on this specific statement. The legal advisers told me it was absolutely libellous, and the only reason I let the matter rest there was that I knew that the hon members would make a political issue of it, as the hon member for Pietersburg has just done.

I should just like to tell them that I have been serving the public in my constituency for all of 17 years …

You nearly lost this time. [Interjections.]

… and in those 17 years we have observed the highest ethical standards in our dealings with old people in our constituency.

Order! The hon member for Overvaal is not going to make any further remarks.

It is an ethical principle for us in our constituency, for me personally, for my wife, for all my workers, for every Nationalist sitting on this side of the House and for all of our workers, to act with nothing but complete honesty when we deal with old people during election campaigns. [Interjections.]

I should like to tell hon members of the CP that I am the chairman of a standing committee which will examine the Electoral Act this year. I promise the hon members of the CP that there are certain practices that have come to our knowledge and about which we shall amass evidence, and that we shall try to embody certain provisions in that Act which will keep such practices—they are not perpetrated by us—in check in future. [Interjections.]

I should like to tell them that it is much better to inform people fully than to half-fill them with lies, and we on this side of the House believe that we should deal with these matters in that way. Eventually every half-truth has to be supported by a lie, and I wish to appeal to those hon members to abstain from such practices for the sake of honesty in politics and for the sake of the elderly people of this country. [Interjections.]

I do not want to waste any more time; my time has nearly expired. [Interjections.]

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

I want to tell the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition that I should have liked to have answered his question, but unfortunately I have only four minutes left. [Interjections.]

There is another matter I should like to raise with the hon the Minister, and I shall have to do so in haste. I should like to tell the hon the Minister that I have been approached by people in my constituency and people in Pretoria who have formed an association they call “Yana”. The association’s full name is “You are not alone” and it is affiliated to the Welfare Board. They are people who live in very difficult circumstances as a result of families with one or more members suffering from schizophrenia.

Because there is not enough room in the psychiatric hospitals, this society requests the State to render assistance so that these people can be accommodated outside the psychiatric hospitals and perhaps in homes where they can receive a little help and where they can take their medication regularly. This is a welfare problem with enormous implications for the thousands of people in South Africa affected by schizophrenia in their homes. It disrupts people’s lives, and science is currently taking great strides with regard to medication.

I do not have the time to elaborate, but I should like to ask the hon the Minister in passing whether it is possible for this aspect to be examined.

The last aspect I should like to touch upon—my time has almost expired—is the matter of the care of the aged. I should like to say that an enormous amount of work is being done in our constituency by the community—that is by the churches and private organisations—to care for those people.

In this House today the hon the Minister drew our attention to the financial implications, and I should like to indicate here in what an absolutely impossible situation we shall find ourdelf in South Africa by the year 2000 if we make a projection of the relevant figures and of the money which will be necessary for the support of the people who have to be cared for in those homes for the aged and service centres. Therefore we took cognisance of this situation.

I think it is important for the State to launch a major information campaign in order to tell all the people of South Africa repeatedly that the care of the aged, of people in the evening of their lives, cannot be the task of the State alone, but must in fact be a team effort by the whole community, the church and, I should like to add, the children as well. In my part of the world I see people taking the view—and this really saddens me—that as soon as their parents are in the care of an old-age home, irrespective of the fact that they are now receiving a social pension and that facilities are provided by the State, that they can be regarded as being off their backs, as it were. I do not think it is right or fair that well-to-do families should rely so heavily on the State in respect of the care of these people.

I should also like to pay tribute to all the churches and those who involve the elderly people of our area in society and church activities in a very positive way so that those people can always remain part of a society to which they have contributed their share. [Time expired.]

Thank you very much, Mr Chairman, for the opportunity to say a few words in this House. As a newcomer, I feel quite small and insignificant and rather nervous in the presence of all these eloquent ladies and gentlemen around me. I hope the same thing does not happen to me as happened to the fellow who wanted to make a speech and was not used to a microphone. Every now and then he tapped the microphone and blew into it, and eventually he asked: “Can you hear me?”. Everyone said they could. Then he said: “But that is funny; I cannot hear myself’. They replied: “Go ahead, man, you are not missing anything!”. [Interjections.]

As a wood connoisseur, it is a wonderful experience for me to stand in this Chamber surrounded by wood panels made from the noblest indigenous woods of the Republic of South Africa, which improve with the years, like good wine, and become more beautiful. It is a privilege for me to be a member of this House.

Before I continue, I think it is fitting to pay tribute to my predecessor. Mr Amie Weeber represented the Welkom constituency for many years, first as MPC, then as MEC, and he represented the constituency in the House of Assembly from 1981. Over the years we came to know him as a man who listened to us, the voters, and we also knew him as a man to whom we liked to listen. He served the constituency with zeal, since he placed a high premium on service. May I be given the strength, the energy and sound judgement to be a worthy successor.

Soon after entering the political arena, I realised that the political ocean is rather stormy. Nevertheless I want to say that I feel safe in the strong and well-constructed NP ship. [Interjections.] I have unshakeable confidence in its helmsman, as well as its navigators and the rest of its crew, and I am sailing into the future with confidence.

With your towel in front of your eyes.

I realise only too well that the passage of this ship will be delayed and hampered by the onslaught of storms from the right and the left, as well as freak waves and currents in the waters under the ship, but I firmly believe that our helmsman, our hon State President, will steer us through the tempest to calm waters of peace and safety and that we will continue to sail on the crest of the wave of prosperity and progress.

It is a wonderful privilege for me to be able to represent the Welkom constituency, which has plus-minus 24 000 registered voters, in this House. The Welkom constituency is unique in many ways. To be more specific, the city of Welkom was the very first city in the world to be planned in full on paper before two bricks had been laid on top of one another to build it. You heard correctly, Sir, I said the “city” of Welkom. The city of Welkom acquired city status in 1968, 20 years after its establishment. That was very recently. Welkom was planned so well that we still do not need traffic lights and parking metres to regulate our traffic. [Interjections.] This is despite the fact that this city accommodates approximately 53 000 Whites. Another 10 000 live in Odendaalsrus, and 100 000 people or more are accommodated in the Black township of Thabong. In addition, there are 195 000 Black mineworkers in the area surrounding the city, as well as 10 000 Coloureds in Bronville. Anglo-American and Gencor, the two large mining houses, are at present in the process of housing their Black workers in their family context—I am speaking of the 195 000 mineworkers. This means that plus-minus 33 000 new housing units will be built in the Black township of Thabong within the next 10 years.

The Free State goldfields produce approximately 30% of South Africa’s total gold production, and approximately 14% of the total world production. This means that approximately 170 tons of gold are produced per annum. Expressed in terms of rands and cents, this amounts to approximately R5 billion. This constitutes more or less 10% of the total export product of the country.

Welkom has also developed into one of the most important industrial centres in the Orange Free State. The Free State goldfields are therefore a young, growing giant, and Welkom is certainly the golden city of the future. The goldfields are no longer a tent town that is going to disappear, and planning for the goldfields will have to be done on a long-term basis in future, particularly as regards the road and rail networks, air service facilities, water supply, housing and hospitals. I am pleading very earnestly for this in this House, since the planning for this region in the past, in my humble opinion, has been done on too short and small a basis.

Apart from everything else, I think that my constituency’s most important asset is its people. The community of Welkom and Odendaalsrus is a cosmopolitan community consisting mostly of Afrikaans-speaking people, but there is also a large English-speaking community. In addition, it consists of Greeks, Portuguese, Italians, Poles and other small communities. A large section of the inhabitants is a mining community.

Although they are often spoken of disparagingly, I want to assure you that they are wonderful people with hearts of gold.

I feel that the old mining medical aid association with its panel system is outdated. It should be replaced by, or changed to, a proper medical aid scheme, just like the old Railway Medical Aid Association was replaced by Transmed.

These people also ought to have the freedom of choice when it comes to choosing a medical doctor, specialist or other medical services.

The fact that the mining house’s mineworkers and officials are treated by a certain panel of doctors, does at least provide some sort of choice, but nowadays the employees are being compelled to see the full-time doctors instead of the part-time doctors. They therefore do not really have a choice. This, together with the fact that a medical practitioner is not remunerated per case, but receives panel fees per member on a monthly basis, causes both the medical practitioner and the patient to be dissatisfied. These panel fees are per family, and it does not matter whether there is one child or eight children in the family. I know that this happens, because I worked for the Mining Aid Fund for 27 years on a part-time basis. In my opinion this is a very unhealthy state of affairs, and it sometimes leads to abuse and exploitation of the system, such as the excessive use of medicines.

This brings me to the matter affecting the health and welfare of the country’s entire population, viz the excessive use of medicines by members of the public. Not only does this chase up the costs of medical aid schemes, but it also adversely affects the health and welfare of our people. Today’s medical practitioner is swamped with requests for prescriptions for medicines, because nowadays there is a pill for everything. There is a pill for those who do not want children and there is a pill for those who would like children. There is a pill for those who would like to eat less, and there is a pill for those who want to eat more.

Order! I regret that the hon member will not be able to continue with his pills, since his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, allow me to congratulate the hon member for Welkom on his maiden speech in this House. I think it was good; he need not be ashamed of it. He was a little reserved in the beginning, and he thought he would not fit in here, but we can assure him that he does fit in here. His voice carries very well. He told us about Welkom. When one drives through Welkom, one always notices that the city has no traffic lights. That is very nice, since one need not be afraid of crossing against a red traffic light. I think that will be the case here as well. The hon member will also represent his city here with dignity, and we believe he can mean a great deal to us in this House.

Before continuing with my speech, I just want to ask the hon member for Innesdal something.

There he goes.

If his wife apologised, why did she apologise, and to whom did she apologise? He owes us an answer.

This afternoon I want to speak about our senior citizens. Like a good former clergyman, I want to touch on three points. Firstly, I want to speak about the safety of our senior citizens. In 1960, 6,7% of the total White population were senior citizens. In 1980 the figure was 7,6%, and this year it is 12%. It is estimated that 22% of our White population will be senior citizens in the year 2 000. The reasons for this percentage becoming so high, are that people have a high life expectancy and that the White population is not growing as quickly as in the past. Percentage-wise we therefore expect more attacks on our senior citizens by people who are always trying to harm them with evil plans. In nearby Rondebosch alone there have been 10 cases from 1 March to 4 May this year where elderly ladies have been robbed of their handbags. It is difficult to identify the thieves, since our elderly do not always have the powers of observation and ability to react that our young people have.

We also want to break a lance for our SA Police this afternoon. They are very helpful and in the past, amongst other things, they have visited old age homes and informed the aged of how to be more aware of security and how to prevent being attacked. The SA Police have also given the necessary protection when the elderly have requested it, and they still do so today in high risk areas. For example, they patrol our boarders with our Defence Force. We want to thank them most sincerely. We are sure that our aged really appreciate it. The SA Police realise that every elderly person cannot be guarded all the time, and they have therefore sent out a fine publication informing all the elderly people of the dangers. They have even shown films and employed the SABC to assist them in this process.

With this information at the disposal of the aged, success has been achieved in reducing the attacks on our senior citizens. From 1 January 1987 until last Friday there were 42 attacks on the homes of people over the age of 50. Approximately 51 people were involved and have been harmed in some way. Fortunately this shows a decrease, since in the last six months of last year there were 115 cases of people over 50 who were attacked in houses and in which 147 people were involved. The reasons for the decrease are Police information and security measures by elderly people themselves. There is almost no farm where one is not met by dogs or encounters a fence or lock preventing one from getting to the occupants. Many elderly people have also moved to safe accommodation where they will not be so easily attacked.

The freedom of movement of the senior citizens of our country has been curtailed. They no longer want to walk in the streets. They hear the insults that are often directed at them. They know that discipline is on the decline in South Africa. The Blacks in our towns often crowd our streets, and sometimes this is the case day and night. Influx control to our towns has been abolished.

Order! I must draw the attention of the hon member to the fact that influx control by no means falls under this Vote. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May I point out to you that the hon member is speaking about the aged and the problems they experience. The hon member’s speech deals with the position of the elderly and he is giving an example.

Order! I have listened attentively to the hon member and I have given him the opportunity to develop his argument. However, if the hon member is allowed to continue in that vein, there is nothing under the sun he could not discuss. Anything could be a problem for the aged. The hon member may proceed.

I shall proceed. This causes everything to be opened and the results are that the elderly land up in a financial crisis. Inter alia they let their houses on the farms in order to move to town. There they have to rent flats, whilst they are taxed on the rental from the farm. They draw their savings to secure their houses, they often leave their own homes to rent an expensive house and they become dependent psychologically, because their freedom and independence have been taken away from them. There is no time for more details.

