Mr. Chairman, when business was suspended yesterday evening, I was referring to the necessity of price control in some form or other in order to prevent the exploitation of the public. In this regard I want to refer especially to the part that chain stores in particular play in this process of exploitation by the chronic sales they are forever having. I must say at once that a great deal of money is spent on advertising these sales. It is calculated that Rll,4 million was spent on advertising by chain stores and retailers for the promotion of business in 1971. That was 32 per cent more than in 1970. I have no fault to find with these people advertising their wares and seeking business in that way, but I think it is wrong if those costs are eventually recovered from the consumer. Recently a case came to our attention of a chain store that had on its shelves an aerosol canister containing a certain cleansing agent and selling at 55 cents. The next day, when the sale of that chain store started, the canister’s price was 61 cents all of a sudden. When the difference of 6 cents was pointed out to them, the reply was, “Yes, but it is your Government with its sales duty that necessitated this increase.” This kind of exploitation must be checked and therefore I want to plead that price control in one form or other to remain applicable in order to prevent this kind of malpractice.

In this regard there is another matter to which I should also like to refer. Recently prosecutions were instituted in the Eastern Transvaal against certain bakeries that sold bread which was underweight. I must say that we are grateful to the Consumers’ Council, which pointed out this very evil and took the initiative in having these prosecutions instituted. I also want to plead with the hon. the Minister this morning for an investigation into this kind of offence not to remain limited to the Eastern Transvaal, but that investigations into the weight of bread should be extended to include the entire country and that the matter should be looked into periodically.

In the last few minutes left to me, I want to put in a plea for the East Rand. The East Rand is to an increasing extent becoming the victim of mines closing down. Without going into too much detail, for which there is no time this morning anyway, I just want to mention in passing that the East Rand will be losing all its mining activities in the next five or ten years. I think it will be a good thing if some or other form of compensation could be given to make up for the disappearance of the mines. In speaking about compensation, I particularly have in mind the possibility of establishing light industries on the East Rand. Now, the problem which is usually experienced, especially by prospective industrialists from overseas, is that they are not always acquainted with the possibilities offered to such industrialists by an area such as the East Rand, and Springs in particular. There are the possibilities of the availability of labour, housing, schools, communications and. from the nature of the matter, industrial land as well. Consequently I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is not possible to consider allowing local authorities to supply to the hon. the Minister’s department particulars of such facilities as they have available in abundance. That department, which continually has to deal with inquiries from prospective industrialists, can then keep this information in the form of some register or other which they, in turn, can place at the disposal of prospective industrialists who make inquiries. In this way assistance may be riven in order to bring these people into contact with those places, such as the East Rand, where they may further investigate the possibility of establishing industries. I realize that such a step may entail many administrative problems for the department concerned, but I have every confidence that the department will be able to steer clear of those problems so that a special contribution may be made in that way to compensate us on the East Rand for the cessation of mining activities there.

Mr. Chairman, before replying to the matters which have already been discussed, I should like to express my appreciation to the members of this House who have participated in this debate. I believe that this debate lends itself to the making of constructive speeches for the promotion of our trade, our industry and our economy in general, and it is in fact my opinion that we have had a considerable number of these in this debate. I therefore have the privilege of expressing my appreciation to the hon. members for the contributions they have made. I already discussed several subjects yesterday, and now I want to deal briefly with the remaining subjects.

I shall begin with the hon. member who has just sat down, namely the hon. member for Springs. Yesterday evening he spoke about the delivery of cars by road and this morning he touched upon two other subjects. I do not want to elaborate very widely on them. As far as the delivery of cars is concerned, I must point out that the purchaser may choose how he wants his car delivered. There is a lot of talk about the speed at which cars are driven when they are delivered by road, but as far as I know road deliveries are usually done under the supervision of a mechanic and should be done properly. Nevertheless, there is always a difference of opinion on this matter among purchasers. There are those who say they like the car to be delivered by road so that when it reaches them, it has already been run in, but on condition that such a car is run in properly. This is the problem which the hon. member raised. But if the purchaser insists that his car should rather be delivered by rail, his request will be granted. I think in South Africa many more deliveries are done by rail than in most other countries of the world. In most countries of the world it has to a larger extent become the practice to deliver cars by road than is the case in South Africa.

The hon. member also spoke about price control and about bread being underweight, etc. I just want to say that where there are any complaints and problems, we appeal to the public to get in touch with the Department of Commerce in regard to any abuse in regard to prices. As far as bread is concerned, inspectors visit the various bakeries from time to time to see whether the bread is not underweight, and prosecutions can then be instituted if necessary.

Lastly, the hon. member spoke about the East Rand. I understand his problem in that regard; I realize that when the mines on the East Rand reach the end of their lives, other industries will have to be established to take the place of the mines and to provide employment opportunities there. The hon. member will realize that it is not really the task of my department to give substantial encouragement for the establishment of industries in a particular local area. We have to see South Africa as a whole. I think it is primarily the task of the local authority to bring the available facilities to the attention of the department. When industrialists are looking for places to establish their industries, we can bring the facilities available at the various places to their attention, after which they can make the final choice in the light of all the particulars.

Sir, the hon. member for Pinetown raised another question about which I should also just like to say a few words, namely State corporations. The hon. member has discussed this matter in the past as well, and he has now asked in particular to what extent we have control over State corporations and what the aims and objects of these corporations are. The hon. member was concerned about not being afforded sufficient opportunity to examine the investments made by the State corporations, especially by the IDC. As I see the position, the primary, the most important and the main purpose of the IDC as such, if I may confine myself to the IDC—I think that what I am saying here applies to the other State corporations as well—is to promote industrial development in cases where the private sector is perhaps slow in establishing industries, or where the private sector perhaps does not have the necessary means. The task of the IDC. then, is to render assistance by means of loans, share investments or whatever, in order to promote industrial development in that sphere. Of course, this applies particularly to strategic industries, industries which we regard as essential to South Africa, and which perhaps cannot be justified on a purely economic basis, but which are nevertheless essential in the national interest. There it is the task of the IDC to intervene and to help. Then of course there is the question of the establishment of border industries. Here too, the IDC also plays an important part. We use the IDC in order to render the necessary aid and assistance through various avenues in regard to the establishment of border industries. Furthermore, the hon. member said he had been unable to obtain a list of the investments of the IDC. It is true that all those particulars are not made available in the annual reports of the IDC, but I want to say to the hon. member that I receive full particulars from the IDC every year in regard to its investments and activities, and if the hon. member is interested in obtaining anything in that regard, he may just get in touch with me and I shall give him the necessary information or obtain it for him if I personally do not have it at my disposal. This, in broad outline, is the task of the IDC, and this also applies to the other State corporations, each in its particular sphere. We are fully aware that the State corporations should not enter spheres where private entrepreneurs are able to do the necessary. My personal conviction is that where private entrepreneurs are able to tackle the work and carry it out, it is not the task of the State corporations to intervene. It goes without saying that in the past the IDC perhaps made investments which were not as sensible as the hon. member or I would have liked to see, and it may also appear later that the IDC made certain investments that were not sound or good. But this probably applies to any undertaking of the magnitude of the IDC. In general, however, I think the State corporations are doing very valuable work for South Africa. As far as control is concerned, I do not think the hon. member need be concerned. I personally and my department are continually in close contact with the activities of the State corporations, and before entering any new spheres—these are my instructions to the IDC in particular—they must first get in touch with me so that we may ascertain whether it is the proper sphere for the IDC.

†The hon. member for Pinetown also referred to the so-called Swazi gap. I suppose the hon. member was thinking of the possibility that whereas we have import control in South Africa, Swaziland could allow the importation of, say, cheap raw materials, manufacture goods there and then sell those goods to South Africa, because there is a free traffic of goods over our common borders. Sir, I think this is a possibility, but I think in the present circumstances it is rather unlikely. In our customs agreement with the three former Protectorates—Swaziland, Lesotho and Botswana—there is a clause which provides that if South Africa introduces import control, this must be respected by the other signatories to the customs agreement. We are always in consultation with Swaziland and the other territories with regard to matters of this kind; they are aware of our protective measures for our industries, and in view of the fact that we consult with them from time to time I do not think it is very likely that Swaziland would allow our import control measures to become ineffective by allowing the importation into Swaziland and, through Swaziland, into South Africa of goods of which we would not approve. The possibility is there, but we shall watch the position, and I do not think it is likely to become a serious problem.

*The hon. member for Smithfield spoke about the motor industry. I do not think it is necessary for me to elaborate further on that. The hon. member for Gardens also spoke about the motor industry. In the Budget debate earlier this year he also spoke about the motor car industry. I think it is necessary for me to say a few words with reference to what he said about the motor car industry yesterday, as well as earlier. In the first place, I think it is wrong to say that we are tackling this Third Phase, or rather the development of the motor car industry, in a period of inflation when we have to contend with all the different problems which arise from inflation. The hon. member is aware that we started with these various phases a few years ago already. We had inflation then as well, to a worse extent than we have it today. Therefore it is not right to say that we are now tackling the Third Phase of the motor car industry in a period of inflation. It is part of our programme which we feel compelled to proceed with. Furthermore, I think it is wrong to say that the quality of South African motor cars is necessarily inferior to that of other cars. On the whole—not that there are no shortcomings anywhere—I think the motor cars manufactured in South Africa are of good quality.

The hon. member also referred to the numbers of motor cars manufactured here in South Africa by the various manufacturers. He said there were 15 manufacturers in the country and that they would manufacture at an average of 5 000 units per year. I do not think this little calculation is correct, because if we take the 176 000 motor cars sold in 1971 and divide it by 15, we get 11 700, and not 5 000 as the hon. member said. Besides, the commercial vehicles are also the product of the manufacturers and if they are added to the motor cars, the average for the same 15 manufacturers is 19 400 units per manufacturer instead of the 5 000 which the hon. member mentioned. The real facts of the matter are that four of the manufacturers sold between 35 000 and 48 000 units. Three manufacturers sold between 20000 and 29 000 units. Three manufacturers sold between 12 000 and 16 000 units, while five manufacturers sold between 2 000 and 8 000 units. Then the hon. member elaborated on the prices and the various components of the motor cars which are allegedly so much more expensive. I admit that our motor cars are more expensive, but they are not so much more expensive as the hon. member suggested.

The hon. member for Smithfield mentioned examples yesterday of motor cars which are not so much more expensive as the hon. member for Gardens alleged. He mentioned that the Ford Capri was 35 per cent more expensive in South Africa than in the United Kingdom. Information I have received from the Ford Company shows that, inclusive of sales and customs duty, the retail price of the Capri Coup 1 600 is R2 377 in South Africa and R2 134 in the United Kingdom, which means a difference of only 11,4 per cent. The hon. member said the difference was 35 per cent. If one leaves all the duties out of account, there is a difference of only 4,4 per cent on this Capri which the hon. member mentioned as an example. The hon. member also said: “We must pay for the luxury of a motor industry.” I do not want to carry this argument too far, but I find it strange that we are all eager to expand our industries, while this hon. member is trying to restrict their expansion. Surely it is common cause with us that we ourselves should manufacture and expand as far as possible, but what is much more important to me is that this entire scheme was tackled in close co-operation with the motor industry. The motor industry knows of this undertaking. Some of them have problems, but in general the manufacturers, especially the major manufacturers, are in favour of this Third Phase and do not want to hear of anything being done to curtail the Third Phase development. I therefore think we should proceed with the implementation of this Third Phase, because, generally speaking, I think it is in the best interests of South Africa.

I do not want to discuss the matter of the models any further. We know there are too many models in South Africa. This question of the models and of how we should reduce the large number of models is something which has been argued about for a long time already. It presents a problem and I personally believe that these various phases of the development of the motor industry, and especially the Third Phase, will contribute towards certain of the models dropping out in the process so that there will be fewer left, but perhaps not to the extent that the hon. member for Gardens and I should like to see.

The hon. member for Bellville referred to the trade fair being held in Johannesburg, and I should like to join him in congratulating the people who arranged this trade fair, on this undertaking of theirs. I had the privilege of opening this first trade fair of South Africa last Monday, and I think it is really wonderful to see, when moving around there, what is already being manufactured in South Africa and the high quality of the goods exhibited there, not only for the local buyer; there are several hundreds of foreign buyers who have come to South Africa for this purpose.

The hon. member for Von Brandis put forward a very theoretical argument in regard to GATT and I feel I would prefer to study his speech in writing, because I cannot agree with him. If I were to accept his suggestions that GATT is not dangerous and that we should simply leave matters at that, i.e. all the controls which we have in respect of certain commodities and which create so many problems for us because, as a result, we do not have a free hand in protecting our local industries, we may simply close the doors to our economic development. This is our big problem today. I must honestly say that I found the hon. member’s arguments rather theoretical, but I accept that the problems are not necessarily a result of our association with GATT. I accept that and I agree with him on one point, namely that if one enters into an agreement with a second party, one cannot only want to reap the benefits and suffer no disadvantages. Naturally we must accept the disadvantages of our association with GATT as well. But at present we are living in circumstances which are so completely different from what they were when this agreement and these commitments were entered into, that we should make it our major aim to attain greater freedom to develop South Africa’s economy in the direction in which we should like to develop it. At present, it is controlled and regulated to an excessive extent by our commitments to GATT. I just want to add that the Board of Trade and Industries to which the hon. member referred, does not freely grant tariff increases for the protection of industries. They do not only take into account the protection an industry wants or the circumstances of our association with GATT. They take into account all the other circumstances which may affect the development of that industry and the general economy in South Africa, and consequently they are in fact rather conservative as regards affording protection to our industries. That is the very reason why I recently asked the Board of Trade and Industries to be somewhat more liberal in their approach to protection and not simply to push the matter aside because it is a tied article under GATT, but to bring it to our attention and to see whether some other way cannot be found of meeting the problems.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central again discussed the possibility of ore exports through Port Elizabeth. I am not going to discuss that any further today. In fact, I am sorry the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central raised it again. The Cabinet has taken a decision that the obtaining of tenders should be proceeded with for the construction of the railway line and the harbour, etc., in respect of the Saldan-ha-Sishen scheme, and we should give that scheme a proper chance now. Part of that decision taken in favour of the Saldanha-Sishen scheme is that St. Croix will not be proceeded with at the moment. We should rather leave that matter at that now. The tenders are being awaited, and let us first see what the tenders will be in regard to Saldanha, and then the hon. member can discuss the matter again.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he does not agree with the statement made by Minister Schoeman that if Wilhelmi is able to produce written proof, further negotiations may take place? *

The newspaper report I saw was to the effect that there was a possibility of selling an additional 1 million tons of ore. The present facilities at Port Elizabeth are not yet being fully utilized. Only two-thirds of the present facilities there are being utilized. If that contract can be obtained, I should like to ask Mr. Wilhelmi to use the facilities already existing there and to accept the contract and export the ore through Port Elizabeth, using the facilities already available there.

The hon. member for Algoa spoke about television and asked certain questions. To begin with, I want to reply to those questions, after which I shall relate in brief what we are trying to do in regard to television. He asked whether we were going to go in for local manufacturing. My reply is “yes”. He asked whether there would be standardization. To this my reply is also “yes”. He asked whether there was going to be hire purchase. My reply is also “yes”. Therefore we need not discuss those details any further. As far as television is concerned, it is only the manufacturing aspect which falls under the Department of Industries, as the hon. member will understand. I should like to give some information. We have made it our task to try to determine, in the first place, how many undertakings there are in South Africa which are interested in manufacturing television sets. After we had obtained the particulars, we found that approximately 48 undertakings were interested. Our first step is to determine how many companies are interested in assembling and building television sets. Secondly, it is essential to determine which undertakings are interested in manufacturing the components of television sets. In the third place, it is necessary for us to sort out the matter and, with a view to the best interests of South Africa, to try to determine how many manufacturers there should be, who should manufacture the components and what components, if any, should be imported. A committee consisting of senior officials of my department, the Board of Trade and Industries and the South African Bureau of Standards has been appointed for this purpose. The S.A.B.S. naturally plays an important role in regard to the standardization of television sets.

Initially we found that no fewer than 48 undertakings were interested in manufacturing television sets. We then tried to reduce the number and eventually reached 19. Then we tried to combine them and group them. Subsequently the number was reduced to 11. At the moment we have to decide to whom the building of television sets is to be entrusted. My personal opinion is that it is in the interests of South Africa that there should be few manufacturers so that there is a large turnover per manufacturer. On the other hand, however, it is equally essential that there should be sufficient manufacturers so that there may be proper competition among them. On the basis of those two considerations, we have to decide how many manufacturers there are to be and who they are to be. In my opinion four or five manufacturers would be able to meet the needs of South Africa best.

Furthermore, of course, there is the question of the manufacturers of components. I assume that if a manufacturer of television sets is decided on, that manufacturer will in all probability manufacture components as well. If not, the components will be manufactured by outside concerns. All things considered, our main task is to have as much of the manufacturing done in South Africa itself as far as this may be economically justifiable. At the same time, we should try to ensure that the public are able to obtain these sets in the cheapest possible way.

Before concluding my reply on this subject, I should like to emphasize that although 1975 has been set as the tentative target date for the introduction of television, no final decision has yet been taken in regard to the introduction of television. [Interjections.] I want to point this out because I think it is essential to do so. 1975 is the tentative target date, but it is still in the hands of the Cabinet—this was announced previously—to decide on the final date on which television will be introduced.

The hon. member for Cape Town Gardens also spoke about the collecting of guano. I want to say to the hon. member that the fact that guano is collected at a loss, is virtually as old as Table Mountain itself. It would appear that since 1898 guano had always been collected at a loss. This is a matter to which we have given attention on various occasions. It is not something new either that the agricultural industry is subsidized in some way or other. At present we are giving attention to this matter once again. The idea has been expressed on many occasions whether we should not leave the collecting of guano to private entrepreneurs instead. However, we have a problem there as well, because the bird experts or bird lovers—one must be careful with these words—are anxious for the bird life on these islands to be preserved. Even if we were to leave the collecting of guano on the islands to private entrepreneurs, my department would still have to see to the bird life on the various islands. Consequently it would still involve expenditure.

As a result of the exceptional increase in the costs of collecting in recent times, we have, of course, become more concerned about the whole matter, but we have felt that the whole matter should stand over until the commission’s report becomes available. At present the report of the commission is being translated and printed and once the report has been received, we shall re-examine this entire question of the collecting of guano.

Nevertheless, it would appear to me that, as the hon. member suggested, we should in fact make guano available more freely to ordinary people in small quantities. I understand that we do in fact sell small quantities in packets of 2 kg at 50 cents a packet.

But it is always sold out.

At present, however, it is sold directly by the department and perhaps we should consider making it available to trade so that it could be more freely available to the gardener or other consumers.

The hon. member also spoke about the report of the Steenkamp Commission. With reference to that, I want to inform him that it is a matter which falls completely under the control of the Minister of Agriculture. That Minister appointed the commission and he is in charge of its report. I prefer not to say anything about the matter.

You could talk to him about it.

I often talk to him.

†The hon. member for South Coast raised the matter of oil pollution of the sea. It now appears to me that Mr. D. Watterson, M.E.C. of Natal, is probably more than anybody else responsible for the lack of information which exists in Natal. I received a message yesterday that Mr. Watterson, the chairman of the Pollution Control Action Committee in Natal, said the following yesterday. This is how the message reads—

That is what I said.

Yes, you also said it, but I cannot understand how you could say a thing like that.

What do you say?

That is my problem. I will explain to you in a moment. This man is the chairman of a committee appointed by me.

Hear, hear!

Yes. He seems to think that it is a committee on behalf of the provincial administration of Natal, but that is not the case. He is the chairman of the action committee in Natal which was appointed by the Department of Industries.

Why do you not give him power and money?

Wait a moment, give me a chance to explain the position. I will explain it to the hon. member. Mr. Watterson is the chairman of a committee acting on behalf of the Department of Industries and in that respect he and his committee are responsible for working on the sea in cases of any big disaster or any big pollution. He said that his committee was charged with cleaning the beaches “once they have been polluted, but that it did not have the authority to do anything about the oil while it was still in the sea.” He urged that the matter be treated with great urgency before there was a major catastrophe as the cost of this would be far greater than preventive measures. As I have explained, this man is the chairman of an action committee appointed by me. It would therefore appear to me that Mr. Watterson is to a large extent responsible for the completely wrong impressions the hon. member for South Coast revealed last night. Why is it that this uncertainty only exists in Natal and not in the Cape Province or South-West Africa, where the Government made arrangements similar to those in Natal? The same conditions that apply in Durban, also apply in Cape Town, Port Elizabeth and in South-West Africa.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he has a copy of the minutes of the last meeting of that committee where this very issue was dealt with?

I do not have a copy of those minutes.

Then I suggest that the hon. the Minister has a look at those minutes before he comes with this reply to me.

Mr. Chairman, I have not said anything yet. I am only trying to explain how this matter works.

I am trying to save you from putting your foot in the oil.

The true position is that the action committee in Natal is a committee which has been established by the central Government, by the Department of Industries, as I have explained. The mere fact that the M.E.C. in charge of local government and development in Natal is chairman of this committee, does not mean that it is a committee of the Natal Provincial Administration. The chairmanship of the committee was vested in the M.E.C. concerned in the spirit of mutual goodwill and co-operation and on the full understanding that oil pollution is a national problem which can affect all concerned in South Africa. The Natal Provincial Administration also provides the secretariat to the committee. This action committee has, inter alia, two senior officials of the Department of Industries as members thereof and has full legal authority to act while oil slicks are still at sea. Now he says that he does not have the authority to act when the slicks are still at sea and that he must only clean up on the beaches.

You read those minutes.

That is what he said.

Read those minutes.

Whatever the minutes said, this gentleman must be all wrong in his understanding of the whole affair.

I am accepting your statement with open arms.

The hon. member for South Coast and Mr. Watterson are therefore both wrong on this score. This committee’s function is to decide on action in cases of serious oil spillages. It has no direct responsibility when minor incidents, which are to be dealt with by local authorities, are concerned, although I want to add immediately that the advice of this committee is certainly available to any local authority in Natal should it be required. Provincial administrations and local authorities, on the other hand, have no legal powers to act at sea. As it is true that it could in certain circumstances be more effective and cheaper to deal with oil slicks while they are still at sea, the advisability of empowering provincial administrations and local authorities to act at sea in an area of one or two miles off-shore was raised at a meeting of the action committee in Durban at which the hon. member for South Coast was present by invitation. The representative of my department then said, as the hon. member will probably remember, that he would explore the possibility of arranging such powers for provincial administrations and local authorities for oil pollution purposes only, i.e. to clean up for a distance of maybe one or two miles into the sea. At this meeting the hon. member for South Coast also asked for definitions of “serious incidents” and “minor incidents”. The hard and fast rule would be that all spillages resulting from the breaking up of or accidents to oil tankers are the Government’s responsibility. All other incidents are the responsibility of local authorities. It was realized, however, that these latter incidents could also be of a serious nature. It was therefore decided by the action committee to appoint an assessing committee. The hon. member should know about this. It was decided by the action committee in Durban to appoint an assessing committee consisting of four members, the idea being that these four members will advise the action committee whether a threatening oil slick at sea or pollution of the beach is of a major or minor nature. The assessing committee will be a sub-committee of the action committee in Durban. Then the hon. member said last night that they do not know where they are because they do not know whether it is a major or minor slick, but we have appointed an assessing committee as a sub-committee of that action committee in Durban which will advise the Action Committee as to whether it is a major slick or not. If they decide that it is a major slick, it is the responsibility of the Government. If it is a minor, it is the responsibility of the local authority. I do not see any problem in this regard.

No, not yet. I am lapping up every word you say. Please go on.

I am informed that the hon. member for South Coast expressed satisfaction at the time with this arrangement. As far as I can see, this is a reasonable solution to the problem. I hope the hon. member thinks so too.

The hon. member also referred to insurance for these big tankers. I may only mention that there are two insurers, the one for tankers themselves called Tovalop and the other for the contents, the oil, called Cristal. I am being assured that 98 per cent of tankers are insured with Tovalop and with Cristal. In the circumstances, I think we should be reasonably satisfied that the necessary insurance is there, not only for the Government, but even for any private individual or local authority who may be harmed by reason of the pollution of the sea when any incidents happen where an oil tanker is involved. This deals with the matter of oil pollution.

*The hon. member for Vanderbijlpark referred to motor car mechanics and the repairs done to motor cars which were not what he would like them to be. That may be so. There will probably always be complaints. In this regard I should like to say that as far as our motor car population is concerned, we have manpower problems. We have a tremendously large motor car population in South Africa. The number of qualified motor car mechanics per motor car is probably smaller in South Africa than in most other countries in the world. This is a major problem we must take into account. But we usually act in close co-operation with the M.I.F., i.e. the Motor Industry Federation. We have an understanding with them that when we have problems in regard to the quality of the work done on motor vehicles, we may approach them and they will institute the necessary investigation and rectify the position as far as possible. I am afraid the problem raised by the hon. member, will probably remain one.

This deals with the matters raised here by hon. members.

If I may, I want to conclude by saying a word or two about the economic future. Right at the beginning I said that at present we were acting in circumsances which were different from what we had previously, even earlier this year. I want to prove this to a larger extent now, especially as I am grateful that there is so much more optimism than before. Earlier this year hon. members on that side created a very dampening atmosphere here at times about the economic situation. I should like to mention a few examples. I am grateful it has not emerged once again in the discussions during this debate. On 28th January, the hon. member for Von Brandis said—

On 1st February, the hon. member for Johannesburg North said the following—

This is what hon. members said earlier this year in regard to the economic circumstances.

I should quote the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens as well. He said—

the Opposition that this Government either recognizes the desperate plight in which South Africa finds itself, or is capable of taking the necessary correcttive measures to bring our economy back to an even level.

On 16th February the member for Von Brandis said again—

I should quote the hon. member for Parktown too, who is the main speaker. He said—

And how!

I continue reading—

Do you not agree?

Thus for this year we have received no constructive criticism. We have received no ideas as to what we should do. No recommendations have been made to the Government.

That is nonsense.

All we have received is destructive criticism. In spite of that, we are in a position today for which I think we should certainly all be grateful.

Saved by the bell.

There is much more optimism once again; there is much more life in the economy. All the signs are there: The industries and the Handelsinstituut, all of them, indicate that they are more optimistic.

