laid upon the Table:

1. (1) Publications Amendment Bill [No 86—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Home Affairs and National Education).
2. (2) Rules Board for Courts of Law Bill [No 87—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Justice).

To be referred to the appropriate Standing Committees, unless the House decides otherwise within three sitting days.

Mr Chairman, I move:

14h30 to 18h45;

20h00 to 22h30.

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to reply to hon members who spoke during the period when I acted on behalf of the hon the acting Minister. [Interjections.]

Order! The Committee must please settle down.

I shall begin with the hon member for Pietersburg who spoke here about a problem as regards exposure to asbestos. I wish to assure him that his representations in this regard are not without merit and that we examined them very sympathetically; the hon member will also recall that we corresponded on this particular case. Unfortunately I am bound by law. It is not a matter of legal technicalities forbidding the payment of compensation to these people. For the general information of the committee I wish to say that a person suffering from asbestosis is not entitled to compensation in terms of the relevant Act purely because asbestosis is a disease that carries such an entitlement. Such a right arises only if the disease was incurred in the course of pursuing risk work. Risk work is also defined in the Act.

Uncertainty existed in my mind, in that of the hon member and even among other members of my department on precisely what was meant by risk work because it appears that there is a contradiction in section 13, subsection (1) and subsection (5). These provisions were referred to the State legal advisers, however, and the uncertainty eliminated. Subsection (1) deals only with existing mines and industries and grants the Minister wide powers to declare work carried on in or at or in connection with a mine or industry as risk work. A particular job therefore first has to be declared to be risk work. This provision has obviously been worded in broad terms because work regarded as risk work is mentioned specifically in the relevant notice in the Government Gazette.

The hon member referred to a specific person—I shall not mention his name—whose business has been defunct over the past 20 years. That is why section 13(1) applies in his case. The fact is that for his own gain this person offloaded asbestos from lorries at Pietersburg, which is situated about 100 km from the mine, and transferred it to railway trucks. In other words he was self-employed and so on. Section 13(5)(b) provides against such cases in which a mine or an industry has already been closed. I quote this subsection because it applies specifically to this case. It runs:

1. (a) work performed at a controlled mine or a controlled works before the date on which that mine or works became a controlled mine or works; or
2. (b) work performed at a mine or works which, in the opinion of the Government mining engineer, would have been declared a controlled mine or a controlled works had it not closed down,

I had this matter very thoroughly investigated and, if I should approve the payment of compensation for this so-called risk work, I naturally run the risk that it would be regarded as unauthorized expenditure by Parliament. So much as regards that aspect.

The hon member also referred to the Pharmacy Amendment Act and I wish to assure him that this Act contains no new legal principle or any other new principle especially as regards dispensing by medical practitioners. Since the inception of medicine, doctors have had the right to dispense. That matter is not affected by this Act but the Browne Committee may investigate it.

The hon member also referred to activities of the Browne Committee. It naturally does not fall within the power of the department to establish the momentum or the lack of this in respect of that committee. We have already received two reports from that committee, namely the report on rates and a report on the pharmaceutical industry which I am informed is on the way to us. That concludes my response to the hon member’s speech.

The hon member for Welkom also has a problem in connection with occupational diseases. The interdepartmental work group which is drawing up legislation arising from the Nieuwenhuizen report will consider the recommendation that compensation should in future not necessarily fall under this department. The entire question of the determination of degree, the extent of compensation and the way in which compensation will be paid are all matters still under consideration.

†The hon member for Durban Point commented on, as he called it, “simmering undercurrents” and said that “a war is breaking out.” Then it transpired that he was referring to the disunity, if I may call it that, between doctors and chemists and between doctors and chiropractors—a fight which, as he stated it, was based on ethics and standards. I do not want to elaborate on the standpoint of doctors as far as chiropractors are concerned. There will be ample opportunity to debate this question when the applicable Bill comes before the House. However, I want to make a plea to hon members please to keep this misunderstanding, as I shall call it, between the doctors and chemists as far as various things are concerned, out of politics.

It has nothing to do with politics!

I am just making a plea—the hon member need not get so excited! He got excited yesterday already! [Interjections.] The point I wish to make is this: There is an ad hoc committee sitting at the moment consisting of members of the Medical Council and of the Pharmaceutical Council which is trying to solve this difficulty between the doctors and the pharmacists. I see no point whatsoever, except for political gain, in this being discussed in this House today. [Interjections.]

I come now to the dream of yesterday. The hon member for Parktown ended his speech with: “I have a dream.” He then postulated a number of ideals and principles of a health scheme as he saw it. However, whilst he was dreaming, we were carrying out and implementing exactly those principles that he was dreaming about. The trouble is that whilst he was dreaming, the Minister and I and the department were working. We have our national health facilities plan. We have our Population Development Programme. We have various research programmes. I cannot enumerate everything that this department does. However, an enormous task is being carried out at present. Ideals and dreams are very much in order if they are tempered by realities such as the shortage of funds, the lack of qualified manpower and particularly the Third World situation we find ourselves in at this point.

The task of health care in this country is certainly a vast and very difficult one, but it is a task that must be undertaken. However, with the limited resources at one’s disposal and with the Third World situation being what it is, one still has to teach most of the people whom one wants to teach the basic tenets of health care. The hon member’s entire speech sounded like a dream, a dream interspersed with … with …

You sound like a nightmare.

… with nightmares. The hon member is quite right. [Interjections.] Quite a lot of what is said sounded like that.

I said you sounded like a nightmare.

I was not dreaming; I was down to earth, but he quite obviously suffered from nightmares and brainstorms looking like hallucinations. [Interjections.] I say that because it was quite obvious…

Order! The noise level is so high that nobody can dream in this committee at the moment! [Interjections.] The hon the Deputy Minister may continue.

Mr Chairman, with respect, it is not my intention to put these hon members to sleep in order to dream. As I was saying, it was quite obvious that many parts of his speech had no relation to the realities or to the facts. I shall refer to these as I go along.

Apart from dreaming, he entered the fray like a bull in a china shop. He simply criticized almost every facet of my department’s activities without taking cognizance of the true state of affairs and of the facts. He hit out at each and every one of them in sight. He may achieve success with this type of bulldozing in Parktown but he will certainly not achieve it in Parliament. Neither the Ministry nor the department will be intimidated by such a show of aggression. [Interjections.]

*In the first place I want to protest most strongly against his unjustified comments as regards district surgeons vis-a-vis prisoners or detainees. Without having the facts at his disposal—he had no facts whatsoever because they are not known to anyone yet—he launched an attack on the department saying those persons had most probably not been examined by district surgeons. How does he know that? Where did he obtain that information?

Have you ever heard of Dr Lang?

Mr Chairman, Dr Lang was not at issue yesterday or the day before yesterday. The hon member spoke about the two latest cases. Has he hon member for Groote Schuur heard about them? Did he take notice of anything that happened there? That is what was mentioned, not Dr Lang. [Interjections.] Do not rake up old grievances.

*Naturally we are deeply distressed that these incidents occurred and I also wish to express our sympathy toward relatives. I also know every step was taken to obviate and prevent such incidents. Our sympathy goes to relatives. To attack officials of my department, however, while the case is sub judice and all the facts have most definitely not been made public, is totally irresponsible. It is totally irresponsible to utter the statements made by the hon member. In fact, reports on certain investigations are still being correlated in the two cases in question.

The hon member complained that in spite of numerous questions he had been unable to obtain information on the position regarding district surgeons and prisons. I have just received a message from the hon member—it is a pity he cannot be present today. Nevertheless I shall lay it on the line for him: District surgeons pay visits to prisons and places of detention on a regular basis and also at the request of the police. Regular reports are submitted to the SA Police and the top management of the Department of Health and Welfare. Secondly, the district surgeon in charge of prisons may also call private medical practitioners into consultation. To allege that such a thing does not exist, therefore, is simply untrue. Thirdly, the Department of Health and Welfare, the South African Medical Association and the Prison Services have instituted a modus operandi in consultation with each other to deal with this matter. Hon members can therefore see my department does everything in its power to provide medical services as and when required to those departments which keep detainees in their prisons. There were unfortunate cases in the past but we are discussing the present situation and steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence.

The allegation made at the conclusion of this part of his speech that the South African Medical Association had been expelled—his word for it was “banned”—by the World Health Organization is simply untrue. The SAMA withdrew voluntarily from that organization at a certain stage. It is perhaps interesting to note that if certain circumstances had not arisen, the congress of the World Health Organization would have taken place in Cape Town this year.

I looked up the hon member’s Hansard and he made the wildest allegations, inter alia: “The department seems to be ruled by ad hoc measures”; “Medicine in South Africa today is at the crossroads”—actually he said that it was in a crisis situation—and “The future overall health services in this country have not been adequately defined and they are endangered in the face of the frightening population growth”.

†It would appear that this hon member either did not know of the Population Development Programme or merely ignored its existence. It would also appear that if he did know of this programme, he certainly does not understand the role of the department in the Population Development Programme and what in fact is intended with this programme.

To recapitulate: It is based on four tiers—the social, economic, physical and constitutional. The department is charged with the co-ordination of this programme, but every State department has a function to fulfil. This is then reflected in the budget of each department, for example housing, water supply, job creation, adequate training, teaching, etc. As far as the department is concerned, other facets of its activities do in fact constitute part of the bigger programme, for example, family planning and general nursing with the emphasis on the Third World situation. The figures referred to by the hon member are only for the co-ordinating role of the department and reflect a 44,3% increase over last year’s budget.

*To summarize, I wish to say the total budget for the Population Development Programme is 26,1% more than for last year. The community development component is 44,3% higher to this department but many other state departments also contribute and this is not shown in our budget. The budget for family planning alone is 23,9% more than that of last year and that is naturally the sole responsibility of our department.

†The hon member also referred to the provision of the necessary manpower to provide comprehensive health care for the total community. In order to achieve this, a health data base needs to be developed in order to establish priority health needs in the community. This has now been done in the form of a data bank that is now being computerized. In close co-operation with various authorities involved in the rendering of health services a framework has been drawn up for a national data bank which will become functional in the very near future.

A National Health Services Facilities Plan accepted by this Government and which is currently being implemented covers the various points made by the hon member covering as it does basic facilities, primary health care, regional hospital care and specialist facilities. The linking of this approach to the Population Development Plan will ensure total care for the whole community.

To create the impression that differences in health status are caused by Government design—this was what the hon member implied—through acts of omission or commission is absolutely malicious. Doctors in South Africa attend to the needs of all population groups. For decades outlying hospitals have been manned almost exclusively by dedicated White doctors. Curative services are provided for all population groups by provincial and State hospitals staffed by doctors from all population groups. For quite some time now there has been a lack of suitable Black candidates. However, the position has changed and Black doctors are now being trained at an ever-increasing rate. I am not sure whether it was this year or last year that 3% to 4% of all Black matriculants qualified for entrance to medical school.

The Department has adopted the four simple measures indicated by the UN Children’s Fund as part of its primary health care service. The first of these measures is breastfeeding. We actively propagate and advocate this form of feeding among parents. Secondly, there is the prevention of infectious childhood diseases in regard to which polio and tuberculosis immunization is compulsory. Vaccinations are administered via 35 000 vaccination points. Thirdly, we see to the oral rehydration of children suffering from gastro-enteritis or where this is necessary for other causes, and this service is available at each and every clinic where we operate. Fourthly, we have “Road to Health” charts which are being used by all local authorities and clinics. This is a very essential document for the effective monitoring of children as far as their health status is concerned and the identification of their needs at an early stage.

*Mr Chairman, it is important to note that in 1982-83, the latest figures available, the public sector spent R2,186 billion on health services in which no fewer than 19 institutions and 450 local government bodies were involved. The private sector spent R1,615 billion on health-related professions for the same financial year. The percentage of the GNP spent on health services in the RSA is therefore not 3% as alleged but 5,7% as regards the 1983-84 financial year. If we compare this with the position in developed countries, we find the USA figure to be 11% and 6% in Great Britain whereas it is only 2% to 3% in developing countries. This expenditure percentage has increased appreciably over the past few years.

†I wish to conclude by reacting to the hon member’s reference to a three-tier medical profession, and particularly to what he terms primary health-care professionals, general practitioners and specialists. Primary healthcare professionals is a concept which we of the Department of Health and Welfare certainly cannot accept. It apparently implies the training of a new type of medical doctor called a primary health-care professional. That is completely unacceptable to us.

One is either trained and fully qualified as a medical doctor or not trained and qualified at all. All trained medical doctors must have received the highest standard of training otherwise the integrity and quality of our degrees will fall away. The department pursues a policy of the privatization of health care. Nearly one third of the beds required by the department are administered by the private sector.

Privatization applies to cities and big towns only, not to rural areas.

Does that hon member conceive of a private hospital being able to exist at Pofadder? What rubbish! [Interjections.]

*In favour of private hospitals and of regulations which are in the process of formulation, a strict obligation to private hospitals …

[Inaudible.]

Mr Chairman, if the hon member for Durban Central would only listen sometimes, he would occasionally also learn something. Possibly he would then make fewer ridiculous statements in the House. [Interjections.]

Order!

I am attempting merely to sketch the true state of affairs here and I am naturally also doing it for the edification of the hon member for Durban Central.

In favour of private hospitals and of regulations which are in the process of formulation, a strict obligation will be placed on private hospitals to provide basic training to nursing and paramedical staff. Consultations are in progress with those involved.

Mr Chairman, the Department of Health and Welfare covers an immensely important field of functions. Its task is the physical and spiritual care of man—from the cradle to the grave. This involves every person in this country. I have been waiting since yesterday for hon members of this House, and in particular my hon male colleagues, to say something about this group of people who do by far the most work in this department. Naturally, I am not presuming now. I must ask, however, when hon members will ever say anything about women in this department. Take the women away from this department, and I should like to see the chaos that would result! [Interjections.]