Thirdly, I want to speak about a particular group of elderly people, viz the infirm aged. Of all elderly people in old age homes, 36% are infirm aged. Let me take one old age home as an example to indicate the problems of our elderly. In the 1986-87 financial year it cost R753 to care for one infirm aged person. After all the subsidies had been included, R80 per month was still needed to care for that one person. This year the cost has increased to R854, and if all the subsidies are included, R112 per month will still have to be found to care for one elderly person. For the 118 elderly people in that home this means a deficit of about R45 000 per year. I am concerned about this, since the budget for our elderly has increased from R463 million to R499 million. This is an increase of only 7,6% in the Budget. I do not think this 7,6% is sufficient really to care for our aged in the times in which we are living. The main reason for this misery is inflation. Inflation is the cancer which also devours the savings of our elderly, as it were. The fear of inflation lets the dreams of the future of many a senior citizen vanish like mist in the morning.

Mr Chairman, inflation is a swelling bogeyman that keeps our elderly people awake night after night. The day before yesterday it was reported that this year’s inflation rate was 17,3%. Our elderly people are concerned. We want to ask the Government please to look after our elderly people. We also ask the Government please to stop the bogey of inflation.

Mr Chairman, this evening I was most impressed by the calmness of the entire discussion here in the House. I feel this is as it should be because welfare is a subject which is very dear to all our hearts. This is also the impression I got from listening to hon members on that side of the House.

However, during the recent election campaign there was one thing which did worry me a great deal. I had a PFP candidate as my opponent in Edenvale, as hon members might have noticed. As a matter of fact he is very highly respected in this House. But the PFP told many of the old people in Edenvale that this Government had absolutely no time for the elderly.

Marius would never say anything like that! [Interjections.]

Order!

I am quoting from a pamphlet which was distributed by the PFP. In this pamphlet they say:

Mr Chairman, this is surely not true. [Interjections.]

Order!

Today we have a Government which has very great respect for our aged. After the hon the Minister had made his Budget speech here, I went and found out exactly how much money was being made available for the care of our aged this year. It amounts to R499,551 million, which is R36 million more than the amount for last year. When we take into consideration that 142 625 elderly people received old-age pensions in our country, we realise what a formidable duty and task rests on the shoulders of the Government to provide all these people with pensions. A total of R384,378 million is spent on pensions alone.

It has been said here today that we are not a welfare state. We do not have inexhaustible sources of revenue either. This is a fact. We are nevertheless proud of the standard of care given to the aged and the accommodation in the 405 old age homes in our country. We are used to that high standard. We are also extremely grateful to all the organisations who so faithfully make their contributions towards keeping these organisations in operation. It is true that not so long ago there was a stigma attached to the care of the aged and old age homes. One was actually ashamed to admit that a loved one of yours was in such an institution. Nowadays things are different. Now we actually have long waiting lists of people who would like to be admitted to these institutions.

As has already been mentioned, people are living longer. We belong to a generation which is growing older. In 1982, only 2% of the Whites were over 65 years of age. At the last census in 1980 this figure had risen to 8%. What is more the HSRC predicts that in 2020 altogether 21% of the total White population will be over 65 years of age. We already have 250 000 old people in our community and the present objectives of the department and of the Government is to keep those old people independent for as long as possible and allow them to stand on their own feet. It is a fact that when a 65 year old man retires, he can look forward to making a productive contribution for 11 more years. On the other hand women are naturally in a more favourable position. They still have 15 years in which they can make a meaningful contribution.

This evening I want to ask whether hon members do not think that we must give more consideration to pushing up the retirement age of our aged to 70 years, because there is a shortage of trained people in our country. What do our aged do with that extra injury time they are given? They must be able to use those abilities they have to the benefit of our country and its communities. Since 1971 our department has dealt with 361 housing projects, through which accommodation has been provided for 21 800 people. These are the apartment complexes which have already been mentioned here this evening.

I am very proud that in my constituency Arbor Village is to be officially taken into use next Saturday. The Methodist Church is managing that complex, and they sold those apartments to wealthy old people, because wealthy old people and those in the middle income group have as big a housing problem as the aged in the subeconomic groups. The State has been subsidising that service centre since last year to the amount of approximately R58 000 and we also gave them R15 000 in assistance that they could buy furniture, etc.

It is important for there to be an increasing number of service centres nowadays. They should virtually form the core of the care of the aged. There are 92 service centres in our country, which are subsidised by the Government.

A few years ago the City Council of Edenvale decided that it was not going to build one of those extremely expensive civic centres, but a multi-purpose community centre. The City Council received a subsidy of R634 000, which was actually a loan from the then Department of Community Development with which that community centre was built. The Senior Citizens’ Association, which has a WO number, manages this centre which has been built for the old people. In the afternoons a balanced hot meal is served to the old people, they can have tea there, they can meet there, lectures are presented for them there, they can have their hair done and receive pedicures, there is also a library and a clinic which is supported by the local authority, and as a result those old people feel that they are still part of the community.

It is important for our old people to remain in the community for as long as possible. As hon members know, the old age homes only make provision for our infirm aged. These are the aged who fall into category C. These old age homes are already receiving a R500 per month subsidy to be able to provide this care for the aged. There are always accusations of there being insufficient money. I agree. Our present economic position is such that we must count every cent and distribute the money evenly where the need is most pressing.

I should like to congratulate the hon the Minister on his new position; I am sure he is going to make a success of it. I also want to convey my congratulations to the officials who are doing their best to look after the welfare of our country and make the necessary funds available. It is important for us to continue with these services.

It is always said that our standards are not as high as those apply overseas. But we can compete with any overseas country. In Holland, which is supposed to maintain a very high standard, only 6% of the aged are cared for in old age homes. In Great Britain this figure is only 4%, while it is 7,9% here in South Africa. We must see to it that our old people are not admitted to old age homes too soon.

I want to conclude with an old German saying: “An old man loved is winter with flowers”. We are proud of our old people, because was it not they who made the contribution on which we can build in this beautiful country of ours?

Mr Chairman, whilst I enjoyed the middle and latter parts of the speech of the hon member for Edenvale I must say, regarding the first part of her speech, that I much preferred the previous member for Edenvale and his remarks on welfare. I have no doubt that I shall in the future have the opportunity of hearing him in this House again. [Interjections.]

It is not my intention to try to debate with the hon the Minister any subject on which he cannot reply, so I should like to put some points to him to which he can respond. I should like to begin by referring to some of his remarks in introducing this debate. I gather that, having met with various national welfare bodies, he wished to make a statement concerning certain facts. He referred in particular to a reassessment of the norms of subsidisation. He reflected on the fact that the amount budgeted for had increased by 750% over the previous 10 years and on what the increase would be over the following few years. In fact, he pegged it at a figure of 2,3% in real terms.

Now, I want to reflect on what was said on this matter during the debate on last year's Budget Vote, when the whole question of privatisation was raised. I set out this party’s policy as follows (Hansard: Assembly, 2 May 1986, col 4807):

I referred to our high figures for infant mortality and infant malnutrition and to the racial differences which exist here and I stressed that we did not have a safety net. I then went on to say:

The response we received from the hon the Minister’s predecessor went as follows (Hansard: Assembly, 21 May 1986, col 6151):

I must say, in reflecting upon what the hon the Minister called the statement of facts that he made here today, that what we are actually seeing is the beginning of a process of privatisation without a full public debate on this matter, something I believe we need. I can only quote an example from my own constituency along the lines indicated by the hon member for Durban North said, because I can quote actual cases. I am very pleased that we have an old-age home in the Pinetown constituency that received a very appreciable loan of R1,5 million last year, but it has now struck a problem. It has to be equipped, and the amount of money provided for that purpose is far too little to equip it even with the most basic items required to cater for the aged and infirm. The community, charities and welfare services themselves are therefore being called upon to fund these requirements.

In his statement the hon the Minister set down the guidelines he intends to follow. The one that worries me the most is the first, which states that applications will not be approved if they only demonstrate a need and that there has to be a composite ability to show that funds are available. I have a problem there because what this means is that the hon the Minister and the Government actually have to prioritise welfare needs. The hon member for Edenvale made it quite clear that she believed that the Government as a whole spent money for the aged. I acknowledge that they do, but what we are seeing in the hon the Minister’s statement is, I am afraid, that is slipping down the list of priorities. That worries me, even if we look at the care of the aged in our community from a broad perspective.

I should like to quote from a paper on the White South African social pensioner. This essay is part of the Second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Development in South Africa, and it says of social pensions that “a vast unresearched field is open for study”.

It is actually a field on which we do not have much information. In talking about pensions, which I believe are related to this entire area, he says:

The problem that I have is that this academic study then goes on to say the following:

What I am getting at—I merely use that as an example as well—is that we are into a field of welfare, of care of the aged either by pensions or the provision of buildings where, in fact, a vast field of research and a vast debate in our society actually needs to take place. In essence this Government is saying—I said this two days ago—we are going to have to cut back on the number of teachers and old age homes we have in order to provide money elsewhere. I believe very earnestly that we should be debating those priorities. That is the point of the hon member for Yeoville. Unless we know the five-year plan and the priorities and designs of the Economic Committee of the State President we cannot make those decisions wisely.

A discussion on privatisation was held at the University of Natal in March or April, but I was unable to attend it because of the election. It is unfortunate that it became a very emotive debate. It was seen by many social workers attending it that the Government was retracting funding in the area of welfare because it was utilising its funds for other factors like “apartheid” or its security forces. Be that as it may, I believe that the debate on the issue of privatisation and the issue of prioritising how we decide where our welfare funding is going, is a very important one.

There are a couple of other minor points that I hope to make before my time runs out. One is to repeat the plea made annually for the abolition of the means test on war veterans of World War II. I have a letter from one of my constituents in which he writes that he had a reply from the Minister’s department stating that because he was in receipt of a State pension—he is an ex-schoolteacher and is 72 years old now—he could not get a war veteran’s pension until he had reached the age of 100 years. I believe that at the age of 100 he also qualifies for a social pension without a means test. [Interjections.] This is a ludicrous situation which I think really deserves reconsideration, because the man makes the very valid point that even at an age where pensions have been received by individuals, many companies and the State do not increase these pensions as the years go on. People require some further assistance. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, today I want to talk about something that is very important to me, something that was broached earlier in this debate. I am referring to our aged and to our attitude in respect of old age.

†Old age is defined, inter alia, as:

According to this definition it is quite clear that the aged person is obliged to adjust himself to the changes which are coupled with ageing. However, the nature of the adjustment he makes depends on the roles assigned to him by society and by the opportunities made available to him.

Society therefore has a positive responsibility in respect of the aged person. This responsibility applies to all. The Government and the community—everyone has a responsibility towards those persons on the last leg of life’s journey. We all have a part to play, not merely to add to the years of life but what is much more important, to add life to the years. We must learn to accept old age in others, to treat it with understanding and generosity and to meet it with courage and maturity when our turn comes.

I want to refer briefly to statistics. In 1921 five in every 100 White persons in South Africa were 60 years of age or older. In 1982 the ratio had doubled and the figure was 10 in every 100. The actual projection is that there will be 1,5 million White people older than 60 by the year 2020 in comparison with 81 000 in 1921. The increase in the total aged population will be from 1 340 350 in 1970 to 5 934 760 by the year 2020.

There are 61 000 aged Whites who require immediate services and care. This number excludes those who are presently being cared for. Of the 61 000, community services are required by 43 000, protected housing by 13 000 and frail aged care by 5 000. Taking into account that it costs R36 000 per person to provide frail aged care facilities, R20 000 per person for protected housing and R2 500 per person for community services, it becomes evident that astronomical amounts of money are required.

*It is clear from the figures I have quoted that Government funds alone will never be able to afford this. That is why the communities must assist in finding the necessary funds to make provision for their aged, according to their own needs and aspirations and within their own cultural sphere. Community involvement appears to be the key to the solution.

I should like to avail myself of the opportunity to convey my sincere thanks to the hon the Minister and his department, as well as the South African National Council for Care of the Aged, every welfare organisation in the country, large and small, and every individual who is involved in the nursing and care of our aged, for the wonderful work they do.

I should also like to pay tribute to one of my predecessors in this House—he was also my opponent in the recent election—Mr Geoff Oldfield, who had the interests of our aged at heart at ail times.

The problem is that the definition of old age labelled the aged as people who had lived their lives merely on a chronological basis, viz 60 years for women and 65 for men, without taking their health and capabilities into account.

The constantly increasing generation gap because of less contact and involvement between the generations has also caused the aged to be regarded as a separate entity. Compulsory retirement, usually without taking skill, capabilities and health into account, has led to the aged’s being regarded as of lesser value and importance.

The emphasis on the negative aspects of old age, such as ill health, infirmity, poverty and loneliness, particularly in the media, has identified old age as a problem. This has created a negative connotation which causes people often not to recognize the positive side of old age. Materialism and individualism, characteristics which have emerged strongly in the twentieth century, have caused part of the community to develop a negative attitude towards the aged. Success in life is often linked to external matters, and there is growing impatience with people who may inhibit progress.

The lack of a conscious marketing of the positive characteristics and contributions of the aged means that too many people are unaware of the true facts, viz that most aged people remain healthy and active right up to their eighties; that each new generation of retired people is better qualified and trained, and is more competent than previous generations; that most aged people, viz 88%, are not a burden on the State or the community; that most aged people still have a useful part to play in their communities; that most aged people are not poor and decrepit, and therefore do not live like parasites at all.

