as Chairman, brought up the Report of the Select Committee on Soldiers’ Pay and Allowances.

Report, proceedings and evidence to be printed and to be considered on 5th April.

When the House adjourned yesterday, I was pointing out to the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs the impossible state of postal and telephone facilities which are installed on railway stations. The Railways agreed to a contract to do the work, but they appoint no additional staff. When I drew the attention of the Minister of Railways to it the other day, he referred me to the Postmaster-General. Where the Minister of Posts pays for the services and the Railways do not carry out their duty, because they do not appoint sufficient staff, will the Minister not bring his influence to bear so that the Railways will see to it that they have someone there to answer the telephone? The Railway personnel cannot do the work. I further want to emphasise what the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. van Nierop) has said about the enormous accumulation of the work of the Post Office personnel. The people cannot do all the work. Is this now to save money for the war? The Minister must please leave the war aside for a while and see to it that proper services are provided. Do not over-burden the people so that they work themselves to death. Concerning the dismissal of Mr. Schutte, the Minister did not at all enter into that. Why not? It is a serious matter. Mr. Schutte was of course Afrikaans-speaking, and as we heard in the House yesterday there was not the least complaint about his work, and there was nothing justifying the Radio Board to dismiss him. The Minister of Posts ought to go into this matter where injustice has been done, but he does not do this. Is he not concerned about it because it is only just an Afrikaans-speaking official? I believe that if it had been an English-speaking official, the Minister would have broken his legs to get there and see that justice is done. But when an Afrikaans-speaking person is being done an injustice, and we ask that justice be done, the Minister says that he takes nothing of it to heart.

I would like with your permission to make use of the 30 minute rule. When the debate was in progress here yesterday, one of the main complaints from this side was the unjust treatment of Afrikaans-speaking persons (not unilingual persons), in the Post Office service. We had hoped that the Minister when he heard the spirit in which the debate was carried on, would give attention to these matters and that he would see to it that justice was done to these officials. He heard the complaint that one section of the officials were being done injustice, but instead of the Minister rising when the complaint concerning Mr. Schutte was more specifically brought to his attention, the Minister replied: “I did not take the trouble to find out.” If there is a business in the country and complaints about unjust treatment are made, will the person who is at its head simply say that he is not concerning himself about it? Here we are concerned with a person who was congratulated on the good work he does and suddenly he is dismissed and the head of the business says that he has not taken the trouble to find out why the person was dismissed. I think it is an unreasonable and inhuman attitude taken up by the Minister. It is not fair towards the public and the officials that a person holding a position with the Radio Board, is simply suddenly dismissed, while the Minister as head of the section says that he is not concerning himself about the reason why Mr. Schutte was dismissed. While we are busy on this, I want to ask the Minister if he can still remember that shortly after the war began, we asked questions about propaganda talks over the radio. We asked how many hours were taken up by propaganda talks and how many persons gave propaganda talks. The Minister then gave us the figures and also the hours, and gave us the assurance that much change would not take place. This year I again put the question, and I will read it out to him—

1. (1) How many hours per week the South African Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts.
2. (2) How many hours per week are regularly set aside for relays of news reports from overseas.
3. (3) (a) On how many occasions since the end of last Session up to the present the speeches of overseas statesmen were relayed or broadcast by the Corporation; and (b) whose speeches they were and on which dates the broadcasts took place.

The Minister replied—

1. (1) 86½ hours, from each station.
2. (2) 16½ hours.
3. (3) 14.

The Minister announces that 14 speeches were given by overseas politicians, and that about 16½ hours were taken up by them. They were more or less all persons who took the same direction and made propaganda for the war. I further asked—

1. (4) (a) How many times per week propaganda talks were given over the radio, (b) what the names were of the persons who were used or being used to deliver such talks and (c) what each of them were paid since the outbreak of war up to date.

This does not include the 16½ hours. This is still extra propaganda. The Minister replied—

1. (4) I have had a list of speakers compiled and the hon. member will himself be able to judge how much work is attached to it. The list consists of 193 pages and is available for inspection in my office.

There are propaganda talks and it will require 193 pages to give the list. The Minister then said that I could peruse the list in his office. I did it, and I must admit that the Minister answered correctly when he said that he could not give the list. This type of nonsensical war talks was constantly being broadcast, to such a degree that the Minister could not say how many hours they took up, and how many persons gave these talks. It would require too much work. When the radio service was taken over by the Government, the object was to broadcast talks of educational value, and now I want to ask the Minister whether he does not realise the desirability of, where all these ridiculous things are broadcast, in which the people who talk do not believe themselves, reducing the licence fee by half, or making it completely gratis. Then those who want to listen to it can do so. The radio was now still being used only here and there for educational purposes. It was originally intended to give poor people who could not attend concerts and these types of things an opportunity to hear good music over the radio. I hope the Minister realises the sad state into which the radio service has fallen. Not only are Afrikaans-speaking persons who are employed there persecuted without the Minister taking notice of it, but the service has also descended to sorrowful level. One constantly gets the lame war stories to which you cannot listen. I hope that when we meet again and this Government is still in power, which I doubt very much, that it will not again be necessary for us to have to plead in this manner. Now something about the Post Office itself. When you walk into the Post Office there are posters all over which catch your eye, colourful pictures from the one end to the other, to make propaganda in the country. But there are two views in connection with the war. In South Africa the war is a political question. The one side of the House is in favour of it that we must proceed with the war. The other side is opposed to the war policy and says that it is to the detriment of the country. I do not want to go into the merits of the case, but the Post Office belongs to the people of South Africa, and not to the Government. This side of the House has as much right to the Post Office as the other side. We pay the same taxes and it is not right to use the Post Office as a political machine and for the canvassing of recruits. When you come there you find the whole place full of recruiting posters.

You rather want to see Hitler’s picture.

If the persons who draw double salaries would only do a little work instead of sitting here and interjecting. Let them make the propaganda. But they do nothing, and now papers have to be pasted up. But on the other hand the Minister comes along and says that we must now get another kind of postage stamp owing to the shortage of paper. He wants to effect a saving of paper and the small stamp of 1 inch by 1 inch must now be halved to conserve paper, but on the other hand the Post Office is being pasted full of large posters. And the attractive, typical South African scenes on our postage stamps, like a ship or something else, must disappear and instead you must have pictures of guns, of women wearing caps and in uniform, or something of this kind. We are being told that the stamps must be changed and that paper must be saved. But the Minister says that it is not to replace our old stamps, but just an additional series of stamps.

What about Goebbels?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member has slept badly, give him an opportunity of recovering a bit. Savings must now be effected on paper by reducing the size of postage stamps, but the large posters are being pasted up everywhere. I want to ask the Minister whether he will obtain one single recruit through those posters. That type of silly posters helps nothing. But of course we must keep up the war blight, and also the Post Office must be used by the Jingo Minister to make Jingo propaganda. I want to refer to something else. When we said that the Post Office staff had to do so particularly much work, the Minister said “Hear, hear.” Why then are they treated so unsympathetically? The staff is loyal and works hard, but the scales are unreasonable. I put questions to the Minister pointing thereby to the unreasonable payment of a certain group of officials. I put the question and will read it out in English: “What are the rates of pay of the second grade engineering staff?” The Minister replied—

1. (1) Presumably second grade Telegraph and Telephone Electricians are referred to. The rate of pay for this grade is £240 x £20—£400 per annum.

I then asked—

1. (2) Whether on several occasions representations have been recently been made to the Government requesting an increase in their rate of pay; if so, whether such request has been complied with in any respect; if so, in what respect.

The Minister’s reply was—

1. (2) Yes. The request has not been met because the rate of pay is quite favourable in relation to other grades.

In addition I asked the Minister whether, with a view to the nature of the work which they do, he would regulate the scale so that it begins on £300 and rises to £400, and if not, why not? The Minister’s reply was no. The Minister does not say in his reply that these people are being paid well enough. He avoids it. His reply is that their payment is quite reasonable in comparison with the scales which are paid to others. He does not state in his reply that these people receive enough, but he says that others receive as little. These people do not ask for an increase in the scale at the maximum. They simply ask that the starting salary should be increased from £240 to £300. I want to ask the Minister to meet these people with this reasonable request. He himself admits that it is not unreasonable, but he simply says that it compares well with other scales. In other words, he says that two bad beans make one good bean. Then I would like to discuss with the Minister the appointment of Postmen. When I do this I do not want to drag the Minister into something which will immediately bring him on the hind legs. There are many young people who do not have the means to continue their studies, and they apply to the Post Office to become Postmen. I must say that there has been a great improvement in the appointment of Postmen. But now we get this position. When we come to a town like Paarl we find that all the Postmen are coloured. When we come to Somerset West we find that they are Europeans again. When we come to Mossel Bay then we again find that they are coloureds. Now I want to ask the Minister, as there is such a large number of our less privileged Afrikaners who for financial reasons cannot continue their studies—and they belong to both sides of the House—and who apply to become Postmen, to set aside specially this work for Europeans only. I will tell the Minister why. Here in South Africa there is a colour bar, whether some people want it or not. Now we have the position that the white man wears the same uniform at one place as coloureds, and a class who certainly is not a very satisfactory type in some instances, at another place. When we take this into consideration we can realise that the white man who already has a feeling of inferiority gets a still further feeling of inferiority. Therefore I ask the Minister to set aside this work as work for Europeans. Here we can apply the colour bar. Set aside this work for the Europeans and other work can again be reserved for coloureds. I am certain that the Minister will take this hint in the spirit in which I gave it. I ask him to reserve these posts for Europeans only, and he can again reserve other posts for coloureds only. Then I want to say something more about the Post Office. I put a question to the Minister concerning the heads of the different sections. I asked him which persons, which heads and deputy heads in the Post Office, held military rank. We put this question because when we were engaged on the budget last year, we time and again, when we spoke about matters in connection with the Post Office, got the answer from the Minister that these matters had nothing to do with him, because it came under Defence. We got that answer from the Minister every time, and therefore we asked which heads and deputy heads of the Department held military rank. The Minister’s reply showed that seven heads and deputy heads of the Department had military titles. This means that nearly half of this class in the Post Office also do military work. At the top was Brig. Lenton. I do not know whether he is now still a brigadier or not. The reply was that he was a brigadier-general because he was head of the Post and Telegraph Department and also chief censor. Because the staff of the Post Office was reduced and because the Department of Defence poked its nose into Post Office matters in this manner, which it could not do previously, we now find that in connection with the delivery of letters and the despatch of telegrams more mistakes are made than before. I do not blame the staff for that. I blame the work of the censor and all these additional things that have to be done. I would now like to know from the Minister whether he is again going to allow, or has it happened already, that the present Postmaster-General is also going to get a military post. We want to ask the Minister for his own sake and for the sake of the Post Office, not to allow him also to accept military post. Again I want to point out that the work of the censor, the opening and steaming open of letters, causes unnecessary waste of time. Let me give an example. I will not mention names because the Minister can then ascertain whom it concerns. I am prepared, however, to give the information to him privately. Letters that are posted in a town concerning meetings in that town, are not delivered immediately, but a week or ten days later. It takes ten days to deliver a letter in the same town where it was posted. I do not know where the fault lies. We fill in forms to enquire what has happened to the letters, and then when the forms are returned to us, we are simply told that they were sorry to hear that there was a delay. The Minister, however, knows well what is happening. It is the censor who causes the delay. Then I want to put this question to the Minister. Is it true that in every town a list is furnished to the Postmaster of persons whose letters must be handed to the censor to be steamed open? I want the Minister to reply to this, and he must please rather refuse to answer than to give incorrect information, because we will then be compelled also to take away that pound which we have left. This list is called the black list. If this is so, I want to ask him not to allow his position as Minister of Posts to be so misused by people who have nothing to do with the Post Office. He must realise that such a black list gives trouble to people who are already overworked, as the Minister admitted. Then I want to speak about something else, and that is the telephone position that we have in this country. An hon. member on this side has already spoken about the uncivil treatment that we sometimes get over the telephone. I leave it at that. But I want to speak about the impossibility of obtaining telephones in this country. The Minister has said that he has not got enough telephones, and in that connection I incidentally got hold of a letter this morning which the Minister wrote with reference to an application for a telephone. In the letter he states that he has not the material and equipment and that he is not in a position to meet the demand. He points out that there are no fewer than 14,000 applicants on the waiting list who are waiting for that type of service. He says that with a view to the difficulties of obtaining supplies from overseas, it is impossible for him to say when that demand can be met. Well, I assume that there are difficulties. But now I want to bring something perculiar to the notice of the Minister. In Hottentots-Holland we had a by-election. I know that there are people at the Strand and Somerset West who have already been waiting a long time for telephones, and they cannot get them. But then came the by-election and a United Party office was opened. The Chairman of the United Party at the Strand applies for a telephone shortly before the election, and propaganda is made in the Department—I will not mention names, and the Minister cannot deny it, because I know it is so—to supply him with a telephone, although the other people in the town cannot get it. Fortunately I came to hear of it and I went to the Postmaster and told him that if he did it the fat would be in the fire. The United Party office at. Somerset West got a telephone, and that in spite of the fact that other applicants had to wait. The Minister might now say that an arrangement was made. I know about it. But the fact remains that when the election was over that telephone was again immediately removed. If a telephone can be given for election purposes, I want to point out to the Minister that there are most urgent cases where people live far away and where they urgently require a telephone, and they cannot get it. I want to warn the Minister that he is known outside, that he is a Minister who is known to the people outside as someone who stands a little to the left. He stands near the precipice and he is partial to people who hold his own political views. He is known as someone who not only persecutes the Afrikaners in the service, but that he is a man who views matters through political glasses. The Post Office has so far usually had unsympathetic Ministers, but this Minister is the worst of them all. If he says that it is an unreasonable conception of him then I want to say to him that it still is the opinion outside. The things the Minister has done are not to his credit. [Time limit.]

I want to deal with some of the remarks made by the hon. member who has just sat down (Dr. Van Nierop). In the first place I think he is justified in complaining about the short answer I gave him last night—but I did not know anything about it. I did not intend to convey the view which he has taken. But the position is this. We have the Broadcasting Corporation controlled by the Board of Governors—they are responsible for the good order and government of that organisation, they appoint officials and dismiss officials, and I have no control—unless I dismiss the Board—I have no opportunity of going into their affairs.

Supposing you get a genuine complaint, what do you do?

If a genuine complaint is made to me I investigate it, but in this case I said—and it was the truth—that I had not worried about it but I shall take up this question with the Chairman and find out what the position is. I want to make it perfectly clear—the Chairman and the Board of Governors of the Broadcasting Corporation have control of that organisation and I am not going to interfere in that control, I am not going to interfere with discipline, but if a definite complaint is made to me I shall investigate it.

Are you responsible for the Board’s appointment?

Yes, and I stand by the law.

Who appointed the Commission of Enquiry?

I shall stand by the Board so long as they are carrying out their duties. In fact, if I were on that Board and the Minister interfered I would turn round and say: “Stop it, or I shall resign.” That is the position which I do not want to create.

It is a statutory body.

Yes, it is a statutory body. I am speaking from memory now, but I believe provision is made in the Act that they employ and dismiss their own employees.

Did you appoint a Commission of Enquiry some time ago?

No, the Broadcasting Corporation themselves were responsible for that Commission. A Commission was appointed, but at their request.

Who appointed it?

I think I did now that I come to think of it. It was a Government commission.

So you did interfere.

No, the request came from the Broadcasting Board; I did not appoint it over their heads. Now, if I may be allowed to continue I want to say that I am glad to see that the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop) takes an interest in the welfare of the postal officials. I should like to say here what I have said in Another Place—how much I appreciate the loyalty of the post office officials under very difficult circumstances in giving the services which they are giving in the circumstances. I met that deputation which the hon. member referred to, and we discussed those questions, and I told them what the position was and subsequently I stated publicly that the post office cannot take any further work. If other work of that nature is necessary a fresh department will have to be established. They appreciate the position and the thing is working quite satisfactorily. Now the other point the hon. member made was about these electricians. The position is this: it is quite true that when they finish their apprenticeship of five years, they start off at £20 per month. They are not getting the wage which prevails for electricians, and many of them in consequence leave the department, although we have trained them—they leave the department in order to get immediately an increased salary. But if they remain in the department six or seven years they are in a better position than if they go out on their own. It is that period of six or seven years which they complain of. But they cannot have their cake and eat it. These people get facilities and advantages as public servants which they do not get outside. They have security of tenure, and they have advantages which they do not have in the open market. It is perfectly true that electricians who finish their apprenticeship for six or seven years do get less, and we do lose a number of them. That we cannot help. These men are there as monthly servants and they can go where they wish. The other question which the hon. member referred to was in regard to the posters, which he sees at the Post Office. A request was made by the Defence Department in their recruiting campaign for these posters to be put in the post offices, and I have no hesitation as Minister to agree to their request.

Do you really believe they help?

Do not ask me to criticise the action of another department. Now there is the question of postage stamps. The reduction of the size of the postage stamp is due to the Government Printer. The position as far as stamps were concerned became serious and it was at his request that we agreed reluctantly to reduce the size, and when we agreed to make a special issue we did so in order to show that we appreciate the services rendered by tens of thousands of South Africans, men and women, for the country’s war effort.

Are the old stamps available?

They should be.

Well, they are not.

It is possible that in some offices there may have been an oversight. One member complained about it and then afterwards it was found that a mistake had been made.

Of course having to keep these duplicate sets means a lot of extra work to the staff.

The other question referred to was that of the postmen. We give all the encouragement we can to these young postmen who join the service. They first join as messengers, and sometimes they get temporary appointments as postmen, and we arrange to give them the increase due to them. But it will be seen that on the Estimates we have a limited number of postmen and they are only relieving postmen. When vacancies occur they are filled from these temporary postmen. The hon. member was right when he said that the conditions of the postmen had been vastly improved in the last four or five years. Salaries have been increased and I may tell hon. members that we provide facilities in the bigger towns for these young men to continue their education, to give them an opportunity of qualifying for the ordinary post office work. As hon. members know they have to pass certain examinations and we are helping them, we encourage them and allow them time off for the purpose of carrying on their further studies. Now the hon. member also referred to those military titles. Brig. Lenton is no longer in the post office. The present Postmaster General is plain Mr. Burke.

Are you keeping him there?

So far as I am concerned, yes. Mr. McGuffog, the under-secretary for staff, is a Lt.-Col. because he is in charge of the post office signalling battalion, composed of voluntary people who have joined up for service anywhere in Africa, and this brigade has over 3,000 members. There are several other officers there occupying positions in that brigade.

He is not a Lieutenant-Colonel by virtue of his position in the post office.

Why did you make him a Field-Marshal or something of the kind.

I did not make him a Field-Marshal—he is a Brigadier.

Why didn’t you make him a corporal—or something of the kind?

Now in the censor’s department many people hold military rank—some of them are seconded from the post office, and others are men who have retired from the post office. Now the hon. member raised another question. He asked whether I knew that there was a black list in every village post office. I do know. I know that postmasters have certain instructions in connection, with certain correspondence, but that has nothing to do with the post office. That is an instruction from the military; I have no control over the censorship. We have to comply with military regulations.

Is not the chief censor on your staff?

No, the chief censor happened to be Mr. Lenton; he was Postmaster-General, he was appointed in charge of censorship, his was a joint position. His duty as Chief Censor was a military function it was not a post office function, and today Brig. Lenton is still chief censor—only he is no longer connected with the post office.

You are splitting hairs now.

