Mr. Speaker, I move—

INTRODUCTION

During the past financial year and, for that matter, also during the current financial year to date, the exceptional demand for Post Office services continued without any sign of easing-up. Particularly in the field of telecommunications, the demand continued to pose a challenge to the Department. A big increase in the calling rate caused further overloading of the telephone system in certain areas— particularly on the Witwatersnand—while the demand for new services was so high that the waiting list for new telephones unavoidably lengthened despite the provision of services at a markedly higher rate than at any time in the past.

The Department’s efforts to keep pace with the demand and to eliminate existing backlogs as soon as possible, are still being hampered by a shortage of trained staff, particularly on the technical side. Nevertheless, bigger programmes were carried out during the past financial year than in the preceding one. For this I convey my appreciation to the Post Office staff, who, under difficult circumstances, managed to meet the high demands made on them.

I should now like to give the House details of the more important aspects of the Post Office’s services in the past financial year, as well as a review of expectations for the present one.

THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1969-’70.

CAPITAL WORKS

Spending

A total of R88.39 million was spent on capital services. If the individual items of expenditure of R18.8 million for the purchase of the Durban Corporation’s telephone system, loan redemptions of R5.82 million which were not payable in 1968-’69. and other capital expenditure totalling R2.39 million on purchases which during 1968-’69 were still financed from revenue funds, are not taken into account, then the capital spending in 1969-’70 increased by R16.93 million over that for 1968-’69. In the main, this increased spending reflects the continuation of the Post Office’s planned stepping-up of its programme of expansion and modernization. The spending also represents the maximum expansion permitted by the available manpower, the capacity of the factories supplying telecommunications equipment to the Post Office, and other factors which physically determine the rate at which the programme can be carried out.

On the telecommunications system alone, R54.02 million was spent as against R38.9 million in 1968-’69.

Postal services

At the end of the financial year, new facing-up and stamp-cancelling machines, ordered to speed up the handling of mail and to save labour, were already in use in Johannesburg, Cape Town, Pretoria, Durban and Port Elizabeth. An amount of R853,000 was spent on these machines. The balance of the capital appropriated for postal services, namely R285,000, was spent on the purchase of postal vehicles.

Telephones

The total number of telephones in use (including extension telephones and other services) was 1,311,864 on 31st March, 1969, and 1,514,421 on 31st March, 1970—an increase of 202,557. This figure includes 116,674 telephones which existed in the South-West Africa and the Durban Corporation Telephone systems when these were taken over on 1st April, 1969. The balance of 85,883 telephones represents the nett increase resulting from the provision of services during the financial year.

A total of 237,740 applications for various kinds of telephone services were dealt with during the financial year, and 225,684 new services were provided. The number of services provided includes those that replaced services given up, and therefore does not as a whole reflect a nett increase in the number of telephones connected to the system. It does, however, show the extent of the Department’s work in providing services during the financial year. In its efforts to catch up, as soon as possible, with the backlog which has built up over a number of years, the Department in 1969-70 managed to provide 15,000 more services than in 1968-’69.

On 31st March, 1970, the number of deferred applications for telephone service came to 90,838. I told the House last year that I expected a further increase in the waiting list before the additional capacity being built into the system would be available for reducing the waiting list and later eliminating it. As I have explained before, it takes a long time to supply and install the additional automatic telephone exchanges and other facilities on which so much more capital is now being spent than in the past.

The demand for new telephone services keeps growing at a faster rate than expected earlier and, in addition, there has been an unprecedented increase in the use of the service during the past two years. This is a world-wide phenomenon. Unavoidably we have to build extra capacity into the system, not only to give service to waiting applicants but also, to a greater extent than previously expected, to relieve and avoid overloading of the system. There is no sense in concentrating on the provision of new services without increasing the carrying capacity of the system as a whole—such a course would only lead to the general deterioration of the existing service.

The waiting list is not a reliable indicator of the extent of any backlog in the telephone service. The carrying capacity of the system as a whole is a better yardstick by which to measure the backlog. The capacity of each of the various segments of the system, such as telephone exchanges, junction cables between exchanges and trunk routes between cities and towns, determines the traffic the system can handle and the quality of the service to its users. Additional investment in the system reflects its over-all growth and enlargement of its capacity, and I may mention here that the total investment in the system increased by more than 20 per cent during the past financial year.

Trunk line telephone service

During the financial year, good progress was also made with the further extension of the direct distant dialling system and the expansion of the microwave trunk system. The microwave system provides the large numbers of high-quality trunk lines which are essential for the direct distant dialling system and for carrying the growing volume of trunk traffic. The Johannesburg-Pretoria-Pietersburg microwave system, and an additional system between Johannesburg and Bloemfontein to serve as an alternative route, were put into operation last year.

Farm lines

7,409 applicants were given farm line telephone service, and the services of 1,155 farm line subscribers in five country exchange areas were converted to full automatic working.

Telegraph services

Automatic telegraph exchanges

The inland telegraph service has now been fully automated. There are 617 telegraph offices in the Republic and South-West Africa at present connected to the nine automatic telegraph exchanges. All these telegraph offices can dial one another direct for the fast and efficient transmission of telegrams.

Telex service

The demand for telex services keeps growing, and special steps had to be taken to get the apparatus needed to satisfy it. During the financial year 1969-’70, 1,046 new telex connections were provided—nearly twice as many as in 1968-’69. On 31st March, 1970, 5,312 services were in use.

Despite the faster provision of telex services, there was a waiting list of 317 applications at the end of July this year. Owing to an unexpected interruption in the delivery of tele-printers caused by production difficulties experienced by the suppliers in 1969, the demand for these services could not, unfortunately, be met. Some of the applications had to be deferred owing to a shortage of underground cable leads. Good progress is, however, being made with the provision of these facilities and the Department expects the position to improve considerably during the remainder of this financial year.

Building works

During 1969-’70, 22 large building services, costing R2.7 million, were completed. Eighty-eight houses were provided for the staff. The total spending on housing was R1,064,000.

THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1970-71

To ensure adequate extension of file telecommunications system, it will be necessary during the next number of years to spend considerably more on capital works than in the past. In addition to large expenditure on the purchase and installation of equipment to eliminate the backlog, particularly in the cities, considerable spending on modernization will be necessary. As country towns grow and the traffic increases, manual exchanges must be replaced by automatic exchanges. Apart from the fact that it becomes impossible, beyond a certain volume of traffic, to handle calls efficiently by means of manual switching, manual exchanges become quite uneconomical when they get too large.

I shall now deal with the more important activities of the present financial year.

Postal services

An amount of R115,600 is needed for installing facing-up and stamp-cancelling machines at Germiston, Bloemfontein and East London, and R445,000 for replacing and purchasing additional motor vehicles for use on postal services.

The Post Office is conducting a comprehensive investigation of mail traffic flow in the Republic and South-West Africa and into ways of improving the handling of mail matter. A particular aim is the modernization of the letter sorting process by making use of sophisticated equipment and scientific techniques. The investigation also covers the development of a suitable system for the coding of letters in order to facilitate the sorting process.

Telecommunications services

It is expected that R17.7 million more than in the previous financial year will be spent on telecommunications services, and that the number of telephones in use will increase to approximately 1,600,000 by 31st March, 1971.

Trunk line services

To keep pace with the demand for trunk calls, the existing trunk line network will have been extended by 2,250 new circuits by the end of the financial year. It is expected that the Bloemfontein-Kimberley, Johannesburg-Nelspruit and Johannesburg-Glen Harvie-Westonaria microwave systems will be put into service before November, 1970.

Direct distant dialling facilities from the Cape Town and Peninsula automatic exchange system to the other big cities in the Republic will be provided towards the end of this year. The facility will also be made available to subscribers in Stellenbosch, Somerset West and Worcester. Several other big manual exchanges due to be replaced by automatic exchanges this year, will also be provided with direct distant dialling facilities.

Farm line telephone services

In addition to the rebuilding and overhauling of farm lines, among other things, to render them suitable for automatic working, it is expected that about 5,000 new farm line services will be provided. The services of nearly 2,400 farm line subscribers in 18 country areas will be converted to automatic working, and a start will be made with the conversion of about 1,800 more farm line services in 12 country areas.

Telephone exchanges

Provision has been made for the extension of 153 existing manual exchanges by 16,750 additional subscribers’ lines in this financial year, and it is planned to replace eight large manual exchanges in the Republic and two in South-West Africa with automatic exchanges by the end of 1970. To give service to waiting applicants, 45 automatic exchanges will be extended by 36,930 additional lines during the financial year. The temporary automatic exchange of 540 lines at Isando will be replaced by a permanent new exchange with 3.531 lines. New automatic exchanges with more than 10,000 lines will be erected at seven centres, and 12 temporary automatic exchanges with a total of 4,570 lines will be installed.

Building works

Thus far, two major building works were completed this year, and it is expected that a further 37 major building projects will be completed during the remainder of the financial year. These include the J. G. Strijdom microwave tower in Hillbrow, Johannesburg, a training college for technical staff at Olifantsfontein, Transvaal, a stores depot at Koedoespoort, Pretoria, and the addition of a new wing to the General Post Office building in Johannesburg.

A further 15 building projects are under construction at a total cost of some R7.1 million. They include a mail sorting office in Bloemfontein, a new automatic telephone exchange building in Hillbrow, Johannesburg (second stage of the J. G. Strijdom tower), a new technical block and parcels depot in Windhoek, and a new radio transmission and receiving station at Walvis Bay.

In addition to the buildings at present being erected, work is expected to start on 37 new building services during 1970-’71. The most important of these is a new executive and administrative headquarters building in Pretoria. The present total estimated cost of these projects is R49.8 million.

Housing

Under the housing programme for this financial year, 136 housing units are to be provided. The expenditure will amount to R1.9 million, of which R300.000 is intended for housing in South-West Africa.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

International Telecommunications Services

The submarine cable between South Africa and Portugal has already been linked to various strategically important cables to Europe and the United Kingdom, and sufficient reserve capacity exists to meet South Africa’s requirements for a number of years. The cable will also be linked to other cables to North America and Europe this year.

The international radio stations near Pretoria have been modernized and adapted to serve as emergency aids in the event of interruptions to the submarine cable service, and also to meet the demand for service to those parts of the world not served by cable connections.

The first stage of the international automatic telex exchange in Pretoria is in operation, and semi-automatic working has been extended to a number of overseas countries. Facilities for full automatic working to South Africa via the submarine cable are available and are already being used by some countries. A similar outgoing service is planned for the financial year 1971-’72.

Since March this year, 13 additional telex channels and nine additional telegraph channels in the submarine cable were taken into use.

STAFF

Technical staff expected to complete their training this year and next year number 700 and 800 respectively. Further to meet the shortage of trained professional and technical staff, recruiting was undertaken in Europe and the United Kingdom last year. Thirty-seven candidates were recruited. A second and more comprehensive recruiting campaign is in progress overseas and it is expected that between 300 and 400 candidates will assume duty in South Africa during the course of the present financial year.

Maximum use is being made of temporary and female staff. To increase staff stability, it has also been decided to appoint deserving married women and certain temporary staff in permanent capacities.

Former officers who return to the Service are now paid the salaries they received at the time of resignation, plus adjustments related to salary increases which were introduced since they left. We believe that this concession will encourage more former officers to return to the Service.

Arrangements for making better use of the available staff and thereby increasing productivity are continuing. Incentive bonus schemes have been further extended and various other schemes resulting in appreciable savings are in operation. In one case, a saving of R385,000 a year has been brought about.

FINANCES

The operating revenue for the 1969-’70 financial year totalled R185.8 million, and the surplus brought forward from the previous financial year amounted to R14.5 million. Both these figures are higher than originally estimated, mainly on account of higher earnings by the telephone system resulting from the increased use made of it. Operating expenditure was R161.17 million in 1969-’70. This expenditure was also higher than previously estimated, mainly because of salary improvements last year. The gross operating surplus for 1969’70 was therefore R24.6 million—R7.4 million more than the estimate.

Revenue for 1970-’71 is expected to amount to R212.69 million and operating expenditure to R181.28 million, which will give an operating surplus of R31.41 million. On 31st March, 1970, the balance in the Post Office Fund stood at R18.44 million, which, owing to the additional revenue I have mentioned, was more than expected.

The total capital expenditure provided for in this budget is R93.65 million. Of this amount, R47 million will be defrayed from loan funds made available by the Treasury, and the remainder will be met from the operating surplus together with the balance which was available at the beginning of the financial year. An amount of R3.20 million will, it is expected, be carried forward to the next financial year as an opening balance.

TABLING

I now lay upon the Table—

I think most of us, in listening to the speech made by the hon. the Minister this afternoon, were to a greater or lesser extent disappointed at what he said. I would say it was less of a budget speech and more of a political funeral oration for that side. We had to listen to the sad tale of a Department and of a Minister that cannot keep pace with the expansion and growth of the country’s economy. I would remind you, Mr. Speaker, that when Dr. Dönges was Minister of Finance years ago, he gave every budget a name—for example, the baker budget, the tailor budget, etc. This budget of the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs deserves to be given a name from our side. I want to call it the “lobster budget”. You know, Mr. Speaker, that when a lobster wants to move forward, it must actually go backward. This is the case here with the Minister and his Department, because the more telephones the Minister gives us, the greater the shortage of telephones becomes; the larger the profits, the heavier the tariffs which he imposes on the country; the more his staff expands, the greater the shortage of staff becomes; the more broody the television commission becomes, the longer we have to wait for the television egg to hatch.

In order to emphasize this, I wish to move the following amendment—

1. (1) failed to arrest and reduce the growing telephone shortage and to provide efficient local services;
2. (2) increased tariffs out of proportion to the needs of a Post Office which must be run on business lines; and
3. (3) failed to take steps to expedite the advent of television by, inter alia, requesting the Commission of Inquiry into Matters relating to Television to submit an interim report”.

Before you continue, first tell us where Douglas Mitchell is to-day.

First of all, I want to express our very sincere admiration and appreciation to the courageous staff of 50,000 for the great service which they are rendering to South Africa under these extremely difficult circumstances. We thank all divisions; the administrative division, the clerical division, the technical division, the professional division, the general A and the large general B division, as well as the large number of general workers. We are now in the second year of the new structure of the Post Office. On the positive side there are the new posts structure and the new wage scales which have been drawn up. As far as these matters are concerned, we on this side of the House are prepared to adopt a waiting attitude and to wish the Post Office everything of the best. I only hope that, in view of the increasing cost of living, the hon. the Minister will not adopt a lackadaisical attitude when it comes to the interests of the Post Office staff.

However, there are also some negative things which we must mention in connection with the staff. The position is not that there is something wrong with the staff itself, of course, but that there is something wrong with the Minister and the Government. Firstly, I find it alarming that the heavy staff losses of the past are still continuing. Do you know, Mr. Speaker, that of a total staff of more than 50,000, there was a loss of no fewer than 38.0 over the past three years? Even if one takes into account those officials who have died, and those who have retired, and persons who are appointed for short periods, I still say that an average loss of 12,000 a year from a staff of approximately 52,000 is disconcerting. A second aspect which we also find alarming is that there has been no change in regard to the enormous number of overtime hours that have to be worked. According to the figures furnished to me by the Minister, 11.093.0 hours of overtime were worked last year—the highest figure ever. A third aspect causing concern is the shortage of staff that exists. From facts which have been furnished to this House, it appears that on 30th June, 1970, there were no fewer than 3,367 vacant posts in the six large divisions of the Post Office. This is an enormous number of vacancies. Of these 3,367 vacancies, 3,153 were in posts for Whites. There was a shortage of 609 trained technicians. Here we have a phenomenon in the Post Office which we have also seen on the Railways—that this Government is forced to fill posts previously held by Whites, by non-Whites.

Do you object to that?

At the moment 2,094 posts are filled by non-Whites, 1,068 of which are filled by Bantu. These posts were previously filled by non-Whites.

Are you concerned about that?

I am not in the least concerned about replying to that interjection. Our policy is very clear. By its maladministration this Government has placed the Post Office and the country before only two alternatives: either complete collapse, or the use, because of sheer necessity, of non-Whites in posts which were created for Whites. Of course I prefer the Post Office not to collapse. Of course I realize that under that Minister’s policy it is the only alternative which they can offer, whereas we have better alternatives than that. We say that if those services must be rendered by non-Whites, we are satisfied, but we want them to receive the necessary training for that purpose. From my experience with non-White postmen, I can Say that I am satisfied with their courtesy and service. In the third place we say that, whatever he does, he must recognize the staff associations in all fields in this regard. Fourthly, we have said to him, and we repeat, that no White must be forced out of a post simply to make way for a non-White.

Now the hon. the Minister will say to me: “But we are doing these things. It is our policy”. Yes, part of it is the policy of the United Party, which the Government has taken over after all these years. It was not their policy. I can recall the years when those hon. members were in opposition. I can speak about those years, because I know much more about them than many of the young members. I go back to the days when Dr. Piet van Nierop, the hon. member for Mossel Bay, sat in this House. At that time he was the Nationalist Party’s main speaker on postal affairs. On this particular day he had asked for the privilege of the half-hour and said the following in this House—

I am not mentioning this in order to criticize what the Government is doing to-day. I am mentioning it to show what a tremendous somersault there has been in regard to policy on that side of the House. Now we accept a part of that somersault.

You had a similar article in the Kruithoring the previous week.

I am very glad the hon. member mentioned that. He remembers it well and he also knows which newspaper that was. That newspaper propagated the official policy of his party, which is no longer mine.