I want to admit quite frankly that there are various factors which have helped us from outside and over which we have had no control. Nevertheless, they have helped us to assume this more stable position in which we are today. The greater monetary stability we have today, may be attributed to a large extent to the marked influx of investments from abroad. When all is said and done, hon. members should at least also take into account that foreign investors would not invest in South Africa if they did not have confidence in South Africa and in the present Government. Furthermore, we are aware that in recent times the free market price of gold has risen very substantially, to the advantage of South Africa. The world sugar price has risen, as we mentioned in this debate. There has been a stabilization in the prices of metal. All these are factors which have brought about an improved economy for us. The climatic conditions in South Africa were favourable for us. We have had wonderful agricultural crops. Taking everything into account, several factors have been very much in our favour. In spite of this, it is also clear that we are already beginning to see the benefits of the adjustments in the fiscal, monetary and economic policies which this Government has introduced. Already there is proof that what the Government has done were the right steps under the right circumstances.

All the economic journals and daily newspapers testify to an economic revival being in sight again. Recently the Bureau for Economic Research at Stellenbosch said the following about our economy (translation)—

We can continue in this vein. I quote further from the Bureau’s report—

The Financial Mail of 28th April summarizes the general attitude of Assocom in the heading to a report as follows: “Assocom’s view—confidence rising”. For example, in a document released by Assocom on 24th April this year, it is anticipated that it would in fact be possible to reach a level of approximately 5 per cent in the growth rate this year as a result of improved agricultural prospects, devaluation and the stimulus of the budget.

The comments received from other quarters are also quite positive. For example, Hill Samuel said the following in his April report—

The congress of the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut commented encouragingly. Generally speaking, I think we may look forward to prosperous months and years ahead.

Fixed investment is usually one of the best indications of the business climate. In 1971 fixed investment in all the sectors increased by 15 per cent, compared with 19 per cent in 1970. What is extremely encouraging, however, is the fact that investment in the manufacturing industry increased by 34 per cent in 1971, compared with 28 per cent in 1970. Therefore we can expect that considerable additional production capacity has been built up during the past year, and this can be utilized now. Our major task is to make proper use of the opportunities which have been created for us. Specially the opportunity of devaluation. Our success will depend upon the extent to which we utilize these. If we could succeed in keeping our inflation rate lower than that of other countries of the world in spite of devaluation, it would mean that we would have an advantage over the other countries of the world, rather than a backlog as the hon. members on that side of this House have tried to prove from time to time. That is why I look forward with great confidence to the year that lies ahead and I hope this confidence will have been justified when we discus this Vote next year again.

Votes put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 35.—“Police”, R1ll 993 000:

Mr. Chairman, it is indeed a unique event this session to be able to start a debate without there being a bye-election somewhere hanging over the debate and what happens in that debate. I hope that we will be able to discuss this extremely important Vote in that new light. May I say at the very beginning that we on this side of the House welcome the agreement which the hon. the Minister has arrived at with the Commissioner of Police, Gen. Joubert, that he will stay on for another year. We congratulate him on that and we wish him well with his Force in the next year. There are a number of things which we want to deal with during this Vote, particularly the conditions in the Force and the best use that can be made of the Force. I also wish at some sta_e, if not on this occasion when I am on my feet, to deal also with the Gen. Danie Bester affair about which we have not had a satisfactory reply either from this hon. gentleman or from the hon. the Prime Minister.

The Police Force concerns all of us, the whole citizenry, intimately, in the good times as well as in the bad times. A good Police Force is part of any organized modern society. We all rely upon it and its operation relies on the co-operation of the public. It is also the due of the public to have a good Police Force. We have an excellent Police Force, but there are aspects of it which we believe could be vastly improved. Let me say at once that the range of the work of the Police in South Africa is probably greater than in any other country in the world. They are fighting terrorists on the borders and they do deal with everything you can imagine in circumstances which are extremely trying. The old adage: If you want to know the time, ask a policeman, is translated in South Africa as “Whatever happens, no matter what happens, no matter where it happens, the public’s reaction is, let us call a policeman”. The decision to have on the borders non-White policemen with White policemen is one which we applaud wholeheartedly. It takes off the strain of the White Force and it also serves as a demonstration to the world that not only are the White people of this country determined that our security shall not be interfered with, that we stand together on that and that we will brook no interference from anyone in this respect, but it tells the world that the whole country is at one on this subject. Despite our internal differences it pays tribute to the ultimate, namely, that when the chips are down we rely in South Africa upon the co-operation of every single race group in this country.

These policemen on the borders do a very special task. It is a very unpleasant task. The hon. Minister has on occasion invited us to accompany him to the border areas. I must say that a place like the Eastern Caprivi Zipvel is not a place where I would like to be in for three whole months. This was on a voluntary basis …

We may even send you there.

If it is necessary for me to go, I will go, but at the moment it is not necessary. I want the hon. the Minister to consider the following suggestion: There are medals in the Force for various things. Medals are struck for all sorts of things. Medals are struck for long service and so on. Is it not perhaps a good idea that a medal should be struck for border patrol services. We know what these people have to put up with. They are in the front line as every policeman is everywhere. I believe that due consideration should be given to that.

When one looks at this Police report one finds as one would expect to find—this is the position I suppose in every other country—an increase in crime—a fantastic increase in crime. All of these things have to be dealt with by the Force. I think the hon. the Minister will immediately agree with me that what is lacking is a sufficient number of policemen who are patrolling and who are around. There is nothing that prevents crime more than the presence of a policeman in the street. He should be seen there and it should be known that he is there. This in itself is a great deterrent. We do not have enough members of the Force on patrol in the streets. I believe that consideration should also be given to some sort of incentive for them to go out on patrol. The incentive might be in the way of an allowance for a patrol. It might be in the way of paying policemen overtime, rewarding them for what they have to do. But Sir, mostly I think that ways and means should be found whereby policemen are relieved of the work that they have to do which I believe is unnecessary.

If one looks at the crimes on page 5 of this report, one finds that of the crimes the police have to investigate, the overwhelming number, the biggest of all, are traffic offences. Traffic offences increased by 132 000 in the last year to 535 000. Surely some other arrangement can be made with other authority for the investigation of traffic offences. It is not only the investigation of the offence itself but all the time that is taken up filling in the report and accident forms and all the bodies that are involved sitting on their chairs doing this when they could be better employed outside. I hope the hon. the Minister will give his attention to this. There will be several other members who will speak about the better employment of members of the Force.

The good name of the Force is a matter of public importance because the public must have confidence in the Police. The Police rely upon that confidence in order to operate. The discipline in the Force is good and the name of the Force is good. One can rely upon what happens in the Force itself. But I wonder whether there is any control and if there is what control is exercised by the commissioner or divisional commissioner, persons in authority in charge of regions and overall over the members of the Security Branch. It is the actions that take place—matters of judgment and whatever it may be—that tend to give the whole of the Force a bad name. Now, I wonder what the control is. My hon. friend from Umlazi who has experience of the Administration in this regard will have some words to say about it. This is an important matter for the Force itself. It is an important matter for the confidence of that Force that there should be that control which we believe is lacking at the moment. One finds for example that during the recess there was a wave of arrests. People were taken in and put inside under section 6; people were searched and there was general public concern. The statement that was eventually made was made on the South African Broadcasting Corporation by way of an interview with Gen. van den Bergh. and not the hon. the Minister of Police who may not have been here—that I cannot remember—at the time. It was also not the Commissioner of Police but Gen. van den Bergh, the head of the Bureau of State Security who was at great pains to point out that he has nothing to do with the Police Force. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Durban North spoke about the good name of the South African Police. Sir, to have a good name two things are required; one has to see to it that that good name is maintained through one’s own deeds but there is also another requirement and that is that responsible people should not slander one when one does not deserve to be slandered, and unfortunately I have to accuse the hon. member for Durban North of not co-operating in that respect. In this respect I just want to refer to two newspaper reports. The Star of 28th October, 1971, reported the hon. member to have said—

Disgraceful!

Furthermore, I want to refer to a report in the Sunday Times of 31st October, 1971, in which the hon. member said, inter alia, that the Police were using “third degree Gestapo methods”. Sir, it is no use always having two fronts, a front for the liberalists and a front here of lauding the good work of the Police. One has to be logical; one has to disparage the Police all the time or one has to say all the time that they are doing good work.

I want to go further and express our heartfelt congratulations to Gen. Joubert on the extension of his period of service. He is a person who has the necessary qualities of leadership and the personality to be able to mean so much to this country in this further period of one year in which he is going to stay on in the service. Furthermore, I want to thank the hon. the Minister for the privilege certain members of this Parliament have had to accompany him last year to the borders where our Police are serving. I think I am speaking on behalf of all of us who were there when I pay tribute to our men who, in difficult circumstances, are defending hearth and home there and who have proved that their deeds of heroism are on a par with the best of any soldier or any policeman in the world. I also want to plead here— and I know that this is a difficult matter I am raising here—that consideration should be given to the facilities of the men there. My humble opinion is that where this is justified by the concentration of large numbers of men on the borders their facilities should be brought up to the same standard as those of the Army. I want to quote one example. Where it is justified by the number of men a mobile kitchen may be supplied for them which is of the same standard as that used by the Army in those areas.

I now want to deal briefly with the main theme of my address. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister that the South African Police should be placed under its own Service Commission. It is a fact that other departments which control their own staff, for example, the Railways and the Post Office, have their own budgets. In certain respects a better case could probably be made out for those departments to exercise control over their own staff, but I want to say today that the Police is a unique organization and that special arguments can be advanced for them to be controlled by their own commission. In the first place, as far as numbers are concerned, the South African Police is one of the largest Government departments, if not the largest, and this, to my mind, is one of the sound reasons why they may ask for their own commission. But one of the strongest reasons is that the services rendered by the Police are quite unique. In the Public Service one has a peaceful five-day working week which, on account of the nature of their work, we do not deny our civil servants. But I do not think I exaggerate when I say that the South African Police have a busy seven-day working week and that a working day there does not consist of eight hours but of 24 hours, which means that the Police have to cope with working conditions quite different from those of the civil servants. Another reason is that the South African Police—and quite rightly so—is organized on a military basis. This implies that the Force has different ranks. These ranks are quite different from the ranks in the Public Service and there are also a far greater number of ranks in the Police Force. For example, there are only four ranks in the Public Service with a maximum salary notch of R6 900 per year. In the Police Force there are seven ranks with this salary notch, viz., from constable to lieutenant-colonel. Sir, this makes salary adjustments extremely difficult for one commission. A further reason is that in many of the Western countries there are arrangements for the Police to have its own chief, who is fairly autonomous. For example, I may quote the case of Great Britain, where the Police have their own council, viz., the Police Council of Great Britain, which controls all the affairs of the Police. In Canada the Police is fairly autonomous directly under their commissioner. I feel it is time that we bore in mind the particular role the Police fulfil in South Africa. These are the people who have to be in the forefront of the danger all the time; these are the people who have to endure all the elements of nature for our benefit; these are the people who, at this stage, are waging a war for the benefit of South Africa as a whole. Sir, if we are not prepared, under these circumstances, to recognize the unique position of our policemen, if we do not go out of our way to establish conditions of service to enable our young men to join the Force, it may well be that we will experience serious problems in recruiting young men in the near future. [Time expired.]

I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Kroonstad on his very strong plea for the Police Force to be divorced from the Public Service Commission. This was a point I raised in 1970 when I was a very young backbencher, and it was supported by other hon. members. But the hon. the Minister told us that it could not be done and he gave his reasons. But now that it has come from that side of the House, I hope that the Minister will give it every consideration. I know for a fact that the Police have been battling for years to be divorced from the Public Service Commission, because of the various reasons the hon. member mentioned. I also want to congratulate my old comrade-in-arms, General Gideon Joubert, on having been asked to serve for another term of office from 1st December, 1972. We have known each other for many years. In fact we were then not quite as burly as we are now and we competed on the sports fields. May I congratulate him. Whilst I congratulate the Commissioner, I think it is very unfair to a Commissioner or any other officer to be kept on a waiting list. When General Joubert took command of the Force on 1st July, to the best of my knowledge, he was not told that he would be asked to stay on after 30th November, 1972. I think the time has come for the Minister at least to consider appointing these Commissioners on contract for at least five years or so. After all, even if the Commissioner is a headquarters officer, it takes him some time to assess the situation and to appreciate it and to lay down the policy which he would like to see brought to fruition, whether it is for major works or minor works, or whether it is bringing about reforms in the Force for the “algemene opknapping van die Mag.” It takes time to make his plans and he has to get the feel of it as Commissioner. He cannot do it as a man who is not quite there, and I think the time is ripe now that Commissioners should now know that they will serve for a definite period of time, unless of course something else goes wrong.

They are afraid you will come back.

The hon. member knows there is a Police Bill coming, and one never knows. But we will not discuss that. It is still sub judice. I notice in the Police report that a new division for the Far North has been formed with district headquarters at Oshakati, Rundu and Katima Mulilo, but the headquarters of the division is at Pretoria Head Office. I could guess what the reasons are, but I should like the Minister to tell us why the headquarters remain at Pretoria instead of at either of those centres, or even Windhoek for that matter. Sir, we honour those members of the Police, White and Black, who were killed in the execution of their duty. I see two names I know here in the roll of honour. One man’s father served under me and I can remember this man as a youngster. Others have since fallen as the result of enemy action, and no doubt we will say something more about them when the time comes next year. We sympathize and grieve with their orphans and widows and their next-of-kin. I should also like to congratulate those who have been decorated and awarded the Police medal for faithful service. Many people have come to regard this medal as a reward for long service, but the emphasis is on faithful service. As one who has borne the heat and burden of the day I know what those men have done to receive that reward, and full credit goes to them. For those who have been commended—there are only a few who have been commended, six members in all—I want to extend my congratulations. The Commissioner knows as well as I do that there are hundreds of unsung heroes who have worked day and night without looking at the clock in all sorts of inclement weather in order to bring cases to a successful conclusion. We must also honour the wives and children of those members of the Force who go out for these long hours day and night, and I would particularly mention the families of the Bantu, Coloured and Indian members of the Force, and particularly the Bantu members who live in the locations where their wives and children are subject to intimidation. To them goes full credit for carrying on with the work they are doing with absolutely exemplary loyalty. Whilst I am congratulating everybody, I would also like to congratulate the Force on the Reserve Police Force. According to the report there are 16 377 White members of the Reserve Police Force. These men are ordinary South African citizens—Whites, Coloureds, Indians and Bantu who are serving their country loyally in their own spare time, putting in about 8 hours a month, without any pay or any other consideration. When one considers how they take over stations over week-ends while the Police Force have such a shortage of manpower we must give full credit to these citizens of South Africa for filling the breach. Whilst I say this, I also want to refer to this little magazine which they put out in Durban. This shows you what the goodwill of the public is towards the Police Force in the Port Natal Division. They give you all sorts of interesting articles. Here they quote a man who praises the Bantu Police reservists at Kwamashu. It says:

These are Bantu people talking about their own Bantu Police Reservists. Here is a later one, with the Commissioner’s photograph next to it.

What is the point?

I am coming to the point. These people are doing magnificent work but they get very little practical thanks from the department for it, in that they have difficulty in getting replacements for their uniforms, and the vehicles they use on the stations are usually the old ones. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, Ishould also like to associate myself with what was said by the previous speakers when they congratulated the Commissioner of Police on his appointment for a further period of one year. We are very pleased about it and for that reason we want to wish him well for the ensuing year. I want to avail myself of this opportunity of thanking him for his dynamic leadership in regard to the South African Police Force. We know that the task that rests on his shoulders is not an easy one. It is a very great responsibility.

I also want to thank the previous speaker on the Opposition side for the constructive and positive contribution he made as far as the South African Police is concerned. It is really encouraging to hear something good being said on the part of the Opposition in regard to the South African Police Force.

The hon. member for Durban North made the statement that “whenever something goes wrong, the public always adopts the attitude: Let us call the Police”. My personal opinion is that when something does go wrong, the Opposition as a whole always adopts the attitude of: “Let us blame the Police.”

That is nonsense!

Was it also nonsense when this article was published in the Sunday Times—

Disgraceful!

Apart from what was said by the hon. member for Umlazi today I have never heard a positive contribution being made on the part of the Opposition in this House as far as the South African Police is concerned. These Gestapo stories also go back a long way. In 1953 the cries were raised, “Vote for the right to vote again”, and “South Africa is becoming a dictatorship”. These were the stories that were being spread at that time and continued in this very same vein even today. The South African Police Force is blamed for it under all circumstances. “South Africa is a Police State.” Here the hon. member for Durban North proves that these allegations are being made by making this statement to the Sunday Times. However, he never advances those arguments in this House; he always does so outside this House and through the Sunday Times.

I want to come back to the Police Vote. I said that I want to congratulate the Commissioner of Police on his dynamic leadership. For example, to a certain extent the Commissioner of Police now has a new policy in that he is using Bantu, Coloureds and Indians on the borders now. This does not mean that these people have not been used there in the past, but they are being used to a far greater extent now. The result is that it brings relief for the White members of the South African Police Force on the borders. I should like to congratulate him, because basically it was his idea that greater use should be made of the services of these people in this respect. I also want to mention the case of the Bantu wounded on the border. This Bantu was nursed back to health here in Cape Town and thereafter he returned to the border. He was in a great hurry to go back there. We are grateful that these people are prepared to guard the borders of South Africa in that spirit.

The South African Police has to guard over 6 000 miles of border against the infiltration of terrorists and Communists. As far as our borders are concerned, we sometimes even lose sight of the stocktheft unit on the border with Lesotho which also requires substantial manpower. Protection of our borders is subject to severe discipline. This is not a task for laymen. This is a specialised task because it could disturb diplomatic relations if something were to go wrong. At this stage we cannot afford to have our diplomatic relations disturbed. It also ensures our internal safety. This is a further advantage it has. It protects our South African economy. We know the conditions prevailing in countries where for example terrorism has infiltrated. There is chaos in those countries. What would our position in South Africa have been if terrorists were to have free access to South Africa? This is the important task the South African Police Force is performing today. I do not think we always realize or appreciate this.

What I want to mention here is the disadvantages in regard to this whole matter. This involves the withdrawal of a substantial portion of the South African Police Force, because a substantial portion of the Police Force is now withdrawn from the internal services in South Africa. It is a fact that we know that crime is on the increase, not only in South Africa, but throughout the world. Whilst crime is on the increase, we cannot really afford withdrawing our internal South African Police Force. We have to accept—this is the very point I wish to make—that a certain measure of permanency will be given to the withdrawal of the South African Police Force from the domestic scene over the following two or three decades, because the terrorists will be terrorising us from outside during the following two or three decades. The South African Police Force will therefore have to be withdrawn from the internal scene in South Africa. That is why a certain degree of permanency will be given to guarding our borders. This is something we will have to consider and take into account.

In this regard I should like to suggest that far greater use should be made of our Police reservists. They will have to come forward. Short-term training periods will have to be instituted for them so that they may be trained properly. After this has been done we will probably be in a position to replace the policemen who have been placed on the border temporarily. I also want to say that the service on the borders is disrupting the Police Force to a certain extent, because many of the married men are also placed on the borders and this whole project costs the state a great deal of money.

However, there is one other matter I should like to deal with in passing. As is the case with any other body, the South African Police Force is not a perfect organization either. As is the case with any other organization, the South African Police Force also has its faults and shortcomings. However, we should not overemphasize the shortcomings of individuals in the ranks of the Police Force. For example, we have the case—as is evident from the speech made by the hon. member for Durban North—of criminals being elevated to the rank of heroes in South Africa. [Interjections.] That is so. In what light do certain people regard Timol today? Timol is being regarded as a national hero today. On account of statements of this nature these people are regarded as national heroes. That places the South African Police in an unenviable position. The South African Police certainly do not deserve to be placed in such a position. I have said that they are not perfect; there are people who exceed the limits. However, it is a fact that 99,99 per cent of the members of the Police Force perform the task and the responsiblity which rest on their shoulders faithfully. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I take a somewhat different view, which will not surprise hon. members, about the role which is being played by the Police. I do not believe they should be doing the job of the Army. I think it is unfortunate that this has become necessary. I think, of course, that if we had different internal policies, policies which would not have earned the hostility of the rest of Black Africa, it would not be necessary for the Police to be doing the job of the Army on our borders. I think it is time that this House notes that we are today spending more under the Police Vote than we are under the Vote for National Education in South Africa. I think we also ought to take note that if we add the amount spent on prisons to the amount spent under the Police Vote, we are spending just about as much as we are spending on Social Welfare and Pensions in this country. We are spending nearly three times more under the Police Vote alone than we are spending under the Health Vote. It seems to me that we have our sense of values wrong. If we did more to put things right inside South Africa, to correct the policies that have earned us hostility in the outside world and to improve the conditions of the vast majority of our population, it would not be necessary to spend this enormous amount under the Police Vote.

I want to come to the hon. the Minister of Police, and I want to put a few questions to him. I have a question on the Order Paper about the persons who are being held in Owambo. As far as I know, at the time of going to Press, there were something like 83 people still held in Owambo in detention under Proclamation R17. That is as at the 11th April. I have not had a reply to this question which I did not put forward till last week sometime, but I am hoping that the hon. the Minister will be in a position to answer the question today. Perhaps he would like to make a statement to this House about the position in Owambo, and about whether or not this Proclamation R17 is being widely used. I am asking him to make a statement because I understand from the hon. the Minister of Prisons that Ministers are very coy about making statements in this House unless they are specifically asked to do so by hon. members. Therefore I am asking the hon. the Minister to do so. I am asking him in particular whether he can give me information about what has happened about the Rev. Olavi Nailenge about whom there is considerable consternation in the Church in Damaraland. People are very worried about this man. He was arrested on 26th January; he has been held, presumably in solitary, as most of these people are, all that time and he has neither been released nor charged to the best of my knowledge. I would be very grateful if the hon. the Minister would tell me if, after four months, it is not possible for him to release this Rev. Nailenge or to charge him with whatever crime he may have committed. It seems to me that Proclamation R17 is rapidly assuming the same sort of role as Proclamation 400 in the Transkei, which was introduced as an emergency measure more than ten years ago but is still in force in the Transkei. It rather seems to me as if the same procedure is going to be followed in Owambo unless one perhaps draws public attention to this.

The second thing I should like to ask the hon. the Minister is whether he does not think that he owes this House and the country some sort of explanation about the whole business of the October, 1971, raids when well over 100 householders were “visited”—this is the word the hon. the Minister prefers to use—in the early hours of the morning by members of the Security Branch. It was first described as a routine investigation. Then the hon. the Prime Minister told us that the Security Police were engaged in comprehensive and serious investigations connected with terrorism and sabotage. There were more raids; there were more detentions and we never knew the exact numbers. One has to glean from Press reports how many people are being detained. Then, of course, the head of Boss informed us that those who criticized the Security Police would “eat their words”. The hon. the Minister himself talked about the Police having stopped “a powder keg” from exploding. These are all very exaggerated phrases, it seems to me. Several months passed, the number of detainees under section 6 dwindled as far as one could follow from Press reports, from 47 in October to 23 in December, to 16 in January, to 14 in February of this year, to nil in March, when we were told that all have been either charged or released except for five who were being held as witnesses under section 215 bis of the Criminal Procedure Act. What has this powder keg produced so far? It has produced one German photographer who was fined R20 for possessing dagga, one student who was found guilty of possessing banned books, three who absconded who were charged under the Suppression of Communism Act, and four persons who were charged under the Terrorism Act. One, Jacobsen, has already been tried and acquitted after being held for 140 days in solitary. Three are still awaiting trial. It seems to me so far to be rather a damp powder keg. The point I really want to make is whether the hon. the Minister is not worried about the unreliability of the witnesses and agents acting for his Special Branch who are called in these cases. It seems to me that he must not just sit there with a childlike faith in the infallibility of the Security Branch, when we have had comments from the courts as follows. The State evidence in the Jacobsen case was, first of all, described as “bordering on the frivolous”. One of the chief witnesses was described by the judge as “a fraud, a sponge and a parasite”. In the Dean’s case, where one might have expected even more care than usual to have been exercised, the court apparently came to the conclusion that there was not a single security agent who was found to be an acceptable witness on any matter which was in dispute. That is a pretty harsh judgment. As for secret agent Jordaan, he was found by the court to be untruthful. His evidence was “plainly a farce, unreliable, contradictory, something he had thought out for himself”. The professional Security Police witness gave completely conflicting evidence. These are the court’s comments, not mine. We have had a long saga of recording machines that did not work, amateurs taking notes without knowing anything about shorthand, and there was a report even of a 20-year old apprentice diamond polisher having been assigned to report to the Police on the activities of citizens. It seems to me that there is something very wrong when we have this very important branch of the Police, who have been given enormous powers, simply being left in a state of no control. The sort of people they use are obviously lacking in reliability. I think this is something that the hon. the Minister must now do something about. He, in the last resort, and indeed in the first resort, is the man who is responsible for the actions of the Special Branch. As I say, he must stop sitting back and rely on the infallibility of a branch of the Police which has been found to be very fallible indeed.

Now I want to ask the hon. the Minister what he proposes to do about the use by the Police of the powers given to them under section 37, I think it is, of the Criminal Procedure Act, anyway, that section which allows them to shoot persons who are trying to evade arrest or to escape from custody. I have always had the gravest doubts about giving these powers to the Police. I do not think in the heat of the moment, when trying to arrest an escaping fugitive, the Police sit down and work out whether in fact the man had been accused of something listed in the schedule under this particular Act. I think, knowing that they are allowed to shoot under certain circumstances, the tendency is in fact to shoot. I cannot discuss the case which is the most glaring abuse of this, because it is sub judice at the moment. I am referring to the Elliot case, but I cannot discuss it. The hon. the Minister replied to me and told me that in 1971 alone 52 adults and two juveniles were killed by the Police and 201 adults and 22 juveniles were wounded by the Police. If the Police are forced to shoot in self-defence, that is one thing. If they are being tackled by dangerous armed criminals, it is the same. One understands that they are obviously fully entitled to defend themselves. But I believe it is another thing entirely for the Police to be able to draw their guns and shoot a man who is trying to evade arrest, often for a petty crime.

Why do you say that?

Because here are the figures given to me by the hon. the Minister. What about the Elliot case?