Once we have identified the problem, we must seek possible solutions. There are three possibilities: Making people aware of and marketing the positive side of old age; an effort to keep the aged in the community; and an educational strategy that includes all sectors.

Making people aware of and marketing the positive side of old age can entail the following: Improved media coverage; the creation of opportunities in the community for the aged to render service, especially as volunteers—welfare organisations can exploit the potential of the aged to render service; educational opportunities to enable the aged to promote knowledge and skill; greater utilisation of competent aged people by the business sector—a register of aged people who can still make a contribution is a good concept and is regarded as a useful instrument overseas; encouragement of the aged to put and promote their case in public by means of their own societies; promotion of Senatus, the newspaper for senior citizens. An effort to keep the aged in the community could entail the following: Greater encouragement for community services; encouragement for the activities of smaller local service groups; the utilisation of the aged in rendering of service; and the multipurpose utilisation of existing facilities such as homes for the aged in the community.

Order! I am afraid the hon member’s time has expired.

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

I thank the hon member for Pietersburg.

It is essential to establish an educational strategy. We must educate the youth in respect of their attitude to the aged, and create more opportunities for young people and the aged to meet one another and work together.

We as politicians in this House regard it as very important to advocate the positive message in our constituencies. The business sector must recognize the buying power of the aged and utilise it correctly. Church and welfare organisations can place greater emphasis on programmes to develop abilities and promote self-help among the aged. The aged themselves must be educated in marketing their abilities and talents. The family’s responsibility toward the aged person must be projected more strongly, placing particular emphasis on the value and the role of the aged person. There should be more effective preparation for retirement in programmes presented by the employers.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr Chairman, Dr Schlomo Livni studied geriatrics throughout his medical career and, according to an article in the Sunday Times Magazine of 7 July 1985 when he himself was over 80 years and retired, he is quoted as having said:

*The cry of the aged may not fall on deaf ears. In days gone by they were the ones who helped to build up our rich heritage, which led to the prosperity of our communities today. They invested then in the people of today. We owe them a dividend. I should therefore like to make an urgent appeal to everyone in the community and to every hon member to come forward to support this noble cause. Our aged deserve our helping hand.

Mr Chairman, I have listened attentively to the speakers on that side of the House. Many points were raised on which I can agree with them. One of the most important of those points is that we must look after our aged. They are the salt of the earth. They have sustained this country in the past and have brought it to where it is today.

However, if we look at the increase of R20 per month in pensions these people are going to receive from 1 October, I cannot help saying that this is shocking. One can do nothing with R20 these days. If one looks at how the price of food and everything else has gone up over the past two or three months, everyone on that side of the House will agree with me that the R20 increase is completely inadequate.

Now there is the trend that we want to eliminate the wage and pension gap, and although the pensions of our White elderly people is an own affair which we are discussing now, it is constantly being said that the people of colour must get a bigger increase than the Whites. I feel that this is completely unfair, since, firstly, the Whites maintain First World standards, whilst the people of colour still maintain a Third World standard.

All of them?

That is why I say that one cannot treat the Whites the same as the people of colour. There are other Houses that also have own affairs, and that should look after their interests. It is the duty of this House to see to it that the White pensioner in White South Africa gets a decent pension. We have heard from the hon the Minister and other speakers on that side of the House that the question is where the money must come from to make provision for that. Last week we all heard when the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs addressed the world. He said that we were going to spend billions of rands—take note, billions; not just one billion—on education. He did not tell the world on television that there was no money. Today I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to appraoch the hon the Minister of Finance again. He must tell him that they must take only one billion of those billions of rand they want to spend on education to give the White man a livable increase in his pension so that he can lift up his head and look everyone in the eye.

He lifted up his head long ago.

Not all Whites are like you people. [Interjections.]

I want to raise another point as well. I feel we should respect the White pensioner for what he is. A letter was read out here today in which the NP made a great fuss about providing elderly people with pensions. However, they did not say that it was the taxpayer and the State’s money that provided livable pensions. It was made to seem as though it was the NP that was doing so.

Yes, that is a misrepresentation in the letter.

Then the hon member for Innesdal, who certainly did not display good manners, in my opinion, challenged hon members on this side of the House to be here. When the hon member for Witbank wanted to reply to his allegation, however, he walked out. I just want to tell him that with that challenge he issued, he was pointing four fingers at himself and one finger at the other party. Old people in every constituency were threatened with eviction from their little homes …[Interjections.]

Order!

They were threatened with losing their pensions. [Interjections.] I have stated clearly that I was not going to point a finger. I am referring to what that person said. [Interjections.]

Order! I cannot allow hon members to try to refute the hon member’s arguments by the volume with which they react negatively. It is the right of every hon member, and every hon member has the opportunity, to react by way of argument to the hon member who is speaking now. The hon member may proceed.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I can find no fault with the letter the hon the Minister wrote. Nor can I find fault with those people who used those base tactics. When one’s political life is hanging by a thread, one uses anything.

What was your majority?

He could just as well have said in that letter that it was the NP who had seen to it over the years that the pensions were so much and so much, and that it was the NP who had looked after those people. However, he should also have added that it was the NP who had seen to it over the past few years that these people got pension increases that were far below the inflation rate in South Africa. He should also have said in that letter: “It was we who saw to it that you became poorer, because we spent money which we could have spent on you, on other things”. [Interjections.] I therefore want to make an appeal to everyone in this House this evening. There is going to be another election. When that election comes, let us respect the feelings of the elderly, so that those elderly people can vote for whom they want without being told for whom to vote by way of threats. [Interjections.]

Another point I should like to discuss under this Vote, is ordinary pensions. Those hon members who have been here for a long time will remember that as far back as 1976 there was a recommendation and a draft Bill on the preservation of pensions. We know what happened in the Port Elizabeth area. We know the Government then got cold feet, and that that legislation was never put into operation.

There is a new report now, and I therefore want to appeal to the hon the Minister that we should have legislation as soon as possible which makes the preservation of pensions compulsory so that a person cannot draw his pension before he has reached retirement age or has been found to be medically unfit. [Interjections.] It is one of the most important matters at present to …

Order! The hon member is digressing from the Vote under discussion.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The matter of preserving pensions very definitely affects social pensions and the burden they place on the State.

Order! I observed earlier this evening that if that argument were taken to its logical conclusion, there would be nothing one could not discuss under this Vote, since everything under the sun could influence the position of the aged. That would make the maintenance of order completely impossible. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, just allow me the opportunity to make this clear. What I wanted to say was that if there were to be retention of pensions, we would be self-sufficient as far as old age was concerned. We would all receive a livable pension sc that the burden on the taxpayer at present could be eliminated in the future. That is why I made the appeal.

Order! I regret that the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I am rising merely to afford the hon member the opportunity of completing his speech.

Well done, Sakkie! It is a good speech, is it not? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I just want to touch on another point, and I do not know whether you are going to rule me out of order again. It is something to which the hon member for Welkom referred, viz health services.

The hon member apparently only told half the truth as regards the medical services that are being provided, and he specifically referred to Welkom in this regard.

It was the hon member’s maiden speech. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I asked you to rule me out of order if I am in fact out of order. [Interjections.]

The medical scheme operating in Welkom is not as bad as he maintains. It provides all the employees in that area with medical services. There is, however, one problem as regards specialised services. Problems are being experienced in this regard, but not as far as payment, services and a free choice of practitioner are concerned. These people do have a choice. All that is expected of them is to exercise their right.

As regards consultation fees, if one adds it all up, it is a little less than a private person would pay in consultation fees. I think we could possibly discuss this further under the Health Services Vote. Reference was also made to pills. A woman drinks one kind of pill and a man drinks another kind of pill…

Order! The hon member must really make his argument more applicable to the Vote under discussion now.

And use the right pill. [Interjections.]

The point I want to make is that it is the medical practitioner who writes the prescription, not the patient. We shall therefore debate this further under that Vote. I just want to provide the hon member with some ammunition.

Mr Chairman, to me the hon member for Carletonville does not look like a little angel either. Do the accusations being made here, that the NP supposedly did this or that in the election, not sound familiar? The old people in the old age homes were told: “Vote against the National Party because if they win, Coloureds and Blacks will be living in these old age homes.” [Interjections.] It seems to me I have put the cat among the pigeons. [Interjections.]

This side of the House is just as eager as that hon member to give everyone a livable pension, but just give us a chance. We do not make idle promises. We keep our promises. If I read through the Annual Report of the Department of Health Services and Welfare in the Administration: House of Assembly, I am astounded at everything with which the department is concerned. It is concerned with everything from the cradle to the grave, and with everything in between. There is child care, care of the aged, care of the disabled, and vagrancy. One first has to bring them up and then one still has to rehabilitate them as well! I once heard someone say that one could beat sense into a person that did not want to work and only wanted to drink. My father said so, too. Many people have this opinion. The fact is that alcohol and drug dependence are among the greatest social problems confronting us in South Africa. Consequently this pathological phenomenon is being given sustained and active attention by the Department of Health Services and Welfare.

The lack of knowledge and information on the total extent and incidence of alcohol and drug dependence, however, is a serious deficiency. This deficiency has often led people and institutions to make use of information that is scientifically unsubstantiated but which because of its nature receives a great deal of publicity in the media. Mention is made, for example, of large numbers of children who abuse drugs, or statements are made by so-called experts that there is no evidence that the use of dagga is harmful.

There is, however, no doubt that the alcohol and drug problem is of such a nature and size as to cause serious concern. We are very grateful for the timely legislation, Act 41 of 1971, because it certainly helped combat this abuse. The National Advisory Board on Rehabilitation Matters, NABRM, which was established by this legislation, has for some time been giving a great deal of attention to this issue. This council is in agreement with other experts in this area that alcohol and drug use and dependence can be meaningfully combated only if a lot is known about its extent and incidence. On various occasions appeals have been made in this connection for research institutions to concentrate to a far greater extent on more comprehensive research into this problem. The conclusion was subsequently reached that the creation of specialised research components in South Africa, similar to the Addiction Research Foundation in Canada, was a top priority.

A further deficiency that must receive serious attention is the establishment of State rehabilitation centres in other provinces. At present all the centres are situated in the Transvaal—I do not know whether they drink more there—which makes it difficult to involve the families of patients that come from elsewhere, and often from far away, in the treatment programme. [Interjections.] A lack of personal contact between the patient and his family can be counterproductive. I know the department is giving attention to the establishment of other centres, but progress is being hampered by the economic climate. According to recent reports, the economy is picking up again. After all, things are improving and I therefore want to appeal to the State to act more quickly in establishing centres in other provinces.

Combating alcoholism and drug dependence costs money—a lot of money! The ratio between the subsidies—listen carefully now, Sir—paid by the State for combating these diseases, and the revenue the State receives from the sale of alcohol is, however, totally unrealistic. I can mention the figures. The revenue the State receives from the tax on wine and brandy amounts to R157 million. However, beer also contains alcohol, and people drink far more beer than wine. I want to warn them. It is not all that healthy, and the State revenue from this source amounts to R570 million. [Interjections.] The total State revenue from the tax on alcohol amounts to R822,3 million. This is almost R1 billion. If we drink enthusiastically this year, we shall reach that billion. [Interjections.]

The KWV and the wine farmers consider the evil of alcohol to be so grave that the KWV makes an annual contribution of R75 000 to combat alcoholism. This is over and above the contributions the wine farmers make from their own pockets. [Interjections.]

Hon members probably want to ask now why these people, who are so active in the wine industry, discuss this “evil”. The wine farmers and the KWV are very proud of their product. We shall do everything in our power to ensure that this noble product of ours is used, not abused. It is something that should be used properly!

The involvement of the community is an important factor in combating alcoholism and drug dependence, particularly as far as mobilising and making use of interested parties and service groups is concerned. These self-help groups should be used to a far greater extent. The State and the formal welfare sector do not have adequate means or manpower at their disposal to overcome this problem alone. It is of the utmost importantance for these groups in the community to come forward and offer their assistance and services to members of their own community. This is already being done to a large extent. However, I want to appeal to the public to come forward in greater numbers to help solve this extremely important and deserving problem, which is waiting at our front doors and within our homes.

The good work being done by the rehabilitation centres is unfortunately often negated through a lack of good and adequate research structures. Problems are often experienced, particularly in the case of single people without any immediate family. After they have been discharged they cannot find suitable places to stay where the support necessary for a healthy readjustment is offered. There is a lack of homes in the community where such persons, as well as others who have gone off the rails, can be accommodated so that they may find their feet and function independently again.

Order! I regret that the hon member’s time has expired.

Sir, I shall be tabling the rest of my speech! [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to follow the hon member for Worcester. He may have been quite keen to table his speech, but I am sure the hon member would just as eagerly have laid a KWV product on the table! The hon member for Worcester and I have come a long way together; it has been almost 40 years. I married his neighbour’s daughter, and I can truly say that I took away with me there and then all the good things Worcester had to offer! [Interjections.] I do not know whether the hon member for Worcester was referring under this Vote to the welfare of the wine farmers. I hope he tells me later what he was talking about.