I don’t think the hon. member is fair in saying that. I said before, and I repeat it now, that Brig. Lenton occupied a dual position. He was Postmaster-General and at the same time chief censor.

The same dog with a different piece of string.

As chief censor I could give Brig. Lenton no instructions—he was a military officer.

A case of Dr. Jeykll and Mr. Hyde.

In any case, what may have happened in the past is finished and done with.

Oh, no, if you murder a man in the past it is not finished and done with.

The present Postmaster-General is plain Mr. Burke. Now the other questions which the hon. member referred to was in regard to telephones in the Hottentots-Holland by-election. That is perfectly true. We have made arrangements for telephones to be available, one or two in each constituency, for Parliamentary elections, and when the election is finished, there will be a few telephones available for subscribers.

So you admit that you have some telephones.

I have already informed the hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. Erasmus) to get on with it and find out what his requirements are. I don’t say that we can give everyone a telephone, but we shall do our best. But there will be no favouritism in connection with the matter. Everyone will be treated on the same basis, and when the elections are over these telephones will be available. I know perfectly well what the position is, I know how necessary and essential it is to have telephones for these elections when paper is being cut down to a minimum. Now, the hon. member for Worcester (Mr. Woolfaard) has raised the question of the Worcester Post Office.

What about the Mossel Bay Post Office?

The hon. member knows that the Mossel Bay Post Office has been on the Estimates for some time. It is a question of getting the material.

Why does not the building controller give us some material?

I want to point out that shortly after the outbreak of war the Public Works Department were called upon to do a great deal of work. They must have done from £12,000,000 to £14,000,000 worth of work for the military. And that is the reason for the delay. I am as anxious as anyone to see that all these post offices are constructed—Worcester is not singular—there are many others which have to be carried on with. The hon. member for Kuruman (Mr. Olivier) also raised a question. I have already instituted enquiries. I have given instructions for the matter to be gone into. We have to see that at post offices these people get fair treatment and if they use post offices for political purposes one has to step in and stop it.

Where was that done?

At Danielskuil. And the other question raised was in regard to the Railways running our telegraph offices. We pay the Railways for running the post office and telephone exchange, and when the time comes that there are sufficient subscribers and the work improves, we establish a post office. That is the position. The Railways are responsible when they run our post office.

Does the Minister of Railways take responsibility?

The position is this: these people are Railway officials and we pay the Railway for utilising their services, and they are supposed to do the post office work. If the hon. member will tell me of a case or a place where he is having trouble, I shall have it investigated.

At all the stations from Breede River to Orchards.

I will have the post office inspected to see if we cannot get relief. The post office is out to give the best possible service to everyone concerned.

I want to sympathise with the Minister with some obvious difficulties he is having. He has told us today of a number of post offices that have been passed on the estimates, but it seems that his great difficulty is to get building material for them. What we would like the hon. Minister to do is to go to the Chief Building Controller and try to persuade him to take up a more reasonable attitude. I think the Minister will find that the Chief Building Controller is a particularly difficult person to deal with, but as I have often heard said, the easiest person to persuade is oneself, and it may be that when the Minister uses his most persuasive manner, his bedside manner, to the Chief Controller, he may succeed in persuading him to supply him, the Minister, with sufficient supplies to go on with this work. But I think we all sympathise with him in this difficult position in which he finds himself, and we sympathise with him because he has to deal with this difficult individual, but if he goes to the Chief Building Controller we assure him that he will have the whole country behind him, and knowing that the whole country is behind him, he may become even more persuasive, and he might be able to persuade the Chief Building Controller to accede to his request.

But he must do it personally.

Yes, he must do it personally; he must not do it by correspondence. I want to come back to the matter of Schutte and the African Broadcasting Corporation in general. Yesterday when I dealt with this matter the hon. Minister made signals to me that if I sat down he would tell us all about the case. Eventually I did sit down, and the Minister said that all he knew was nothing. It may be that he does not know anything. Personally I think the hon. Minster knows why Schutte was retrenched. Personally, I think that notwithstanding the fact that he shook his head, which might signify approval or disapproval, I still think that the Minister knows all about the reasons why Schutte was retrenched. But if he does not know then it shows a rather serious state of affairs. We have here a Broadcasting Corporation which was started by the State and which is a utility company for the benefit of the people in South Africa, the Board of whom are all appointed, or the majority are appointed by the Minister. The Minister knows absolutely nothing of what they do. They tax the public to a very large extent. I forget what the amount is but it is something like £200,000 a year, and they are supposed to supply us with goods in return. Most of the goods are repeats; most of the goods are second hand, which we do not get at half price, for we have to pay for it at full rates. There have been some very flagrant cases of retrenchment in the Broadcasting Corporation. People have been retrenched for no reason as far as the man who pays knows, and for no reason as far as the man who has been retrenched knows. A public utility company like the Broadcasting Corporation should be responsible to some other body. The Minister should be able to give us the necessary information that we require in regard to the working of the African Broadcasting Corporation, so that it will be possible for us to criticise that company. It is not a private company; it is a State utility company which is there to provide certain facilities to the public for which we pay, and for which we pay rather dearly, much more dearly than most other countries in the world. Our subscriptions are very high in comparison with other countries in the world, and the public is not getting a return for its money. And in the second place, very funny things take place in that Broadcasting Corporation, so funny that a year ago the hon. Minister himself appointed a Commission to go into their workings, and even after the appointment of that Commission curious things are still going on inside that Broadcasting Corporation. When you ask the hon. Minister for details he shakes his head and he says that he knows nothing about it. I think the Minister should supply the House with any information which we require from the Broadcasting Corporation with regard to the method of working, or the whys and wherefores of their doings. I think this position is very unsatisfactory indeed, looked at from every angle, and I think that a change should definitely be brought about. There is one other small matter on which I would like the hon. Minister to give us some information. A little while ago we had another post office transaction that was discussed in this House. We have learned to be very chary of post office transactions. We have had some very queer post office transactions in the past. When the Loan Estimates were discussed, we discovered that a new post office site was bought at Vereeniging.

We have not bought it yet.

No, the Department of Lands has bought it.

Nor have they bought it.

Well, we voted the money for it. Perhaps the hon. Minister is again having difficulty with the Chief Building Controller. Perhaps the Chief Building Controller won’t pass the plans. We bought the ground from Lewis and Marks, and it was bought for something like £15,000. Well, sir, there is a post office at Vereeniging. I want to put these questions to the Minister: What is wrong with the present post office? Will the Minister write these questions down? Is it not situated in the best part of the town?

You must go a little more slowly.

Is the building not good; is the site not large enough? Did the Minister make representations to the Minister of Lands to buy the site? If so, why did he make those representations? If not, why did the Minister of Lands buy that site? Who acted as the intermediary with regard to the sale of that land by Lewis and Marks to the Minister? We would like to have that information just for a start.

The hon. member has asked for certain information with regard to the post office site at Vereeniging. That money that was provided on the Estimates was to buy a site at Vereeniging. That site was selected by Mr. Redelinghuys. The property belonged to Lewis and Marks, and two others and negotiations have taken place … .

Who are the two others?

Jackson, I believe, and someone else. They turned down a vacant place of ground close by. The matter is being investigated. I do not want to buy Lewis and Marks’ site. I want to buy the vacant piece of ground, because it is cheaper and considerably larger. In regard to the necessity for a post office at Vereeniging there is no doubt about it. The present post office is absolutely congested. They are working there under great difficulties. I want the House to agree to a specific sum to build a post office at Vereeniging.

So the position is that the Minister of Lands wants to buy the worst land at the highest price?

That is the position. The site that has been selected was a site selected by Mr. Redelinghuys in conjunction with the Mayor. I am in communication now with the Mayor and the hon. member for Vereeniging (Lt.-Col. K. Rood) in connection with this vacant piece of ground that I am now speaking about. No sale has taken place, but it was contemplated that a sale would take place with Lewis and Marks, and this money is there for the purpose of paying for it, and it is not £16,000; the total purchase price when the deal goes through will be in the region of about £10,000.

Why then did we have to vote this extra money?

The extra money is for the requirements of the Lands Department.

But then they misinformed us.

I do not say that. My colleague, the Minister of Lands, was not as fully informed as I was.

I want to refer briefly to the remarks which were made here by the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop). I agree with the hon. member when he referred to better pay and better conditions in the post office. But I disagree with him when he asks the Minister to get rid of non-European postmen. Today there is hardly anything open to non-Europeans in any branch of the service. In the post office, apart from postmen, there is hardly any position that is open to them. They accept non-European postmen, and now the hon. member for Mossel Bay wants to get rid of them too. I say one should recognise that they have as much right to their share of service as the Europeans in this country. After all, they are citizens of the country. On what possible ground can they be excluded? Personally, during my long service in Parliament, there is no branch of the public service with which I have come into greater contact than the postal department, and I know that there are certain areas in the suburbs where you have non-European postmen. May I say, too, that they do their work splendidly, and they do not get the promotion which is given to their European colleagues. If there were any grievance, it should be a grievance because these people have not got the opportunity of getting their sons to enter the public service, or even private services. How many trades are open to them today? How many apprenticeships are open to them? I think the hon. member for Mossel Bay is on the wrong wicket. When he asks for an improvement in general conditions and rates of pay in the post office I agree with him, but when he asks the Minister to close the door to non-European postmen, I say that he is asking the Minister to do something that is unjust, something which will not be tolerated by the general public, either European or non-European.

I am sure that the hon. Minister will agree as a matter of principle that the native and coloured people are entitled to efficient and courteous service in the post office. I am sure the Minister will agree with that in principle. What I want to ask him is whether he is satisfied in his own mind that that principle is being carried out, and I ask him that because of the complaints I have had about the lack of efficient service to the non-European public in many post offices. Post offices in such places as, for instance, Cradock have been separated into two sections—the native people do not object to that—they have said that if the European people do not want them amongst them in the post office, they would prefer to have a separate part of the post office; but what they do want is the same facilities as any other section of the public has. In the case of De Aar, for instance—I hope it has been put right now—but a short time ago the section which was reserved for the non-Europeans was a very small portion of the post office, and they were served by the same clerk who served the European public, and I am informed that frequently they have to wait a great length of time before they are served. In the case of Cradock, the same conditions prevail, and the native community in Cradock, asked through me, for a special clerk to be appointed to deal with the native and coloured public, and that request, which I conveyed to the department, was refused on the ground—according to the Minister’s officials—of a shortage of staff. The hon. Minister knows the law quite well. He knows that it was laid down by the Appellate Division of this country that it is perfectly legal to divide the post office into one portion for Europeans and another portion for non-Europeans, provided similar facilities are given. I do suggest to the hon. Minister that it is a perfectly reasonable request that when in effect two post offices are established in this manner, there should be a separate officer to deal with each section of the public. And I go further and suggest this to him, that the native people and the coloured people, if they are to be put in a separate part of the post office, should be attended to by one of their own people; I submit that special clerical officials, coloured and native, should be trained to serve their own people in the post office, at a rate of pay commensurate with the type of work they are doing. As far as shortage of staff is concerned, I feel quite certain that in the case of Cradock, for instance, it would be possible to get a well-educated native clerk to serve the public there.

We are doing so.

I am glad that the hon. Minister is acting in this matter. In that case I would like to ask for particulars, where post offices have been divided between the European and non-European sections and where non-Europeans have been appointed to serve their own people. I think that is a reasonable request. Now I should like to ask the Minister what volume of post is required before he will institute a house to house delivery service, and I ask that with a particular case in mind, and that is the case of the non-European portion of the town of Beaufort West. There is a large location there. It is as large as some places where I know there are special postal facilities, but the only kind of service that is given by the post office in that location is the establishment of an agency, the agency being the location superintendent, and I understand that that costs the Minister’s department the sum of £2 10s. per month. What the community there has asked in most respectful terms is for a delivery service to their houses by one of their own people directly employed by the Minister’s department. Last year there was, as a matter of fact, considerable pilfering of letters, not through the fault of the location superintendent but through the fault of the chaotic conditions that prevailed in his office. He had to do all the municipal work and he was also responsible for the distribution of post. Actually there is no distribution. The people have to come there and wait for a long time. Sometimes he asks the native constables to deliver the post but that is not part of their duties. I know that this particular case of pilfering is being gone into, so I shall not say much about it. But the point I want to make is that if the distribution was done by someone who is directly responsible to the Minister’s office, he will take jolly good care to see that he did his work properly; and the amount of expense that would be involved in instituting a delivery service would not be very large. I understand that the agency costs £2 10s. per month. According to these estimates, the maximum that the Minister pays the native postboys is £7 10s. per month, and therefore it would not be an exorbitant extra charge for him to employ a non-European postman to deliver letters amongst his own people. Now, sir, some time ago—about two or three years ago—the Minister stated it to be his policy,—and I for one welcomed it, that where he had established post offices in the native areas, whether in the country or in urban areas, he would appoint native or coloured or other non-European officers to take charge of these post offices. I know that that has been done in some cases, but why is it—I want to ask the Minister—that these people are not given graded posts? There is nothing on these estimates to show how many of these native sub-postmasters there are, and there is nothing to show where they have been appointed. I want to ask the Minister how many there are, what their rate of pay is and where they have been appointed. There is, under the item “Miscellaneous” on these Estimates, the following entry: “Unestablished postmasters, sub-postmasters, postal, telegraph or telephone agents substitutes.” I take it that that heading would include these native sub-postmasters. It does not say how many of these people there are and what their salary scales are, and I want to ask the Minister whether he will not consider these people for graded posts. If a man is in charge of a post office serving a populous area, he should have a graded post, so that he may know what his future is. And finally, I want to ask the Minister who the people are in his department who gets £2 a month, because I maintain that £2 per month is too little for any human being to live on. It may be that they are only part time employees, but according to the Estimates, 805 native postboys are employed at a scale ranging from £24 per annum to £84 per annum, that is from £2 per month to £7 per month. [Time limit.]

It is not often that I can agree with the hon. member for Cape Western (Mr. Molteno), but in what he has said in respect of a certain section of the Department of Posts, I quite agree with him. I also want to plead for those people. There is perhaps no other Government Department which produces a larger surplus than the Department of Posts, and I think that on the other hand there are no officials in the whole public service that are more badly paid than the servants of the Post Office. Some years ago there was a case where a girl who was in full charge of a Post office went wrong and at the hearing it appeared that she only received £1 10s. or £2 per month for her services as Postmistress. This is a shameful state. This is a wage you would barely pay your servant in the house. You find places where such women are placed in very responsible positions, where they have the whole post office under their control, all the financial matters, and then they are paid £2 a month. I want, however, also to join in the plea of the last speaker for those Postmasters who are not on permanent service. The unestablished Postmasters, and also the Postmistresses who are not yet in permanent service and who render particularly good service and have large post offices under their control. Then I want to plead for pensions for those in the service who are not yet in receipt of pension. In any big business you have today a pension scheme under which people who have given a number of years of good service receive a small pension. But in the Department of Posts, with its large surpluses, you find officials who have given their best services to the country, and who, when they can no longer find work one day, are dismissed without the least pension. This ought not to be. Then you have Postmasters who hold a very responsible position and who receive a salary of about £300, and their salary does not carry a pension. On the day they leave the service they have no pension. I just want to bring those points to the notice of the Minister. There is still another section about which I want to say something and that is the servants of the Telegraphic Department who do night duty. Those people receive no cost of living allowance, and I think there are other sections also who do not receive the allowance.

Don’t they get it?

No, the night operating staff does not get the allowance. I hope the Minister will immediately go into it.

It seems to me that the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop) is a little bit drastic in proposing to reduce the Minister’s salary to £1 per annum. I do think he might have made it a guinea at least; and indeed I would starkly maintain that it should remain at the figure at which it has stood hitherto, because in my opinion he is one of the Ministers who has done a very reasonably good job of work, and that is recognised throughout the country. Many a time, as a matter of fact, I have wished that a pay book had been given to soldiers’ wives and their dependants and they had been told to collect their money at the Post Office. I have that confidence in the Department that I think there woud have been vastly fewer mistakes and heart-aches and delays than have happend in the case of the inexperienced department which has had to deal with it.

Do you say that because he comes from Natal?

No doubt that fact explains the quality of the hon. Minister. But I am not only going to praise the Minister’s Department; I have to criticise him a little too. The pudding cannot be made entirely of plums. I want to say a word or two, in all timidity, about crooners. Unfortunately in saying what I have to say about the crooners I am limited by the standard of English contained in the Book of Common Prayer.

Will you tell us what you mean by crooning?

I shall try to put it into a few words. My brother, member from Umbilo (Mr. Burnside) has the audacity to propose to give the House an actual example of this lamentable thing. He does support the sugar-plum terminology and syrupy voices which intrude into our private quarters with words like these: “I have your adoration; what is the explanation?,” and so on. I submit, Sir, there can only be one explanation. The poor gentleman addressed in this ditty is perhaps blind; he must surely be partly deaf and also what the Americans describe as “dumb” if he appreciates such distressing and repellent noises. It is very difficult to arrange programmes to suit all-comers, but seriously I do not think anyone would really mind if all the crooners were to vanish in the night. If I may say a word or two with regard to broadcasting in general; I take it that the main purpose of the radio service is to give news on the one hand, but still more important, to give entertainment to the people of this country, entertainment which in these days is badly needed. With regard to the news, it is very often no news at all. Must we have the same items read four or five times a day? Must we have tiresome information read over the wireless in a very pompous manner, in a regal tone of voice.

Is it not more a nancy-boy manner?

I would not even contradict the hon. member there. It is read in a sort of condescending cadence. This, for example, is one of the heart-throbs that a message concerning the Minister’s own people inflicted on me. I always turn on at the wrong time. Or perhaps there is never a right time. This is an instance of the type of announcement we have to listen to: “Owing to the difficulty in obtaining silk stockings permission is extended to all female employees of the Department to go on duty without stockings. This is the end of the news.” And just as well, one would think. Now I suggest that the main purpose of these wireless programmes is to give entertainment, which is a highly technical business.

Hear, hear!

The hon. Minister says “Hear, hear”, and I hope he will be “there, there” when the question arises of supplying the Board with some real entertainers, some people who know what they are trying to do. Experts are needed to take control here. I very much doubt whether some of the arrangers of entertainments now in office have ever tried personally to entertain an audience in the flesh. When you have your audience actually present with you, you have to do your stuff fairly well or, especially if they are husky members of the mercantile marine, they might rush you! Well, Sir, the people who broadcast are in a secure position. You cannot rush them, whether or no you approve their performance.

It is like a Minister on the pulpit.

There is possibly a certain resemblance. But in very important respects the artist who is broadcasting is handicapped far beyond the limits of the performer on a platform whose audience is present with him in a hall. It calls not merely for ordinary skill, but for a measure even of genius, successfully to “put over” a concert or variety programme on the wireless. If you are going to have entertainments over the air that are really worth while, I suggest to the Minister that he needs to get some competent professionals on the Broadcasting Board. They do exist in South Africa. There are some very clever professional producers and directors in this country, and the Minister should have people on that Board who are specially qualified to do this job of broadcast entertaining. They would know what to ask for from their artists, and they would know what to pay them for their performances. As a consequence it would not be left open for the people to criticise quite so much. I submit that on the Board at present there are no such experts, and I say that such experts should be appointed. I do not know how much that Board costs, but I have my own idea how much it is worth. I would like the hon. Minister to tell us how much it costs, and to give us a promise that he will put real technicians and professional entertainers on the job, people who understand their business. May I suggest that a very good form of entertainment for the people, and some form of instruction, would be to broadcast the proceedings of this House. The people have largely lost interest in Parliament, it would revive the interest to some extent if listeners were able to tune in on a certain wavelength and to hear what is said in this House. Some of it is nonsense, but not all of it; and the important point is that many wish to hear the proceedings here, and I am of opinion that all are entitled to do so. This matter is worth considering. Before I sit down may I come to the question of the postmen, both coloured and European, who have been mentioned this morning during the discussion on this Vote. I had contact with a number of them in Durban during my recent duty trip there, and they are having extraordinarily difficult times. They are called upon to walk a marathon distance every day, and I submit that a salary of £10 per month, rising to £25 per month after 12 years service, is not sufficient for the work of real importance they are expected to and actually perform. A high standard of integrity is demanded of them, and I suggest that their salaries should be raised. One could wish that the Minister would be 100 per cent. master in his own house, and then it would probably be done. I believe he himself agrees that the Post Office is a utility service, and that the profits thereon should be distributed to the public in the form of reduced charges or to the workers in increased wages, and particularly to those who are, as these postmen are, doing very important service and standing at the very bottom of the salary grade.