The field in which women operate in their greatest numbers, is definitely the field covered by the functions of this department. In the first place I merely want to say something in connection with women as social workers. Their work is invaluable. They cannot be recompensed for their work in rands and cents. Nor can their hours of work be brought into account. They do not have set working hours, after all. When the need is there, they have to be at their post, regardless of the time of day or night.

In a time such as this, in which such an immense attack is being launched on man’s spirit, the adjustment for all people is so great that it is truly imperative to have people who can assist in the spiritual care of their fellow beings. This requires a great deal, however, in training and knowledge, expertise and insight, from the women involved. They have to know what it is all about and which aids they can apply to make the task easier for their fellow beings in this mixed up old world, which sometimes becomes simply too much for some of our people.

In the second place the woman in her house is the one who takes care of the health and welfare of her family. She also has to see to the spiritual care of her family. Women are just as indispensable in the house therefore, and without the task they fulfil in their houses and with their families, perhaps there would be more cases in society, needing urgent treatment.

Next I should like to say something in connection with the nurses. The profession of nursing is a science of the heart. Nurses—and they are mainly women—perform imperative work. They maintain the highest regard for human lives, and this sometimes requires them to sacrifice an infinite degree of their time, patience, energy, vigour and of themselves. In the first place nurses must have medical knowledge, as well as scientific and technological knowledge. Using this equipment they can watch over patients whose lives are being threatened and they usually fight grimly for them. They also experience intense sadness if nothing more can be done for a patient. The glances they cast at their patients always attest to sympathy, encouragement and interest, which they need so bitterly at times. A nurse’s fife is never dull, for every day in her life is truly different. Her own joy and sorrow, her own physical weaknesses and own problems always have to wait and in most cases are moved to the background until later, a “later” that may never come.

Her day is full of casualties, accidents, tragedies and sometimes even tirades. Happy occurrences such as successful operations, successful treatment and even the birth of new little beings, do compensate sometimes for the less happy occurrences they have to experience and assimilate day after day. People who are ill need a great deal of understanding and attention, for often they cannot move or are confined to bed. They can merely lie and worry about themselves, their people at home, their future and even the settling of their hospital accounts. Nurses therefore need infinite human knowledge and have to be very selfish to make things easier for others.

The department makes stiff demands on the available womanpower for the very reason that women have received so many fine characteristics from their Creator that they can lay claim to the fact that their services are urgently needed. These days society lays claim to women’s time, knowledge, love, servitude and willingness. These demands require a great deal of them and sometimes they have to work out their daily duties and programmes carefully to find time for everything. This results in their often having to forfeit the luxury of a little time for themselves.

We must not lose sight of a very important aspect, viz the service of love performed by women, a great and comprehensive service for which they do not receive monetary compensation, a voluntary service. In an unselfish way women perform welfare services for organizations and various associations which have to care for people in society, from babies to the aged. Personel contact and interest which people receive in a period of need are particularly meaningful to them. It is also important for welfare organizations to try to make less privileged people feel necessary. They can make good use such people to perform small tasks, which may help them to forget their own problems. It is important, therefore, that the department also makes use of the services of aged people. There are tasks which can be entrusted to them to make them feel once again that they are needed and are not a nuisance. Often they can help in tasks in which they have a great deal of experience. Life becomes more meaningful for them and they find a purpose in it. These people also find life much finer and more bearable.

More than anything else, women are people who serve others. This department is also notably dependent on women for successful functioning in every facet of this activities. There is not enough time at my disposal to enumerate everything.

I do want to say that women are not only necessary for every facet of the Department’s functions, but also for every facet of society, for every man needs a woman for his pains, for his moods and to share in his successes as well as his defeats. Every child needs a mother to share his sadness, his highs and lows, to nurse sore toes and to kiss away tears. Every family needs a woman to elevate and support the family, to comfort and to listen, to protect and to inspire. Every society needs women to perform charitable services. Everyone needs women, whether as a wife or as a mother. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I found it interesting to listen to the hon member for Germiston district. Despite that, it is difficult for me to respond to her speech. She says she has been waiting since yesterday to hear whether a man was going to speak about women. Possibly it is a little dangerous for me to speak about women now, but nevertheless I can agree with her reference to the role of social workers, who have a particular place in our society. We shall return to that in a later debate.

I also have particular interest in what she said about nurses. Because I have had so much to do with hospital services in my life, I am aware of the role played by nurses. I should like to stress what she said and also point out that there are many married women who still nurse. These people make immense sacrifices in order to continue nursing, for their families suffer. In the same breath I want to say that families have to make similar sacrifices because in many cases the mothers have to nurse.

I found it interesting that she said every man needed a woman. I agree with her wholeheartedly in this connection.

I am sorry I could not take part in this debate yesterday. It would probably have been my duty to take part yesterday, but I think hon members are aware of the fact that I was busy with health affairs the whole of yesterday. As a result I could not be present here.

I think it is a good idea for me to refer at this late stage of the debate to the departed Minister. The chairman of the study group on this side cannot be present either and because I could not be here yesterday, I do want to express our sincere sympathy towards the departed Minister’s family. I should also like to put on record that the death of the late Minister Nak van der Merwe is an irreparable loss to us as a group, to Parliament as a whole and to our country.

It is also a pleasure for me to refer to the chairman of this side’s study group. He underwent a serious operation, but is recovering well. I heard only this morning that he is making good progress.

One wants to refer to the department’s annual report. It is a special privilege for me to be able to point out that we are dealing here with an annual report which gives us reasonably new information. The annual report concerns 1984. Whereas information about the activities of the department is not normally available so soon and reports are a year late, we have the case here that Dr Retief and his staff succeed in giving us the very latest information every year. So we are dealing here with the 1984 annual report. In paging through this annual report and reading it, it is very clear that the Department of Health and Welfare functions on a very wide level and that this report gives us extremely valuable information.

It is also a good thing to refer in this debate to the annual report of the Medical Research Council which functions under the presidency of Dr Brink with Prof Van Heerden as the Deputy President. It is a council which does very important work in the sphere of research into a large variety of illnesses. This is set out in great detail as is their research work which is done in conjunction with universities and other institutions. They work with a budget of R5,5 million which gives an indication of the very wide field they cover.

I also find it pleasant to see a reference in this annual report to the co-operation of my own son in respect of research. It always does one good to know that a contribution is being made in respect of health from the ranks of one’s own family.

An amount of R1 326 538 000 is being budgeted for the Department of Health and Welfare. If one compares it with the budget for other departments, one finds that the Department of Health and Welfare is among the six departments with the largest votes. This shows us how important this department is in our national economy. It is right too, because the health and welfare of a people are of the greatest importance and should always receive high priority because the health of a nation also determines its prosperity and productivity.

The department performs extended services in respect of health. If we look at the analysis of the department’s budget, we come under the impression, as I have said, of the immense field covered by the department.

It is clear, therefore, that the provision of health services cannot be continued in an unplanned way. We are experiencing a period in which we have to deal with a population explosion which is breath-taking and definitely has to be regulated through the guidance of the population development programme, if we do not want immense problems in future. What concerns us most closely in this Vote, however, is that we must decide now how we see the provision of health services in future. The demand in respect of health services is becoming increasingly greater and it is very clear that on the present basis the taxpayer will not be able to bear the burden of health forever. It is clear that a way has to be found to get away completely from the socialization of health services in any case. If we want to provide ideal health services, every inhabitant of the country should be given personal attention on a professional level. If we then say that we want to get away from socialization of health services, clearly only the affluent section of the population will be able to pay for professional services. I am referring in particular to the cost of medicines. According to a report in the Beeld of 18 February the hon the Deputy Minister, Dr Morrison, spoke at the general meeting of the Aptekerskomitee van die Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut. He said and I quote:

The hon the Deputy Minister discussed the replacement of prescribed medicines by cheaper similar remedies. It is an aspect of medicine provision which still meets strong resistance in certain circles because it is often argued that such medicine is of doubtful quality. An additional argument is that it will have a retarding effect on research.

We as representatives experience serious problems with one aspect and that is the price of medicine. We are constantly receiving representations from pharmacists about the extreme difference in the prices of the same medicine. In many cases there are three different prices for the same medicine; there is a price for the doctors, a price for the State and a price for the retail pharmacy which supplies the private consumer. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon the Deputy Minister attacked me for bringing the question of friction within the health family into politics. I have never heard such utter nonsense.

I did not attack you.

He spoke of somebody else talking nonsense! I think I must have touched him on a very tender spot when I said the new Minister of Health should not be a doctor because he would …

What absolute rubbish!

Yes, as much rubbish as it is to suggest that I am bringing politics into health matters. That is one thing that I am not doing. On all sides of this House and in all parties there are people who think alike. I believe other speakers on the Government’s side had support for exactly the same line that I took in regard to this issue. I am not playing politics with it; I am bringing certain sensitive issues to the attention of this Parliament which today has a Bill on the Order Paper and will have another Bill coming which is now before the standing committee which deals or comes close to dealing with some of these issues. I made an appeal for impartiality, a judgement of facts and a resistance to lobbying and pressures.

When my time expired yesterday I may have stopped at a point where I left a wrong impression. I want to make it very clear that I am not against doctors. I owe my life twice over to doctors—to an Indian doctor in Asmara in the 16th Combined Military Hospital, and to another doctor when I got back. I know their dedication and I myself can never repay the debt that I owe to those doctors. I have three members of the health family in my own intimate family, so it is not that I am against doctors. What I am appealing for is that we keep an open mind and that we do not allow ourselves to be influenced.

In the few minutes I have left I want to deal with the announcement of the hon the Deputy Minister and appeal to the hon the Acting Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister on two counts. The one I have lost already through a decision of the hon the Minister of Finance, and that is the payment of pension increases in October instead of at the time of the Budget. I want to ask the hon the Minister to look to next year and to see whether it is not possible to make up the loss of those six months. I want to ask him to look next year at the possibility of granting increases when they are announced. In those six months between the announcement and the increase coming into effect, the cost of living has robbed it of its value. I also want to ask the hon the Minister to look at the question of bonuses and to try to advance their payment for those old people for whom six months is a terribly long time to wait.

The other appeal I want to address to this hon Minister is one on which the hon the Minister of Finance has been very sympathetic. He said he would discuss the matter of removing the means test from the 1914-18 war veterans with the hon Minister concerned. There are at present only 172 of these war veteran pensioners, compared to 1 600 a matter of 15 years ago. There are fewer than 7 Coloured First World War pensioners. My request to the hon the Acting Minister is not to wait until the next Budget but to remove the means test—it can be done administratively—from that handful of people of whom the youngest is already 83 years old.

Another matter which I would have liked to deal with now is the question of standard salaries and conditions of service in the various provinces, but I will have to deal with it under the own affairs Vote. The last point with which I will also have to deal under that Vote concerns the cost of private hospitals and their effect on medical schemes and their viability. Unfortunately I have no time to continue with that now, so I will leave it at those two appeals to the hon the Acting Minister—the October payments to be advanced to April, and the lifting of the means test on 1914-18 war veterans.

Mr Chairman, for various reasons I listened with particular goodwill to the hon member for Durban Point who has just spoken. My diagnosis is that a slight misunderstanding exists between him and the hon the Deputy Minister on who actually said what. I wish to say to hon members that I not only have a regard for the hon member but that I also feel slightly sorry for him. This weekend we had a very serious debate on the bus to the border on smoking and non-smoking. I pointed out the serious dangers of smoking to people. Some of the hon members who are a little too fond of their smokes then referred to my physique—my somewhat “weighty” problem. I think I won that debate reasonably well when I told those hon members that in my 24 years as a medical practitioner I had never issued a death certificate with the term “Paunch” as the cause of death. I have issued many death certificates, however, bearing the diagnosis of lung cancer—that is how I extricated myself from the argument. I think the hon member for Durban Point falls into both categories and I am sorry for him!

Who has heart by-pass operations? It is the non-smokers! [Interjections.]

I shall return to a few aspects to which the hon member also referred yesterday but I want to make a different comment now. Owing to very important circumstances I could unfortunately not be present yesterday. The hon member for Parktown then made a speech to which the hon the Deputy Minister has just referred and in which he said inter alia: “I had a dream.” I chose a very similar subject for my speech today. I chose: The State and Private Sector in the Health Service and the Future Health Dispensation. I obtained the hon member for Parktown’s speech this morning and read it through cursorily. It was clear to me that he had taken a large part of his speech from the pamphlet Medical News of 10 January 1985 from Prof John Gear’s inaugural address. I quote from the publication mentioned:

What did Prof Gear say? Among other things he said:

I must say I was almost entirely in agreement with what that professor said. To a great extent it corresponds to what the hon member for Parktown said but there was one very important matter mentioned by Prof Gear in his speech which the hon member omitted and to which he attempted to attach another slant. Prof Gear said the following:

The point made by Prof Gear, however, is that the Government is doing its share. Prof Gear said we should all acquire a totally different approach and then apply it but the hon member omitted the fact that the professor had said the Government was doing its share. What did Dr Nak van der Merwe say? He said we had a maldistribution of medical practitioners, namely an overconcentration in the cities while training was specialist-orientated instead of being community-orientated. In other words, what the hon member is advocating has been carried out for a long time by the Government. I agree with the hon member that perhaps we are not moving sufficiently rapidly in that direction.

Before returning to the matter of privatization and the distribution of medical services, I just wish to make two comments on what the hon member for Durban Point said yesterday. He requested inter alia that the Minister of Health should not be a medical doctor. It is the State President’s prerogative to nominate a Minister of Health and Welfare—I definitely do not qualify for the position at this stage of my career but watch me in a few years’ time—therefore I honestly think that to say the Minister of Health and Welfare should not be a medical doctor is equivalent to saying the Minister of Agriculture should not be a farmer and the Minister of Justice should not be a member of the legal profession. I think the hon member makes a mistake by saying that, as there is a battle between doctors and pharmacists, a doctor should not be the arbiter. If one considers the overall health service and health task in South Africa, however, one sees that this battle between doctors and pharmacists comprises about 0,005% of the total. Consequently to make the statement that the Minister of Health should not be a medical practitioner is I think totally erroneous.