I come to the next matter which is causing grave concern in our country, industries and economy, namely the tremendous increase in the shortage of telephone services in South Africa. It is alarming to see not only how that figure is rising, but especially the increased rate at which it is rising. In 1968— one can almost say the good years of 1968— the shortage was only 59,000. At that time there was another Minister of Posts, whom we regarded as the worst in South Africa. Today the hon. the Minister tells us that on 31st March the shortage was 90,838. Mr. Speaker, I have news for the hon. the Minister. He gave me the figure for 31st March, 1970, when the shortage was 90,000. I will now give him the figure for 30th June, i.e. three months later, when the shortage was not 90,000, but 98,000.

But I have already replied to you.

The hon. the Minister did reply to me, but why did he not mention it in his Budget Speech? I have more news. In June it was 98,000. Sir, do you know what the shortage is expected to be on 30th September, i.e. at the end of next month? The expected shortage is neither 90,000 nor 98,000. The expected shortage is 106,000! This is the most acute shortage there has ever been in the telephone system of South Africa. To-day no fewer than 114 exchanges in the Republic have been shut down completely. Not one new telephone can be accepted in those exchanges. At the end of 1966 it was only 41. To-day it is 114 already. I have a list of those 114 exchanges here.

It is the plan of the House of Assembly you have there.

Yes, in a moment the hon. member will see why. In Natal exchanges were shut down at places as far apart as Durban (Central) and Pietermaritzburg; in the Cape Province as far apart as Cape Town (Central) here in the west and Uitenhage, East London and Port Elizabeth in the east. Now we come to the Transvaal. In that province no fewer than 65 exchanges are shut down to-day. This is why I have the plan of the House of Assembly with me to-day. The names of the exchanges which have been shut down, sound like a list of dishonour of Nationalist Party members of the House of Assembly. The exchange at Vanderbijlpark has been shut down, as well as those at Boksburg, Ermelo, Krugersdorp, Randburg, Rustenburg and Vereeniging. Where is the Minister? The exchange at Klerksdorp, the constituency of the hon. the Minister of Justice, has been shut down. The exchange at Roodepoort, the constituency of the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development, has been shut down. The exchange at Alberton, the constituency of the Minister of Labour, has been shut down. The exchange of the member for Heidelberg has been shut down, as well as the exchanges at Springs, Potchefstroom and Rustenburg. Is this how they and their Government look after the interests of their constituencies? I hope that in the provincial election that lies ahead many of those hon. members will receive an answer to this blatant neglect of duty. I hope hon. members will agree with me when I say that we must admit that the public has reason to be upset. [Interjections.] I notice that the hon. member for Sunnyside does not agree with me. Let me read a quotation to him. The words in the quotation sound very much like those which I have just used. The quotation reads as follows (translation) —

Sir, do you know who said this? You will never guess. It was the hon. the Minister him self in an interview with Dagbreek en Landstem. I see he is nodding his head in affirmation. But behind him they are saying, contrary to his own point of view, that there is no reason to be upset. The hon. the Minister said that “a poor telephone service is one of the most frustrating difficulties to contend with”. They are being condemned by their own Minister. I have another quotation here which was written by a good journalist. This is a lady, however, who is sometimes a rather caustic journalist. She writes for Dagbreek en Landstem, one of the official newspapers of that side of the House. This journalist is a certain Mrs. Joyce Waring. Fortunately we received this article in time, because it appeared in yesterday’s edition. She wrote (translation) —

It is not only the acute and fantastic shortage we have to-day that is undermining our economy and restricting our growth rate. The poor quality of the service itself is equally important. The hon. the Minister can come along here and refer to the capital shortages of the past. He can throw up his hands and shout: “Mea culpa, mea culpa!", but this contributes nothing towards solving this major problem of the poor services. I have already written down 22 different things which can go wrong when one picks up a telephone. Hon. members could probably mention many more to me. Let me give one example. I wonder if this hon. House will realize the significance of these figures. We all know that at all the telephone exchanges subscribers every day report cases of telephones which are out of order. Do you know, Sir, how many cases of telephones which were out of order have been reported in a single year on the Witwatersrand? Not 10,000 not 50,000 not 100,000 not half a million, but more than 1½ million. There were more than 1½ million cases of people either picking up their telephones or going to their neighbours and complaining: “My telephone is out of order”. Is it any wonder that in their frustration people resort to various other means such as using their motor-cars more than the telephone, sending telegrams, obtaining a telephone in an exchange in which it is easier to get through than in the exchange in the area in which they live? There is even one classic case in which a certain manager of a business concern could not get in touch by telephone with one of his directors who was a few miles away. He then telephoned his head office in Germany and asked them please to telephone the man here.

Sir, we have had promises that, if the tariffs are increased, we will receive better telephone services and more telephones. I still remember what the hon. the Minister’s predecessor said in September, 1966. He was speaking on behalf of the entire Cabinet—no matter what they did to him afterwards—when he said in a broadcast of the S.A.B.C.—

This is what the Minister’s predecessor said on 5th September, 1966, and to-day, four years later, we would have had all the telephones we need. This is what happens to promises from that side.

Mr. Speaker, I come to another point in our amendment. It deals with the vicious increase in tariffs which was announced so suddenly. Let us mention a few examples. In the case of printed matter, such as ordinary accounts and the pamphlets which those hon. members are going to issue in the next election, the tariff used to be one cent per two ounces, less 25 per cent for bulk posting. The cost was therefore three quarters of a cent per letter, pamphlet or item of printed matter. Today it costs 2¼ cents, and only 10 per cent can be deducted for bulk posting. Whereas it used to cost R7.50 per 1,000 letters, it costs R22.50 for 1,000 to-day. This constitutes an increase in tariffs of 300 per cent. Has there ever been an increase of 300 per cent in any other country. I can mention examples of 100 per cent increases, but this increase was 300 per cent. This tremendous increase affects large as well as small firms and undertakings. For example, I think of large oil companies, large banks and large publishing companies. Some of these concerns send out between 100,000 and 1 million items a month, and they are now hit by a 300 per cent increase in their postal tariffs. The postal accounts of some of these companies will be increased by R10,000 to R15,000 per month in future. [Interjection.]

Yes, the Minister is going to make millions. I think of small organizations. I think of countless publications of organizations, such as those of trade unions, church societies, etc., which have a circulation of between 500 and 1,000 a month. The postal accounts of these organizations will now be increased by 400-500 per cent as a result of these tariff increases. Only to-day I received a message from the editress of a missionary publication. She complained about this and pointed out that that missionary publication would have to close down as a result of this increase in tariffs. There is one thing which I feel compelled to do: I want to ask the hon. the Minister to be so kind as to consider the following matter. In the case of large companies which have to send out hundreds of thousands of articles every month and sometimes every week, when they sort out those postal articles according to the zones of the Post Office, as is done in the case of the newspapers, will he not consider not applying those increases in such cases? It is a reasonable request. Those companies are already paying more than the ordinary newspapers. It is a reasonable request, because in this way the Post Office will also be saved time and money.

There is another serious matter which I want to bring to the attention of the Minister. I hope he will reply to it. I want to know why he did not give sufficient warning to commerce and industry that he was going to increase these tariffs. I am saying this as a result of a specific, explicit promise which he made. I have that promise here and I am going to read it to this House this afternoon. When the hon. the Minister delivered the official address at the opening of the Assocom congress in October last year, the big congress attended by representatives of all business undertakings in the country, he said the following—

Then he added the following—

Where is that “timeous” warning in this case? A maximum of seven days’ warning was given to the majority of these large undertakings. Some of them must send out hundreds and thousands of these articles; some articles are in colour and millions of them are printed. These articles are compiled from three to six months before the time, and must sometimes be obtained from overseas. In spite of this, the hon. the Minister gave a short notice of a week or 14 days without the timeous warning which he promised at the Assocom congress. The result is that he imposed unnecessary burdens of hundreds and thousands of rands on these companies. If I have quoted the hon. the Minister wrongly in any way, he must tell me.

I cannot go into the details of all the other tariff increases, tariff increases which affect the ordinary telephone subscribers very severely. To think that a personal call now costs double what it cost in the past! In the past one could have a telephone transferred from one house to another for R3. but what does it cost today? R20! Then the hon. the Minister comes along here and tells us that he has a gross surplus of R24 million as compared with R14 million or R15 million in the previous year. He is therefore making more money, but he is still asking for more money and he wants to load even greater burdens on us.

A gross surplus is not a net surplus.

The depreciation costs can be deducted from that gross surplus; just as much as you like, but the surplus still remains larger than that of the previous year. Why, if the surplus is larger, must you increase the tariffs further?

I just want to say a few words about the last part of my amendment, namely about the broody Television Commission. That commission was appointed on 3rd December last year. I do not know whether that was during a holiday period or not, but it took two months before they met for the first time on 10th February this year. In the eight months since their appointment, they have held only five meetings. These gentlemen of the commission have a tremendous amount of time, but they grant no time to the 125 church organizations, cultural organizations, commerce, industry and all the huge organizations which were asked to submit written evidence. Oh no, they allowed only the short period of three to four weeks for these organizations to send in their replies to their inquiries. Of course, in the meantime we find that the Chairman and the Secretary are travelling jovially around the world, vi siting places such as Ireland, New Zealand, Canada, Japan and Germany in order to look at television. However, it does not seem to me that one of them visited Switzerland, which has a service in three languages, and it would be of great use for us to know how it is run. In the meantime, nobody may know what the commission’s questionnaire contains. Probably nobody will know either what is contained in the replies before we receive the report. We do not even know if it will be made known then. In the meanwhile the dramatic journey to the moon has taken place, there have been the two great test matches which our country and our people could have seen, but could not see as a result of the tremendous delay on the part of this Government. This Minister is the Minister of Try and Fail. I shall give him time until the Third Reading to tell us that, although he cannot give us the details of a television system, he can announce that television is in fact coming. I am asking the hon. the Minister to tell us. Is television coming, yes or no?

I shall reply to the hon. member.

If the hon. the Minister did that, it would be great news. As far as this Government is concerned, the nation’s patience is becoming exhausted. Our economy is losing millions of rands, our growth rate is being restricted, and now I want to know:

Is this an efficient Government, which we dare keep in power any longer? Are they efficient? Reach out only two feet to the nearest telephone, pick it up and one out of five times you will have proof of how inefficient this Government is. Do you know, Sir, that if one out of ten of all telephone calls which subscribers put through in a year is put through to a wrong number, or the line becomes crossed, the ordinary subscriber loses R6 million a year. They have to pay for those wrong telephone calls. This is an example of this Government’s so-called efficiency. If there is one message that the people of South Africa want to convey to this hon. Minister it is the following: The people are doing it in writing, orally, over the telephone, by telegram, by telex messages and on closed circuit television. That message is: “This Minister and this Government are incompetent. You are obsolete. You are politically senile and politically decrepit. Please take your walking sticks and your crutches and hobble out of the Road of South Africa.”

Mr. Speaker, it is customary for us, and specifically for me, to follow the hon. member for Orange Grove up in this particular debate. It is indeed a pleasant task, because there is so much to reply to that one does not know where to begin and where to end.

The hon. member for Orange Grove began his speech by referring to the political funeral of the National Party. I cannot understand how the hon. member could make such an allegation. We have just had a general election, and there the United Party lies buried with so small an increase to its membership that it is not even worth mentioning. They have, in fact, only got back the crumbs they lost years ago. I think that if the hon. member really wants to attend funerals he could begin making arrangements to attend the final funeral ceremony of that party in the near future. The past debates have proved irrefutably that the hour has struck for the United Party. I shall refer to this again in the course of my speech. The hon. member said that this was a “Lobster budget”, that it was a backward-moving budget. This immediately indicates to me that the hon. member prepared his speech before the hon. the Minister had delivered his Budget speech; otherwise he would have altered his choice of words slightly. The hon. member complained about the tremendous increase in tariffs. The hon. member also mentioned it in his amendment, but now that we have listened to the hon. the Minister’s Budget speech it is very clear to us that the hon. member did not know what would appear there. With reference to a crab-like speech I just want to say that I accept it as such, because his lobster-like speech was a crablike speech. It was a speech that no South African could eat or digest. One could expect that a United Party speaker would regard this debate, and any debate that is beneficial to the voters, that has substance and is good for South Africa, as a “lobster budget”. The hon. member complained about the tremendous increase in tariffs, and I shall make one or two references to that. I have here the United Party’s yellow booklet, or is it tangerine like the uniforms of our air hostesses? Nevertheless, the contents of this leaflet are much poorer in quality than the material of the tangerine uniforms of our air hostesses. In this booklet the United Party, in their big effort to come into power in the recent election, made a few statements. The publication is called “You want it? We have it!” Well now, “They have had it”! I quote:

The telephone backlog.

The United Party will work to eliminate the backlog in the supply of telephones by:

1. (1) Making more capital available for this purpose.

I should now like to ask the hon. member who is going to follow me up: Where are they going to find that capital? The hon. member has now just criticized tariff increases. In addition they envisage “removing unnecessary restrictions”. In other words, they want to remove import restrictions. Is that not going to need a tremendous amount of extra capital as well? Where are they going to get it? After all, they are opposed to tariff increases. I quote further:

Where are they going to get the capital for that? Here are three simple questions, and they cannot tell me of a single source where capital could be found. I challenge the United Party to tell me of a single source where capital could be obtained in order to carry out these promises which they presented to the voters.

But, Sir, I said that the hon. member had written out his speech even before the Budget speech had been delivered. Permit me now to express a few additional thoughts about the matter.

[Inaudible.]

The hon. member must keep quiet. He has already spoken. The hon. member for Simonstown will probably enter the debate in a short while. I hope so, because in the previous two debates he always followed me up. In Hansard, volume 28, column 521, the hon. member for Simonstown said:

That is those people—

It would be the first time in history that an Opposition with such small numbers at its disposal could introduce legislation and lay down policy. After all, that is impossible. It shows that these members of the United Party already began to make promises at that stage, before the election. They went no further than promises. But, by your leave. Sir, the majority of the South African voters are not dung-beetles in the wake of a tractor. There is only one way for the hon. member to be placed in a position where he could implement policy, and that is to cross over to the Government side. But then he will first have to get permission, because we will not simply take anyone. But what happened that the hon. member could not keep his promise after 22nd April? It is so characteristic of the United Party that they make promises left and right and cannot fulfil them. I want to submit that as the shadow minister of the Opposition he is unfortunately still in the shadows. If they obtain an additional ten seats every five years it would take them precisely 110 years to take over the government. There are many voters who had begun to believe these promises of the United Party. They even said that the Opposition should be strengthened so that it could act more forcefully here. In the previous debates, and also in this one—I refer particularly to the previous speaker—it came to light very clearly that we do not need a stronger Opposition, because they are completely incapable of doing anything of value. Their criticism has always been negative and unconstructive. I want to submit here that they do not avail themselves of their democratic right to come forward with constructive arguments in this democratic Parliament of ours, with the result that their presence in Parliament is of no value to anyone. In no single Posts and Telegraphs debate, nor in this debate, did the hon. member for Orange Grove attempt to suggest any feasible plans. That is why my statement that they act negatively is not devoid of truth, but is, in fact, well-founded. Mr. Speaker, in the few moments I still have at my disposal allow me to express a few thoughts here about the matter of postal tariff increases. These postal tariff increases are justified, in my opinion, for the following reasons: There have been no postal tariff increases since 1952. Notwithstanding backlogs the National Party Government did not increase the tariffs. Since 1965 losses have been suffered annually on postal services. I just want to mention a few figures in this connection: In 1965-’66 the loss was, in round figures, R81,000; in 1967-’68 it was R1,695,000, and in 1969-’70 it was already R12,675,000. Those are the losses suffered on the service, and notwithstanding these losses the National Party Government did not see fit to increase the tariffs. But now that the losses are increasing even further, and are already in excess of R12 million, it has become an urgent necessity to increase the tariffs. The annual revenue from these tariff increases is going to be a mere R4.486 million. Compare this with the previous year’s shortage of R12 million and then you will agree with me that it is not nearly enough to eliminate the shortage.

Notwithstanding the fact that since it obtained its independence the Post Office has been administered as a business undertaking —and this Budget substantiates this statement of mine—the National Party Government kept is tariffs low and furnished the necessary services, notwithstanding the shortages. I should also like to compare these tariff increases with the tariffs applicable overseas. I just briefly want to mention a few. Take the surface mail tariff for ordinary letters. In South Africa the tariff is now 2½ cents for the first ounce and 1 cent for each additional ounce. In Australia it is 4 cents for the first ounce, and then 3.20 cents per ounce up to four ounces. In Canada the tariff is 3.30 cents. What justification does that hon. member have for his allegation that the National Party Government, the hon. the Minister and his staff, are unfair and that our tariffs are unreasonable and too high? Here is a comparison between the tariffs in other countries and in South Africa. Take the airmail tariff. In South Africa it is 3 cents for the first ounce and H cents for each additional ounce. That is the tariff applicable to-day. In Australia it is 2.40 cents per ounce, irrespective of the weight. In Canada it is 3.3 cents per ounce up to eight ounces, and from nine ounces it is 21.79 cents. Therefore, how reasonable are not these South African stiff increases? In the United Kingdom—and see how the blood rushes through the veins of hon. members on that side when I refer to the United Kingdom …

But, after all, you are satisfied with them.