I have here before me a letter dated 14th May, 1940, which comes from the Postmaster-General, Brig. Lenton, in which he writes to me that the telephone lines in my district would have been built during that financial year. He has kept his promise nicely, but just this. He has built the shortest lines and the most important he left out, with the result that the line from Kleinswartberg to Seweweekspoort has still not been built. It is a thickly-populated area, and they have no telephone facilities. These people are far away from the town and it is impossible for them to get along without a telephone. We want the Minister to make the money available to the Postmaster-General so that he can build these lines. I know it is not the Postmaster-General’s fault. The Minister does not give him the means with which to complete this work. Then there is another matter. That is the post office building at Ladismith. At the time a building was bought from a man and it was converted into a post office and residence for the Postmaster. This was done on the recommendation of certain persons. I was opposed to it because I knew that it would not be adequate. The place has progressed and today that building means nothing to us. There is only one counter for the whole public, European and non-European, and when the pensions are paid out, the post office is so crowded with people that a person cannot stand it in there. The Minister must set aside a sum for a post office building at Ladismith. We cannot get along in this way. Long ago a promise was made to us that we would get a new post office. I do not want to talk any more. I come straight to the point and I ask the Minister to carry out that promise which was given.

I am sorry in a way that there is a little bit of a rift in the loot insofar as the Labour Party is concerned, but I must break a lance in this House on behalf of the crooner.

Are you a crooner?

I can do it very well, but I believe it is against the rules of the House, but I am sure that if I were permitted to sing the Boogey-woogey in this House it would be more entertaining than the speech of the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop) for instance. I believe that the low-brow in South Africa has been very unfairly treated, and all this talk about croonerds and all these attacks on crooners is not quite fair. There is a large proportion of the South African public, a large proportion of the intelligent population of South Africa which enjoys a programme in which crooners feature. I listen in sometimes to overseas stations, and I do not think I am exaggerating when I say that the South African broadcasting programmes are probably the most ghastly programmes on earth.

Have you listened to the Afrikaans programmes?

My hon. friend wants me to listen to the Afrikaans programmes. I can tell my hon. friend that I have listened to the spoken programmes in Afrikaans and they were probably just as intelligent to me as the English programmes. I want to ask: Why should we not have crooners? The idea of broadcasting in the main, an idea, of course, which has slowed down during the war, is to provide amusement and recreation for the people. There is a certain portion of it, which I understand is education, but in the long run I am not quite satisfied that the present Broadcasting Board is so composed as to be in a position as to educate the South African public. I am quite satisfied that I would not be prepared to indulge in any educational exercises laid down by the present South African Broadcasting Board. I would like the hon. Minister to tell me the average age of the members of the South Africa Broadcasting Board. If one takes into consideration their ages, one can quite clearly see why crooning is not their idea of what we should listen to. Crooning is a modern product.

Crooning or swing.

I like both. In these days when we have a sufficient amount of serious things to think about, something lighter in the broadcasting programme is desirable. There is nothing more ghastly than the Sunday programme. I have listened in to it on several occasions, merely because I thought it was Sunday and that possibly a little bit of self-upliftment was necessary now and again, but I am afraid I could not listen in too long. We have all these dreary dirges which we are told is high-brow music. And yet there is music which the ordinary common man in the street can understand. I have a partiality myself for hymn-tunes, but we never get them on a Sunday programme. We get some confounded symphony or other from composers who have been dead for five hundred years; we get thirty minutes of chamber music and then we switch over to some orchestral screeching. There are, I believe, actually dozens of very magnificent renderings of hymn-tunes of “Abide with me” or “Nearer my God to Thee.” These tunes are rendered in Afrikaans as well; but you never hear these tunes over the wireless on Sunday. These are simple things, but simple things are not to be desired, and yet I think that we should concentrate on the simple things in our music. But it seems to me that when these people have given us the amount of light music which they think should be given—and they cut it down to the minimum—they then concentrate on the most highbrow music. I have never been able to understand the highbrow music, and I make bold to say that probably 95 per cent. of the population do not understand highbrow music. I have had individuals telling me that this music is capable of wonderful interpretation; I have been told that this represents the wind sighing, that this represents something else, but to me it is just like a cat’s wailing in the early hours of the morning. But as long as it is classified as classical music, you have to listen to it. I am satisfied that in South Africa it is a pose with quite half the people who profess a love for classical music. Many of them do not know the difference between classical music and a sour lemon. Why should we not have swing and crooning? The people are interested in love, they are interested in blue-eyed babies. They are interested in “Si-si-si-I love you very much; Si-si-si I think you’re swell”. There is a marvellous couplet. That is the kind of stuff that would soothe the most jaded nerves. That is the kind of tune that, if we could sing it in this House would soothe the nerves of hon. members on the other side of the House. But we would certainly not be able to soothe their nerves if we made them suffer the excruciating torture of thirty minutes of high-brow music. The hon. member for Durban, North (The Rev. Miles-Cadman) criticised crooners. I do not think the hon. member knows the song: “Yes, my darling daughter”, for instance, because in that song is contained the kind of advice which the hon. member himself might give to the young ladies in South Africa, and I advise him to make it his business, not only to get the words of this song, but to hear it sung by a first-class crooner.

What about “La Cucaracha”?

The difficulty in South Africa with this broadcasting is that the Broadcasting Board is completely out of touch with the general public. The Broadcasting Board is in an entirely different position from any other general utility company. We have in South Africa, for instance, an Electricity Board. Well, the duty of the Electricity Board is to supply the people with electricity. There are no two opinions with reference to electricity. All you demand in connection with electricity is that you pull down your switch and the light is turned on; but with broadcasting, it sets out to cater for multifarious tastes. It is an entirely different thing, and broadcasting cannot be successfully administrated by individuals who know nothing about public taste, and whose very age and whose very remoteness from modern life makes them incapable of understanding what the public wants.

I am glad to see that the Minister after 10 years has eventually got so far as to realise the injustice which he committed towards certain telephone subscribers. Whereas some paid £7 per year, others again had to pay any amount from £20 to £40 per year. Notwithstanding the fact that we in the course of years repeatedly drew the Minister’s attention to it, he persisted in it, and I can only say that we are glad that he has now eventually realised that it is an unfair thing that one person pays £7 per year and the other one must pay any amount. This was unfair and we are thankful that the Minister’s eyes have eventually opened in regard to this matter. Then I also want to come to the Postal agencies in connection with which I annually brought the difficulties and injustice to the notice of the Minister. I am glad that the Minister has now eventually got so far to listen to our representations in so far that he has reduced the rental from £7 to £5. But this reduction of £2 has not removed all the people’s difficulties, because the fact that they paid £2 less in the past does not mean yet that they are going to get certain services, and I want to join in the representations made here that the Minister must do his level best to see that at all these postal agencies, particularly where there are stations, the people get a regular service, because if this does not happen, the rental of £5 is even still too much for the service they get. I hope the Minister will try to improve the service. Then I would very much like to draw the Minister’s attention to this fact. I regret that the loan, estimates have not yet been tabled. It causes us great trouble to know what the attitude of the Minister is, and we can only criticise according to the Budget of last year. The Minister then placed an amount of £10,500 on the estimates in respect of farm telephone extensions for the whole Union. This is simply a ridiculous amount. Cannot the Minister use his influence with the Cabinet to obtain a larger amount? I speak subject to correction, but I think that the Minister’s Department will tell him that in my constituency there are telephones which are already outstanding since 1936. There are applications which have now been standing over since 1936, and at the moment those applications cannot be carried out. I think that between £50,000 and £100,000 will be required to carry out those applications in my constituency. If the Minister continues to place £10,000 per annum on the estimates for the whole Union, and he spends it all in my constituency, it will be take 10 years before he meets our requirements. We want the Minister to take the lead in connection with this matter and add strength. He will now ask me where he is to get the material. He has poles and wire enough. The phone itself is the difficulty. Cannot the Minister get his experts going to see whether these things, which have always and still come from over the water, cannot be made in South Africa itself? South Africa has greatly progressed in this respect, and I wonder if the Minister cannot add his strength to see whether we cannot manufacture these essential appliances here. The farmers cannot get petrol now, and in a district like Brandvlei there is not one telephone. From Vanwyksvlei to to Brandvlei, a distance of 130 miles, there is no telephone. There is not even a public telephone. The people have not got petrol; in many instances they have not got tyres, and at Vanwyksvlei there is not even a doctor. They must go to Williston or elsewhere which is very far away. The Minister must please realise how essential the telephone is to these people. I hope the Minister will not say that a telephone is unobtainable. I want him to give us the assurance that he will personally throw in his weight to see what can be done. Then I want to associate myself with what the former speaker has said in regard to salaries, particularly of Postmistresses. I know that exceptions have been made in special cases, and we are thankful for that. I now speak in general. There are Postmistresses who receive £10 per month, and I am thinking of one instance where she because there is no other boarding accommodation, has to go and live in the hotel where she has to pay £7. Out of a salary of £10, £7 is a great deal when it does not even include washing. The Minister knows how much additional work there has been in the post office in recent times, and what responsibility those people must take upon themselves, and how on earth could he bring himself to it to let those persons do all that work for so small a salary? As a result of the delivery of the post, I know of one instance where the woman has to be in the post office at 7 o’clock in the morning because the post has to be despatched. It is still pitch dark in winter. The Minister must change the regulations in this respect so that in such instances the people can rather be given an assistant. He must specially go out of his way to see whether he can give additional help to these people, or otherwise he must make arrangements in regard to their payment. I was not here, and I do not know what the Minister said in regard to the censor. I understand that he takes up the attitude that he has nothing to do with the censor. I want to point out to him that the censor is the cause of letters being much delayed. One of the censor’s offices is at De Aar. And we have the experience that letters are held up for weeks on end. Telegrams are also delayed. Before I left Cape Town, I telegraphed for the motor car to be sent to the station. It is 500 miles, but I was there before the telegram, and I had to telephone again from the station. We travel faster by train than the telegram does. The Minister ought to enquire into this delay to find out what the trouble is. Then I want to bring to the Minister’s attention the request which has already been made to him in the past to build a post office at Vosburg. It is urgently required. The present little post office is not the property of the Government. It is a little private place which is rented. The post offices at other places which are not according to the Minister’s wishes, and where he says other post offices must be provided, are palaces compared to this little building. Land is still cheap there and we want the Minister to act. If he wants to build the post office, and he cannot get the land, the public will certainly be willing to give the land to him. [Time limit.]

I want to put a question to the Minister in connection with a matter which the Minister of Finance referred to in his Budget speech. He says the matter has been under consideration for some considerable time—that is to say, to afford some relief to the users of farm telephones, and he pointed out that a sum of £8,000 was put on the estimates for the purpose. As so many people are interested in this matter I would consider it a favour if the Minister would tell the House what the tariff for the users of farm telephones is going to be?

I would just like to bring one matter to the notice of the Minister. I believe the Minister has already been to Riversdale, and he will agree that it is one of the prettiest towns in the South Western Districts. Not only is it a nice town but there were also fine people living there. Unfortunately I cannot say that the town has one of the most attractive post offices. The Minister must surely know that for a town with so many inhabitants as Riversdale, the post office is altogether too small. It is clearly one of the oldest public buildings used for this purpose in the whole of the Cape Province. I just want to give a short description of it: It is a double storey building, with a very narrow frontage on the main street and sandwiched in between other buildings. Whether the Department itself arranged it in earlier years and perhaps built it with the object of accommodating the Postmaster in the upper storey. I do not know, but the fact is that for many years the upper storey has been vacant. It is not used and is dilapidated, and below there is not room at the entrace to serve people properly. I do not know if the post office personnel have already complained to the Minister, but if they have not done it, they are the most tolerant officials one can find. They cannot serve the public properly and they work under the most difficult circumstances. I want to ask the Minister to improve the position at Riversdale, but do not try to improve the existing building a little. The Minister might say that there is not money enough to build a new post office, but perhaps just now the opportunity offers to obtain a suitable and decent stand for the new post office. About 100 yards away from the old post office a large building has burnt down. It is a beautiful corner stand and there is nothing on it now. It is perhaps the time to obtain a good stand there, to use it in the near future for the building of the new post office. If the Minister does this, it will be to his credit, and there will be a monument at Riversdale which will remind of him.

I do not want to take up the time of the House, but last year the Minister of Posts placed a post office for Rustenburg on the estimates. It no doubt still stands on the estimates, but it does not stand on the place where it ought to stand. I would like to know whether the Minister will not only put the post office on the estimates this year, but also on the place where it has to be built. The Minister of Finance himself went through the building two years ago and he can testify with me as to what the position is. It was still built in the days of the Republic, when Rustenburg had only a few hundred inhabitants, while today thousands of people live there. The post office is quite inadequate. The officials also nearly have no room to stand and the public still less, and particularly at the end of the month people have to stand in rows to get inside. I would like to know from the Minister whether the post office will be built this year or not.

To get back to this question of broadcasting. One of the difficulties as far as the programmes are concerned is that only on very rare occasions does one find any attempt being made to provide a South African background for the programmes. Most of the time—and that is only one of the arguments I am prepared to admit in regard to crooning—most of the time the background is American or English. Then we have this other point, that to my own knowledge for six years we have had the same individuals broadcasting at the same time on the same day every week. I am not suggesting that these people don’t know what they are talking about. I am referring particularly now to the gentleman who talks to us about foreign affairs. I do not suggest that they have not studied the matter on which they talk, but I am going to suggest that he is a heaven sent genius who can appeal to the public every Monday or every Tuesday for six or seven years. And that is the position with the Broadcasting Corporation. We have people who have been talking to us on Foreign affairs for six or seven years, and it seems peculiar that there should be only one man in a given area who is capable of talking about Foreign Affairs. Well, the public are getting sick and tired of it. Similarly, when the Broadcasting Corporation suddenly finds an artist that artist is rammed down the public’s throat week after week, and I have come to the conclusion that the question of broadcasting is purely a matter of whether you belong to a particular little clique, and if you do, you are put on the air—sometimes two or three times per week. And this has to stop. I remember myself at the Durban station a couple of cabaret artists were put on the air twice a week for six weeks until everybody got absolutely tired of them. They were put on the air from the studio, from night clubs, or from bioscopes for six weeks on end. Mind you, they were quite competent artists, but as a Scotsman myself I could not listen to Harry Lauder every night of the week.

Surely you could.

No, I could not; even the finest artist palls on you if you get him every night. Most artists have a technique of their own and they keep to that. Wireless is one of the most important things in modern civilisation. It can be used as an entertainment factor, it can be of great aid to culture, but even in entertainment we can have a South African background, and that is very important as far as the English speaking people in South Africa are concerned. Our friends on the Opposition benches, of course, make the allegation that we are not South Africans. Well, let me tell them that we are. And our objection is that in our broadcasting programmes no attempt is made to build up a South African outlook, a South African background, for the simple reason that the members of the Broadcasting Board are completely out of touch with the people of this country, they have had no experience of this particular line. I am not suggesting that you should fire the Broadcasting Board, or that you should give us a new board. But there should be some kind of body in this country connected with the Broadcasting Corporation whose duty it is to find local talent in South Africa, even if they have to travel all over the country to try and build up a South African background for this kind of stuff which is being broadcast, and whose duty it will be to see that we do not get the same old voices and the same old names over the air almost week by week in the same old way. There is a technique about it. In the case of this weekly broadcast on Foreign Affairs there is a technique,—you have this one man telling you about Constantinople. He sees a one eyed man who has just thrown down a cigarette—what does it mean—they dramatise people they know nothing about. It is just bunk. And that is the sort of stuff you get week after week, year after year. Similarly, since the war has started, we are inundated with propaganda, and I think we are getting just about enough of it. If we had a little more crooning and a little less propaganda, it would not do South Africa any harm.

Oh!

The hon. the Minister says ‘oh” and he says it almost in the tone of a crooner. Yes, really, I should like to try him out—he might do very well. Possibly members of Parliament are not in favour of crooning—they get too much moaning outside. Fortunately members of the public do not have to listen to the debates here. And that brings me to another point. When the original Broadcasting Bill was put through this House I made a plea that the proceedings of this House should be broadcast. I now make the same plea again. It is more important now than it was in those days. Here is the most important body in South Africa. In this House we find the people who are supposed to be the rulers of this country—I say supposed to be—but we are not because most of us are not in the Cabinet. But anyway we are supposed to be the rulers of this country. But to many, or at any rate to very large numbers of the population of South Africa the prominent figures in this House are merely names. They have never been heard by the majority of the population in South Africa. And I do feel that above all other things the people of any country are entitled to hear the views, whether good or bad of the individuals who are sent to any legislative assembly to govern them. Now I do not say that the House should be put on the air as an entertainment. I do not say that the crooner singing “Boogey Woogey” should be taken off the air in order to put the Leader of the Opposition on, but there is no reason why the House of Assembly proceedings should not be broadcast on a wavelength of its own.

Probably we would all lose our seats.

That would be a good thing for the country generally, and that is what lies behind my suggestion. Possibly such a scheme might be taken away from the Broadcasting Board altogether. The Minister might institute it purely as a matter of Parliament itself. We might have a station fixed up here in the House and if people like to listen into Parliamentary debates they can turn their nob to the specific wave length and listen in. It might result in a little less irresponsibility being talked because if one felt that vast numbers of the population listened to one one might choose the theme of one’s speech more carefully—possibly I would not be talking so much about crooning myself. And finally I believe in democracy. I believe in the greatest amount of discussion—whether I believe in what my opponents say or not. We are facing a General Election shortly, and we should realise that we are going to fight those elections under great difficulty insofar as paper is concerned.

And petrol.

Petrol has nothing to do with it.

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

Afternoon Sitting.

Amendment put and the Committee divided:

Ayes—30:

Bekker, G.

Bekker, S.

Boltman, F. H.

Bosman, P. J.

Brits, G. P.

De Wet, J. C.

Dönges, T. E.

Fouché, J. J.

Grobler, J. H.

Labuschagne, J. S.

Le Roux, P. M. K.

Le Roux, S. P.

Loubser, S. M.

Louw, E. H.

Malan, D. F.

Olivier, P. J.

Schoeman, N. J.

Strauss, E. R.

Swart, A. P.

Swart, C. R.

Van Zyl, J. J. M.

Verster, J. D. H.

Viljoen, D. T. du P.

Vosloo, L. J.

Warren, S. E.

Werth, A. J.

Wilkens, Jacob.

Wolfaard, G. v. Z.

Tellers: P. O. Sauer and P. J. van Nierop.

Noes—49:

Abbott, C. B. M.