†According to today’s paper—I have not yet had time to read his Hansard—the hon member also said:

*I am certainly not aware that any doctor has ever moved in that direction. Unlike the maize farmers and just like Genis, doctors in any case lack the power of abstinence. We have never considered adopting a threatening attitude towards health services. I do not think it has ever been mentioned.

But there have been such cases.

I do not think the hon member is speaking about South Africa—he must be speaking about another country. As I have only a little time left, I wish to make a few statements about this battle. I do not wish to involve myself in it altogether but do wish to adopt a definitive stand. Doctor bashing is becoming the national sport in South Africa.

You have a vested interest.

To tell me I have a vested interest because I am a doctor means that no farmer may speak on the maize price here. Naturally I have a “vested interest” in helping to protect my profession against people who know nothing about it—that is a problem. I can mention a good example. As far as my needs are concerned, Beeld is certainly the best newspaper in the country but on 1 May 1985 Beeld published a leading article in which the following was said:

Naturally it is rubbish to say these doctors are angry because they cannot obtain excessive fees. It has always been the medical practitioner’s right to dispense medicine to his patients—this happened even before the times of Hippocrates. There has never been anything wrong in a doctor’s making up his own medicine for his patients and there is nothing wrong with it now. It is naturally wrong if doctors purchase vast quantities of medicine and sell it to other doctors and other doctors’ patients; that is certainly wrong and should be acted against. I myself have made up medicine for my patients and sold it to them and I shall do it again in future. I shall make up medicine for my patients, dispense it to them and sell it to them at a profit! It is no disgrace for a doctor to make his living from this as well. The attitude is adopted that a doctor with Black people in his practice where he cannot make a profit on medicine is permitted to do so but the moment his practice consists of White patients, in which case he can make a profit from medicine it is evil. This is the wrong attitude, and the way in which we attack doctors is totally incorrect.

Time seems to have caught up with me, therefore I wish to make only a general statement. We had been in South Africa for about 300 years before we realized we were not “Europeans”. The other day I entered a so-called cultural centre and there was a notice “Europeans only”. They had not yet realized we were not “Europeans”. I am told that farmers ridged groundnuts for a thousand or two thousand years because they thought this would provide a better yield. Now they have discovered ridging is unnecessary because it does not improve growth.

As regards health services, we should note in South Africa that we have a 25% First World and 75% Third World population. By coincidence that is the exact ratio throughout the world. During the Alma-Ata conference in 1978 the World Health Organization issued a statement that they would attempt to provide primary health care to all individuals and families in the world by the year 2000. We are attempting to do the same in South Africa. I have great respect for heart transplants and work done in that regard, but certain health care such as that furnished to the top structure of the First World population should be provided by the private sector, and is not the duty of the State. I shall be speaking on this subject in another debate. We doctors and the entire practice of medicine should become community orientated—we have been speaking about this for years. We should not only talk about it; we should start applying it in practice now. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should now like to participate in the debate. At the outset I want to say thank you very much to the speakers who have been participating since yesterday, namely the hon members for Swellendam, Durban Central, the hon member for Witbank, who spoke twice, the hon members for Stilfontein, Pietersburg, Wellington, the hon member for Edenvale who spoke three times, the hon members for Randfontein, Paarl, Germiston District, Middelburg and the hon member Dr Vilonel. I want to thank all these hon members very sincerely for participating. I shall react to as many of the points which they raised as I am able, and the others I shall reply to in writing. I want to single out a few points from the general discussion, because five or six members raised the same issue during the discussion. Consequently I should like to reply to hon members in groups, rather than to mention every hon member by name every time.

At this juncture I should just like to say that I am sorry that the chairman of the Health Group, Dr Jan Grobler, is not here. He has had a serious operation, but I have ascertained that he is recovering well. He asked to be excused for the remainder of the session.

Why is Mr Hollander not here?

As the Minister concerned I miss him and his exceptional advice far more than I would miss the hon member who has just made that interjection if he were to leave the House.

You people made Hollander chairman.

Right at the outset I want to congratulate the hon the Deputy Minister on his reply to the debate today. He officiated while I was unable to be here…

[Inaudible.]

I wish the hon member would just keep quiet. I am dealing with serious matters. If he really feels unable to contain himself, I would really not be sorry if he excused himself. [Interjections.] Then we could have a meaningful discussion. He was away for such a long time that I began to miss him, but I am sorry that I did so. [Interjections.]

Right at the outset I should like to say a few words about the Population Development Programme. The hon the Deputy Minister reacted to the speech made by the hon member for Parktown. I read his speech, however, and he devoted approximately five to six pages to this wonderful dream he has for this country. The Department of Health and Welfare has been working on this dream for more than five years.

The hon member Dr Vilonel pointed out that it was time we took community health back to the community and began to practise preventive health services, instead of spending large amounts on curative services and training hospitals. I do not wish to put it as strongly as that. I believe there is room for both, but that we should separate the two. We have the greatest opportunity to do this in the new dispensation, in which we have our own affairs. Since we are community orientated, we now have the opportunity to take the matter of health back to the community. It can therefore grow out of the community in accordance with our National Health Facilities Plan. It seems to me the hon member for Parktown has never heard of this plan. It was compiled in the form of an excellent book, and was published in this form in 1984. I shall return to this in a moment, because it is important that I should first discuss the Population Development Programme. Many of the hon members spoke about this, namely the hon members for Witbank, Stilfontein, Wellington, Eden-vale and Paarl, as well as the hon member Dr Vilonel.

What is the Population Development Programme in actual fact? It was a programme which was introduced on the 16th of March 1984, on precisely the same day as the Nkomati Accord was signed. The object is to bring about an enhancement of the standard of living and the quality of life of all the people in South Africa during the next century. What are the subsidiary objectives of this programme? They include: Accelerated social and economic development; orderly spatial distribution of people; a maximum population of 80 million to adapt to the resources of the country according to our present knowledge; and a total fertility rate of 2,1 per woman. This is the fertility rate which we envisage for every woman, regardless of her race. There is no other connotation attached to this. This is a figure to which the White woman can rise and to which women of the other groups can descend. It is no coercive measure. These are, instead, guidelines which the communities can adopt if they want to live well, if they want to educate their children, if they want food for those children, if they want clothing for those children and if they want to send those children to university. These things are important. However, it is also important that each of those communities talk to their own people, with the help of the Department designated by the Cabinet as the co-ordinating department.

We must get away from the habit of attributing all high death rates among certain sectors of the population to the Government. If a population group wants to have 4, 5, 8 or 10 children per woman, the people of that group must realize that they are going to have a higher death rate if they are unable to feed their children. The Government cannot accept the responsibility for every child born in this country if the people do not want to play a part in the Population Development Programme. The same applies as far as housing is concerned. Housing forms part of the planning. The Government cannot accept responsibility for the housing of people who do not want to multiply and make progress on an orderly basis.

If we consider the rest of the plan—I do not want to go into all these matters—we shall see that there is a social side, an economic side, and physical planning component that deals with housing, township development, urbanization, water supply and sanitation. There is also a constitutional side which deals with the creation of political structures. I do not want to go into that aspect either today. The Cabinet has in fact appointed this department to co-ordinate this programme.

The department’s own function, the line function, is family planning. General health programmes must strive to attain the object of lowering the mortality rate and raising the level of health.

What structures have been created? The hon member for Parktown spoke as if nothing had been done during all these years, and that his dream could now give us a clear picture of how to regulate this country’s health services. What structures have been created? There is the interdepartmental population development committee and interdepartmental committees in each of the participating departments to direct the population development activities of each department. These are not concerned only with people, but also with housing and many other facets including economic factors. In addition there are interdepartmental committees on a regional level to do the work and to initiate whatever is required so that community developers can be appointed by the department in all the development areas in the country. Forty nine committees of this nature have already been appointed. One hundred and ten subcommittees, local committees for community development, have already been appointed. There are various indicators which allow us to see what is actually happening, such as total infertility, child and infant mortality, housing, literacy, as well as social pensions, school attendance, urbanization and the per capita income, which are all monitored. That is what the department is doing in this programme. It also looks after the values, the norms, the socialization and the responsibility.

The hon member for Parktown spoke about the Budget, which was so small. That portion of our Budget is small, but surely other organizations are also spending money on the Population Development Programme, such as those which provide housing, and many others I am not even going to mention. Then, too, there is the family planning component of this programme which has almost reached the R42 million mark. There are the clinical aspects of family planning, as well as guidance on family planning.

The hon member for Wellington spoke about the Rural Foundation. In this connection a herculean task is being performed, although it has been suggested here that nothing is being done in this country. Already there are more than 70 000 farmers in South Africa, with more than 5 million farm workers. One thousand farmers are already actively involved in this institute, and through them services are being rendered to 80 000 people. Considerable amounts of money are being spent by these farmers everywhere in the country, out of their own pockets, to try to educate and uplift their farm workers through the provision of water and sanitation and by ensuring that with the help of the department they receive information on family planning.

One of the cornerstones of our Population Development Programme is our family planning campaign. It is an important component. Clinic-client contact is offered in a coordinated way, together with guidance directed at target groups. This is the importance of community health. It is the Zulu who has to go and tell the Zulus that they should have fewer children so that they can have more to eat, can afford a good house and will be able to find work. So, too, it is I as a White person who have to say to my White fellow countrymen: These are the facts, do you think that with your income you can have more children or do you think you ought to have less? We do not determine how many children a person may have. We are not saying that he should have fewer. What we are saying in the Population Development Programme is that a person should see what he has and if his position improves, he can have more children, but if he cannot afford it, he must not run to the Government and say that he has ten children, but has no means of taking care of them and that they are therefore the children of the Government.

There are other programmes which form part of this, such as the sterilization programme which the hon member for Paarl knows so much about. There is a doctor in his area, a certain Dr de Villiers who, with the consent of the Coloured community, is doing tremendous work in Paarl. The Coloured population there has become relatively stable. Hon members should go to Paarl and see what kind of clothes the people there are wearing, what kind of housing they have and what the children one sees in the streets look like. That is what we are doing, while the hon member for Parktown sits here and dreams.

It is part of the programme that we should appoint a council for it. I want to announce today that we are going to establish a population development board soon. The board will cover a wide field and will deal with the-entire Population Development Programme. I do not really want to elaborate on this, except to say that the board will be composed of people from a very wide spectrum, such as commerce, the various communities, women’s organizations, etc. The board will advise us and take the programme which has been established further. I just wanted to make these few introductory remarks on the Population Development Programme to indicate to the House that this department has for some considerable time now been engaged on a tremendous task.

This brings us now to own affairs vis á vis general affairs. At present it is the task of the department—together with the Commission for Administration—to see to it that own affairs are devolved to the administrations for own affairs, and that general affairs remain under the jurisdiction of the department of which I am at present also the responsible Minister.

As the hon member Dr Vilonel said, this is a magnificent opportunity for us to cause health matters which is directed at the entire community to get off the ground now. This process is already taking place. There are community health centres which are already in operation. This undertaking can best be initiated however when it is done within the community context. When it is confined to one group only each group can of course manage its own community health services.

Who would know better what the needs of the Coloured group are than the hon Minister April? That is why we are allowing these matters to be managed as own affairs by each relevant group. I observe that the hon members for the CP agree with me in this regard. [Interjections.] Who would know better what the community interests of the Indian group entail than Dr Padayachy? That is why we allow the Indian group to decide this aspect for itself.

One hundred per cent!

When we review the community health facilities plan, surely it is not difficult to understand its functional classification. We must not allow ourselves to become obsessed by the university hospitals and then say we do not know how to carry on because we are at our wits’ end with those hospitals. There are certain proposals that can be made. At present I am having talks with the department and the Commission for Administration. In addition, interesting suggestions have been made in regard to the university hospitals. As hon members know, there are for example Guy’s Hospital and the St Thomas Hospital in London, each with its own council—its own autonomous council—which organizes and regulates all the activities of the entire hospital, including the training facilities. Perhaps it is high time we did something like this in South Africa; that we made the council of the hospital concerned responsible for those regulating activities and not the Government. A training hospital of a university is after all an educational institution, which should also have control over the nursing and medical services for which it is responsible. It ought to be able to make its own appointments and deal with its own budget. It can be co-ordinated by the Minister responsible for general matters. When those hospitals are made responsible for their own budgets, they should also acquire the right to impose certain tariffs—which can then be deducted from the subsidy which they receive from the Government in regard to certain services they have to render. This is an idea we ought to investigate.

We can no longer continue to allow the training hospitals of universities to dominate our health matters so completely. This is after all the Department of Health—not the department of disease. It seems to me, though, that this department has over the years developed into a department of disease. [Interjections.] Consequently it is more than time that it returned to the status of being the Department of Health.

The hon member Dr Vilonel made a statement here in connection with the First and the Third World. One of the other hon members who spoke, also mentioned this. They placed great emphasis on health services in the First as well as the Third World. What is very important is that it is high time the Third World component of our population was looked after medically by the State. On the First World level far more privatization must take place. We can do whatever we like, it is essential that the private sector be involved to a greater extent in the provision of facilities for the treatment of patients in hospitals. I am referring specifically now to patients from the First World component of our population.

However, we can take the process of privatization even further. We can allow companies, which are today already erecting hospitals in the national states, to do precisely the same thing in our Black residential areas. They can utilize their own capital for that purpose, while the State can hire hospital beds from them. Why should we constantly be in search of millions of rinds for the erection of hospitals—the one larger and more impressive than the next; with standards which we simply cannot afford? We shall have to investigate this very interesting and challenging aspect once again.