Sir, I did not refer to Heath. In the United Kingdom the surface mail tariff for up to four ounces is 3.5 cents. [Interjections.] If that hon. member would listen to me he would perhaps learn something. Up to six ounces the tariff is 6.42 cents. When looking at the airmail tariffs we find the same position: In Britain the airmail tariff is 5.71 cents per ounce up to eight ounces. In South Africa the tariffs are therefore much lower. Take the local surface mail tariff, i.e. the second-class post. Mr. Speaker, you will find in Hansard that in the debate about the Post Office gaining its independence I have already referred to this second-class post that fills our postboxes and occupies the time of our officials. I am glad that the hon. the Minister and his staff also increased the tariffs on this portion of the mail matter. But in South Africa it is still 2 cents for one ounce, and from one ounce to four ounces it is 2½ cents. As far as airmail is concerned, for the same second-class mail matter, it is 2½ cents for the first ounce and 1 cent for an additional ounce. But what is the position, for example, in Australia? There it is 4 cents for the first two ounces, much higher than in South Africa, and the airmail tariff for this second-class mail matter is 6.4 cents for the first two ounces. How reasonable are the hon. the Minister and the Department of Posts to do this mass of work at these low tariffs! South Africa’s tariffs are in many cases lower, and compare very favourably with those of overseas countries, since these tariffs have already been applicable for years.

I now come to another point. There were complaints here again about the telephone shortages. This Budget shows what a fantastically great effort the Minister, the Postmaster-General, the senior officials and the staff made in recent years to deal with these shortages. and to approach the final goal of eliminating those shortages, if possible, as previously stated. Here in his Budget speech the hon. the Minister mentioned that there was a net increase of 85,883 in one year, and notwithstanding that increase there is still an additional shortage of 15,000. I call it an additional shortage of 15,000 because it exceeded the already great shortage by that amount. It is easy to apply for a telephone service. It is only a question of a few minutes and the form is filled in, but to supply that telephone service is not so easy. Supplies, material, etc., must be purchased beforehand; planning must be done: the technicians must come and do this work, and there is also a shortage of technicians. The Minister pointed out that an effort is being made to supplement the shortage of staff. Is it then not absolutely unreasonable and almost inhuman, for someone who wants to serve this country of ours, to come along with criticism about such a meritorious effort that is being made? But is this the first time there have been telephone shortages? No, from Hansard I can prove to you that in 1951, when the National Party had only been in power for three years, it inherited a shortage of 102,000 telephones from the previous United Party Minister of Posts and Telegraphs. Sir, compare the present-day conditions. Compare the growth rate and the demand for telephones in those years with the present-day growth rate and demand. The demand and the growth have increased hundreds and thousands of per cent since the National Party came into power. That is why this figure of 102,000 is, in my opinion, comparable to ten times the present backlog, and then these members still come along and speak of retrogression.

I should also like to say a few words about our telephone services, the installation costs, etc., and the increases that have now been mentioned here. The annual rental for an exchange line is R18, or R12 for a shared service line. What is the position in England? In England, where these amounts have been applicable for a long time, the amount is R42.86 for services within a radius of three miles. Compare this with these tariffs that have now been made applicable here. I mentioned that the rental in South Africa is R18 for an exchange line, In Britain a business connection costs R41.16, and for an ordinary home service the amount is R34.28. Just give me South Africa with its Minister of Posts and Telegraphs and his officials and I am completely happy. Keep those jewels you love so much for yourselves. In this case the tariffs can also be compared favourably.

I want to conclude by saying that the hon. the Minister’s Budget testifies to a resolute desire to make a success of the Post Office, which recently obtained independent status and which is being run as a business undertaking, and in my opinion the hon. the Minister and his officials are making rapid strides in that direction. They kept the tariffs as low as possible and they tried to provide whatever could possibly be provided. I conclude toy quoting a paragraph from the Postmaster-General’s Report for the year ending 31st March, 1969—

All members of the staff are warmly thanked for their excellent services, often under trying circumstances. The zeal and full support of the staff could always be relied upon to meet the exacting and new demands being made upon them as a result of the sustained expansion of the activities of the Department.

Here we have a testimonial to the hon. the Minister, and I as a humble member of this House want to endorse every single word of that with a word of thanks to the Minister and to every member or the Post Office, as well as to the S.A.B.C., which does a wonderful job, even though it has to broadcast rugby matches where blood flows.

Since the last Post Office Budget we on this side of the House have increased our representation here by nine, and I think the public of South Africa is pleased about it. But they would have been even more pleased had the hon. the Minister been able to increase the telephone services by a like number. The hon. member for Harrismith tried to justify the imposition of higher tariffs and referred to a speech of mine in this House last year during the Post Office Budget, a speech in which I set out in broad principle the policy for which we on this side of the House stood. That is in marked contradistinction to the policy as regards tariffs for which the other side of the House stand. For example, we say that tariffs would only be increased as a result of the recognized financial measures approved by Parliament, i.e. postal service tariffs and telecommunication service tariffs. But we do not find this is the Government’s attitude. What we have from the Government is a statement by the Minister to the effect that it has been decided to increase tariffs.

The hon. member for Harrismith also referred to postal rates elsewhere in the world. I think he is following a set speech because I have heard similar references by him in the debate on Postal Affairs for the past two or three years. I think it is time that he revises that speech so as to make it more interesting for the Budget debate next year. Here I should like to mention that the hon. member has had two or three opportunities to prepare the same speech whereas the hon. member for Orange Grove is forced, under the rules of the House, to reply to the Minister’s Budget speech without having seen it at all. As you know, Mr. Speaker, after the Minister of Transport delivers his Budget speech, the debate is adjourned for a day or two. Then only does the real debate start. That means that the chief Opposition speaker on railway matters is given a reasonable opportunity to prepare his speech on the Budget of the Minister. The same applies to the Budget speech of the Minister of Finance. That too is usually followed by a break and the chief Opposition speaker on Finance has a couple of days to study the speech and collect the necessary material in order to be able to answer the Minister’s Budget Speech in some detail. But for the Post Office Budget, the Minister hands to the Opposition speaker a copy of his speech in the course of his speech only, putting the hon. member for Orange Grove at a considerable disadvantage in that he has to reply immediately, without having had an opportunity to consider the Budget proposals in detail. Therefore it is difficult for him to come forward with specific proposals; even more so to frame the terms of our amendment because we do not know what the Minister’s Budget Speech contains until after the Minister has delivered it. In the circumstances, it can be said to the credit of the hon. member for Orange Grove that year after year he acquits himself well of his task and comes with such devastating criticism. as he has again done to-day, of the activities of the Minister and his Department.

While the occasion is still fresh in our minds, I should like to pay a public tribute to those postal officials who took part in their official capacities in the last general election. They assisted us enormously with postal votes and telegraphic services. This applies to this side of the House no less than to the Government side. I think it is time that this House records its deep appreciation for the part played by the postal services in a general election in South Africa.

We also welcome some of the proposals contained in the Minister’s Budget Speech. We particularly welcome the fact that married women are now being appointed to permanent posts, and we welcome concessions that are being made to former staff of the Post Office, those who have left the service, to enable them to come back. Nevertheless, it is disturbing to us to see that there is a personnel loss of about 12,000 per annum, and, as the hon. member for Orange Grove pointed out, that about 11 million hours overtime has to be worked each year. These are problems the Minister and his Department have to face. I want to ask him whether it is the policy of the Government to introduce a five-day working week. There has been mention of it in various journals issued by the postal department and staff associations. Therefore, I should like to know what the Minister’s attitude to such a proposal is. Is it the policy of his side of the House to introduce a five-day week to get him and his Department out of the difficulties in which they find themselves at the moment?

The Department has had a very busy year. The volume of mail handled has increased considerably. We welcome the methods advocated and in some instances already put into effect to speed up services to the public. We think particularly of letter sorting machines which, I believe, is still in their experimental stage in Pretoria. We think of the facer/canceller machine and the stamp vending machines which seem to have been a great success and as such welcomed. I notice that mention is made in the Postmaster-General’s report of power-driven cycles in Johannesburg and Pretoria for postal deliveries. Is it the Minister’s policy to expand that service also to the other major cities of the Republic?

As regard telecommunications, we have seen a notable achievement during the past year on the part of the Department, i.e. the laying of the overseas submarine cable.

But while that has been a notable achievement, the number of telephones provided in South Africa has only been increased by 5.5 per cent, or 72,659. The telephone shortage at the end of March, 1969, was 79,545. The more recent figure for this year of 98,612 was quoted in this House this afternoon by the hon. member for Orange Grove.

In the Postmaster-General’s report concerning telecommunication, and more particularly concerning telephones, it is stated that steps are being taken to eliminate the backlog in the shortest possible time and to make more adequate provision for the future. This is a very laudible sentiment, but I should like to have from the Minister some specific details of the steps he is taking to carry this out. I think that we are entitled in this House to know what progress he can report on the steps that he is to take. We have had explanations. We have had excuses and we have had the apportionment of blame by this hon. Minister on his predecessor. We have had fresh plans but the fact remains that the people of South Africa are just not getting the telephones. In all the major urban complexes of South Africa, there is a crying shortage of telephones. The time has come for less talk and more action from the hon. the Minister and his Department in the provision of telephones.

In the days of the former Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, we criticized him for the lack of telephones, and the growing list of applications for telephones. The reasons that he gave for telephone shortages were first of all a shortage of capital, then a shortage of exchanges and thirdly he complained that the profits were paid to the Consolidated Revenue Fund instead of being ploughed back into the Post Office. The latter reason is of course no excuse, because the profits are now being ploughed back into the Post Office. I think it is fair to say that there is still a shortage of exchanges. In fact, as my friend the hon. member for Orange Grove has said, some of the exchanges have completely closed down. There should however not be a shortage of capital. After all, when the former Minister of Posts and Telegraphs increased the tariff on local telephone calls by one cent per call, he anticipated R10 million to R14 million in revenue. At that time he said—

That was approximately five years ago. Since then we have had a new Minister, a new broom that was going to sweep so clean, a Minister who is verlig especially when it comes to Press relations. He has a first-class relationship with the Press. From the time of his assumption of office he has on a number of occasions made statements to the Press about what he was going to do. On 25th July, 1968, he said, for example—

The headline to that report in the paper read: “Buite hulp ingeroep”. Shortly thereafter, in October, under the heading “Suid-Afrika se telefoondiens word verbeter”, he is reported to have said—

Mr. Speaker, let us skip one year. Let us come to the celebrated interview of the hon. the Minister with Mr. Thys Human of Dagbreek. Mr. Thys Human appears to me to have become an apologist for the failures of most Ministers, if we are to judge by recent interviews he has given to other Ministers. On this particular occasion he had an interview consisting of questions to and answers by the hon. the Minister. The report is headed: “Meer mense is die pil vir die Poskantoor pyne”. If you look a little further into this question-and-answer interview, there seem to be a number of other problems. For example—

And then there is a further problem given as a reason for the bad telephone service, namely—

But, Mr. Speaker, there has been a more recent reason, one that was not quoted by my hon. friend, the member for Orange Grove. This reason was advanced by the wife of the hon. Minister of Sport in her article on Sunday. She said this—

Meaning the leaders of course—

I believe that is a shocking thing to say about the hardworking staff of the postal services in South Africa, more particularly when it comes from a Minister’s wife.

What are the further reasons given by the Minister for the delay in providing adequate telephone services? He pleads in his interview for more time, more patience and more understanding, because he says it takes years to train technicians, years to develop new exchanges and years to build extensive cable works. The Nationalist Party has been in power for 22 years in which it could have done all of these things. But in his interview he says: “Ons pomp miljoene rande in.” Factories are working night and day. Private enterprise is being used. We have even sent another team overseas to recruit technicians. Naturally we wish that team the greatest possible success. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs of the Republic did not, however, begin with the assumption of office of this particular Minister. He had a number of predecessors and those predecessors and the governing side sitting opposite us must share full responsibility for the appalling situation in which we find ourselves to-day in respect of telephone services. *

Mr. Speaker, as an ex-Post Office official I am bitterly disappointed in the hon. members of the Opposition who harp on the same old theme every year. I feel very sorry for my ex-colleagues who have to sit and listen to this nagging about telephone shortages and so on, while those hon. members, with their tongues in their cheeks, say thank you very much for the good work the staff has now done. The only man to be blamed is the hon. the Minister who did not do his job.

I have had experience of a United Party administration of the Post Office. As an exPost Office official under their administration I want to say that I can make a very good evaluation of the hypocrisy of their thanks to the staff.

Order! The hon. member is going very far in using the word “hypocrisy”.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw that word. I have had experience of their administration. Their Minister at the time was a Senator. He could not even capture a seat in the House of Assembly. His Department discriminated. In those days Afrikaans never came into its own. To-day I can say with a great deal of gratitude that, in the Post Office, that old United Party practice is no longer adhered to. It is the first practice we corrected, so that we do not discriminate against a person on the basis of his language or the political party he may support. The hon. member for Orange Grove, who is the Opposition’s main speaker on these matters, knows all about that. Prior to 1948 he wrote bitter reports in the Kruithoring. He was one of the people who converted the 1948 United Party administration into the golden National administration. As far as the hon. member for Orange Grove is concerned, it is such a pity that he is such a negative kind of person that he always wants to be in the Opposition. It suited him very well at the time to discredit and to criticize. When the opportunity arose for him to come along and to help build and do constructive work, what did he do then? Then he went to join the Opposition, because it then suited him so well. He is still the same to-day. If one listens to his speeches year after year, one finds that they contain only completely negative aspects, with not a single suggestion of how a United Party Government could help to solve the problems with which the Post Office is faced. He does not come forward with a single positive thought. There are always just complaints. He exaggerates many of the complaints by using fine-sounding and colourful words. But I leave that hon. member at that.

The Post Office is a business undertaking. The primary requirement in a business undertaking is that it should be a success. If one looks at the financial report with its financial statements, such as the balance sheet and the results of working of the Post Office for the year ending on 31st March, 1969, and one judges it as a businessman ought to judge a business undertaking, one comes to the conclusion that the Post Office did its duty in full in respect of a very important requirement. I want to express here, in passing, my great appreciation for the professional way in which these statements were presented to the House of Assembly. It is really a pleasure to see them. All the data one could possibly imagine is there. On that date the Post Office had a capital of R262 million. I am not speaking in terms of rands and cents now. I am only speaking in round figures to indicate how many millions of rand the Post Office had available. Of that amount, R202 million was invested in telecommunications equipment. Seventy-seven per cent of its total capital is in telecommunications equipment. For me that is now the answer. One does not speak about a shortage of so many thousand or so many hundred thousand telephones. One ought to look at the way in which an undertaking spends its money to provide for the needs that exist. Only 12 per cent, or R31 million, is invested in buildings. I leave this matter at that. I do not want to go into too much detail.

On the other side, the liabilities side, we find that contributions for capital works from revenue amounted to R31 million, i.e. 12 per cent, and we therefore find that the Post Office succeeded in financing capital works from revenue. Is this not a wonderful achievement? That answers the hon. member for Simonstown, who pointed out that the Government had said that the Post Office was going to apply that additional revenue to supply capital goods, in order to provide for the increased needs of the public. I could continue in this vein. The capital account increased by 17½ per cent in one year. Is that not an exceptional achievement, in a country where we have a growth rate of 5 per cent to 5½ per cent? It is a wonderful achievement. I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister on it, and in referring to him I include his entire staff, who gave him the utmost support in these matters. They did their level best to keep that promise and to provide for the needs of the South African public.

The Post Office is doing tremendous work. In my day the persons who stood behind the main counters were old and experienced greybeards. To-day they are in many cases young and attractive women. I want to welcome that tendency most heartily, because the Post Office is a service organization. In the course of that service it must also make use of the labour at its disposal. I can tell the women of South Africa that the Post Office offers them an excellent career. The activities of the Post Office are of a tremendously comprehensive nature. Staff members come into contact with the public every day, whether across the counter, over the telephone or by telegraph. They can be of great value to the Minister and his Department by entering the service of the Post Office in larger numbers. I myself have had experience there.

I now come to the labour shortage in South Africa, and hon. members will know that it is a general one. The Post Office must compete with other employers. It succeeds very well in doing so. However, there is one aspect that we perhaps lose sight of sometimes, i.e. that the Post Office trains many people for the private sector. After persons have received a proper training in the Post Office, in whatever branch, whether as technicians, telegraphists or telephone operators, they are enticed away by the private undertakings because of higher salaries offered to them. In that respect the Post Office is also furnishing a service to South Africa because it must, to its own detriment, hand over properly trained staff to the private sector, where they then do good work. You know, Mr. Speaker they even trained someone for Parliament. Now you can imagine how thorough their training is! In conclusion, in speaking of the Post Office as a service organization, I want to tell the hon. member for Orange Grove an annecdote, which it would be well for him to take to heart. Since the Post Office is a business undertaking, I want to tell the hon. member the annecdote of a member of a co-operative society who attended the annual general meeting of the society each year. One particular year the board of directors of that co-operative society decided to place a certain amount of the profits they made in reserve.