Abrahamson, H.

Acutt, F. H.

Alexander, M.

Allen, F. B.

Ballinger, V. M. L.

Bawden, W.

Bell, R. E.

Botha, H. N. W.

Bowker, T. B.

Burnside, D. C.

Carinus, J. G.

Christopher, R. M.

Clark. C. W.

Collins, W. R.

Conradie, J. M.

Deane, W. A.

Du Toit, R. J.

Fourie, J. P.

Friedlander, A.

Gilson, L. D.

Gluckman, H.

Hayward, G. N.

Henderson, R. H.

Hirsch, J. G.

Hofmeyr, J. H.

Johnson, H. A.

Kentridge, M.

Klopper, L. B.

Lawrence, H. G.

Marwick, J. S.

Moll, A. M.

Mushet, J. W.

Neate, C.

Payn, A. O. B.

Pocock, P. V.

Robertson, R. B.

Shearer, V. L.

Smuts, J. C.

Solomon, V. G. F.

Sonnenberg, M.

Steyn, C. F.

Sturrock, F. C.

Trollip, A. E.

Van den Berg, M. J.

Van der Merwe, H.

Warren, C. M.

Tellers: G. A. Friend and W. B. Humphreys.

Amendment accordingly negatived.

Vote No. 24.—“Posts, Telegraphs and Telephones”, as printed, put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 25.—“Public Works”, £1,558,000,

I see here an amount of £101,500 under “Minor Works”. I would very much like to know from the Minister what those minor works are. Then I would like to bring this to the notice of the Minister. In 1937 he promised me to build a new Post Office at Ventersdorp. It is now already six years ago since he made the promise, but up to the present he had not yet carried it out. When I was a Fusionist the promise was made to me, but since I left the Fusionists I am being treated like a stepchild. I would very much like to know what the position is regarding the Post Office at Ventersdorp. The Minister knows that the old Post Office is in a terrible state, and it is very necessary that a new Post Office be built.

I would like to make a similar request to the Minister in connection with the magistrate’s office at Brits. We are already waiting 15 years, and not five years, like that hon. member has said. The Minister will know that two reports have already been made by magistrates that the condition of the office is of such a nature that it must be described as scandalous. The Minister will also know that certain amounts were made available to make a start with the building of another office. It was already approved and £1,000 was made available. Now I would like to know from the Minister whether his Department intends to continue with the building of the magistrate’s office or not. I just want to add—the Minister was not yet at Brits and he does not know what the position of the magistrate’s office is there—that the magistrate’s office is truly a blot on the town. I have on a previous occasion drawn the Minister’s attention to the fact that the magisterial area of Brits is one of the busiest in the Transvaal, especially on the platteland. A greater percentage of cases are heard there than in 90 per cent. of the other magisterial areas, more than in some of the cities. There is, therefore, definitely a great need for a proper and spacious building in the place of the one at present in use. I will be glad if the Minister will give a reassuring reply that a building will shortly be completed.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to know what the Minister’s postwar policy is in regard to public works. I am hoping there is going to be a period of construction and reconstruction in most of our smaller towns, and in the bigger towns as well. There is a sad lack of public buildings in the smaller places, and even in the bigger towns we possess only dingy old buildings, out of date buildings and unhealthy buildings, and in some of the bigger centres there are no public buildings at all. They possess of course a post office and a gaol and a magistrate’s court, but there are no proper public buildings. I am sorry to come down to parish pump affairs this afternoon, but I just want to mention one or two things happening in my own centre. We have a Public Works Department of sorts situated virtually in a back yard, and the Agricultural Department near the police station is also in a back yard. One or two other offices, such as the Births and Deaths Office and the Electoral Office, are in a fairly decent building. But in a building which was previously used as a bar, and other departments such as Child Welfare, the Labour Department and the Social Welfare Office are all in separate places. They are in quite nice offices but in private buildings, and if you want to visit these you simply have to walk the whole town flat because they are in six or seven different places. I think that is a wrong policy. It would be far better to have a proper central block in which everything could be centralised. There is a sad lack of public buildings suitable for housing these offices, right throughout the country, and I would like to know what the post-war policy is.

I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to the cleaners and other labourers who are in the service of the Department of Public Works. These persons receive a very small salary, and then they get 14 days leave annually. Now the practice is that they get leave every year towards the end of December, so that three public holidays fall within their holiday period. The result of this is that they lose practically three holidays. We know that the position in the public service is such that when a public holiday falls within a person’s leave period, it is not added to his holiday; he does not get that additional day or days. This, therefore, means that these persons, because they are given leave towards the end of the year, lose a period of three days each year. In other words, instead of 14 days’ leave, they actually get only 11 days. I would hope that the Minister can meet them in this respect, either by adding the days, or by granting the holiday during another period. Also this in regard to their position. The cleaners in the magistrate’s offices receive a uniform, but the persons who are employed at other places, must use their own clothes. They do the same type of work as those who receive the uniform, and I would like to hear from the Minister if it is not possible to treat all these people equally and to supply all of them with a uniform. If a uniform is supplied in one section, then it ought also to be done in another section.

I think the Minister will say that now here a member is rising who really has reason to complain. I represent Harrismith already now for five years, and the Minister has from time to time promised that he would give a decent Post Office to the attractive and important town of Harrismith. In the past he has said that he could not erect a new building, but could have alterations brought about in the existing building to make it a suitable Post Office. The Magistrate’s building is so antiquated, that it is truly a shame to see in what circumstances the Magistrate, the assistant Magistrate and the staff had to carry out their duties. Another place in my constituency is Warden. Years ago already an exchange of land took place there. A stand is available there for the Department on which to erect the necessary buildings; year after year promises have been given that the Post Office will be built, but up to the present this has not yet been done. The same applies to the Post Office and Police quarters at Memel. If it is impossible to erect these buildings let the Minister then tell me so, then the public know where they are, and then I know where I am. But I trust that the Minister will go out of his way to make these few small concessions to the Harrismith constituency.

I would like to bring the Magistrate’s office and residency at Richmond to the notice of the Minister. Years ago already representations were made to him. It is a building which is quite 100 years old, and it is high time that a new building is erected there, and I hope the Minister will see his way clear to make a change as soon as possible. Then I come to the magistrate’s office at Hanover. The hon. member for Brits (Mr. Grobler) has spoken of waiting for fifteen years. I think we are waiting for fifty years already. The position is very critical. If the Minister comes there, he will see that the passage where Europeans and coloureds have to enter and where the counter is, is not larger than 10 ft. x 3 ft. If a coloured man stands there, no one can get past. This position cannot continue as in the past. I hope that the Minister will immediately send an Inspector there and make investigations to see what changes can be made without perhaps erecting a new building. A new building is urgently necessary, but if it cannot be done under the circumstances, the existing building must be altered, so that the position can be temporarily improved to solve the question of Europeans or coloureds, who cannot be together in that terrible little place. If the Minister personally sits in that office for half-an-hour, he will realise that it cannot continue like that and that a change must come.

Here I now hear all the complaints of the other members. They have not got complaints in comparison with mine. They are just speaking for their constituencies. The hon. member for Victoria West (Mr. D. T. du P. Viljoen) has a palace compared with what I have in my constituency. The Police Station at Aliwal North is a place through which the wind has now been blowing for years. Five years ago, the building was fourth on the list, and it has now not yet been built. The police came to me. They say they are taken ill in the building. We then went to the church and the church took mercy on us and made available a building to us at £8 per month. Take a place like Barkly. It snows there in winter. The doors of the building are broken, you can see through the walls. And then members talk here of buildings at their places. The Minister yesterday called himself Prime Minister. Today he is Minister of Public Works, and I am convinced that, if he goes to look at those buildings, he will begin building immediately. My area has genuinely been neglected. I have spoken in a friendly way; I continued to speak in a friendly way; I went to the Department and I went to the police, and now I am beginning to feel that I will have to take action. Should fire occur at Aliwal North and Barclay, you must know where it comes from. I invite the Minister to come and have a look. I hope he will not again postpone indefinitely these buildings. I belong to this side and I also need police protection to look after me, I genuinely hope that this year will not pass before we have the necessary buildings there. Other members cannot complain in comparison with the buildings in my constituency.

Mr. Chairman, I want to appeal to the hon. Minister on behalf of our youth and especially on behalf of those young men who will be returning to this country after the war. I want an opportunity for them to become skilled craftsmen. While I know that the Apprenticeship Act provides for the employment of a certain number, I think the Government should see that in every building contract of theirs a provision should be made for the employment of a certain number of apprentices or learners on the job. There will be a big war construction programme. If you look round on any building that has been put up in the past, you will have noticed that very few apprentices are employed there. Perhaps that is on account of the close preserve of the trades unions, but I would suggest to the Minister that in future in any Government building contract a clause should be inserted to the effect that the contractor should employ a certain number of apprentices, say one for every four skilled craftsmen. On these large buildings all sorts of craftsmen and artisans are employed, electrical, mechanical, carpenters, plumbers and others, and I think if a clause such as this could be inserted in future Government contracts, it would definitely give better opportunities for our youths to become craftsmen.

I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the state of the magistrate’s office at Malmesbury. I might say that if the hon. member for Aliwal (Capt. G. H. F. Strydom) was acquainted with the position of the magistrate’s office at Malmesbury, he would himself have admitted, however serious the conditions at Aliwal North might be, that the position at Malmesbury is still more serious. Last year I went to the Minister’s office in connection with this matter. Time and again I described the position to the Minister. I might say that this old established town in the Western Province has one of the oldest magistrate’s offices in the country. The place where the counter is situated, where Income Tax, Motor Licences etc. must be paid, is 9 ft. x 5 ft. There Europeans and non-Europeans have to come and make their payments. It is one of the buildings to which the Department of Public Works has already given attention. The Department is aware of the position, and therefore, I want to ask the Minister in all earnestness now to give his attention to this matter. If they are not yet quite certain, let them hold an inspection and then do justice to Malmesbury.

I have listened to the complaints of all the members. I did not think that there would be so many members who would have to complain about the conditions in their constituencies. They must look after their constituencies. Swellendam is the third oldest place in the Union. I should like the Minister to take the magistrate’s office and to remove it to the local museum. That is the best place for it. It is not small. It is fairly big, but the facilities etc., are of such a nature that I am surprised that the magistrate manages to retain his health. The magistrate’s office in Robertson is part of the gaol. When the window is opened, one looks into the backyard of the gaol; and when one conducts a case there, one can hear the screaming of the youngsters who are being beaten. It reminds one of the middle ages. The time has arrived for an alteration to be brought about in connection with that type of building. I want to admit that in some parts of the constituency, as for instance at Riversdale and Montagu, there are new buildings. But the time has arrived for something to be done in so far as the other places are concerned. I do not even want to refer to the magistrate’s office at MacGregor. It is a big building which was formerly a broom factory. Now it has become a magistrate’s office. I know the Minister will say that he does not possess the necessary material at present for the construction of these buildings. But he can at least make investigations, and I shall be satisfied if he tells me that these places will receive preference. In connection with these buildings I want to say that I think it is wrong on the part of the Government to hire buildings. They should rather have their own buildings erected. I am very glad that a place like Cape Town has got a beautiful post office. It makes us feel proud of our country. But if they had taken a small portion of the money which was used for the numerous ornaments in the post office and had erected buildings in the country, which are necessary, it would have been better. I have already said on a previous occasion that the magistrate’s residence which was built at Robertson, consists of a flat-roofed building which resembles a police station. The magistrate’s old house is still there. The assistant magistrate does not want to live in it because he is afraid it will collapse on him, and it has been let to a foreigner. The assistant magistrate had a house which he rented; now this house has been sold and he is practically on the street. The Government should make provision for their highly placed officials, and if they cannot do so they are neglecting their duty. They should make provision for proper facilities for those people. Today we have the position that the assistant magistrate has to live in an hotel or rent a house. In Robertson the Government owns the land with the building on it. All that is necessary is to put a small piece of dynamite under the house and to blow it sky high, and then the Government will have their land available to construct another building. They have sufficient land available to erect all these buildings. These places in the Platteland urgently require new buildings, and we cannot understand why one place should receive preference.

We have heard so many complaints from all sides of the House in connection with magistrate’s office buildings, that one almost hesitates to make a further request to the Minister. May I remind the Minister of the fact that five years ago the magistrate’s building at Parys appeared on the estimates. This unfortunate war came along, and the money for that building was removed from the estimates. The principle has therefore been accepted. The present building at Parys is absolutely a disgrace to a place like Parys, which was nearly the capital of the Union. It is not at all impossible that in the future it may still become the capital of the Union. The conditions are so miserable in so far as that building is concerned, that it is simply a scandal that the public should have to use such a place. I want to point out that Parys is the holiday resort of the Northern Province. The land is there, and I hope that the Minister will give further consideration to this matter. May I now deal with a very important point. After making enquiries in the Cape Peninsula I find that there is tremendous surplus of native labour here. I find after investigation that when the Government has a building erected for defence purposes,—I take it under the Department of the Minister—a telegram is sent by the contractor to the effect that he requires 100 natives. Instead of a hundred, a thousand natives arrive. The result is that there are thousands and thousands of unemployed natives in the Cape Peninsula with whom the Department is saddled. I hope that in the future the Minister will take steps to see to it that when public buildings are erected, only the people who are actually required, will be recruited.

All sorts of threats have been made here. Some people want to burn down buildings and others want to out dynamite under them. Some members have pleaded and others have quarrelled. I want to plead. I think the Minister knows the English saying: “First the girls and then the boys.” The hon. member for Harrismith (Mr. E. R. Strauss) made a plea in this House for a magistrate’s office and a Post Office in the town bearing the name of Sir Harry Smith. In my turn I want to say: First give Lady Smith (Ladismith) what she is entitled to. She is the wife of Harrismith, and she is an older town than Harrismith. The Minister is aware of the conditions at Ladismith. He has been there and he knows that there is an old thatched roofed building. We shall not set fire to it, because then we would have nothing left, and if we were all to do that, the Minister would not have the money to erect the necessary buildings. The Minister knows what the position is there; he has made investigations. I have brought it to his notice year after year, and certain promises were made by the Minister. When will the Minister eventually make a start with this work? I am becoming old, and I may die before the Minister gives effect to these promises. I want to ask the Minister in all seriousness to give these buildings to us now, because we require them. If the building should catch fire because of the thatched roof, the furniture in it will also be burnt out. Then it is also attached to the gaol. The Minister was friendly enough to provide us with a gaol, but this building is attached to the old goal, and I think he should give us another building, as he has promised to do.

When I look at the Minister, I feel that he should be ashamed in regard to the condition of the agricultural college at Middleburg. Lizards are running all over the building, and all sorts of insects crawl through the walls. The Minister does not mind taking away the money of the teachers and the students. Five years ago already he promised to effect improvements, but he has not done so yet. The water pipes were laid on during the Second War of Independence. They are so rusty that they are almost closed and half the water is simply wasted, but these poor people have to pay for it. When the Australian farmers were here they said that Grootfontein was one of the best agricultural colleges in South Africa, but that it was the most badly equipped. The farmers used their own money to build a wool research laboratory at that centre, but the Department did not follow this up with something on similar lines. I invite the Minister to go and sleep one evening in one of those bungalows. Well, at the moment he is looking quite well, but after a week of that experience he will be reduced to a skeleton. The children have to put up with the cold winter winds. I slept there myself, and I know how cold it is.

Did you sleep ?

I tried to sleep. The children put two blankets under them, and then the cold wind still comes through. The students are sent there in order to do their work and to study, and then we find that they leave in a sick condition. The Minister should do his best to make adequate provision. I take it the Minister of Agriculture has often spoken to him about the matter.

Yes, he has.

I am convinced that in thise case the Department failed in its duty. I invite the Minister to go and sleep there; he will then immediately realise that better buildings are required.

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to the magistrate’s court at Trompsburg. It is a good thing that mythology portrays the goddess of justice to us as being blind, because if the goddess of justice were to go about in this country and see the various priests of her faith, such as the hon. member for Kensington (Mr. Blackwell) and the hon. member for Fauresmith (Dr. Dönges) and others, and especially if she were to see the high priest of her faith in South Africa, the hon. Minister of Justice, she would have blushed in shame if she had not been blind. But I think that the goddess would also blush in shame if she were to see the temples in which her faith must be practised, and I think that one of the most scandalous cases is the magistrate’s court at Trompsburg. I think it is almost impossible to expect justice to be done in surroundings such as these, and since the Minister has so carefully made notes of this matter, I cherish the fond expectation that this injustice to the goddess of justice will no longer be tolerated at Trompsburg.

I do not know that this discussion is in keeping with the Vote which we are dealing with. We have a Public Works Loan Vote where all these matters can be dealt with.

We shall repeat them there again. An election is coming.

All I want to say is this. I have listened to the remarks made by the various hon. members opposite and for every speech delivered on that side of the House, two similar speeches can be made by members on this side of the House for various Government buildings throughout South Africa. I want to say that the Public Works Department realises that the Government buildings in the country towns particularly need renovation. We have a building programme of over £10,000,000 which has been submitted to the various departments for their order of priority to tackle when opportunity enables us to do so, when building materials and things are available. We are not waiting for the opportunity of putting this £10,000,000 programme into operation. We are preparing even now so that there will be no delay when the opportunity offers.

The present requirements will be out of date when you start building.

That is quite possible—what is required now may be out of date in two years time—you may want double the amount of accommodation. I want to point out to hon. members that the only buildings I have control over, subject to the financial provision being approved of by the Minister of Finance, are the post office buildings, and I shall take good care that post offices get a good share of the money spent. All the other Departments will also look after their own requirements. If it had not been for the war, many things complained of today would have been behind us. There are items which have been on our Estimates for a long time. We have not been able to tackle them. I hope we shall be able to do so soon and get rid of some of the items on the Estimates. One is conscious of the necessity of these things being done. The hon. member for Bloemfontein, South (Mr. Haywood) has raised the question of cleaners. Some of them do get uniforms and others don’t. I don’t know why not, but I shall investigate that matter. The other question about the three days I shall go into. I am not able to say that you shall pay, but the request has my sympathy. I hope hon. members will be satisfied with my explanation of the position we are in.

There is a small matter which I have already brought to the notice of the Minister in writing but which I want to raise here because his reply was not satisfactory, and that is the building of an office at Hopefield. Something happened there which came as a slight shock to the inhabitants of the town, and when it was brought to my notice, it was also a slight shock to me to discover that such things were taking place, namely that the Minister came to an agreement with a certain inhabitant of the town that if he erected a building, the Minister would rent it from him. I did not think that such things could be done.

It is happening everywhere.

I want to comment on this particular case. In the first place it was arbitrarily given to this person; no tenders were asked for or anything of that nature. The Minister must please explain, in the first instance, how it came about that he asked this particular person to erect the building, or who asked this person to do so? If a building had to be erected, why was it not done through the general public? The second question which I want to put is how it came about that the land where the building is going to be erected, borders on land belonging to the Government, and how it came about that this man fortuitously owned the land adjacent to the land of the Government. In the third place I want to ask, in view of the fact that there is a great shortage of Government buildings at Hopefield, whether it would not have been better to erect on its own land, the buildings which the Government required, instead of building and renting such swallows’ nests? Will it not pay the Government better to erect these buildings on its own land? I can appreciate that there are certain difficulties today with regard to materials, but I want to repeat what I said in a previous debate, namely that palaces are being erected at certain places by individuals, and when one sees those palaces, one is surprised to learn that the Government has no material available for buildings which are so urgently required.