†The hon the Minister will recognise that we on this side of the House discussed this Vote very seriously, and it is with sorrow that I say that I think the hon member for Innesdal introduced a very sad note into this debate. I can understand it, because I think he felt personally involved. However, it is sad that in this Vote on welfare he became very aggressive and very angry. He challenged this House to give examples of how NP candidates in some way or other coerced aged people to vote for them. The hon member knows quite well that his party did it repeatedly during the previous election. [Interjections.] If he wants us to give him examples, we can quote him many. I really think that the hon member for Innesdal—who is now shaking his head—should give me a chance to give an example.

I was opposed in Parktown by a PFP reject who went to an old-age home to try to get elderly people to vote for her. She brought them basketfuls of perfume which she handed out to the elderly ladies. I want to ask the hon member for Innesdal if he thinks that is bribery or not.

It is against the Electoral Act. It is illegal.

Order!

This hon member accepts that. The NP candidate who opposed me in Parktown admitted in the Press that it was true. She gave the source from which she had received these perfume samples. She said that they had been given to her by, of all people, Reeva Forman.

The SABC!

Well, well!

Secondly, she said that she had been trying to bring some happiness into the lives of old people by giving them something that smelt nice. I can understand members of the Nationalist Party taking perfume into the old-age homes …

National Party!

Order!

Nationalist…

National Party!

Order! The hon member for Klip River and that hon member over there in the back bench must realise that when the Chair calls for order in the House, it does not mean that hon members can simply keep on making interjections. The hon member may proceed.

I want to tell the hon member that I can understand NP members going to old-age homes with sweet-smelling stuff to explain the NP policy, especially to elderly people, because it stinks! [Interjections.] Therefore they need something to make it smell better. [Interjections.]

Why did you not lay a charge?

The hon member asks me why I did not lay a charge. I did not lay a charge, because it was my pleasure to beat that NP candidate hands down in Parktown. That gave me much greater satisfaction.

Order! The hon member must now come back to the Vote under discussion.

Sir, I shall do so without samples of perfume.

There is a matter which I should like to mention briefly to the hon the Minister. It concerns a report about elderly people living in a Sea Point apartment budding who had encountered a problem recently. Maybe he read the report of their being threatened with eviction. Let me quote:

The report was written by a Mr Tony Busuttil, president of the United Settlers Foundation, who actually called for the Minister responsible to be sacked.

I want to say in all sincerity to the hon the Minister that things like this should not happen. The security of elderly people should not be threatened in such a manner. I want to ask him to consider some means of assisting people like that so as to ensure that this kind of eviction or threat to the security of elderly people who in this case had actually bought their apartments on a share-block basis can be avoided.

I would be very grateful for an opportunity to discuss with the hon the Minister the question of the funds available to his department for the care of the aged being reduced. I should like to try with the hon the Minister and his department to find ways of ensuring that enough money will be available such as giving tax incentives. We must consider ways of enabling the elderly to work longer so that they do not have to retire at 60 or 65 years of age. Every possibility should be explored to find ways and means of ensuring that the elderly will be looked after so that they can live in security and comfort in their old age. I think they deserve it and I hope the hon the Minister will help and support us in this.

Mr Chairman, firstly I really cannot neglect to refer to the speech the hon member for Carletonville made here tonight. He tried to turn the R20 increase that will come into operation in October into a political issue. This just shows how a political party that is politically quite bankrupt tries to make voting cattle of people.

A party that won 20 seats.

Yes, after that party had said it would win 50 seats. [Interjections ]

Order!

It is clear to me that all that party wants to do is acquire votes. I can assure them that this hon Minister and this capable Government will do everything in their power for the aged and the dependants in this country. The CP’s problem is that they think their white skins are their passports to heaven. They begrudge anyone without a white skin everything. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I strongly object to that insinuation that our …

Skins are white! [Interjections.]

Order! When an hon member puts a point of order, he is entitled to do so undisturbed. The hon member may proceed.

I object to the insinuation that our white skins are our passports to heaven. In my opinion this has a disgraceful religious connotation. [Interjections.]

Order! Whatever objections the hon member for Overvaal has to the remark, it is not unparliamentary.

Sir, I then say his white skin will take him to hell. [Interjections.]

Order!

Sir, if my white skin is going to take me to hell, we shall see each other there. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May the hon member for Overvaal, when referring to the hon member for George, talk about “his white skin”? Should he not refer to him as “the hon member”? [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for George may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I must say that if the hon member for Overvaal says I shall go to hell, at least he will bump into one acquaintance there. [Interjections.]

Order! No, I am now appealing to hon members to drop this line of debating and return to the Vote under discussion.

Mr Chairman, since we are now dealing with the hon member for Overvaal I, too, want to refer to him. On Saturday, 21 June 1986, the hon member for Overvaal referred here in the House to an episode involving the two of us that occurred earlier at the J J Watson House, in George. On that occasion he tried to …

Which Vote are you discussing now?

I am discussing homes for the aged. On that occasion the hon member for Overvaal tried to intimidate old people. Here in the House on 21 June he made the following remarks with reference to me. Unfortunately I did not have the opportunity to react to them then, except to tell him that he was telling a lie—a remark I had to withdraw. On that day he said to me, inter alia (Hansard, House of Assembly: 1986, col 9259):

You did run away! [Interjections.]

He did this in front of old people, Mr Chairman. The hon member went on and said:

Yes, then you jumped into your car and drove away! [Interjections.]

Order!

I put it to the hon member for Overvaal now that before that day he had two potential supporters in that old age home. As a result of his actions on that day, the NP got all the votes of the people in that home. [Interjections.]

Koos does not have the courage to swat a fly! [Interjections.]

Order!

The CP tactic of intimidating people at old age homes has boomeranged on them.

Furthermore, I want to refer to the hon member for Parktown. It really is rather unreasonable of him to point out that his spouse comes from the Nuy Valley. He should also say where he spends his holidays. I can tell hon members we greatly appreciate the role the hon member plays there. I do think, however, it is a pity that the hon member insinuated that Nationalists had to take perfume to old age homes to get rid of other odours there.

Yes, that is because the Nationalist policy stinks!

I really do not believe such a remark befits a person of the stature of the hon member for Parktown. I do think it is a great pity he had to say such a thing. On the other hand, I also think the hon the leader of the PFP should feel a little uneasy about the fact that the hon member for Parktown is arguing in favour of people in the Sea Point constituency. It seems to me that the hon member is undermining his hon leader a little here in the Peninsula. Perhaps he wants to come back to the Cape. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to pay tribute tonight to the hon the Minister and specifically also to the staff of his welfare office which has a regional office in George, too. If there is one department I shall defend at any time on any public platform, it is this department, and the staff of the regional welfare office in George.

I should like to focus specifically on a particular section of our community tonight, namely those taken up in places of sheltered employment for the disabled. I am not speaking tonight purely of necessity. I am also speaking tonight as a profoundly thankful person—profoundly thankful to the department and the hon the Minister, and also to the board members of those institutions who sacrifice their free time. I realise it is the department’s point of departure that the physically and mentally disabled should be dealt with and accepted as an integral part of society. I am sure that we in the Southern Cape, and you too, Mr Chairman, would be able to testify that we have always remained faithful to this point of departure. To be disabled in certain physical and mental activities does not necessarily mean to be disabled in all activities in the community. There will always be disabled people in our community who will be dependent on us and who will not be able to look after themselves, and they will therefore need continuous supervision and care. We must always ensure that we do more for them and also that we make more facilities available to them.

An interesting fact is that according to a recent survey by the World Health Organisation, approximately 10% of the population of every country suffers from some form of mental or physical disability. It is estimated that approximately 400 million people in the world are disabled in some way. The number of disabled persons is also increasing as a result of a longer lifespan, which is the result of improved social circumstances and medical care.

However, I should like to dwell briefly on those members of society who have to be institutionalised, and who should also be effectively utilised in this way.

At present the department administers three settlements, but I do not want to elaborate on that any further. At present 53 institutions for the physically and mentally disabled, which are equipped with places for sheltered employment, are being subsidised in South Africa. In this way 2 968 people are served. In addition to this, 375 day workers are involved in these institutions.

There are certain members of our community that require our earnest attention, and these are the people that have to be placed in institutions because they are unable to look after themselves in the community. This year these institutions were subsidised to the tune of R11,688 million. Last year, in George, we opened a centre of this kind for the Southern Cape, namely Emmaus.

†The Southern Cape Mental Health Society was established in 1963. Its main function was the organising and running of monthly psychiatric clinics in co-operation with the then Department of Health through the Valkenberg Hospital. In 1972 the State began to develop and extend its psychiatric community services, and the mental health society, having achieved its initial goal, decided to concentrate its efforts on establishing Emmaus.

*Sir, today we are proud of the fact that we are able to accommodate people from all areas of the Cape here.

†Emmaus was established in December 1977, and with only 14 workers, R150 in cash, borrowed premises, and not much else, it had far to go to reach its goal.

*I can assure hon members that the pleasant working and living conditions of these people are a pleasure to see. Nevertheless, there is a problem and this is connected with the subsidisation of the people in the hostels.

I want to conclude by saying that we must not neglect this part of our community. Let the State, too, like the disciples of Emmaus of old, go the whole way with them. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, earlier on in this debate the hon member for Pietersburg said that there was no place for politics in a debate dealing with care of the aged. I agree. I want to thank the hon the Minister for the R500 million which he has appropriated for care of the aged. With effect from 1 October South Africa’s White pensioners will receive R218 per month. That is perhaps not enough to live on, but the intention behind a State pension is that it should provide financial assistance and not a complete income.

Commentary on the Budget dealt on the one hand with the fact that the increase of 10% was not enough and on the other hand—one could almost say in the same breath—with the viewpoint that the Government was now practising socialism. I believe that a fine middle course has been steered in introducing the 10% increase.

†There will be 143 000 pensioners in this country this year. At the moment they make up about 8% of the population. In some of the countries of the Western World at present the old people make up 12% of the total population. We heard from the hon member for Edenvale yesterday that the figure will probably rise to 21% in 20 or 30 years’ time. We are sitting on a time bomb of the aged, where young people of every country in the world will have to provide the taxes for the old. I do not think that that is an acceptable situation at all. We heard from the hon the Minister today that this situation is going to be utterly impossible to control over the next eight years in this country. The hon the Minister also said that we must take some radical steps to cure this ill. He defined radical as “grass roots” or “basic”.

I think one of the basic things we can do in this country at the moment to cure this problem is firstly to raise the age of our women pensioners to 65. I do not know why social pensions in this country are granted to men at 65 and to women at 60, whereas civil pension payments to both are commenced at 65. I think this is a case of misplaced chivalry and that giving women a pension at 60 takes away something from them. If we got the idea into everybody’s heads that women should also retire at 65, we could give her five more years in which to earn money and be economically viable. We would be making her productive, which would also be psychologically beneficial.

We’ll tell the voters that that is your attitude.

We could probably tell the voters that if we had to.

Another radical step we could take is to reintroduce a Bill which was, I believe, before this House in 1983 or 1984. I believe that before the introduction of the own affairs system, which is a very good thing in my opinion, a Bill was drafted proposing a permanent pension. This meant that from the time one started working as a 19 year old, for instance, one would retain one’s pension throughout one’s working life.

Are you a radical thinker?

When one ceased to be a worker, one’s pension contributions would be suspended and the pension held for one until one started working again. I think this House was almost forced to withdraw that Bill in 1983 or 1984 because of the great opposition to it by Black people and the trade unions.

Now that we have own affairs, I think it could be a very fine thing to reintroduce this Bill so as to make pension payments permanent, so that young people cannot draw out their contributions merely because they want to buy houses, motor-cars or luxury items or resign their jobs so that they can go on holiday. This is one of the things we really should concern ourselves with. The private sector should help us too so that pensions cannot be withdrawn by the general public and so that we can have permanent pensions.

As has already been mentioned today, there are approximately 405 old-age homes. One of the greatest expenses for pensioners is housing. It has been mentioned already that there is an inflation rate of 15% per year and that pensions are being eroded at a steady rate. At the same time housing becomes more and more expensive and forms a large portion of a pensioner’s monthly expenses.

During the election campaign I worked in a city centre, and I found that one of the things which militated against suggesting to old people that they should share their flats and expenses was the fact that they are fiercely independent. They want to live on their own, so they live in the 405 institutions and, with the system we have for old-age pensions, we subsidise those old-age homes and service organizations help us run them. There are at the moment about 28 500 people in these homes, but I think there are at least 30 000 who want to live in old-age homes and have their names on lists but who cannot live there. The Government assists the Urban Foundation to build very cheap single units for the Black population. The Government also, through the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works, lends money at a very low rate of interest for the building of housing for elderly people who are economically viable.