When we consider the aspect of functional classification, it is important that we should take cognizance of what is being done in terms of the national facilities plan. This entails four important things, of which the first two are the provision of clean drinking water and the removal of waste products and refuse. These two matters, I think, could be delegated to the local authority concerned. It is the local authority which ought to look after these matters. When a certain community does not have the facilities of clean drinking water and garbage removal, surely the Department of Health and Welfare cannot accept responsibility for that. The local authority controlling that region should look after those things.

The aforementioned functional classification includes, in the third place, the provision of adequate sources of nutrition. In this respect the involvement of the private sector is once again very important, particularly the farming community and the housing department in question, which is of course involved in the provision of the basic accommodation infrastructure. In this House as well the other two Houses of Parliament there are specific Ministers to whom this task has been entrusted.

This brings us to the next level—that of personal health and health guidance. The latter of course is an own affair. Every community has things which are applicable only to that community, for example, the combating of tuberculosis, and family planning. Whites are no longer able to give people of a different colour and people speaking a different language guidance on family planning, and we have already trained thousands of people to do that work in each language group. Matters such as littering, the breeding places of flies, etc, are nothing but own affairs, which can devolved.

On the third level, for example, there is the Rural Foundation, which the hon member for Wellington discussed. Then there are health care and community service organizations, which are also own affairs. The own affairs’ ministers can take charge of these matters as soon as we have devolved these matters to them. On this level there are the mobile units and community health centres. The more community health centres or day hospitals there are, the fewer hospitals are needed. This is proved by the situation in the Cape Peninsula where a hospital was last build 20 years ago. However, there are 29 health centres, clinics and day hospitals which treat thousands of people annually.

Are you now going to abolish the general department?

No, the general department is very important, because the Minister responsible will have to co-ordinate the services and the expenditure. At present there are 19 organizations applying to the hon the Minister of Finance for money for health care, and this money will have to be channelled by a Minister who has representation on the Cabinet so that there will be financial co-ordination. One cannot eat the cake on the one side only, one must eat the cake on the other side as well.

All these things on the third level deal with basic health services. They must be coordinated, but must also be devolved to the own affairs department so that the responsible Ministers can deal with them.

Then there are community hospitals, which include private hospitals. They can be controlled by the own affairs ministers in whose area they fall. That is not a problem. I have already discussed the co-ordination of finances. No authorities ought to be allowed to build large community hospitals if they have not already deployed the first, second and third tier services I have just been discussing. We must get away from hospital-orientated and hospital-centric medicine and must return to community health if we want to save money. We are already doing this, but it must be done on an even larger scale.

Local authorities can also play a role. It can even be considered whether community hospitals cannot in due course be controlled by local authorities. After all, this was the case in the old days when local authorities controlled these hospitals. Then one arrives once again at the old subsidized hospitals which are still able to render the cheapest and best service, because the moment the State takes over these hospitals, the costs double. That is simply a fact of life, and one does not always know how to explain it.

There are also special hospitals, large hospitals which accommodate all population groups and which developed over a period of many years. These hospitals can be administered on the second tier of government, which my hon colleague announced the other day. Furthermore, I have already discussed the academic hospitals. These are new ideas which I think will meet with approval, and which we can still discuss as soon as they have been disposed of by the Cabinet, but which at present are still being considered by the department, in co-operation with the Commission of Administration. Then the own affairs and general affairs aspects in regard to health services will be clarified.

Who controls the whole business? Surely there must be a head as well. I would say that the general affairs Minister should be the co-ordinating Minister. The composition of the National Health Policy Council has been changed so that other members may be appointed to it. The Act has already been amended to allow the inclusion of own affairs Ministers. It may even happen that some of the leaders of the national states may be included in this body, so that they can discuss matters which affect them.

Then there is the Health Matters Advisory Committee. This is the committee of officials. It advises the NHPC, and the Minister is chairman of this body. As the Act provides at present, the Minister has the final decision. Not even the NHPC can override him; he takes the final decision.

Having said all this, I also want to point out that it will be the task of this Minister to establish norms and standards as far as the rendering of services are concerned. He must also co-ordinate the training of health workers and be the moving force behind the Population Development Programme. These aspects are not matters which we merely have as a blue-print; three quarters of these aspects are already in operation.

Nevertheless the hon member for Parktown alleged that nothing was being done. He dreamed about how he wanted to see South Africa’s health being looked after. It is all very well to dream, but to turn that dream into reality is unfortunately the task of the Minister of this department and of the ministers of the departments of own affairs. That is in fact where the problem lies. It is no use dreaming if one cannot turn that dream into reality.

I do want to furnish a few statistics after all. On the first level—this deals with the provision of basic services—we find that 60% of all services are in fact required there. As far as health guidance is concerned—this relates to personal hygiene, the environment, flies and so on—the figure is 10%. Health care—that is an own affair—which is related to the nursing services as well as to medical services on the personal level, the community organizations, the auxiliary associations and the voluntary organizations, these amount to a further 20%. Furthermore there are community hospitals where the figure is 3%. Special hospitals—these, as I have said, fall under general affairs—also amount to 3%. Academic hospitals amount to approximately 4%.

One therefore finds that one can render 93% of the health services on the ground level in the community, and then one can deal with the remainder as well, because if one is able to deal with the 93%, surely one can find a way of dealing with the remainder as well.

As far as this subject is concerned, I want to conclude by saying that with the Population Development Programme, with the separation of general and own affairs and with the strengthening of the Ministers for own affairs, this country is on its way to ensuring that we introduce community-orientated health services on the basis of preventive medicine instead of merely expensive curative medicine. There is a place for the latter as well, but for that purpose the private sector will have to accept primary responsibility.

I want to come to a few other matters raised by hon members. I have already referred to the establishment of the Population Development Board, something which I consider to be imperative, and I shall not go into this any further at the moment, except to say that organized commerce and industry, agriculture and women’s groups will all have representation on the board. Its actual objective is to propose a policy for the population development programme on an ongoing basis for consideration and implementation by the State. It will, on request, advise the State on the co-ordination, the implementation, the research and the evaluation of the Population Development Programme. It must also consider and recommend methods of furthering the programme in the specific communities. The board must also, with the concurrence of the Minister of Health and Welfare, constitute specialized committees in respect of certain projects on which it may decide. Furthermore, the board must, in conjunction with existing research bodies such as the HSRC, the MRC and the universities, generate further research.

What are we doing with this board? We are taking the entire population development programme directly to the community and we are giving the private sector and all kinds of other bodies an opportunity to make a contribution. Why must the department always have to worry about getting things done itself? We must receive advice from these people and they will probably be granted monitoring powers as well.

I should like to react to the speeches of a few hon members. Perhaps I should deal with the hon member for Durban Point right at the outset. Yesterday I did not hear very clearly what was said. I am certain it was merely a slip of the tongue on his part when he said that it was not a good thing that a doctor should occupy this position. I want to say that one does find impartial doctors. As the hon member Dr Vilonel also said, I think we should simply leave it to the State President. He is not inclined to allow speculation about appointments to continue. I think we should leave the speculations at that. I have sufficient confidence in him; he will know precisely whom he wishes to appoint to this position [Interjections.] I read in the newspaper that the hon member said in reply to an interjection that he felt he would be a suitable Minister. I want to tell him at once that I see nothing wrong with that. The only difference is that I will not allow myself to make that recommendation to the State President.

†The hon member mentioned the 1914-18 war veterans. I am in full agreement with him. Since pensions have been divided up between own and general affairs, this has become an own affair, but I happen to be the Minister responsible for own and general affairs in this particular case and I will ask the department to look into this matter. We have taken the member’s hint that, if there is agreement, we do not have to wait till the next Budget. I shall have a look at this matter. Perhaps that will also create a better feeling between the hon member for Durban Point and my colleague, the hon the Deputy Minister.

*There seemed to be a bit of friction between the two of them today. I said I was an impartial Minister, did I not? I shall see to it that this matter is also cleared up.

†As regards the question of increases in pensions becoming effective in October or April, I can say that it involves not only an economic problem but also an administrative one. The department has looked at the matter from all sides. This issue is a hardy annual. What the pensioners lose from now to October, they again gain from October to April. They are then better off from October to April and worse off from April to October. [Interjections.] If something can be done in that connection, it will be. I will look into that.

*Yesterday the hon member for Swellendam made a speech on chiropractors. I do not want to go into this matter. At present it is before the standing committee. I just want to say that the hon member set out the entire history of this matter very well indeed. What is important, is that this Parliament has accepted the chiropractor as an entity. Consequently the issue is not the recognition of chiropractor’s existence. This Parliament has taken a decision in this regard, and that includes the hon members who may have expressed opposition to such acceptance. The promise was made to the people concerned—it appears in Hansard—that if they set their house in order and got rid of the charlatanism in their profession, which they have already done, and if they would in addition come forward with training proposals and then ask for a register to be opened, it would be considered. One hundred and forty people are involved here. As I have said, I do not want to comment on what the standing committee is doing. The standing committee must simply take into consideration that this Parliament has granted recognition to chiropractors as such. Every hon member in this Parliament did that. Consequently it is not a question of whether or not they should receive recognition now. It is simply a question of the next step. The standing committee must decide whether the chiropractors have done their share and have set their house in order. If the standing commitee decides that they have in fact done that, they must consider the legislation in this connection very seriously. I want to thank the hon member for his contribution, I think he stated his case very well. One could see that he had made a study of the entire history of this particular matter.

†I turn to the hon member for Durban Central. When the hon member for Edenvale in his speech yesterday said he thought it would be a good thing if like Decimal Dan we introduced a Prudent Pete, I wondered whether he was perhaps referring to the hon member for Durban Central, but perhaps in some of the things he has been doing lately he has not been so prudent. So perhaps we should not link him to this. The hon member for Durban Central talked about the poor distribution of doctors and said they should be more comminity orientated. That is the whole idea behind our programme. I think our doctors are already being educated to a considerable extent on the community medicine side at our universities. It is, however, a difficult matter. We will consider the possibility of enticing doctors into the rural areas, but if they do not want to go, it is very difficult to do anything about it. They are a very democratically minded profession. They do not like to be pushed around, least of all the Minister. I think one will have to bear that in mind.

The hon member also talked about the code for substitutes for mother’s milk. The Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act deals with the monitoring of the different products. I think the hon member wanted a monitoring of the use of these particular preparations but it will be very difficult. We have now made sure that they understand it. The hon member thanked us because the code had been laid down, but I think it will be very difficult for us to go any further than that.

*The hon member for Witbank always makes a good speech because he makes a thorough study of matters. I listened very carefully to what he had to say about the price of medicines and also what they cost in other countries. It was shocking to hear that one group gave 85c for a cough preparation, which one had to pay R6,25 for retail. I think we must adhere to what my late predecessor said, namely that the Minister should try to ensure that the price of good quality medicine is lowered. As the hon member for Middelburg said, however, the quality must not suffer in the process.

I have already discussed the question of the Population Development Programme which the hon member raised. The hon member referred to the medical practitioners, the pharmacists and the problems which arose in that area. Some of the other hon members of the Opposition parties who discussed this matter wanted the hon the Minister to intervene. I want to state that as long as I am Acting Minister of Health and Welfare I have no intention whatsoever of intervening between the medical practitioners and the pharmacists. They are adults, they have two statutory bodies, and if they want to fight about dispensing it is their own business.

They have now consituted a committee which consists of members of the South African Medical and Dental Council and the Pharmacy Council, and I think they realize that they must put an end to this dispute. They are disparaging the health community in the eyes of the public, because one reads stories in the newspaper of how a medical practitioner for example received a thousand pills as a gift, and bought an additional one thousand, and then sold the two thousand pills for the same price as the retail pharmacists. Such cases are probably the exception; surely they cannot be the rule. On the other hand, one hears that the pharmacist charges three times as much as the medical practitioner. Who can this benefit? Surely it cannot benefit anyone. These people must now settle their differences and see to it that they come to an agreement like adults. That is the appeal I want to make to them.

The hon member for Pietersburg said he wondered whether there should not be one council for everyone. He added that he thought that he thought that it should be the South African Medical and Dental Council because a diversity of people were serving on that body. I cannot agree with him; I think that if one were to put all those people on one council, it would be like throwing a lot of cats into a sack and tying it shut. I think they should iron out their problems in the open and see in what way they are able to regulate matters because they are able to do that.

I also want to make an appeal to the media not to ferret out all the ugly things both medical practitioners and pharmacists are doing. They should take a wider look at all the good things the medical practitioners and pharmacists are doing. One should not allow oneself to be carried away by sensationalism. I am not referring to all the members of the media now—one should be careful not to generalize—but I am merely making a general appeal to all of them. I am not railing at them; recently I have been on quite good terms with them. But I should prefer not to go into this matter any further at the moment.

The hon member for Stilfontein discussed the Population Development Programme and family planning. I think we must make it very clear that family planning is not viewed as population reduction. If one is going to advocate population reduction in that way, it contains within itself the seeds of destruction. I said earlier on how one should regard this matter. A person should decide for himself whether he is able to feed his child properly.

The other evening there was an appalling programme on television about the conditions in Africa, and specifically in Ethiopia. President Julius Nyerere said that they had not yet been able to make a breakthrough with family planning. If a Black president in Africa has been unable to do this, how will we as Whites be able to force it upon our Black population groups? I think that programme should be shown on TV2; it should not be seen on TV1 only. It should also be shown on TV2 so that the people watching that programme can see what conditions are like in the rest of Africa.