I want to draw the Minister’s attention to what I consider a matter of great future interest, namely the question of providing and catering for building material. The Minister of the Interior outlined his new building schemes in the House recently, and the point struck us when he was telling us how the Government was going to provide building loans to carry on building for soldiers and others—where we would get the materials from. As hon. members may know I have been in the building trade practically all my life and I know that many difficulties will occur in regard to providing the necessary building material. I hope the Government will bear that in mind. I want to say this from my point of view, it will not only be necessary to provide what we at present consider our future requirements, but I believe with the great era of prosperity which we are going to experience after the war that our present requirements in the way of building material will dwindle into nothingness with what we shall need then. Perhaps I am taking up an unduly optimistic attitude, but that is what I feel, and I hope the Government will bear this in mind. I therefore want to ask the Minister to provide building materials in this country on a large scale indeed. I want to avail myself of this opportunity of thanking the Government for the way they have provided and conserved building materials since the beginning of the war. A tremendous amount of defence work has been carried out, and to my own knowledge not even a nail has been lacking, and considering we are at war and building materials have had to be brought many thousands of miles, and our Defence Force has had to be looked after, I think the thanks of the country are due to the Government for the way they have provided all that was necessary. I would like to know the Government’s intention in regard to providing building materials in future.

It has been generally felt during the course of this debate that the Minister devotes his attention more to matters with which he has nothing to do, and that as a result of that he devotes less attention than he should to matters which do concern him. It has been felt, for example, that the Minister devotes an excessive amount of attention to the war. When it comes to the war he is very liberal. I want to remind the Minister of the fact that he is not occupying his office in order to wage war, but, in the first instance, to keep his eye on and to devote his attention to the work which falls under his Department. The Minister may reemember that some years ago—and I did so nearly every year—I complained about the conditions of the police station at Boshof. The facts are on record, and the Minister can obtain them. I doubt whether there is any place in the whole country where the police station and the office are in such a poor condition as at Boshof. The people stationed there have been working in a little galvanised iron building for many years. The Minister said that the work was approved of long ago, for the erection of a new building, but it is still awaiting completion. One cannot expect the officers and men to stay in a small galvanised iron building for an indefinite period, crowded together as they are. This matter cannot be put too strongly. It is an unusual case. The Minister may say that certain work must be held over on account of the circumstances in which the country is placed, but here we have a very urgent need. A great deal of work is still being done, and here we have an urgent case which should definitely engage the attention of the Minister.

In reply to the hon. member for Boshof (Mr. Serfontein) and the hon. member for Lang-laagte (Mr. Bawden) I want to say that the position in South Africa so far as building materials is concerned, is very serious. And we have to be very careful as to how these materials are used. I know that these complaints are due to permits which were granted before there was building control. Many houses that are being completed and bioscopes that are being completed started before this building control came into operation. It should have been in existence twelve months earlier and the position would have been different.

Why did you not start it earlier?

In regard to permission for new bioscopes—well there is no hope of that. The same thing applies to Government buildings. And Municipal and Provincial buildings have also to be held over for lack of material. We are doing all we can to conserve the materials which we have, we are doing all we can to find substitutes, and our primary object if to see that materials are available for the building of houses for which there is a growing need throughout South Africa. The same thing applies to the buildings at Boshof as applies to the other towns. At present no one can give any undertaking when these buildings will be taken in hand.

How long will this position prevail?

. Tell me how long the war will last? The position of building material is very serious. The hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. Erasmus) asked a question about the post office at Hopefield. Leasing post offices built by private people is quite a common practice although I do not encourage it. In this case a post office official examined the position and made a report to the Public Works Department, it was scrutinised by the Public Works Department, and a lease was entered into.

I feel that I cannot be satisfied with the reply of the Minister. If he were to get up and say that buildings are no longer being erected, one might be able to appreciate his argument, but certain public buildings are still being erected, and since that is the case, no delay can be tolerated as far as the police station at Boshof is concerned. The officers and men are working in a small galvanised iron building, in summer and in winter, in cold and in heat. Brick buildings are being replaced by stone buildings, but this galvanised iron building is allowed to stand, and the people must work under impossible conditions.

Vote put and agreed to.

Vote No. 26.—“Government Motor Transport and Garages”, £205,800, put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 27.—“Interior”, £1,147,600,

May I avail myself of the half-hour rule? I intended to speak in English, because I have something to discuss that is of particularly great interest to Natal. I spoke to members of the Dominion Party out there just now, and informed them that I am going to deal with the subject, but they are conspicuous by their absence. In view of the fact that it affects their own Province, I had hoped that they might perhaps support this side of the House. It is the subject of the penetration of Asiatics in both the Transvaal and Natal. In 1939 the Government of the day introduced a Bill, called the Asiatic (Land and Trading in Transvaal) Bill. That Bill was introduced by the previous Government and it was looked upon as an interim measure intended exclusively to peg the position so far as trading on and occupation of sites by Asiatics are concerned. The then Minister of the Interior, Mr. Stuttaford, explained the matter fairly comprehensively at the introduction of the Bill, and there was a long discussion in connection with the whole matter of separate residential areas. The then Minister felt very strongly on the matter and expressed himself strongly, and he informed the House that he is quite in favour of the provision of separate residential areas for Europeans and Asiatics. This was perhaps one of the reasons why Mr. Stuttaford, when there was a change of Government, was not again appointed as Minister of the Interior, because I can recall that at the discussion of the measure the present Minister of Finance strongly resisted certain Clauses in Committee, to such an extent that the Minister of Finance had to forfeit his place in the Party. When the Bill was introduced Mr. Stuttaford, after he had discussed the whole problem of residential areas said—

That is to say the solution of the problem of penetration into European residential areas, and the securing of trading licences—

That was in 1939. The then Minister said that it was merely a temporary measure to enable him to go fully into the matter and to draft a comprehensive measure that would serve as a solution of the problem, and that would be introduced at the next Session. In view of the attitude of the Government and the intention of the then Minister, the Act then provided that it would be valid until 1941. It is desirable that hon. members shall know what the most important provisions of the Act were. The Act had three important provisions, namely (1) that from April, 1939, no certificate would be issued to an Asiatic to obtain a new trading licence in the Transvaal, except in areas that have already been set aside under the Gold Law for Asiatic occupation. That Was the first important provision. Then no certificate was to be issued to an Asiatic for the purpose of obtaining a new trading licence. The existing licences would remain, but no new trading licences would be issued. There was a second important provision, that no certificate would be issued to any Asiatic to transfer his trading business to another place. That was also an important provision. Then there was still a third particularly important provision, namely that no certificate would be issued to an Asiatic after 1939 to enable him to go and live on a site which was not already occupied by non-Europeans on that date. This meant that no Asiatic would be allowed to go and live on a site which on 30th April, 1939, was occupied by a European. Those were the three important provisions of the Bill. The Bill would be valid until 6th May, 1941, but it was an interim measure and the Government would draft a broad and comprehensive Bill before the time for the solution of the whole problem. That was in 1939. At the end of 1939, however, a change of Government came about, and the present Minister of the Interior was appointed as Minister of this particular department. In 1941, when the period of the 1939 Act had expired, the present Minister came to Parliament with an amending Bill to extend the provisions of the original Act to 1st May, 1943. The responsible Minister, the present Minister of the Interior, then asked for postponement so as to have an opportunity of going more thoroughly into the matter and then finding a solution. He said, inter alia, as a reason for the further extension—

The House will remember that the Government in that year decided to appoint a Commission of Enquiry in connection with the penetration of Asiatics, and Mr. Justice Broome was appointed as Chairman. The Minister said—

That was in 1941. Then the Minister passed off the matter on to the Broome Commission. The Commission was appointed and the matter would then be tackled as soon as the Broome Commission’s report became available. The report of the Broome Commission was submitted on the 25th July, 1941, but 1942 passed and the Government sat still and did nothing. This Session came, and up to the present we have not had notice of any measure that will be introduced to solve the problem. What is the reason? Is there any intention on the part of the Government to grapple with this important problem? The House knows that this problem did not originate a year or two ago, but that we have had to do with it for the past thirty years. Numbers of laws have been adopted in connection with the matter, but no satisfactory legislation has yet been passed. All the laws had their weaknesses which made it possible for the Asiatic to evade them in every way. Most of the laws did perhaps curtail penetration to a certain extent, and put the brake on the aggravation of the problem a little, but actually no solution of the problem was found. The matter becomes more urgent every day. This Session has already lasted two months and up to the present the Minister has said nothing of what he intends to do. I put the question to him at to whether he intended to extend the provisions of the old Act. His reply was that the matter was being considered. But I understand that the actual reason for the laxity and neglect of duty on the part of the Government, and the fact that they do not intend to do anything in connection with the matter, is this. The Government today is dependent on the support of the Coolies for their war effort and on India as a member of the British Commonwealth. They are dependent on the support of the Asiatics in South Africa, and this Government does not dare to do anything in connection with the matter. This Government has not the moral courage to do anything to solve this important problem. That is the actual position. And instead of solving the problem, more and more rope is being given the Asiatics. One can really not expect anything else, because, as I have already said, the cause of the neglect of duty and the neglect of the problem by the Government is so obvious that it is not necessary to expand on the subject. We see in this connection how weakly the Act adopted in 1939, to peg the position temporarily, was administered in the past three and a half years. In the three and a half years of the administration of the present Minister of the Interior, there was, to say the least of it, laxity in connection with the application of the three important provisions of the Act which I have mentioned. But there is still another important provision in the Act and that is the provision which empowers the Minister of the Interior to grant exemption to any Asiatic in connection with the three positions I have already mentioned. The Minister has the power to grant exemption to an Asiatic so that he may obtain a new licence, or may transfer his business, or may reside in a house that was occupied by a European on the 30th April, 1939. And now the first question that arises is this: What use has the hon. Minister made in the past three and a half years of this exemption clause; how did he use the powers he possesses under this provision? According to the figures I have received from him he has granted 1,283 permits during the four years since the operation of this Bill, for trading licences and transfers to Asiatics. In the four years he has granted no fewer than 1,283 permits, and these are not in connection with hawkers or any Asiatics who do not fall under the provisions of this Act; but to Asiatics who fall under the provisions of this Act the Minister has issued 1,283 permits to obtain new trading licences and transfers. In addition he issued 95 permits to Asiatics who were permitted to occupy sites that were occupied by Europeans at 30th April, 1939. That is the manner in which the present Minister has administered and applied this Act in the past three and a half years. This is the number of permits granted, but it is generally known that apart from the exemption which the present Minister has granted the Asiatics, the Asiatics still evade the provisions of this Act on a big scale. Where we find that 1,283 exemptions were granted, we can take it that at least double that number of Asiatics evaded the provisions of this Act. I am going to give the numbers of a few stands that are illegally occupied by Asiatics and the names of the persons who are the owners, to show to what extent the Act is being evaded. Recently I put a question to the hon. Minister in connection with one of the suburbs in Johannesburg. I asked him if any steps were taken in connection with the illegal occupation of sites by Asiatics in the Newlands Township, in Johannesburg, and if so, what steps he took. The Minister replied that it was the policy not to grant permits in respect of that Township in view of the fact that it is overwhelmingly a European residential area. He replied that the matter was being investigated. I have a list here before me of the owners of sites in Newlands. I just want to mention a few names on the list. I have a list here of forty or fifty sites already occupied by Asiatics in Newlands, and on the majority of those sites there are trading undertakings conducted by Asiatics. Take for instance Site No. 1616 at Newlands. There is an Asiatic trading undertaking on that site. The registered owner is a certain Mr. A. Kroger, 140 Pritchard Street. Then there is site No. 1560 registered in the name of Miss B. Hendrik, c/o Gada & Co., Evaton. Then there is No. 1562 in the name of the same person. Nos. 1564 and 1567 are also in the name of that person. There must be some means or other by which the Asiatics evade the law. One matter of importance is this, that all these stands are not freehold but lease-hold stands. There must be some provision or other in the law that enables the Asiatics to evade the provisions of the 1939 Act. Here we have stands that are ostensibly registered in the names of Europeans, but which are actually owned by Asiatcs. There are a large number of stands that are ostensibly registered in the names of Europeans. In some way or other the Asiatics evade the law so far as that suburb is concerned. It is one of the suburbs in which large-scale evasions take place. But it is not only in that suburb where this happens; I can say with the greatest confidence that that evasion takes place today throughout the Transvaal. That evasion is taking place on a particularly large scale. The Asiatics are today illegally obtaining possession of stands, and the danger is that after a year or two the Government will have to come forward with an exemption measure and say that those Asiatics have been in possession of the stand so long that they must now be allowed to own that property legally. There are other ways in which the law is evaded. I have one case here of an important building of tenements in Braamfontein, Johannesburg. These tenements were recently sold for more than £12,000. They were registered in the name of a certain company, directors of which were ostensibly all Europeans. The name of the company, is Faithlie Investments (Pty.) Ltd. The directors are James May Duthie and Catherine Swan Godfrey, both Europeans, but according to my information the latter is the wife of an Asiatic doctor. In this way the law is being evaded. The Asiatics obtained possession of these valuable properties. Not only that, but three or four shops in that building are occupied by Asiatics, and nothing is done by the Government to put a stop to it. These are a few of the numerous evasions that take place. But instead of the Government intervening and putting a stop to this state of affairs, it simply lets matters develop. The position so far as Natal is concerned is much worse. There the position amounts to a greater scandal than in the Transvaal. Early in 1940 a deputation from the City Council of Durban met the Minister of the Interior. I just want to say in passing that so far as this problem is concerned it has assumed greater proportions in Natal than in the Transvaal. In Natal there were no provisions to prevent the Asiatics from acquiring important and valuable stands in the big cities. Although there was perpetual agitation the Governments of the past simply sat still and did nothing, but since the outbreak of the war the action of the Asiatics in connection with the acquisition of valuable property has increased to such an extent that a hefty agitation arose in Natal. The Government was ultimately compelled to do something in connection with the matter. In 1940 this deputation from the Durban City Council approached the Minister, and after they had made representations to the Minister, he said that he would now appoint a fact-finding commission, and that he would now determine whether there was actually penetration into European areas in Natal and the Transvaal since 1927. He then appointed a fact-finding commission under the Chairmanship of Mr. Justice Broome. On the proposal of the Minister, and after the Durban City Council and the Indian Congress of Natal had come to an agreement, they also appointed a certain committee, which was called the Lawrence Committee, in the middle of 1940. The object of the appointment of this Committee was to try to put a stop to the peneration of Asiatics into European areas in Durban in a nice way. But this Committee which was appointed on the proposal of the Minister had no statutory powers. It consisted of leading Indians and Europeans, but they had no legal powers and they were not able to do anything. They could merely act in a advisory capacity on the one hand, and on the other hand try by means of discussions to put a stop to this penetration of Asiatics. Towards the end of 1942 the City Council had already notified the Minister that this Lawrence Committee had no value, that it had no statutory powers and that they could therefore do nothing to circumvent penetration. They asked therefore that the Committee should have legal powers. To this the Minister replied—

In other words, the Minister replied, when the City Council of Durban urged that the Government should do something in connection with this matter, that the Government should introduce legislation, to this the Minister simply replied that the Government did not intend to do anything in the matter of legislation in connection with this matter.

You did not read the whole reply.

That is the most important part of the reply; it is the kernel of the reply. In 1940, before the Broome Commission, for their terms of reference were of such a nature that they could not actually fulfil their duties as the City Council of Durban and the Natalians expected—in the middle of 1940, before the full report of the Broome Commission was drafted, the Natal Municipal Association held a meeting in Dundee. That was on 24th October, 1941, and there they adopted this resolution—

Even before the Commission had brought out its report the Association of Municipalities in Natal felt that absolutely nothing would be achieved by the Broome Commission. They knew, as is usually the case with commissions, that the Commission would gain possession of only half of the facts. Ninety per cent. of the evasions that take place never get to the ears of the Commission. This is a very important body; the Association of Municipalities in Natal represents all the municipalities in Natal. In connection with this resolution which was sent to the Minister, he replied as follows—

That was his reply, that any attempt to solve the difficulties by means of legislation would be most inappropriate and inadvisable at that juncture. Now we want to ask the Minister why it should be inappropriate and inadvisable to solve this problem by means of legislation. Is it because the Government did not have the moral courage to introduce legislation in connection with this matter; is it because they simply want matters to develop until after the war and then to leave it over to another Government to solve this matter? On 25th January, 1941, the Broome Commission brought out the report, and they found that penetration had taken place in Durban. They said, for instance, that in the old city area alone there were 512 cases of penetration. This Commission found that the rateable value of property in the possession of Asiatics in Durban in the old city area amounted to more than £2,000,000. But on 6th November, 1942—the city of Durban was not satisfied with this report—their property manager submitted a report to the City Council which showed that between 1 October 1940 and 30 September 1942 another 208 properties had been sold by Europeans to Asiatics to a value of more than £350,000. They again sent a deputation to the Minister and urged that this matter should be solved and that legislation should be introduced. But on 17 December the Secretary of the Interior wrote to them—

In other words, the Government accepted that further big-scale penetration had taken place since 25 January 1941 to the end of 1942, and they decided to appoint another commission namely Mr. Justice Broome, to enquire into the matter. All that was necessary for the Minister to do was to go to the office of the Registrar of Deeds and to find out how many properties were registered in the names of Asiatics during this period. But in order to delay the matter again the Minister again appointed a commission. Then came the further announcement in February of this year that the Government had suddenly appointed an Asiatic Affairs Advisory Committee, but again without statutory power. That is what the Government has done in connection with this important problem in Natal and the Transvaal in the past 3½ years. They have appointed commissions, and they are still appointing commissions. I would like to learn from the Minister if the Government is simply going to abide by the commissions which they appoint, or whether they are prepared to do something to solve this problem? This matter is assuming larger proportions every day. In Natal the newspapers are full of properties that are bought by Asiatics in the middle of the commercial area of Durban. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, it is very gratifying to me to hear the hon. member for Fordsburg (Mr. B. J. Schoeman) taking up the cudgels on behalf of the Europeans in Durban on this matter of Indian penetration. I was very glad to hear a few days ago the hon. Minister of the Interior say in a speech which he made in the Senate that he intended taking up the question in regard to Indian penetration in Natal, but he qualified his remarks, saying it all depended on the report of Mr. Justice Broome’s Commission, which is undertaking an enquiry into the subject. I am grateful to the Minister for what he has done, but at the same time I consider that he has been dilly-dallying with this subject to such an extent that the position is becoming intolerable in Durban and Natal. A short while ago I put a question to the Minister, as to whether the Broome Commission found peneration by Indians had taken place in Durban. The answer was “yes”. I then proceeded to ask what he had done since the report had been published in which serious peneration was disclosed. The Minister replied that he was appointing another Broome Commission. Well, anything more futile I do not think one could possibly imagine. What was the use of appointing the first Broome Commission as a fact-finding commission, and when that Commission pointed out that serious penetration had taken place, nothing was done except to appoint another Commission? The thing has got to such a pass that the people of Durban have got into a state of exasperation. I am receiving letters almost every day. This is one from a constituent of mine. She says—

I want the Minister to take note of that.

One of the pleas put up by the Asiatics is that they buy property as an outlet for their accumulated funds. Well, I would like to ask the Minister whether he has enquired if the Indians, with all their surplus funds, have invested in war loans or Government stocks. There is always an opening for investment there, and to my mind, this plea of theirs, that they buy Durban property in order to find investments, does not hold water at all. Some people say that this is a Natal problem, we are always having it thrown up at us that Natal brought the Indians there. Well, sir, I deny that allegation, the people of Natal did not bring the Indians there. When the sugar planters wanted cheap labour the people of Natal said: “If you bring Indians to this country on no account are they to stay.” They made the stipulation that if Indian labour was brought into Natal it was not to remain, but was to go back at the end of the five years indenture. Well, sir, that went on, and eventually the sugar planters and politicians got together and Natal is now landed with these people.