I think we could combine these two ideas. We could borrow the Urban Foundation’s idea of designing houses which can be constructed very simply be unskilled labour, using good quality but cheap materials, as well as the private sector’s idea of cluster housing, and build groups of houses, 100 at a time, which service organizations could help us to build. I think they will be keen to assist. We could build the recreation centres and provide the services and medical facilities that old people have to share at the centres of these developments, and give these groups of houses security. In that way the private sector could help the Government with this explosive time bomb of an aged population that is ever increasing at the expense of the taxpayer.

I thank the hon the Minister for what he has done for the old people in this country in the present circumstances, but I would like to say that we have to regard our pensions as supplementary to the old people’s income and that, at some stage in this House, we have to make young people look after themselves so that when they do become old, they at least have a pension which is a basis for them to live on. I think that the hon the Minister has done a very good job under the circumstances.

Mr Chairman, in general the debate was characterised by positive and constructive contributions on a wide variety of subjects. It was clear that many members had done their homework very well and made skilful studies of the subject. As a newcomer I learnt a great deal by merely listening to hon members and their informative contributions.

Perhaps I had better correct an impression at the outset which could have arisen here in consequence of my comments earlier today on the financial position of the department. A few speakers referred to the problems this would create for the welfare community and the impression—I want to call it no more than this—was created that welfare financing was being scaled down. The point I emphasised and tried to convey by the comments was that we could not continue to subsidise welfare at the same accelerated rate; it would have to level off.

It has been scaled down.

There is not only a negative but a positive aspect to this. It is clear that we should revise our entire approach to welfare financing and move away from excessive emphasis on institutional care. It is clear we shall have to place far more emphasis on the care of the aged and those who required assistance in the community. It is cheaper to move away from institutional welfare care and try to do it in a community context. Perhaps we became too intent on institutions over the years and established them too easily for every type of patient or welfare case. A far greater responsiblity rests on the community to examine its own conscience and undertake welfare care itself.

At the moment 8 000 normal, healthy old people are being accommodated in institutions in the country. If many of these people could be absorbed into the community, those places could make provision for the very infirm aged. The aged can play an important part in the community. The hon member for Umbilo pointed out that we should not merely proceed from the standpoint that, because the person was old, he should simply be cared for in an institution and no longer have a part to play in the community. Old people can act independently and play an important part in the community until an advanced age and need not merely be accommodated in an institution. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Pietersburg commented on social pensions and various speakers also referred to the increase coming into effect from 1 October. We would of course have liked to pass a greater increase on to our aged. Everybody in this House, regardless of party affiliation, sees it as a matter of compassion people in distress, the aged or whoever they may be.

The allegation that the Government has no compassion and sympathy for the White pensioner and his socioeconomic needs is patently untrue. It is important to re-emphasise that the social pension scheme is non-contributory and financed entirely from public funds. A social pension is not intended to make the individual, the pensioner, economically independent either; it is merely a contribution to supplement the specific income which that person can earn and the provision he has made over the years.

Since 1962 there have been annual increases in social pensions but there is a limit to what the taxpayer can afford. Every increase, no matter how slight, places an enormous burden on the taxpayer who will clearly be unable to carry the ever-increasing burden demanded by pensions and social services indefinitely. It is the Government approach for people to make provision for their old age during their working lifetime. I am grateful that speakers from all parties support this view. It is ultimately the only way in which we shall be able to reduce the growing burden on the taxpayer for social services.

I should like to mention a few illuminating statistics to illustrate what every increase in social pension means to the taxpayer. The increase of R7 a month granted on 1 October 1977 resulted in an annual expenditure of R199 million. Hon members should bear in mind that once such an increase has been instituted it has a permanent effect on Government expenditure. Against this, the increase of R20 which will come into operation on 1 October 1987 will result in an annual expenditure of R522 million. The magnitude of these figures is becoming phenomenal. Over a 10-year period the basic pension of R79 a month on 1 October 1977 will have risen to R218 a month on 1 October 1987. [Interjections.] That is an increase of 175,94%. This consession was as generous as the Treasury could afford.

Therefore the Government has compassion for our social pensioners; we are sympathetic toward them but unfortunately there is a limit to the extent to which it is possible for the Government to help. The department and the Government are only too aware of the problems of the aged and how difficult it is for people to manage, especially under the present economic conditions, but there is a limit to our aid. It is also true, however, that in addition to social pensions there is a variety of subsidies to welfare organisations for the services they render—to the aged in particular too. The major portion of these subsidies is provided for institutional care and services from which the aged derive a great deal direct benefit.

I should like to draw the attention of the House to a few very interesting facts in this regard. Once again they have a bearing on the percentage growth of allocated funds but also on the number of the aged who have been institutionalised over the years with the aid of Government subsidies.

†From 1960 to 1966 those cared for in subsidised homes for the aged increased from 2 840 to 27 639 people. This is an increase of 873,2% over 10 years! During the same period, the same 10 years, the aged population grew by 85,9%—this while the number of people in institutions grew by 873,2%!

*The State therefore does everything it can afford for the aged. In this connection the hon member for Pietersburg also referred to the date of increase, 1 October 1987, and asked whether that date could not be brought forward. Technical problems attached to an earlier payment have been removed; pensions have been computerised and today the department is able to pay an increased pension within six weeks, so it is not a technical but a financial problem. The hon the Minister of Finance has only a specific amount he can spend on social pensions. If that amount is spread over a longer period, that is to say over 12 months, the percentage will be still lower. After we had negotiated for finance this year and the hon the Minister of Finance had allocated to the best of his ability, the Ministers involved discussed the matter very thoroughly. They comprised not only the Ministers of the Administrations of all three Houses but also the hon the Minister of Education and Training, and they decided that the finance was inadequate to institute the increase a year earlier. Consequently we are again granting an increase 12 months after the last one in 1986, but we remain committed to negotiating for more money in an attempt to bring that date forward. As soon as we succeed in this, we shall announce an earlier date. We do not know whether it will have to be phased in; this will depend on the funds, but I can assure the hon member that we desire this too. It will only be possible, however, to the extent that more money is voted.

The hon member’s two contributions contained constructive comment and positive questions. I forgive him for trying to score a political point in passing but I should like to tell him about Piketberg. It seems Piketberg worries hon members and not without cause, for if one assesses the result in Piketberg correctly, it was the best in South Africa. I shall tell you why. If one takes the number of votes polled by the winning candidate and expresses them as a percentage of the number of registered voters in that constituency, the Piketberg result was the best in the country. In all modesty, I represent more of the registered voters of Piketberg than any other hon member of this House does the number in his constituency.

What is the percentage?

It is 56%.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pietersburg also asked about disability pensions. All I want to tell him about them is that a medical evaluation is carried out before such a pension is paid. This is reviewed by a neutral board in Pretoria so it is not simply an unqualified payment—the necessary medical evaluation also has to be carried out. At the moment I do not have figures from the other Houses to give the hon member a satisfactory reply. The hon member for Pietersburg also referred to the Meiring Report and statements it contained on the means test. I think the hon member for Parktown also referred to this. It is State policy to encourage the individual to make provision for his old age to the maximum of his ability. We agree with the statement in that report that the means test excludes certain people who have provided for their old age, but it should be noted that every means test will contain a cut-off point somewhere or other which will include some people and exclude others. Even if the means test were raised annually, as is the case at present, the incomes of some people would still fall outside that cut-off point and they would be excluded from the benefits.

One should also guard against simplification or oversimplification of the application of the means test—as actually takes place in one case in the report—by using no means other than a small pension as illustration. The asset portion of the pension, in conjunction with the income portion, also plays an important part. The two portions together—that is the entire income—are regarded as inextricably connected. The example used does not create a complete picture. It has been the department’s experience that it is usually a combination of the two segments which provides the best evaluation and it is also as a result of the joint evaluation of the two components that the individual is often excluded from a pension because the overall picture of his income is considered.

The hon member for Maraisburg spoke about child abuse, about which I should also like to say something. He suggested that volunteers be trained by the department. In this respect I can assure the hon member that the department would gladly offer assistance in training volunteers; in addition we shall definitely follow up the idea of a walk-in clinic.

The hon member made some interesting comments on child abuse. This subject featured prominently in the news recently as a result of various Press reports on a most tragic case. I do not wish to express an opinion on the details this evening as the matter is being properly investigated.

The disquieting aspect of the reports, however, is that the association involved exonerated itself by putting forward the defence that a shortage of funds was being experienced which should have been provided by the State and that this had given rise to the neglect in this case. I pointed out earlier in the debate today that limited funds was not only a problem of the State but that many welfare organisations were also experiencing that problem. Just as the department has to set certain priorities with the limited funds at its disposal, in the same way I believe it is also necessary for welfare organisations to set specific priorities.

I caused enquiries to be made at various welfare organisations and they all assured me that baby battering or child abuse was an emergency that was accorded the highest priority by each; it receives preferential treatment. Consequently I should like to advise the association concerned to examine its own conscience and reflect on its actions before blaming the State, as happened in this case.

Over the past few years the department has paid increasing attention to welfare organisations and other institutions such as hospitals with a view to the prevention of child abuse. It is also true that exposure provided by the media in such a case brings an enormous number of new cases to light. I think the hon member for Rosettenville also referred to this in saying that recent experience had been that many new cases were being reported. For purposes of extending knowledge of and insight into this complicated problem and to assisting institutions and organisations concerned in it to introduce preventive measures, the department undertook research and the results were published in a departmental document. Institutions or hon members who are interested in this are welcome to obtain this document from the department; it deals with child abuse.

Dealing with the problem of child abuse is certainly a complex matter as it relates to people who are psychologically and mentally ill or who are inclined to deviant behaviour for other reasons. Dealing with such parents or guardians is difficult and is aggravated by many other factors. To approach the problem in a practical matter, a register for the registration of ill-treated children was instituted at all regional offices of the department as from 1 April 1980. The idea was that the registration of child abuse in that area would produce specific statistics and this could also have definite practical preventive advantages. The purpose of the register was to gather information on the incidence and distribution of child abuse in that particular region, information which could be applied usefully for measures in combating or preventing the problem. An additional purpose was to protect the abused child by preventing concealment of previous abuse by parents. The register would also be an aid in monitoring the child as well as the parents on a continuous basis and supplying them with the necessary supportive service.

Unfortunately I have to inform hon members that this register is not being used properly, so the advantages attached to it are not being obtained. The registration by child and welfare organisations of ill-treated children is not prescribed by legislation; there is no control over cases and no obligation to the organisations to record cases which do occur. There seems to be a definite disinclination among these organisations and I really wish to appeal to child and welfare organisations to offer their knowledge on this matter and do the necessary registration in the interests of this case.

Section 42 of the Child Care Act, 1983, provides for the mandatory notification by dentists, doctors, medical practitioners and nurses of all cases of child abuse coming to their attention. I do not know why child and welfare organisations were not included. In fact, I have requested the department to go into this matter.

We are currently taking the steps required to bring these provisions to the attention of the medical profession again through the Registrar of the Medical and Dental Council. There are also various multidisciplinary panels to aid social workers and to be of assistance to ill-treated children as well as the parents involved. These panels are attached to provincial hospitals and my information is that they are functioning very well.

†Mr Chairman, the hon member for Parktown asked me a question regarding the lack of funds for welfare services and mentioned people without food. Welfare services have been rendered by welfare organisations which are part of the private sector and are subsidised by the State. That is the point the hon member made. He asked whether we were phasing out the role of the State, or something to that effect. The State has a role to play as far as welfare is concerned, and will continue to play an important role. It is a partnership, but a partnership in which we prefer the private sector to take the initiative. We have already privatised welfare services in that regard. The department is only a partner insofar as we render supportive services and provide the funds for the private sector to…

In a time of crisis!

If a crisis arises we will certainly deal with it in a different manner. By and large, however, we regard the work done in the field of welfare as a partnership between the private sector and the State. We have a role to play, and that role will continue; we are not phasing ourselves out.

The hon member for Parktown asked about the statistics in the annual report. His request will be considered when the annual report for next year is compiled and, where possible, the number of posts and vacancies will be tabulated.

The hon member for Parktown also asked whether the Minister is involved in the budgetary process. I am not going to deal with that subject again. I believe that I dealt fully with all aspects of the financing of own affairs under the previous Budget. I refer to the amounts described in section 84 (a), (b) and (c). The budgetary process is a protracted one. It goes through many phases and there are many negotiations with the hon the Minister of Finance on an individual basis and in the committees. Eventually, as I explained in the previous debate, the financing of welfare, like that of the other departments in the Administration: House of Assembly, will basically be done according to certain formulae.

The hon member for Parktown also referred to the case loads of social workers. He said that these were too high and that assistance should be given. The average case load of social workers in the employ of the department and of welfare organisations is 54 cases. There is no money available for the creation of more posts and social workers must therefore set priorities.

A new scheme of financing social welfare services is being implemented at the moment and will hopefully help to ease the situation.

The hon member for Rosettenville made an excellent contribution. I would like to congratulate her. She highlighted the value of the volunteers and I fully agree with her and would like to endorse what she said. She expressed her admiration for these people, and there again I certainly think she has the support of all hon members in this House in expressing our admiration for every member of the private sector and every individual who contributes to a welfare organisation and in that way tries to alleviate the needs of society. They render invaluable services. I would also like to support her appeal to the business community to make larger contributions to the welfare organisations.