[Inaudible.]

Oh, you do not know anything about this. Go out and entertain yourself. Anyway, as I say, I think this section of the law needs a drastic overhaul. I am hoping that the hon. the Minister thinks the same. It is just possible that he might agree with me on this particular matter. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Houghton has now criticized the fact that R1ll million is being earmarked for the Police Vote in the Estimates, but she would not have been satisfied even if the amount had only been R1 million. She does not want to have anything appropriated for the Police Vote in the Estimates, because she wants to do away with a police service here in South Africa altogether so that there can be chaos. But it is rather interesting, because the old kindred spirits have met again this morning. The only difference is that the hon. member for Houghton has the courage to get up here and to say what the hon. members of the United Party do not have the courage to say here, but continue behind the scenes with their derogatory compaign against the Police.

Disgraceful!

That is so. I shall return to it later, but before dealing with it I should like to say a few words in regard to the Police reservists. I should like to refer in particular to the voluntary and unselfish service rendered by the Police reservists which requires great sacrifices from them. This service is being rendered without any reward and which even means a loss of income to some of them. I have had the privilege of accompanying the Police on several occasions during the night to acquaint myself with the excellent work they are doing and the dangers to which they expose themselves in the execution of their duties. I want to say that I have only the highest praise and appreciation for the manner in which they executed their duties. I think we have reached the stage where we can no longer do without those Police reservists. They are not only being used as a police reserve force, but they also do their share as far as the routine duties of the Police are concerned, to such an extent that, as has been mentioned here, on occasions they have manned police stations for whole week-ends and have acquitted themselves of their task in an excellent manner.

I want to make a plea in connection with a few matters pertaining to the Police reservists. In the first place I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is not possible to consider giving some measure of remuneration to those Police reservists rendering this service on a voluntary basis. I am asking this in the first place because, in rendering this service, some of these men lose some of their income. Some of them cannot afford this. This also entails some expense on their part. I am thinking, for example, of one single item, viz., transport. They have to use their own transport to go to the police stations. There is also some concern about the dwindling number of new recruits for the Police reservists on account of the military service introduced for all young men. Consequently young men are not available for the Police reservists because once they have received their training they are put on the reserve list and they no longer join the Police reservists. For that reason I want to say that I am grateful for the legislation laid upon the table of this House in terms of which policemen who have received their training and who have left the Police Force for some reason or other may now be absorbed into the Police reservists. However, I wonder whether the provision made here would be sufficient. Is it not possible for an arrangement to be made with the Department of Defence for some of those young men, after they have received their military training, to be transferred on a voluntary basis to the reservists instead of being kept on the reserve list in the Defence Force?

I am surprised at the pious talk we have had here this morning. Even the hon. member for Durban North suggested today that medals should be awarded to the Police. Surely, this is not how they feel. At every possible occasion outside this House they are the people who cast suspicion on the Police. They are the people who are constantly criticizing when crime has to be combated and where steps have to be taken for the sake of our safety. These are the people who are always concerned about the treatment and the safety of criminals. Let hon. members go and look at the questions on the Order Paper. They are the people who elevate virtually every criminal, I can even say communist and terrorist, to the rank of martyrs and heroes in this country.

That is a disgraceful accusation!

I shall furnish proof of this in a moment. On every occasion they are the people who openly act as champions of criminals and people indulging in undermining activities in South Africa.

You are politically bankrupt.

What was their attitude during the recess when they had ample opportunity to express their appreciation to the Police who had sacrificed their lives, and to others who had been injured in the execution of their duties?

Who is talking about lives?

We never hear one single word of appreciation, sympathy and concern about the inconvenience and the hardships those Policemen have to endure in the execution of their duties. These are the people who stake their lives for South Africa. I heard what he said. I almost want to use the word “hypocrisy”, because this is what it amounts to. I say I almost want to call it that, although not quite.

Order! The hon. member must withdraw the word “hypocrisy”.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I withdraw it.

I now want to mention a few cases. There we have the hon. member for Port Natal sitting over there. He is the person who, in an interview with a newspaper, said that the Security Police was going to clamp down on members of the Opposition. They were speaking about those hon. members. I now want to ask the hon. member for Port Natal to get up and tell us whether he wants to suggest that we are living in a one party State in South Africa, in a State in which steps will be taken, against the ’ Opposition? Let him tell us whether he has a guilty conscience. Does he have a guilty conscience that his activities are of such a nature that he is afraid of the Security Police?

He has a guilty conscience.

I want to say that if he is guilty of …

Order! The hon. member for Fauresmith must withdraw those words.

I withdraw them, Mr. Chairman.

I want to tell him that if he is guilty action taken by the Security Police will meet with our approval. If that is the case, it will meet with our approval if they take him and lock him up. I want to ask the hon. member something: If he wants to do South Africa a service—and let us look each other squarely in the face—he must pack his belongings and go. Leave South Africa: go to England where you can join your kindred spirit, Peter Haine, to try and bring about the downfall of South Africa. There he will have the opportunity of taking action as well. The hon. member for Durban North is sitting over there. He made the major statement to the Sunday Times in which mention was made of the dark rooms where people were being tortured and where Gestapo methods were being used. Do hon. members know, that hon. member does not have the courage to say that he said so himself. Now he is hiding behind the so-called public who is supposed to say so. Tell us what public said so!

Read what I said there!

He does not have the courage.

He is insinuating it.

I say to him that he is the person who tries to put that idea into the mind of our public; he is the person who is trying to sow suspicion and stir up the public against the Police; he is the person who is speaking in derogatory terms of them wherever he goes. Now he is hiding behind the man in the street. That man in the street is himself, Mike Mitchell.

The hon. member for Umlazi, as a former commissioner of Police, also got up in this House and made some pious statements. He is one of the people who say that conditions in South Africa are worse than in Nazi and communist countries.

Where did I say that?

I shall read it to him in a moment. He said so in an interview with a newspaper. I am sorry, I do not have the newspaper here now. [Interjections.] I shall get the report and give it to the next speaker on our side of the House. The hon. member for Umlazi made this statement to the newspaper on account of problems they experienced with the Rotarians. Does the hon. member deny that he said that conditions here are worse than in Nazi and communist countries? I shall go and fetch the newspaper report in my office right now and I shall ask the next speaker to quote it. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the speech of the hon. member who has just sat down, was such a pot-pourri or mix-up, that one can hardly reply to it. I think I will leave all the points that he raised to the hon. members whom he had accused. I cannot speak for them. Although he is leaving the Chamber, I should like to compliment him for saying a few excellent words regarding the police reserves. They do a wonderful job of work, both in the European and non-European areas.

*Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to hear that the period of service of the Commissioner of Police has been extended by one year. I am convinced it will also be good news in the ranks of the Police throughout the country. We congratulate him.

Another year has passed, and it is with pleasure that I once again thank the Police as a whole for the service they have rendered in maintaining law and order during this period. I am speaking from my heart when I say this. We should not forget the members of the Force doing service on our borders. They are endangering their lives protecting our borders against terrorist attacks. At the same time, we cannot draw a distinction between them and the members who have died in the course of ordinary police service throughout our country. They too were members of our Police Force and were also exposed to great dangers during their periods of service. We salute all who laid down their lives.

I should like to support the hon. member for Durban North’s proposal that medals should be struck for members serving on our borders. In the course of their service they play a name of “Russian roulette”—they never know when they will step on a bomb.

†Mr. Chairman, then we have to pause and think of all the next-of-kin of the policemen who lost their lives whilst on duty, whether they be parents, wives or children. We pray that they are well looked after financially.

I too want to congratulate the Commissioner for taking the bold step of training a company of mixed European and non-European policemen for patrol duty on the borders. They wear the same uniform and they carry the same arms. I feel certain that non-White South Africans are honoured to think that they can help to protect South Africa. I also wish to congratulate all members of the force who were decorated during the past year for devotion to and bravery whilst on duty.

Then there is the appointment of welfare officers. It is a very belated step, but very essential. From my own past experience I can say that if a member of the service is unhappy at home or when something is worrying him, he cannot perform his duties satisfactorily. Members of a policeman’s family often require assistance in this respect, but are far too shy to discuss it with his seniors. I feel certain that these welfare officers will play a very important part in the welfare of the service.

Then I come to the most criticized branch of the South African Police, namely the Security Police. It is not my intention to discuss them here. It would be wrong. They do look after the security of the State and I thank them for that.

I am glad to see that the hon. the Minister has kept his promise to provide accommodation for the South African Police. I notice a considerable improvement in the number of dwellings, and that there are numerous buildings in the course of construction. I am given to understand that in South-West Africa the Administration is permitting civil servants to buy the homes that they are occupying at the present time. Why, may I ask, are the police not also granted this privilege in the territory? There must be some reason for this.

Then, Sir, in view of the rising number of serious traffic accidents which result in death and injury on the road and which are caused by drivers under the influence of liquor, I would like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to consider the question of allowing the police to make wider use of the breathaliser on suspected drivers of motor vehicles to establish whether or not they have consumed alcohol in excess of the quantity permitted by law, that is 0,15 per cent. Sir, if the test proves positive, a medical practitioner is called in to take a blood test, but if there is a delay, there is a sharp drop in the alcohol in the person’s blood. The breathaliser, or alco-test as it is called, is used overseas, especially in America, Great Britain and on the Continent. Although a new mouthpiece and glass ampoule containing the crystals are used on each suspect, I am given to understand that defending counsel have successfully argued that there should be a sterilization certificate and proof that the ampoule has not been previously used. Is it not possible to promulgate regulations for all the provinces with a view to uniformity to control the use of these breathalisers and the acceptability by courts of law of the evidence of the police when these tests have been carried out on drivers? They should also be available at all police stations in the Republic of South Africa. Sir, I have had permission to bring a set of these ampoules into the House. It is called an “Alco-test”. This particular set was manufactured in West Germany. These are the mouthpieces. They are sealed, and I take it that they were sterilized at the factory, where they were placed in these containers. A new one is used for every suspect. These are the ampoules. They are sealed in glass. The ampoule contains two filters and an amber crystal. The points are broken off; the one section is put into the mouthpiece, and the other section is put into the breathing-bag. If the person has alcohol in his breath, the crystals turn green. The bar is for no other reason than to show the placeman that the suspect has breathed through the ampoule and that he is not trying to bluff. Once the bag is full, they remove it and examine the crystals. If it is green, a doctor has to be called in. But I believe that overseas they avoid that.

Sir, what we have seen here today is really a game of a Dr. Jekyll and a Mr. Hyde. What we see here today is one face of the United Party, but outside this House they paint quite a different picture to the public. I just want to come back again to the hon. member for Umlazi. The hon. member for Boksburg made a statement here a moment ago and hon. members on that side of the House laughed at him because he could not lay his hands on the newspaper from which he wanted to quote. I should like to quote to the hon. member for Umlazi what he himself said. This is published in the Sunday Times of 12th December, 1971. This is what he said in regard to the Security Police in this country and the methods applied by them. He denied this in this debate a moment ago, but this is what he told the public—

But it does not end there, Mr. Chairman. I also want to deal with other members of the Opposition. As I have said a moment ago. they tell quite a different story to the public outside this House. In their yellow policy they say, inter alia, that the United Party pays tribute to the South African Police for the excellent way in which they render their services in spite of the staff shortage. This is what they said in their yellow policy and are saying here today, but this they do not say in the newspapers and not at their congresses either. Further to what was said by the hon. member for Boksburg I should like to read to you this newspaper cutting of what was said at the congress of the United Party in 1968. One of the members got up and said—

This is how they feel in their heart of hearts, viz., that we are using the Police for oppressive purposes. But the hon. member for Pinelands said “disgraceful” when the hon. member for Boksburg told him that a moment ago. There is also some further evidence of the same methods they tell the public about outside this House. I do not want to read it all. The one I have just quoted, was published in the Star. But let us consider whether they really pay tribute to the Police of this country. The year before last we were told here of the three Bantu who, unfortunately, died in a police van on the West Rand. The Opposition accused the Government and blamed them for this unfortunate incident to such an extent that they requested a special debate in this House in order to discuss the matter. That special debate was requested for only one purpose and that was to place the Police in an unfavourable light in the country. They thought they would succeed in discrediting the Police in the eyes of the people outside. But we are also thinking of the A liotti affair. This was referred to by the hon. member for Durban North and other hon. members on that side of the House. After they had raised the matter, questions were put to the hon. the Minister, and his replies to those questions were quite clear. In the no-confidence debate at the beginning of this year the hon. the Prime Minister dealt at great length with the Agliotti affair and explained precisely what had happened there. Subsequently another statement was issued by the hon. the Minister of Police in this House but that side of the House was still not satisfied. They wanted to discredit the Police with the people and for that reason they raised the matter once more. The fact that the Commissioner of Police had sent an officer to get a statement in regard to Gen. Bester in Durban, was not to find him guilty. Surely, it was quite clear that this was only done for one purpose and that was to prove his innocence. But now the Opposition wants to pretend as if the statements made by the Police officers were incorrect and that they did something wrong. For that purpose they also asked for a special debate. Why? When it comes to Police matters they ask for a special debate in this House every time. The hon. member for Houghton, when speaking here a moment ago. pretended as if the Police were “trigger happy”, as if they are walking around in the streets, drawing their guns and shooting people left, right and centre. She also mentioned the Elliot case in Hillbrow. But does the hon. member not realize that 28 Policemen were killed and 493 injured in the execution of their duties last year? Does it never occur to people that occasions do arise when the Police have to use their weapons to defend themselves? We on this side of the House feel that there is no need for us to apologize for the actions of the Police, but, to the contrary, that we want to encourage them to do their duty as they have done so far in the interests of the country. The Opposition says that they also pay tribute to the Police. During the last five years I have had the privilege of attending the passing out ceremony of recruits at Loftus Versveld in Pretoria. I have not seen the hon. member for Durban North or any of the other members on any of those occasions there except the hon. member for Umlazi, whom I saw there last year. But on no other occasion have I seen any of the hon. members there. Then they say that they speak on behalf of the Police. Why do they not give the Police their moral support and why do they begrudge the Police this moral support, these people who sacrifice their lives for our sake in South Africa? We are thinking of the men on the borders. I should like to refer to page 7 of the Report of the Commissioner of Police. I think that we will be able to strengthen the hands of the Police in this country even through this paragraph. I quote from page 7 of Report R.P. 40—’72, as follows—

This in itself is the green light we have to give the Police to say to them that they should continue their excellent work.

Before my time expires, I should like to mention another matter. This concerns the mortuaries at Police stations. My constituency is in a hot part of the world and this is particularly the case in the vicinity of Groblersdal and Marble Hall. Last year we had an unfortunate incident there when a bus with Bantu passengers left a bridge and 14 of them were killed. However, there were no facilities at the Police station where the bodies could be accommodated temporarily. The Police were compelled, at great inconvenience to themselves, to convey the bodies around trying the find a place elsewhere to accommodate them. Is it not possible for provision to be made for such incidents in this hot part of the world? Groblersdal is situated nearby but does not have a mortuary either. A member of the public recently told me that when he arrived at the police station there were two bodies lying there. However, no provision could be made for those bodies to be accommodated in the mortuary. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give serious consideration to erecting a mortuary in which bodies can be temporarily accommodated because that part of the world has such a hot climate.

Mr. Chairman, like every other member on this side of the House, I, too, was very pleased indeed to see that Gen. Joubert has decided to stay on for at least another year. I say this, not only because we know that Gen. Joubert is a very well respected and able policeman, but I feel very pleased because I believe that at a time when the S.A. Police Force is possibly facing its greatest challenge in the history of South Africa, we can ill afford to lose people of the calibre of Gen. Joubert. I only hope that the hon. the Minister will be successful in getting Gen. Joubert to stay on even longer than the year he has agreed to stay on.

I want to come firstly to the hon. the member for Boksburg. I want to say that I agree with the first portion of his speech in which he dealth with the need for the increase of police reservists in South Africa. He made certain suggestions and he even went as far as to say that he regardedthe police reservists as indispensable. He also suggested that possibly they should be paid for their services. I want to say at the very outset that I do not agree with this portion of his speech, because I believe that people who offer themselves as police reservists do so out of a sense of duty and I think that by paying them we would defeat the very object which we are trying to achieve.

I want to say that I deplore the attitude adopted by the hon. member for Boksburg and the hon. member who has just sat down in trying to create the impression here that we on this side of the House do not appreciate the services that the South African Police are rendering to South Africa. I want to say, too that we on this side of the House yield to no one on that side of the House in our respect and appreciation for the Police in South Africa. I say this with all the conviction that I can muster. I believe that every person in South Africa, be he White or Black, owes the Police Force of South Africa a debt of gratitude. I want to assure the Police that while there may be times when we, as an Opposition, reserve our right to raise certain matters which we believe should be raised here, this is not a reflection on the S.A. Police Force; this is our duty in the job which we have been sent here to do. We reserve the right to raise any matter that we feel should be raised in this particular House.

Mr. Chairman, I mentioned earlier on that possibly the South African Police are facing the biggest challenge ever in the history of South Africa. I think this is fully borne out if you look at a few figures which appear in the report which we have before us. If you read the report, you will see for instance, that there were almost 3 million reported contraventions of criminal law between 1970 and 1971. If you read a bit further, you will find that this represents an increase of no less than 150 000 on the previous year. When you break these figures down, believe me, it is quite frightening. It boils down to this: One crime is reported on the average every second of every hour of every day throughout the year. If you go even further, you will find that one person in every seven of our total population is involved in some offence or other. Mr. Chairman, I merely mention these figures, because they show very dramatically the tremendous job that the South African Police Force have to do in South Africa. We know that, besides investigating crimes, policemen today have to be virtually public relations officers, too. I say this advisedly, because of the tremendous role they play in maintaining good race relations in South Africa. We know that to them falls the job of carrying out the laws of the country. We know that many of these laws are not particularly liked by the non-Whites, and it is the tactful way in which the Police apply the laws that maintains good race relations in South Africa.

I am just listening; I can’t believe my ears.

I want to say, too, that the job of the Police is even more difficult. We know that the numbers of the Police are continuously about 10 per cent below full strength. This means that the Police in South Africa have to work harder than they normally would have to work if they were at full strength.

This brings me to the matter which I want to raise. Like the hon. member for Boksburg, I believe, too, that the easiest and the quickest way of assisting our Police in their tremendous job is to increase the Police reserve force, and not only that, but to increase the status of those reservists. I notice, too, that unfortunately there has been a slight drop in the number of Police reservists serving South Africa today, because the 1970 figures show a Police reserve of 17 350, while in 1972 I find that it has dropped to 17 276. My feeling is that the Police reserve force under the present circumstances should be tripled if possible. But I want to say immediately that under present conditions I do not see how you are going to attract sufficient numbers to increase the force. It is quite ridiculous. I think the first thing we should say to a reservist is that if he offers himself to do a job of work for South Africa, to assist the Police in maintaining law and order, and something happens to him, for example an accident, or if he is killed in the line of duty, his dependents will be looked after properly by the Government. Unfortunately this is not happening. I see for instance in this little magazine issued by the Police Reserve, that Police reservists are now considering very seriously having their own insurance scheme. I believe it is a complete disgrace that you should ask people to serve in a Police reserve force, to assist South Africa, and then expect them to pay for their own insurance policies. I have raised this matter before. Sir, I think you will remember that some time ago a Police reservist in the course of his duty in Rose-bank was murdered. The case was brought to me by his widow. I presented a petition to Parliament. Nothing happened. I then raised the matter in the House. We found this very unsatisfactory position that this woman, who lost her husband and was left with two young children, was given the magnificent ex gratia payment of R200, and a pension of R36 for herself plus R18 each for her children. This means, in effect, that this woman received an amount of R200 and a pension for herself and her two children of R72 a month. I think this is quite shocking. I raised the matter here two years ago. The hon. the Minister gave me, I think, a half-promise—I have his Hansard here—that he would go into the question to see whether this reservist could be treated on the basis as if he were a policeman at the time he was killed. Unfortunately, nothing has happened. I think the Minister knows all about this case. I want to make a plea again here to the hon. the Minister to see if something can be done for the widow of this unfortunate man. I believe we must do this. I believe that, if we give men in South Arica the assurance that if something happens to them, their families will be looked after, you will find that you will have a great influx of public-spirited men in South Africa, into the Police Reserve. I make that plea to the hon. the Minister, and I believe that the very least he can do, is to see that there is a very special insurance fund for reservists, and that the total cost of this particular insurance fund must be carried by the State. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a very interesting attitude which is being revealed today in the discussion of this Vote by members opposite. Over and above the fact that their main speaker in that connection was not present for the major portion of the debate, we also note that the other hon. members hardly follow up on any of the points he mentioned. They ignore him, as it were. I think that is also the best thing for us to do, to give him the attention he deserves. In any case, I want to give the hon. member, who has just resumed his seat, the assurance that the positive matters he mentioned have also received proper thought and consideration on this side of the House from time to time. Thus I think, for example, that he definitely did the Reserve Police Force credit by the way he stated the case. We on this side of the House have already for the past four or five years been involved in discussions with the Reserve Police Force, and we have been advocating better and more extensive benefits for them. In fact, we have also succeeded in that respect. I want to take the opportunity of thanking the hon. the Minister of Police very sincerely for all the benefits he has allowed to accrue to the Reserve Police Force at the request of this side of the House. We are thinking, for example, of a variety of uniforms and shooting practice, for which they had to carry part of the cost initially, and for which the State now carries the cost for the most part. That is how it should be, and we thank the hon. the Minister. I also want to add a plea that we allow to accrue to the Reserve Police Force all the other benefits that can possibly be made available, including those in terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, for example. But that is an aspect one can elaborate upon on another occasion.

Sir, I also share the view of the other hon. members who think that with the help of the Police Reserve we can establish a greater crime prevention force. Here I am thinking specically of traffic accidents. Although it is a field in which the provincial and local traffic police are involved, the hon. the Minister has, by way of his department, and by virtue of statements by senior officers, hit out at road accidents and at times launched campaigns in that connection. We also thank the Police Force in this respect. But a great deal of the time of our police is lost in investigating traffic accidents. Every accident must be reported in terms of the Ordinances applicable in each province. We want to support the idea that in that connection a policy of the grading of accidents should be adopted. If it is a less serious accident, they should only take particulars of the relevant parties and vehicles. But when some of the relevant parties are injured, the investigation must be extended further as far as the taking of statements is concerned. This must, of course, also apply in the case of fatalities. This will immediately be beneficial in the sense of freeing the Police Force’s hands as far as the smaller accidents are concerned. But now I also want to ask whether we cannot entrust a certain part of this task to the reservists. Numerous prospective reservists, who want to present themselves for service, will perhaps hold back because of restrictive circumstances which this entails. But when such a person is doing that work throughout the day without it interfering in the slightest with his daily activities, it will be possible to involve a larger number of people. I specifically have in mind, for example, that we should ask the motor clubs to enter the reserve force with the specific task of keeping their eyes open for negligent and reckless drivers. Our Criminal Procedure Act makes provision for any member of the public to institute certain legal proceedings. Under certain circumstances, they can even carry out arrests. The Criminal Procedure Act does not, therefore, have to be extended any further to make provision for these particular powers. We must see whether we cannot make it possible for such a private person, who enters the reserve force, to keep his eyes open in the course of his daily activities, wherever he may find himself, for negligent and reckless drivers and to report when he has observed such a negligent driver. The system can then be extended further, and when the system of national registers for licence holders is introduced, very quick information can be sent through, with the aid of the new computers, which can then be recorded on the cards of such drivers. It can then be indicated on their cards that they have been observed to be reckless and negligent drivers. That information, coming from reservists, reliable people, etc., will then be recorded on the register. When a second and third report has been added, this can be taken into account as serious aggravating circumstances when such a person is involved in an accident. There will be the added benefit that if motorists know that there are reservists on the road who are watching them, they will drive more carefully. It is a fact that where we have our provincial traffic police on the roads, they have a preventive influence on negligent and reckless motorists. When this is extended in the cities and towns and this task is made the collective responsibility of reservists, that idea that they are being watched will stick as far as motorists are concerned who would perhaps be negligent and reckless in their driving. I want to advocate that we think along these lines.

Business suspended at 12.45 p.m. and resumed at 2.20 p.m.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, when we speak of crime prevention we must single out the particular role of the Security Police and give them all the credit they deserve. I want to call to witness none other than the Dean ffrench-Beytagh. On his return to London, for example, he said about the security division—

In the light of that we ask the Opposition what they substitute for that, or do they not support ffrench-Beytagh in this case?

Mr. Chairman, at the outset I and members on this side of the House would like to pay a tribute to the Commissioner of Police and to the Police Force generally for their loyalty and for the work they are doing. Members on the Government side of the House seem to resent any criticism from this side of the House against the Government. They have a way of trying to direct any attack on them at the Police. I want hon. members to understand that we parliamentarians, as representatives of the people, attack the Government and the Minister concerned directly. That is our right. The position is that we hold the Minister and his Government responsible for the actions of any individual under their control. One of the things we find as far as the hon. the Minister and the Government are concerned, is that the public relations of the Police with the public and the handling of justice have fallen down very badly. It has fallen down to such an extent that a university not so far from here, the Stellenbosch University, was able to lampoon what happened about the early morning arrests. It was not very pleasant; it did not make a good impression. It is up to the Government and the Minister concerned to reassure the public with regard to what is happening.

We on this side of the House have the greatest confidence in the Police and in what they are doing. They are unfortunately black sheep in any family, but that has been the case over the years. However, they have a very difficult task to perform and we know what they are doing on the border.

Mr. Chairman, I want to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister. Having regard to all the good work the Police are doing, Iwant to appeal to the hon. the Minister to have the whole pay structure of the Police Force examined. Let us have a look in the Estimates at the pay in respect of, for example, the lowest category of the posts filled by Whites. If one looks at these Estimates, one is rather shocked to see that a young married constable draws between R165 and R170 per month after private insurance, etc., has been deducted from his pay. I do not think that it is generally known that Police recruits pay for their own blankets, sheets, etc., and uniforms. It is not generally known that the Police do not get any overtime. The hon. the Minister may say: “Well, they are not expected to get overtime”. However, their counterparts in the Railway Police do get overtime. It is nothing for a constable, a sergeant or any member of the Police Force, after having been on duty all night, to wash and clean up and go and attend a court case. He may spend a day or even two or three days there. Yet he is expected to come on duty every night. He gets no reward at all for that. I feel that it is high time that the Police were compensated for the work they do and that a look into their pay position is needed very badly. I think it wrong that the Police should have to pay for their uniforms. I do not think they should be required to do so. One finds that even the young recruits who join up must pay for their blankets, sheets and so on. I understand it to be correct that, when they join up, they must pay for all this. Then, on top of that, they are very poorly paid. Relatively speaking, they are paid very, very poorly.