For the sake of argument, let us say the amount was R100,000, while the cash in the bank was only R50,000. Then the good old farmer said to the Chairman: “You took R100,000 of the profits we made, put it aside and placed it in reserve, but you do not have it in cash in the bank. Where is the money then?” They then told him that some of the money was in the bank, some was locked up and some had been invested in vehicles and buildings, and that he could accept the assurance that there was, in fact, money. They following year there was a vacancy on the board of directors. Then there were other members of the co-operative, like the hon. member for Simonstown, for example, and they suggested the old man should fill that vacancy. The old man was then elected as a member of the board of directors. In his speech thanking the members who had elected him, he said: “Fellows, I assure you that I am going to look for that amount of R100,000 and that I shall find it. Next year when I come along to deliver my report I shall tell you where that money is.” The following year came along and the reserve fund was increased further, but that money was not in the bank. Then the members who had elected the old man to the directorship said: “Sir, you told us you were going to look for that money. Where is it?” He then said: “Friends, I looked for it, but I did not find it. I can assure that it is there. It is like a calf mooing in the bush: you know it is there, but you cannot find it.” The hon. member may take that to heart.

Then I just want to address one more message to the hon. member. I saw that this little story brought a smile to his face. The Post Office is a friendly organization, and I want to ask him to see it in that light as well. By friendliness one can achieve much more than by the sour, sombre way in which he wants to build up his political career, i.e. on the inconvenience of people who, as a result of circumstances beyond the control of any normal person do not have a telephone they could use.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who has just sat down has stated that the Post Office undertaking is purely a business undertaking and one must view it purely from a business aspect. However, he omitted to inform us of one point and that is that it is an undertaking by the State on behalf of the citizens which is run on business lines. That is the objective of the change-over which has taken place. It is not a business undertaking which operates in order to make larger and larger profits so that it can pay larger dividends to its shareholders, neither is its objective to build enormous reserves. Its objective is to give service to the community on efficient and business lines. In that respect, the compliment which was paid to the Postmaster-General and his staff by the hon. member for Orange Grove and the hon. member for Simonstown and which is endorsed by this side of the House is no idle compliment. We are aware of the services of the postal Department in this country. We have always had the highest regard for this outstanding organization which has had some of the best technological men that our country could provide serving its cause; so much so that these men have received the approval and approbation from technological men in similar fields in other countries who have highly commended both their initiative and their enterprise in the development of postal services. But we are not here to criticize the personnel of the postal services of our country. We realize the problems that they have to meet and the difficulties they undergo. We are concerned with the policy of the Government. It is the policy of the hon. the Minister and his Government that is at stake and not the question of the ability and the assiduity of the staff of the postal services.

I would like to draw the attention of the hon. the Minister to the fact that the backlog in telephone services is obviously due to the lack of automatic exchanges. Of that there can be no question and the hon. the Minister admits it himself. Unless I misread the provisions in his Budget, I find that approximately R5 million only will be spent on the erection and extension of automatic services in the coming year. To me this seems an extraordinary low figure. After all one of the main objectives is to try, even by the building of these numerous small automatic exchanges, to assure that additional services are given in the fast growing townships that are spreading all over South Africa.

As was correctly stated by the hon. member for Orange Grove, the failure of the Government is in their failure to keep up with the rapidly expanding economic life of the country. This should have been foreseen by the Government. The Government knows full well that in every part of our country cities are expanding their townships. In part of the country which for years have been rugged bush, new enterprises are growing and new towns and cities are in the course of being developed. Certain provision should have been made for that, and I think that the capital provision here, half of which will be provided by loans and the other half by operational profits, is a very poor way of funding the capital requirements of the Post Office services. Capital requirements are traditionally met from public loans. There is no reason for the hon. the Minister to be concerned as to the soundness of that investment at all. If you take other big organizations such as Iscor or the Rand Water Board or other similar public utility bodies you will find that they are constantly going to the public for enormous sums of capital in order to expand services. Those moneys are found.

I regard telephone services to the public in the same light as the supply of electricity and water, the supply of accommodation or the supply of any other normal daily requirement of people. It is as essential in a home to-day as transport is essential to the movement of people from those homes. It is as important as the supply of fuel to those homes. It is not something extraordinary, but is something which every member of the public should enjoy in this world of fast moving communications. To have neglected it in the manner I am satisfied it has been done, is something for which the Government alone is responsible.

When the Rand Water Board has to increase its reservoirs, its services, its special plants for the cleansing of water or its facilities for the drawing of water from the various rivers, it engages on undertakings which involve tens and tens of millions of rand. It goes to the public for that money and the public does not remain short of these supplies over a lengthy period or continue to remain shorter and shorter of those supplies, as telephone services have remained in this country. It is no excuse for the hon. the Minister to say that he is short of capital or to ask where the capital will come from. Nor is it right for him to say that he suffers from some other difficulties such as shortage of staff. He has said himself in public at other functions where he has had the opportunity of expanding on his policy that he will go outside his own services and that he will find outside contractors to enable him to catch up with the backlog which is so great.

There is another matter with regard to which the hon. the Minister should reply, namely the question of tariffs. Does he realize that they affect the average cost of living of the householder just as much as anything else. To do what he is doing, namely by announcing an increase in tariffs through the Press, in the Gazette and through a statement at some particular ceremony, is also leaving the public to face this increase without any opportunity of redress. In the main Budget speech and even to some extent, I think, in the Railway Budget, warning is given through Parliament, and Parliament is asked to approve of these increases. Increases in taxation at all times should be subject to the will of the people as represented in Parliament. But here the tariffs are raised in an arbitrary manner and the hon. the Minister comes to Parliament merely to ask for the sanctioning of the additional moneys for something to which he has already committed his particular portfolio. Now, Sir, to continue to make large profits with the object of using those profits for capital is placing a greater burden on the community as regards cost of living. Therefore I think it merits his attention that he should consider this question of an increase in tariffs through the avenue of Parliament in the proper democratic manner, so that, as has been rightly pointed out, industrialists and commercial undertakings will not be caught on the hop and find themselves with millions of rands worth of printing, ready to be posted, affected by the increases that have taken place at the phenomenal level which we find.

I just want to point out another simple example of what happens namely ordinary commercial mail to which we as party politicians have been committed in the course of an election. If one sent out 10,000 pamphlets prior to this increase in tariffs, it would cost R75. If one sends it out after the increase in tariffs, it would cost R180. So, on a simple matter of 10,000 pamphlets, there is a difference of R105, an increase of almost 250 per cent on the original rate. I think that that is a scandelous thing and something to which the hon. the Minister should reply.

There is another important aspect to which I should like to draw his attention, namely the difficulty that is being experienced by the public in connection with the lack of automatic exchanges. There are suburbs of towns where, because of the lack of these facilities, calls are routed through other automatic exchanges far beyond their own immediate contiguous area. The result is that they are metered twice per call. There is a township in the Jeppes constituency where the calls are metered through the Alberton automatic exchange, although this particular township is part of the City of Johannesburg and contiguous to other suburbs of Johannesburg; so that every caller pays twice for each call. That immediately doubles his bill. With the increase in tariffs, it sends his bill up to a phenomenal sum. I think that is an important matter which should be borne in mind.

In the few minutes at my disposal I should also like to deal just a little with the South African Broadcasting Corporation, where I believe, having studied their full report, much of which I highly commend, more imagination is required with regard to their programmes. I think, for instance, that they should pay a little more attention to the daily events in the various cities of the country. For instance, in a city like Sydney in Australia you find that in the morning between seven and eight o’clock there is a spot announcement every five minutes advising motorists where parking can toe obtained, where areas have been filled up and where parking facilities remain available in parking garages. Sir, this is a very great help in coping with the traffic problems of the country. Another service which is provided is that surveys are done from time to time to find out at which hour the greatest number of listeners tune in. I had the experience once of talking on South African affairs on one of the systems at 10.15 a.m., and I was told that five and a half million listeners would definitely listen in at that time. These surveys are constantly being made in Australia, but in the report of the S.A.B.C. I can only find a reference to the Bantu services and only with regard to a certain period in the morning, I think between 6.45 a.m. and 8 a.m.

The other matter to which I would like to refer with regard to broadcasting is the ques-of television. One knows that there is a commission sitting on this subject, but there is one thing that the public wants to know: Why the Government has not got the courage to make up its mind from a policy point of view? Surely the public is entitled to expect the Government to tell the country that it is bringing all its technological services up to date and that the Government is making the necessary preparation for the introduction of television services in South Africa. Sir, these are very sore points with the public, namely, that commissions are appointed, that the Government shelters behind the commissions, that time moves on and that we make no headway. Of all nations in the world we are the most backward in this particular respect. As has been pointed out in this House on more than one occasion, some of the smallest nations in the world have television services, make a profit out of those services and at the same time provide a sorely needed service in the educational and recreational life of the community. Our Government, however, has dug in its toes and although we put forward suggestions it never makes a statement of policy. If they want to know what our policy is, our policy is that when we come into power the first announcement that will be made toy the future Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, who now sits smiling on a front bench on this side of the House, will be that television will be provided for the people of South Africa.

Then there is one other thing to which I want to make reference in passing. It is all very well to read in the S.A.B.C.’s annual report for 1969—

Sir, whilst one appreciates the efforts which the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation is making to bring the public up to date with world events, it must remember one thing, namely, that it is a public undertaking; that it is required to be impartial in the interests of the public and that news must not be slanted in such a way that it favours the Government in power. I believe that that is abusing an important service for which the public pays and which was established purely in the interests of the community.

The hon. member for Simonstown stood up here, made a great fuss and thanked the officials for their good service, even during the election, etc., and then the hon. member for Jeppes followed him up in that.

Do you not agree?

I agree because it is so, but it is this good National Government and this Minister who give it to us. It is the policy of this Government and this Minister that have ensured us of a Post Office staff that is happy and satisfied and prepared, with a smile on their faces, to work 11 million hours overtime and to say: Thank you for the privilege we have of working overtime. They are people who are not too lazy to do their share for South Africa, but this hon. member is now presenting matters as if it were a disgrace to work overtime. He stated it in such a way as to suggest that this was reckless exploitation of the first water. No, the Post Office officials supply their services; they do their jobs well; they are proud of it, and we are proud of them. I say thank you once more to this National Government and to the Minister.

The hon. member for Orange Grove misled the House this afternoon, and I want to correct this. The hon. the Minister said very clearly here what the telephone shortage was. He said that on 31st March of this year there was a shortage of something like 90,000. Then the hon. member told the Minister that he was not conversant with the latest figures, and that the hon. member would give him more recent figures, more recent by three months, than the figures the Minister had given.

He did not say so.

We shall read that Hansard. What is the state of affairs? On 24th July the hon. member put a question to the Minister; the reply was given to him in writing, and here it is.

I wonder whether the Minister has read the reply.

The Minister told him that on 30th June there was a shortage of 98,612, and he also said that the expected shortage on 30th September would be 106,000.

Why does the hon. member pretend that the hon. the Minister does not know what the shortage is? We did not hear this verbally across the floor of the House. The hon. member comes along here with this performance, as if the Minister had not told him and as if he did not have this written document in his hands. Sir, I consider it recklessness on the part of a member to act in this way. I like criticism; attack the Minister, but do not mislead the House.

I shall come back to this again, but I want to settle another matter with the hon. member for Jeppes. I am glad he said that the Post Office officials do good work. But the Minister must be attacked on his policy.

The Government.

Yes, the Minister and the Government; that is quite correct, but the only criticism he has in the long run is that the R47 million, which comes from loan funds for capital expenditure, should not have been a mere R47 million but the full amount of R93 million. I want to fell that hon. member that it is, of course, an old tradition that certain capital expenditure should be financed by loans. That is so, but surely it is unnecessary for every cent of that to come from loan funds. From the money that is being voted there is, inter alia, a loan of R7 million that must be redeemed; that is what must now be paid off. One finances capital works from loans when one purchases assets to-day and does not have immediate use for them. One is then not going to tax the consumer with the full price he must pay in cash; one spreads it over a number of years. If the life of those assets is 20 years, one spreads it over 20 years, so that it is paid off over 20 years. If it is 10 years, one spreads it over 10 years. The hon. member surely knows that many of the assets, now being purchased for the services that will be rendered, are to replace existing assets that have not yet become obsolete. That is why we must automatize; that is why we must do it. The hon. member also knows that the assets that were taken over by the Post Office, when it became independent, totalled R199 million, and a large portion of those assets must be replaced. Therefore one cannot come forward with a sound financial policy if one pays for everything out of the existing moneys. It is also good policy that in the future one should not simply write everything off. Take thought for the morrow: make sure that there is a nest egg, and pay for a part of those assets in cash. I therefore think that someone who knows something about finance will thank the Minister for having come along with this policy and for not having taken everything from loan funds, thereby overburdening the children of tomorrow.

The Opposition speaks as if a good policy has not come to the fore. The hon. members for Orange Grove and for Simonstown did not know what to say; they could not criticize this Budget. We sat waiting to hear the United Party’s policy. Where is your Post Office policy? Why did you not state your policy under this Budget? That is why a budget is presented. After all, that is the time when you, as an Opposition, must say what you will do and when you should state your policy.

We did so last time.

Your policy is so feeble that you are ashamed to state it again to-day; so feeble that the voters took no notice of it. I should like to know what that policy was that you mentioned last time. You came along, just as you did to-day, and asked a few questions, and you have never stated an alternative Post Office policy. The real growth in South Africa is round about 6 per cent, and here the hon. the Minister comes along and votes 10.8 per cent more from revenue than last year. The fact is that we could sooner be accused of inflation than of not doing enough. As far as capital works are concerned, there is an increase of 4.8 per cent. Salary improvements for officials, apart from other benefits such as housing, amount to 10.4 per cent more this year. As far as telecommunications services are concerned, the matter about which hon. members opposite had the most complaints, provision is being made for 32.7 per cent more this year than last year. What more do you want? Where can you simply go and spend a third more than in the previous year? As far as postal tariffs are concerned, the hon. members for Harrismith and Germiston replied very effectively to criticism from the other side. The hon. member for Orange Grove complained about the increased postal tariffs for businessmen and newspapers. But companies in South Africa make gigantic profits. In virtually every newspaper we read that their latest profits are R1 million or R2 million more than in the previous year. The hon. member cannot deny that this is so. Why, then, may they not pay more? Why must the small-scale consumer, with his letters and so on, pay higher postal tariffs while those companies pay almost nothing for their post? Let the businessmen also pay for their services. Why must John Citizen stand in for those big businessmen? Why must John Citizen help them with their load? We know that over the years the Post Office has suffered heavy losses on postal services. The figures are quoted here. For last year I think it was R12 million. Who must carry these losses? Why must people who want to send out millions of pamphlets as the hon. member dramatically stated here, not pay for them? Why must the telephone subscriber and John Citizen help to carry their loads? It would not be fair and just. The voters of South Africa will know that this Minister and this Government are reasonable and just. But to top it all the businessmen themselves are satisfied. Their mouthpiece in the financial sphere, the Financial Mail, is happy about the whole thing. It states that people will be satisfied. I refer here to the Financial Mail of 3rd July, 1970, in which it is stated—

Therefore, they are altogether satisfied and happy. But the hon. member says it is wrong. He complained about the installation fees for telephones. But why must such a service be granted free of charge? On what grounds does the hon. member claim that the Post Office should furnish this service free of charge? I could then just as well claim that he should be sitting in this House without receiving a salary. Throughout the world it is the custom to pay for the costs of installing a telephone. In England it costs R42, in Sweden R41, in Norway between R60 and R70, in Holland R30 and in Australia R24—much higher than ours here. Why must this service be furnished free of charge?

The hon. member for Orange Grove had a few additional things to say here about the shortage of telephones. He acts as if this shortage were such a terrible thing. I just want to remind that hon. member that there was a shortage of 60,000 telephones in 1948 when the National Party took over the Government of the country. Then South Africa’s population was also much smaller than it is now. And how poor South Africa was in 1948! No-one could afford a telephone. How many business undertakings were there? Since then our commerce and industry have expanded fantastically. Every 2.6 people in South Africa own a telephone to-day. In 1948 the national revenue from commerce and industry was very small. However, to-day it is the highest of all. The majority of telephones are needed by commerce and industry. Our commerce and industry are not standing still either; they are expanding by the day. I think that this whole matter is being exaggerated too much. Now that R20 is being asked for installation costs, not every Tom, Dick and Harry will simply apply for a telephone. I live in a flat area and I move around a lot from flat to flat. I see and I know which people have telephones. Many of these young men who live in flats just have a telephone to phone their girl friends at night. The question of the staff shortage is likewise being exaggerated. Unfortunately I cannot elaborate further, because my time is limited. In spite of this staff shortage in the Post Office, officials are doing their work so well that they are still being praised. I admit that there is a staff shortage, but it is not as great as it is professed to be here.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Sunnyside slightly glossed over the shortage of telephones. He took the hon. member for Orange Grove to task in regard to figures that he quoted during the course of his speech. However, the hon. member for Sunnyside cannot deny the fact that there is an escalating shortage of telephones. The hon. the Minister in introducing his Budget quoted a figure in this regard of 90,838 at the end of March. In reply to a question by the hon. member for Orange Grove, the hon. the Minister then indicated that three months thereafter this figure had increased to 98,000. He also indicated that at the end of September there would be a shortage of 106,000 telephones, Surely the hon. member for Sunnyside should try to defend this escalating shortage of telephones. It is the responsibility of the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs to provide additional telephone services as they are required.

The hon. member also referred to postal services and the cost involved. However, he did not indicate that the cost of the increased postage in many cases will be passed on to the ordinary man in the street, “Jan Burger” as he called him. Surely commerce and industry, to bear extra costs for postages or telephone services, merely absorb this into their cost structure. The man in the street, the consumer is the man who ultimately pays for these increases. It is not a question of merely placing the onus on commerce and industry to pay these increased postal services. It, in turn, will be passed on to the man in the street.