The hon member raised one very dangerous matter—I do not wish to reprimand him for doing so, because he makes very good speeches—and that was the question of compulsory sterilization. If we have to consider compulsory sterilization, we have lost the war. We must do everything in our ability to persuade people to have themselves sterilized of their own accord. This is something which frequently happens. However, we cannot introduce compulsory sterilization. How is one going to do it in any case? With the help of the Police and the Defence Force? We have already heard what happens when the Police and the Defence Force are used to do certain things. I think we should give that idea a wide berth. [Interjections.] However, the hon member for Stilfontein made a fine contribution. He said inter alia that we should also involve primary school children in educational programmes. We must get the programmes to the families, and the families to the programme. I think that is a wonderful statement, and can only serve as an incentive to us.

The hon member for Pietersburg did make a small blunder by saying that the White rate of increase was only 1,08%, but I think it was merely a slip of the tongue on his part. He was probably thinking about the admissible 0,08% alcohol in the bloodstream! [Interjections.] At present the White population increase is 2,03%. A short while ago it was 2,07%. The rate of increase of the Asiatics is 2,7%; of the Coloureds, 3,29% and of the Blacks at present on average over 5%. In Soweto the rate of increase is 3,8%. There we are achieving excellent results.

It is still below the replacement rate.

No, I think the replacement rate is 2,1%. That is why we say in our Population Development Programme that we should all aim at 2,1%, because then we have a replacement figure. However, the figure is not 1,08%, and I am not attacking the hon member on this score now—it is possibly a figure which he misinterpreted. The important matter concerning the population increase, however, is that we should all try to adhere to the replacement figure. The Whites for example, do not have the right to say to the Blacks, Asiatic or Coloureds that they should reduce their numbers. It just does not work like that. The programme must be available, though, so that if anyone becomes aware of it, he will realize that it can be of great advantage to him.

I have already referred to the one board which the hon member referred to. I have also referred to the question of dispensing medical practitioners and pharmacists in the same buildings. I think we ought to have clarity in regard to part of this issue relating to the manufacture of medicines and the handling thereof by the wholesaler, the medical practitioner who receives it and the pharmacist, in the report submitted by Mr Brown. I think the report is going to appear this week, and I requested him to have parts of the report which he has completed, considered by his council, and sent in, rather then to wait until he has completed all the reports. Perhaps we shall have more clarity on the matter from that report. I want to point out, however, that one should not exonerate the wholsaler and the manufacturer, while the medical practitioners and pharmacists are squabbling on the other side. If there are wholesalers and manufacturers who are selling their products behind the scenes to medical practitioners, they are also the culprits—not only the medical practitioners. I think that I have now reacted to all the points the hon member raised.

I have already replied to the hon member for Wellington; I thank him for his contribution. The hon member for Witbank also discussed the asbestos type of cancer, but the hon the Deputy Minister has already replied to that. The hon member did, however, make an excellent contribution on pollution. Once I was on my way to Pretoria via Witbank when the pollution was so bad that I asked the department to take an immediate look at Highveld Steel—this was three or four years ago—because thick red clouds of smoke were being emitted, so that one could not drive through the area without switching on one’s car lights. Let me put it this way, however. The costs of atmospheric pollution combating equipment is tremendously high. The question is what has been done during the past few years. Highveld Steel spent R40 million; Rand Carbide, R7 million and Trans Alloys R3 million. Jointly this amounts to R50 million spent during the past five years to effect an improvement in regard to atmospheric pollution.

During the past three years Ferro Metals spent R4 million; South African Cyanim approximately R1 million; Southern Cross, in Middelburg, R5 million. At Secunda Sasol spent R150 million on the construction of its plant, and subsequently spent a further R30 million on trying to control H2S—that is sulphuretted hydrogen or “rotten egg gas”.

Let us now take a look at power stations. The hon member advocated the use of nuclear power, compared to power generated by coal. Initially R20 million was spent at Kriel; R10 million at Hendrina; R10 million at Arnot and R20 million at Matla. The programme is being improved during the next few years because each of them is going to spend an additional R10 million, just to get rid of this pollution. However, there are problems in the Lowveld. The atmospheric pollution does not disappear easily because there is no wind. After all, one can sit there until midnight, having a braai, because there is no wind to blow out the coals. I flew over this area during the time I was Minister and saw how low the smoke was. One simply cannot get it away. Of this amount R40 million was spent during the construction of Duvha as well as Tutuka. A new plant is going to be built at Kendal, where R70 million will be spent for this purpose. We now come to an interesting figure. To build an ordinary power station costs R2,5 billion. To build a nuclear power station, however, costs R4 billion. Surely it is better to build for R2,5 billion and then spend R50 or R100 million on atmospheric pollution control. Instead of a nuclear power station costing R4 billion, one can build two ordinary power stations. I am not asking for this to be done—my hon colleague is the person who works with this—but I just want to say that we should use the raw materials we have, but we should also use the research and knowledge we possess to prevent atmospheric pollution. Therefore I thank the hon member for his contribution, because it brought the issue to our attention.

I must now, as the saying goes, make haste slowly. The hon member’s contribution was of great value. I shall discuss the implementation of the law and the implementation of norms and standards with him later.

†I should like to deal with the hon member for Edenvale, because he made one of the most interesting speeches that he has ever made in this House. He did me another favour because he spoke three times and actually spared me having to listen to two of his colleagues as well. [Interjections.] I might have had many more questions to answer.

The hon member spoke about the question of pensions, but he has improved and changed a lot since the last time I had this portfolio. He will remember that he tried to convince me that we should have a national health scheme run by the Government. He has dropped that issue, but has now come with the advice that I gave him four years ago—I looked in Hansard—when I said that the employer must be the one who contributes. If it has not been for that small debacle about the interchangeability of pensions, we would have been further on this road. I can only agree with him. He gave exceptionally good figures, but he knows that my late colleague appointed this special inter-House committee to deal with the whole question of pensions, and he is a member. I think this speech of his should actually be referred to that committee because it contains so many facts which should actually be gone into.

However, the one point that the member made which was actually a very good testimonial for the department, was that the population was now growing older. This was not the case a few years ago. People are living longer because of good health services, better conditions, better housing and improved economic stability. However, that does not solve our problem. We cannot now cut down on health services. He used a very interesting new word “equalization” instead of “parity”. I think that is a better word.

We still have to look at the possibility of a differentiated payment of pensions, irrespective of colour. We have talked about this before. There are three components: Clothing, food and incidental needs. Those can all be equal, but then there is a last component, namely housing. The aged couple living in their own home for which they have paid, paying water and lights and municipal taxes, cannot be expected to get the same pension as somebody who lives in a municipal house for R2,50 per month and does not have to pay for water and lights. This is something which the department and the committee on which the hon member is serving, must consider. There is no question of parity for all pensioners. It is not fair to the people who are actually paying more. This is actually just to help them subsist; it does not provide them with a wonderful living. It must give them subsistence so that they can manage. If they are not paying out that amount, I think that it is an important point the member must look at.

The hon member raised a number of other points, including that of the proportion of the group. I think the hon member has changed his views a bit, but everybody’s views about these problems have changed. He put the problem of the large number of people who actually need some sort of subsistence aid very clearly to the House.

*The hon member for Randfontein made a very clear but heartrending speech for us here on the problems of teenagers who commit suicide. We are in favour of rendering as many services as we are capable of doing, but assistance should also come from the community. We try to support the crisis clinics, and we can even give them assistance, but we feel that it is not merely a departmental welfare problem, but also a community problem. I listened attentively to the hon member and I shall read his speech through again to see whether I can learn anything further from what the hon member said. I thank him for bringing this matter to the attention of the House. Apart from reading one or two reports in newspapers, I do not think hon members realize how serious a problem this is.

I reacted to the speech made by the hon member for Paarl in his absence.

The hon member for Germiston District made a very interesting speech. She proved once again that one can keep health outside the political arena. She paid tribute to women. I can only agree with her, and for a few reasons. Firstly, my mother was a woman, and secondly the mother of my two children is a woman. My last reason is rather personal, namely that the mother of my grandson who was born a short while ago, little Lapa, is also a woman. [Interjections.] It gives me great pleasure to add, to the case which the hon member put for the woman here this afternoon, that without the woman health and welfare in this country cannot continue. I mention in this connection the paid workers, the nurses and the social workers, but especially the group of voluntary workers. We thank the hon member very much for her contribution. It is a good thing that the hon member drew the attention of the other hon members of this House, who perhaps do not always appreciate women at the right time, to this matter.

It seems to me the hon member for Middelburg still appreciates a woman at the right time. [Interjections.] I thank him for the way in which he praised the health report and the MNC. He also spoke about cheaper medicine, and I thank him for doing so.

I have mentioned the two points that the hon member for Durban Point raised. I thank the hon member Dr Vilonel for his contribution. I referred to him during my speech.

It has been a privilege and an experience to talk about health in this House again. I thank all the hon members who participated and I hope that in the time which lies ahead that the plan which I submitted here this afternoon and the way of getting round to it, will have the full support of this House, so that we can once again take health back to the community where it belongs.

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

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr Speaker, I move:

In terms of this Bill provision is being made for the establishment, regulation of and the control over national libraries with the object of promoting the rendering of information services to the population of the Republic by collecting, preserving and making accessible published and unpublished material; for the establishment, composition and powers of an advisory committee to coordinate and promote the activities of national libraries; and for matters connected therewith.

†The importance of national library legislation became clear at the National Library Conference of Library Authorities in 1962. Against the historical background, the conference accepted that within the framework of the national library services there would be two national libraries, namely the State Library in the north and the South African Library in the south. The Act has become an urgent necessity for the following reasons. Firstly, the national libraries do not fit in with the present Cultural Institutions Act. While the ordinary cultural institution usually owes its establishment to private enthusiasm and initiative, a national library is by its very nature of national importance and is therefore the responsibility of the State. Secondly, the objects and functions of a national library are laid down by this measure. Thirdly, the national functions, which are at present fragmented among a number of institutions, are being co-ordinated by this Bill; and fourthly, co-operation and co-ordination are of importance and are being improved considerably by the Bill.

*In clause 5 more freedom of movement is being conferred upon a national library so that its board may perform any act which in the opinion of the board is necessary for or incidental to the performance of its functions. As in the case of other statutory bodies, however, certain provisos are being laid down in this clause in terms of which a board may only perform certain acts, such as the letting, selling or alienation in any other way of movable or immovable property, or the lending of money, with the approval of the Minister and with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance.

In terms of clause 17 the accounts of a national library are audited annually by the Auditor-General. In addition the annual report of a national library shall, in terms of this clause, be laid upon the Table.

†Mr Speaker, a provision is being inserted in the Act to provide for the transfer to a national library of any immovable property belonging to the State in order to enable that national library to perform its functions. The transfer will take place with the concurrence of the Minister of Communications and of Public Works and the Minister of Finance. Clause 11 provides further for the transfer to a library which becomes a national library at the commencement of the Act of liabilities and obligations of the State in connection with that library, money standing to its credit and claims of the State, and rights and privileges of the State in connection with that library.

Clause 13 provides for the establishment of a National Libraries Advisory Committee with the object of co-ordinating and promoting the functions and activities of national libraries and of advising the Minister on such co-ordination as well as on any other matter which the Minister may refer to the committee.

*In clause 16 the sources of revenue of national libraries are specified. The principal source of revenue will be the money appropriated by Parliament, while money will also be found by way of donations, royalties, loans and money accruing to the national library from any other source. The clause provides that moneys received shall be used to defray expenditure in connection with the functions of a national library, while any balance remaining at the end of a financial year and not used for any other expenditure in connection with the performance of its functions shall be invested with the Public Investment Commissioner, or in such other manner as the Minister with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance may determine, on the understanding that a board of a national library may establish and operate a reserve fund and may deposit therein such amounts as the Minister may approve.

In clause 20 provision is being made for the present board to function until the boards of the national libraries have been constituted in terms of clause 6 of the Bill. Furthermore the clause makes provision for the retention of the salaries, allowances and other benefits of existing personnel.

Clause 19 confers upon the Minister the right to make regulations.

In conclusion I should like to request that the respective Houses, after the conclusion of the second reading debates, go into Committee to consider an amendment which substitutes the following clause for the existing clause 4 (2):

Second Reading resumed

Mr Speaker, I think it is appropriate that I make reference to the hon the Minister’s Second Reading speech on 29 April and give a brief synopsis of it as we commence discussing this Bill on National Libraries.

The hon the Minister at that stage made mention of the fact that the objects of this Bill are to establish and control the National Libraries of the RSA. I think it is important to stress that as far back as 1962 this was discussed by the library authorities of this country. At that stage it was proposed that there be two National Libraries, namely the State Library in the North, that is in Pretoria, and the South African Library here in Cape Town.

He then cited three particular reasons for the necessity for this legislation. First of all, the National Libraries do not fit in with the present Cultural Institutions Act. Secondly, the objects and functions of a National Library need to be set out clearly by this measure. Thirdly, the functions of the National Library are presently fragmented and can be co-ordinated in this legislation.

He also made reference to the fact that there are certain State properties which will be transferred to the National Libraries in order to enable them to carry out their particular functions. Lastly—and here I am obviously making reference to the particular clauses in the Bill—the Bill sets out the functions of the National Libraries Advisory Committee and the boards of the two libraries.

Mr Speaker, I think it is appropriate to make reference to the standing committee under the chairmanship of the hon member for Innesdal. I think the Bill, as it initially appeared, was a fairly difficult one as there were certain legal ramifications that needed to be sorted out. I think that the chairman of that standing committee handled that particularly well and I am pleased to say that we in this party will support this Bill now that these amendments have been made. I should also mention that there is a further amendment that has been proposed by the hon the Minister which we note he will be putting forward. We will be supporting him in that amendment as we believe that it does clarify the exact nature of the hon the Minister’s responsibility towards the functions of those National Libraries. The amendment makes that quite clear.