If one looks at the annual report, one is shocked at how many of the Police buy themselves out. They do not buy themselves out because they are unhappy or anything like that. In the 1969 report one finds that nearly 1 500 members of the Police Force bought themselves out. If one inquires into this, one finds that the background is that they cannot live on the pay. One finds that the average policeman is happy in his job and likes his job. However, when he gets married and has children, he finds that the pay is very poor and that he cannot carry on. Naturally, he leaves and goes elsewhere. He can join up and become a traffic officer and get very much more pay. We cannot be expected to build up a Force here under these conditions. I think it high time that the hon. the Minister had a good look at the police pay scales from the lowest up and to see whether these scales are in line with what is paid outside, for instance by the various traffic control departments, bearing in mind their responsibilities and the task they must carry out. It is all right saying to the young constables “if you study, you can become a sergeant”, but one cannot make every constable a sergeant. In other words, they must wait for their promotion. A lot of them do study and hope to be promoted in the Force. Looking at the shortage in the Force, one finds that in the establishment in 1969 there were only 7 843 constables whereas 9 096 were required. Although I do not have the figures for 1970, the position in that year was not much better. One finds that the Police Force has never been brought up to a full strength. If one were to improve their conditions, I am fairly certain that one would get the recruits. I feel that, as far as emoluments, uniform allowances and other fringe benefits are concerned, these are things the hon. the Minister should look at. Then there is also the question, as I have said, of overtime. It is very necessary that we should look into the question of overtime as far as the constables and other members of the Police Force are concerned.

Although there is no mention of it in the latest report, we have noticed that the hon. the Minister’s department is recruiting women Police. I think that that is a good thing and that there is a place in the Police Force for our women.

It is overdue.

I think it is very much overdue. I think that there are numerous duties in the Police Force that have been carried out by men, that could be usefully carried out by the females in our population. I think that all countries in the world use women to one extent or another in their Police Forces. I do not see real reason why we should not use them here. I think we should use them to a greater extent. I feel it would release a considerable number of our male staff, who one finds are tied up in offices, for work elsewhere. Those are the points I wish to make this afternoon and I hope the hon. the Minister will give them his attention.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to link up with those who congratulated Gen. Joubert on his reappointment for a further one-year period of service. Apart from congratulating the Police on their work, we cannot offer any congratulations or say any nice words about what the Opposition said and did here today. The hon. member for Salt River advocated a certain matter here and also said they were not attacking the Police, but only the Government. We want to tell the Police today that these words of the hon. member for Salt River are empty lip service.

Nonsense.

I say this because when they get outside this House it is a completely different story. With respect to the conduct of the Security Police the hon. member for Port Natal said—

What has that got to do with the Vote?

It deals with the treatment by the Security Police. Hon. members may go and have a look themselves. This report appears in the Star of 2nd March, 1971. The hon. member for Turffontein may just keep quiet for a moment. We shall be going further. Today I want to tell the hon. main speaker on judicial matters on that side of the House that we specifically did not react to the hon. member. We no longer regard it worth the trouble to react to that hon. member, because his conduct in the discussion of the Justice and Prisons Votes was of such a nature that any trained lawyer would not even want to touch such a debate with a barge-pole. We also saw this in the Legodi case. Now the hon. member wants us, as lawyers, to react to the main speaker on judicial matters on that side of the House. I choose to leave the hon. member at that. We shall no longer give any further attention to people who profess to be lawyers and then know nothing about that. In addition there are other people here who also profess to be lawyers. The same shouting and sowing of suspicion about the Police is not only being done by a few members on that side, but also by organizations from outside this Parliament. The hon. member for Transkei also added his little spurt. He said that where there is smoke there must be a fire.

I have here the newspaper report containing the statement. Apparently the hon. member is looking very upset, but the hon. member himself states that where there is smoke there must be fire. If these hon. members themselves come along and sow suspicion about the Police the public must, as stated in his own words, accept that there is a fire. I do not have the time to quote the report in full, but the most shocking aspect of all—and today we have listened here to the Police being done lip service—is what was said by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition himself. These are shocking things. In connection with the so-called suicide cases of detainees, the Leader of the Opposition said—

Here he says “in the hands of the Police” and not in the hands of the Government, as the hon. member for Salt River tried to have us believe—

Yes, by the Government. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Salt River, or anyone on that side of the House, must stand up and tell us how this Government has been handling any of these detainees. Let them stand up and tell us. It is mere lip service. I want to tell the hon. member that we on our side of the House have the utmost respect not only for the Government’s conduct, but also for that of the Police. We want to ask the Police to go on as they have been doing. Even though we have bad luck in certain courts—we are not criticizing the courts—we know that that work is being done properly.

We want to tell the Commissioner that he must carry on as he has been doing, even though the Police are placed under suspicion, as the hon. member for Houghton would so much like to do. She links up, in the strongest possible language, with the hon. members on that side. In Johannesburg the hon. member for Houghton made a speech before her “pink pals” at Wits in which, after she had discussed the Terrorism Act, she struck at blow at the Police which is absolutely scandalous in my opinion. It is not only scandalous, it is a contemptible action. In her speech she said, inter alia, that the members of the Police who are guilty of certain offences are brought before a disciplinary committee, etc., it is true, but those people who, in particular, were heavy-handed in their treatment of the detainees are the people who get quick promotion. I want to ask the hon. member for Houghton whether she said that. She only has to nod her head. The hon. member will probably not want to say it now, but the report reads as follows—

I say it is a despicable statement …

Order! The hon. member may not use the word “despicable”.

Then I say it is a …

The hon. member must first withdraw the word.

It is a scandalous thing to do.

Order! Will the hon. member now withdraw that word!

I shall withdraw the word “despicable” and use the word “scandalous”. It is scandalous in the worst degree. This type of thing, and we in South Africa must take note of that, is simply done to get at the Police with respect to detainees in terms of the Terrorism Act. There is a tremendous campaign in progress to present the conduct of the Police as suspect in any case. This is quite simply being done because South Africa’s enemies know that the Police is the first line of defence in our security and also, in a certain sense, the guardian of our country’s moral standards. These claims have surely been tested in the Pietermaritzburg trial where Judge James specifically heard the evidence of 92 witnesses about the maltreatment which detainees have allegedly received. In connection with Judge James’s finding that in no way were detainees being assaulted by the Police, did any of the members say they were sorry about their remarks? Did anyone on their side get up and have a word to say for the Police by acknowledging that the Bench had found that the people are not being maltreated? No, we did not find that happening.

Today the hon. member for Umlazi, the hon. member for Salt River and the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg City entered the debate. The hon. member for Umlazi was to have given examples this afternoon of how the Security Police’s administration is out of control and how the Commissioner no longer has any control over the Security Police. That is what we deduced from their first speaker’s speech, but the hon. member for Umlazi said nothing about that; he cannot say anything about it either. Now these people come along and pretend they are the Police’s greatest friends. Let us just tell them, in the words of an old man who was praying for co-operation in my constituency at the time (translation)—

I want to tell the hon. the Minister, his department and the Commissioner, the United Party men to the Police—“never, never, never”!

Mr. Chairman, it really is quite astonishing to see that this side of the House has in its ranks two ex-officers of the Police, whereas as far as I know there is not a single exofficer on that side or a single ex-member of the Police. This side of the House has steadily in this debate been giving credit where credit is due to the Police and it has been pointing a critical finger again where that is due. What have we found? We have found from the other side what one can only imagine must be a positively organized attempt to try and suggest that this side is doing anything else but its duty in this regard. We have had this from speaker after speaker. I would like to point to the double standards of that side with regard to this matter of the proper function of the Opposition. Nothing gives hon. members opposite and their Press greater pleasure than to say how weak and ineffective is the criticism from the Opposition side. They say how weak it is and how easily they can brush it aside, thereby making it perfectly clear and plain, as indeed is the case, that it is the clear duty of this side of the House to point out weaknesses in the administration of the country by the Government.

Then you must be logical.

When this is done, either in this House or outside, we get this double standard operating; we are told that we are being disloyal, that we are being unpatriotic, and that we are adopting an intolerable attitude. Sir, I ask hon. members opposite rather to examine their own double standards. They will not distract us from doing what is our duty. Let me say that no hon. member opposite does the Police a good service by asking the country to shut its eyes to things that need to be put right. We are the first to say—and I was planning to say, and do say—that we respect the Police. They are our Police; we take them to our hearts; we are with them where they are on the border, and we are with them when they are on the beat, but I believe that they would want us …

May I ask a question?

Sit down!

I have limited time. I am quite certain that the illustrious Commissioner of Police, to whom so many tributes have been paid, with which I would like to associate myself, would have no objection to the statement that the highest standards are expected from this fine force. This is certainly the attitude that we shall continue to maintain. We shall be sympathetic with the Police if they make errors, but at the same time it is our duty to point to them and to seek to try to bring about improvements, if necessary.

Sir, I am glad to see from the report that various courses and refresher courses have been instituted. I would like to see the highest possible percentage of refresher courses for serving men, not only for those seeking promotion, because the job of the policeman is a difficult one and it is necessary for one, by means of some academic study in the middle of one’s practical work, to be helped to adopt better methods in one’s work. I notice in the case of the non-Whites that there are not as many courses being undertaken as in the case of the Whites.

Sir, I would also like to know whether attention is being given to crowd control training in the Police, including riot control training. There have been various new developments in this field, and I would be glad to know that they are being given proper attention so that in any event of this nature can be handled with the least possible harmful result.

I would like also to know what the position is with regard to police stations, particularly in the Coloured and Bantu townships. Does the hon. the Minister consider that the position is satisfactory in these areas, and what has he got in the way of plans for them? There is a far greater incidence of crime in these areas. We have heard from the hon. the Minister of Community Development that we can expect a quarter of a million Coloured people at Mitchellsplein in the course of the next few years. I would be glad to know what plans have already been made for police stations there, and what ratio of police to the population the hon. the Minister hopes to achieve in the various non-White areas. Mr. Chairman, the report quite rightly refers to the fact that the Police are on guard against terrorist infiltration on our borders. We are all very much in their debt for the service they are doing there. Much of their service bears similarity to active service in war. I would like to know whether they do in fact receive any special allowance for this work. I hope also that the hon. the Minister will give us a balanced account in this debate of the position on our borders in relation to terrorist activities. I hope he will tell us how the position looks to him and that he will give us a balanced assessment of the strength of the movement against us there, and tell us whether he expects it to increase or not, because this clearly involves the retention of larger or smaller bodies of police forces.

One has noted with regret the deaths from landmines on the borders. In most cases these occur when the personnel are travelling in vehicles. The hon. the Minister may remember that during war-time use was made of a flait mechanism in advance of a tank to detect the presence of mines. I hesitate to mention this so many years thereafter, but I would like to know whether the possible use of this mechanism has been ruled out as not being helpful.

Sir, there is one matter that I find much less satisfactory that I would like to mention, and that is the annual report of the Commissioner of Police. I find it dis-disappointing in two respects, firstly the typographical presentation and the setting out of what is in the report, but, more importantly the increasingly scanty information that we get in this report. By way of comparison I looked at a report of the Commissioner in the early ’fifties. If the hon. the Minister makes a comparison between the reports, he will see what I mean. I could give him some examples. In the report of the early ’fifties, considerable attention was given to circumstances which called for the particular attention of the Police. This is one aspect which is now entirely omitted from the report. Another aspect of those earlier reports, an aspect which is now entirely omitted, is the number of people convicted. The number of contraventions and the number of people sent for trial are still mentioned, but the number of people convicted is not mentioned. [Interjection.] Well, this was a common feature of the reports in those days, and it is surprising that no reference is made to it in this report. It was always a feature of the reports in the past, and there is no reason why it should not be a feature of the report now. Another feature of the earlier reports which one does not find in this report is a comparative statement showing the amount of serious crime reported over a period of years. The percentage of crimes undetected is also omitted from this report. I think it is important that people should know how the Police are doing in detecting crime. I am sorry, therefore, that this, too, has been omitted. There are various other items that have been omitted, as the hon. the Minister will find if he will take the trouble to look at those reports. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I just wish to deal shortly with the first portion of the speech made by the hon. member for Pinelands, where he accused the Government side of an organized attempt to bring the attitude of the official Opposition under suspicion. We do not object to constructive criticism; nobody objects to that, but we do object to their negative approach in seeking to derive political advantage from certain aspects of the administration of the Police Force. I also wish to deal with two remarkably irresponsible aspects of the speech of the hon. member for Houghton. Surely this hon. member should know that when a policeman is accused of killing a person in the process of arrest, there rests a very heavy onus on the accused to prove on a balance of probabilities the circumstances under which such a person is killed. She surely should also know that the circumstances are very closely scrutinized to ensure that the conditions are completely fulfilled, and the courts are very strict in the criteria they employ in cases of this nature.

She has also deemed it fit to mention certain aspects of the evidence given by Mr. Jordaan and others in the ffrench-Beytagh trial. The duty of the Police is, amongst other things, to ensure a conviction, but it is also to bring a prima facie case to the attention of the Attorney-General. Surely she will not disagree with me that in the ffrench-Beytagh case there was at least a prima facie case brought to the attention of the Attorney-General. The Judge-President of the Transvaal chose to accept the evidence of Jordaan and others, and it was merely on certain aspects of credibility that he succeeded on appeal. But surely she cannot say that this is having a child-like faith in the infallibility of the Security Police.

*I think I can leave her at that. I just want to refer briefly to the report by the Commissioner of Police in regard to the decorations which were awarded to members of the Police Force. I should like to mention a few instances, and I want to start with the case of the late lieutenant Trollip of the East Rand Division, a sportsman of exceptional distinction, who recently lost his life in a courageous manner near Heidelberg while trying to arrest a lunatic. I also want to refer to the case of sergeant J. G. Pietersen, who took action on 28th January, 1972, at the confluence of the Limpopo and Levubu rivers, where the Pafuri border post had been subject to heavy and continuous rains and the rivers had overflowed their banks. Bantu huts in Portuguese territory in the vicinity of the river were flooded and non-Whites climbed into trees and on the roofs of huts to avoid being drowned. Sergeant Pietersen offered his services voluntarily and distinguished himself in an exceptional way in doing rescue work. In one case he was lowered from a helicopter, by means of a hoist, to a Bantu man who was clinging to a tree with a Bantu child in his arms. He drew both of them up to safety. In another case six Coloured people were clinging to branches of trees in the flood-waters. As a result of trees the helicopter could rot get close to the Coloured people, but sergeant Pietersen jumped into the water and swam to the trees. A harness was lowered to sergeant Pietersen from the helicopter and by means of the harness he had the panic-stricken Coloured people drawn up to safety one by one. In another case a family of three Bantu people, a blind woman, a man and a child, were found on the roof of a house. Once again the helicopter could not be taken up to the house as a result of trees around the house. Sergeant Pietersen then jumped into the flood-water with a tube and swam to the house. He forced open the door of the house and climbed through a hole in the roof to reach the Bantu. He tied the child to his back, put the Bantu woman in the tube and swam out from under the trees with them. In the same way he brought the Bantu man to safety as well. The rescue team then noticed a group of non-Whites in tree-tops in the flood-water. The rescuers were unable to draw the non-Whites into the helicopter by means of a harness, because of their panic and ignorance. Sergeant Pietersen was then lowered into the trees with the harness and after great difficulty he succeeded in putting the harness around every non-White in turn, so that they could be drawn up to safety. I also want to refer to the case at the Piesang River near Durban during the recent heavy rains in May. 1971. when captain Muller and detective-sergeant J. L. McPherson saved the lives of approximately 21 people when the driver of a motor-bus with 66 Bantu passengers braved the flood-water and tried to cross a road-bridge which was under water. I mention the case of sergeant J. B. Fouch, the station commander at Patensie, who also distinguished himself in doing rescue work. He was on duty shortly after midnight during the period 19th August to 21st August, 1971. He was warning the people and assisting and advising them where necessary, but since he knew his area well he was placed on one of the helicopters to indicate places where the emergency was at its greatest. In one case 31 Coloured men, women and children were trapped on the flat roof of a farm-house. The water had already washed over the roof and the building had begun to show signs of collapsing under the weight. Sergeant Fouch jumped onto the roof from the helicopter and within a short time he took the Coloured people on his shoulders and helped them into the helicopter one by one. Likewise there are other cases of heroism displayed by members of our Police Force of which I would want to make special mention.

After having been quoted out of context, I do not withdraw a single word, and I will now explain for the information of the hon. members opposite, who obviously do not know, how the police work. I can tell you now, Sir, that where there is a Special Branch posted, neither the senior station commander of that station, nor the district-commandant or the divisional commissioner know what the Special Branch is doing. [Interjections.] They have absolutely no say over the comings and goings of the Special Branch. Way back in the 1950s when we used to have to check the transport diaries, and I had Special Branch men under me, all they said was “Secret inquiries; geheime navrae”, and they gave a file number; I refused to pass it because I said I did not know what their duties were and I could not say they were on Government duty. Now this is the point. Without the normal policy knowing what the Special Branch are doing, this goes up to Pretoria. I put the blame fairly and squarely on the Minister, who does not give a statement when it should be given, but who hides behind the Police. The Minister of Justice also says: “It is over to the Police”, and so it is ping-pong, ping-pong, between the two of them, and the public does not know what is going on. But in the meantime the Special Branch expects the uniform branch and the C.I.D. to cover up for them. That is the position. [Interjections.] I know more about Nazis than you do. [Interjections.]

Order!

That is the position and this is the point we on this side make, that the Police are doing an excellent job of work in fighting crime, especially when you consider that they have somewhere around 471 445 square miles to cover and about 3 000 miles of coast, and they are doing it well, including their duty in Rhodesia and in the Caprivi, but the Minister does not tell the public what is going on. No wonder the people are suspicious and dissatisfied. This is the wonderful Government we have. Here I also quote from Sapres. This is a report in connection with the Indian police reserve at Chatsworth. The reporter tells us that there is a population of 208 000 people and that they are fighting crime there. I now quote—

The Minister responsible is not here. [Interjections.] I quote further—

This is more than the Nationalists can have. [Interjections.]

Order!

Iread further—

He then tells us how they went on to have a dance where they raised money amongst the Indians. I read further—

If that is not a scandalous position that we call upon the Indian community to supply the police with walkie-talkie sets, then tell me what is. [Interjections.] I now come to the point of these extraneous duties.

Explain yourself.

I have already explained myself. [Interjections.]

Order! [Interjections.] Order! Will hon. members obey the Chair now. The hon. member may proceed.

Crime prevention …

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon. member for Boksburg must contain himself.

People have complained that they see no police patrols. No wonder, when one reads here that no fewer than 2 063 241 manhours were spent on extraneous duties which, if you break it down, means that 706 members of the Force were employed on 8-hour shifts per day for that year.

Tell us about the Nazis.

This is over and above the men who attended courses during the year. In this connection 5 459 members were involved. Then of course at headquarters there is also a proliferation of men—1 525 of them. This gives you a total of 6 984. You have also to add to these figures those in respect of men on sick leave, those on vacation leave and then those who are still doing border duty or are otherwise engaged upon anti-terrorist duties. No wonder the Police cannot do patrol duty in towns.

Why?

They have to work through the paper work that is inevitable with this bureaucratic Government.

What is your complaint?

My complaint is that you have nobody in the streets. I am complaining that the police are called upon to perform extraneous duties to the extent that 706 policemen are employed every day on extraneous duties on 8-hour shifts.

But what about the Nazi accusation? [Interjections.]

Order!

I was bom in the Police Force; I grew up in the Police Force; I served in the Police Force and there is nobody here who can ever deny my loyalty to South Africa or to the Police Force and my love for the Police Force. These criticisms are raised because we are sore about what is going on because of Government legislation.

Mr. Chairman, when the hon. member for Umlazi stood up he began by saying he wanted to give us an explanation. I then really expected him to tell us what he meant when he said that the methods being employed here in South Africa are worse than those in Nazi and Communist countries. He still owes us that reply. I got hold of that cutting. If he has not seen it, or if he possibly made this statement in his sleep, I can give him this newspaper so that he may read it and then give us his denial or acknowledgement at a later stage.

Speaker after speaker on that side of the House stood up and said that the accusations they were making against the Police were not accusations aimed directly at the Police, but that they were in fact accusations against the Government of the country. I think I understood them correctly. I wonder, since they are now saying this, what they think of their own leader.

What do you think of yours? [Interjections.]

Order!

I wonder what they will think of him if I quote to them that he asked for a commission of inquiry into the methods the Security Police use to interrogate people who are being detained without trial. The following are his own words (translation)—

The Leader of the Opposition asks the Prime Minister to appoint a commission of inquiry into the Security Police’s methods. [Interjections.] Surely what he was making there was a direct accusation against the Security Police. Surely they must go and tell their own leader that he has the wrong end of the stick and that it is not always the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District alone who has the wrong end of the stick. He referred here to the Police, after all, and this is an accusation against the Police. I now want to put the next question to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. In the past year 28 members of the Police were killed and 495 injured in the execution of their duties. Did he ask for a commission of inquiry to be appointed into the death of a single one of those Policemen? No!

It is being investigated.

They are worried about a Communist; they are worried about terrorists; they are worried about underminers. If a single Timol jumps out of a ten-storey building, a commission of inquiry must be appointed to investigate his death. I am asking here for an impartial judgment. Who are they most concerned about?

May I ask the hon. member a question?

No, sit down! The hon. member had two chances. I am asking: Who are they more concerned about? Are they more concerned about Timol, or are they concerned about the safety of the Police? I say in addition: There sit the protectors of the Communists and subverters here in our country.

Scandalous!

Order! The hon. member must withdraw that.

I shall withdraw it, Sir, May I then say “the sympathisers”?

Yes!

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, is the hon. member allowed to say “the sympathisers”?

Of course!

May he say “sympathisers” if he may not say “beskermers”? He is speaking of sympathisers to an unlawful act …

It is a nice word; it is euphemistic.

The hon. member may proceed.

I think there are many cowardly acts one can commit in life, but one of the most cowardly acts one can commit with respect to a person is to attack him when he is not able to or allowed to defend himself. Here we now have blatant attacks on the Police, while everyone knows that neither the Commissioner of Police, nor any of his officers or constables have the power or the right to defend themselves. The attacks were such that Gen. Bester—no, excuse me, he was not the one—that Maj.-Gen. Venter, the chief of the Security Police, said the following in an interview with Die Vaderland (translation)—

He continues and states—

Where does the Press get its inspiration from. Sir? There they sit! They are the people who feed that poison to the Press to make the attacks on the Police. I say it is a scandalous attack on a person who is not in the position to defend himself, and on persons who cannot defend themselves.

Sir, a moment ago I used the word “Communism” here. Do you know, the hon. member for Wynberg went touring in America. When she got back here she made certain comments. I quote from the Star of Thursday, 9th December, 1971, and this is what is stated here:

Which is quite correct—

Does this amount to the fact that the hon. the Minister does not have the right to say that the Police are the Communists’ target? Immediately the hon. member for Wynberg takes up the cudgels for those people whom he attacks. Mr. Chairman, a moment ago you asked me to withdraw certain words, but I want to tell you that I am still entertaining that idea. If an hon. member in this House wants to act as a protector for such a person …

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order …

Order! The hon. member may not say that, because entertaining the idea is exactly the same thing as saying it. He must withdraw that.

Very well then, I withdraw it, Sir, But I want to tell the Commissioner of Police: We as law-abiding and patriotic South Africans say thank you to the Police for the protection they afford South Africa. We say thank you to them for the good work they are doing. Go on with that good work you are doing and simply let those wolves go on howling!

Mr. Chairman, there is one good thing that can be said about the hon. member for Boksburg, and that is that he is the expert listener-in to “skinderstories”. Apparantly, on the evidence of the hon. the Prime Minister, it was as a result of the “skinderstories” he heard in Boksburg about Agliotti that the inquiry was instituted. Otherwise he has made no contribution whatsoever to public life in that speech he has made this afternoon.

Let us examine this debate that we have had this afternoon, which is now drawing to a close. What has been the contribution? Far from what the hon. member for Brakpan had to say, that there was a negative attempt to draw politics out of the administration of the Police, quite the opposite is the case. We have made from this side of the House various interesting and new suggestions as to improving the lot of the individual members of the Police and as to improving the use of the Police, so that the public will have more of this “beskerming” about which that hon. gentleman spoke. What have we had from that side of the House in the way of contribution to this debate? Nothing whatever, except invective—except for one hon. member, the hon. member for Kroonstad. I hope this is not the kiss of death for him that I should say to him that he made the only positive contribution, and that was that the Police Force should be withdrwn from the ambit of control of the Public Service. That has great merit, because we have proposed it several times before. But that was all. I was attacked personally also by almost every hon. member. I want to tell them that I am not going to threaten not to talk to them again. This is life. This is politics. But you know, Sir, what has come out of this debate this afternoon, has been the attitude that the Police Force is synonymous with the State. Quite the opposite is in fact true. The Police Force, and they will recognize it first in spite of what those hon. members say, is a department of State, the servant of the public, the friend of the public and is controlled by the public through this House. It is certainly not the slave of the Nationalist Party or the slave of any Government. Just look at some of the suggestions that have been made. The hon. member for Umlazi pointed to the establishment at head office as given in the report. One can see how many officers there are, how many warrant officers and how many sergeants there are at head office. Hon. members opposite who come from the Transvaal, who need protection like we all do, should go and look what the establishment is in the Witwatersrand especially.

Just stick to Natal, and it will be all right.