However, I should like to deal with the shortage of telephones and other services in the growing economy and associate myself with the remarks that have been made by members on this side of the House. As far back as 1964 figures indicate the lack of planning as far as the Government is concerned, in regard to the postal services and telephone services in townships that have been developed and the natural development that is taking place in suburbs adjacent to our urban areas. Under legislation passed through this House the municipal telephone service in the area of Durban was taken over by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. I know that in many of these suburbs that were not incorporated in the municipal service there has been the greatest shortage. In suburbs adjoining Durban and suburbs that are actually part of the Durban borough these shortages have existed. I want to refer to a reply to a question put in this House in 1964 when the then Minister of Posts and Telegraphs indicated various areas where there was a shortage of telephones. He mentioned suburbs adjacent to Durban such as Hillcrest and other suburbs that are part of Durban, such as Fynnland, Durban North and Rossburgh. These are all areas that fall within the borough of Durban which were not incorporated in the Durban municipal telephone service, but which had telephones administered by the Government telephone service. Wentworth is another suburb of Durban the telephone service of which was at that time administered by the Government telephone service. The hon. the Minister then referred to non-European areas such as Chatsworth, Clermont, Umlaiz and Reservoir Hills. He indicated that these were the areas where the shortage was most acute. I submit that the shortage, six years after this question was answered in this House, is increasing. The situation in these areas is far worse than it was in 1964. Surely this indicates a lack of planning and co-ordination by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in supplying telephones in areas where development is taking place. Surely the hon. the Minister’s department should be aware of such development taking place and make suitable provision to see that the demand is at least met to an extent. Part of the constituency that I represent experiences a tremendous shortage of telephones. There are also Government service telephones in this particular part of the constituency. Here the position is just as bad as it ever was, if there is not a deteriorating situation, as the overall figures show. The development of these suburbs and rapidly growing areas should receive priority by the hon. the Minister in his future planning of postal and telephone services.

What happens now is that in some of these areas where there are no telephones these people in times of emergency are obliged to use public call offices; that is public telephone booths. If one looks at the number of telephone booths or public call offices that are in operation, one sees that there has been an increase in terms of the latest report that was laid on the Table of the House. The report reflects that this is now totalling something like 17,000. I should however like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister that in many of these public telephone call offices, the telephones are out of order. Cases have been drawn to my notice of people living in areas where telephones are unobtainable who have had, in cases of emergency, to go from telephone booth to telephone booth to find a telephone that is in working condition. I believe it is important that the hon. the Minister should endeavour to have more telephone booths established in areas where many people are unable to obtain their own telephones, so that these people could make telephone calls in times of emergency. I know of some cases where for medical reasons it was essential that a person should communicate with the doctor by telephone but up to half an hour has been spent looking for a telephone booth with a telephone that is working.

This leads me to another point in regard to the provision of telephone services and the use of public call boxes. This is the fact that some of these telephone booths are damaged by vandals. I know that the hon. the Minister in reply to a question some time ago indicated that a considerable amount of damage was done by vandals to telephones in these call boxes. He indicated that these figures sometimes exceeded 2,000 in one financial year and involved estimated expenditure of over R30,000. Here I should like to suggest that the hon. the Minister should give attention to the use in these call boxes of apparatus that can withstand possible damage by vandals. In other words, the apparatus should be of a type that would offer the greatest resistance to damage by these vandals. The old type of telephone booth which was constructed in such a way that the money in the box as well as the instrument itself could be easily damaged has received some attention by the hon. the Minister. I do hope that a greater degree of inspection is carried out of these telephone booths so as to ensure that they are in working order and, where necessary, if apparatus has to be replaced, it should be replaced with apparatus that offers greater resistance to these vandals. It would also be of assistance if these telephone booths were equipped with alarms that go off in the event of these booths being tampered with. This could lead to the apprehension of these vandals and if necessary to their conviction in court as it is an offence to damage these telephone booths.

The other matter with which I should like to deal also concerns the planning of telephone services and related services for the development taking place in South Africa. I refer to the telex service which is provided. I believe that this is of paramount importance, particularly to people in business who find that a telex machine is an absolute necessity for the running of their business. I know of an area in Durban which through town planning is now being developed as a commercial centre rather than as a residential area. When these people who have established offices in this area apply for a telex service, they find that they are unable to obtain such a service. In one particular case I know of, the head office of a large financial organization has been established there. There is a telex service in their branches in Port Elizabeth, East London and Bloemfontein but in respect of their main branch in Johannesburg and in their head office in Durban, they have been unable to obtain any telex service at all. In addition they are restricted in the number of telephone lines they can have. This again makes it exceedingly difficult for them to run a business on modern lines since they require a telex service as an important part of their business. The figures the hon. the Minister mentioned when he introduced his Budget to-day, showed that there was a shortage of more than 300 of these telex services. These are now on the waiting list and are awaiting installation. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give top priority to providing these telex services where there are outstanding applications for such services. It is important that these people receive priority. This is an essential part of the running of their businesses. In many instances as they cannot have a telex service installed, they find it exceedingly difficult to administer their business by means of trunk calls, unless there is direct dialling. If these calls are made to a smaller centre, there can be a delay of two to three hours whereas in many instances they require an immediate answer. If they are unable to communicate with a number of their branch offices, the administration of their businesses is seriously affected. This shortage of telex services and the shortage of telephone services is undoubtedly a great hindrance to the development of South Africa in the commercial and industrial field, quite apart from the inconvenience it has caused to many people who would like to have a telephone installed for their own personal use. I want to make a point of the fact that business concerns are finding that the running of their businesses is being hamstrung by the inability of the hon. the Minister to provide, through his department, the needed services to enable these concerns to continue with their services and run their businesses as they should be run.

There are other matters affecting the welfare of many people, which I believe the hon. the Minister can endeavour to improve, and in respect of which he can endeavour to render assistance. I should like to refer to the payment of pensions which is undertaken by the hon. the Minister’s department. We know that these figures have increased considerably in recent years. To-day they have to pay out approximately R105 million in respect of the various pensions that are payable to pensioners of various categories. I should like to make a plea to the hon. the Minister to make some provision for additional seating for many of these older folk who sometimes have to wait a long time at the various post offices. During the summer months they sometimes have to wait in appressive heat and stand in long queues without any seating being provided at the various post offices.

Especially the non-Europeans.

This affects all race groups. I am particularly concerned about conditions that exist in some post offices where these older folk have no seating facilities made available to them. This is particularly important in hot weather. I hope that the hon. the Minister, when planning the future development of his post offices, will also bear this in mind so as to provide these people with an additional service. I do not wish in any way to criticize the manner in which his department pays these pensions. I believe that they are doing a very good job indeed. The officials work under tremendous pressure as this is responsible work involving many millions of rand every month. I do, however, hope that the hon. the Minister can give us some indication that he is taking care of the needs of these people so as to meet this need as it increases year by year.

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you at the outset that I am standing here as a disappointed man. During the past week-end I noticed in the English-language Press that the Opposition intended launching a fierce attack in this debate. The reason they advanced was the fact that there were so many problems in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. I believe these people are still punch-drunk. They got such a hiding during the past debate, the Railways debate of a few days ago, that they have not recovered yet. They had such a difficult time last Thursday and Friday after they had been embarrassed by the statements of the hon. member for South Coast, that I get the impression that these hon. members still do not know where they are.

What did we find in this debate this afternoon? Let me say right at the outset that I do not object to the Opposition criticizing some of our departments. Surely, it is their duty to criticize the Government when things have gone wrong. Since we are discussing matters concerning this important department, one would have expected the Opposition to come forward with positive contributions. In other words, we would have expected the Opposition to come forward with certain suggestions in an attempt to solve our problems. Allow me, Sir, to say to you in the first instance that we are aware of the matters that have been raised here. The fact that there is a shortage of telephones in South Africa is no secret. Neither is it a secret that some of the services can be improved. This side of the House is quite capable of coping with the problems there are as far as this department is concerned. Surely, this is not the first and the only time this side of the House has solved problems in the interests of South Africa.

When we speak of this department we speak of a big department. This department is second only to the Department of Railways and Harbours as far as size is concerned. The Post Office is rendering a service of strategic interest to the national and international welfare. For that reason the department has committed itself to a more expeditious programme in order to expand and improve the services it renders, particularly as regards telecommunications, at an even faster tempo than ever before so as to catch up with existing backlogs and eliminate bottlenecks in the shortest possible time and to provide adequately for future requirements. When considering the position prevailing a few years ago, we find that an amount of R26.6 million was appropriated for the year 1966-’67 in respect of capital expenditure. This amount was increased to R30 million in respect of the year 1967-’68. During 1968-’69 it was increased to R39 million, while an amount of R54 million was appropriated last year. In this Budget under discussion, we notice that the estimates exceed an amount of R70 million. I have already said that there are certain problems which have to be solved by this National Government and the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. The reason for this was the fact that we in South Africa, particularly over the past few years, experienced an economic upsurge the like of which we have never had before in the history of our fatherland.

Sir, I want to say to you that the banks did not close down nor did blood flow in the street, of South Africa when we became a Republic in 1961. We can recall the forecasts of doom made by hon. members on that side of the House. On the contrary, Sir, after South Africa had become a Republic its economic development was something unparalleled in its history. This economic development took place for the simple reason that we have a stable Government in South Africa—a Government which, economically, does not only enjoy the confidence of the majority of its citizens within the borders of the country, but also the confidence of many people outside the borders of South Africa. One need not be an economist to be able to see to what extent South Africa has developed during the past few years. One need only be practical to be able to see it. When travelling through Cape Town, one sees one building after the other going up. When passing those buildings in Johannesburg. Durban or in any other centre, one appreciates that all of them contain offices for which telecommunication services have to be provided. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs has a major and important task to fulfil in South Africa, and this they have to do under difficult conditions. I should like to avail myself of this opportunity of complimenting the Postmaster-General and his staff and everybody assisting him, from the highest to the lowest rank, with the brilliant way in which they are rendering postal services under difficult conditions in South Africa.

If time allows, I should like to deal with two legs of the amendment moved by the hon. member for Orange Grove. The first leg I should like to deal with, is the big fuss he made as regards the present shortage of telephones. In this regard I should like to say that the hon. member for Orange Grove has been demonstrating about telephones for many years. That hon. member was demonstrating even in the days when the United Party was governing South Africa. Surely, the hon. member knows that he, as editor of the Kruithoring, used to criticize the Government of that time day after day and in every issue of that newspaper on the poor and inadequate telephone services which existed at that time. These are the facts of the matter. On 31st March, 1948, there was a shortage of 73,000 in respect of telephones in South Africa. Hon. members should remember now that South Africa was suffering an economic recession at that time. The economic structure of South Africa was collapsing.

Where do you get that from?

The hon. member asks where I got that from. I want to tell that hon. member that because this very position was prevailing at that time, that side of the House went out of office in South Africa. As I have said, South Africa was experiencing an economic recession in 1948 and there was a shortage of 73,000 in respect of telephones. At that stage South Africa reached an economic low-water mark. On 31st March, 1949, there was a shortage of 92,000 in respect of telephones in South Africa.

Since you took over.

The fact of the matter is that we took over a bankrupt organization. On 31st March, 1950, the shortage was 104,000. This is what we inherited from the United Party. This National Party and its Department of Posts and Telegraphs then tried to reduce the telephone shortage. In 1960 there was a shortage of 15,000 and in 1964, 13,000. I know we are dealing with a serious communication problem. We realize this only too well, but we are dealing with a problem here the extent of which this Government is fully aware. This Minister and his Department know what the causes and the factors are that have given rise to this situation. He is aware of all the factors which have contributed to this problem. What is even more important, is that we appreciate the important task awaiting this Government, namely to solve this problem. South Africa will have to be patient, but we are not simply asking for patience and a blind trust. We are asking people to be patient in the knowledge that this problem is going to be tackled systematically and that results will, in fact, be achieved. When we talk of the shortage of telephones in South Africa and when hon. members on the other side of the House talk about the inadequate telephone services, I want to tell those hon. members and prove to them now that the telephone services in South Africa, under the circumstances, are still among the best in the world.

Do not exaggerate.

I say and I believe that it rates among the best in the world and I am going to prove it to those hon. members. Let me tell the hon. member for Orange Grove what the position is in Brazil. I am going to quote for the information of that hon. member from Newsweek of 2nd June, 1969—

I do not think there was any need for him to do this, but what I want to quote now, is something in a more serious mood. I quote from The Evening Gazelle of 23rd September, 1969, from an article entitled “Phone Service: Tough all over”—

I am also going to quote a paragraph from an article published in the Westchester Business Journal of 16th September 1969—

I am also quoting from an article “Outcries rising on phone service”, which was published in the Houston Chronicle of 22nd September, 1969. It reads as follows—

The hon. member for Orange Grove should listen very carefully now. He should judge conditions in South Africa by to what I am going to quote now. I quote further—

Let us go a little further and consider the conditions in England. Hon. members mentioned England this afternoon as one of the countries with the most effective and successful telephone service. This is what the Sunday News has to say—

Let us briefly consider the position in France. Unfortunately time will not allow me to go any further than this. I quote from the same newspaper—

This is what people have to put up with to get a telephone in France:

Sir, I can also tell you what the position is in Germany, Holland and Italy. I want to tell hon. members in all seriousness that we in South Africa should be grateful for having a National Government. We should be grateful for the Minister and the Department we have, because I want to tell hon. members that I believe that, compared with conditions in the rest of the world, the telephone services in South Africa are among the best in the world.

In conclusion, I want to say that this side of the House is fully aware of the fact that there are certain problems and certain bottlenecks which should be eliminated. However, I can give hon. members this afternoon the following assurance: This National Government has had to solve many problems in the past, more serious problems than merely this problem of the shortage of telephones. I want to give the assurance that this Government, in view of the new deal in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, will make active and purposeful attempts during the coming years to eliminate these bottlenecks as well. I want to give them the assurance that this National Government is definitely going to do that.

Mr. Speaker, in reply to the hon. member for Welkom, I want to say that I do not think it is necessary to tour the world to find out what bad service they have. We have our own bad service in South Africa. We would rather have liked him to explain to us how to improve this bad service. When we ring up here, we get the wrong number. When one dials, one finds that one has got the wrong number again.

What about Douglas Mitchell?

I will reply to that, too. Speaking about having it again and getting the wrong number again, it makes me think of the young medical officer who opened his rooms the first time. He waited the whole day for a patient. As he was leaving, this man rolled up. He was covered in a rash. He examined the man and rushed to his inner office. He consulted all his books, but there was nothing about a rash. So he came out and examined him again. He asked him: “Have you had this before?” He replied: “Yes.” “Well,” he said, “you have got it again.”

Mr. Speaker, referring to the hon. member for South Coast, I think he will take part in the debate and reply to this hon. member. I do not know what it has to do with Post Office affairs, but if he read the papers this morning and this afternoon, he would most likely find the reply there.

We on this side of the House have never denied or queried for one moment the fantastic organization that the Post Office as a whole is in South Africa. We also acknowledge that it is the most important service in South Africa. But we also have the right to query anything that we think is wrong. The Post Office is also suffering from the same complaint as the Railways and many other Government Departments, namely the shortage of manpower. We also admit that. But there is one thing that we do acknowledge, namely that the women employees of the Post Office play a very important part in running the various departments. I understand that they, too, have to work overtime. I notice that in this coming financial year, it is estimated that an additional amount of R105,000 will be paid to them for overtime. But the point is that there must be a word of warning. I sincerely hope that the staff that they do have will not be overworked. I think the telephonists and the general clerks in the office are all women; they do exactly the same work as the men next door to them. I think in the registered parcels section in Pietermaritzburg there are three women employed and at no time have I come there without having had to stand in a queue. Those people work flat-out from the time they arrive in the morning till they go off duty. What I want to know is why the women in the Post Office are not paid the same salaries that the men are being paid, and I wonder why the hon. the Minister, who can be reasonable does not take the lead and pay these women employees these increased salaries. Men can go home at night, take off their shoes and put their feet up and rest, with most likely a glass of beer at the elbow, whilst the women have to prepare dinner for the whole family although they have worked flat-out for eight or nine hours during the day.

Don Juan Smith.

Sir, I note with pleasure that the hon. the Minister is employing Coloureds, Indians and Bantu as postmen. It is a few years ago that I asked for this. They have since employed these Indians at Pietermaritzburg, and these people have served the Post Office with success and they have given satisfaction. I would like to know when they are going to be placed on the permanent staff As far as I know they are employed on a temporary basis at the moment.

I too would like to endorse what the hon. member for Simonstown said about power-driven cycles. This is a very welcome innovation especially in towns which have steep hills. These poor chaps use their own cycles and when they come to these hills, especially in Natal, in the heat of the day they have to push both the load and the cycle.

All they have to do is to turn round and ride downhill.

Sir, there is another matter that has been brought to my attention. Who is responsible for the delivery of mail in the homelands, at a place like Mbali in Pietermaritzburg? I do not know whether the position has improved now but I was told that the Post Office there was stacked with undelivered mail addressed to the residents of Mbali township. These Bantu leave for their work early in the morning before the Post Office opens and they come back late at night. When must they take delivery of their mail?

Then I notice that there is a terrific shortage of houses. This means that many Post Office employees have to rent expensive houses on the open market. Has the hon. the Minister considered the question of subsidizing the rents, as is done in the Civil Service with building society loans? Sir, one very pleasing aspect of the Postmaster General’s report is the fact that oversea technicians have extended their contracts and that none of them have so far returned to their native countries. I sincerely hope that this treatment of immigrants will continue and that other Government Departments will take note of this.