Having said that, I think it important that it be noted that we in this party have doubts—and the hon the Minister may make reference to this—regarding the actual functions of the National Libraries as juristic persons. There is this query in our minds—and I do not want to overstress it—regarding the role of the Minister as the person who appoints the advisory committee and the boards, and also regarding the responsibility of the National Libraries to make reports to Parliament, and the fact that Parliament grants the funds. Obviously, what we are concerned about is the exact role of Parliament in this; that is, the possibility of Parliament’s being able to question and to look at the functions of these National Libraries. Having said that, I want to add that we of course take careful note that it is important that the parameters of the autonomy of bodies such as this are clearly set out. Possibly the hon the Minister will make reference to that factor as it is set out in clause 5 of the Bill.

I think I need to make reference to the functions of the National Libraries. These can be clearly set out in five particular aspects. First of all, there is the establishment of collections of two kinds, namely collections of material emanating from South Africa, and secondly of material relating to South Africa. I think it is necessary for me to make brief reference to at least one of these national Libraries, namely the South African Library in Cape Town. This was established and had its base on the Grey Collection given by the Governor of the Cape Colony at the time—1861—for the setting up of this library. Of particular value in that collection are the Medieval manuscripts and the incunabula, that is printed material from before 1500. The importance of these collections cannot be overemphasized. Any researcher who has looked into the history and the involvement of persons in South Africa at whatever level, cannot overemphasize the importance of the collections in these two libraries.

If I may at this point make a suggestion to the hon the Minister and his department, then I would ask that they look into the aspect of the protection of the South African historical and literary manuscript material. One knows that in countries overseas manuscript material is protected by legislation from being exported. There is the ability of countries to protect material. What I find particularly painful is that already some of our researchers in literary history have to go to American universities to study our South African writers. Why? Because American universities have the funds and the ability to sweep up manuscript material from this country and import it. Possibly this very manuscript material should be in our national libraries and not in places like Texas and have to be studied there.

A second function of the National Libraries is obviously dissemination, ie the spreading of information and material from these National Libraries. Here I must make particular reference to the exhibitions on heraldry currently being held at the South African Library. Any hon member who during his lunch-hour is not walking down the avenue is well advised to go and have a look at the heraldry exhibition being held next door. I particularly suggest that the Van der Merwes in the House should go there. The exhibition features the arms of the Van der Merwes—not the arms one carries but the ones that one may exhibit.

The left arm and the right arm.

Yes.

On this aspect I think the hon the Minister may also make reference—I think it fits in well in this Bill—to the suggestions, found in the Schutte Commission of Inquiry into the Promotion of the Creative Arts, on lending fees for libraries. I would trust that lending fees for public libraries are not going to be introduced. My own particular feeling is that lending fees should not be introduced at public libraries and particularly not at National Libraries for reference material.

A third function is that of the creation of bibliographic material. For example, the South African Library has just published a bibliography of the Orange Free State. All published material on the Orange Free State from its creation up to the 20th century is available in that bibliography and it is obviously of great value to researchers.

Fourthly preservation and restoration and fifthly national and international liaison with universities and libraries throughout the world are touched upon. One must make it quite clear that we are not only talking about books in this regard. We are talking about manuscript material and all the types of material cited in the definitions in this Bill including microfilm, microfiche, audio material, pictorial material, etc. All of this is protected under the National Libraries Bill.

I think it is important under the Bill on National Libraries to make mention of the work of the librarians of those institutions, not only the directors but also those persons who actually work in the libraries doing extremely valuable work there. Many of them are totally hidden away from the eyes of the public. I think one must make it absolutely clear that the exactness of the work of these librarians is invaluable to the whole of this country because the basis of our civilization is information. We have to be able to control that information, we have to be able to have access to that information and we have to make sure that we can obtain it easily.

Lastly I cannot fail to make mention of the work of the voluntary organizations that aid both the State Library and the South African Library. Particularly the Friends of the South African Library and the Friends of the State Library are organizations which both generate funds, publish material and make people well aware of the functions of these libraries.

I believe we in South Africa have a duty to recognize that the establishment of the two National Libraries will be to the greater benefit of the cultural heritage of all South Africans and therefore we in the PFP will support this Bill.

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon member for Pinetown for supporting this measure on behalf of his party. Indeed, I believe it is appropriate that we should say to the hon the Minister on this occasion that it was indeed a privilege to all of us who served on the relevant standing committee to be able to co-operate with him in order eventually to come up with this National Libraries Bill.

I believe that everyone who thought and worked together on that committee realized afresh what tremendous cultural wealth we have in South Africa in these two libraries, the South African Library in Cape Town and the State Library in Pretoria. Accordingly we wish to take this opportunity to thank Dr Roux Venter and all the officials of the department who have been so helpful in the drafting of this legislation. We also thank General Du Toit, Mr Peet Westra and Dr Hans Aschenborn of the relevant libraries.

On this occasion we should also like to say to everyone in the employ of the two libraries in question that it is with great appreciation that we in this House take cognizance of the enormous task they perform and that we should like to wish them everything of the best for the future.

We live at a time when the word explosion is often used. For example, one talks about a population explosion, an urban explosion, a technological explosion and so on. Ultimately the explosion which probably causes the greatest confusion among the greatest number of people is the tremendous explosion of information that we are faced with at present.

When we consider these two libraries—the South African Library across the way from Parliament and the State Library in Pretoria—it is certainly true that in comparison with all the other libraries we have in South Africa, eg university libraries and other large libraries such as that in Johannesburg, these two libraries certainly do not constitute the final and most important source of information in South Africa. Moreover, in view of the tremendous technological revolution in the distribution and availability of information we shall undoubtedly be justified in asking whether it will be worthwhile to keep these two libraries in future, particularly if we bear in mind what it will cost in money and labour.

However, particularly since there is specific legislation compelling every author in the country to send a free copy of every work he publishes to each of these libraries, no one contends that those libraries are merely vast, monumental sources of information. If it had been solely a matter of the storage of information then I believe it would have been valid to ask whether this could be seen as a primary objective for the future.

Therefore, what we should really like to say on this occasion—and we want to thank the hon the Minister and the Cabinet for this—is that by way of this legislation we are granting far more stability and prominence than before to an irreplaceable cultural treasure which we ought to preserve for posterity at all times.

It is interesting to note what the object was in establishing the South African Library as clearly formulated by its founder, Lord Charles Somerset, in 1818. I wish to place his words on record here:

I truly believe that Lord Charles Somerset would have been astonished today to see what he described in 1818 as “this remote comer of the globe”. He would have been even more astonished if he could have known that all hon members in this House are today sharing the gratification of further perpetuating, by statute, these two libraries as well as the irreplaceable cultural history treasures accommodated therein—while at the ame time fully recognizing their value.

I shall not ask the question today how many hon members of this House have paid a visit to the South African Library which is just across the road from the Parliamentary building. However, I believe it would be appropriate for me to tell an anecdote about an incident which happened a long time ago in the Parliamentary library one Wednesday evening. I was sitting working there when former Minister Pen Kotzé came in with a deputation of women from his constituency. The women were quite taken aback—in fact they were impressed—by the spectable of the wealth of books in the Parliamentary library. While they were standing there taking in the enormous collection of books around them, one of them said: “Yes, and to think that there are men sitting in this Parliament who have been there for ten years and who have not even read through these books yet.”

That, of course, is true. We have not yet read through those books. The joy of the library—indeed, of any collection of books—is of course also to be found in contemplating them. We have just been discussing legislation relating to the testament of Cecil John Rhodes in this House. If hon members would like to see a lock of Rhodes’ hair, they may do so here at the South African Library. There is also a great deal else that is of interest there. All in all we would be justified in describing those two libraries as sources of the ongoing preservation of information on a vast scale and of a priceless treasure of cultural history.

Another aspect which may also interest hon members is the very wide-ranging research into and indexing of all South African newspapers—from the very first printed newspaper in the country up to date—which is being undertaken in the research division of the South African Library. I think it is very important that, as an hon member asked on one occasion, we bring the Parliamentary library closer to the SA Library, on a mutual basis, as far as the gathering and processing of information is concerned.

With these few words I want to emphasize once again that information is of enormous importance to the world. A little knowledge is like a little water in the desert—one may not really use it. I hope that the SA Library and the State Library in Pretoria will not mean only a little information for hon members and the public, but will be a vast source of information for everyone who wants to share in the wealth of written cultural history. It is wonderful to view, in the SA Library, a Bible that was written out hundreds of years ago, letter for letter, word for word and text for text, in the most beautiful hand. I do not believe that there will be another generation capable of doing that. I pay tribute to the staff of the SA Library in Cape Town and the State Library in Pretoria and wish them everything of the best on the road ahead. We hope that we as legislators have made a very modest contribution in making their work simpler for them and according them some recognition for what we regard as important work in the interests of South Africa.

Mr Chairman, before making a few remarks about the Bill, which we support as a whole, I want to point out to the hon the Minister that under the old dispensation we would have agreed to this measure without commenting on it at much length, but it is now a general measure which forms part of the racially mixed coalition government of this Government, and that the Minister to whom reference is made in the measure may therefore be a Coloured or an Indian in future and quite probably, in terms of the dispensation that is still going to come, even a Black person. We shall never let a moment pass without reminding the hon the Minister of that.

In clause 3 reference was originally made to all the population groups but this was deleted by the mixed standing committee and replaced by “the population”. I objected to that in the standing committee because I saw it as yet another aspect of the intention of the standing committee and the Government to force all the different population groups of South Africa into one specific homogeneous ethnic group. I do not agree with that.

In the nature of the matter this House, and the bodies that will later be appointed, will be mixed, and we do not agree with that either.

The Bill once again draws our attention to libraries, and in this instance to national libraries. The officials of the department and all the other people who appeared before the commitee made a good contribution and did their best to draft the Bill as clearly and neatly as possible and I should like to express my appreciation for that.

One is also grateful and appreciative of the people who, over the centuries, have systematized the information collected by man and accummulated it at specific places so that today we can go to libraries to carry out research on man and even on what happened thousands of years ago. One really wishes there were fewer vandals thousands of years ago, and more people who could have left behind information about the way of life and pattern of life of man so that we could have had a better idea today of the man’s history.

I have a particularly great appreciation for the staff of libraries. The specific atmosphere of any library, and that of the national libraries, brings home to one, as soon as one enters one that what goes on there is something different to the normal. I have tremendous appreciation for students who undergo training to work there and for the staff who have been working in the libraries for a long time. I think that in that exceptionally quiet, calm atmosphere they have added exceptional lustre to the libraries of South Africa.

Very often, when a government or even other bodies construct a building, there are those who say that the money could have been used for other purposes. Personally I think that the special character of the civilization that comes to the fore in a people or a generation can be seen in its buildings. I believe that apart from Government buildings, the building structures and complexes in which the libraries are established must be of a special nature. In future, when our finances are in better shape and it becomes essential to do so, one should perhaps take another look at the buildings in which these libraries are accommodated. I think that this is something for which money should be set aside.

Moreover, the architects who design such buildings must be specifically instructed that it is not only the inside of the buildings that must adapt to the growth of science and the requirements of the libraries as such, but that even the outside of such structures should be such as to be timeless, in a certain sense, for future generations. By “timeless” I do not mean that it should not be meaningful, but that the outside structure of the building, too, should have a specific meaning for future generations. It must reflect the history of what man has collected over the centuries. Quite probably a time will come in the future when these two libraries will have to be accommodated in other places or when the existing buildings will have to be extended, but when that is done what I have just said must be taken into account.

The functions of these national libraries are very wide-ranging. They are perhaps expressed in only seven or eight lines but the work that entails will be tremendous. I want to emphasize one of them by quoting clause 4(1)(f):

The art of restoration has made considerable progress in our century. One often finds that very valuable things are lying around, perhaps in the attic of a farmhouse somewhere, or in a Government building. We as the public must be more geared towards checking whether old books or other articles lying around are not perhaps far too important simply to be thrown in a box of rummage to be eventually thrown away or burnt. One should take a closer look at these things, and perhaps the restoration service provided by these libraries could help one in that regard.

I wish to conclude by saying to the hon the Minister that we support the Bill. We trust that the foundations we are laying by means of this Bill will benefit us in the future. We trust that those who are concerned with this will have great success as regards the ideals they set themselves.

Mr Chairman, the subject dealt with by this Bill is a very fine one. It is also a matter of such obvious merit that it is probably unnecessary to say a great deal about it. Moreover I do not feel in the least inclined to react to a few unfortunate false notes struck by the hon member for Rissik.

This is an important milestone in the history of the South African Library and the State Library in Pretoria. One could in fact see this legislation as granting these institutions their charter from the State, because in future they will function directly, and in their own right, in terms of Parliamentary statute, and State funds will be appropriated to them directly in the Budget. Moreover, their accounts will be subject to Parliamentary audit.

It would be interesting to go into the history of the institution here in Cape Town in particular, but in view of the unanimity enjoyed by the measure that is probably unnecessary. I just want to say that it is well-known that the foundation for the library in the Cape is in fact the so-called Dessinian collection. It is an interesting history, but as I said I do not believe it is necessary to elaborate on that further today.

The hon member for Innesdal referred to the proclamation of Lord Charles Somerset. Perhaps I could just add an interesting fact in connection with this proclamation, viz that primarily it had nothing to do with libraries. It concerned the regulation of the Cape wine trade. In terms of the proclamation a tax was imposed on every barrel of wine marketed in the Cape. I might just mention in passing that this was the very first tax on wine in this country. What made the tax unique was the fact that the proclamation specifically provided that the proceeds would not be deposited in the general tax account. The tax collector had to open a special account. From that, having first paid his own salary and covered related expenditure, he had to deposit the remaining part in a Government bank. The hon member for Innesdal has already referred to the fact that it was mentioned that this was to go towards the education of the youth. I think I have said enough about that history.