Who allowed them to stay?

It was not the people of Natal, anyway. [Time limit.]

I would also like to use the half-hour rule. It is really encouraging to see that the hon. member for Stamford Hill (Mr. Acutt) has now really come to the conclusion that the penetration of Indians is a real danger, not only for Natal, but in fact a national danger. It is only a pity that he has woken up rather late to find out that this side of the House has not today for the first time protested against the policy that has been followed by consecutive governments, but has done so long ago. It is only a pity that we at that time when we on this side of the House on various occasions protested did not receive support from them. Perhaps the situation which has developed in Natal recently is assuming such proportions, is becoming so serious, that we in the future dill now get more support from them than we have had in the past. The hon. member also complains that, as he expresses it, the Minister is “dilly-dallying” with the problem. One commission after another is appointed and it appears that the Government can never come to a definite decision about what is to be done in connection with a definite solution to this problem. The reason for this is of course very clear. It is the same reason which today prevents the Minister from taking effective action which prevented the various Ministers in the past from taking effective steps. I go so far as to say that in principle it is the same reason which even in the days of the Transvaal Republican Government made it practically impossible to solve the problem, i.e. the interference of people who place the interest of Indians on a very high level, and consider it of very much more importance than they regard the interests of South Africa. We find that even in the Republican days when the Republican Government wanted to take action in connection with this problem, that there was interference from the British Government and that steps were taken which made it practically impossible to find an effective solution. After the Republican Government, efforts were made by consecutive governments to solve the problem, but as a result of the fact that South Africa was first a member of the British Empire and then a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations the position was in my opinion of such a nature that the Government with the best will in the world could not take action. Now the position may become still worse. In all fairness, if I were in the position of the Minister, I would probably have adopted the same attitude. It is very difficult to expect the Government to take steps against which an ally will protest strongly. I want to admit immediately that it is very difficult to expect the Minister to do so. It will certainly not surprise me if the Minister is not prepared to do something. But I again want to emphasise very strongly that unless effective steps are taken to find a solution to the problem, then I want to predict that this Indian problem will without a doubt be one of the most important reasons why South Africa will leave the British Commonwealth. I want to tell the House what my experience was during our visit to India. I had the honour to go there as a member of a delegation of the Government, and we repeatedly discussed the conditions in South Africa with prominent Indians. I mention this to show what the attitude is of the educated Indian in India. I came to the conclusion that the prominent Indian in India understood our position better than those people who reputedly represent the Indians here. They often asked us why we in South Africa hated the Indians so that we did not want to give them certain rights. Some of them asked me why if England gave those rights, for example the franchise to Indians, we in South Africa could also not give it to them. And I can give you the assurance that after we had explained the position to them that conditions in South Africa are quite different from what they are in England, i.e. that as regards the composition of the population, there was a small percentage of coloured people in England, while in South Africa the vast majority were coloured, they came to the conclusion that it was not unreasonable to expect that we in South Africa could not give the same rights to Indians as they have in England. I we tackle this matter properly, and if it is presented in the same perspective to the Government of India, then I feel convinced that the Indian Government will not consider it as unreasonable for us in South Africa to act in such a way so as to get an effective solution of this problem. I would like to say: The time has come, whether it is war or not, when effective action should be taken. Since I became a member of this House the Government has been warned year after year that this problem was threatening to get out of hand and that it was becoming greater and more difficult every year. In spite of commissions, laws and blue books, the problem has become greater every year, and I feel that we are eventually going to reach the stage where in certain places, especially in a surrounding like Durban, conditions are going to develop that are going to end in trouble. Those people will take matters in their own hands if the Government does not take effective steps. If this happens, then the Government will to a great extent be blamed for it. That the situation is unsatisfactory it is not necessary to emphasise here. The Minister has by implication in his statement in the Press admitted that conditions are very unsatisfactory. The hon. member for Fordsburg (Mr. B. J. Schoeman) has referred to it and also the hon. member for Stamford Hill (Mr. Acutt). I say therefore that the fact that the situation is serious leaves no doubt. The question is now whether the Government is going to do something. I want to appeal to the Minister not to delay any longer, but to take action as quickly as possible. When the Broome Commission was appointed, we appeared before the Commission in Pretoria and we registered protest because we thought—and I also did so here in Parliament—that the terms of reference of the Commission were not sufficiently comprehensive. Too little power was given to the Commission and the result was that although the Commission reported findings, its report was not of such a nature that it enabled the Minister to solve this problem. I mention this to show that no effort was made to get to the root of the trouble. The penetration was admitted by the present Commission, especially in Natal. But that it has also happened in the Transvaal, leaves no doubt. Some years ago I personally took the trouble to write a series of letters to the various municipalities in the Transvaal. I did not omit a single one of the Platteland municipalities. I confined myself principally to the Platteland. I asked all the town clerks to give me the number of Indian licences which existed in 1920 and which existed later on the date of my letters —I think in 1935. I can give you the assurance that I received a reply from about 95 per cent. of the town clerks and I can also give the assurance that with a few exceptions there was an increase in the Indian licences, and not only an increase, but an increase that was altogether out of proportion with the licences of European people. I admit that the Minister would be entitled to say that it is not fair merely to point out the increase in the number of licences, because there can also be a great increase in the number of licences for Europeans. But I say very clearly that the increase in Indian licences was out of all proportion with the increase of European licences. I do not want to take the matter any further, but I want to associate myself in all seriousness with the two previous speakers in making an appeal to the Minister to do something during this Session to put a stop to the development that is going on. If the Minister is going to wait still longer, then we do not know what is going to happen. The problem may assume very serious proportions. It has already assumed serious proportions. I do not blame this Government alone and also not the previous government alone. The situation is a result of the fact that consecutive governments have hesitated and have never taken effective action. The time has now definitely arrived when an end should be made to the existing conditions. Then there is another matter which I want to bring to the Minister’s attention, and that is the great delay that there is in the hearing of cases of appeal of interned persons. I have raised this matter on a previous occasion, but unfortunately the Minister was not here then. It is something which falls under him and therefore I now again want to draw his attention to it with the hope that he will properly consider these few points. One of the chief grievances of the internees today is the situation that for one reason or another they cannot have their appeals heard. A person is taken into custody and interned. The Minister has given me the assurance that it is done only after a proper investigation. I want for argument’s sake to assume that these people are arrested only after a proper investigation. But then we come to this point. I accept that the great majority of the internees claim that they are innocent. What is the position then? The Minister says that they can lodge an appeal and the appeal will be heard as soon as possible. If it is really the case that cases of appeal are dealt with quickly, then it would give a certain measure of satisfaction, and it would undoubtedly create a better spirit than what exists at the moment. But now we find that terrible delays take place—of this there can be no doubt. I have on a previous occasion mentioned a case which I want to mention again, i.e. that of a certain Mr. Theron of De Kroon in my constituency. Mrs. Theron on 26th October last year wrote to me that her husband had then already lodged an appeal. I communicated with the Department and on 23rd November received a reply that the matter was under consideration and that the appeal would first have to be dealt with before his case could be decided. On 11th January Mrs. Theron again wrote to me. Five months had already elapsed and the man was still waiting to have his appeal heard. It is now almost April, almost eight months since the date when the appeal was submitted and as far as I know, it has not yet been heard, unless it has happened in the past two weeks. Almost eight months have elapsed. There is a similar case of a certain Meiring of Magalieskraal. He was a commandant of the Ossewa-Brandwag. His appeal has been in the hands of the Commissioner for some time already and it also has not yet been heard. Then there is the case of someone outside of my constituency which has been brought to my notice, i.e. the case of constable P. H. Pieterse who was arrested at the time of the big raid on the police. He has been detained since 6th June and for seven months of that time he was in solitary confinement. His case has also not yet been heard.

Has he been interned?

I understand he has now been interned. He was in solitary confinement for seven months and I think that he has now been interned. I will read from a letter in connection with the case of Pieterse. Here it is stated—

He has therefore apparently been interned. The position is that he was arrested on 6th June and that he was locked up alone for seven months and apparently his appeal has not yet been heard. Then there is the case of constable G. du Plessis. I do not want to go into the particulars now, but I just want to point out that he is a sickly man who according to information, supplied by the firm of solicitors to whom his case was given, is suffering from a stomach complaint. He is really a sick man. Then there is the case of constable Benadie. This person is between 22 and 23 years old. His father has died during his internment. His mother lives at Kimberley and has no one to provide for her. There is also a little brother who is dependent on him. He has applied for parole, but it cannot be dealt with before his appeal has been heard. He requests that representations should be made for his appeal to be dealt with as quickly as possible. There are lots of these cases, especially of the police. I have mentioned these cases to bring to the Minister’s attention how much delay there is. I have been to Sir Theodor Truter, the Chief Control Officer and he tells me that the difficulty is that there are some hundreds of cases waiting. I have already asked the Minister privately whether it is not possible to appoint three or four commissioners of appeal. Let us now assume that the commissioner of appeal with his assistant must investigate all these cases. As the Minister admits himself some of these cases take a week to investigate. Well, then it will take four or five years before they have completed all the cases. In the meantime these people sit in the camps and they are perhaps innocent. I feel that the Government will be doing the people a great service if it would appoint a number of commissioners of appeal so that these appeal cases can be dealt with as quickly as possible.

I also want to deal with this question of Indian penetration, and I want to remind the House that when the Broome Commission was appointed it was appointed purely as a fact finding Commission. I do not want to deal with the terms of reference of that Commission except to point out one fact in regard to its recommendations on Indian penetration, that out of 577 cases of alleged penetration by the City Council of Durban, the Broome Commission did uphold that in 512 cases Indian penetration had been established. Now, admittedly these cases were over a period ranging from 1927 to the 30th September, 1940. It may be argued that quite a number of these cases were in contiguous areas, and that being so it may be argued that in regard to the areas which had been defined as predominently non-European, no consideration has been given to what might be described as the natural development of the Indian community, but since the appointment of that Committee we find other facts. At the same time I should like to say that while I am deeply sorry that the Government has not been able to solve this problem, I do not want the House or the country to consider that the Minister is entirely to blame. A Committee was appointed in Durban—known as the Lawrence Committee—with a view to an endeavour being made to solve this problem. Unfortunately, owing to the fact that, the Committee had not been given statutory authority, it failed. This problem cannot be solved without statutory authority, and any Committee which has been set up as for instance, the present Asiatic Affairs Advisory Body, can have no effect without such authority. Therefore the Committee, in actual fact, has been given a dose of slow poison by the Minister. But I shall deal with the Asiatic Affairs Committee later on. I would say again that the Lawrence Committee failed because it did not have statutory authority. Since the recommendation of the Broome Commission we find that from the 1st October, 1940, to the 31st December, 1942, there had been additional Indian penetration in 291 properties. These facts must be taken as proved because they are statistics which have been compiled from the returns of registered deeds of transfer, which the Registrar of Deeds, in terms of his statutory duty has furnished from time to time. They perhaps can be considered as conservative because they do not include two types of cases. Firstly, they do not include cases in which formal transfer has been taken, that is to say, where agreements have not been fully implemented, and they do not include the type of cases where Indian transferees who have had a European name and thereby might have escaped notice. So the 291 cases of Indian penetration which has taken place during the last two years and four months must be regarded not only as authentic figures, but as conservative figures. I think, bearing that figure in mind, and the previous figure, constitute grounds for justification, for the citizens of Durban, to feel alarmed at the increasing rate of penetration. In fact, I would go so far as to say because so very little has been accomplished in the last two or three years it has led to a position being created in which, as a result of what has happened, irreparable damage has been done to the relationship between the Indian community and the European community of Durban. I believe it will take some time before good relationship will be established again. Mr. Chairman, I want to appeal to the Minister this afternoon, in regard to the statement he made in the Other Place the other day. The Minister indicated if the Broome Commission proved that there was Indian penetration, the Government would introduce legislation, and furthermore, he took the opportunity of advising the Indian community that if such legislation was introduced it would have retrospective effect and he thereby warned them that there was no need for a last minute rush. Now, exactly in what way could we tackle this problem of Indian penetration? It has been suggested that anti-Asiatic clauses should be compulsory, and anti-European clauses too, or local option to anti-Asiatic clauses.

I regret to interrupt the hon. member but I must remind him that I cannot allow him to advocate new legislation.

Well, may I put it this way, that in my opinion, irrespective of whether the Government introduces legislation this matter can only be settled by the Minister taking strong action by taking powers to veto inter-racial acquisition of properties.

No, the hon. member cannot advocate that.

In regard to the appointment of the Asiatic Affairs Advisory Board in Durban I just want to say that in my opinion that Committee has been given a dose of slow poison because it has not got the statutory authority to veto either the acquisition of properties, or of taking action where such property has already been bought—it has no power to veto Indian occupation of an Indian owned property which is at present occupied by Europeans. I want to point out that that Committee has been given a dose of slow poison unless it is given statutory powers. If, of course, the Minister were to take these powers, then this Committee could perform a very useful function in seeing that the needs of the Indian community were being cared for.

I would like to remind the Minister of the Interior once more of the promise he made to me four years ago. Four years ago he promised me that he would visit Vrededorp to see what the conditions are there. Whether he has had so much work in this period, or whether he is afraid to see how serious matters are, I do not know. In any case he has not yet come, although I have reminded him every year of his promise. I would like him to come and see what the slums of Vrededorp and Johannesburg look like. I can tell him that things are very bad there. The position is that the houses of people are being broken down; there are vacant stands, but no other houses have been built for those people to live in. Those people must simply go and move in with others, or they must rent a house in a slum which is still worse. It is not that Vrededorp is so bad, but the position is that the location is on the one side of the street and the town on the other side. We therefore have Europeans on the one side of the street and natives and coloureds on the other side. The white people and the coloureds look into the front doors of one another. Although President Kruger in 1885 gave that piece of land to the Malays with the stipulation that no sub-letting should take place, yet it is allowed to be done, with the result that a native location has been formed there. We do not get many Malays there. They have a little shop and then in the back yard they have built a number of shacks in which as many as 75 natives sleep. This I saw personally when I went about there with the late Mr. Grobler. We had to go under police protection, because without police protection one cannot risk it. If this is necessary then we can well realise in what danger those European people are. I went and looked through those places and I was amazed that a disease has not yet broken out. The dirt and filth which I saw there is too terrible to describe. It has been brought to the attention of the City Council of Johannesburg time and again that subletting is not allowed there. But of course the City Council consists for the most part of negrophilists and they do not care what becomes of the poorer European people. They do not concern themselves with the people who live in Vrededorp. It is a scandal there. Every now and again we find that houses must be broken down in Vrededorp. I am thinking of the case of a certain Muller. He is a blind man, and his only child is also blind. His wife is sickly, but she assisted him by taking in washing to pay off the house. A week after they had paid off £475 they received notice that the house must be broken down. Muller himself could not break it down. This is where the parasites now come in. They break it down and then they take the windows and doors and sheet iron. Now Muller sits without a house. He has a bare piece of land and what can he do with that? I want to know from the Minister whether we dare allow such a state of affairs to develop. We have the skokiaan queens there and all kinds of terrible things go on there. The hon. member for Johannesburg, West (Mr. Lindhorst) will be able to confirm what I say here.

It is a question of Public Health and Housing. It does not fall under the Interior Vote. You must wait for the Public Health Vote.

But these are internal conditions. Vrededorp is not the only place. We also find those conditions in the constituency of the hon. member for Johannesburg, West. There it is just as bad. There we have the peneration of Asiatics, natives and coloureds. We have those places like Newlands and others, in which terrible conditions are developing.

I regret but I cannot allow the hon. member to discuss this matter further now.

Will I get an opportunity again?

Yes, on the Public Health Vote.

I want once again to touch on a matter that has been already been raised during previous Sessions, a matter in which a measure of improvement has been brought about, but which has not yet been altogether satisfactorily disposed of, i.e. the changing of names, which is something about which this side of the House feels very strongly, and I can give the Minister the assurance that also many members on the other side of the House and people who support him feel strongly about this matter. The Act of 1937 is clear. It provides that a change of name can be permitted provided the Governor General is convinced that there are sound reasons for the applicant to change his name. The Governor General is after all the Minister that must give the necessary advice. He must be convinced that there are sound reasons for the change of name. Well, I have during this Session put a question to the Minister in which I mentioned a number of such cases and I ask what the sound reasons in these cases were. The one case which I mentioned was the changing of Levy to O’Leary. I asked what sound reason there was for the change. O’Leary, I think, is a good Irish surname. The reason that was given by the Minister was that the applicant who was born in the Union, followed the Christian faith and that for social considerations he desired a surname which in the ordinary way would be associated with the mentioned conditions. But why an Irish name? A person would have expected that in the circumstances he would have chosen an English name.

Lawrence, for example.

Yes, I also know of people of Jewish descent who have adopted the name of “Lawrence”. I do not think that it was the intention of the Act that that should be regarded as a sound reason. Social reasons are not sound reasons for allowing the changing of name. What is the result? Nothing other than that the man now wants to gain admission into certain circles which he cannot get if he has the name of Levy, but which he can get with the name of O’Leary. In other words, he can and will gain admission under false pretences to certain circles. That is what happens and that was certainly not the intention of the Act that that should be a sound reason. Another case is the changing of the name of Chitiz to Chitters. The explanation that is given, is that the applicant was born in the Union and that his original surname was generally mis-spelt and that Chitters was the correct pronounciation of his name and that this in reality was also the name by which he was generally known. These now are sound reasons for such a change of name. Then another case: Berolsky changed his name to Berrill. As the reason for this it is said that the applicant who was born in the Union was generally called Berrill and that he was anxious to get rid of a name which in his opinion was a foreign surname. I ask you if this is a sound reason to change your name, because he thinks that his surname is a foreign surname. That is exactly our objection, that when you go into a shop and you think you are buying from a good Scot or an Irishman, when you come there, you find that it is not O’Leary’s shop but Levy’s shop, and not Berrill’s place, but Berolsky’s place. For the changing of Czarlinski to Carlin the reason was given that the applicant is a naturalised British subject and that his friends have difficulty in remembering his name. If on these grounds we must change names, then we will have to change the names of many people here in South Africa. It is said further that he is anxious to follow the example of members of his family who have adopted the simple surname of Carlin. There are cases of children who want to adopt the surname of their step-parents with whom they have lived for years. These are sound reasons. A child has for 20 or 30 years lived with adopted parents and then such a change of name is quite understandable. To this we have no objection. I have just taken a few names from the Government Gazette. Apparently there are many more. I feel that without absolutely good grounds no change of name should be allowed, because it results in fraud of the public. A man changes his name to penetrate into social circles or for business reasons and in both cases it is contrary to the intention of the Act. These are not sound reasons. That as regards the intention, but what of the results? You can take quite a number of names. Take for example Gordon, a good old Scotch name, I think. This name has been adopted by so many Jews that today when you see the name “Gordon”, then you immediately come to the conclusion that he must be a Jew. It is very hard on the real “Gordons” whose forefathers came from Scotland. The same applies to “Morris” and “Harris” for example. They have to a great extent been adopted by Jews and today if you meet a Harris, a Morris or a Gordon then you involuntarily think he must be a Jew. I admit that an improvement has been brought about in the position and that the number of changes of name is less this year than in previous years. But I hope that there will be an end to the changing of names for social or business reasons. These are not sound reasons and I hope that the Minister will give instructions or see to it himself that this sort of thing does not happen again.