I will come back to this if I have time because I would like to put on record what these figures are and I hope the hon. the Minister will deal with it. I hope those hon. gentlemen will deal with it too. But what has in fact happened? Hon. members have castigated us for various statements that were made. They did not like the word “Gestapo” and the words “communist methods” and “communist countries”. Let us examine the expressions “Gestapo methods” and “communist countries”. What was there about the Gestapo which was so awful? It was that they had the power to detain a man, to arrest him and put him inside some place and keep him there, forever if they wanted to, and to interrogate him without any recourse to any court of law. That is the difference. We have gone a long way. because we have to go a long way and because the Government and the country need the support of the Opposition in fighting terrorism, Communism and subversion. We must be as one on this, but as to the method of dealing with it, we differ. I cannot for the life of me see how it will make any difference whatever to the process of interrogation if after 14 days the Police have to go to a judge to get an order laying down the conditions of further interrogation. Our suggestion has nothing to do with interrogation. We say that the Police must have the power to interrogate. What is wrong with that? Why shouldn’t a man be taken to a judge? When one does not want that and can do it practically, that is what makes this attitude and that law and the administration of it likened unto the Gestapo and likened unto any of the godless communist states.

The hon. member for Bloemfontein West says that I have not been here for most of the debate, but for the record I want to say that that is absolute nonsense. It is true that I did go out occasionally. What do these accusations mean? We have been pilloried by what they call our Press, the English language Press, because we supported the principle of the Terrorism Act and because it could not be allowed at any price and because we supported the principle of the anti-Poqo Bill, and other matters. They say we have been pilloried for our attitude towards these things by our Press. When has the United Party attacked the Police? These are the allegations that are made. Go and look at the records. When did the United Party ever attack the Police Force? It does not happen. The hon. gentlemen should have a look at it. They should look at the records, because it has never happened. The United Party has never attacked the Police.

Just have a look at your own Press Statements.

I will come to those Press statements. If the situation ever arises in this country that the public would accept without demur the unlimited power of section 6 without recourse to a court of law, then we are really in trouble. This country owes a great debt of gratitude to this Opposition for keeping in the minds of the people in South Africa and overseas the thought that we are still a democracy with a vigorous Opposition. Do not ever forget that. It would be monstruous if these powers were exercised without demur. The record is not very good. Look, for example, at the evidence in the Dean’s trial. Tell me on the evidence, what justification is there for detaining this man under section 6 and interrogating him? I do not see it, but what is it? That is the record. What did we say at the time? My hon. leader said at that time: Look, we want an investigation by a judicial commission of inquiry into the whole process of interrogation and how it is done and so forth. What was the attitude? Complete rejection immediately. What one must appreciate is that that was motivated also in the interest of the Police. I said at the time, and I say it now, that they would welcome it. The same happened in Ireland with the Compton Commission. There they had a commission of inquiry. It was disclosed that there were certain irregularities, but the public was reassured. This is the point: the public must not only be reassured, but it must also have complete confidence that these things are not happening in these little rooms. That was our attitude. Why not have a judicial commission of inquiry? I beileve that the Police would welcome it because there is nothing for them to hide, but it will, as I say, do the job that I mentioned.

I have very little time left at my disposal, but I want to refer the hon. the Minister to the Danie Bester affair.

Oh, please!

It is no good saying “Oh, please”. The latest contribution on this subject came from the hon. the Prime Minister during his Vote. All he had to say was that the Commissioner of Police was seized of the matter and, therefore, dealt with it. What was he seized of? He was not seized of a criminal inquiry, an inquiry into a criminal charge; he was not seized of a departmental inquiry—there is machinery for that where, by the person being inquired into is told of the fact and then there is an inquiry. What was it? It is very hard to believe that this inquiry could have happened in the circumstances without some pressure from the top on the Commissioner. This is it. Without any satisfactory explanation of this …

In other words, you do not believe the Commissioner.

I am not going to talk about the Commissioner. You are the fellow responsible, not the Commissioner. I am not going to hide and you must not try to hide behind the Commissioner either. I have no fight with the Commissioner. I would not dream of fighting with the Commissioner because he cannot defend himself. This point undermines the whole morale of the Police Force without an explanation. What happened? The reaction at the time from the Police, immediately when this was disclosed. was: My goodness, if that can happen at the top, what about us poor blokes at the bottom? [Time expired.]

Mr.

Chairman, the hon. member saved the Bester affair for the last few seconds of the time allocated to him. Consequently he did not have the time to tell me what he was dissatisfied about. All he could give me an indication of, was that there were things which are inconsistent with what was said by the Commissioner of Police. He said he was speaking to me. Of course he was speaking to me. Now I want to state here unambiguously that I am responsible in this House for every action of every policeman. I shall come to the hon. member for Umlazi at a later stage. In the meantime he may prepare himself for furnishing me with proof as to where I have ever hidden behind a policeman. I am responsible to this House for the actions of every policeman.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister says he is responsible. Could he tell us why he knew nothing about this matter? He is, after all, the Minister of Police.

Does the hon. member now want to make the assumption here that a Minister of Police must at all times know everything about everything that happens in the South Africa Police? [Interjections.] Surely this is the most ridiculous thing in the world.

He is the Deputy Commissioner.

That does not matter. I must accept responsibility in this House for what is done by the South African Police. If some members of the Police Force do wrong, I must admit it and they must be punished for it. If they do well, I think the necessary recognition will be shown by commending them. That is how matters stand. I am the last person in the world who will dare to say that the Police do not make mistakes. There are more than 34 000 of them, of whom approximately half are non-Whites and the other half are Whites. There are senior officers, ordinary men and young chaps who have just left the college and who often have to do responsible work on their own. To say that mistakes are never made, will be the biggest mistake in the world. It stands to reason that mistakes are made. I have to account here for each of those mistakes, if hon. members ask me questions about them I am prepared to do so.

That is our duty.

Of course. I do not deny that. I do not know what the hon. members are quarrelling about.

What do your colleagues say; that it is our duty?

I have no objection, and I do not think there is anybody on this side who denies any hon. member on that side the right to raise any matter in regard to the South African Police when that Vote is under discussion.

That is not what hon. members on that side are saying.

You are undermining the morale of the Police. [Interjections.]

That is the reply given by everybody on that side.

Heaven preserve us from a Minister like you.

Let us cool off a little and be responsible in regard to this matter.

Tell your own people to cool off.

No, it is not necessary to speak to them. The attacks made

by them against hon. members on that side, were concerned with their contradictory statements and their attacks outside this House and in the newspapers, as was done by the hon. member for Durban North, who always seeks publicity and so often spreads gossip. In this regard I can do nothing but agree with them. But it is the right of every member of this House—and I shall fight for that right—to raise Police matters here when the Police Vote is under discussion. If mistakes are made by the Police, it is the right of hon. members on both sides of the House to say that mistakes were made here or there. How often have I not admitted that mistakes were made?

For 2½ hours I have listened to the debate that has taken place here on the South African Police. It is a service department; a department, as I have just said, which consists of approximately 34 000 men, and which is concerned with the activities of the public every day, all day, every hour of the day. It is an interesting department to discuss. Several members here raised matters concerning the South African Police, and I should like to reply to them. In the first instance, I want to refer to the first speech that was made by the hon. member for Durban North. He spoke right at the beginning this morning and referredto the non-Whites we have on our borders at the moment. He agreed that it was a good idea. I share that view, and I anticipate that they will do very fruitful work for us there. Then the hon. member expressed the view that consideration should perhaps be given to awarding medals to those who have rendered service on our borders. I do not wish to elaborate at length on each of these topics, but I should like to tell the hon. member that the same idea is already being considered by the South African Police. There are quite a number of advantages and disadvantages. pros and cons, to this idea, but it is nevertheless something which we may take into consideration.

The hon. member referred to better employment. I think that what he actually had in mind, was that there had to be overtime pay for the South African Police. If I am not mistaken, the hon. member for Umlazi also said something in this regard. While I am dealing with overtime, and especially with reference to what was said here by the hon. member for Salt River in regard to the remuneration of the South African Police, and also with reference to the hon. member for Umlazi, I just want to say that since I became Deputy Minister of Police, I think I can bear witness to the fact that the conditions of service of the Police have improved considerably. I readily listen to ideas for effecting further improvements to their conditions of service, where necessary. I appreciate the interest displayed by hon. members in this regard. But the Department of Police is in point of fact a part of the Public Service. It is a department within the Public Service, and as such there must be a connection between the remuneration of the Police officials and that of the rest of the Public Service. In this regard I must say that when a policeman enters the service, he receives the same remuneration as does any other person who joins the Public Service. He receives the same remuneration and, just like other officials in the service of the State, he gets his annual increments. In the Police we have the additional benefit that as soon as a police official has completed his training, which occupies approximately one year of his term of service, he gets an additional notch. He gets this because of the training he has undergone for the special work he is going to do as a police official. In that respect, therefore, he is one notch better off than is an ordinary official in the Public Service. Over and above that, and here I am referring to what was said by the hon. member for Salt River in regard to the uniform allowances, there is an allowance which is paid to the members of the Force. This allowance starts in the second and the third year of his service and gradually increases until it is an annual amount of R420. Subsequent to that it starts decreasing again, and later on it disappears completely when such a person reaches the rank of lieutenant, or more or less in that vicinity. This allowance of R420 per annum is meant, inter alia, for clothes and uniforms as well as possible overtime that has to be worked, for police officials are not paid any overtime. I am grateful for the discussion that has taken place here on the improved conditions of service and improved conditions of the South African Police. I take pleasure in listening to such discussions, and whereever it is at all in our power to do so, we shall make their conditions of service as pleasant and as good as possible.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Is the Minister aware of the fact that the Railway Police receive overtime payment? They are also a State institution.

Yes, that is true, but the Railways are a quite separate department. The salary scales of the Police are not the same as those of the Railway Police. I do not want to draw comparisons between the two, because I think the South African Police compares a little unfavourably with the Railway Police. In point of fact, I have no argument, for the salary scales of the Railway Service are quite separate, and it does not fall under the Public Service.

They receive a higher salary.

They do receive a higher salary. The only respect in which I have a sound argument, and I think hon. members will perhaps agree with me, is that the Police should be compared with the rest of the Public Service as forming a part of the Public Service. I think this ought to be the basis of my approach, from which it would be preferable for me, in my search for better benefits for the Police, to find arguments in support of the request that their remuneration be improved.

The hon. member for Durban North also referred to control over the Security Police. Just as is the case with any other subdivision of the South African Police, the Security Police falls under the Commissioner of Police. As hon. members know, the chief of the Security Police is Gen. Venter. Gen. Venter, as chief of the Security Police, is responsible for everything that happens in that regard, and he is in charge of the Security Police. He, in turn, is responsible to the Commissioner of Police. Therefore I cannot see that there is any lack of control at all, as the hon. member for Durban North suggested.

Who controls them in a division such as Port Natal and Cape Town?

We have a chief in every division of the Security Police. For instance, Col. Pienaar is the chief of the Security Police in the Cape Town Division. He, in turn, is responsible to those set in authority over him for everything that happens here in the Western Cape.

Not to the Divisional Commissioner of Police?

No, of course not; I am telling the hon. member that Gen. Venter is the chief of the Security Police. The officers in charge of these subdivisions are therefore responsible to the chief of the Security Police, Gen. Venter, and the latter is in turn responsible to the Commissioner of Police. The control in respect of the Security Police is just as it is in any other division of the Police.

The hon. member for Kroonstad received such a big compliment, and I hope that this will not be to his detriment. He spoke about the possibility of the South African Police getting its own service commission. This is a matter to which we gave a great deal of attention in the past. In fact, the idea has come to mind that there ought to be a separate service commission for the service departments, i.e. for the Defence Force, for Prisons and for the Police. To tell the truth, we have made a great deal of progress in this regard. The hon. the Minister of Defence and the hon. the Minister of Justice, the other two Ministers concerned in this matter, are here. We have made a great deal of progress in regard to this idea, but we were faced with certain problems, such as the constitution of such a service commission. The constitution of such a service commission presented us with quite a number of problems, and we have in fact not reached any finality as yet. But I think I must agree with the hon. member that we should give further attention to this matter. There are many good reasons why sympathetic attention should be given to the possibility of establishing a service commission for the three service departments.

The hon. member for Kroonstad also referred to facilities for the men on the borders. He was speaking from experience because he had been there. He saw under what circumstances the men were living there. At the moment we are once again considering the possibility of effecting a change in the facilities for the men on our borders. But there are problems. The hon. member will appreciate that the large field kitchen, to which he referred, which the Defence Force has, is quite a big installation, and I wonder, in view of the mobility which is necessary for the Police and in view of the size of the individual camps, whether this is not too ambitious. But, nevertheless, I appreciate the thoughts expressed by the hon. member. We are in fact intent on providing the men on the borders with more facilities. The existing facilities are very poor, as hon. members know. These men have to live in tents, and we shall perhaps be obliged to do something in this regard.

The hon. member for Umlazi said in his first speech that we had to appoint the Commissioner on a contract basis. I do not know whether he simply wants me to catch a person outside and to appoint him on a contract basis. When I appoint a commissioner, surely I must appoint a person with the necessary experience. It must be a person who has the necessary status in the Force. Consequently there is only one sphere from which one can choose, and that is from the ranks of the most senior officers in the Force.

Is. the hon. the Minister satisfied with a commissioner staying in the Service for two or two and a half years only?

Sir, that is a problem,, but I suppose it has always been a problem and will always remain one as well. As an ex-police officer the hon. member for Umlazi himself knows that seniority is terribly important in the Police. It is almost as important as seniority is in the Cabinet. When we discuss the Police again, the hon. member may tell me what his views are on this matter, but it is simply not very easy to choose from the ranks of the Police a youngish person, with five or six years’” service only, for appointment as Commissioner. I would personally give preference to that if we were in a position to keep a person in charge of the department for a longer period, for the sake of continuity, but usually it does not work that way. I personally feel that the Commissioner must, from the nature of the case, be part of the-Force. He must come from the Force and be part of the Force, so that he may live-with his men and work with his men.

The hon. member also mentioned that we had established a separate division for Runtu and Katima Mulilo; in other words, for the entire Caprivi for the north of South-West Africa. He said he found it strange that we had located the head office of this division in Pretoria. We decided after consideration that this would be best, for where else could we actually locate it? Katima Mulilo and Runtu are terribly far from each other. The necessary accommodation does not exist there, and over and above that there are still quite a number of other factors, practical considerations, which induced us to keep the head office in Pretoria instead. We have the question of radio control and that of the air traffic from Pretoria to Katima Mulilo, and the other offices of the Police, including the head office, are there. Therefore, contact is much easier, and there is also the question of training, not only of the students in the college, but also that of the men who have to go to the borders. This is in the vicinity of Pretoria, and with due regard to all these practical factors, we felt it would be best to have the head office in Pretoria.

The hon. member for Aliwal said nice things about the police. I appreciate this gesture and thank him very much for having said these things. Then I want to come to the hon. member for Houghton. I found it strange that this year the hon. member for Houghton did not speak about Soweto again.

[Inaudible.]

Or is that perhaps the nice thing the hon. member wanted to say?

Yes, that is the nice thing I wanted to say.

I want to reply to her as follows, and also to the hon. member for Pinelands, who also spoke about the staffing of police stations for non-Whites. Soweto has become such a tremendously large complex. Last year I went there with the Commissioner of Police, as I had promised the hon. member for Houghton when this Vote was under discussion last year. At the time I decided to establish a special division for Soweto. At present there is for Soweto a quite separate division with two districts. I think the results are evident already. Because the attention is specifically confined to Soweto itself, an improvement in the policing of Soweto can be detected already. I may also tell the hon. member for Pinelands that as the Coloured areas expand, we shall of course be obliged to provide them with the necessary police services and to staff the necessary police stations there. This is our desire, and as far as possible we are staffing the stations in Coloured areas by Coloureds, so that these stations may be completely under the control of Coloureds, and the stations in the Bantu areas are largely being staffed by Bantu. Of course, in a place like Soweto we cannot have Bantu in charge of matters at this stage, but we already have numerous stations in the country which are being manned exclusively by Bantu. We shall extend this practice as circumstances render this possible for us.

The hon. member for Houghton wanted to know what was happening to the detainees in Owambo. There are several of them who are being charged with murder, attempted murder, arson, damage to property, incitement, etc., and in due course they will be tried on these charges against them. The hon. member also referred to the Rev. Nailenge of Damaraland. I should like to inform her that he has already been released. Then she said she would like to have information on these so-called raids in 1971.

Could the hon. the Minister tell me how many people are in detention in Owambo?

I cannot say at the moment, but I shall furnish the hon. member with the information later on, if she wants it. As a result of the activities in October of last year, the following have been char ed but their trial is still in progress. They are Essop—I am not mentioning their full names—Desai and Moodly. As far as Quentin Jacobsen is concerned, the case was before the court, but Quentin Jacobsen was acquitted. Furthermore, there were three others, namely Cousins, Behrman and Notcutt, who were released on bail and subsequently fled the country. They ran away from their difficulties. There was also a certain David Davies, who was found guilty in Durban.

Guilty of being in possession of banned books, I believe.

I am not sure of what, but I think it was in terms of the Suppression of Communism Act. The hon. member is blaming me—it was also said here— for these terrible investigations which took place in those terrible hours of the morning. If one views the matter superficially, it is an unpleasant hour of the morning for carrying out investigations such as those. However, if one looks at the work of the Police, one realizes that this is not such an awful hour or that the hour does not matter so much. I want it to be borne in mind that these investigations were carried out at various places throughout the country at the same time, for if this is not done, they are not effective. These people know one another and are in contact with one another. If one of them were to scent danger, all his friends throughout the country would be informed before one could say Jack Robinson. That is why it is so essential that if one wants to take effective action, one should take steps against all the suspects at the same time. That is the first point. The second point is that if one is charged with these investigations, one must ascertain beyond all doubt that the people concerned are at the place where one is going to carry out the investigation. That is why the Police choose an hour in the night which they expect to be the most suitable hour when they can be sure that these people are in fact at home.

I may be asked why in fact it had to be 4 o’clock; it may just as well have been 6 o’clock. Perhaps 6 o’clock is even more inconvenient to certain people than 4 o’clock is. It probably depends on what time one went to bed that night. The fact of the matter is that the South African Police are led by those two considerations. This is a matter on which a great deal has already been said, but those two considerations compel us to carry out such things at such an—one may as well say—impossible hour of the night.

Does the hon. the Minister really think that the whole exercise of raiding the houses of very respectable citizens has in fact proved worthwhile and has not done an enormous amount of damage to South Africa?

No, I do not agree with the hon. member. Certain information is placed at the disposal of the Police, and if they were not to act on that information placed at their disposal, I and even she would blame them if anything went wrong. According to the information they obtained after arresting these two Indians in their motor car, all the indications were that they would find it worthwhile to knock up these people during the course of that night. It is easy for the hon. member to talk now. Jacobsen was acquitted, and I do not find any fault with that, but one may as well look at the evidence led in the Jacobsen case. The hon. member should read that evidence, and then she should not put herself in the place of the judge, for the judge found him not guilty. The hon. member should put herself in the place of the Police, who, with that information at their disposal, had to decide whether or not they had to proceed with the case against Quentin Jacobsen. I must honestly say that if, with that evidence that was brought to light in the Quentin Jacobsen case, they do not proceed with their investigations, I shall take it amiss of them. I want to add that it is, after all, not for the Police to decide. All this information is eventually submitted to the Attorney-General, and in the end it is the Attorney-General who takes the final decision as to whether or not a prosecution should be proceeded with. It is not a matter of my wanting to shift the responsibility from the Police on to others. They do have a great responsibility. That is true. But in a case where they have information giving them an indication that thin s are happening which are prejudicial to the security of the State, they would definitely be neglecting their duty if they did not take any action.

The hon. member wanted to know here whether I was not concerned about the poor evidence led in the ffrench-Beytagh case. Unfortunately the hon. member for Durban North also referred to the ffrench-Beytagh case a moment ago. He wanted to know whether it had been worthwhile to detain that person. Let me just remind them of …

Under section 6.

Yes. The Judge President of the Transvaal found him guilty on seven out of 12 charges, the seven most serious ones. Subsequent to that he was found not guilty on appeal, but the fact of the matter is—now I am coming back to the hon. member for Houghton again— that the Judge President of the Transvaal believed those witnesses. Now, she wanted to know from me whether I was not concerned about the poor quality of the evidence, after the Judge President of the Transvaal had believed that evidence. What is more, he is the person who had the evidence before him, which the Appeal Court did not have. Surely the hon. member knows that this is also of value. He is the person who had the evidence before him. He believed it. Therefore I think it is very unfair to level the charge against me that the evidence was poor and inferior in quality after what happened in the ffrench-Beytagh case had in fact happened.

What has that to do with holding him in detention in terms of section 6?

The gravity of the charge against ffrench-Beytagh, the gravity of the circumstances and the value of the evidence which the Police had at their disposal, were such that the Judge President found this person guilty on that evidence.

The hon. member for Houghton also wanted to know here from me when a policeman could shoot if a person was escaping, and whether we were not of the opinion that they shot too easily. Now I simply want to tell the hon. member what the standing order of the Force is. This is the order of the Force, and any policeman who does not act in accordance with this order, would be acting outside the scope of his authority, not so? One cannot go beyond that. This standing order reads as follows—section 39 of Act No. 56 of 1955—

That has a bad psychological effect on young policemen.

That is the standing order. Those are the instructions that have been issued, and I do not know whether the hon. member for Houghton finds any fault with them, but I do not.

The hon. member also referred from time to time to assaults by the Police on members of the public. I should like the hon. member to turn to pa:e 6 of the Police Report. The third subdivision under “Assaults” reads as follows: “Resisting, obstructing and assaulting Police officers in the execution of their duties”—825 cases of “White by White” were reported, of which 772 cases were sent for trial; 1 456 cases of “White by non-White” were reported; 196 cases of “non-White by White” were reported, and 3 103 cases of “non-White by non-White” were reported. My sole reason for mentioning these particulars is to give an indication as to the extent to which assaults are made on the South African Police and obstruction of the functions of the Police in the execution of their duties is taking place. On a previous occasion the hon. member put questions to me in regard to this matter. With reference to those questions I told her that in 1971 191 policemen had been convicted of common assault, 20 of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and 3 of culpable homicide. Now I want to go further and tell her that of the 191 convicted of common assault, 21 were Whites and 170 were non-Whites. I am mentioning this because the hon. member is always inclined to think that all the problems we have in regard to assaults in the South African Police, are in regard to assaults committed by Whites. The hon. member is inclined to forget that 50 per cent of the numbers of the Force is comprised of non-Whites. In this case I just want to point out to her that of these 191 persons, 21 were Whites and 170 were non-Whites. Of those of the 191 persons who were convicted, 10 were Whites and 27 were non-Whites. I also want to mention other figures to her in regard to assaults and the use of fire-arms by members of the Force. The hon. member wants to create the impression that, in cases where the Police commit offences or perhaps go too far, no steps are taken against them. The following figures are in respect of persons killed by the Police during 1970: Whites—1, Coloureds—15, Bantu —33; i.e. a total of 49. Out of the total of 203 shooting incidents by members of the Force during 1970, criminal proceedings were instituted against six members of the Force on the instructions of the Attorney-General. After all, the Attorney-General is the person who decides whether criminal proceedings should be instituted. In fact, out of this total, criminal proceedings were only instituted in six cases. In 1971 there were 277 shooting incidents, and the Attorney-General only instituted criminal proceedings in 12 cases. I think I have now more or less replied to the questions put by the hon. member for Houghton.

The hon. member for Boksburg referred to the reservists. He suggested that we compensate them. We appreciate the work done by the reservists very highly; but I think that the value and the image of the reservists are in fact to be found in their placing their services at the disposal of the Police on a voluntary basis and without receiving compensation for them. Although one is sympathetic towards some of them, especially towards those to whom the hon. member referred, who have to make the sacrifice at their own expense and cannot really afford to do so, I want to tell the hon. member that we have quite a number of problems in this regard. We have many problems, and it will not be easy to accede to this request. The second request made by the hon. member was that Police reservists be exempted from national service. They are not exempt from national service and do not undergo such training with us. The members of this new scheme to which the hon. member referred, the Police Reserve that is about to be established, will in fact be exempt from national service. However, I am afraid that I myself cannot do much to get these people exempted from national service.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg City wanted to know why we did not make more use of that breathalyser when people were suspected of driving under the influence of liquor. What the hon. member has in mind, if I am not mistaken, is that we should carry out raids and test people without any reason. If this is not what the hon. member had in mind—he has indicated to me that he did not have this in mind—I want to say that we are already making use of this Alco test, and quite often, too. Of course, we only make use of it if we have a suspicion that a person is under the influence of liquor. We cannot go beyond that. However, I want to give the hon. member the assurance that this is in fact done. We may not simply test people left, right and centre with this little device. People will not submit to it voluntarily. However, in cases where we have a suspicion that people are under the influence of liquor, we do use this device as often as possible.

The hon. member for Potgietersrus referred to mortuaries. The erection of mortuaries is an expensive business, for they are equipped with refrigerators. It is therefore not possible for us to erect mortuaries in every town, or at as many places as we should like to. At the same time I may tell the hon. member, however, that a mortuary is in fact going to be erected at Nylstroom. As he asked for a mortuary for that area, I trust that this will perhaps meet the needs of that area to a certain extent. In a case such as the one to which the hon. member referred, where 12, 14 or more persons are killed in an accident, a mortuary will in any case not be of much value, for the mortuaries we build in country towns, usually make provision for approximately six persons only. The hon. member also referred to accidents and he said, amongst other things, that in the case of minor accidents, only the names and addresses of persons should be taken down, and in the case of more serious accidents, statements should be taken down. I just want to tell the hon. member that this is the procedure followed at present. In the case of an accident where nobody has suffered any injuries, only particulars of names and addresses are taken down, but in more serious accidents, statements in connection with such accidents are taken down. The hon. member suggested that reservists might be used to trace people who drive negligently or, rather, to enter an endorsement in the register or on the licences of such people. I am afraid that according to our system this cannot work, for this would actually amount to a person being convicted without being tried, i.e. if the statements made by people who see how others drive, were to count against such persons and endorsements to that effect were to be recorded on their licences. Nevertheless. I think it is in fact fruitful to talk about all the traffic accidents that take place.

To a large extent I have already replied to what was said by the hon. member for Salt River, but I should like to extend my thanks to him for the interest he showed in regard to the remuneration of the Police, their uniforms, etc.