I just want to conclude by making an appeal to the hon the Minister in connection of the funding of these institutions. I think it is important that apart from the monies to be appropriated for the institutions in the Budget every year they should perhaps also be helped to build up their own funds. Provision has been made in clause 16 for a variety of sources of revenue. Perhaps I could also just point out for interest’s sake that one of those sources of revenue will be the remnant of the Dessinian collection. Together with the library donated to the church by Von Dessin, which later formed the basis of this library’s collection, he also donated an amount of 1 000 rixdollars. Today this would have a value of approximately R400. He donated this to make it possible to maintain and extend that library. Eventually that donation found its way to the DR Church of Cape Town and up to this day this has been a fund of which the interest is paid to this library every year. At the moment it amounts to approximately R7 to R7,50 per annum. I mention this merely in passing.

My plea to the hon the Minister is that we must consider giving these institutions, particularly the one in Cape Town, their own independent sources of revenue. We must also help them to build up funds. I shall mention why. If one compares this library with similar institutions abroad, particularly our countries of origin in Europe and even in America, one finds that similar institutions are capable of building up enormous collections. We do not compare very well with them. The secret is that in those countries these institutions have sources of their own whereby to supplement their collections and select what they want to buy for their collections. It would be as well if we could make a start with that here too.

What I have in mind—this is not the first time that this has been mentioned; it has been advocated in this House before by the hon member for Paarl—is that provision be made for tax-free donations to institutions such as these. Such institutions should be declared educational institutions so that donations to them may qualify for deductions for income tax purposes.

I think it is most important that we help the institutions in this way to supplement their collections. I appreciate that it is not the hon the Minister who decides on this but if he could exchange a few words with his colleague, the hon the Minister of Finance, on some occasion it would be a good thing. His weight and his influence are certainly far greater than ours.

With these few words I, too, should like to support the Bill.

Mr Chairman, it has become evident that if everybody was given free rein here this afternoon, I am sure that most hon members would like to speak on this fascinating topic and they could probably wax eloquent, each in his own way.

In his introductory speech the hon the Minister pointed out that the recommendations contained in the measure before us emanated from a National Library Conference of Library Authorities as far back as 1962. The hon the Minister made the significant point of saying that a National Library is by its very nature of national importance and is therefore the responsibility of the State. I am very pleased that we have arrived at this point where we do have the legislation before us which was obviously discussed as far back as 23 years ago.

We have heard some very interesting speeches here this afternoon but what we believe is important is that the status of both the State Library in Pretoria and the South African Library here in Cape Town is now being established once and for all. This is of tremendous importance because these libraries are now officially what they should be; they are now National Libraries that will be controlled by a body that will be appointed by the hon the Minister arid that will consist of, as I understand it, at least seven persons. There will also be an advisory committee.

There is another interesting aspect of this Bill. In the original Bill there was a definition of the functions of National Libraries. We had representations made under the signature of Dr Roux Venter whom I commend, incidentally, for the tremendous amount of work he has put into this Bill, as regards the changing of that particular clause. The hon member for Pinetown has dealt with it very extensively and I think he has more than handsomely, if I may say, dealt with the importance of the changes in that particular clause. He covered the field exceptionally well and I think he made a tremendously important point in regard to manuscripts. He mentioned that manuscripts from countries such as ours do get “swept up”, as he put it, by the big libraries of the world. These manuscripts are then lost to their countries of origin. This is a matter which we should look into.

Incidentally, I am interested to hear about the exhibition next door as far as the heraldic arms of the Van der Merwes are concerned. That must really be something. When one talks of heraldic arms one thinks of these arms pointing heavenwards. When one thinks of Van der Merwes, one thinks of left arms such as Tiaan’s, right arms like Daan’s and then arms that go straight down the middle like Stoffel’s. [Interjections.] This must be quite an interesting exhibition. I can see Stoffel is not listening.

I remember back in 1978—if I may digress for a moment—when the Van der Merwes in this House were all still going in one direction, I was with a certain Van der Merwe in Germany. One evening he told me at great length about the heraldic arms of the Van der Merwes. He told me their history almost from the day when they first set foot in South Africa. I will always be indebted to that hon gentleman for that and I think he will remember the conversation we had. However, as I say, in those days Van der Merwes only went in one, direction. Today Van der Merwes go in all directions.

Sir, to the Van der Merwes and to the National Libraries we in this party say: Go with our best wishes. We trust that what we have done here today in passing this measure will augur well for the future—I am sure that it is going to. I hope that in what we are doing here today we are going to lay the foundation for establishing something that one day could possibly be compared to the other great libraries of the world, and what comes to mind is that wonderful institution, the Library of Congress in Washington in the USA. I think that possibly we have done something that will lay just that very foundation. We trust that that is indeed the case.

Mr Chairman, I should like to thank all hon members for their support for this legislation, as well as for the very interesting contributions they made.

†The hon member for Umhlanga went page by page through the diverse history of the Van der Merwes whom we have in this House. [Interjections.] I will deal with some of the points he raised in my reply to the hon member for Pinetown.

*I should like to convey my thanks to the hon member for Innesdal, as chairman of this standing committee and also for the guidance he furnished on the standing committee. I should like to associate myself with the praise which he conveyed during the course of his speech to the members of the standing committee, the department and its officials, and to the administrations of our two National Libraries. We want to thank him very much for a very interesting speech.

He referred to the great value of the collection and preservation of our cultural-historical heritage, and of these two institutions as sources of knowledge. It is so true that we are living in times in which the emphasis falls too heavily perhaps on the material, and in which the equilibrium between material progress and the spiritual heritage of our country and community has been disrupted. That is why it is a refreshing breeze which blows through this House when we are occasionally able to agree on matters affecting the deepest spiritual interests of the various communities in South Africa. We therefore say thank you very much to the hon member for Innesdal; I should like to associate myself with his speech.

†I want to thank the hon member for Pinetown for what I want to describe as a good summary of my introductory speech. If I were a teacher, I would give him a good mark for that summary. He referred to the autonomy of these institutions and expressed concern about parliamentary control which he regarded as being perhaps inadequate. I find that somewhat strange because when one compares the control there was over these two institutions before with the control there is now, I think the hon member will agree with me that parliamentary control and involvement have been considerably strengthened by this Bill. However, instead of welcoming this, he takes the road which the PFP unfortunately takes too often by saying: We ask for more. Clause 17(4)(b) stipulates clearly that reports must be submitted to Parliament and that control by the Minister responsible will really ensure the kind of control the hon member requested. The hon member for Sundays River also referred to the fact that the books would be audited by the Auditor-General. Therefore, on that point I find myself in disagreement with the hon member for Pinetown.

He also referred to the collection of manuscript material and was strongly supported by the hon member for Umhlanga. I can give him the assurance that I have taken note of his suggestions and shall see to it that his suggestions and the suggestions of the hon member for Umhlanga receive thorough consideration in this regard.

With regard to the question of lending fees, the hon member was a bit naughty. That is part of the Schutte Report, as he quite rightly pointed out, and I should prefer to deal with that subject when we discuss the Schutte Report at a later stage.

*The hon member for Rissik made a mixed speech. He mixed political nonsense with well-deserved thanks to various persons and bodies. What political statements did he then proceed to make in regard to this legislation? Basically he had problems because it was a general Act, part of a racially mixed new dispensation. Suddenly the Government, with this legislation as well, wishes to force everyone into a single homogeneous community. That is why the CP has no future. What the hon member said was so naive, childish and far removed from reality that his credibility is rapidly dwindling—in this connection I almost quoted a few lines of poetry on this subject. Why does he not tell Parliament what they tell the unsuspecting members of the public outside they are going to do with the new Constitution? Why does he not—I shall not be long, Sir, you allowed him a little leeway and surely I will be allowed to reply to this one point only—admit that they maintain that they are going to keep this racially mixed Parliament intact?

Nonsense!

Oh yes! That is what the hon member’s leader said here in this House! [Interjections.] When I asked him, he said affirmatively that they would not change this Constitution outside the ambit of the Constitution Act. They will not abolish any of these mixed institutions which have been entrenched unless they have a majority in each of the three Houses. [Interjections.] He said so again last night on television. Why does he not also say that they are telling the unsuspecting members of the public that what they will do is in fact to declare everything except, I think Foreign Affairs, to be White own affairs? Yes, regardless of the provisions of the Constitution Act, they intend to declare everything to be White own affairs, without fair application of discretion and the directive of the Constitution. People who want to deal in this way with an Act which has instituted the highest authority in this country, and which has the authorization of two-thirds of the White voters are people we cannot trust—not even with the National Libraries. With that I come back to the subject. [Interjections.]

The hon member advocated a specific approach to the planning of buildings, and referred to future generations. I want to thank him for one of his most future-orientated speeches in years. Usually he occupies himself with attempts to cause us to move further into the past. Today, however, he directed our gaze to the future and said we should plan our buildings in such a way that they would also be acceptable to future generations. [Interjections.] I should like to associate myself with this innovative, future-orientated approach of the hon member. I agree with him that the planning of the buildings should be done in such a way that they are not associated with one era only and so that our buildings may also in themselves be an expression of the specific character of our country and its people. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Sundays River clearly spoke with great knowledge of a subject we know is of deep concern to him and in respect of which he makes a special contribution outside this House as well. He advocated the strengthening of own funds, and I should like to support the principle, that in regard to the question of tax-free donations, I do wish to utter a word of warning. There are many commendable causes, but if the principle is accepted of making donations to commendable causes tax-free, the queue of people with equally commendable causes will soon become so long that the Minister of Finance will have to dig in his heels, slam the doors shut again and disallow it to continue.

I think we should rather look for other sources of revenue for important institutions such as these, instead of applying tax concessions. Legacies by individuals and institutions in the private sector as well as donations can in my opinion make an exceptional contribution, but in reply to all hon members who expressed concern in this connection, I want to point out that provision is made in the department’s budget not only for direct funding and direct financial involvement in these two institutions, but also for the purchase of cultural treasures when the danger exists that these may leave our country, if the Minister of National Education concerned were to decide that such purchases were in the national interest. I want to make an appeal to all who attach value to this cultural-historical heritage of South Africa, which includes manuscripts, keep their eyes open and warn the department in time if there is a danger that one of these important treasures may be taken out of the country, so that we can make this appropriation and so that those treasures will remain part of our country and its heritage. We are seeking information in this connection, and we should also like to make a contribution in this way to the strengthening of the ability of these two institutions to serve their purpose fully.

In conclusion I want to wish these two institutions everything of the best with the new dispensation that is beginning for them. May they derive inspiration from the acceptance of this legislation and may it be an incentive to them to carry out this important task with new dedication in the interests of everyone in this county.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Mr Chairman, I move:

Agreed to.

Committee Stage

Clause 3 agreed to (Conservative Party dissenting).

Clause 4:

Mr Chairman, I move the amendment printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:

1. (1) On page 4, from line 22, to omit subsection (2) and to substitute:
2. (2) The Minister may by notice in the Gazette determine what functions shall be performed by each National Library.

The new subsection (2) being inserted in terms of the amendment is already incorporated in clause 2 as printed in the Bill in the sense that provision will still be made for the Minister to determine which functions are performed by each national library, in other words for him to be involved in the allocation of functions.

The rest of the clause which is to be deleted sought to vest in the Minister the power also to extend or change the functions of a national library by notice in the Gazette. In my opinion this would have infringed upon the rest of the Bill in the sense that it would give the Minister the power to amend a facet regulated by the Bill itself purely by way of proclamation. I think it would be more correct if in such a situation the Minister came back to Parliament if he wished to alter the charter that this parliament has given these institutions. It is for that reason that I am moving the amendment.

Mr Chairman, we wholeheartedly support the amendment moved by the hon the Minister. Clause 2 was inserted in the Bill due to a slight difference of an opinion as to the degree in which the details of the functions of national library should be defined in the Bill. The purpose of subsection 2 is to be a kind of general clause to provide for functions which may not, strictly speaking, fall within the defined functions in the subdivisions of subsection (1) itself. As the hon the Minister correctly indicated, subsection (2) renders the subsections of subsection (1) somewhat meaningless.

We are satisfied that the amendment rectifies the matter entirely and we are also satisfied that the functions as defined in subsection (1) are in any event widely enough stated to include without difficulty any imaginable function of a national library. Therefore it will not result in any problems in practice and we believe that this amendment will lead to more orderly and meaningful legislation. We therefore support the amendment.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to say that we support the hon the Minister’s motion.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill, as amended, reported.

Bill read a third time.

Fair copy of Bill certified and transmitted to the State President for his assent.

Mr Speaker, I move:

The Bill now under discussion has passed through the hands of the Standing Committee on Mineral and Energy Affairs. Once again the committee showed proof of dedication to its task. Not only did the committee consult with various interested parties to enhance democratic principles but it also did not hesitate to propose amendments—amendments which, although they appear to be insignificant, give clarity to the practical application of powers. I will, therefore, in the appropriate place, accept them.

As this Bill is the final measure pertaining to mineral and energy affairs, I wish to express my appreciation and thanks to the committee for their invaluable and constructive work.

Considerable time has already been spent in this House on the subject of crude oil procurement, secrecy and the prohibition of the publication of certain information regarding petroleum products. Secrecy can give rise to suspicion, and it is not regarded to be in the interests of the country to have to cope with suspicion whilst we also have to cope with international boycott actions in the procurement of petroleum products. Secrecy should therefore be restricted to the most essential matters only.

In a thorough evaluation of the causes of suspicion and the invitation of allegations of dark “cloak and dagger” transactions, two connected elements were revealed, firstly, the apparent lack of formal financial control measures on crude oil transactions; and, secondly, the secret atmosphere in which such transactions of necessity take place. The first problem has already been adequately resolved with the State Oil Fund Amendment Bill, 1985, and it is necessary suitably to amend or adapt the rigid and fixed provisions in respect of secrecy contained in the Petroleum Products Act, 1977.