Mr. Chairman, I feel that I agree with some of the points made by the hon. member for Beaufort West (Mr. Louw). I have always taken the view in this House and elsewhere that an attempt to change a name with the object of concealing identity or of getting some advantage which might not otherwise accrue, is something that should be definitely objected to. But, Sir, in the majority of cases that is not the object. I know in my own case which happened years before this law was introduced, as far back as 1912 my father changed his name from Kantorowitch to Kentridge. The object was not to conceal identity or anything of that sort. It was done with the utmost publicity in the Gazette. I think my hon. friend will agree with me that in my own case I have never attempted to disguise the fact that I am a member of the Jewish community, and the change of name was not with the idea of hiding identity. My hon. friend should remember that originally names were assumed and did not always remain permanent. If he will examine the origin of names of hon. gentlemen opposite he will probably find that when the Hugenots came here their names in many cases were quite different. It is probable that the name Malan originated from the Latin word Malus.

Don’t talk nonsense.

I do agree with the hon. member that names should not be changed haphazardly, or easily, as a means of hiding one’s identity. The hon. member has mentioned the name of Gordon as one of the examples of name-changing. The prevalence of that name among people who are not of Scotch extraction is due to the fact that a large number of people from Scotland centuries ago, in the time of Peter the Great went to Russia, and the name Gordon became general there. To mention the reverse process, my hon. friend may remember that Lord George Gordon, a celebrated character in English history, became a Jew. I think my friend will agree that the name he mentioned, Chitiz, is one which it would be almost a scandal to go about the world with. One can understand a desire to make it a little bit more acceptable. In connection with this matter, I would like the Minister, if he can find the time, or his Department can find the time, to examine the number of Afrikaans-speaking people who have assumed different names. I think some of them have taken British names, for example, and an enquiry of that kind might be all to the good, because it shows that the principle is one which is accepted by all sections.

My objections would be the same there.

I rise to support the hon. member for Brits (Mr. Grobler) in his request to the Minister to expedite trials in connection with appeal cases. The hon. member will remember that some time ago, probably a month ago, I made representations to him in connection with eight men from Potgietersrust who appeared before the Court; the law had no case against them, no accusations could be brought against them, and there were not sufficient grounds on which to convict them, and then they were interned. I have to hear continually that these people are still awaiting an appeal. The applications of two to appeal were considered and refused. Now the other six are still awaiting leave to appeal. I wrote a friendly letter to the Minister in connection with these cases. I went so far as to say that so far as one of the cases is concerned at any rate I had no doubt that the man is not guilty, but however that might be, I was willing to stand bail, to stand bail on my personal recognisances for Graaf and Japie Genis, and to guarantee that they are no danger to the State. Unfortunately the Minister has not yet replied. The Government professes that the object of the internments is the protection of the safety of the State. I as representative of the constituency am prepared to guarantee personally that those persons will not be a danger to the safety of the State. If they are a danger to the State when they are set free, then the Minister could take me and dump me into an internment camp. I hope the Minister will expedite the appeals. They have been waiting for several months. I want to ask the Minister again to set those men free. They can report themselves once a month to the magistrate or the police, but set them free because their farming and business are going back. Graaf Genis, for instance, is a leading character in Potgietersrust. He is Chairman of the Agricultural Union and has rendered great services to the district, and he is one of the persons whom I would least expect to do anything to endanger the safety of the State. He was nevertheless imprisoned and put into the camp, and his appeal has not yet succeeded. I can assure the Minister that the feeling of embitteredness among our people will be tempered to some extent if he will be helpful. There are the two brothers Genis, there is Dyason, MacDonald, Taljaard, Vermaak and Smit—I am prepared to guarantee bail myself if you think that the safety of the State is involved in setting them free. I hope the Minister will heed the request of the hon. member for Brits for expediting trials.

I want to associate myself with the pleas of hon. members in connection with the penetration of Indians. It is unnecessary to speak at length on the matter, because the matter has been put clearly. I appreciate the tone in which hon. members have presented the matter and I can give the Minister the assurance that it is a matter about which the Transvalers are very worried. I have here two long letters, one from the Chamber of Commerce, and another from the Municipality of Rustenburg in which they strongly urge that this problem should be tackled and that at least if legislation cannot be introduced to fix the matter once and for all, then at least the Act of 1939 should be prolonged. I have here a map of the town which I will hand to the Minister to show how the penetration takes place. The purchase of land takes place through syndicates and companies and in this way the law is evaded. Although the Act of 1939 provided that no Asiatics may penerate into European areas and that they may not go and live there, yet it happens and I want to ask the Minister seriously to urge the Registrar of Companies to investigate the matter and to see where the loopholes are in the Act which enable the Asiatics to evade the law. I do not want to say anything more about this, but I want to urge the Minister to make a statement as to whether we can expect legislation during this Session.

I would like to support the hon. member for Beaufort West in his plea that changing of names should not be made so easily. I just want to tell the hon. member for Troyeville (Mr. Kentridge) that if he had listened to the hon. member for Beaufort West then he ought to know that the plea of the hon. member for Beaufort West was not that certain people are not allowed to change their names and other sections are. The hon. member for Troyeville has said for instance that there are Afrikaans-speaking persons who change their names to English names. This we deplore just as strongly and even more strongly, because a man ought not to despise his own nationality and origin in this way and adopt something that is an imitation of another country. But when we notice in the Government Gazette that you get so many people who belong to one race, and who change their names, then we object. If everything is so honest and correct, why is it then only the one race that finds it so necessary to change their names? The hon. member for Beaufort West has quoted a number of names and there are no real reasons for the changing of names. Does the hon. member for Troyeville think that it is a good reason for changing a name if it is difficult to remember? He has mentioned himself as an example. Years ago his father changed the name of Kantorovich to Kentridge. I want to ask him whether it is a fact that his own brother changed his name to Kantor. Why must the hon. member’s name be changed to Kentridge, his brother’s name to Kantor, and his father’s name must again be changed to something else? Why could the whole family not agree to adopt one name. I think that the hon. member’s brother’s name is Kantor.

No, that is not so.

But there are Kantors in his family. If the hon. member does not know them I will introduce them to him. I would like to bring another matter to the attention of the Minister. We first wrote a letter in connection with this matter and afterwards asked questions. When there was an election pending in Hottentots-Holland the vacancy was announced in this House in March. We then waited for the fixing of the date of the by-election. I then wrote a letter to the Department and asked why there was such a great delay in the fixing of the date. The Minister replied that the delay was not really great, and that dr. Malan at one time or another had waited still longer than he had waited. I did not ask the Minister whether another Minister has acted wrongly, but I asked why in the case of Hottentots-Holland there was a delay from March to September before the election was fixed. When I asked a question in the House, the Minister gave another reason. Then he did not say that it had already been done before, but the Minister replied that there had not been any undue delay between the announcement of the vacancy and the date of the by-election. Was that not a long delay? In March the vacancy was declared and in September the Minister saw fit to hold an election. I would like to know honestly from the Minister whether there was not another reason. Was the reason not that his party could not get a candidate for Hottentots-Holland? How does the Minister explain that the by-election at Sea Point was fixed almost immediately after the vacancy occurred? How does the Minister explain that other vacancies were no sooner announced than a by-election was arranged? We also know that the hon. member for Stellenbosch (Mr. Fagan) has not resigned now because the Minister does not want a vacancy over a long period in the House, and because there is a prospect of a General Election, but in the case of Hottentots-Holland we had a long delay. I think the Minister must admit that it can hardly be defended. He can find no reasons for it. I want to ask the Minister whether he is now Minister of his party or Minister of the country.

How long did it take to fill the vacancy at Claremont?

Yes, that was filled immediately. No, in the case of Hottentots-Holland the Minister waited until his party was in a more favourable position. If the Minister wants to make propaganda for his party, let him do so outside, for example on a soap box at Salt River, but do not let him use his position as Minister to benefit his party in this way. I think that very few Ministers will agree that the Minister should use his position in this way for party purposes. Then there is yet another point I want to touch upon and that is the visits of members of Parliament to internment camps. We have asked the Minister whether he would allow members of Parliament to visit internment camps at any time. The Minister made a promise last year. He said that he would allow a group of members of Parliament to go to the camps. He refused to allow me personally to visit the camps but he would get a group of members of Parliament to go to visit the camps. What has become of this? He says that the onus was on us, that we should have made an application and that he gave the member for Kuruman (Mr. Olivier) permission to go. We do not want to announce beforehand that we are going to visit the camps. There are rumours that come from the camps that everything is not so well. The letters from the camps are censored, but still complaints come about the conditions in the camps, rightly or wrongly. We want to visit the camps to see what the position is. We do not want to go there to discuss military matters. He can place us under oath that we will not do that. We want to know whether the people are treated well. There is for example the rumour that persons in the camps did not have sufficient blankets during the last winter and that the huts in which they live—because they are nothing but huts—are very cold in the winter. The Minister has denied this, but he says that the public can send blankets if they want to. The public are willing to send blankets, but it is the duty of the Minister if people are locked up to see that they have sufficient blankets. I want to ask him once more to allow us to visit the camps to see whether the people are treated well. You can understand that the families of the people who are locked up feel concerned about the treatment of their loved ones in the camps. The Minister knows that from time to time requests have been made that certain people should be allowed to come out because there are circumstances at their homes that demand their presence. [Time limit.]

I shall not keep the House more than a minute or two, but I want to ask the Minister one or two questions with regard to the celebration and the registration of marriages in this country of ours. So far as the Departmental officials are concerned I think it will be fair to allude to them as the “underpaid brigade”. The principal clerk gets a moderate salary of £700 per annum, and the sixty clerical assistants share a total of £10,460 which works out at an average of £174 a year, which in turn means £14 10s. per month, a very small salary indeed for the very important work which these officials are called upon to do. I notice moreover that there is an increase for temporary assistants this year from £2,000 to £4,225. This very large increase is not due, I trust, to any increase in the number of deaths in South Africa, but it is more probably necessitated by a great increase in the number of marriages being contracted. And thereby hangs my tale. The increased number of marriages in South Africa is, of course, largely due to the influx of troops from other countries who, looking upon our maidens, and seeing that the ladies of this country are fair to behold, promptly and quite understandably desire to get married. The ordinary procedure is that we send overseas for particulars, we cable to England or elsewhere and require that the banns of marriage be called in the parish or magistracy in which the man resides and is generally known. It is obviously difficult otherwise to be sure that anyone who has been in this country for a month or six weeks, perhaps, is qualified to marry. We therefore take every possible precaution to probe into the circumstances and to make sure that the applicant is qualified to marry. That part is all right; but the difficulty arises when a soldier who may perhaps have been in South Africa only for a few days raises £5, and goes to the magistrate and gets what is known as a special marriage licence. He then generally goes with that and the lady he desires to marry to a Church, to a clergyman, and requires the marriage ceremony to be canned out. Now, certain responsibilities—I would almost say certain penalties—attach to the wrongful performance of marriage in South Africa, and therefore I want to follow the example of the hon. member for Humansdorp (Mr. Sauer) by putting to the Minister certain exact questions, to which a large number of the clery of our country require categorical answers. The first is this—

I put those exact questions to the Minister. If he can answer them definitely, the clergy of the country, of all denominations, will get relief from their present state of bewilderment and indeed distress.

I would like to associate myself with what has been said by the hon. member for Brits (Mr. Grobler) and the hon. member for Potgietersrust (the Rev. S. W. Naudé) and bring the Minister’s attention to these interned people who today have been sitting in the internment camps for a year and in some cases longer, without a hearing. I have on a previous occasion mentioned the case of Mr. Prinsloo and I have repeatedly presented Mr. Prinsloo’s case to the Chief Control Officer. In December I went to his office personally and his official advised me to give the case a little time because Mr. Prinsloo’s case would be heard within 14 days. It is now March already and Mr. Prinsloo has now been sitting for eleven months already in the internment camp. Last year he was locked up in the Pretoria goal and then Col. Verster said that they had arrested the wrong man. Mr. Prinsloo was then released and now he is in the internment camp. I want to give the Minister the assurance that Mr. Prinsloo is no criminal. He has not committed a crime. The only evidence there is against him is that of a Crown witness who swore that he was an S.J. I can give the hon. Minister the assurance that he is not an S.J. He is a commandant of the O.B. He is also my commandant and General Opperman and I went to Col. Verster and we offered him the books of the O.B. to prove that Mr. Prinsloo had nothing to do with the S.J. Col. Venster’s reply was that he was willing to assist the man merely on his personality. I now want to make an appeal to the Minister. I want to assure him that Mr. Prinsloo is an innocent man and that he is in the internment camp although he is innocent. The hon. the Minister last year as a result of representations which we made to him, released Piet von Willigh and he has never again heard of Piet von Willigh. I want to give the Minister the assurance that Mr. Prinsloo is an honourable citizen. He is today sitting in the internment camp solely as the result of cooked evidence by a Crown witness. I want to ask the hon. Minister now to release this man. He has a wife and three children who are alone on the farm. He is a maize farmer. He has purchased a number of oxen, there is a drought in that area, and his wife is in this difficulty and she does not know what is going to become of the farm. I want to give the Minister the assurance that he is making a poor white of Mr. Prinsloo; he is busy ruining him. Mr. Prinsloo is no criminal and I want to make an earnest appeal to the Minister to release him on parole. If the Minister is willing to do this, I personally will stand security for him. This sort of thing creates an unnecessary spirit of bitterness. I can give the Minister the assurance that the friends of this family and indeed the neighbourhood are deeply shocked and disappointed about this case of Mr. Prinsloo. Financially the man’s position will be seriously threatened if he is detained still longer, especially in view of the winter conditions that are setting in. It is essential that he should be at his home to see to the farm. I want to give the Minister the assurance that the man will not in the least effect, violate or hinder the safety of the State. If the Commissioner of Police is satisfied to sign for him, then I want to ask the Minister what fear he has in releasing Mr. Prinsloo and allowing him to go and see to his farm. His wife and children must suffer unnecessarily. I want to conclude by making an appeal to the Minister to give his serious consideration to this case.

When last I spoke I was dealing with the appointment of this Asiatic Affairs Advisory Board, and I want to point out to the Minister that I do foresee two difficulties in regard to the appointment of this Board. First, if this Board is to look after and to see in what respect it can further the interests of the Indian community in Durban I think it must be agreed that there must be the closest collaboration possible between everyone, the Local Authority on the one hand and this Committee on the other. We have had it in the Broome Report that perhaps some of the reasons for Indian penetration in Durban have been the lack of civic amenities and planning. And it is in that respect that whatever the Minister may decide to do, in the future in regard to putting a check to this problem, it must be agreed, that whatever measure is adopted, no such measure shall be oppressive, it shall be elastic, and bear some relationship to the principles of the Atlantic Charter, and it is in that respect that I feel that with the assistance of the Asiatic Affairs Advisory Board and the Minister there should be representation of the Local Authority on that Board, to see that whatever steps the Minister may take, those steps shall have some relation to the economic position of the Indian community in Durban. I want to suggest that the Board should have on it representatives of the Local Authority. It may be that if a representative on that Committee is a member of the Local Authority he is put there not because he is a member of the Local Authority but because of his knowledge of the particular problem. I think that the Municipality should have direct representation on that Committee, not perhaps a nominee appointed by the Minister, but nominees appointed by the City Council. There must be greater liaison between the Local Authority and the Board as pegging the position must bear relationship to civic amenities. Town planning should be the main function of the Committee in collaboration with the Local Authority. The second difficulty I see in regard to the appointment of that Committee is because of its composition and its personnel. The Committee as at present constituted would look after the interests of the Indian community in Durban alone. I think one must readily appreciate that in the Province there are different sets of circumstances in different areas, and bearing that in mind I hardly visualise that a Committee with a personnel made up of representatives from Durban is likely to appreciate and understand the problems as they affect Natal as a whole. So in regard to that second point I want to ask the Minister seriously to consider either by way of an extension of the personnel of the Committee, or by the appointment of sub-committees in other parts of the Province—not all over the Province—but in parts where the Indians are in quite large numbers—that perhaps in those areas he will consider the appointment of sub-committees. I said that if that Committee is to tackle this problem which I have indicated it would require some stautory authority. And if they are to have that statutory authority, that authority must not be oppressive but elastic and in accordance with the principles of the Atlantic Charter.

Statutory authority for what?

For seeing that the Committee can veto the acquisition of property … .

The hon. member must not advocate legislation.

If I am unable to discuss that point of view I want to put it to the Minister that it is imperative if we are to try and make up the leeway in regard to what I consider the natural relationship between the Indian community on the one hand and the European community on the other hand—where I believe irreparable damage has been done—then there are several factors which should be taken into consideration, and I believe that the widest possible powers should be given to this Committee. Without referring to the necessity for legislative powers I hope the Minister, when he gets the Broome Report, in which he will have before him a judicial statement of fact, will take into consideration the necessity for seeing apart from pegging that position that the relationship between the Indian community and the European community is restored. It is not enough to take a chopper and just chop a tree down and leave it at that. One has to bear in mind that this particular community is a section of the population of Durban, and although one can argue that there are times when they make their position somewhat difficult, that is to say when it suits them they claim to be Indians, and when it does not suit them they claim to be South Africans. However for Statutory purposes they are South Africans, and as such they are entitled to consideration, and I hope the Minister will see that that position is dealt with in the light of the report of Mr. Justice Broome. Whatever attitude he may adopt, although permanent and definite, I hope he will see to it that it is not oppressive but elastic and in accordance with the principles of the Atlantic Charter.

It is extremely unfortunate that when we touch on these matters of non-Europeans we must necessarily turn to a Minister who sits in this House by the grace of the non-European vote. One realises that for this reason the Minister is placed in a difficult position.

What about you?