What incentive do you offer?

She commented on the subsidy for social workers and asked whether it was high enough. The subsidy in respect of social work posts amounts to 75% of their approved expenditure. As I said in relation to our partnership, South Africa is not a welfare state, as she herself stated, and I therefore believe it is a generous contribution and it is not possible to increase it.

The hon member for Bezuidenhout made a very interesting contribution. He paid homage to the volunteers. He called them South Africa’s secret and silent strength, and I should like to endorse what he said in that respect. Once again, these are people who do a great deal to alleviate the needs of society in many fields.

He asked a question regarding multidisciplinary teams rendering services to alcoholics, drug addicts et cetera. I can inform the hon member that it is the policy of the department to render a multi-disciplinary service in all the institutions for alcoholics. More State rehabilitation centres are being planned. I shall give him more information when I react to the hon member for Worcester who also touched on this subject. [Interjections.]

*I shall come back to that. The hon member for Bezuidenhout also discussed volunteers, the promotion of which project the department obviously encourages. Certain regional officers of the department keep registers of these people and I shall follow up the hon member’s idea in this regard.

The same applies to self-help groups referred to by the hon member for Worcester. The department supports this idea very strongly and encourages community action through our regional offices.

†The hon member for Mooi River tendered his apologies. He cannot be here tonight. He asked me certain questions regarding the aged in rural areas. I shall provide the hon member with the answers to those questions, but in view of the time factor I am not going to deal with the various questions he raised.

*The hon member for Langlaagte discussed the status of the Head of Welfare post. I agree with him on this and have already made the necessary representations. The hon member for Brits made a very good contribution; he approached his subject in a very skilled and meticulous manner. It dealt with the inadequate subsidies to children’s homes; he proposed that subsidies be allocated on a more differentiated basis, and motivated this very well.

The department is well aware that the current subsidies are lower than managements’ actual current expenditure. The problem experienced by such homes was tackled last year when a 20% increase in subsidy was applied whereas the increase was only 10% in other cases. I can inform the hon member that it has already been decided to pay subsidies to children’s homes on a differentiated basis. This will enable them to rectify their staff structure to provide the highest quality of service possible to the children, not on the basis suggested by the hon member but I can assure him that this matter was thoroughly investigated and the decision reached that differentiated subisidies be paid. Factors such as the type of children’s home, the availability of supporting services, a multidisciplinary team, the quality of service and other factors will have to be taken into account, however.

†The hon member for Durban North referred to the safety of the aged. I would like to refer him to my colleague, the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works, who announced in the House not long ago that his department was prepared to render financial aid to elderly people in order to increase the safety of their homes.

Regarding the particular project in his con stituency, I am sure the hon member is familiar with the procedure I have explained. I quickly took the opportunity during the dinner break to try to get hold of that particular application, but unfortunately I could not lay my hands on it. The fact is, however, that new applications will still be approved, but within a regional context. They will be evaluated by the regional welfare committee advising the ministerial representative, and the evaluation and approval will depend on whether that particular application meets the criteria as to whether funds are available and whether that is a high priority in that particular region.

*The hon member for Innesdal put a question on the organisation “You are not alone”. This is a matter which should be raised in the discussion of the Health Services Vote as it actually deals with schizophrenics.

The hon member for Welkom made an excellent maiden speech. I wish to associate myself with his image of the stormy political sea and our good helmsman. I think the hon member exhibited all the skills required to become a good seaman himself very soon. I regret time caught up with him and he could not administer his last tablet to us but he is still going to prescribe good medicine in this House.

The hon member for Witbank complained that subsidies for old-age homes were inadequate and pointed out large annual deficits in a particular case. Subsidies for such homes are based on the average runing costs of all old-age homes in South Africa. If those homes therefore experience problems, I want to advise the management to take a look at the 50% of homes that find the funds more than adequate, and to examine possibilities of better utilisation of money by changes in management and by economising.

The hon member for Edenvale made a very good contribution. I am very grateful that the hon member emphasised the importance of service centres. These centres will have to replace institutions to a greater degree, although the latter can never be entirely replaced; we shall always have institutions. Nevertheless a greatly improved service can be furnished from service centres—to the aged as well—which can appreciably reduce expenditure in respect of institutions.

†The hon member for Pinetown complained that the subsidy for furniture and equipment is insufficient. The present subsidy, however, is only meant to assist the management of homes financially in the purchase of basic furniture. Nevertheless, I have some good news for the hon member. As the institutionalised care of aged persons, especially frail aged persons, requires specialised equipment which is very expensive, the department considers special grants over and above the subsidies for ordinary furniture. [Interjections.]

Equipment that can be included under special grants is: (a) medical equipment; (b) intercommunication systems; (c) washing equipment; (d) kitchen equipment; (e) cleaning equipment; and (f) vehicles for the transportation of aged persons. Applications for special grants are considered on merit and approval is subject to the availability of funds for the future.

*The hon member for Umbilo made an excellent contribution. I am very grateful the hon member stressed that we should not automatically regard the aged as welfare cases. Old people can play a positive and constructive part in the community up to a very advanced age and we should allow the aged an opportunity to come into their own in that respect.

This brings me to the hon member for Carletonville. I do not wish to be ungracious, Sir, but I find it difficult to understand how people think we can create a future in this country by begrudging others what one feels entitled to oneself. That is all, Sir! [Interjections.] I do not know why there are people in the White community who think that the position of Whites will benefit if that of others is detrimentally affected. I just cannot understand that mentality. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Worcester spoke about combating the abuse of alcohol and drugs. I should like to tell the hon member the department has made great progress in establishing rehabilitation centres in all provinces. We have already purchased land in Port Elizabeth and construction will begin there in the 1988-89 financial year. The intention is to start construction in Durban in the 1988-89 financial year too. The Western Cape and Bloemfontein are on the list; construction in Cape Town will start in the 1989-90 financial year and we hope to do the same in Bloemfontein by 1990-91.

My time has almost expired, Sir.

†The hon member for Parktown also referred to the apartment block in Sea Point. My information is that the building in that case was a private boarding house, and the department has no say over private boarding houses. Nevertheless, we have every sympathy with that particular case and if we can provide any support, the department will gladly do so.

*I am very pleased that the hon member for George again drew attention in his contribution to the position of the handicapped as well as the good work done by the department in this regard.

Finally I come to the hon member for Germiston. I think there is strong evidence of the hon member’s mettle in the fact that he made his maiden speech late on a Wednesday evening. [Interjections.] This House can be rather confused on such an evening, Sir, and a newcomer venturing to make a maiden speech in this House on a Wednesday evening is a man to be reckoned with.

Hear, hear!

The hon member put forward good, interesting proposals on how to handle the problem of the growing burden of pensions to the taxpayer and I shall request the department to give further attention to this matter. [Interjections.]

I have just been informed by the Whips, Sir, that it was not altogether a maiden speech. The hon member learnt fast in this House.

I wish to close by thanking all hon members again for their contributions to a very interesting debate.

Vote agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr Chairman, I move:

The Bill proposes a number of important amendments to the Sales Tax Act, all of which are dealt with in the notes on the objects of the Bill, which have been made available to all the hon members of the Standing Committee on Finance. It will be noted that the Bill is confined to a few specific matters only. The customary Bill amending the Sales Tax Act in other respects will be introduced at a later stage.

Exemption of Fuel Subject to the Fuel Levy.

Hon members will recall that the hon the Minister of Finance recently announced in his Budget Speech that it had been decided to consolidate the levies on petrol and diesel presently imposed for the Road Fund, Central Energy Fund and Motor Vehicle Insurance Fund, as well as sales tax, in a single levy with effect from 1 July 1987. This step was necessary to curtail the increasing evasion of levies and sales tax, and will be administratively more efficient. As the fuel levy will be collected by the Commissioner of Customs and Excise directly from the oil companies, the scope for evasion has been minimized. However, as fuel will be subject to the fuel levy from 1 July 1987 it follows that sales tax should not continue to be imposed on such fuel from that date.

Order! Hon members must please lower their voices.

The Bill, therefore, makes provision for exemption from sales tax in respect of the sale, importation or application for own use of any fuel which will be subject to the fuel levy.

Vendors who are presently entitled to an exemption from sales tax, such as farmers and manufacturers, will in future be liable for the fuel levy, but provision will be made in the Customs and Excise Act for a refund of an amount of so much of the sales tax as would otherwise not have been payable. The vendors concerned will not, therefore, be placed in a worse position as a result of the consolidation of the levies and of the sales tax. Their tax position in effect remains unchanged.

As those vendors who sell fuel will have stocks of fuel on hand on 30 June 1987 in respect of which no sales tax has been paid and which from that date will be exempt from sales tax, clause 15 of the Bill makes provision for the imposition of sales tax on such fuel stocks. Vendors concerned will, therefore, be required to take stock on 30 June 1987 and account for the sales tax payable in respect of such stock in their monthly returns for the June tax period. The tax will have to be paid by 20 July 1987.

However, as the fuel on hand on 30 June will not have borne any sales tax or fuel levy but will be sold at the new price, inclusive of the new levy, the vendor will in fact recover the sales tax which he has to pay within a short period after that date. Nevertheless, if any vendor experiences cash flow problems as a result of having to pay tax on such stock, he may approach his local Receiver of Revenue with a request for a reasonable extension of that period in which to pay the tax. Any such request will receive sympathetic consideration.

Summary Cancellation of Vendors’ Registration Certificates.

As explained in the notes, the Commissioner for Inland Revenue is empowered under the Act to cancel a vendor’s registration certificate under certain circumstances, for example where the vendor repeatedly fails to pay any tax due by him, or utilizes his registration certificate to obtain goods free of tax in circumstances where tax is chargeable. Clearly, such actions by vendors must be viewed in a serious light and the cancellation of certificates would be fully justifiable. However, before the Commissioner may cancel a certificate he must give the offending vendor written notice of his intention to do so. The vendor then has the right to request that the matter be referred to an advisory committee for a binding decision. This procedure can take some weeks, thus allowing the vendor to continue withholding payment of tax which is legally due or misusing his sales tax registration certificate. This is an untenable position which is being exploited by unscrupulous vendors. The Bill therefore makes provision for the summary cancellation of a vendor’s certificate in such circumstances.

Although the vendor’s right of recourse to an advisory committee is suspended in such circumstances, if the vendor makes a further application for registration and the Commissioner then refuses to register him, he may request that such refusal be referred to an advisory committee for a binding opinion. I am sure hon members will agree that the proposed regime is fair to both the fiscus and the vendor concerned.

*Hon members will recall that an amendment was effected in 1986 in terms of which the Commissioner is empowered, when it appears to him that the information which is reflected on a vendor’s registration certificate should be revised, to request any person who is in possession of such certificate to surrender it for revision and the issue of a new certificate. The Commissioner has now requested all vendors to provide him with sufficient information to enable him to provide them with more effective certificates. Thus far, 173 000 vendors have responded to this request, and they will shortly be issued with new certificates. These certificates describe more fully the activities of the enterprise and will make evasion more difficult, while the paper on which the new certificates are printed is tamper proof. To ensure that only the new certificates will be valid, clause 5(a) empowers the Commissioner to declare by notice in the Government Gazette that registration certificates issued in a form previously prescribed by him shall no longer be valid from the date fixed in that notice. I therefore appeal to those vendors who have not yet responded to the Commissioner’s request for information to provide him with such information as soon as possible. This will ensure that they will not be unable to purchase their inputs free of tax as a result of their present certificates being declared invalid.

It sometimes happens that vendors fail to perform their duties, or commit offences, under the Act. The present limits for fines and imprisonment which may be imposed for offences under the Act—R100 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months—are regarded as unrealistic in the light of the large amounts of sales tax involved, and the Bill therefore provides for an increase in the various limits. The limits are being increased so as to fall within the jurisdiction of the magistrates’ courts.

Second Reading resumed

Mr Chairman, it really is an extremely taxing task to discuss such a prosaic subject as general sales tax ao late on a Wednesday evening.

Move for an adjournment.

I wish I could.

However, in the circumstances, I shall try to keep my speech as short as possible. When GST was initially instituted in South Africa, the main reason for its institution was to raise the tax levy basis of the Exchequer and to spread it more evenly across all strata of society. It could perhaps be argued today that that objective has been exceeded, since we find that the revenue the State derives from general sales tax is higher than from any of its other tax sources bar one. One could perhaps leave this topic for another debate, and I do not want to devote my speech to it.

It is our point of view that since the tax should be collected and the tax liability imposed on the individual who makes certain purchases and the tax, as is at present the case, is actually collected on behalf of the State by the seller who in turn then has to pay that tax money over to the State, we can actually regard that tax money, the GST the seller collects from the purchaser, as trust money which that seller has collected for the State.