*Therefore this amending Bill seeks to repeal the rigid prohibitions in the principal Act, which have to be amended by an act of Parliament whenever it is necessary to adapt to altered circumstances, but to make provision at the same time for the making of regulations to ensure absolutely essential secrecy as and when required. It is nevertheless being provided that the Minister may grant written exemption from such prohibitions. This power of exemption in the principal Act is extremely limited and problems in connection with the interpretation thereof necessitate the revision of the sections concerned.

Furthermore the amending Bill makes provision for the enforcement of measures by means of appropriate penalties and jurisdictional measures. Other consequential amendments and technical corrections are also being effected.

Two other important amendments are also being incorporated into this amending Bill. Although the Minister is already empowered to maintain a price for petroleum products it is necessary, when this is essential in the national interests, to be able to counteract avoidable cost-increasing practices in connections with fuel distribution. The price of fuel is one of the principal cost inputs and items of expenditure in our economic system and therefore its importance must be recognized. Business practices and trade agreements which will have a detrimental effect on the ultimate price of the product are not in the public interest. Similarly it is important that certain minimum standards should be evolved and maintained for the services rendered throughout the country. These services which are linked to the provision of fuel and if certain services are neglected, competition is distorted and this militates against the principle of consumer interest, which of course comprises a high priority objective in regard to control over fuel prices.

Second Reading resumed

Mr Chairman, you will forgive me if I just mention in passing that it was quite nice and a bit nostalgic to have a Committee Stage again.

Mr Chairman, it is interesting to note, when one looks at the debates that have been taking place on Mineral and Energy Affairs, that there in fact seems to be more debate about economic systems than about actual mineral and energy matters. The hon the Minister will recall that when we debated the Coal Resources Bill this was what we were actually debating. I have thus come to the conclusion that the hon the Minister and myself are both frustrated economists as he seems to enjoy every opportunity to debate economic systems.

In terms of clause 2 which is one of the key clauses in the bill, the Minister may—

In terms of this clause the Minister has the power to stop petrol being sold at a discount. We know what has caused the problem. There is a discount chain called Pick ‘n Pay which has been selling petrol at a discount. I think the normal profit margin on petrol—perhaps my hon colleague on my right can help me—is 5,2 cents per litre, and I understand that this particular organization has been offering a discount of 4 cents. I live fairly close to this outlet but I was not aware of that discount otherwise I would have worked out whether it was in fact more profitable and cheaper to go and buy my petrol there. The people concerned, the industry itself has objected to this, and I can understand why. I am sure they would prefer to operate on a fixed margin which is laid down by the Minister because that does away with the need to compete on the question of price. It also does away with the need to improve one’s quality of service and one’s efficiency. I can understand why businesses like a regulated industry because it can make life very, very comfortable indeed.

However, one cannot say this. I gain the impression that when many businessmen talk about free enterprise and free markets, what they are really saying is that it is a good idea as long as it does not affect them. However, one cannot actually say: I want things regulated because I do not like competition. So what does one say? One says: I want the industry regulated—I am not referring to this industry only—because it is in the national interest. This is what I would like to debate because there is a tendency for people to see their own particular interests as the national interests.

I ask myself this question because the hon the Minister’s colleague who sits next to him is the Minister of Finance who stated publicly in this House that inflation was one of the major problems that we faced in South Africa. He said, in fact, that it should be singled out as Public Enemy No 1, and yet here we have powers that can actually be used to prevent those who want to reduce prices thereby helping to combat inflation from doing so. I ask myself in whose interests this is. It certainly is not in the consumer’s interest. If there has been an increase in the price of petrol of 40%—and we understand why—then I think the consumer should be given the opportunity, if he wants to drive there and have self-service, to be able to buy petrol at a discount.

There have been many complaints about the possibility of self-service in the petrol industry. It has happened overseas. There are mixed feelings about how successful it is going to be. It is a trend which is universal in the retail sector. If one goes to supermarkets—and I do not want to use Parliament to give free advertising to various supermarkets—one will find that it is unusual to be served by someone today. The trend is that one serves oneself and goes to the check-out point. The reason is very simple: It helps to contain costs and therefore helps to reduce prices. The argument is that this is going to have a very negative impact on the small distributor of petrol. I think we should argue this point out. Small businesses will always be affected by big businesses. If they try to compete head-on with big businesses they are not going to be successful. Why are small businesses successful? I would suggest that they are successful for two reasons: Firstly, they exploit a particular niche in a market more effectively than their competitors. Secondly, they do better because they give highly qualified service; they are more effective and more efficient. That is the reason for the existence of small businesses and in such a situation small businesses will prosper.

I find it interesting that when one looks at the particular sector to which we are now referring—let me say immediately I dissociate the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central from any criticism I might have—we find that it is a sector which has tended to get a reputation for giving poor service. One has only to look at the complaints section in a newspaper to see that there are many garages that do not give the service they should.

I agree with you.

Thank you very much. [Interjections.]

†We have reached the stage where often when one takes one’s car in to be repaired one hopes that it will come back with fewer problems than it had before. I have personal experience of this. [Interjections.]

You did not come to me.

No, I did not.

You drive the wrong car.

I am driving the wrong car. I would love to mention the name of the car, it would actually make me feel quite good, but I will not. It is a fairly well-known make.

A Rolls Royce!

It has been said that if one does not introduce these measures to regulate prices one will destroy jobs. It has been said that up to 45 000 jobs could be in jeopardy. I would like to know how this figure was actually arrived at because if one big chain that sells at a discount can jeopardize 45 000 jobs I would be most surprised.

What actually threatens jobs is poor service and inefficient management. One cannot regulate for efficiency or good management; it is impossible. If regulations were the answer then North Korea would be booming and South korea would be stagnant. If regulations were so good then the Soviet Union would be economically dynamic and the USA would be economically decaying. A good economy has a vibrancy about it and is in a constant state of flux.

It is very difficult to protect jobs. It is interesting to look at what is happening in the USA and in Europe. In the USA they have created something like 14 million jobs in the past 10 years. In Europe they have destroyed approximately 2 million jobs. Why? The reason is that the economy of the USA had a vibrancy about it that allowed new industries to be developed. There was a massive process of deregulation in that economy which created new job and business opportunities. I think we have a situation here that is a little like the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution was going to destroy jobs but eventually it created jobs. I want to say to the hon the Minister that I believe it is in the long-term national interests of South Africa that we should have more competition and less regulation in this country, not vice versa.

I would like to come to the second aspect of this Bill with which we have problems. I refer to clause 4 and 5.

I am sure the hon the Minister will recall that in 1979 the PFP supported the original Petroleum Products Bill. I want to go back to that particular time because people might wonder why we are not supporting it now when we supported it in 1979. I would like to motivate why we are not supporting it.

That Bill was introduced at a time when South Africa found itself not in a difficult position but in a critical one. I think there was at that stage a very real threat that South Africa might not be able to continue to exist as a result of a lack of oil because in 1978—I think it was in that year—the government of the Shah of Iran had fallen and South Africa had therefore lost its major supplier of petroleum products. It is interesting to note what the Minister of Economic Affairs at that time said. He actually referred to the problems that were apparent in the oil industry and the difficulties South Africa was having in obtaining oil. He went on to say (Hansard: Assembly, Vol 81, col 6466):

It was an amendment which the PFP acquiesced to with reluctance. The PFP speaker at the time said (Hansard: Assembly, Vol 81, col 6468):

He went on to warn the Minister of the need for (Hansard: Assembly, Vol 81, col 6470)—

I have quoted what happened in 1979 in some detail because I believe the situation has changed fairly dramatically since then. I can see the hon the Minister is already shaking his head, but no doubt we can debate the issue. I think the hon the Minister’s argument is going to be that for South Africa it is as difficult now to obtain oil as it was in 1979.

As critical.

Fine, it is as critical as it was, not as difficult as it was. Let us then debate this issue. I find this a little surprising because, when one looks at the world situation, it has actually improved substantially. Let us look at the figures. I am told that at the moment the consumption of oil is something like 44 million barrels per day and that the actual production is somewhere in excess of 45 million barrels per day despite the fact that two of the major producers, namely Iraq and Iran, are today producing between them only something like 3,2 million barrels per day compared with about 10 million barrels per day before the war began in 1980. Therefore, if the war between Iraq and Iran were to end, there would be a dramatic increase in the supply of oil. Today one has a world situation where it seems that at the present stage there is an excess of supply over demand. This is reflected in the price of crude oil. North Sea Brent crude, for example, is selling at $27 a barrel. Light Arabian crude is also selling at $27 a barrel, and the Soviet Union, which has in fact become an aggressive seller, normally sells oil at $28 a barrel. I think the present price of oil is indicative of a work situation that is easing. One would anticipate that South Africa would be benefiting from that. One would also anticipate that it is easier now to get tankers than it was five or six years ago because many tankers have been sent to scrapyards. There is no demand for their services.

Since that time too we have of course had the improvement in the output of Sasol and we have had an opportunity to stockpile fairly large quantities of oil. I therefore tend to think that we are less vulnerable now than we were in 1979. Oil will always be of critical importance to South Africa—that I accept—but I think we are talking now about how difficult it is to obtain. Looking at the international situation, I would assume that the position should have improved for South Africa.

The second factor that has changed is that we actually see how the Government handles these powers. I am referring here particularly to the Salem issue. [Interjections.] I think that is in fact very critical to this. What did we have here? We had a situation where some crooks took us for a ride. Let us be very blunt about that—some crooks took us for a ride. I do not blame the Government for having been taken in because this is a cut-throat industry and other people have been taken for a ride as well. However, what I do blame them for, is that when my colleague the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central raised the matter, there was in fact an attempt at that stage—not by this Minister but by his predecessor—actually to stop the debate in Parliament and prevent the Press from reporting on it. I am not going to go further into that because my colleague the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central will be talking later on in the debate and he will cover that matter. [Interjections.] I can see from the reaction that there is in fact tremendous interest in listening to him. [Interjections.] I am sure that he appreciates that.

What is he going to squeeze out of them this time?

An extra barrel or two! [Interjections.] Looking at that sort of situation, the only conclusion I can come to, is that that whole affair is not so much an embarrassment to the country as an embarrassement to the Government. They used the provisions of the existing Act in an attempt to keep the issue quiet.

When one looks at the Bill before us now, one notes that the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs has wide and considerable powers. What we have is a situation where the certitude of the law is in fact to be replaced by ministerial regulation. Whatever one may think of this particular Minister—I may be at fault but I like him particularly because I think he has actually done quite a good job in his portfolio; there has been an improvement in a number of matters; I hope my opinion does not harm his reputation with his colleagues—I think it is a dangerous principle to put such power in the hands of one individual no matter who that individual is.

This Bill does not set out the grounds and criteria on which the Minister must exercise his powers. It may be that under this Minister we may actually have an easing in reporting, I do not know. He may give us some indication. There may in fact be a relaxation in the regulation of or restrictions on reporting on matters relating to oil. Indications have already been given in regard to matters like petrol prices and the composition of the price that there has been an easing. That depends on this particular Minister. What happens when he is replaced by another Minister who may have a completely different viewpoint and who in fact will have the powers in terms of this Bill to exercise his discretion to an undue extent?

Do you want to retain the present Act?

I want the hon the Minister to take the terms of the regulations he is thinking of introducing and put them into the law. I want the certitude of law. [Interjections.]

We in the PFP believe that rather than extending the powers of the Minister we should be limiting them. One must also acknowledge that this particular Bill is not going to do much to protect our supplies because the people one has to protect our supplies from are not the South African Press but the overseas Press. Those people seem to have an awful lot of information. There are in fact published lists of companies and tankers that supply South Africa with oil. Overseas people know what is happening. If they wanted to take action, they could. The fact that they do not do so shows that people, particularly in a period of oil surpluses, are more concerned about finding buyers for their products than about who those buyers are.

We believe there is a need for South Africans to know more, not less, about what is going on because secrecy can become counter-productive, and I think that is one of the lessons Salem taught us. I believe the media play a vital role in an effective democracy in protecting the public’s interests by searching for and exposing information.

The PFP will always act in what it sees to be the interests of South Africa. We believe, however, that it is in the long-term public interest that we oppose this Bill. We believe in government by law rather than government by ministerial decree, no matter how benevolent that Minister may be.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Edenvale spent some time explaining why his party had departed from its previous standpoints in some respects. I shall comment again later on some of the arguments advanced here by the hon member, but to begin with I just want to thank the hon the Minister on behalf of the standing committee for the friendly reference he made to the standing committee in his second reading speech. I also just want to mention in passing that I noticed that in the latest Rapport a correspondent discussed the standing committee system and the secrecy which, according to him, it entailed. In my opinion, today’s debate is a very good indication that this is not the case and that when there are differences of opinion they may be aired here in public. Not giving publicity to discussion in the standing committee entails definite advantages. However I leave the matter at that.

To begin with I want to refer to the hon member for Edenvale who, at the start of his speech, discussed retail price control by the Minister. The hon member can advance sound arguments about free competition and about all manner of admirable standpoints in this regard. Of course, we also endorse the principle of free competition but in certain trade practices one also has to take fully into account the circumstances in that particular trade. In the first place, this trade employs fully 5 000 workers. Moreover the motor industries federation in Europe carried out an investigation into this matter and they found that disruption occurred when free competition principles were applied to the retail price of petrol in particular. The hon member said that in this industry the small businessman simply had to pull up his socks and ensure that he rendered quality service in order to remain competitive. However, it is not as simple as that. Some of these macroenterprises sell this commodity as a sideline and do not base their finances on it. In other words, they use it merely as bait and are therefore able to give a tremendous rebate on the product. I agree that this may be to the benefit of the consumer but we must not overlook the broad interests of the public. I believe that the hon member has in fact done so.