The hon. member for Pinelands referred to refresher courses, and said he would like to have seen more refresher courses being offered. If I had to quote from this report of the Commissioner of Police something in regard to which I should like to sing the praises of the Police today, it would in fact be that part of the report which deals with training. In looking at page 3 of the report and reading about all the training provided by the Police, one can only say that the Department of Police is an example to many other departments and probably to many outside organizations as well. I think this is the greatest need in our labour force today, namely the fact that we do not have a sufficient number of organizations providing the necessary traning. I should like to invite hon. members to look at page 3 of the report, where all the various courses offered, are indicated. Many refresher courses are also being offered, and hon. members will see in the report that even a member of the Malawi Police attended a course in the treatment of sick dogs with the South African Police during the past year. In view of the considerable demand for study grants, the Public Service Commission has made available 38 additional grants of this nature, with the result that a total of 50 bursary loans for graduate study has been allocated to the South African Police, all of which are being utilized. If hon. members would look at the continuation classes of the Police College, they would see that in respect of the National Senior Certificate 300 members, i.e. 40,5 per cent, obtained full certificates, as against 27,8 per cent the previous year. In respect of the National Junior Certificate, full certificates were obtained by 27,3 per cent of the candidates in this group.

On page 4 of the report one finds a paragraph dealing with the chaplains, and I should like to say a few words in this regard. The South African Police is very grateful for the fact that it has in recent times had at its disposal the services of a chaplain who is due to retire soon, namely the Rev. Cloete. Many of the hon. members will probably know the Rev. Cloete. At the moment he holds the rank of brigadier, but he will probably have to retire one of these days. When the corps of chaplains of the Police was established in 1960, he was taken over from the Defence Force and appointed as the chaplain-in-chief of the South African Police. He has probably won more medals than has anybody else in South Africa. He won the British Military Cross, the Southern Cross Medal, the American Bronze Star, and various other medals. The Rev. Cloete is a person who knows the psychology of the members of the Force, who lives with the young people and who is performing invaluable service for us in the South African Police. We shall have to search for a person who can succeed him with dignity. I am grateful to be able to say that we have at our disposal the services of other very good chaplains. It may just be mentioned, inter alia, that the Moderator of the D.R. Church in Natal is also a chaplain of the South African Police. I should like to take this opportunity today to pay tribute to a person such as the Rev. Cloete, who has given so many years of his career to the South African Police and the young people.

The hon. member for Pinelands asked that the Police should undergo crowd control training, as he called it. I just want to tell him that it does in fact form part of the training of the South African Police.

The hon. member asked whether something could not be done in regard to the question of land-mines. He also asked me to say how things are on the borders. Time does not allow me, however, to give a long exposition of the situation on the borders today. I simply do not have the time to do so. As everyone probably knows, the position has changed a great deal in recent years. Where groups of terrorists used to cross the borders and could be tracked down and wiped out by our people, they no longer cross the borders now, but use the treacherous method of planting land-mines during the night or when it is quiet. As a result of this we have been caused serious damage by these landmines in recent times. These land-mines remain a particularly serious problem to us. I must say that we have not yet found a really effective means of locating these land-mines. But now I do want to tell the House that I have received advice from hundreds of people from far and near on how these land-mines can be located. I should just like to read out a letter which I recently received from an old, experienced man of 77 years.

He is not so old.

Yes, I am sorry, he is not so old yet. He writes as follows (translation)—

He has even drawn a picture of the pushcart—

He goes on and says that if this one does not work, he has another. He says—

He goes on to say—

So is the hon. member for South Coast, I suppose! He goes on and says—

I am only reading this as a matter of interest. and I also want to express my appreciation for the many pieces of advice which we received as a result of the interest which is taken in this land-mine problem and in ways in which it can be solved.

I have almost finished, but I still want to refer to the hon. member for Umlazi, who in his second speech referred to the Security Police, who work in secret. I just want to tell him that this is essential. He complains about the fact, so I understand from him, that the station commander is not always kept informed of the movements of the Security Police.

And the Divisional Commissioner as well.

But it is essential that the Security Police, because they are engaged in such top secret work, should work in secret and that even their fellow officers at the station should not know where they are. The hon. member also rightly drew my attention—I do not want to use the word “complained”—to all the extraneous services performed by the Police. We are aware of this. But the hon. member knows as well as I do, after all, that if there is a ob to be done, no matter for which department, particularly in the rural areas, it is always convenient to say that the police will do it. It just happens. We are trying to relieve the police of some of that work, but we just cannot manage to relieve them of all of it.

The hon. member for Durban North fried at the end of his speech to justify the allegations made by him and others in regard to Gestapo and all those things. To me this just makes the allegations so much the worse. In other words, I now admit that I overstepped the mark in my allegations against South Africa, but this and that is the reason why I did. The hon. member still wanted to ask me something concerning the case of Gen. Bester, but in the end he did not get round to it. I am afraid that I shall just have to leave the matter at that.

There is one subject which I want to mention in conclusion. I cannot let it pass. I am referring to the uncalled-for, improper and libellous accusations made against a member of the Police by the hon. member for Wynberg. I think it is right that I should say something in this regard, for record purposes. The hon. member saw fit to bring up the Imam case again last week during the discussion on the Vote of the Minister of Justice. Why she found this necessary, I do not know. I do not object to the fact that she did so, but I do strongly object to the reprehensible way in which she did so. I object to the libellous allegations which she made here against a man outside, while she is under the protection of Parliament here and the man outside is not in a position to defend himself. She said no less against Andries van Wyk than that he had murdered the Imam. That, and no less, was the implication of her allegations. She went on and said that as a result of the fact that he had mistreated and murdered the Imam, he became mentally deranged. I want to read the actual words she used. These read as follows—

She said 1971, but it was 1970—

Now she quotes herself as she expressed herself in 1970—

That was what she said. In other words, the death of the Imam was caused by no more and no less than what he did, and therefore he is actually the man who was responsible for the Imam’s death. She had a motive for this, of course, for she is vindictive towards Andries van Wyk. She went on and told of his admission to the asylum at Stikland, where she claims he still is today. She goes on to say—

How can such an allegation be made if there is absolutely no truth in it? The hon. member made this allegation without having bothered to make sure whether it is the truth or not. In 1970 she delivered the same sort of tirade in this House. She seems to be even more frustrated today, particularly about this matter, than she was before. She gets up here and revels in the illness of someone who asked the Imam a few routine questions. I want to emphasize that he asked the Imam a few routine questions at the beginning of his detention. There is a difference between the interrogation of a person when he is brought to a police station for detention and then asked a few routine questions and the actual interrogation to find out whether or not he actually took part in subversive activities. There is a world of difference. In point of fact, this man never had anything to do with the actual interrogation of the Imam. But this is what the hon. member for Wynberg now comes along and dishes up to us here. From the inquest at the time she quotes the part which suits her. I shall just read to hon. members the part which she quoted. The question was (translation)—

That is the question which was put to Maj. Genis. The reply was (translation):

That is Andries van Wyk, whom we are talking about now—

This is what the hon. member read out. Because the name of Andries van Wyk, A. J. van Wyk, is mentioned here, she makes all these inferences, but does not read the next paragraph. The next paragraph, which she did not read out here, reads as follows. The question put to Genis was (translation):

The reply by Genis was (translation)—

Detective-Sergeant Van Wyk is not Andries van Wyk, and she knows it. He is Spyker van Wyk, to whom she has referred here how many times. They are two brothers. The one is Andries van Wyk and the other is Spyker van Wyk. She knows just as well as I do, if not better, that “Detective-Sergeant Van Wyk” is Spyker van Wyk and not Andries van Wyk, of whom she alleges that he became mentally deranged as a result of the fact that he allegedly murdered the Imam, and that he is, as it were, still in a madhouse.

And then? The hon. member has admitted that she was approached by the Attorney-General because she said here in Parliament at one stage that she was in possession of information concerning the Imam’s death. Hon. members will remember that episode. When she was approached by the Attorney-General for that wonderful information which she had concerning the man’s death—concerning a murder! — she said: “No, I invoke the privilege of Parliament. I am not prepared to make that information available now.” The hon. member probably realizes the difference between a piece of gossip and a statement which is made under oath.

What is the truth? The truth of the matter is that this Andries van Wyk. to whose illness she referred, became indisposed as a result of heart trouble and was admitted to hospital, where he underwent treatment. While he was undergoing treatment there, he began to act strangely, presumably as a result of the treatment he was receiving for the heart trouble, and he was admitted to the Stikland Hospital. He was there for a short time and I should like to read out to the House the report of the doctor at the Stikland Hospital. Then hon. members may judge for themselves whether the hon. member’s allegations are true, namely that he was in an asylum and still is and that it is as a result of his actions against the Imam. In the report by the doctor, Dr. Johan Bruwer, he certifies as follows:

I want to contend that the allegation made here by the hon. member is really scandalous. It is really scandalous and I hope that it will weigh heavily on her conscience that she made an accusation under the protection of this Parliament against an honourable person outside the House, a person who is not in a position to defend himself. In order to correct this matter, I shall ask her to go and make these accusations outside the House. I want to ask her to go and make the accusations outside the House and not to say such things under the protection of Parliament, things which are untrue and which are reprehensible in the eyes of decent people. I really take exception to this and I am sorry that such irresponsible things should be said of members of the Police.

I should like to express my appreciation to the members for the calm discussions, in so far as they were calm.

Mr. Chairman, I asked the hon. the Minister two very important questions and I do not know whether he regards them as unimportant, but I would like to ask him to reply to these points I have raised. The first one was in regard to the insurance for reservists, and the second was in regard to the position of the widow of Mr. Pirie, who was murdered in Rosebank.

Mr. Chairman, I am very sorry and I apologize to the hon. member. I seem to have left out this page. I had the notes and I should like to reply to him on this. The hon. member raised a very important matter, namely the insuring of reservists. Although there is no insurance at the moment, I want to tell him that I appreciate the fact that he raised the matter. I want to assure the hon. member that we are giving attention to it at the moment. We are thinking of a group insurance scheme for the reservists. Of course, this will not mean, as the hon. member indicated here, that the insurance does not have to be carried by the reservists. They will have to carry the insurance nevertheless, but the advantages of the insurance will at any rate be their advantages. It does not matter whether something happens to them while they are working as reservists or otherwise. We are working on a group insurance and I hope we shall be able to institute such a group insurance for the reservists.

In respect of the other case I must admit that we have made no progress. I still have to negotiate to see whether other circumstances cannot be created. I think the hon. member will agree that when a man voluntarily offers his services to the police and he dies under those cirumstances and in the performance of his task as reservist, he should be better looked after than in the case of Pirie. At the moment no further provision has been made in this regard, and we shall have to give the matter further attention.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 38.—“Information”, R7 049 000:

Mr. Chairman, since we discussed this Vote in this Committee last year, we have had a full debate on the motion of the hon. member for Stellenbosch concerning this Vote. Secondly, the hon. the Minister took a trip abroad and visited overseas offices. We did not object to that trip, and I want to thank him for the full reply he gave to a question of mine relating to the places at which he called and in connection with what he did. He took a few administrative steps, which I think we on this side shall approve. We do not know the details of the steps, but in general we think they are good. I should have liked to know whether it is not possible for us to open an information office in Brazil as well. Perhaps he can tell us that. Then we may also open offices in Japan and in the Middle East, since we already have representatives of the Department of Foreign Affairs in Israel and Beirut.

†I would like to ask the hon. the Minister whether, as a result of his trip abroad, he has not changed his view as to the task of a Department of Information. I would like to tell him how I see that task and perhaps he can tell us to what extent he agrees with this point of view. As we see it, Sir, an information service of the nature controlled by the hon. the Minister should have a broad South African basis. It must represent, explain and defend South Africa as a whole, all its races, all its people, all its different political parties, from the ultra-conservative to the ultraliberal. It should give a general total picture of South Africa itself. It would be wrong for a Division of Information only to present a picture of one single party and one single policy, without giving a clear picture of the country as a whole. Sir, hon. members receive material from different legations in this country; we receive it regularly in our mail. I ask them: Which of those do they read, and which do they discard? I am quote sure that the answer will be that they are not prepared to waste their time on anything that seems to be too propagandistic and that does not give a fair picture of a country as a whole.

*Secondly, there should not be the slightest suggestion of crude propaganda in any publication of a Department of Information. A Department of Information should not give the impression, as the English saying goes, that it is carrying a chip on its shoulder. One must be able to defend one’s country with a sense of humour and with a sophisticated attitude. Good material has been published by the department, but I have also seen things with which I am less satisfied. Suid-Afrikaanse Oorsig and South African Digest sometimes contain things that surprise me. I have a few editions of them. In virtually three consecutive issues a survey was given of the history of South Africa since the time of Jan van Riebeeck, and one third of the entire series of articles was devoted to the history of South Africa since 1948.

†These are some of the highlights presented to the world in South African Digest on South African history since 1948: According to this Digest, the one single big event in 1962 was this—

In the next year, 1963, the one big event mentioned by the South African Digest is the fact that the Transkei had achieved self-government. Last year, the year in which we had devaluation and in which there were many important developments in South Africa, the visit of Pres. Banda, quite rightly, is mentioned, and to that is only added the fact that the Ivory Coast suggested a dialogue with South Africa, and that internal self-Government was granted to the Zulus. Surely, Sir, more important events in 1971 played a part in the history of South Africa in that year.

§Thirdly, as we have advocated before, there should be much closer co-operation between the Minister’s department and other departments which also have interests overseas, particularly the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Department of Industries, and also the Tourist Department.

*Fourthly, we believe that the staff of the department should come from the cream of the crop. What I am saying is not intended as criticism of any of those individuals, because there are some of them who are extremely competent. But they too should be able to associate themselves with the culture, the background, the history and the language of the countries to which they are accredited, not to accept those other cultures, but to be able to be sympathetic towards their way of thinking and trends of thought. Fifthly, we believe that material should be of a high quality. I have already said that some of the material is in fact of a high quality, and I have also given examples of one or two that are not of a high quality.

†Sixthly, Sir, a Department of Information must have a two-stream policy or rather a two-way policy. It is not only a question of giving information to other countries such as France, Britain or the United States. It is also a question of keeping the Government fully informed as to what those countries are thinking, however unhappy their thoughts might make us on occasion. I have the impression that only two types of things are largely brought to the attention of the Government by our overseas officers. The first is the good propaganda, to which I do not object. I am happy to know that there are good articles and favourable comment on South Africa. The second is the other extreme, where the really trashy propaganda is brought to the notice of the Government. What is most important to our country, are the views of that vast middle body of opinion, which is so often against us and which is not as badly informed as we are inclined to think in this country.

*Sir, then I want to say something about the work of the Department of Information among the non-White races, particularly among the Bantu, here in South Africa. I am sorry the hon. the Minister is so quiet about that in his annual report. In the annual report only 10 inches are devoted to that in contrast to 10 full pages on the work of the department abroad, and yet the staff working among the Bantu is larger than the staff overseas, and every year the department brings out publications. the total circulation of which comes to 658 000, among the non-White population of South Africa. The Department of Information has a multitude of information officers throughout South Africa. We want the veil to be lifted; we want to know more of what is going on in that regard.

†Sir, in other countries there are iron curtains. In South Africa the hon. the Minister has what I would call a bullrush curtain, and we want to know what is going on behind that bullrush curtain, where his department and his officials go from kraal to kraal in their great big Herren-volkswagens of the kind which we often see in Parliament Street. In his report the hon. the Minister says that part of the work of his department is to further the promotion of socio-economic planning and development of the homelands and that this receives constant attention. Surely that is. part of the task of the Minister of Bantu Administration. It is not part of his department’s task to carry out work of that nature which properly belongs to another department. The hon. the Minister admits that the Government should be kept informed of the views and desires of the Bantu group. The two-way system that I mentioned is essential, but I wonder how reliable this information is that he has received from his officials over the years. I am thinking specifically of the case of Owamboland, where there are top officials in Owamboland itself, who apparently did not keep him or, what is more important, the Government informed of certain developments which led to the strike or the threat to strike that we had some time a o. It is essential, Sir, under this two-way system between the Central Government and the information officers in the homelands, that the information that is returned by them should be accurate.

It is also essential that the information that goes out should not be one-sided and only in connection with one political party and its policy. I do not mind the hon. the Minister telling those people: “This is the Government’s policy, and this is the policy that we are going to carry out,” but it would only be fair to give a picture, too, of the policies of other Opposition parties, particularly the policy of the alternative Government that we have in this country. [Time expired.]

Sir, I was delighted when the hon. member, who has just resumed his seat, started off with his speech this afternoon. But it beats me why the hon. member cannot continue at that high level. Year after year he sinks here right into the mud. That hon. member says we should have an impartial information service, but what do we have other than a proper information service? The hon. member says the department does not convey the Opposition’s policy to the outside world. But the hon. member will recall that last year the hon. the Minister invited the United Party to give him their policy in writing and undertook to convey it to the outside world. The hon. the Minister said he would do this for every party that gave its policy to him in writing.

Is your policy in writing?

The hon. member asks whether our policy is in writing, but he comes along here with the objection that it is our policy which is being conveyed to the outside world in writing. The hon. member cannot commit his party’s policy to writing. They refused to hold meetings in Brakpan; they did not want to reply to questions. He cannot commit their policy to writing. Sir, it was only the Progressive Party that committed its policy to writing and gave it to the Minister. The United Party cannot do so; they do not want to do so; they dare not do so, because South Africa and the world outside would destroy them if they knew what their policy is. I am very grateful that we have, this year, had the hon. member for Stellenbosch’s motion in which he gave us a first-rate account of what brilliant work this department is doing.

I looked at the annual report which the Secretary submitted to us in time for this debate, and we are starting off right away at a very high level; the department begins with a photograph in which the hon. the Minister, the Secretary and our Ambassador, Mr. Taswell, had an interview with the vice-president of America, Mr. Spiro Agnew. It is at this level that this department has been moving in the past year. At the highest level this department was conveying information and making contact, was keeping South Africa’s name high.

Let us see what happened in the previous annual report. With what did the department begin that report? There was a photograph in which the hon. the Minister, Dr. and Mrs. Mulder, meet our hon. State President and Mrs. Fouch when they went to look at the premiere of the department’s films. That is the level this department was moving on. Sir, I have been through this annual report. I was also interested to see what our department is doing overseas, and particularly our liaison services in the various offices overseas. I looked at what is happening in America, for example, a tremendous country stretching far and wide, probably six times the size of the Republic, and I want to quote to you from page 11, which drew my attention—

I also looked at the previous year’s report to see what happened then, and I see that as far as New York’s office is concerned the Secretary also gave us a report at the time. He stated—

Please note, it was requested. It is not being forced down their throats. It is not simply being distributed. When people discovered what excellent service this department is furnishing, with the Minister at the head, they requested it. I made inquiries from the department to see exactly what more was going on and how much is being done, and this example I am now going to give you is a representative one; it is exactly at the same level on which the department moves. At the end of the 1969-70 financial year this film strip. “South Africa, Dynamic Progress” had already been distributed for five years. and it is calculated that 11¼ million pupils have seen that film strip. That is what has been achieved in America by this service that was furnished. During those five years the educationists said it is excellent. That is the comment it drew. The comments of the teachers were—

It is current and up to date, better than our textbooks. The teachers of America say it is better than their own handbooks. But then this hon. member comes along and talks the kind of rubbish he talked this afternoon. This film strip is accompanied by a “Teacher’s manual”. This is the background information that is given with this film strip. I then obtained from the department the film strip itself which they use there, and I should very much like to show it here to the House. It is a film strip with 52 pictures on it, and it is of such a quality that it will last at least five years. All the schools that requested it, now have these film strips. I now want to tell the hon. member that if he then says it is partisan or that it is only the National Party’s policy that is being stated, he is making a very big mistake. I just want to read him one of these strips, for example, the Sasol one. The description here is as follows—

This is surely impartial, and the whole book is like that, and the hon. member may see it if he has not yet done so. But then he says that only one-sided propaganda is being made. This strip is also accompanied by a wall-chart which is published by the department, and I should like to hold it up so that you can see it. It is a fine, neat piece of work which South Africa can be proud of. It is an advertisement second to none, an advertisement this hon. member and his party would not have been capable of if they were in power. For example, it gives us information about all the phases of life.

It was drawn up by agents.

It was drawn up by agents, but the Government is responsible for it. We get the best brains to do this and not the weakest, as that hon. member would get to be-smirch South Africa overseas. We are very proud of this piece of work the department is doing. The hon. member has just quoted here from Oorsig to indicate that there is something he is not satisfied with, but what about these people? I want to quote to him three further passages about what these people said about this film strip. The next one is this—

But the hon. member does not like this. He does not want to see people overseas saving something positive about South Africa, because as the hon. member for North Rand said a few years ago, jolts from outside must knock us out of the saddle. They want the world to have contempt for us and to think badly of South Africa. They cannot see the difference between the National Party and South Africa. They reckon that if the world has contempt for South Africa it also has contempt for the National Party. The National Party looks after the interests of South Africa, but he must think of South Africa when he comes along with his complaints. I want to mention a second example in which they state:

That is surely positive, and the people are erateful for it. A third one is “Good introductory material to free class from false impressions of South Africa”. That is the good propaganda that is being made, if the hon. member wants to call it propaganda. But throughout is is merely a matter of facts being furnished by this department, with all its competent officials. The hon. member is insulting the officials by saying that there are good ones amongst them. But I say that every one of them is good [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Sunnyside spent most of his speech quoting from reports which are available to any member of this House. I do not think it warrants much reply and all I want to say is that we on this side of the House appreciate much of what is being done by the staff of our information services abroad. He referred to the point which the hon. member for Orange Grove started to make when his time expired, and that is the question of whether our information service should tell the world rather more of what is going on politically in this country. I shall return to that in a few moments. It would be fruitful for us to examine the purpose of the Department of information as far as our outside work is concerned. Obviously, it is important for the department to create as favourable an impression about South Africa abroad as possible. That does not mean that the department must necessarily confine itself only to publicizing such things as the natural beauty of our countryside, our achievements in commerce, industry, our flora and fauna and things of that nature.

Do you want us to publish the Sunday Times?

They are important, but this alone certainly does not constitute giving people abroad a properly balanced picture of what is going on. I have raised the question of our information services abroad on several occasions in this Chamber, and of giving both sides of our political picture. That is what drew such a sharp reaction a few moments ago from the hon. member for Sunnyside. Last year when I raised it under the Information Vote, I was told by one of his colleagues, the hon. member for Algoa, who is unfortunately not here at the moment, that this is not the sort of thing an information service does. He was the only member who dealt with this aspect of the matter. He was not repudiated by the hon. the Minister or any other speaker on that side. The hon. member for Algoa said to me—

Now, Sir, there has been some change of heart. As I have said, he was not repudiated by anybody on that side of the House. We can therefore assume that this was the official Government line. But there has been a change in attitude since then. So far as I can make out, the change in attitude has been confined more to words than anything else. But I think we should take note of the fact that when the hon. member for Stellenbosch introduced a private member’s motion earlier this year, he made the point that our men in overseas countries convey a balanced picture of South Africa. He said—

These are words. I do not know what evidence he has to suggest that our information services really are seriously trying to give any clear picture of the very real political dialogue that is taking place in this country. I should like to ask him now, if he takes part in this debate, to tell us how it is being done. What the people abroad are more interested in than any other factor concerning South Africa, is what is happening here politically. I do not believe for one moment that our political situation is so delicate that we cannot tell them. After all, let us look at what a country such as Germany does. The German Tribune, for instance, is a weekly review of the German Press. I think many members of this House get it. It is an extremely well turned-out publication. It has no hesitation in publishing material dealing with all shades of political thought in Germany. And I might say that Germany of all places might be more sensitive than we are here about the balance of political power. By doing this the German Tribune certainly tends to gain the confidence of its readers. This is a terribly important thing in disseminating information abroad. I think it is common cause that if readers see something that comes from only one point of view, they will take such material to be more propapanda than anything else. And I am afraid, Sir, that we tend to skirt around anything to do with our domestic political scene i; our publications abroad. It is true that a certain amount of political material is handled. But most of it has to do with purely pro-Govemment matter and anything that can present this Nationalist regime in a favourable light. I should think, quite seriously, that this is an ideal time for the Department of Information to start tellini the world a little of what is going on in this country. Indeed. I could not think of a better opportunity. I do not want to be accused of making cheap political propaganda, but I believe it is terribly important that the world at large should be told of the major changes which are taking place in the politics of this country. Let us just look at the Brakpan by-election.

Are you going to tell us something about Japie as well?

All people interested in South Africa would be fascinated to learn that the United Party has strengthened its position so considerably in what is after all a very strong Nationalist seat. Our information service could quite readily tell the world that the United Party’s share of the vote in Brakpan has risen from 26,99 per cent in the Parliamentary election in 1970 to 37.66 per cent in the Parliamentary by-election this February …

Figures do not lie.

Three months later it had risen to 39,55 per cent in the provincial by-election that we had last Wednesday. [Interjections.] This is the sort of thing that people outside this country, people abroad who are interested in the politics of the country, should know. I wonder how much of this type of thing is really told to the public abroad. I would go even further. I do not think that these things can be reduced to figures alone. If you will allow me, Sir, let us come back to Brakpan again, because this has to do with telling the world about the local domestic political situation. We should make sure that the people outside know of the progress of the official Opposition in a seat such as Brakpan in spite of the fierce, aggressive campaign fought by the Nationalist Party, a campaign that went so far even as the free distribution of the newspapers Die Transvaler and Die Vaderland in the constituency.

So what?

These are interesting things. These are things that should be placed on record abroad so that people overseas can realize that there is a strong and growing Opposition in this country.

In the short time available to me I want to touch briefly on the Press conferences organized by the hon. the Minister’s department.I am referring to the hon. the Prime Minister’s press conferences. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Kensington says that what the Information Service should actually be distributing abroad is what is happening locally in South Africa in the political sphere. We must take a critical look at what that side of the House regards as information. We on this side of the House regard it as the task of the Department of Information to give the world a reflection of our country as a whole. It is a very lovely, a good and an interesting country, a country which has very great potential, as that hon. member ought to know. It is a country with a fine and noble history, no aspect of which is concealed. It is a country with positive approaches to difficult problems, such as our race question, which that hon. member ought to know about. In the light of what has just been said, I want to ask: What impression is made by that Opposition’s, that United Party’s senior politicians such as this hon. member for Orange Grove and the hon. member for Yeoville, who is not present at the moment? [Interjections.] No, the hon. member for Walmer is right; there is nothing wrong with him. I am referring to the hon. member for Yeoville, who is not present at the moment. Those are the people who internationally influence the information set-up and of whom cognizance must be taken. These are distinguished people. Sir, I want to come back to what that hon. member’s leader in the Transvaal, the hon. member for Yeoville, said before the Brakpan by-election. After having listened the other day, in the Transvaal Provincial Council, to Mr. Harry Schwartz’s tirade about Brakpan, I think in any case that that hon. member for Kensington is going to have a different Transvaal leader when his party holds another congress this year. It will not be the hon. member for Yeoville again, because I have never heard a greater big-mouth.