I do not know who the hon. member is that has asked this; perhaps he is sitting here with the vote of the coloureds. It is certainly not my position. The matter which the hon. member for Fordsburg (Mr. B. J. Schoeman) has raised here, is extremely important in the Transvaal, but here in the Cape Province it is no less important, if we take into consideration the Asiatic population there is here. In the Cape Province there are only 11,500 Asiatics and despite the fact that there are only 11,500 Asiatics there were in 1937-’38 no less than 2,792 licences issued to Asiatics. But in the year 1938-’39, a year later, it rose to 3,288. To the 11,500 Asiatics in the Cape Province in one year no fewer than 3,288 licences were issued and I think that the Minister will agree that this number is absolutely out of proportion with their numerical strength. We find for example that as regards fresh fruit there are no fewer than 524 Asiatics who are dealing in that business. There are 1,244 Asiatics in Cape Town who are doing business as general dealers. There are 104 Asiatics here who are doing business as butchers. I think that it is an extremely unhealthy situation when we find that the Asiatics have to such an extent secured a hold on our fruit and vegetable market. You can go to the Cape Town parade any time and you will find that the best display stalls for selling vegetables and fruit—and there are no fewer than 16 stalls—all belong to Asiatics. They have all the stalls on the parade. Everywhere in Cape Town right up to Bellville the business is practically all in the hands of Asiatics today. I want to ask the hon. Minister now whether he thinks that it is healthy, in the general interest of the public and whether he thinks that it is healthy looked upon from the point of view of the farmer, that one section has practically a monopoly. I think that we have the fullest right to know from the Minister whether he is going to permit this state of affairs any longer. Then there is the question of the penetration of Asiatics in European areas. The position in the Cape is certainly just as serious as it is in the Transvaal. We find today—and I have already brought it to the attention of the Right Hon. the Prime Minister, and he has referred me to the Minister of the Interior, that the Asiatics are penetrating to the best European areas. We have found that the Asiatics today own two properties in this small street in Blaauwberg. Now I want to ask the Minister what his policy is and what the policy of the Government is in connection with this penetration of non-Europeans into European residential areas. I want to ask him whether he is going to do something in this matter. We are entitled, especially now that we are facing a General Election, to an unequivocal statement by the hon. Minister. We want to know whether he is going to do anything in this matter of penetration by non-Europeans into European areas. It is said that we are going to have housing schemes for Europeans and non-Europeans separately, but I want to ask the Minister whether in the meantime it is not of the greatest importance that residential areas that can still be regarded as European areas, should be maintained as such. I want to ask the Government to take steps to prevent properties in European residential areas being sold to Asiatics. I would like to come to another matter and that is the question of political segregation. I would like to bring it to the attention of the Minister—he will perhaps find pleasure in it, but I think that the European population in general realises that this matter is becoming extremely serious. In 1937 there were 26,000 non-European voters in Cape Town and in September 1942 it rose to 43,000, and we all know that during the last supplementary registration several thousands of non-Europeans again came on the Voters’ Roll. I want to ask the Minister whether he thinks it is a healthy state of affairs. Here in the Cape Province the non-European population is just as strong as the European population. We give the coloureds free education up to Std. VI. We give the coloureds better housing; we give better wages to the coloureds; in other words we are busy giving the coloured the qualification which will enable him to come on the Voters’ Roll and now I want to know from the Minister what is there to prevent the coloured voters in the Cape Province in a short time from being half the number of the number of European voters; and I want to give him this assurance that later on it will not only be the Herenigde Nasionale Party that will have an interest in this, but I want to give him the assurance that hon. members of the United Party also feel strongly about this matter. Now already there is talk that the coloureds will come in those constituencies where they are strong, constituencies like Hottentots-Holland, where they have 1,900 coloured voters, and say: Very well, we will give our support to the United Party candidate for the House of Assembly, but we demand that they give us a non-European candidate for the Provincial Council. And I want to see while the coloured voters in the next five years will become so strong, whether they will be able to refuse. We feel that where a party is dependent on the vote of the coloured that it is not able to say “no” to the coloured when he comes with his demands. We feel that the reason why we have not got separate residential areas is not because members on the other side do not want separate residential areas, because they do want it, but the reason is that they are afraid to introduce legislation because they depend on the vote of the coloureds. We regard this matter as very serious. We feel that if there is a separation at the polling booth the Europeans will be unanimous on this matter. And then they will no longer for the sake of their M.P.-ship, tolerate these conditions. Today there are members in this House who feel just as we do about this matter, but they have used the coloured for votes and now they dare not act because they are faced with an election.

When I spoke just now, I was told that I was speaking under Public Health, but I am convinced that I did not speak under Public Health. I only pricked the Minister’s conscience. I spoke of housing.

Housing falls under “Public Health”.

Why then does everyone speak about housing?

The hon. member will have ample opportunity of discussing housing under “Public Health”.

Then I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to what is being done at Johannesburg West, namely, that the Asiatics are penetrating the whole constituency. It is not my constituency. Asiatics are settling throughout the constituency, and where Asiatics settle, they are usually accompanied by numbers of coloureds and natives. The houses that are occupied in Newlands and in those parts are houses bought with the savings of workers suffering from miners’ phthisis. The majority of the phthisis people live in Johannesburg West, because there is more fresh air there than in the city itself. This is what breaks our hearts, that those people have saved their money to buy a house. They have paid it off monthly with difficulty, so that their wives and children will have a house one day when they get very bad or die. Those people can no longer stay there. In front of them, behind them, and next to them the Asiatics are moving in, and wherever the Asiatic moves in, coloureds and natives follow, because the Asiatic always has small shacks in his backyard which are filled by natives or coloureds. In this way they make money which enables them to buy more houses. The Minister must take steps to prevent that kind of thing. I see that in Durban land and properties are required by the Indians. We see that in predominantly European areas the Indians have penetrated since the Broome Commission’s report in 1942. We can perhaps still understand it in Durban because there are many Asiatics there. But how dare we allow it in Johannesburg which is a predominantly European area? This does not only happen in Newlands. It happens in Vrededorp where the Malays have obtained that small piece of land with the stipulation that no sub-letting may take place. It is allowed by the Johannesburg City Council, and therefore, we want the Government to intervene. It is not the first time that I bring this matter to the notice of the Government. I already brought it to the notice of Mr. Stuttaford when he was Minister of the Interior. The Government must see to it that those locations are cleaned up. The late Mr. Grobler took 800 natives away from there, and why can’t the present Minister remove the natives and coloureds from there?

He is afraid of their vote.

He need not be afraid in the Transvaal because they may not vote there. He should be afraid of the vote of those Afrikaners and Englishmen. He will not get it because the people are annoyed at being treated in this manner. Then there is something else in connection with interior affairs, viz. that the Minister refused leave to an Afrikaner lad to go oversea. He could not get a permit. This boy was at the Johannesburg University, but he was not allowed to return and complete his studies. They told him that he had to enlist as a soldier and if he then obtained an honorary discharge, he could return to the University. He did not want to enlist and now the Minister refuses to allow him to go oversea to continue his studies there. In our own country our own sons may not go to our own Universities because they do not want to play soldier. Therefore, they have to go to other countries, and this is now also refused them. This young man’s name is Van der Nes, and I would like the Minister to reply to it.

I wish to continue the remarks I was making previously in regard to the very serious situation in Durban with regard to Asiatic penetration. When they first introduced Indians into Natal they did it on the distinct understanding that on no consideration were these people to remain, they were to go back at the end of their indentures of five years. Two classes of Indians were allowed to come into the country, one was the trading class and the other the indentured labouring class. The trading class, of course, were very much less in numbers than the indentured class, but the trading class was allowed to come in in order to trade amongst the Indians, but of course they did not stick to that class of trade, they traded with everybody. The point I want to make is that whatever may be said for the indentured Indians in Natal, it is the trading Indians—some of whom came in illegally—who are penetrating and buying properties in predominantly European areas. It is against these Indians that the people of Durban today are clamouring for some drastic legislation, in order to stop the penetration that is going on. It has always been levelled at Natal that the people brought them there. That I flatly deny. To show how seriously the people thought of the subject at the time, we had a very public spirited man—we had many public-spirited men in Natal just as we have today, but one in particular was so opposed to the then Administration (not responsible government) for allowing the Indians to come into the country, that he decided to resign from the party he belonged to, and joined the Labour Party, just to show his dissent from the actions of the Administration. The city of Durban which is one of the most important strategic points in the world today—I do not think anybody will deny that—is rapidly becoming Indian-owned, owing to the attitude of the Minister in refusing to tackle this problem. I don’t want to take up the time of the House by quoting all the sections of the Broome Commission report dealing with this penetration, but there is one section I would like to quote. Section 312 reads—

I do not think anything more drastic could have been said than that there is a burning sense of grievance. This is allowed to go on, nothing is done, all we have is another commission appointed. Most people seem to think that this is a Natal problem, a Durban problem, but I want seriously to warn members of this House, that if they think they are going to allow the Indians to increase in Natal, and that it is not going to affect the rest of South Africa, they are making the biggest mistake of their lives. I can assure hon. members that when once the Asiatic gets in, he spreads and spreads and spreads; he works 24 hours a day.

What do you mean by “getting in”?

As sure as night follows day, unless the hon. Minister tackles this problem, as the people of Durban insist that it shall be tackled, it will be a very serious thing not only for Natal but for South Africa as well. I warn hon. members of this House that Durban is rapidly becoming an Indian-owned town; there is no one to stop it except the Minister. He will not allow the people of Durban to stop it, he will not allow the City Council to do what they would like to do, he will not allow the Provincial Council to do what they would like to do, he sits and does nothing but appoint commissions. We are not going to put up with it.

I want to move the following amendment—

As the Minister’s own supporters so strongly oppose him, I expect this amendment to be carried. We want to warn the Minister that, unless he acts in this matter, we are in time going to have international difficulties in connection with the Asiatic problem. Last year I pointed out to the Minister that we were bringing in still more Indians with State funds. We placed an amount on the Estimates to send out Indians. They have the right to return after two years if they repay the amount. What now happens is that young Indians go to India. They remain there for a year or two; they get married, and then return to South Africa. The wife remains there but after a while she comes out with her children. We, therefore, intensify this problem with State money. I want the Minister to make a clear statement as to what his policy is in regard to immigration, not only as far as Indians are concerned, but also concerning other sections of the European population who are going to become a great danger to us. I am no longer going to dwell on the Indian question, because it is clear that the friends on the other side feel the seriousness of the situation. I know that the Prime Minister has received telegrams and deputations. This is one of the biggest problems that we must solve, and if the Minister does not act, we must believe in what Mrs. Gool said in the City Hall last night: “Harry Lawrence is too afraid to take action.” It is a serious question. It is going to develop into serious difficulties for us. Some time ago I put a question to the Minister about the number of Jews which entered the country in the past three years. His reply was 1,557. Some time afterwards I received a letter from an organisation of those who feel that we must not combat the Jews, and that we must have more Jews in the country. This letter reads—[Translation]

Here we find a Jewish organisation which comes along and admits that there is a large and rapidly-growing Jewish population in this country which must be absorbed in one trade or another to be able to make a living. Before me lies, for instance, the statistics of the Rand University. We find that there are in the medical faculty, for all the years from the first to the sixth year, 941 medical students. Of these no fewer than 440 are Jews. In other words, 50 per cent. of those students are Jews. Last year 90 of them completed the final examination. Of that 90, 18 were Afrikaans-speaking, 15 English-speaking and 57 Jews. It is becoming a serious problem for us. What is the Minister’s policy in respect of the entry of more Jews, who will create a serious Jewish problem here? This organisation wrote a second letter to me. I mentioned here in the House that approximately 90 per cent. of the meat trade was in the hands of the Jews. I may state that other members of Parliament also received such letters—[Translation]

It is a Jewish organisation which writes thus. It means that four million Jews are ready to come to South Africa. The Minister laughs at this. Nevertheless, his own reply showed that 1,557 Jews entered during the last three years. Cannot the Minister see where these figures are leading? The country will not forgive him this immigration of Jews. He simply sits still while the Indian problem becomes serious, so serious that his own side is fighting him. We already have enough racial problems in this country. The Minister cannot deny this by way of argument, his downfall in South Africa is still going to be the coloured problem.

Must I abolish the Immigration Board?

But the Minister is at least at the head of this affair. He can see to it that this problem does not daily grow bigger. Let him give instructions to the Immigration Board to be more strict.

That would be contrary to the law.

Then the Minister can introduce a new law. He cannot allow things to continue in this manner. If the Minister shakes off all responsibility from himself, why then is he there? He is the man who has to look after these problems which get more serious day by day. No, the time has arrived for the Minister to take drastic action. I also put a further question to him in regard to the immigration problem, and he replied that there were about 14,000 refugees in South Africa. For us it is a serious problem because it intensifies the housing problem. His own soldiers combat him because they cannot find living accommodation. I do not know whether the Minister comes into contact with those people. We come into contact with them. What is his policy in regard to these aliens? There are 14,000 refugees who are now living here, and what is his policy going to be? During the past three months, 300 men fled here. Are those men all unfit for the war, and what then is the reason that they come here? Must they come and find a home in South Africa? The Minister knows that there are scores of them who have already said that they are not going to leave the country. It is going to create problems here and I hope that the Minister will state his immigration policy clearly to the House so that we can know where we stand. The Minister has promised to introduce legislation to arrest Indian penetration. He will recall that General Hertzog in 1939 promised that in January 1940, legislation would be introduced in connection herewith. I see the Minister shakes his head. Then he was not present at that caucus meeting. I challenge the United Party to deny it. General Hertzog made that promise on behalf of the United Party.

The hon. member cannot now discuss legislation on that point.

I want to point out to the Minister that legislation was promised by his former leader.

The hon. member is asking for legislation and he may not do so in Committee.

I only want to say to the Minister that he must remember that that promise was given, and that legislation should already have been introduced. Why does the Minister not carry out that promise? It is a promise that was given on behalf of the United Party. The Minister must say that he is going to introduce legislation this Session still to arrest the Indian problem.

I do not intend to keep the House very long, but I do wish to read a letter from one of the northern districts. The Town Clerk of one of the northern districts of Natal has written to me on the subject of trading licences. When people talk about Natal they just think about Durban, and while we have heard a great deal about Indian penetration in Natal, the Broome Commission is doing most of its investigation in Durban only. Now this letter reads as follows—

The position is this, Mr. Chairman, I venture to say that the greater number of licences, the greater percentage of licences in Natal are in the names of Indians. I think that is sufficient for the Minister to take action.

I don’t think it needs any words of mine to impress upon the Minister the importance of this Indian penetration question in Natal. He is well aware of the figures of the Broome Commission’s Report, he has been acquainted with the number of acquisitions of property in Durban and Natal generally since the Commission reported. But what I would like to know is this. In his statement in the Other Place the Minister spoke of legislation being passed this Session. Is that legislation dependent upon the report of the present Broome Commission? If it is, have any steps been taken to ensure that the Commission will hand to the Minister the report in ample time to permit of legislation this Session. These are the questions which are agitating my mind and the minds of the people in Natal whom I represent. Indian penetration is not confined to Durban, it is prevalent also on the South Coast in my constituency. Only the other day I handed to the Minister a telegram about the acquisition by an Indian of 250 acres right in the centre of the Marburgh settlement. That will practically give to the Indians a 50 per cent. ownership in the settlement, and the Indians will then, and propably are now, asking for representation on the Settlement Board.

I want to say something about this question of refugees in South Africa. I want to start by saying that we on this side—I speak for myself—do not want to take up an unmerciful attitude. We fully realise that in time of war people are driven out and have no homes, and that they must have temporary employment. I do not object to those people but the question arises whether this thing is not going too far. I put a question to the Minister. The hon. member for Victoria West (Mr. D. T. du P. Viljoen) put a similar question, and the Minister then referred me to the reply to his question. From the reply it appeared that about 14,000 refugees were in South Africa. But the Minister said that some of them were returning again, or returned from time to time. The point I want to make is this. I want to ask whether the Minister is really keeping an eye on the position, and whether we do not find the position that people who are in reality not perforce refugees in the fullest sense of the word, have come to our country because conditions in other parts of Africa, for instance East Africa, are not so pleasant at the moment, and that in those circumstances they merely decided to come to South Africa, where better and easier circumstances exist. Now, I think that the Minister is aware of it that as the result of the large number of refugees who are now in South Africa, there are of our own people in South Africa who are beginning to feel the position. The Minister is aware of it that particularly in the large cities like Cape Town, Durban, Port Elizabeth and elsewhere, there is an enormous shortage of houses. The Minister is also aware of it that it is frightfully difficult to obtain accommodation in hotels and boarding houses in this city today. I think his colleague, the Minister of Railways and Harbours, can tell him that the Railways find it terribly difficult today to find accommodation for their own people in Cape Town. Cases have come to my notice of people who are literally on the street, and of other people who are living in sheds and garages, because houses are not to be had. I know that it must be attributed in a measure to the fact that not enough houses have been built, but there is not the least doubt that the difficulties have been created to a great extent by the large number of aliens and so-called refugees whom we have in South Africa. Also in other respects the position is made more difficult today by the large number of aliens and so-called refugees. There is today a great shortage of necessaries. Clothing and other articles are essentially required for our own population, and there again the position is considerably aggravated by the fact that there are a large number of aliens and refugees in the country who buy up these things. In reply to a question that I put to him the Minister also admitted that there were aliens and refugees who take up employment. He says that in certain cases the application on being made was refused, but how many cases are there about which the Minister and his Department know nothing and we in our own country are today faced with the difficulty of providing employment. The work is being given to aliens and so-called refugees who are in the country. I want to say that we do not want to be unmerciful, but the question is whether there is not a large percentage of these people today who are not refugees in the true sense of the word. Take the case of people who are here from Egypt. The Prime Minister has said that Africa has practically been cleaned-up and that the danger of a German or Italian invasion in Egypt has passed. I, therefore, want to ask whether the time has not arrived that the refugees from Egypt can return from where they came. And then we have here people from Singapore and those parts, who originally came from England. Has the time not arrived that they should return to England after having found temporary shelter here? I am afraid that cases really exist where our hospitality is being abused. From time to time we even see letters in the newspaper from people who really do not appreciate our hospitality. I want to ask the Minister if the position is being genuinely watched, whether he and his Department know how many of these people are in the country and whether those who enter on temporary permits have their permits renewed from time to time. There is another aspect which must not be lost sight of and that is, that some of the people who have come as refugees say that they want to remain here. For a certain type of immigrant there is possibly room in our country, but there are scores of industries in South Africa in which there is no room to absorb our own young men, and we really are not a charitable country in that we give employment to people while our own people in our own country badly need the work? We believe that there are many of the so-called refugees and aliens, of which a section can no longer be called refugees. And then there is also another question I want to put to the Minister. The Minister knows the attitude of this side of the House in respect of Jewish immigration. According to the figures—unfortunately I have not got them here now—it appears that Jews are still entering. I say that our standpoint is that we must face up to this matter once and for all, and not only the Minister but also the existing Jewish population must realise once and for all that we have a Jewish problem in our country, and we ask the Minister to give effect to the provisions of the law. The law clearly says that no permit for permanent residence may be given to any immigrant who cannot, within a reasonable period after his entry into the Union, identify himself with the European population of the Union. I do not want to enter into the matter now. We have discussed it here time and again, but we also want to tell the Minister that the time has now come to specifically carry out the law. If the Minister were to receive the number of letters that I get in this connection he would realise that the people take a serious view of the matter. Only yesterday I again received two letters, not from our supporters, but the Minister’s own supporters, people who feel strongly in this matter. It is not only this side of the House, but throughout South Africa, also among English-speaking people, as appears from the newspapers and letters that we receive, that the feeling exists that this is a problem which always has been serious and is getting still worse. I hope the Minister and his Department will take notice of the provision of the law and that when permits are issued for permanent residence attention will be given to the question whether the person who is entering can readily identify himself with the permanent inhabitants of the country.

I would like to make representations to the Minister in regard to internees. We know that many of the persons who have been interned are people who deserve to be in internment camps. There are others who were misled to do certain things, and who got into trouble as a result. We have seen that lately the Minister has released quite a number of these persons according to circumstances. At one time there was much sabotage, also in the part where I come from, and I take it that if sabotage is again committed, certain steps will be taken to put an end to it. But the sabotage has now practically ceased, and I want to ask the Minister to consider, where there are not serious charges against persons, acting leniently and releasing the people from the camps. There are, as I have said, people who have been misled to do certain things and who as a result thereof are in the camps. It is not quite necessary to see them free, but they can be released on parole, and if after a while sobtage occurs again the Minister can again place these people under control and intern them. I will be glad if the Minister will show a little pity for certain persons against whom there are no serious charges, and if he will give them a chance. I shall be glad if the Minister will tell us what his policy is in this matter.

At 6.10 p.m. the Chairman stated that, in accordance with the Sessional Orders adopted on the 28th January and 11 March, 1943, and Standing Order No. 26 (1), he would report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

The CHAIRMAN reported progress and asked leave to sit again; House to resume in Committee on 26th March.