It is my point of view that if a seller has collected GST from someone else to be paid over to the State and he fails to pay over this money, it is nothing but plain theft. We then find that in this process the damage being done is twofold: To the buyer who paid the tax in the first place, and in the second place, to the State itself.

We can therefore find no fault with the Government’s introducing legislation to eliminate the possibility of tax that has in fact been collected, not being paid over to the State. Since this Bill is primarily concerned with effecting a change in the way general sales tax is collected, particularly in regard to fuel, it meets with our approval.

The consequential amendment in terms of which the payment of GST will from 1 July no longer be collected from the public by the seller of fuel for payment to the State, but instead that the fuel retailer, when purchasing his stock, will have to pay a consolidated levy to the suppliers which they in turn will have to pay over to the State, also meets with our approval. The subsequent amendment for the collection of GST on stocks held by the dealers on 30 June is essential in order to prevent them from becoming illegally enriched in the process of transition. We welcome the provision that they will be afforded sufficient time, should they experience cash flow problems, to pay their tax.

I do not want to refer now to the effect of these provisions on the farming community, because another speaker on our side will be dealing with this matter. As regards the provision concerning the cancellation of registration certificates of people guilty of corrupt practice, and according to which the situation is being dealt with slightly differently now so that unnecessary delays will be eliminated and offenders in this connection will be prevented from being above for an unnecessarily long period, to misuse the present situation, this, too, meets with our approval and we shall therefore support it.

The fines for infringements of this important Act, which are stipulated by the present Act, are actually ludicrously low if one takes into account the amounts of money that can be, and indeed were, involved in infringements. We therefore also support the considerable increase in fines for which provision is being made in the Bill.

Although we have certain reservations on how this measure could possibly affect, for example, agriculture, we nevertheless support it.

Mr Chairman, we greatly appreciate the hon member for Barberton’s positive approach to this measure, and the spirit in which he discussed the matter here.

Indirect taxation, specifically sales tax, remains an important component of the total State revenue. When we talk about indirect taxation, we are dealing with a surcharge on goods or services, but not on income. It is therefore a surcharge on what the taxpayer uses or purchases, rather than a surcharge on his income, as in the case of direct income tax.

This principle of a surcharge on the use of services will have to receive serious attention in future tax structures. In the future there will have to be increasing emphasis on levying a premium on services to the user. Therefore, if we levy an amount as sales tax on the selling price of an article in order to collect tax, there is no deviation from the principle that the purchaser of the goods or the user of the service has to pay for the goods or the service. An additional levy has to be paid on such a purchase or use.

It is unfortunately the case that the taxpayer does not always want to accept his liability for payment, and the hon member for Barberton has referred to that, too. Methods are still being sought to accomplish this evasion of tax. It appears, from an answer to a question I asked the Commissioner for Inland Revenue in the Standing Committee on Finance—I have previously mentioned this here in the House—that in investigations into 98 cases of tax evation, a total amount of more than R40 million was involved, of which almost R2,4 million represented the evasion of sales tax. This really is a formidable amount that is at issue here.

I therefore welcome the fact that the penalties in this measure are being increased. The intentional evasion of tax is an offence and consequently should be subject to certain relevant penalties. The extent of the evasion of sales tax justifies the increase of the fines and the imprisonment on conviction, and we on this side of the House have no problems with that.

A second aspect to which I want to refer is the cancellation of registration certificates. Section 13 of the principal Act has been amended several times to facilitate the cancellation procedure. In fact, the last amendment was effected during last year’s session. Because there are still problems in obtaining certificates, provision is now being made for the summary cancellation of the certificate. It is clear from this that a registration certificate is valid only until the vendor ceases to carry out the specific undertaking for which he requested the certificate, or until the certificate is cancelled, whichever takes place first.

In terms of last year’s amendment it is accepted that a vendor has to furnish certain information to make it possible for his certificate to be revised. Failure to do this can now also lead to the cancellation of the certificate. Holders of certificates need to take cognisance of this.

I then want to come to the linking together of the various levies on fuel, petrol and diesel. This is welcomed by us on this side of the House. It is a very simple operation if Customs and Excise are made responsible for the collection of the total levy. Farmers and manufacturers who were previously exempt from paying sales tax on diesel, will now be given the right to claim back an amount equal to the sum of the sales tax from the Department of Customs and Excise. I understand that an easily comprehensible form will be drawn up by the department and made available to the farmers and the manufacturers for completion, and that these institutions will be repaid as soon as possible.

Furthermore, Sir, I should just like to hear from the hon the Minister whether the idea is that the farmers and manufacturers entitled to this repayment will be able to submit their claims for repayment on a monthly basis in order to benefit from the reduction sooner.

We on this side of the House support the measure under discussion whereby tax evasion, and more specifically the evasion of sales tax, is being made more difficult.

Mr Chairman, I should like to take up from the point where the hon member for Gezina left off. That is the question of the extent to which this particular form of taxation, viz sales tax, has been abused. Over a period of time one has read in newspapers and elsewhere of investigations being undertaken into this particular form of taxation. One has also read about the enormous amounts of money involved in the evasion of GST. This is obviously a problem which is of great concern to the Department of Inland Revenue and indeed to all of us here.

I say it is of great concern to all of us because taxation basically is the funding for the expenditure of the State, and a given amount of money is required to be raised. So if some people are able to evade paying tax it actually means that other people elsewhere in the system have to make up that shortfall. This obviously is fundamentally unfair and is to be prevented wherever possible.

This Bill introduces changes in administrative procedures which obviously tighten the net in collecting sales tax and therefore contribute to the principle of fairness in taxation in sharing the load among all people. On that basis we support the Bill.

It is also interesting to note from this Bill and the one introduced earlier this year dealing with sales tax in the liquor industry, that an estimated additional R500 million will be raised this year as a result of these two measures. That is a half billion rand during the balance of this year, and in nobody’s terms can that be considered as being petty cash. Concentrating collection points, thereby more effectively collecting what is due to the State, is certainly a welcome improvement.

Secondly, we support granting the Commissioner the powers to summarily cancel a vendor’s registration certificate as obviously, if there is something untoward in his behaviour or if there is a suspicion of there being something untoward, it seems manifestly unfair to allow him to continue using that certificate while the administrative wheels go into motion and ultimately take his certificate away from him. Therefore, this also seems a significant improvement in administering sales tax.

Finally, I pointed out previously the enormous sums of money involved, and it therefore seems right and just that the penalties be increased. I support the view of the hon member for Barberton in looking at those penalties again against the enormous amounts of money involved, so I do not think that they are overstated, and hopefully they will act as a greater deterrent against people who are not paying their share and are evading payment of this tax. With those words we support this amending Bill.

Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the hon member for Pinelands for his positive attitude towards this Bill and we are very pleased to hear of his support.

The purpose of this Bill is to consolidate the petrol and diesel levies at present imposed, in respect of the Road Fund, the Central Energy Fund and the Motor Vehicle Assurance Fund, as well as sales tax in a single fuel levy. It would appear that at present the levies in total amount to 22,5 cents on petrol and 22,7 cents on diesel. This will not affect the ordinary consumer in any way as the price of fuel at the pump will remain the same. However, it will add to the effective collection of funds and it has been estimated by certain sources that an extra R300 million could possibly be collected as a result. Vendors, especially garage owners, will have to take stock on 30 June and they will have to pay sales tax on their stocks. This means that they will be placed in a position of a temporary negative cash flow for a short period.

It has been calculated that the average stocks carried by normal garages vary between 20 000 and 30 000 litres. This will mean an extra payment of R2 250. Interest on this amount for a period of a month works out at R28. I do not believe, therefore, that this will force them to dig too deeply into their pockets.

Others consumers who at present enjoy a rebate, such as farmers, fishermen and manufacturers, will in future have to pay the full levy but will then be able to reclaim that amount as a rebate from the Department of Customs and Excise. I believe that this will take up to six weeks. It can be argued that the farmers in this case will also suffer a negative cash flow, but they normally buy their fuel through co-operatives which usually allow them between 30 and 60 days to pay. I believe that the rebate on 1 000 litres of diesel will be of the order of R250-40 for which the farmer will have to wait six weeks. The total interest on this amount over that period would be R3-85. This represents a one-off cost to the farmer which will not, I think, affect his pocket too severely.

The Bill also tightens up the situation with regard to registration certificates. I think it has already been pointed out that there have been malpractices in the past and that, while these have been corrected, the malfeasant has been able to continue such practices until he has been brought before the courts.

The Bill quite rightly also provides for the increase of the limits on fines and sentences of imprisonment imposed on conviction.

When we consider the vast sums of money involved, this seems to be reasonable. Many people are prepared to take a chance when the punishment is small. One has only to think of parking tickets. Yet the average citizen will abide by the law when he knows that the punishment will be severe if he is caught. I am grateful that the Official Opposition is supporting this Bill and I am pleased to support it.

Mr Chairman, one supports the principle that taxpayers should pay tax, and what is more that all taxpayers should pay all their tax. Tax evasion is a scourge and should certainly be combated as far as possible. This Sales Tax Amendment Bill is being introduced specifically in order to make provision for the necessary tax to be levied on tax evaders who, by means of “clever” methods make enormous amounts of money and so become parasites on law-abiding citizens.

This Bill make provision for an exemption of sales tax in respect of the sale, import or use for private purposes of any fuel that is subject to that fuel levy. Consumers that at present enjoy a rebate of duty, such as farmers, manufacturers and others at present entitled to a exemption from sales tax, will in future be liable for the full fuel levy, but provision will be made for a corresponding repayment by Customs and Excise to those consumers that are eligible for a repayment. It is a good thing that consumers, farmers and others enjoying the rebate of duty, retain that rebate. Consumers, like farmers, who at present obtain fuel with a rebate of excise duty, will in future have to pay the full duty when purchasing fuel. Provision will be made in the Customs and Excise Act for repayment to the consumers that are eligible. Farmers will then have to claim back the rebate for which they qualify, and we have experienced problems with this.

We are aware that the farmers in the summer grain areas are usually financed on an annual basis by their co-operatives or by some financial institution or other. We know, too, that the farmers do not always have a sophisticated bookkeeping system and are therefore not able to claim this money back all that easily. If there are going to be delays regarding repayments, we wonder whether it should not be emphasised that this is going to place an additional interest burden on the farmers because they will be losing interest or will have to pay additional interest in cases in which they are being financed by their commercial bank or co-operative.

We cannot fault the amendment of the Act and this side of the House will certainly support it, but we know that in many cases it will take some time for the farmer to claim this money back. Particularly when this has to be done by the farmer himself, it places still more work upon his shoulders, and I wonder whether provision could not be made in the Act for, in cases in which co-operatives are financing the farmer, the co-operative to be nominated by the farmer to make that claim on behalf of its member. The farmer can now receive a repayment that is actually due to the co-operative.

It will also help the farmer, when he applies for credit, to budget for a smaller amount for fuel than when he has to stipulate his application for finance for fuel at the full price before claiming. This could make a substantial difference in the granting of production credit because the credit policy of co-operatives allows credit to be granted at a certain amount per hectare, plus all the other requirements which are not relevant here now. Therefore, if the co-operative can submit the claim it, too, will be safeguarded from the risks it has to run in this case in respect of the collection of the claim for the farmer.

What I have in mind is a form of cession of the farmers’ right to reclaim money to the financial institution providing him with credit. We must just bear in mind that the amounts being discussed here are large amounts. A lot of money is involved here because fuel is a very expensive item for the farmers in the grain regions. Co-operatives that are already struggling with capital formation must be able to utilise the prompt repayment of this money, for their own benefit. This will help relieve the pressure of the cost vice that is being tightened more and more every day by problems relating to inflation, drought, interest rates, and particularly cash flow.

We also have a problem concerning the fact that this Act has to be amended in this way, whereas it is to come into operation as early as 1 July 1987, and in the summer grain areas, this is exactly the time a great deal of fuel is used. We therefore support the Bill, but we just want to ask whether attention could not be given to these two matters.

Mr Chairman, I want to thank all the hon members who participated in this discussion, particularly the hon member for Barberton, who adopted a very clear standpoint, and also his colleague, the hon member for Delmas, who has just resumed his seat. We shall examine his proposals. We are engaged in discussions with the SA Agricultural Union about an uncomplicated system, one which is administratively simple and will entail the least possible red tape. Just like other people, farmers do not like filling in a lot of forms. We must restrict this to a minimum, making it an uncomplicated system which will not be a burden to any of those participating in it. I can assure the hon member that we shall convey the suggestion he made here today in our discussions with the SA Agricultural Union. If it is, in fact, possible and can easily be accomplished, and if it will simplify matters, we shall consider doing it. I do not think we need a statutory amendment to do so. We can, in fact, do it administratively.

The hon member for Gezina had no problem either. He also asked to have forms that would be easily understood and asked that repayments should be made promptly. Let me just give that hon member the assurance that the system is already in operation; the people have been appointed to their positions, to their posts. We are having the forms printed and everything is ready for action. We think there will be a very slight delay. There are approximately 65 staff members who had to be appointed. These staff members, for the most part lower-paid staff members, have already been employed. We think there will be a slight delay.