Let us look, from an information point of view, at what that hon. member’s Transvaal leader said about Brakpan. He said—

What has that to do with the Vote?

Sir, what is the implication of “Brakpan must strike a blow for a healthy future”? It is a suggestion to the overseas visitor that things are not going well in South Africa, that if the National Party wins that election, an unhealthy situation will develop. That is the suggestion. Such utterances on the part of hon. members on that side of the House destroy all the good work this Department of Information is doing. Such utterances discredit this department. They discredit this country. The hon. member for Yeoville, who makes these statements, surely knows they are inaccurate.

This hon. member wrote more about Brakpan—this was published in the Argus of 16th May. He said—

Then there is unfortunately a printer’s error. Sir, how can a Department of Information distribute to the world the kind of material that hon. member requests?

It is the truth.

That hon. member says it is the truth. Let him mention to me the name of one person in this country who was banished to the desert by this Government.

Who said “into the desert”?

Here Marais Steyn said it in the Argus. I ask that hon. member for Kensington, who wants us to furnish the world with this information, to bring me one civilized person in this country who is begrudged “even elementary and basic human rights”. I want him to bring me such a person so that I can see him or her. He cannot do so.

Soweto.

The hon. member says “Soweto”, but I want him to bring them so that I can see what those people look like to whom “elementary human rights” are not being given. I now want to tell you that if front benchers of that side of the House speak of the contribution of this side of the House in the sphere of information as “bluff and bludgeon to the people”, the hon. the Minister does not have to take the slightest notice of the contributions of that side of the House to the debate on Information. It is pure bluff from top to bottom and no notice need therefore be taken of these hon. members’ contributions. It is mere opportunism, solely to try and paint a good picture of themselves.

The hon. member for Kensington began to speak about the Press conference of the Prime Minister. It was a brilliant success. I am repeating the question I asked that hon. member last time: Why did his editor of the Sunday Times, who has so much to say about our hon. Prime Minister every Sunday, not ask the hon. the Prime Minister a single question at the recent Press conference? I say he was too scared. He did not ask the hon. the Prime Minister a single question, because he was scared. I would attach some importance to the contributions the hon. member for Orange Grove and the hon. member for Kensington made if any of them repudiates those statements of the hon. member for Yeoville before the Brakpan election when he said we are driving the people into the desert and are not giving them elementary rights. If any hon. member on that side of the House stands up and repudiates the hon. member for Yeoville, I shall attach some importance to these two hon. gentlemen’s contributions. If not, I shall take no notice of them.

In the broad political set-up this hon. Opposition also has a responsible task in respect of Information. The way they carry on on the platforms, and with the kind of articles they write in their newspapers, they can only create a distorted picture abroad of what is going on in this country politically, and we quite simply cannot trust them. I want to come back to page 27 of this very neat annual report of the Department of Information. On this page we find, inter alia, the following statement—

I want to point out that a very great need is being provided for here by supplying this service to our people. We have a great deal of proof that this service, which is furnished to the public before they leave the country and go abroad as tourists, or are received here as tourists, is a very good supplementary service. I should very much like to ask the Minister whether more of these services cannot be made available to the taxpayers with a view to making the serivces of this voluntary corps available to this Department.

Mr. Chairman, it was really surprising to hear that the hon. member for Pretoria District devoted the major part of his speech to the Brakpan election. One does realize, it is true, that he could perhaps be over-sensitive about the subject. Indeed he was touchy and even referred to a remark of the Transvaal leader of the United Party who allegedly said the people should vote for the United Party to obtain sounder conditions. If that cannot be said in a by-election, what justification is there consequently for the things that were said at Oudtshoorn and elsewhere by the Nationalist Party? We realize that the result of the Brakpan election was in fact a shock for the hon. member for Pretoria District, and that he is now making use of this opportunity to try to put the matter right. I leave him at that.

I want to begin by congratulating the hon. the Minister and his department on the report which was submitted. It is nicely up to date and covers the activities of the department up to March 1972. I therefore enables us to discuss the activities of his deparment on a sound basis. It has been neatly drawn up. A few days ago I had reason to criticize another Minister about the fact that we had to discuss his portfolio on the basis of a report drawn up in 1970, and that was for a discussion in the year 1972. I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his department on our having a fine report which is up to date and which we can use as a basis for our discussion.

Like the hon. member for Orange Grove, I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister would tell us something of the conclusions he reached during his visit abroad. He has made a full report, it is true, for which we are grateful, but it was chiefly a factual report about persons he held discussions with, the offices he visited and the organizational changes he envisages. We should like to know if he has perhaps changed his philosophy, or whether he has gained new ideas and insights which will enable him perhaps to modernize his department in some respects. Will the hon. the Minister tell us whether there has perhaps been a psychological or technical change in his approach to the problem? I am thinking, for example, about surveys that can be made about the efficiency of, shall we say, Press reports, advertisements in the Press, the publication of magazines, of books and the use of news services, the radio and television, etc. If one were to make random tests it would perhaps be possible to determine the value of the various branches of the information service, how many people they reach and how much money is spent on each branch and what the reaction is. In other words, in what respects are people most efficiently convinced and how much does the process cost? It would be of great value to obtain some insight into those matters and to see exactly where the money is being spent and to what extent success is being achieved.

In this respect I want to make a suggestion. In various libraries abroad I noticed that there are few good books about South Africa available on the shelves of public libraries and also university libraries. In 34th Street in New York there is a tremendously large library, the biggest in New York. I went and had a look on the shelves, and the only books available there about South Africa, are books that have been compiled by organizations such as the Anti-Colonial Movement, and the Anti-Apartheid League. There are very few that really give the correct image of South Africa. It is a great pity that this is so, because many of the articles that are written, a great deal of the criticism that is levelled abroad, is levelled on the basis of research work that specifically takes place in these libraries. If a writer, an editor, or someone wants to write an article about South Africa, he goes and looks in the reference libraries for the background information that he needs. I want to suggest that the Department of Information selects a series of books about South Africa that can then be made available in the various languages to the foremost libraries in the major cities and universities, so that where articles are written or research is done about South Africa, the people concerned can go and look on the shelves and find informed books about South Africa.

In a debate about two months ago I referred to the problem in respect of languages in the Department of Information. The hon. the Minister then said, particularly with reference to French—

I know quite a few of these officials, and at the time I felt that his statement was a little bit of an exaggeration. I feel that the need for French is a very great one, specifically because French is the language medium for a very large portion of the world and also for the Common Market, where we will have big interests, and of course also in the countries of Africa. The hon. the Minister replied to a question of the hon. member for Orange Grove in which he referred to the languages which the officials in the hon. the Minister’s department can use. It appears to me from his reply that in the whole of Europe there are, in actual fact, only two officials who have really mastered French, i.e. who can also write in French. Unless one can also write in French, one merely has a superficial knowledge of the language. Two in the whole of Europe are not many. There are a few others, such as those in Ottawa, Canada, which is also a bilingual country. With reference to Ottawa, the answer read as follows—

One would at least have expected him to be able to read, write and speak English, but it is a great pity that in a place like Ottawa, Berne, or other places, the officials involved there have not mastered French. It is, of course, much more easily said than done. I also acknowledge that French is a very difficult language to learn. But I want to suggest here is that more trouble be taken by the department to make audiovisual and other facilities available to encourage the officials to acquire a sound knowledge of the French language or the other relevant languages as quickly as possible so that they can do their work better abroad.

I want to refer again to the question of the German Tribune because like hon. members on this side I feel that it is a very good example of the kind of information that can be supplied to the countries abroad without giving offence, but which can nevertheless give a picture of the democratic background of this country. I do not necessarily want to recommend that only political articles be included, but 1 feel that such a “South African Tribune” ought actually to be a kind of anthology of the best articles from our newspapers and magazines that are available. They can be articles, for example, of a scientific nature. The articles can also be literary, or even humorous. To give an overall picture of everything that is going on here in the country, of the kind of polemics on the local scene and of the quality of debating in South Africa, it must be an anthology of the best that is available in the country. It can be supplied to readers abroad. It is my feeling that it will give a very good picture or image of South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is very clear to me that the hon. member for Von Brandis to some extent moved away from the line of thought pursued by the hon. member for Orange Grove. He at least made a few observations to which I think the hon. the Minister would like to reply.

I believe that it is the task of the Department of Information to present South Africa and its people to countries abroad. To my mind those people very definitely include those belonging to the United Party as well. The department is doing this in word and deed, with more than 50 publications in more than 20 different languages, of which several millions of copies are circulated all over the world every year. The department can present the South Africans as people with a high standard of civilization. The department can present us as people who believe in high moral standards. They can present us as people who attach importance to culture and that which goes with it. They can present us to the world as a group of people who created and developed a language of their own in less than 300 years, but who at the same time, while they have respect for that which is their own, were also prepared to allow the English language and culture to live on in this country. In this spirit the department can present us to the outside world without conveying to them cheap political results. The department can also present us, as I have said, as people who love their own, but who also respect that which is characteristic of others, and consequently respect the non-White in this country and that which is his own. The department is doing this in an extremely effective way. But the language and means by which it does this are what were really rejected here this afternoon by the hon. member for Orange Grove and to an even greater extent by the hon. member for Kensington. The department uses nature, people and animals to convey to the outside world, through its numerous publications, the positive aspects of South Africa.

Earlier this year the hon. member for Orange Grove spoke here about his party’s policy in respect of the Department of Information. On that occasion he made a few statements here. His first statement, which one really rejects with contempt, was that they believed in South Africa’s cause. I say “with contempt’’, because a political party really should not say this, after all; it should go without saying. The hon. member went further and said that their policy was that the department should be impartial and should not be biased. What did he say by that? Look, if someone is not impartial, he is partial; if he is partial, he is not honest; if he is not honest, he is dishonest; if he is dishonest, he deceived people, and if he deceives people, well, then …

Then he comes along with propaganda.

No, that word I shall not use.

Now the hon. member for Orange Grove comes along here and tells us, by implication. that we are deceiving the outside world by what we are sending out. I have a number of examples here of splendid publications by the department. Just take the latest edition of Panorama, for example. This is a splendid publication on our agricultural industry. The only thing which does not appear in this, which could have been an improvement, is something on ostrich farming. Then we have here a state in the making, which deals with the progress being made in the Transkei. On page 5 of this publication I read:

Now the hon. members want us to expound their policy as well. Now I ask, do they want us in this publication, where we say “… to lead the Black nations … to complete political independence”, to write in. “but the United Party does not want to lead them to complete independence”? Take this publication, This is South Africa, for example. This is an excellent piece of work. I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that we should see whether the schools cannot have this publication on a large scale. Even if it may be the case that this publication is sold to individual children at school, it is so effective and it contains so much information that one should like to circulate it. Here I also have Report, a publication of the department which is printed and circulated in London. Then there is also Nutrition and the Bantu and quite a number of others, such as Care, to which we have referred here before, and Health and Healing. We are not afraid to tell the outside world that there are Bantu who are undernourished and who lead a hard life. But we are not afraid to tell them what we are doing for them either. Take this publication on the Transkei, A State in the Making; we could not have produced it 10 or 12 years ago, because we did not have the material then. But now we can do it. We can now tell the world what we are doing and what we have achieved. To the hon. member for Orange Grove and the hon. member for Kensington I want to say that we can now tell the world that the policy of the National Party has eventually resulted in these people living under these conditions.

We were interested to read in the report of the department that one of their most difficult tasks abroad is to refute and deny untruths and twisted statements. I want to tell hon. members that I do not know what the United Party’s share in those statements is. I do not know what the United Party’s share is in the spreading of that twisted information which goes to the outside world. Earlier this year, however, the hon. the Minister of Finance said that because of the pessimism spread by the United Party the most shocking reports were being sent out from this country and published in the newspapers abroad. In consequence of the hon. members’ conduct this afternoon and in consequence of the impression they are creating that the information which appears in the information documents of the department is not true, I want to say that the hon. members are sending untruths out of the country and are causing the outside world to believe that this Government is a Government of liars and that this department is telling untruths. Now they want us to publish the result of the Brakpan election in this. We would rather publish the Oudtshoom result if they want this in future.

We want to give the United Party an assurance in regard to one matter. The hon. member for Orange Grove quoted one or two petty things from one publication this afternoon and then said that this was not good. Why does the hon. member not mention all these publications? Why does he not commend them so that it will be recorded in his Hansard? Why does he not recommend the outside world to read these information documents? The hon. member for Orange Grove, or the hon. member for Kensington, spoke here about information on the Bantu. We are engaged in a tremendous educational task.

What about your pamphlet at Brakpan which ended up in court?

I shall not talk about that now. An hon. member told him to ask me that, but I shall reply to him on that on a later occasion. If the hon. member now wants to talk about the part he plays abroad, we can talk about the Brakpan pamphlet later on. The hon. members are selling out this party by creating the impression that we are telling lies to the outside world. We shall not put up with that. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, since the allotted time for the discussion of this Vote has now expired, I should like to avail myself of the opportunity to thank the hon. members who spoke in this debate for their participation. To the three hon. members on our side of the House who spoke, I want to say a brief “thank you” for their good wishes and for the tributes they paid to the department and the officials for all the work that has been done. I am saying this on behalf of the officials of the department. For the most part these officials are in the thick of things, whether abroad or here in this country, so as to perform the task of the department and to project South Africa’s image to the outside world. For that purpose we have extremely competent officials at our disposal, and I am grateful that I may boast of a staff such as the one I do have in this department. Moreover, the publications and the achievements of the department point to the fact that we are concerned with people of quality, people who bring great honour to our country in general. Later on I shall react to the details mentioned by the hon. members.

I want to start off with the hon. member for Orange Grove, who started off on a fairly high tone this afternoon, but who, of course, was unable to maintain it. By nature he is incapable of doing that. I want to thank him for having maintained a tone worthy of this debate in at least part of his speech. He asked me what the possibilities were of having information offices in Brazil, Japan and the Middle East. I want to inform him at once that Brazil is under consideration at the present time. It is one of the countries which I myself did not visit in the course of my overseas visits, but my Secretary did pay that country a visit. I feel that South America is not receiving the necessary attention, for at the moment we have only one office in South America. Therefore, it borders on attempting the impossible to perform our task there. We are giving consideration to opening a second office, and that will in fact be in Brazil. However, this matter has not yet been finalized. As far as the opening of offices in general is concerned, we come up against the simple fact that that naturally involves money. It involves staff, renting office accommodation, publicity, etc., all of which require money. For example, we shall also have to find locally recruited staff. However, one cannot have one’s cake and eat it. One cannot do this and at the same time effect a saving on the Estimates as the circumstances of the country demand. The Opposition is forever urging us to spend less and to cut Government expenditure. One cannot do this and at the same time open offices throughout the world which will cost extra money. One must choose one of either, and for that reason Ithink it is a wise step to decide on the basis of consideration and priority. As I said in reply to a question, we strengthened the staff in certain cases. At the moment an office in Brazil is under consideration, and others will be considered in due course, as circumstances demand. This year there simply are no funds available for that.

The hon. member went further and said information should have a broad basis. He went on to say what he would do if he were in the position to do these things. According to him, the total picture of South Africa had to be presented on a broad basis. This broad basis had to be such that one would be able to get an image of South Africa as a whole. He added that everything propagandistic should be rejected. He said there should not be the slightest suggestion of propaganda. These were the things we normally rejected. Now the hon. member is utterly confusing me with his standpoint. This is the same hon. member who, earlier this year when the motion of the hon. member for Stellenbosch was under discussion, attacked my department for its films dealing with love for an eagle—which won numerous awards—rock art. etc., being too subtle and for not conveying a message in any way. Surely one cannot have it both ways. One cannot say they are too subtle on the one hand, and too propagandistic on the other hand. Surely one cannot have it both ways. Surely that is impossible. The hon. member was utterly illogical in his approach to this matter. Now the point at issue is the question to which the hon. member for Kensington also referred, i.e. the various standpoints of various political parties in South Africa. I do not have the publications concerned with me since I thought the attack today would concern domestic matters. In actual fact, the hon. member suggested that he was going to criticize my domestic information policy and that too much propaganda was being distributed. He said: “Too much money is spent on propaganda in South Africa.” That is what the newspapers say. When he participates in a debate to which I can reply, he does not touch on domestic information, save to raise one or two small matters.

Half of my speech concerned that very thing.

Yes, but there was not much to it. I did not expect it, but I happen to have one or two brochures with me which deal with what we are doing abroad. Just to show what a wide basis we do have, I may tell the hon. members that in these two brochures which I have available here, I find the evidence which I need to reply to the charge levelled by him. A supplement, for which we paid, appeared in an adition of Fortune in the United States last year. We paid for it because we considered it a good thing for it to be distributed in that way. We had it published in Fortune, because the periodical has a fairly wide covera e and a fairly large circulation. Before quoting from it, I just want to repeat that we paid to have the publication published in a country such as America where it would have a wide circulation.

Could you please give the date?

Yes, I shall give the date. It appeared in July, 1971. I quote—

It goes on to say—

Then the article goes on to say—

Hon. members can take a look at the criticism of the Government—

The article continues in this vein. It goes on to say—

Surely this is the policy of the hon. members on the opposite side. Surely it is as clear as daylight. I quote further—

That is not so.

I expounded the United Party policy better than the hon. members on the opposite side did. [Interjections.]

What appears in that article, is not the truth.

Wait a minute—

That is a distortion.

That hon. member objects to the way in which I state his own party’s policy.

I object to the article.

Why? Because the hon. member does not know his own party’s policy.

What is his objection?

The hon. member cannot raise any objection.

May I ask a question?

The hon. member may, with the greatest of pleasure, ask me a question about this. I am prepared to reply to it.

Will the hon. the Minister a ree that I cannot ask him a question about an article which is a composition of untruths?

Mention one.

Ask him what is untrue in the article.

I shall tell the hon. member what I shall do. I shall let him have this article; he may peruse it and subsequently in the debate on the Third Reading of the Finance Bill, he may uncover the untruths in this article, and I shall reply to him in that regard. I shall send the article to the hon. member.

May I ask by whom it was written?

It was written by the department’s officials. It is an official publication.

It is an excellent article.

The hon. member for Kensington went further and said that we should not be so afraid of politics in our articles. He held up the German Tribune here as a fine, highly moral example of why we should not be so afraid of politics. I happen to have here, for quite a different purpose, a publication appearing in America and issued by our department. It is a monthly publication entitled South African Scope of May, 1972.

Scope was banned.

I am referring to South African Scope, which is published in America. The hon. member says we should not be afraid of politics. I happened to have brought this monthly publication along for quite a different purpose, and what do we find in it?—

Here it features a photograph of him together with our Prime Minister. Here is another photograph of his meeting with the three Bushmen who specifically came to see him. Sir, this is topical politics. What else is it? Then it features a full length article on the Bantu Investment Corporation and everything related to it. Then it features something here on the official opening of the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam, and on Bloemfontein, the judicial capital. Here is a special article containing newsflashes presented staccato fashion. So we read here—

This is politics—hard, cold politics; what else is it?—

This is hard, practical politics; what else is it? I can quote you one example after the other in this way. I reiect, with the contempt it deserves, the charge levelled by hon. members on that side. We are doing what they ask, and more than that. We have been doing this for years. I have learnt nothing from those speeches. In the whole of this debate up to now I have received no positive suggestion of any kind from that side.

Then the hon. member asked me to state United Party policy as well. Is it possible for us in an article such as this to state the United Party’s policy? It is quite right, but let them be honest now. Does the hon. member want me to state the policies of all the various political parties in South Africa? How am I to decide what party’s policy is to be stated, and how it is to be done?

Or what policy of theirs.

That is the important question. I have this situation, Sir: In this Parliament three parties are represented. The Pro ressive Party too is represented. So I must state the Progressive Party’s policy as well. Does the United Party agree with that? Am I to make a full edition of that? Am I to state the policy in all its details? Another political party, i.e. the Herstigte Nasionale Party, also participated in the recent elections. Am I to state also its policy in detail abroad? Am I to say that such a policy also exists?

It is not a parliamentary party.

Is that where the hon. member draws the line? So I am to state the policy of the three parliamentary parties? I want to put a further question to the hon. member and that is what policy of the United Party am I to state …

Do not be petty.

No, I am not being petty. Am I to state the official policy of the United Party, as expounded by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition and which is clear, or am I to state the policy in terms of which the whole question of a bloc of 16 non-White representatives here in Parliament will be reconsidered, for every day the newspapers predict that a change in United Party policy is in the offing.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Since he is ignorant as to what our policy is, how did it happen that he stated it in Fortune?

No that will get the hon. member nowhere. We presented the official policy, as it is expounded by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition at the present time, in Fortune. When Fortune appeared in July, 1971, the prophet of Hillbrow and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout had not yet started the story of the leakage from the caucus that a change in policy might be forthcoming; that came afterwards. [Interjections.] No, I beg your pardon, I am doing the hon. member for Bezuidenhout an injustice. He did not speak about this matter. We do know, however, that some of the members on that side are not pleased with the bloc of 16 representatives for the non-Whites in this Parliament. Will hon. members deny that there is pressure within the party to eliminate that bloc and to try to formulate a different policy? Now, am Ito wait until that policy has been chan ed, or what am I to do? And if the policy is changed tomorrow, am I to say, “I beg your pardon, the policy has been changed”, and then give the new policy? Sir, let me state quite clearly why I am adopting this attitude. The policy of the official Government of the day is the one followed by the country because the Government is in power and is able to translate that policy into practice. That is why that policy is important to the outside world. They must know that it is the official policy of the Government of the day. They must know how that policy is going to affect them or is not going to affect them. On that depends the view they take of South Africa. But that policy is very important to the inhabitants of South Africa as well, because that policy is the one which is being implemented and for that reason John Citizen must know how that policy is going to effect him and for that reason I must explain that policy to the voter in full so that if he does not agree with it, he may vote against it and put the Opposition in power.

With exceptions.

With what exceptions?

All the exceptions.

The hon. member should tell me what exceptions; he cannot simply leave it at that interjection. Sir, I leave it at that.

The hon. member for Orange Grove criticized me about South African Digest/Suid-Afrikaanse Oorsig. He said that by and large South African Digest was good but that there were certain points with which he did not agree. Of course, he had to find fault. Sir, the hon. member has very little support as far as his criticism is concerned. Sir, I can take up an hour of your time, which I am not going to do, with favourable quotations from this very brochure he criticized—Very favourable quotations from what was said not by South Africans, but by people abroad, people who are under no obligation to be sympathetic towards us. I can read out a whole multitude of quotations, but I shall not do so, because it will take up too much time. Mr. B. Timperin of Tasmania said—

That was his reaction to South African Digest. Then I want to quote only one or two more. This one comes from a professor in Washington, Prof. Meckling of Walla Walla College—

Then I have the following from Mr. Ball of Rugby, England, who said—

I can go on in this way. I have pages of these quotations, but I do not want to spend my time on them. I shall proceed to deal with the points of view which were put forward here. The hon. member spoke about liaison with other departments abroad in order to obtain sound co-operation. I may give the hon. member the assurance that we have excellent cooperation with the other departments abroad, such as the Departments of Foreign Affairs, of Commerce and Industries, of Tourism, Satour, etc. Everywhere we have the liaison that may be necessary When, for example, the Department of Commerce is to present a trade fair abroad, the Department of Information, because of its knowledge in this field, acts specifically with them and we arrange such fairs together. We are co-operating perfectly with Satour. The Secretary for Information is a member of the Satour Board and in countries in which Satour has no representatives, the officials of my department act specifically on behalf of Satour. I do not think there can be any criticism of the cooperation in this regard. Then the hon. member said that the material must be of a higher quality. I agree with him, but I want to contend that this is the case already, and that we concentrate daily on raising the quality more and more. Then there is the other concept of two-way information, as to what other countries think of us and what we convey to the Government. That is exactly what is happening, but I am not going to broadcast the information every week so that the hon. member may make it into a story. I receive information from the information officers regarding the criticism in other countries on South Africa and certain reactions in their press, etc. Every week I received newspaper cuttings of reports in various newspapers in the world on various events in South Africa illustrating what the reaction to such events is.

Mr. Eric Louw regularly sent copies of overseas commentary to members of Parliament.

What does the hon. member want to do with them? As I know him. he wants to do one thing only. That information is available, and the Department of Information makes it available to the authorities concerned, the Minister or the department concerned with the specific matter, so that they may act on that information. In my opinion that is the useful purpose it serves and the value it has. But what purpose would it serve to supply the information to every member of this House? One simply must put something right in the right way. I do not intend giving the hon. member unnecessary ammunition.

The hon. member then went on to discuss internal information. He said that we had only published 10 inches on the interior, we had omitted to mention certain things, and that they did not know what was going on. Apart from the sections we wrote about the interior, we furnished the names of all the publications we publish in South Africa. There is an entire column dealing with everything which is published in South Africa, and this alone is 10 inches, if the hon. member wants to know that.

[Inaudible.]

I do not care what the ratio between foreign and internal information is. But the hon. member raised the matter of internal information, and his entire argument was that we are spending too much on internal information and too little on foreign information. Let us now provide a break-down of the department’s expenditure, to see how it is divided between the interior and abroad. We then find the following facts: In the 1972–’73 Estimates R4 424 000 is being made available for foreign information, and R2 627 000 for internal information, which comprises a total of R7 049 000, i.e. 62,73 per cent for foreign countries and 37,27 per cent for the interior. I honestly think this is a reasonable division between the interior and abroad for in the original instructions to this department when it was established, and in the announcement in the Gazette with its establishment in 1961, not only was foreign information entrusted to us, but specifically internal information as well. In fact, Dr. Verwoerd, who established the department closed down the Information Division of his own Department of Bantu Affairs, and transferred it to this department because, he said, one department must act in a co-ordinating capacity, and therefore this department must also supply internal information to the Bantu, the Coloureds, the Indians and the Whites in South Africa. This is our specific task, and our instructions, and our duty, and here 37 per cent of our expenditure is spent internally, and 63 per cent abroad, but the hon. member takes it amiss of me for spending so much on the interior. It simply does not make any sense. We are only doing our duty and carrying out our instructions. But if I wanted to take the time I could tell the hon. member what form this internal information takes, and then he would realize that it is not, as he puts it, propaganda or a question of stating policy, or anything like that.