Then, Sir, I would like to know what liaison there is between the Post Office Department and the planning departments throughout the Republic. When new townships and industrial lay-outs are approved and proclaimed, is there any liaison with the Post Office with a view to laying cables when water and electricity are provided? Surely, if this is done at the time, it would avoid delays at a later stage when the residents require telephones.

Sir, the hon. the Minister has mentioned that he has converted party-line telephones to automatic exchanges. Does this mean that he has replaced the ordinary party-line with individual lines to these exchanges? I would like to know whether he still gets complaints from fellow-users of party-lines with regard to listening in to conversations? Have they managed to overcome this difficulty?

“Meeluistering.”

Yes, I believe that it is really “meeluistering”. Sir, as far as Pietermaritzburg is concerned, may I ask when the new exchange there will be completed and when it will be opened? At the same time may I ask whether the necessary cables for this service have been laid throughout the city and to the industrial sites? In conclusion I too would like to thank the Postmaster-General and all his staff throughout the country for the excellent service that they have given the country through the past year.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) asked the hon. the Minister something in connection with party lines. In the case of party lines it is not only a question of listening in, but perhaps also a question of “tapping”. I do not know which of these the hon. member meant.

The hon. member for Orange Grove moved an amendment, which, in fact, is standing on three wobbly legs. The most wobbly leg is definitely the one dealing with television. He accused the hon. the Minister of having failed to take steps to introduce television. In the first place this is, of course, completely untrue. This hon. member has a television mentality. Ever since I came into this House, he has been dealing with television and he is still doing so. He is still harping on television.

Why do we not have television?

The hon. member for Orange Grove is apparently watching the moves of the commission on television, which consists of 12 members, with the eyes of a hawk. He told us of the first meeting held on 10th February this year, and then informed us that only five meetings had been held since. He also informed us that the chairman and the secretary of that commission travelled overseas to investigate television institutions everywhere—which is, of course, common knowledge. He mentioned a whole lot of countries to which the chairman had paid visits. This is correct, of course, but if the chairman had not done so, the criticism of that side of the House, and of that hon. member in particular, would have been that no investigation had been made of television as presented in other countries. The only criticism which the hon. member had as regards the travels of the chairman and the secretary, was that they had not gone to Switzerland, where more than one language is used, and that they had not made an investigation in that country.

Are you in favour of it or not?

Towards the end of his speech, the hon. member quite arrogantly asked the Minister to tell us before the Third Reading whether television was coming or not. Surely, there is no need for such undue haste. The commission has an enormous task, and it cannot complete that task in the twinkling of an eye. The composition of this commission of 12 members is sufficient proof of the high standards which will be maintained in the investigations as well as the high standard which the report, when it comes, will have. And we know that a great deal of work has been done in this regard, despite the fact that the hon. member criticised the commission directly and the Minister indirectly at this stage, because in view of the fact that he knows that the terms of reference of the commission are wide, he should, after all, anticipate that the commission is going to carry out this task to the best of its ability.

This commission has forwarded circulars to many bodies throughout the country requesting them to draw up memoranda for submission to the commission. That commission will complete its work in its own good time and as it suits it. But the hon. member should take cognizance of the fact that after the commission’s investigations and after it has reported, it will still be the Government that will decide in the end whether the commission’s report should be accepted, whichever way the commission may decide. I say it is unnecessary to argue any further about this aspect of the matter. A television service will only be introduced—let me give the hon. member and the Opposition this assurance— if it meets the requirements laid down by the National Government for television.

It is strange to me that up to now in this debate there has not been much criticism of or many remarks about the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation. It has really become an annual institution for the hon. member for Orange Grove and others to launch an attack on the S.A.B.C. The only criticism we heard this afternoon, was that from the hon. member for Jeppes who said the S.A.B.C. should display more imagination in connection with the presentation of the news. I say we have made a great deal of progress as far as the S.A.B.C. and its conduct are concerned, because only last year those hon. members, as well as the hon. member for Orange Grove, expressed criticism to the S.A.B.C.’s news service to the effect that the S.A.B.C. allegedly lent itself to being used for political propaganda for only one party, the National Party.

This has always been the accusation levelled in the past. We remember very well how only last year the hon. member and others launched an attack on the S.A.B.C, particularly with regard to the programme “Current Affairs” and how they were defeated by the hon. the Minister when he proved that that was not so. There we also had the assurance from the hon. the Minister, when a question was put to him in connection with the attitude of the S.A.B.C., that he would act if the corporation were to lend itself to party-political propaganda. Although the Opposition has not attacked the S.A.B.C. up to now in this debate, the United Party recently made a big fuss about the radio speech delivered by the Prime Minister on 31st May, on Republic Day. It was on that occasion that the Opposition, the United Party, to be specific set up a chorus of indignation about that radio interview which the hon. the Prime Minister had on Republic Day. But not only was the United Party the singers in that choir on that occasion; it was, in fact, the choir leaders as well, because on that occasion they struck up a tune, one that was false and one which they started off on a false note to hoot. What was the accusation which they levelled on that occasion concerned?

On that occasion the United Party felt upset because an opportunity had not been given by the S.A.B.C. to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition to put his people’s standpoint on behalf of, as they said, 500,000 United Party voters. They went further and said this fact proved conclusively the totalitarian tendencies of the National Party. Sir, is the United Party so naïve, is it so, shall we say, narrow-minded that it is not aware of the fact the hon. the Prime Minister was not speaking in his capacity as the Leader of the National Party on that occasion, but in his capacity as Prime Minister on behalf of the whole of South Africa; and that he was not speaking on behalf of the 800,000 Nationalists and their dependents who voted at the time of the last election? The Prime Minister broached national and public affairs on a national day, national affairs. However, it is a fact that when one speaks of “national” in the broad sense of the word, then that side of the House gets goose-pimples; the word “national”, even at this stage, after we have been a Republic for so many years, still gives that side of the House goose-pimples. We are confronted here in South Africa today with questions of such general public importance or, shall I say, universal importance, that it is the duty of the Government of the country, and the duty of a Prime Minister in particular, to keep the inhabitants of the country informed. That is why the S.A.B.C. very often gives Ministers the opportunity to deliver talks on their departments over the various senders. We believe, and we know, that the S.A.B.C will not allow itself to be put off by this criticism from the United Party, because the S.A.B.C. is of the people and from the people and it cannot be indifferent to the questions which affect our people and our country. I have that complete interview here, and I do not want to go into it, but I just want to say that the hon. the Prime Minister spoke of the policy of South Africa, and although it is the policy of a governing party at the moment, it is also the policy of the country and as such the two are synonymous; and there is nothing wrong in making it known, not only to the people of the country, but also outside the Republic. One can only thank the staff of the S.A.B.C most sincerely for the big and comprehensive job of work they are doing, I have here statistics in connection with news bulletins broadcast in the course of 1969. According to these statistics 232 news bulletins are broadcast per day, which takes up more than 20 hours per day. If one expresses the news broadcasts in terms of the number of words, one can say that they represent 145.000 words which would fill 242 newspaper columns or 27 newspaper pages. It shows abundantly the colossal job of work which is being done by the S.A.B.C to keep our listeners informed of events in the local, provincial, national and international spheres.

I really believe that this week’s prize for useless information must go to the hon. member for Koedoespoort, because what a useless bit of information he has given us—believe it or not, 232 news bulletins per day, occupying 20 hours repeating over and over again the same thing! If ever this House was given a useless bit of information, this was it. So was the rest of the hon. member’s speech—all useless. He spent most of his speech on the commission investigating whether or not we should have TV. But such a commission was never necessary; it was not necessary to spend the taxpayer’s money to send them overseas to say whether or not we should have TV. We know our people want television. We agree that a commission could have been appointed to investigate the type of TV and to go into the technical intricacies of it, but certainly not on whether or not we should have TV. That is a complete and utter waste of time. The hon. member spoke about the S.A.B.C and about the programme “Current Affairs” and took my hon. friend here to task for his attack on it. It is not necessary to repeat that attack. That programme is slanted in favour of a political party. It is no use the hon. member for Koedoespoort trying to justify the report of the Prime Minister by saying that he spoke as a Prime Minister. He did not; he spoke as leader of the Nationalist Party, and it is to this that we take exception. Then we had the hon. member for Koedoespoort waxing eloquent and talking about “vir die volk” and “van die volk”. I think we ought to call him “Abraham Lincoln Otto” from now on.

But I should like to return to the hon. member for Welkom, from whom we had a wonderful exhibition. He started off on the wrong foot for taking us to task for not putting forward anything positive. But I want to say that if there was one positive speech made in this House this afternoon, it was the speech of my hon. friend, the hon. member for Umbilo, who spoke immediately before that hon. member. Obviously that hon. member’s speech was written before he had heard what we were going to say. He said the Post Office had a difficult job under difficult circumstances. With that I agree—officials of the Post Office have performed a difficult job under difficult circumstances, but these difficult circumstances are of the creation of the hon. the Minister and of his predecessors in the Nationalist Party over the past 22 years. That I will grant him. But then the hon. member treated this House to a display of the worst of the Post Office and telephone problems overseas. In comparison with those, he said, our Post Office service was the best in the world. What he should have said, was that our service was as bad as the worst in the world, because every instance he quoted from overseas I can cap with one in this country. Let me tell him what is happening in my own constituency, particularly in Richmond. I have spoken to this hon. Minister and to his predecessors about this before. A certain businessman in Richmond does business with many suppliers in Pietermaritzburg. These suppliers have a co-ordinated transport system. Incidentally, this particular businessman votes Nationalist. In any event, on a Monday morning he had to make five phone calls to five suppliers. He booked these calls, this was three months ago, at 8.30 a.m. Richmond is only 22 miles away from Pietermaritzburg. By 9.30 he had not received even the first one. He then got into his motor-car and rode 20 miles to the outskirts of Pietermaritzburg where he phoned the five firms from a telephone booth. He placed his orders, rode back to Richmond and only then did he receive the first of the five calls he booked. This incident is genuine and can be proved. As a matter of fact, I think the hon. the Minister somewhere in his records has a letter about this incident from my constituent.

What the hon. member said about the difficulty of not getting a dialling tone is exactly what we put up with in the Hillcrest and Pine-town areas of Durban where if takes us half an hour to get a dialling tone. When you then get an engaged signal, you have to wait another half an hour for a dialling tone. I am not exaggerating. There sits the hon. member for Transkei who was with me in my office when I tried to get through.

But let us talk about the postal service, let us talk about the efficient postal service we are alleged to have here. I have here an envelope with an express lable on it and franked 12½ cents—a terrible rate of postage but because it was urgent it had to be sent by express post. It was posted in Johannesburg on 5th July, addressed to a member of this hon. House. On 7th July, I see from the back, it somehow arrived in Durban. Finally it arrived in Cape Town on 10th July. If the hon. the Minister wants this envelope, I can let him have it. So much then for the hon. member for Welkom and his talk about efficiency in the service.

But I want to break away from that and want to deal with staff. I know the hon. the Minister has problems with staff. I notice the hon. the Minister of Transport is in his seat and I am pleased about that because it seems to me as if the same things going on in the Department of that hon. Minister are duplicated in the Postal Department. I want to ask the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs whether his Department is now utilizing clerks in other jobs after normal office hours, in the same way as the hon. Minister of Transport is using clerks for shunting, lorry driving, etc.? Is a similar thing happening in the Postal Department?

I do not have trains.

You know, Sir, the hon. the Minister is really infantile when he comes with a remark like that. Let me put it to him this way then. There is a grade for a temporary telephone operator occupied by a person at a salary of R100 per month basic. This particular person was employed as a night telephone operator, from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m., at a centre in the Midlands of Natal. He was allowed to sleep between calls because it is not such a busy exchange that you have to have one there awake all the time. When this person found that he could not come out on the salary of R100 per month, he applied for an increase. This was refused, and he resigned. We now find that this work is being done by a counter clerk after his normal hours, which is, therefore, overtime. For that he is being paid R2 an hour, from 9 p.m. until 6 a.m. the next morning. This amounts to R18 a night, and working six days a week the official earns R108 a week, or R450 a month. Good luck to that clerk for making that money, but would it not have been more economic to this organization, which is now supposed to be run on business lines, to have paid the other man a reasonable salary? Even if the Minister had doubled his salary, he would still have made twice the profit. Even if that operator’s salary had been doubled, he would have had to be paid only R200 instead of R450. Is it necessary and is it essential that this should happen? This man is required to be on duty for virtually 24 hours a day, six days a week. That is what is happening. Does this lead to efficiency? Is this an ideal situation?

The housing situation has been raised before, but I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not consider doing something about housing for his employees in the smaller centres. They suffer tremendous difficulties when trying to find accommodation. It has been all right up to now, because the hon. the Minister of Transport has co-operated. He has made houses available to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in order to house their employees. I am, however, sure that both those Ministers are aware of the fact that in the last year there has been a change of policy. The Railways Administration is now utilizing all the houses they have available for their own staff, even to the extent of housing a railway employee at a place like Eston, which is 35 miles from Pietermaritzburg, although that employee actually works in Pietermaritzburg. The result is that there are no longer any railway houses available for Post Office employees. Because of this a number of resignations have taken place in the Post Office. This has happened purely and simply because these people do not have anywhere to stay. When the hon. the Minister talks about providing housing, I wonder whether he will remember these smaller centres as well as the large centres. The large centres at least have hotels, but very often the small centres do not even have an hotel where such an employee can stay.

To return to the question of running the Post Office on business principles, we find once again that posts are being occupied by temporary staff. I think the term used in the Post Office is “relieving staff”. These employees receive a special allowance, together with a travelling allowance to enable them to get to their place of employment. Normally you find that these relieving officers draw something like twice as much as the post would normally carry if it were filled by a permanent official, resident there.

In conclusion, in the two minutes I have left, I should like to come back to the Pietermaritzburg exchange, which was mentioned briefly by the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City). I want to point out to the hon. the Minister what he is doing to his staff as a result of the poor planning which is taking place in his Department. We have asked questions over the years, since 1966, when we first came into this House, about the new telephone exchange in Pietermaritzburg. We have been told repeatedly that this will be ready in 1970. We have been told that the Post Office will be able to provide all the services required by 1970. There is no need for me to categorize the number of questions which have been asked or the replies to those questions, but I have here a letter addressed to me on 30th April, this year, by a senior official of the hon. the Minister’s Department. This is the invidious position in which the Minister has placed this official, because of his inefficient planning. This official had to write to me as follows—

Do you know what the inference here is, Sir? This means that nobody in Pietermaritzburg can expect a telephone service before November, 1971. This is because of the inefficient planning of this Department. We have heard about the delay of equipment. I was recently in contact with the managing director of one of the largest suppliers, throughout the world, of telephone equipment, which firm has recently established two factories in South Africa. They say that this is nonsense and that they can supply all the equipment which is necessary almost immediately and that as soon as the Minister has premises available, they can supply the equipment to fill those premises. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that if he is going to run this organization on a business basis he should bring in some businessmen with business training so that we can have an efficient service.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District), as usual, said absolutely nothing to which one could react. To waste the time of the House by talking about a postcard which went astray and matters of that kind, is to my mind really pathetic. If that is the only criticism which these hon. gentlemen have to level at the Post Office, then there is no criticism.

The hon. member stated that the appointment of a commission of inquiry into television was a waste of time and money. Now, not everybody is as clever as the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District). We on this side of the House realize that television is a miraculous technological development. We realize that it is a developing technology. What was new in television yesterday, is no longer new to-day. I wonder whether that hon. member can tell me what kind of television he wants to introduce. How many channels does he want to have? Does he want separate channels for an Afrikaans and an English programme? What about the services to the various Bantu nations? Can the hon. member furnish me with a reply to these questions? What influence will the introduction of such a luxury commodity have on our campaign inflation? Must it be introduced on a countrywide basis or does the hon. member want it introduced only for urban complexes? For how many hours per day does he want to introduce it? The hon. member cannot reply to any of these questions of mine. And yet he says that the appointment of a commission to investigate this very complicated matter, is a waste of time. That just goes to show the lack of insight which is being revealed on that side of the House. As usual, the hon. member for Orange Grove, with much swinging of the arms, repeated a whole lot of his old phrases this afternoon. The hon. member again spoke about the 114 exchanges which had been closed down. When an exchange is closed down, it means that that exchange cannot accommodate any more connections. That is what it means. It is conclusive proof of the lack of planning and the lack of insight of the old United Party men, because these exchanges were built in the United Party era. They never foresaw this development taking place and that is why those exchanges had to be closed down. There is no accommodation for further expansion. That is the reason, namely lack of insight and lack of planning. The hon. member disclosed here the sensational fact that one and a half million telephones on the Rand had supposedly gone out of order during the past year. How does the hon. member obtain these particulars? Surely it is nonsense to come and tell us here that these are the actual particulars. It cannot be calculated.

Yes, it can.

No, it cannot. I should like, on behalf of myself and on behalf of my 20,000 voters, to convey my greatest appreciation to-day towards the hon. the Minister and his officials in the Department of Posts for the efficient way in which they are performing these excellent and vitally essential services for our rapidly growing and expanding country under extremely difficult circumstances. It is easy to speak here about England, Switzerland and Holland. They are small countries. Ours is a vast country covering many square miles. In this vast country telecommunication services are absolutely essential for our economic development and for every facet of our national economy. These people are undoubtedly performing the most strategic service, not only with a view to our economic progress, but also in respect of our social life. That service is also being performed with a view to international expansion, progress and our security. Here I am thinking not only of the safety of the individual and of isolated communities, but also of the safety of our fatherland as such. That is why it is an honour for me to thank this Minister and his officials for the efficient service they have rendered, their dedication and the friendliness and helpfulness which I have always received from them. There will of course always be the Jeremiahs. It will never be possible to satisfy those who are dissatisfied. Even if the hon. member for Orange Grove were to arrive in a telephone paradise, he would still throw his arms up and protest to high heaven. It will never be possible to satisfy him. Of course we have long waiting lists for telephones. It would indeed be a sad day for this country if we did not have one person on a telephone waiting list. It would be the clearest indication that we were on the downgrade in the economic and in the social spheres. It would be an indication to us that we had reached the stage of arrested motion, stagnation and retrogression.

There is one easy solution to this telephone shortage problem. It is that the United Party should come into power. Twenty-five per cent of our people who have telephones today, or who are extremely eager to get telephones, will no longer be able to afford them as a result of the fact that there will again be a lack of stability and confidence and economic retrogression, as we used to have in their time. Our ordinary citizens will not then be able to afford a telephone. That will consequently be the solution. Because that will never happen for it is a political and physical impossibility for that party ever to come into office, I am afraid that we will have to be saddled with our waiting lists.

We have a long waiting list which is steadily growing. On 31st March, 1969, there were more than 79,000 names on the waiting list. On 30th September of this year the figure will be 106,000. This is the extent to which the waiting list has grown, despite of the fact that in the 1968-’69 financial year no fewer than 72,659 new telephones were supplied. In the past financial year no fewer than 85,883 new services were supplied. This is sensational, but in spite of that the waiting list is growing. It has grown in spite of the tremendous expansion of our capital expenditure. In the 1966-’67 financial year the capital expenditure for telecommunication services was R26.6 million. The present Budget makes provision for R71.7 million, an increase of 273 per cent in capital expenditure alone for telecommunication services over a period of five years. Is that not fantastic? Is that not sensational? In spite of that, that hon. member is still complaining here. It has grown in spite of the fact that at the end of March 1969, no fewer than 1,300,000 telephones were in service, and in March of this year there were more than one and a half million telephone services. It has grown in spite of the fact that the trunk line telephone system and the micro-wave system was expanded during the past two years by more than 5,000 trunk line circuits, so that 20,500 trunk lines are at present in use.

This growing waiting list for telephones is no reason to throw one’s arms up in despair. It is no reason to level accuzations at the hon. the Minister and his Department. It is symbolic of the tremendous growth of this country, the economic growth-rate which we have continued to maintain, it is symbolic of the tremendous development in the standard of living of our people. It is symbolic of the progress and the growth of the wealth which the public is enjoying under this Government. That is why it is no disgrace to have a telephone shortage. In every civilized country in the world where there is a high growth rate, there is a telephone shortage. What are hon. members on that side complaining about therefore? This sensational increase in the use of the telephone, the telephone explosion, is a sign of our times. It is no longer the case today that only prominent people can use and afford a telephone. Every person would like to have a telephone. We are living in an era where virtually every family has a telephone. The fact remains that there is a telephone for every second person in South Africa. Not only married persons, but also the young people who live in flats and in rooms, want a telephone. They can afford it under this Government. This is indisputable proof of the prosperity and welfare of this country.

Meeting this tremendous demand obviously calls for an almost superhuman effort on the part of this Government and the hon. the Minister. Many people simply cannot understand why they cannot get a telephone. They argue that the wires have already been installed in their house or flat and that the people there before them had a telephone and that they should also therefore be able to get one, So, to shorten this waiting list is not so easy. It does not simply mean the connection of the telephone instrument. Perhaps land has to be purchased and buildings have to be planned. It also comprises thorough planning so that the exchange does not have to be closed down after 30 years, as was the case when the United Party was in power. It means that materials have to be ordered and that equipment has to be manufactured. All this must be ordered long before the time; it means that apparatus has to be obtained and that cables have to be laid. The hon. the Minister stated repeatedly that it took three to four years before a telephone exchange could be completed and telephone services could be supplied. Eliminating the backlog of the number of telephones cannot be done with one wave of a magic wand. In column 977 of Hansard, the hon. the Minister said in 1969—

Last year already the hon. the Minister was saying that this would be the position.

Another extremely important factor which must be taken into account in the elimination of the backlog, apart from the planning, capital and equipment, is the question of manpower. Existing telephone services consist inter alia of more than one and a half million connected telephones, 600 automatic telegraph connections and 5,339 telex services. Simply to keep these services in operation requires many trained people. As the hon. member said, this apparatus is sometimes out of order. It cannot last forever. There must therefore be people to maintain it. That is why we need so many trained people simply in order to be able to supply these services. The way in which an efficiency with which this is done compels one’s admiration. It has happened to me that when my telephone was out of order and I dialled complaints, the people were there within half an hour to repair the telephone. Even if we had sufficient capital and even if we had enough equipment, we must still find the trained technicians and manpower. That is not so easy, because the Department must, obviously, before it introduces new services, make provision for existing subscribers.

Since I am dealing with the interruption of the service, I should like to address a small request to the hon. the Minister. It is that when a telephone account is not paid, the telephone line should not summarily be cut off. That causes frustration and dissatisfaction. Here in the large cities we have a tape recording machine which informs one that your service has been discontinued, and that you must dial a specific number. If it is practicable, it would be better if that tape message were to the effect that your account has not yet been paid and that you must see to it that it is paid within a day or two, or before a certain date, otherwise the service will be cut off. With a message like that we will be achieving the same purpose and we will be able to elicit a more sympathetic approach from the subscribers. By so doing, too, the subscribers will be caused far less expense and frustration. I want to return to the question of the manpower shortage. Because, as I have already indicated, the telecommunications services require trained technicians for the most part, it is understandable that this Department will in fact be hard hit by the manpower shortage. The reason for this is that technicians are in short supply throughout the world. That the Post Office, with such a tremendous programme, is in any way still able to supply services, fills one with wonder, and speaks volumes for their planning, their skill and their dedication. In order to cope with the manpower shortage, the Post Office has taken various important steps. Firstly, the Post Office was separated from the Public Service last year by way of legislation, and the salary structures were revised. Perhaps the time is ripe for further consideration of the salary structures, because according to the report it does not seem as if the revision of these salary structures resulted in any considerable gain in manpower. Secondly, the installation of automatic telephone exchanges, as well as cable-laying works, has been given out on contract to private tenderers, one method of alleviating the work of the technicians. Thirdly, the automation of the telephone system as such has been proceeded with on a large scale, and in this way a very efficient service has been rendered to the public, and considerable labour has been saved as well. Other economizing measures such as the introduction of a computer, an automatic mail-facer machine, cancelling machines, the automatic letter sorting machine which was installed in Pretoria and which can sort 10,000 letters per hour, and the use of mopeds for delivering post, are all helping to save on labour. These are all steps which this Department has taken to save its manpower. Fourthly, in November of last year, the Department also sent two officers to Europe to try to recruit cable jointers in particular. Contracts with forty people were negotiated, a few of whom have already arrived in this country and are fulfilling their contracts. In addition, in February of this year another three-man deputation was sent to recruit technicians. Fifthly, the employment and staff development of the Post Office has been revised and re-organized. Candidates are recruited at high schools, and are then trained by means of in-service training at our existing colleges for technical development, as well as the Post Office’s own college at Baragwanath.

Finally, the various race groups are as far as possible served by members of their own races at the Post Office. This takes place in terms of the general Government policy by means of which non-Whites are able to serve their own people, not on an integrated basis as those hon. members want it, but on a differentiated basis, by delivering telegrams and mail. They are even being trained in the Post Offices as Coloured postmasters, Indian postmasters, etc., to serve their own people in the urban residential areas. This is the policy of this Government, and this is what is being done. The establishment of these people has increased from 4,525 in 1968-’69 to 5,742 in 1970-’71, which proves that an increasing number of non-Whites have been employed who are rendering services to their own people. I should like to go further and discuss the employment of non-Whites where this concerns the work of Whites, but I would not like to tread on anyone’s toes. I see the hon. member for South Coast is not here and I therefore do not want to cause him any further embarrassment.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Algoa who has just sat down, accused the United Party mainly of having a lack of insight. I think hon. members will forgive me for saying that the hon. member was suffering from a hearing defect. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) made particular reference to the commission of inquiry into television, which was appointed and which now has to decide on the principle of whether or not we are going to get television. The objection which the hon. member for Algoa raised in connection with the technical development of television, was acknowledged by the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) when he said that a committee should be appointed in that regard. However, the hon. member for Algoa is now accusing the hon. member for Orange Grove of having too fine an insight into the matter, because he has been able to ascertain the number of calls going astray per annum.

I have searched in vain in the speeches of hon. members opposite for evidence that conditions in the Post Office to-day are such that it can keep pace with the economic development of South Africa. Neither did hon. members on the opposite side prove, in the second place, that the Post Office is capable of making increased development possible. As has been said in various debates by hon. members on this side, this growth is vital to the progress of South Africa. We have now reached the point where it is clear to me, particularly after I have listened to members on the opposite side trying to prove that the economic growth in South Africa is adequate, that we have reached a stage where they are unwilling to see increased growth in South Africa. This unwillingness springs from fear. In the first instance, they fear that they will not be able to direct such development. In the second instance, but more important, they fear that as a result of increased growth and development in South Africa, a situation will eventually develop in which there will be no room for the application of ideologies with which hon. members on the opposite side are so possessed.

It is for this reason that I have been looking forward to the debate on the Post Office. Here we are dealing with a government department which can play special part in the development of the country, particularly because it has control over means of communication. Means of communication are of particular importance to the growth and development of a country. Therefore, it has become clear to me that a stage may be reached where the Post Office can create insurmountable obstacles and place them in the way of development. Now it seems to me that the Government, in fact, again has a choice. The first is to hope that, as a result of inherent weaknesses in the Post Office, such obstacles will indeed be created. The second possibility, in case the first does not come about rapidly enough, is to continue creating artificial obstacles. To me it seems, particularly if we take into consideration the range of the increases, in postal tariffs recently announced, that a stage has now been reached where the creation of artificial obstacles forms part of an offensive to handicap development and growth in this country.

I just want to refer hon. members to certain questions I put to the Minister on 31st July in connection with the estimated annual increase in revenue as a result of the separate increase in tariffs, which was announced this year. One can make an interesting analysis from that. In the first case, we find, for example that on the whole it is going to contribute to an increase of over R14 million. But if we analyse it, we find—and this, I think, is news to the hon. member for Sunnyside— that the increases in postage will net more than R4,486,000, and that those in respect of telephones, installations and fixed-time personal-service calls will amount to R9,690,000. The hon. member for Sunnyside said here that postage rates were not the most important question, and that it was, in fact, the telephone users who had to pay more. In this case we see that these increases do, in fact, point to this. However, if we go into the question of the increases in postage rates we find that the increases in connection with printed matter, commercial papers and samples amount to R4,178,000. In other words, it is therefore clear that more than 90 per cent of the total increases in postage rates is borne by a section of the postal service which deals with the advertising industry. Hon. members surely know that the advertising industry is of great importance to the development of any country. It now seems to me that this, particularly at this stage, is an intentional and selective action to place an obstacle, which I regard as an artificial one, in the way of development. I can only repeat what hon. members on this side of the House have been saying. If the Post Office is to be run on business lines, the answer will be found rather in the direction of a larger turnover. The Post Office must be geared to having a larger turnover in order to yield large profits. For this very reason I believe I am getting suspicious of this prolonged shortage of telephones in the country, and I wonder whether this cannot become another artificial obstacle in the development of the country.

The hon. member for Koedoespoort made reference here to the role of the S.A.B.C., and was surprised because the United Party had not launched an attack on the S.A.B.C. I should like to deal with this matter. I should like to deal in particular with what I regard as the role which the South African Broadcasting Corporation plays in our national life. In this connection I should like to quote from the recent report of the chairman of the Control Board, Dr. Meyer—

As far as the English Service is concerned, we find a little further on in the report that the service—and I should like hon. members to pay attention to this— “provided a high degree of topicality with regard to events in both the local and international spheres”. Sir, what an interesting admission from the lips of the chairman of the Control Board!

But he is a “broeder”.

I do not want to go into the question of the degree to which these events and affairs were, in fact, dealt with in a topical way over the English Service, nor do I want to go into the question of the degree to which the Afrikaans Service succeeded in giving a correct and objective portrait in sound of the thoughts and dreams of the Afrikaner. The fact remains that in the eyes of the Control Board there apparently is an unbridgeable gap between the needs of the Afrikaans-speaking people and the English-speaking people of the country, and as a result one finds this difference in the objectives of the Services. Sir, if we are seriously endeavouring to bring about national unity in this country, surely it is of the utmost importance that the S.A.B.C. should reorientate itself in this sphere, and this is a responsibility which rests on the shoulders of the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs.

What do you want —neither fish nor flesh?

The radio is the medium through which one language group can get to know the other. It is a medium through which they can get to know each other intimately, through which the way of life of one group can be revealed to the other, and which can in actual fact give a portrait in sound of what each group regards as right and just, and we feel it is in this respect that the S.A.B.C. is doing South Africa in general, and the Afrikaner in particular, a disservice. We can argue about this, but surely it is an unequivocal fact that the Afrikaner is being identified with the Government. I do not want to go into the Government side’s assertion that 140,000 English-speaking people voted for the Nationalist Party, or whether that figure was only 10,000. As soon as an English-speaking person listens to the broadcasts over Radio South Africa, then he suffers from no illusion; he knows that through these broadcasts he can gain insight into the thoughts and the way of life of the Afrikaner, and if we want to bring about national unity, the question one involuntarily asks is the following: Is the image which is presented to him in those broadcasts an acceptable image; does he feel he can form part of a population group where such an outlook on life and on the world reigns supreme? The tragedy is that the S.A.B.C. is succeeding through its programmes such as “African Survey”. “Point of View” and “Current Affairs” …

Excellent broadcasts.

… in giving a wrong image of the Afrikaner. The S.A.B.C. succeeds in creating the impression that the Afrikaner is bent on forcing his political views on one in season and out of season; that he is prepared to attack organizations or individuals without their having a chance to defend themselves. [Interjections.] For as long as the South African Broadcasting Corporation is allowed to continue in this way, for that long we shall not be able to bring about national unity in this country.

Bring your evidence.

When one listens to the programmes—even if the various reports are correct—one gains the impression that the spirit in which they are presented leaves much to be desired.

Give an example.

I refer, for example, to a programme on the behaviour of students; I do not know precisely when that programme was broadcast, but one found that the broadcasters had not chosen the prototype student for the programme. If they want to present an English-speaking student on an English campus, they choose a person who is not a prototype of the English student.

How do you know?

Sir, I also move in these circles. The person who is chosen and presented to the people as a prototype, is a person whom one knows is not a prototype, but it suits the programme to choose that person; it forms part of the whole. Sir, it is deeds that count. We may get assurances about national unity from platform to platform, but we shall not find ourselves heading in the right direction towards national unity until the S.A.B.C. gives a more objective image of the real situation.

Sir, my time is limited and therefore I should like to return to the question of the increase in postage rates. The hon. member for Harrismith had a great deal to say about the fact that the last increase of postage rates took place in 1952.

That is a fact.

That is a fact, but what happened as a result of decimalization? As a result of the change-over to decimalization, the Post Office automatically received a 20 per cent increase. Before the change-over to decimalization, one could in certain circumstances despatch 120 letters for 10 shillings. [Interjections.] Who benefited from that? It is unfair and not quite correct to say that there has been no increase since 1952.

Sir, the new member for Durban (Central) is indeed a very courageous member. He once again accused the S.A.B.C. of interfering in the party-political sphere. I want to tell the new member for Durban (Central) that approximately two years ago his Leader, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, told the public and the electorate of South Africa all over the country how the S.A.B.C. was interfering in the party-political sphere.

That is true.

I challenged him to furnish proof to this effect, and up to now I have not received any proof from the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

Sir, the hon. member for Orange Grove levelled the same kind of accusations here as were levelled by the hon. member for Durban (Central) a moment ago.

What did Die Beeld say?

I replied to him and I asked him to furnish his proofs. He furnished proof that was two or three years old, things that happened in 1967, before I had become Minister. It referred to news items broadcast on “Current Affairs”. Sir, to-day the hon. member for Orange Grove very sensibly decided not to discuss the S.A.B.C. Last year I stated my standpoint on the programmes of the S.A.B.C. very clearly in this House, and I do not want us to debate this matter year after year. [Interjection.] If the hon. member for Durban (Point) would not be so nervous, he would learn something as well. Last year I stated very clearly that my standpoint in respect of this matter was, in the first place, that I did not consider it desirable for a Minister to interfere in the programmes of the S.A.B.C., for those members opposite, as I know them, would be the first to accuse me as the Minister of interfering in order to drag party-politics into the programmes of the S.A.B.C. They are not prepared, and will not be prepared, to accept me as an impartial judge of those programmes. In that case, why are we arguing about this matter? In the second place, I carefully explained to the hon. members what the object of those programmes was, especially “Current Affairs”, to which they had been raising so many objections. From this discussion it was very apparent that there was a fundamental difference between my approach and that of the hon. member for Orange Grove. We hold totally different views on the difference between party-politics and politics, and this does not only apply to the views held by the hon. member for Orange Grove, but also to those held by his whole party on the other side. As long as that party is unpatriotic, they will refuse to see the national interests of South Africa, and it is that national interest which the S.A.B.C. is propagating and defending on the radio at all times. In brief, this is the difference, and it is of no avail to us to drag this old topic across the floor of the House and to argue it with one another every time. I want to tell the hon. member for Orange Grove and that young, courageous member over there as well …

He has already sold his Afrikanership.

… that they are to bring me proof and lodge their complaints with me in writing. I said this to the hon. member for Orange Grove across the floor of this House last year, and it is strange that the hon. member for Orange Grove did not bring this up again this afternoon. He left it to the hon. member for Durban (Central) [Interjection.] Then there is the Broederbond spectre which only gives the hon. member for Orange Grove nightmares during Parliamentary sessions and whenever he feels like issuing a statement in the Sunday Times without knowing on what matter he wants to make a statement—then we have the story about the Broederbond. I am giving them the opportunity. I shall investigate the matter, these vague accusations which have also been made by the hon. member for Durban (Central). I do not hold it against him. He has only been here for a few weeks and has seen his other colleagues making those accusations. This is the example they set him, and as the old cock crows, so crows the young. I do not hold it against him, but if any of those hon. members would furnish the necessary evidence in writing, so that I may investigate it properly, I shall do it as I promised in this House last year, and I shall see to it that the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation does not enter the party-political field.

But the political field.

Yes, the political field, which is in the national interest. [Laughter.] You see, Mr. Speaker, we cannot reach agreement with one another, for they do not know what national interest is. They think that in referring to national interest, we are referring to the National Party. [Interjection.]

But, surely, this is true; the national interest and the National Party are one and the same thing; there is no difference.

No, there is no difference. That is why they are feeling so guilty.

In the third part of his amendment the hon. member for Orange Grove said that we had failed to take steps to expedite the advent of television by, inter alia, requesting the Commission of Inquiry into Matters relating to Television to submit an interim report. I want to tell the hon. member that it is, after all, ridiculous to move such an amendment and to address such a request to me. To appoint a commission of inquiry to investigate all the aspects of a television service in South Africa and then, simply because it has entered that hon. member’s mind to make this request to me, to tell them, after a few months only, that I now want an interim report and that they are now to advise me and the Government on whether or not we should introduce a television service, would after all amount to my having taken leave of my senses. Surely, this is ridiculous. This is, after all, the way the U.P. goes to work. This is the way they looked after the interests of this country during the years they were in power. But, surely, this is not the way the National Government and its Ministers do things. But do you know, Sir, what the trouble is with the other side of the House? They do not have matters which they can discuss. I have been sitting here all afternoon, and, Sir, you have been in the Chair most of the time. There is one hon. member who, I think, asked me 20 or 30 questions. I want to tell that hon. member that this is not the place for putting questions; he can put them on the Question Paper and I shall reply to his questions, but why does he ask them here? Why does he not take part in the discussions by conducting a debate on these matters? This shows a lack of arguments on the part of hon. members opposite, and basically this is their trouble. That is why the hon. member for Orange Grove approached me with this request in regard to television, for he does not know what to discuss. He had made such a poor study of the position of our telephone service in this country that he was unable to discuss it for 30 minutes.

But what does Joyce have to say about it?

I want to concede this point to those hon. members, i.e. that what was written by Mrs. Waring, did embarrass me, but I want to tell them that my grandmother used to say that there were some people who, for want of something better to say, sometimes said things they did not know anything about. While I am discussing this matter, there is one thing I do want to put right. In the article she wrote, Mrs. Waring unfortunately stated that she had made inquiries on a high level and sympathized with us for having to work with incompetent, insufficient and incapable staff. I must, on this occasion, deny this vehemently. Neither I, nor the Postmaster-General, nor any Deputy Postmaster-General, nor any high-ranking senior official of the Post Office has spoken to Mrs. Waring in this regard, and I want to state categorically that I definitely deny the statement made by Mrs. Waring in this regard, i.e. that we have incompetent staff in the Post Office. On the contrary, Sir, I want to tell you that we have some of the most competent officials in the service of the Post Office and although the numbers are insufficient—it is true that there is a tremendous staff shortage —I want to thank and praise them for the hard work they have been doing over these years and for the good and faithful service they have been rendering to the Post Office.

The hon. member for Orange Grove had a great deal to say about the telephone shortage. Does the hon. member recall that in 1968, just after I had become Minister, I accurately predicted to him in this House what the telephone position would be? This afternoon the hon. member pretended to be so astonished at the telephone position, and also at my failure to effect any improvements. Now he is astonished at my being no improvement on Albert Hertzog. After all, they want Albert Hertzog back. [Interjections.] Why are they so astonished, Sir? After all, during the election the hon. the Leader of the Opposition did say in the Johannesburg City Hall, “Bring Albert Hertzog back.” I was really under the impression that, if they were to come into power, as they suggested they would, they would make Dr. Albert Hertzog Minister of Posts and Telegraphs again. In fact, I felt sorry for the hon. member for Orange Grove. I want to read out to the hon. member for Orange Grove what I said in this House on 11th June, 1968. He is welcome to look it up. I said (Hansard, Vol. 24, Cols. 7012-7013) —

I proceeded to furnish the House and the country with a detailed explanation of the position.

After I had resumed my seat, the hon. member for Orange Grove was on his feet at once. Now I want to read out to hon. members a few sentences to show what the hon. member for Orange Grove had to say on that occasion (Hansard, Vol. 24, Col. 7014) —

(Col. 7015) —

To-day the hon. member wants to crucify me because what I predicted in 1968, has come true. In that same speech the hon. member continued as follows (Col. 7015) —

That is my reply.

And now, to-day, the hon. member has levelled the accusation that I am a weaker Minister than Albert Hertzog was, and that the position has deteriorated. In 1968 the hon. member gave me credit for my honesty; today he wants to crucify me because the prediction I made in 1968, i.e. that the position would deteriorate, has come true.

Sir, I am being honest about the position. In my statement to Dagbreek, in the course of my interview with Mr. Thys Human, I set out the position very clearly. It is not necessary for me to do so again to-day. Some hon. members opposite read out that interview. The telephone position in certain parts of the country is a very difficult one. That is true. It is no use denying it. I predicted that it would happen. But I also explained, as hon. members on this side of the House indicated, that it would take four to five years before the effect of all the capital expenditure through which we tried to increase the capacity of the telephone service, would be evident. It will only be after the capacity of the telephone service has been increased that we shall be in a position to provide telephone services at a faster rate.

Therefore, it is only the capacity that will be increased over five years? *

Sir, the hon. member should rather listen now. He can put all his questions to me, but for the present he should rather listen. I am now engaged in carefully explaining the position to him. In 1968, on that very same occasion, I told hon. members in this House that we expected to spend R113.5 million on telecommunication services over the next three years, i.e. from 1969 up to the end of the 1971 financial year. That amount would have been R31 million more than the R82 million spent on such services over the previous three years, i.e. from 1965 to 1968. Much more than that amount of R113.5 million has been and will still be spent during the coming financial year. This shows the House and the country the gravity with which this telephone position is being tackled. I want to emphasize this point in order to give hon. members an idea of the capital expenditure being poured into these services.

The estimate we arrived at in 1968, was for an amount of R113.5 million over the next three years in respect of our capital expansion programme, and even if it were a fantastic estimate, I say that that amount has been exceeded. Taken together with the R72 million for which provision is being made in these Estimates, it means that, over the three years from 1968 up to the end of the 1971 financial year, no less than R165 million will be spent merely on financing our telecommunication expansion programme. This is 33 per cent more than our estimate for this purpose in 1968, and it is twice as much as was spent on this over the previous three years, i.e. from 1965 to 1968. This proves beyond any doubt the gravity with which this matter is being tackled.

Before going on, I want to refer on this occasion to the real telephone shortage in the principal areas in which the shortage is very acute. Then I want to set to hon. members two economic problems which are very closely related to the provision of requested and essential telephone services. Everybody in the country is stressing the fact that the Government should persist in its fight against inflation. The conviction is often expressed that under prevailing circumstances it is essential that the financing of State expenditure should not contribute to the aggravation of inflationary pressure, but that it should at the same time not discourage economic growth. This is the dilemma in which the Post Office finds itself at present. It ought to be obvious to anybody that it is not possible to meet both of these requirements just like that. On the one hand it is expected that our capital expenditure should be such that it is not of an inflationary nature, but, on the other hand, the Post Office is expected to expand its telephone services in such a way that it will not impede the economic growth. However, the actual position is, as I have already said, that the Post Office has to expand its telephone services, and will have to maintain and persevere with its expansion programme at an exceptionally high rate, so as to make up the backlog and keep pace with the economic development of the country.

I think it is generally being agreed in the country that the Post Office should proceed with its telecommunication expansion programme at this exceptionally high rate. However, to assist in the campaign to combat inflation, it is being expected that the Post Office should rather limit or substantially curtail its capital expenditure. This can, of course, have only one result, i.e. that of slowing down its expansion programme. This is something which is not desired and is not desirable either. The only alternative is, therefore, to finance fewer and fewer items on our capital expansion programme from loan funds, for this is definitely inflationary. The only other source which is available to the Post Office and from which it can finance its capital expenditure, is its revenue.

Now I want to tell the hon. member for Jeppes something. For a few years he was not a member of this House, and one cannot expect him to have kept pace with the developments here. When the Post Office became autonomous, the hon. member was not here either. I want to tell the hon. member that in raising objections to revenue funds having to be used for financing the loan account, he is certainly not familiar with the Post Office Readjustment Act passed here in 1968. He would be well advised to acquaint himself with it in the meantime, for having done so he would not criticize me on this aspect. In fact, this immediately explains the necessity for almost 50 per cent of the capital expenditure in the 1970-’71 Estimates to be financed from revenue, whereas it was less than 30 per cent for the 1969-’70 Estimates. To render this possible, the increase of certain tariffs on 1st July, 1970. was. for financial reasons, inevitable. I shall come back to the increase in tariffs later on.

Now I want to deal with another economic problem. It is a very difficult problem which is very closely related to the telecommunication expansion programme of the Post Office. People are so apt to talk about accelerating the economic growth rate. When the economic growth rate is accelerated, those very same people who advocated an acceleration of the growth rate, are far too apt to level criticism. Then they criticize those public services which are lagging behind and which cannot develop at such a fast rate. It has been proved again and again that under conditions of strong economic growth, the private sector moves more rapidly than the Government sector does. This does not only happen in South Africa, but also in every other country of the world. This is what both the private sector and the Opposition forget when they are so apt to criticize the telephone services which cannot keep pace with the rapid growth. Then members of the private sector forget that, by means of more attractive salaries and conditions of service, with which the State and the Post Office cannot compete, they are drawing away from the Post Office professional officers and technicians on the Post Office staff. But at the same time they expect the Post Office, now with fewer professional officers and technicians on its staff, to carry on its expansion programme at a faster rate and to keep pace with the faster economic development. In the end the inevitable result is an imbalance in the infra-structure, and this aggravates the backlog in respect of certain basic public services. There is only one cure for that, and this is a sphere which does not fall within the scope of the activities of the Post Office. That solution is, in my honest opinion, orderly development which will result in a gradual but satisfactory rise being effected in everybody’s standard of living, inflation being combated effectively and wasteful exploitation in the sphere of labour being eliminated, and a balance being struck in the infra-structure of this pattern of development in both the public and the private sector, and which will ensure that the public sector will make up backlogs which have actually been caused by the excessively rapid development in the private sector over the recent period of a very high growth rate. This is not a matter over which my Department has any control, and for that reason I cannot say any more about it. I want to point out to hon. members what tremendous development has been taking place here in our urban complexes. I shall take, in the first place, the Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vereeniging urban complex. On 31st March, 1969, the waiting list for telephone services in that area was 38,433. As from 1st April, 1969, to 31st March, 1970, my Department provided 52,319 telephones in that area.

In one year?

Yes, in one year. In other words, 14,000 telephones more than the number of names that appeared on the waiting list. And how many were there on the waiting list on 1st April, 1970?—37,548. Now I shall take the Cape Peninsula. On 31st March, 1969, the waiting list was 13,431. During the subsequent year we provided 16,558 telephones. In spite of the fact that we provided 3,000 telephones more than the number of names that appeared on the waiting list, the waiting list was 15,174 on 31st March, 1970.

How many of those provisions were transfers and not new telephones?

These were new services for the most part, but some transfers were included in this figure as well. However, this figure does not include shared services.

Does it in fact include transfers?

Yes.

What is the percentage?

Unfortunately I am not in a position to tell the hon. member that now. However, it does not alter the argument at all. [Interjections.] How does it alter the argument? After all, one’s name is placed on the waiting list when one moves into a new house and wants one’s telephone to be transferred to that new address.

One’s name is not placed on the waiting list for new services.

On 31st March, 1969, the waiting list in the Durban area was 11,131. During the subsequent year my Department provided 12,125 telephones. On 31st March, 1970, the waiting list for telephones was 15,332. Now I want to mention the last area. These areas are the six areas where the telephone shortage is the most acute. On 31st March, 1969, the waiting list for telephones in the Port Elizabeth area was 3,156. In the subsequent year my Department provided 4,433 telephones. On 31st March, 1970. the waiting list was 3,071, i.e. approximately 85 fewer than in the previous year. The aggregate number of names on the waiting list for these six urban areas in South Africa was 66,151 on 31st March, 1969. During the subsequent year my Department provided 85,435 telephones in all. Instead of a dent having been made in the waiting list of 66,000 the waiting list was still 71,150 on 31st March, 1970. That was the development; this gives us an indication of the tremendous development which has taken place in those urban complexes. All of this is a result of the economic growth which is taking place. What is more, it is in these very areas that the largest number of staff members are being lured away to the industries and to commerce, the result being that I simply do not have sufficient staff to provide for the expansion of telephone services at such a rate that it may keep pace with the economic development. In other words, this inevitably leads to the balance of our infra-structure being disturbed, and in addition to that a quite new development has taken place all over the world, i.e. what is normally called the “explosion” in the use being made of our telephone services. On the Witwatersrand, for instance, it was found that the use being made of telephones over the past year had increased by 12 per cent, which has served to aggravate further the problems of a system which is overloaded already. The hon. member for Welkom quite rightly indicated here this afternoon what the position is in other countries of the world. It is so often being said, and I have also heard about it, how wonderful the telephone services are in certain Western countries of the world. For instance, I had to listen to how wonderful a telephone service they have in America. In a recent American article I read the following—

That is typical of Johannesburg.

No, the hon. member is exaggerating once again. That is an old weakness of his. He is always exaggerating something, and by doing so he weakens his argument at once. It is only during peak hours that difficulty is being experienced in Johannesburg. At least, those peak hours do not last all day. That is the position in the United States of America to-day. Even the much vaunted Bell system of which people are speaking so highly, cannot cope with this increasing use being made of the telephone.

It may seem as though the deterioration of the traffic capacity of transport services in urban areas is playing a major role in this explosion in the use being made of the telephone services, and that more and more use is therefore being made of the telephone. This is a development which we must face squarely and of which we must take due cognizance. It is very clear that more emphasis will have to be placed on the quality and the carrying capacity of the telephone traffic through our exchanges and lines. It will no longer be possible to provide, as easily as was the case before, new telephone services at exchanges that are overloaded already. The deloading of exchanges and of lines will have to be given preference instead. Hon. members will appreciate what this means. Here I want the hon. member for Orange Grove to listen very attentively, for this will only mean one thing: It will result in our telephone waiting list rising more sharply and more rapidly for the next few years, until our telephone service will have developed that extra capacity so that more and more services may be provided. Our telephone waiting list, as I said in my speech here this afternoon, is definitely not a barometer of good service. After all, it will be of no avail to us to boast of our having virtually no waiting list. On a previous occasion I said in regard to the waiting list that, if we stopped our telephone expansion programme and used those people, we could, within a very short while, provide with a telephone every person who wanted one. But what would be the use of installing those telephones, for subsequent to that they would have no telephone service. They would simply not be able to use their telephones. That is why I say that it is of no use to us to boast of our having virtually no waiting list if, along with that, we had a telephone service which could not be used by anybody. The fact that we have been concentrating so much on catching up with the waiting list, has led to the congestion of exchanges. This is what I want to say to the hon. member for Orange Grove, who is so concerned about the congestion of exchanges. But this has also led to a large-scale waste of manpower on the maintenance level, where one has to keep numerous employees to attend to the maintenance of the service. Instead of that one should rather concentrate on the expansion of the capacity of these services, so that more and more telephones may be provided once that capacity has been sufficiently increased. For that reason my instructions at the moment are in fact that we should concentrate more on the quality of the telephone service. The waiting list can only be shortened once the necessary capacity has been built into our telephone system. I arrived at this decision after thorough consideration and detailed discussions with the Administration of the Post Office as well as on the advice of the Post Office Staff Board.

As far as this matter is concerned, I want to add, for the sake of clearness, that it stands to reason that the provision of new services will be proceeded with as and when the capacity of the system, because of our expansion programme, permits. This decision is quite inevitable, owing to the ever-soaring demand for the use of telephone services. In the meantime we shall proceed unremittingly, as these Estimates prove to hon. members in no uncertain manner. With these Estimates we intend to spend almost R18 million more than was spent during the past financial year, when R54 million was spent in order to continue our telephone communication expansion programme. The implementation of our expansion programme will be proceeded with unremittingly, subject, of course, to the restrictions being experienced.