†I thank the hon member for Pinelands for his support. He said there were enormous amounts involved. The hon the Minister spoke about the amount of R300 million for the remainder of this year, 9 months. We think it will be a minimum of R500 million over a full year. There are people who think it could be a good deal more than that.

We have tried over the years to deal with offenders in many other ways, administratively and by way of regulations and amendments, but unfortunately we have been unsuccessful and we still have this enormous tax leakage with diesel and petrol. The system that we propose to introduce is very similar to a system running very well in Australia. We think it will work here too. We thank the hon member for his support, and for his support of the increases in the penalties. I might just mention that the last time we adjusted these penalties was ten years ago. That in itself was good reason to adjust the penalties.

The hon member for Wynberg made a very interesting speech and calculations, and showed how very light the interest on the tax will be in the interim or transition period. In spite of that we have had representations from the Motor Industries Federation. We have taken a very lenient view in that in terms of clause 15 where they have to pay the tax on existing stocks on the night of 30 June as if they had effected a sale the next day, and where that amount would normally be due by 20 August 1987, we spoke with the MIF and gave them the assurance that if they were in fact concerned, we would be very lenient about it and allow people who had applied to have until 20 October 1987 to pay that amount of GST on those stocks. We do not think we will have many applications because, as the hon member himself said, the amount will probably be in the vicinity of under R2 000 per service station. If we have such applications we will deal very leniently with them.

The hon member spoke about the miniscule amounts farmers would have to pay. I thank him also for having brought that perspective to the debate.

*With those few words I thank all the hon members who participated in this debate for their support.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Bill not committed.

Third Reading

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

Mr Chairman, in case there is any misunderstanding, I want to repeat that the CP supports the measure under discussion.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

Mr Chairman, before the previous adjournment of this debate, the hon member, Prof Olivier, spoke about the justification for and the functions of the commission. I merely want to point out that the commission will provide the Minister in question with advice. The commission therefore has an important part to play.

Such progress has been made in the consolidation of the Black states that the consolidation process will be completed in the foreseeable future. The consolidation of KaNgwane and KwaZulu has reached an advanced stage. After the Cabinet has approved the final proposals with regard to the said two states, the consolidation of all ten the states in terms of the 1979 directives will have been dealt with. The constitutional decisions on the borders of the state in terms of the 1979 undertaking will then be completed, and their implementation will be in the hands of the Department of Development Aid. Negotiations on land will then involve the rounding off of borders between states, and can take place at executive level.

The commission will have a part to play as an advisory body as regards discussions and negotiations in specific and individual cases which may be entrusted to it. The functions of the commission in terms of section 3 of the Black Affairs Act, 1959, are defined in very general terms. This section reads as follows:

1. (1) …the consideration of any matter relating to the general conduct of the administration of Black affairs, or to legislation insofar as it may affect the Black population …and the submission to the Minister of its recommendations …
2. (2) The commission shall also consider, and make recommendation with regard to, any matter of administrative routine submitted to it by direction of the Minister.
3. (3) The Minister may in his discretion and subject to such conditions as he may deem fit, assign to a member of the commission any of the powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed upon him under any law.

There must, therefore, be an opportunity for discussions with the communities, the commission must be an instrument to advise the Minister and an instrument of negotiation to test advice and regulate decision-making. The commission must, therefore, provide the Government with general, overall policies. This implies the necessity for the commission to be politically sensitive and for the functions of politicians and officials to be kept separate. The commission can be used to hold discussions with Black leaders at all levels in order to identify problems.

Urban Black communities are a priority because experience has taught us that they are particularly disappointed about problems which have remained unsolved for so long. These problems can be divided into problems which relate to and are unique to specific communities on the one hand, and problems which affect everyone and the solutions to which affect various communities, on the other. The commission can make a contribution towards establishing an overall plan for the identification of land for urbanisation, with due regard to the Government’s decentralisation policy. In this way, the regional planning and industrial settlement patterns can be established.

Order! I have allowed the hon member to speak in general terms, but I do not think the functions and activities of the commission are actually at issue in any of the clauses in the Second Reading. The hon member can refer me to a clause if he thinks that I am wrong, but I am not aware that we can discuss the function and activities of the commission now. I request the hon member not to continue with that part of his speech.

Mr Chairman, I merely replied to the question that the hon member put to me with regard to the role and function of the commission.

I take pleasure in supporting the Bill.

Mr Chairman, first I should like to make a number of formal comments with regard to the legislation, and then put forward arguments as to why this side of the House cannot support this legislation.

In the first place I should like to refer to clause 19. I am not going to read the entire clause. I just want to pause to consider the proviso for a moment and refer to the explanation which was given in this connection, because a definite misunderstanding can arise in this regard. The proviso to clause 19 is interpreted as follows according to the words used in the clause. If the hon the State President is satisfied that the matters referred to in the clause do apply, he must withhold his assent. Therefore, according to the words used in the clause the State President is obliged to withhold his assent. But if we compare this with what was said on the standing committee it would appear that a discretion is built in and that the State President may withhold his assent. It is the standpoint of this side of the House that the wording of the clause will be complied with and that it will be interpreted as obligatory and not discretionary.

In the second place I should like to draw attention to clause 33. The marginal notes to clause 33 read: “Temporary representation of non-elected management bodies on Regional Services Councils”. In the past it was the standpoint of that side of the House as regards regional services councils that they would be elected bodies. It was said that we were getting this new establishment of regional services councils at the second tier of government, and that this would result in a broadening of democracy because it would pertain to all population groups.

It remains the standpoint of this side of the House—and this is not at issue now, but I must put it forward as an argument to arrive at my final point in this connection—that we are opposed to regional services councils, for various reasons, but particularly because they are racially mixed councils and because in our opinion regional services councils are an example of how power is being shared, and therefore taken away from the Whites.

What does Fanie Ferreira say? [Interjections.]

That is not at issue this evening.

I want to dwell for a moment on something mentioned by hon members on that side of the House in the previous debate. Reference was made here to the broadening of the democracy. I maintain that there cannot be any logic in the argument that one is broadening the democracy when one appoints people instead of having them elected. Or is the method that we are seeking to imply something by means of a temporary measure? In this connection I want to link up with the words used in this clause. It reads: “Temporary representation of non-elected management bodies”.

Why is it temporary, Mr Chairman? Are we again dealing with a situation where that side of the House wants to create a specific impression by means of the legislation, at the stage when it is before the House, not only as regards hon members of this House but also as regards the public? When one looks at the legislation carefully, there is no measure which should be temporary, as is the case with this measure. If that side of the House is serious about the appointment of the nominated members, why not make it permanent? Why is this side of the House not being informed at this stage why it is temporary, and what is being planned for the future when it is no longer temporary? It is the standpoint of this side of the House that democracy is not being broadened by this, but that it does not exist at all. In the second place the broadening of the democracy can never be at issue. We are interested in the deepening of democracy and the full right of every people to self-determination.

I should like to dwell for a few moments on what the hon member for Vryheid said about this prior to the previous adjournment. I should like to quote what he said verbatim, and am asking that side of the House to sit back and listen to the words he used. He referred to the hon member for Pietersburg, who had spoken before him, and said that it was very far from what the hon member for Pietersburg had said, namely that the NP was contemplating a unitary state in South Africa.

On this occasion I should like to ask what the policy of that side of the House actually is. Is a unitary state being contemplated or not? [Interjections.] According to the hon member for Vryheid a unitary state is not being contemplated. I wonder whether the hon the Deputy Minister of Education cannot tell us what the standpoint of that side of the House is with regard to the question whether or not they are contemplating a unitary state. Are we not getting a reply from the hon the Deputy Minister of Education? [Interjections.]

You see, Mr Chairman, when I consider the official standpoint of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning in this connection, I read the following in a publication Reform and the Future, subtitled A collection compiled by the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning. Unfortunately it is not a paginated report …[Interjections.] …but it is nevertheless an official report, in which the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning said the following. [Interjections.] I know why there is so much noise on that side of the House, because hon members know what is coming. In this report the hon the Minister said: “We accept an undivided South Africa …”

Order! The hon member must come back to the Bill. He is digressing extensively from the Bill. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, may I address you on this and refer to the fact that the hon member for Vryheid mentioned the problem in connection with the unitary state.

Order! The hon member is digressing from the Bill too much. He must get back to the Bill.

Mr Chairman, I just want to make the point that the Bill deals with self-governing territories, and the question is if self-governing territories are created in the place of national units …

Order! To which clause is the hon member referring?

Mr Chairman, I shall refer you to the relevant clause. [Interjections.]

Order! I have put a question to the hon member, and he is in the process of replying to me politely. Hon members must lower their voices.

Mr Chairman, I am referring to clause 4 of the relevant Bill, which reads:

Then those units are discussed.

Directly below that it is provided that the section is being amended to nominate the self-governing territories. The question which arises here is whether these self-governing territories are autonomous or are going to become autonomous within the framework of the unitary state. That is the reason for the reference by the hon member for Ermelo to the unitary state. Other speakers also referred to this problem, and I therefore prepared myself to put this question. If that side of the House is serious about the creation of self-governing territories, how do they reconcile this with the fact that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning has said: We accept an undivided South Africa? Surely this is totally in conflict with what the hon member for Vryheid said, namely that a unitary state was not being contemplated.

I can continue, Sir, and refer you to clauses 6 and 7, which deal with the matter of citizenship and representation in this connection. In the same document …

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

I shall reply to a question if I have any time left at the end of my speech, Sir.

In this same document of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning the following appears:

Then reference is made to citizenship in the independent states of Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei, “which will be restored”. Now I am asking what the standpoint and policy of that side of the House is.

Order! No, clause 6 does not say a word about citizenship. The hon member must come back to the Bill and if he cannot do so, he must resume his seat. We cannot digress to this extent. Surely the hon member understands that.

Mr Chairman, I refer you to clauses 6 and 9. There is a reference to citizenship in both these clauses. The Bill was discussed quite a long time ago.

Order! I do not want to make things difficult for the hon member, but I do not see anything about citizenship in clause 6. Perhaps I have the wrong version here.

Clause 6 reads as follows:

Now my standpoint is that citizenship and the control of citizenship are at issue here, because reference is made here to citizens of a self-governing territory. It is the standpoint of this side of the House that if the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning says that the citizenship of Transkei and Venda, to mention two examples, is being taken away, this side of the House is obviously asking how one can have a self-governing territory when those people have been deprived of their citizenship. This is a totally illogical deduction. It indicates the anomalies in the policy of the governing party. We have now singled out two of them. In the first place, there is no relevant standpoint in connection with citizenship, because they are now being deprived of citizenship. In the second place we are working with a unitary state, and here we have legislation creating self-governing territories.

I should also like to refer to what the hon member for Umlazi said. He said:

We want to state specifically here that this side of the House is concerned about the goodwill of all population groups in South Africa. [Interjections.] But we are not concerned about a unitary state as mentioned by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning in the documentation and which differs from the interpretation of the hon member for Vryheid. [Interjections.]

Order!

I also want to refer to what the hon member for Umlazi said in this connection. He spoke about the CP and said:

The CP states unequivocally that certain facets of its policy are non-negotiable and in this debate in connection with constitutional legislation we are asking what is non-negotiable to that side of the House as regards the reform process. In this debate which deals with constitutional matters we have not yet received a reply to this.

As regards the hon member for Umlazi, in his contribution he asked whether it was still the standpoint of this Parliament that Zulus govern in KwaZulu. This in turn brings the entire problem of the KwaNatal Indaba into issue, because what is at issue in this Bill is a self-governing territory created for the Zulu national unit. If we consider the contradictions in this connection …

Order! The KwaNatal Indaba has nothing to do with this Bill. The hon member may proceed.

It is embodied in this Bill that as far as KwaZulu is concerned the national unit is no longer the point of departure but that the territory, viz KwaZulu, is being put in its place. Obviously the question is whether the KwaNatal Indaba is in conflict with what is going to be embodied in this legislation.

Order! I have instructed the hon member not to continue making his speech in this vein.

It is the standpoint of this side of the House that this legislation differs in an important respect from the previous point of departure of the Government and that we are moving away from national unity and are making the territory the point of departure. We cannot agree with that, because a territory cannot survive without the people living in it. This side of the House can therefore not support the legislation, because it is our standpoint that recognition must be given to a territory, but not separately from the people living in it.

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

Order! No, the hon member has already said that he will reply to questions at the end of his speech if there is any time left.

The realisation of the CP’s policy lies in the fact that our point of departure is not a unitary state, but an area which is linked to the people living in it.

I should like to move on to another facet. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I assume that there will be a speaker on the NP side who will reply to what the hon member for Losberg is saying. I am asking that he be afforded the opportunity to complete his speech.

Order! The hon member may proceed.

In his speech the hon member for Umlazi said that they gave this side of the House the right to realise its ideal of a separate national state. If this is the case, we should like to know what practical proposals the hon member for Umlazi has in this regard and whether he was really serious when he made that statement.