I want to give a few examples to illustrate what form of information it is, and what it deals with. I asked two of my internal offices to report to me on certain aspects of their internal information. The one office is in Port Elizabeth, and the other in Boksburg. I am referring now to information for the Whites. The hon. member says it is propaganda. Here is the report from Port Elizabeth. I am not going to quote it in full. In the first place, concerning films, they say the demand by public organizations to screen our films themselves is increasing every year. Church organizations, the schools, industries, clubs, etc., are making extensive use of this service. Altogether 164 organizations are on the register, of which by far the vast majority are English orientated. The hon. member must look out, the National Party is canvassing the English through my department, at their own request. They ask us for films to screen at their clubs. Most of these people are English orientated, English organizations in Port Elizabeth. There are films which we make for the specific purpose of informing the Bantu about certain aspects of nutrition, malnutrition the correct nutritional methods, agricultural methods and innumerable other matters. There is an entire series of these films. These films are in demand in the White areas. Owing to the relations problem there is great interest among Whites to see the way of life, the progress and development of the Bantu by means of films. This is in fact for many Whites the only concrete contact medium between casual everyday glimpses, and the real way of life, traditions and upliftment of the Black people. Here it is once again the English-speaking persons who are more eager to learn in this way. Even immigrant groups state that such films clear up much misunderstanding and distorted ideas among them, and they are constantly seeking such films from us to exhibit. This is the kind of use we are making of films in the interior, and so I can continue. Prospective visitors to foreign countries state unequivocally that they cannot venture out into the strange, hostile world, without the assistance of this office. Exchange students and the Rotarians and other organizations receive intensive instruction. and study our publications to be able to do justice to themselves abroad as citizens of our country. This is the kind of work which is being done. Instructional tours for students and other interested parties in the non-White areas are being arranged by my office in Port Elizabeth. Schools and public libraries are supplied with publications, and in this way the public receives information on current affairs. This is one aspect, but another interesting and completely different aspect becomes apparent from the report from the Boksburg office. Here we have a specific official who is particularly interested in the relations between employer and employee, in particular in the question of motivating Bantu workers in the urban areas, and in sound White employer/Bantu employee relations. This is a completely foreign sphere for information, you would say; this has nothing to do with politics, but is a useful service which is being provided. This official, at the request of numerous people has given lectures in this regard, and as a result of his intimate knowledge of the Bantu, he has been particularly successful, as I shall indicate in a moment. With him it is not the same as in an example he quotes in one of his documents, namely the example of Mr. W. J. P. Carr, an ex-director of non-White affairs in Johannesburg, who arranged a seminar in 1970 and said at the beginning of his speech: “I have worked intimately with the Bantu in various administrative positions for a period of 45 years, and I still do not know what makes them tick”. He is one of the friends of the hon. member for Houghton, but he does not know what goes on in the minds of the Bantu, what makes them tick, and that after a period of 45 years. But here are the facts. The number of industrialists with whom contact has been made by this official of my department is 100; the number of Bantu employed by those industries is more than 20 000; the number of managing directors, managers and mine managers he has addressed, is 550; the number of White foremen and supervisors is 1 500. So I can go on and on. What are the results of this? Thank-you letters have come from all over, of which I want to quote only a couple. The one states that the former approach that Bantu labour is in abundant supply and cheap, and that consequently it should be utilized on that basis, is as we all know, an approach which is devoid of all truth. Consequently the Bantu workers are also worthy of a sound, purposeful staff policy and planning, with particular consideration being given to the cultural background of every individual worker. This basic approach in these articles is reflected in a particularly thorough and practical way in the document, and if this document is printed and distributed as an information brochure, Ifeel certain that it will make an enormous contribution to ensure not only a more satisfied and effective Bantu labour corps, but also a more stable Bantu workers group and greater material benefits and higher productivity for the White entrepreneur. This comes from a Mr. J. C. de Villiers, Manager, Urban Areas and Administration. Mr. De Villiers is honorary secretary to the Institute or Urban Administrators for non-White Affairs in Johannesburg. Then I have another from the president of the Institute of Administrators, who also has the greatest praise for it. He says: “Several big industrialists are making use of this, and it is an extremely commendable effort.”

I could continue to elaborate for hours on internal information and on what is being done. I have numerous other documents from which I could quote, but I am not going to do so now. This proves that we are in the position that we are not only supplying party policy information internally, but that we are specifically conveying information in regard to policy on the type of co-operation and relations among White workers and non-White workers, etc., in the general context.

I want to render thanks to the hon. member for Von Brandis for his appreciated words in regard to the annual report which, as he said, was well-compiled and available in time. The hon. member, as well as other hon. members, asked me for my impressions of my trip. I shall say a few things about that when I conclude. The hon. member suggested that we make an evaluation of every branch of the information service to establish where we are spending money, and what the results are. I think this is a very sound idea which we are largely applying in any case. However, this is something which may be applied further with better results.

Then there is the question of the dearth of books on South Africa in public and university libraries. It was said that we should select books and make them available to libra res, etc. The position is that we are making an annual amount of R50 000 available in the Estimates which is utilized specifically for this purpose. Hon. members will realize that with R50 000 one is able to purchase a certain number of books, but that one cannot of course every library with a copy. We are already working on this specific matter, and we will continue to do so because we think is is the only way of getting the source-works to these places. I agree entirely with the hon. member; the problem is that as a result of the world-wide publication of certain negative information on South Africa, and the availability thereof,—publications which are financed by the U.N., and in many cases written and distributed by that organization—the available source works on South Africa in many countries are completely negative. It is therefore our task to place positive reports there, which need not necessarily be politically inspired. This can be done by recognized writers in South Africa and by outside authorities in the field who reflect the facts of South Africa correctly. We purchase a number of these books.

In conclusion the hon. member asked a number of questions in regard to the use of the French language. I can inform him at once that my staff in France speak French fluently. The hon. member says that when one is unable to write a language, one does not know it. I am in full agreement with him. He therefore requested that we should place a person in Ottawa, for example, who is French speaking. That is the ideal, if it is possible. However, one cannot always succeed in doing this everywhere. We are doing our best to make certain that our people speak the language of the country to which they are sent. But now I wonder on the quiet how many representatives of the departments of information or embassies of any other countries in the world who come to South Africa also know Afrikaans as a language. I am merely asking, and do not intend saying anything further about it. Our staff who are sent to a bilingual country ought to have full command of both languages. However, I think that we as Afrikaners can insist that foreigners who come to our country should respect both languages. You can never know the soul of the Afrikaner if you do not know his language.

We appreciate that: it is all the more necessary therefore that we do the same.

Yes. Questions were put to me in regard to my overseas trip, and in conclusion I want to deal with this. However, there is something else I still have to deal with while the hon. member is available. I am sorry, but I cannot disregard this. It happened while I was in Britain on my overseas trip. There I saw a television film called “The End of a Journey”. It dealt with Father Cosmos Desmond and the entire matter in that connection. This is the story of the dumping grounds and discarded people. I think it is necessary for me to say a few words about this. After the exhibition of the film in London I immediately contacted this specific television organization and told them that there were 14 lies in the film and that I was prepared to correct them off the cuff, without consulting anyone, because I was acquainted with South African conditions. I asked them whether they would afford me the opportunity of rectifying this matter on television. It was immediately reported that they were sorry but that under the circumstances they could not allow overseas politicians. I then asked them whether they would make the same amount of time available to me to exhibit some of our own films on the same matter, so that the viewing public of Britain could get a balanced picture. This request of ours was refused. I said that we were prepared to purchase time and in that way make our films available. I was informed that time was not for sale for that purpose. I am mentioning these facts on purpose so that our public, those who ask what we are doing in Britain to rectify this matter, can know that we come up against this wall of resistance. We have no alternative. We are trying our utmost, but we simply cannot get past it.

I hope our television is going to be different.

This is the position now, and I want to lay this at the door of the hon. member for Houghton. She did not participate in the debate, and I do not normally cross swords with her, but I just want to point out to her how she has been used …

I am going to speak on your next Vote.

No, I am not trying to be funny. I want to say one thing to her. The hon. member for Houghton is perhaps not aware of how she is being used through a recording she made here for these people. She does not perhaps know how those people used her in the final film. I do not think she has seen the final film, and that is why I think I must inform her of how she is being used in the final film to hurt South Africa. It is in that spirit that I want to discuss this matter with her.

This film dealt with the entire story of Father Cosmos Desmond and the entire matter in this regard. They find one person after another, and every time they find someone to make a strongly negative, completely untruthful statement about South Africa, they use a shot of the hon. member for Houghton, with a short extract of what she says, to try to illustrate the credibility of the standpoint and to try to endorse it. The technique is quite transparent. From the film I could see that shots of her were taken quite separately, and they cut out short extracts and fitted them in whereever it suited them.

What must I do about that?

No, I am only saying the hon. member should not allow herself to be used for that purpose. I want to explain, and I am going to quote as follows from the text of the film. They got hold of Father Desmond’s mother to say something—

This is what Mrs. Desmond had to say. Then the reporter appears on the scene and he says—

He was therefore going to investigate. Then Mrs. Suzman appears on the scene. I quote what she had to say—

That is, quite innocently, her statement.

That is true.

It may be true as well, for all that I care, but now they are using her to confirm these negative, untruthful statements immediately. Father Desmond also said the following, and I quote—

Then Mrs. Suzman appears on the scene again—

Right.

The facts are true, but see how they are using the hon. member. Does she not understand this? See how they are using her every time to emphasize what is negative. However, I want to proceed. Later on in the film the reporter asks Father Desmond—

Then the representative asks—

Then Father Desmond says—

Then the representative asks—

But then the hon. member for Houghton comes into the picture again. She then states—

Again this is true, but see how they are using the hon. member now. He says that there will eventually be a Black Government here, etc. Then they say that this will make him very unpopular with the Government of South Africa, as well as through his books, etc. This is the implication of the entire situation. So the hon. member continues every time. In conclusion the hon. member is quoted, where she held a report-back meeting in her own constituency. She discussed this specific matter there. She said—listen to the language she uses—

These are the words which go over to England—

Her conclusion is that restrictions are now being placed on that man because he made the facts known, which is totally devoid of all truth. The hon. member ought to know that. Sir, I am mentioning this matter and I am using this quotation deliberately to illustrate to hon. members to what extent television can be used and to what extent use can be made of a person to convey their image, completely different to what you said or intended. That is the essence of the matter. Every time they used the hon. member to give credence to the parcel of lies which are contained in the film. She allows herself to be used for that purpose for the publicity, for the sake of appearing on television, or for whatever other reasons she may have had.

May I ask a question? Give us a few examples of the lies in this particular film which I have not seen.

Examples of lies?

You said there were about 14 lies.

Oh yes. My time is running out, but I shall tell the hon. member what these liese are. I have not made a note of the lies here—I made a note of her story, but the lies here are very clear, for example—

This was at one of the camps at Weenen. I made certain about this in advance from the Department of Bantu Administration and Development—

An infamous lie! We closed the taps when the office closes—is that the idea in South Africa? It is an infamous lie. This is one of the 14. I can mention any number of them here. Here is another infamous lie—

Does the hon. member not feel free in this country? She has the freedom which anyone on earth has. In fact. I think she has far too much freedom. But the hon. member is totally free. This allegation was an infamous lie.

[Inaudible.]

No. but you challenged me to talk about the lies. I did not say the hon. member told 14 lies. I said the film contains 14 lies. I hope it is quite clear.

Sir, on that overseas trip—and with this I want to conclude—apart from the fact that it was interesting and revealing, I found a few things there which I think are worthwhile commenting on. In the first place, when one undertakes such a complicated and taxin~ trip, one is given the opportunity of realizing two things. Firstly one experiences precisely what kind of problems. resistance and hostility one’s information people there have to deal with from day to day. Matters which go down here as being a perfectly normal and an obvious part of our entire set-up have specific political connotations there which are simply not acceptable. It gives one an immediate insight into the situation and the problems with which our officials there have to cope. In the second place, it also gives one the insight of viewing South Africa, the image and the policy of South Africa, through the spectacles of those people abroad, at a distance which gives you a completely different view to the one you have when you are part of the country and you see matters completely subjectively as part of the community.

I want to say immediately that what I found most striking was the tremendous difference in approach which one finds between one country and another. In a country such as the United States of America one finds that the people there are prepared to state their standpoint and also to listen to yours. I found the Americans very accommodating in this respect that you can state your case to them. Consequently the chief officials of my department there have already made good contacts, through which they, when a negative film or report on South Africa appears, immediately have access to that same medium, to be able by way of a quid pro quo to furnish the reply and present an objective image of South Africa, which privilege we are being granted there. I have the figures here. I am not going to bother you with them, Sir, The annual report indicates how many screenings of our films take place, how many different news items on South Africa are broadcast daily throughout the whole of America, and how many millions of people we are reaching in this way. Unfortunately the same is not true of Britain; the same is not true of the Netherlands. These two countries are specifically the two countries in which we receive virtually no assistance or even equal opportunities in the ordinary media. We are not asking for assistance; we are asking for equal opportunities. These are simply not granted to you. One simply cannot purchase time, even if you want to. They simply refuse. That is why I said—and I repeat it—that I want to append a large question-mark to theobjectivity of the news media of these two countries, and in particular their radio and television. These are no longer objective. I am not the only person to complain about this. I have here quotations from numerous conservative Members of Parliament in Britain who also question the objectivity of the B.B.C.

May I ask a question? Does the same apply to the commercial radio in England?

It applies in part to the commercial radio in England, although this is not quite as bad as the B.B.C.

Yes, but I do not want you to leave an incorrect impression behind. That is why I am asking the question.

No, I said specifically the B.B.C. The hon. member heard me. I said the B.B.C. in Britain.

What are the methods we are adopting at the moment, apart from all the other things we are doing? We are inviting guests from countries all over the world to our country. This is one of the methods. During the past year we have had 86 of these guests here. These people are afforded the opportunity of speaking to persons on our side of the House, and they are also afforded an opportunity of speaking to members on the Opposition side, the member for Houghton and various other persons. They are afforded opportunities of speaking to leaders of the Bantu nations; they usually visit the Transkei, Mr. Tom Swartz and others. They speak to Knowledge Guzana, Buthelezi and other people. Then they return to their own country. Once home they normally write articles in which they reflect any party’s policy as they see it. There is no restriction—they can write what they wish. In this way publicity is being given to South Africa’s political probems and complications, more than in any other circumstances, so that we can in this way at least achieve an objective image, or sometimes a subjective image. It makes no difference; we at least have an image which broaches the entire matter in that way. I think we have been very successful with this. I have numerous quotations here, with which I could bore the House if I wanted to, of favourable comment. There is of course unfavourable comment as well, as there ought to be; for that makes the article more creditable. It indicates that the man was not brainwashed during the few days he was here. He has an honest standpoint, he differs in regard to certain points, but he also saw certain positive aspects. Seen as a whole, my impression is that our guest programme is one of the best methods of making contact with the outside world today and conveying our image to overseas countries.

A further impression of the trip, which I just want to state briefly, is the fact that it is impossible for one to reach the masses. We are criticized so frequently by well-meaning people who say: “Man, I was in the company of ten or twelve people in America, and they know nothing about South Africa; absolutely nothing. They do not even know where the country is situated. What are your information people doing?” We cannot reach each of the 200 million Americans. It is impracticable, nor do we have the necessary means. That is why one has to select certain groups of people on which one can really concentrate and which one believes have influence and will be able to convey our image abroad. That is then the idea I want to leave in our midst, namely that we must deal with a specific group of people, and not with the masses outside. We cannot reach the masses through the mass media, for we do not have this at our disposal.

Something else which struck me was the fact that the UN publications,—I am back with the UN—particularly those of certain of their subcommittees, reflect only half-truths to such an extent that one cannot fail to understand why the attitude in the world is what it is. I want to mention an example. In my office I have a publication distributed by one of the subcommittees of the UN and which states more or less the following in regard to Bantu franchise in Parliament: They begin with the old British Colonial period and say that the Bantu then had the franchise in this Parliament. In 1936 the Bantu were placed on separate voters’ rolls by the Joint Government of that time, and they had only a few representatives in Parliament. The next step was then: In 1959 Dr. H. F. Verwoerd, as Prime Minister, deprived them of this right. In that article not a single word is said about the entire Transkei and the fact that the Bantu are now getting a Parliament of their own there, with a Prime Minister of their own, and with their own system. The article simply ends there. It is not a lie; they were deprived of these rights in 1959, but it is a half-truth. The question of the Coloureds is dealt with in an identical manner. The Coloureds had a franchise on a common voters’ roll, subsequently they were placed on a separate voters’ roll, and at a certain date, and I am not certain what it is, Balthazar J. Vorster, the National Party, deprived them of their franchise. There is nothing here about the Coloured Parliament and their development, and so on. I said to myself, with reference to these articles which I read at the United Nations in New York and also in Geneva, that if this is the material and these are the facts and this is the only source from which I as an objective person had to sum up South Africa, I would hate South Africa even more than those people hate us, so distorted is the presentation of this matter. It is against actions of this type that one feels that replies should be furnished and brochures compiled to present all the facts. Whether one can find the channels, however, to distribute these in this same organization, is not such an easy matter, for these will be refused us. I know by now that the UN will not place our brochures on their shelves, or distribute them free of charge. They will refuse to do so. We will therefore have to find other methods to cancel out those negative facts about South Africa. These are the kind of problems we have to cope with and the kind of problems our officials deal with every day. I do not want to discuss my trip in specific terms any further, but in conclusion I want to leave a few ideas in your midst as to what my plans are in regard to the Department in general, which I have already brought half-way to fruition, and will carry out further.

The Information Service is not an end in itself; it serves nothing but the general interests of South Africa. These general interests of South Africa vary from time to time as circumstances change, both internally and abroad. That is why it follows logically that the Information Service also has to adapt from time to time as far as its objectives, techniques, priorities, etc., are concerned, and also as far as its functional basis is concerned, in order to keep pace with its main objective and function, which is to serve the general interests of the country. Since the establishment of this department on 1st December, 1961, world circumstances have changed drastically. Great changes have taken place internally as well, and on the Continent of Africa. Therefore the department has from time to time had to make adjustments to keep pace with these changes. During the past year, great changes have again taken place in overseas countries, and also in Africa, which I think require the attention of myself and the department and the Government as a whole. As far as foreign countries are concerned, I want to mention a few outstanding events which occured recently. Red China’s admission to the UN, and its penetration in East Africa, is a factor which is new, hot and fresh, but which has to be taken very clearly into account. Secondly, Russia’s new interest in the southern oceans and particularly the Indian Ocean is of the utmost importance to South Africa. The establishment of a strong European State bloc with Britain’s proposed entry to the European Common Market, also creates a new situation in that sphere which South Africa and the Department of Information will have to take into account. The foreign policy of the United States of America in Europe and in the Far East is something we will also have to take into account. The rise of Japan as a super commercial power is another factor which exercises influence, which the Department of Information has to take into account in its handling of problems. All these changes present new challenges to South Africa to state its case and play its role in a changing world. That is why further adjustments will from time to time, and now again, have to be made in the department. As far as Africa is concerned, there is the emergence of the Afro-Asiatic countries and their position of power at the U.N., the rise of independent Black states in Africa, which are independent in their own right and form part of the same Continent of which we form part, which also presents a new challenge to our Information Service and our State. We are now, in the light of these circumstances, a contentious country and the main objective of our enemies has become to try to discredit and bring about the downfall of our internal relations policy, and our liaison with Africa, particularly with Southern Africa. Information work, to state it clearly and correctly, has also become security work for South Africa, and ought therefore to be accorded high priority. The information officer is our frontline soldier. On the basis of personal knowledge and impressions which I gained during my recent trip, after discussions with literally hundreds of people in Europe, Britain and the United States, and with our information staff overseas who are daily in the forefront of the struggle, our ambassadors, journalists, politicians and statesmen right up to the highest Government circles, I am convinced that our information efforts can again be amended in numerous respects, and will be, but a little more about that later.

As far as South Africa internally is concerned, it could be mentioned that since 1960 there has been an influx of quarter million immigrants. The population has grown from 12 million in 1951 to 21 million in 1970, and this has made new demands on us internally. Add to this the massive expansion of the communications media, the coming of television within the foreseeable future and the homeland development which will lead Black states to independence with totally new internal situations, then one realizes that it is essential to make internal information as well as the entire structure of the Department even more streamlined than it is at present, while techniques have to be changed and priorities have to be determined anew. Add to this, during the past few years, the rise of numerous organizations which are specifically anti-Western and in many cases specifically anti-South African, which have sprung up like toadstools in many countries of the world and which are directly and indirectly aimed at South Africa, then one realizes that we shall have to pay attention to these as well, and will have to rectify certain matters.

Then, I do not want to make any attacks, but simply state the fact that we do of course have another position which we have to take into account, and are taking into account. The English-language Press in South Africa, in a free country like South Africa, with a free Press as our Press is, certainly has the right to criticize this Government and to attack it and to try to bring about its downfall if they are able to with all the practical, constitutional methods at their disposal. That is their right. That is why there is constant criticism of the Government in numerous English-language newspapers, which is their right and which I do not begrudge them in the least, in which they attack the Government and disparage the Government and other persons, etc.

But there is frequently praise as well.

There is frequently praise, but the hon. member will agree with me that there is considerably more that is negative; he will grant me that. I do not begrudge the English-language Press this in the least, because it is their privilege. But what is the precise outcome of all this overseas? That does not often enter our minds. The fact of the matter is that the English-language newspapers are the newspapers which exercise an influence overseas. and which are read there, because English is an internationally understood language. I do not want to discuss this any further, except to put one single question and leave it at that. If Afrikaans were a world language and Afrikaans were the language which was understood in all the capital cities of the world, while English was only understood in South Africa and we had the same Press position as now, I wonder whether South Africa’s image would still have been the same as it is today? I am merely asking this in all honesty.

How many people overseas read South African English-language newspapers?

No, but the reports are taken over by the overseas newspapers and published there. The hon. member must not try to divert me from my course now. The fact of the matter is that the reports of our English-language newspapers are understood overseas, while our Afrikaans newspapers are not. Consequently the reports of the English-language newspapers are taken over and published by the millions overseas. I do not want to say for one moment …

Reports are sent over from here by journalists.

What journalists?

By South African journalists.

No, the newspapers are sent over. I want to state at once that I do not want any misunderstanding, please. It is my task to make liaison with the Press as favourable as possible, and I am doing this. I am establishing liaison with the Afrikaans and the English-language Press to the best of my ability. It is the right of the Press in South Africa to avail itself of the Press freedom which exists here. When the Government is attacked, specifically by the English-language Press, and is criticized, and matters are exposed and bruited abroad, sometimes quite unjustifiably, in the struggle to rectify matters internally, I just wonder whether it enters the minds of those correspondents that their newspapers are also going to be read overseas, and whether they therefore ask themselves what this report is going to do to South Africa’s image abroad. [Interjections.] There is no need at all for hon. members to kick up such a row. I have quite simply stated a fact. In the world of today, with the destructive forces which nuclear weapons constitute, armed force and the possibility of war is something which people are trying to avert at any price, for in the next war there will be no winners, only losers. We are all aware of this, so destructive are the weapons. That is why the possibilities of hot wars are becoming scarcer, but the war of words between countries is increasing. It is not necessarily a war of words, but conversation and dialogue between countries is also increasing. If countries which have completely contradictory policies, such as Red China and America, can conduct a dialogue with each other, then I say that dialogue and the use of the written and spoken word and image has become important. If this is the case in the outside world, I say that the Department of Information which is the nerve centre of the State of South Africa and of the entire South African society, where everything is brought together and around which everything functions, also has a very important role to play for this is the department which states South Africa’s case in words, and not with weapons. The value of the department in this connection can therefore never be underestimated.

Now I want to say at once that out of the wealth and the knowledge of the past, together with the new concepts and techniques which are at present being used in numerous countries of the world, a new structure and broad fundamental plan will be drawn up for the Department of Information. We are working on this at present. I do not want to go into the details of it now, but I only want to emphasize a few aspects. I hope that I will be able to finish before 6.30. I believe that information must, under the present changing world circumstances, rest on four pillars. Firstly, it rests on qualitative information in respect of the material and groups at whom it is directed. Secondly, on expert staff at home as well as abroad, also in Africa, with specific training, even if it should mean changing the present structure and staff utilization. Thirdly: Modern techniques, television, direct and indirect influence, films, film strips, trips, speeches, guests, invitations, dialogue, etc. Fourthly, preferences will very definitely have to be determined in respect of information projects, and who should be informed. These will be adjusted from time to time. I should like to close on this note. Our critics and enemies overseas show little interest in our private business in this House, in our differences here. Not even the masses of people outside are often aware of our personal differences here. A world in which there are 140 independent countries, and in which there is probably ten times as many problems and grave problems at that, and threatening wars to which sensational publicity is being given by numerous news media throughout the world, does not have the time nor does it feel like arguing about the differences between apartheid and separate development on the one hand, and White leadership with justice and race federation on the other. They know there is a difference of opinion on this, but it is not really a serious one in their view. All that is conveyed to them is that here in South Africa there are 4 million White colonialists, according to their standpoint, who have deprived 15 million indigenous Black Africans of their territory, and who are now refusing to offer them a political say or prospects of a better economic, social and political life. On that basis they condemn the whole of South Africa and the Opposition policy is just as unacceptable to them as ours. Let us have no illusions about this or split any hairs over it. Therefore I intend revising and readjusting the priorities, techniques and projects of my department on a month to month basis. The motto of my department is and remians: Dynamic driving force and effective action. To that I commit myself, and in that way we will defend South Africa.

Vote put and agreed to.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No.23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported.