I move—

This Bill deals with the fascinating subject of water, a commodity which is chiefly known in our country either by its great scarcity or by its excessive and sometimes even destructive abundance. This Bill, if passed, will be a step, though a small step, towards alleviating on the one hand lack and shortage of water, and mitigating on the other hand the severity of the floods. To be more specific, if the Bill is passed it will relieve the shortage of water in Pretoria, and will by necessity create the impounding of more water in the Vaal River, and so relieve the serious flood conditions which we witness in this country from time to time. May I, however, before dealing with the various objects of the Bill, tell hon. members a few facts about the Rand Water Board itself. The Rand Water Board was constituted under the Rand Water Board Incorporation Ordinance in 1903 as a body corporate for the purpose of supplying water to the Witwatersrand District. In the following year under the Extended Powers Ordinance it was enabled to take over the private water companies which were supplying or potentially capable of supplying water to the Witwatersrand District. It is in the nature of a public utility concern. It supplies water at cost to the various Municipalities, and the mines, and makes no profit out of the undertaking. The Board started off in 1903 with 6 municipalities represented on it, namely Johannesburg, Krugersdorp, Germiston, Boksburg, Roodepoort-Maraisburg and Springs. Since then it has taken in four more—Benoni, Brakpan, Randfontein, and Nigel, and if this Bill is passed there will be added two other local authorities on the membership of the Board, namely Pretoria and Vereeniging. In 1914 the South African Railways were also brought in. They were brought in on a 7½ per cent. basis, that is to say they receive that percentage of water and they are liable for that percentage of the fixed charges. The fixed charges are the interest and redemption payable on the loans of the Board, so that the percentages up to now have been 7½ per cent. for the Railways, 46¼ per cent. for the local authorities, and 46¼ per cent. for the mines. And they pay the fixed charges in that ratio and receive the water in that ratio. The growth of the undertaking of the Rand Water Board is reflected not only by the number of local authorities represented on the Board. It is shown also by the following facts: The Board started with an available supply of water of 10,000,000 gallons per day. In 1914 that was increased by 20,000,000 gallons, and by the end of 1934 it was further increased by 60,000,000 gallons per day, and again in 1937 by a further 70,000,000 gallons per day, so that the total up to date is 160,000,000 gallons per day. Recently, the Board has entered into an agreement with the Government through the Minister of Lands and Irrigation by which it will get in return for a substantial payment a further 65,000,000 gallons per day. Legislation dealing with that will, I understand, be introduced by the Minister this session so that there will be a total available to the Board of 225,000,000 gallons per day. The size of the undertaking is further indicated by the increased limits of supply—that is to say the area supplied. It started by merely supplying the Witwatersrand District! By 1934 the area supplied had increased to 1,959 square miles, and today it covers an area of nearly 4,000 square miles. In regard to water actually supplied, they commenced in 1906 by supplying 4,000,000 gallons, and the supply has increased until now the Rand Water Board will be able to supply 225,000,000 gallons per day. The position is that the Board today is supplying populations on the Rand totalling over one and a half million people, of whom some 600,000 are Europeans and some 900,000 non-Europeans. As the undertaking has grown in size so it has developed the capacity of reducing its charges for water. In 1941, for instance, water was sold by the Board at 11.7d.; in 1942 at 11.1d. and in 1943 at 11.2d. per 1,000 gallons. Of late the figures have slightly increased owing to increase in costs due to the war. A feature of the Rand Water Board has been that equality has always been preserved between members of local authorities represented on it, and the Transvaal Chamber of Mines. That equality has been there from the beginning, and the position today is that the local authorities represented on the Board have the following members: Johannesburg 5, Krugersdorp, Germiston, Randfontein, Roodepoort-Maraisburg, Boksburg, Benoni, Brakpan, Springs and Nigel, 1 each, making a total of 14 members. The Transvaal Chamber of Mines have an equal number of 14, and the Railways have one member, and the Chairman is an independent chairman, appointed by the Government who has no deliberative vote but a casting vote only. So much for the Rand Water Board. I want to deal now with what is the principal object of this Bill, namely the confirmation of the agreement entered into with Pretoria and the necessary amendments which have to be made to the Board’s statutes. The position in Pretoria is, as some hon. members know, that of recent years they have had very great difficulty in getting adequate supplies of water from their existing undertaking, so much so that every summer the severest restrictions have had to be placed on the supply of water to residents of that city. The result was that the City Council took steps to see what could be done to augment its supply of water. They advertised and they had some thirty replies which were very carefully examined, and it was found that none of those people making offers could relieve the situation. The only one worth considering was the Hartebeestpoort Scheme, but that could give them about 4,000,000 gallons per day, which would not be sufficient for their present and future needs. Moreover, I understand that the Minister of Irrigation also felt that the area under irrigation under the dam might be increased and the water would be required for that purpose, so that scheme was not feasible. The other scheme to which some consideration was given was the Wilge River Scheme which would have cost the City Council a capital outlay of more than £1,000,000, and would not have given them sufficient water. So at the suggestion of the Minister of Irrigation negotiations were commenced between the City Council of Pretoria and the Rand Water Board. These negotiations were protracted, lasting over a period of some two years, after which an agreement was come to. During these negotiations there was always present a representative of the Union Irrigation Department. After the conclusion of the agreement the Administrator of the Transvaal was approached with a view to getting his sanction for a loan to be raised in order to finance the outlay necessary for Pretoria becoming a member of the Rand Water Board, and getting connected up with its system. The Administrator has given his consent to such a loan being raised, subject to this Bill being passed, and the agreement being sanctioned. The agreement is a schedule to the Bill. I may say that as far as the cost to Pretoria is concerned under this scheme, it compares very favourably with what that city would have had to pay if it went in for any of the other schemes. The only cost to Pretoria is that it will have to build a pipe line which is to take the water from the Board’s nearest point to Pretoria, and the amount involved will be about £280,000 roughly, and there will also be a payment of £150,000 as a contribution in respect of the Board’s redeemed capital assets. That figure was eventually accepted by the Board so that the total initial capital outlay to be met by the Pretoria City Council is a sum of about £400,000. That is what Pretoria will have to pay compared with a very much larger amount which it will be called upon to find if it were to get its water in any other way, and in addition it is doubtful whether even then it would have been able to get its water at an economical price. So that this Bill will put Pretoria in the position of getting a secured supply of water as an economic proposition—under this scheme it will be able to get up to 10,000,000 gallons of water per day and more at this comparatively small capital outlay. Now, as Pretoria is geographically separate from the Witwatersrand area, as it has its own water supply, and as it is not situated in a mining area, as it is a non-mining area, certain special provisions have had to be placed in this agreement and certain amendments will have to be made to the Board’s statutes. I want to deal with them briefly. The first is the question of voting rights. The position is that when a local authority becomes a member of the Rand Water Board, the value of its vote is based on the value of the rateable property in that Municipality. As Pretoria is retaining its own substantial water supply, it would not be fair to give Pretoria a vote equal to its whole rateable property, and accordingly it was agreed that it would be fixed at 10 per cent. of the value of the rateable property of other local authorities. And if the Bill is passed Pretoria will get a member appointed to the Rand Water Board and to preserve the principle of equality the Transvaal Chamber of Mines will likewise have a vote added. Then there is the question of allocation of water. Owing to the fact that Pretoria is situated in a non-mining area, it is necessary to make a different allocation of water from what is made now. There are no mines in the Pretoria area, so the balance which has always existed in the past in the Board’s area of supply between mining on the one hand and other activities on the other hand—that balance has become disturbed and consequently the local authorities will have to get more water and the mines less. The second factor, as far as allocation is concerned, is that the Railways have been entitled up to now to 7½ per cent., and it has been found that they do not require that quantity of water. I understand that is due largely to the introduction of electric traction. The Railways, of course, do not want to be burdened with fixed charges at the rate of 7½ per cent., and the new allocation will take place by which they will be given 5 per cent. The allocation will therefore be as follows: the Railway Administration will get 5 per cent. instead of 7½ per cent. The local authorities 50 per cent., instead of 46¼ per cent. and the holders of mining titles 45 per cent. instead of 46¼ per cent. Then the next point to which I come is the allocation of the fixed charges. These will have to be brought into conformity with the new basis of the allocation of water. And finally there is the other special feature, that there will have to be introduced into the agreement provision for the restriction of water to Pretoria. The reason is that at the beginning Pretoria will take a certain “make-up” quantity of water. As it already has its own supply of water, it was necessary to regulate the position there to some extent, so as to ensure the smooth working of the arrangement. The next main object of the Bill is the admission of Vereeniging as a member of the Board. The position as far as Vereeniging is concerned is that prior to 1935 it obtained its supply of water from springs in and around the town, but when the Vaal River Development Scheme Act, 1934, was passed the Rand Water Board was enabled to supply Vereeniging with water. An agreement was entered into by which Vereeniging would be supplied with 1,000,000 gallons per day. Vereeniging has not become a member of the Board, however. It has been getting water since that time, and it is now felt that the time has arrived for Vereeniging to become a member of the Board. It takes a large supply of water. It actually takes in comparison with the ten local authorities more water than Boksburg. Brakpan, Roodepoort-Maraisburg, Krugersdorp and Randfontein—it takes more than any of these local authorities. I think a strong case is made out for Vereeniging now becoming a member of the Rand Water Board, not only for reasons of economy and security, but also I think it is right and proper that as Vereeniging itself is a large urban area on the Vaal River it should be intimately associated with the undertaking which not only supplies it with water but also vast populations and great industries which are situated remote from the river. The next question that is dealt with in this Bill is the question of voting rights. By Section 8 of Ordinance 48 of 1904, the value of the vote of each member is arrived at by dividing the total value of the votes cast by the members of the local authorities present and voting by the number of such members present. Section 25 of Act 18 of 1914 fixes the value of the Railway Vote at 8 per cent. of the total value of the votes cast by representatives of local authorities and the Chamber present and voting. Now, that has led to very grave anomalies. The position is that there has been very wide fluctuations. The position is that the value of a vote, for instance of the Municipality of Johannesburg, is £28,000,000, whereas the value of the vote of Randfontein is only £2,000,000. To give hon. members one instance of the anomalies which may arise: if at a meeting at which there is a quorum, namely 10, five Johannesburg members attend and five mining members attend, there would be an equality of votes, and the chairman would have to give his casting vote. But if in addition to these ten members, the member for instance representing Randfontein attends, and he decides to cast his vote with the mining members, the result would be that the mining members would be in the minority, so although they had a vote added to them they would be in the minority because the mining vote would be decreased by the smallness of the value of the vote of the Randfontein member, and because of these glaring anomalies and the wide fluctuations it has been decided to put the matter on a more satisfactory basis, and the basis on which the Bill places the matter is to fix the value of the mining votes on the basis of a fully attended meeting, so that there will be no fluctuation. The only two other objects of the Bill are to clarify the proviso to Section 8, which is very obscure and ambiguous. The proviso now proposed clarifies it and further certain amendments are brought in to Sections 69 and 80 of the Ordinance of 1934. These amendments are necessary—they are in a sense consequential amendments as a result of the extension of the limits of supply of the Rand Water Board outside the Witwatersrand district. Those are the objects of this Bill and in conclusion I only want to say that as appears from the evidence which was taken by the Select Committee all the constituent authorities are fully conversant with the provisions of the Bill. They have all been circularised. Everyone who is connected with this undertaking has had full notice and has full knowledge of the provisions and no one has raised any objection. So it is really an agreed measure and I hope the House will therefore agree to passing the second reading. It is a Bill not primarily in the interest of the Rand Water Board, but it is a Bill mainly to relieve the position in Pretoria and also to give Vereeniging the opportunity of becoming a member of the Board.

I second the motion proposed by the hon. member for Germiston (District) (Mr. J. G. N. Strauss), and in doing so I first of all want to congratulate the Select Committee on doing its work so well, so efficiently and also so expeditiously. The steady growth of Pretoria and the recent rather rapid developments brought about by the establishment of various military camps and institutions there, have made it imperative for Pretoria to have a more extensive and larger water supply, and it is good to see that the City Council of Pretoria has taken the situation in hand, and this Bill before the House is the result of their endeavours. As has been explained by the hon. member for Germiston (District), Pretoria has recently had a great deal of difficulty in supplying its inhabitants with the necessary water. It is not generally known, but the population of Pretoria has increased rather rapidly recently, so much so that today we have a European population of something like 105,000, while the coloured and native population is something in the vicinity of 70,000, and that has thrown a rather heavy strain on the somewhat restricted but excellent water supply which Pretoria has enjoyed in the past. I can now say that the reputation which Pretoria has enjoyed, the justifiable reputation, of being known as the City of Roses, which reputation was rapidly becoming endangered, and might easily have been lost to Pretoria, owing to the shortage of water—I can now say that that justifiable reputation is going to be restored and that once again we shall be able to say that Pretoria, the town of my birth, is the City of Roses. There is another reason why I welcome this Bill, and that is because I can see in Pretoria the capital of a greater South Africa, of a larger South Africa. And I hope that a water supply befitting that city will ultimately be given to Pretoria, and this Bill seeks to do that. I have pleasure in seconding the motion.

I move—

Mr. Speaker, this Bill was published in the Gazette on the 12th January, and I hope that hon. members have had time to study it and consider it; I hope, also, that it will meet with their approval. The Board of Trade has become one of our standing institutions. It was originally started by Government notice in July, 1921. It was then established under an Act in 1923 which was amended in 1924, and since that time apart from certain duties which were assigned to the Board of Trade under the Marketing Act of 1937, the Board has functioned under these Acts, that is to say for something like twenty years; and it has functioned as the principal body advising the Government on tariff policy as affecting industries. It has also had another function. But the policy of the Government, the policy of successive Governments, has to a very large extent been based on the investigations and the reports of the Board of Trade, which run into hundreds. In addition to that, Sir, the Board has also had the duty of recommending to the Government alterations or amendments to existing tariffs in an annual report which is submitted to the Minister, and upon which the Customs Amending Bill is based. Well, sir, during the early years of the war the Board largely ceased functioning. The members were engaged on other duties. The late Mr. Fahey, to whom the Board owes so much for the work he did in establishing it, was sent to India. Dr. Norval was engaged in supply organisation. Col. Kriek is now a prisoner-of-war in Italy. So the work of the Board largely lapsed; but last year it was felt that it was necessary that it should start work again, and so the available members were reassembled and work recommenced. A new member was appointed in the person of Mr. A. Moore, late chairman of the Trades and Labour Council; he is now a member of the Board; and the Board is now engaged on a general investigation into the industrial position in the country, an investigation, Sir, of the utmost importance, because we are depending upon that to give us a true picture of the industrial position in the country upon which to base the developments to which we are all looking forward.

How many members are there at present?

There are four members, Dr. Norval, Mr. Sneath, Mr. Hendry and Mr. Moore.

Who is chairman?

Dr. Norval. In addition, the Board is also at the same time carrying out a special investigation into the engineering industry, which is the industry which has seen the most rapid expansion during the war, and is the industry which it is most urgent to enquire into for the purpose of seeing how we can best preserve and maintain it and how we can switch it over to peace-time requirements, because it is today to a large extent engaged in war supplies. But, Sir, even before the war it had become apparent that the Board was not adequately equipped for its work. The Board’s investigations were often unduly delayed. There have been cases where as much as a year has elapsed before a particular investigation could be undertaken at all. The annual report had to be drawn up simultaneously with the other work the Board was doing, and in consequence it had to be drawn up at high pressure sometimes with a minimum of investigation. That annual report has dealt with over 5,000 applications in regard to existing tariffs, which gives an idea of the amount of work the Board has to do. Adequate cost investigations were not always possible, and a recast and review of the existing tariff, which is one of the duties the Board may be asked to undertake, has not been possible since 1925. That is obviously bad; because protective tariffs applied to industry should be kept to the minimum necessary to enable that industry to function efficiently and profitably against the competition from which the tariff is intended to protect it. The country, Mr. Speaker, is looking to secondary industry to make a major contribution to solving many problems; it is looking to industry to provide a large measure of employment, looking to industry to take a hand in the developing of our natural resources, and in increasing the value of our raw materials by processing and manufacture; and thus increasing the national welfare and the national income. In fact, Sir, the country is looking to secondary industry to provide in time to come and in ever-increasing degree a corner-stone in building that social security upon which we have all set our hearts. I am somewhat perturbed sometimes, in view of the way in which the country is looking to secondary industry, I am perturbed sometimes at the light-hearted way in which people and even members of this House talk of industrial development as if it were a thing apart, and as if it only required a benevolent government to make it flourish and secure. How I wish it were true, Mr. Speaker. How I wish it were true. Unfortunately the reverse is the case. The building up of our industries, the maintaining of them, will be no easy task. The development of secondary industries cannot be viewed as an isolated phenomenon. They are part of the life of a community, and they can only be dealt with in harmony with and in proper relationship to the general national economy; and the task so far from being easy, is one of the greatest complexity; and if we are to appreciate the importance of the Board of Trade and Industries—and, I hope, the increasing importance of the services it can render to the country—we must also appreciate something of the problems facing us, problems for the solution of which the Board of Trade and Industries is one of the instruments we shall have to employ. Some of the angles from which it is necessary to view industrial development if a true picture is to be gained, are angles for which secondary industry itself is not responsible. For instance, I do not believe we can build up a sound industrial life in this country unless we have a sound agricultural economy as well. If industry has to supply the needs of the country at a price the country can afford to pay, then workers must be able to buy the necessities of life at prices they can afford to pay with the wages industry can provide. I would like to make the point, especially to hon. members and my colleagues in this House more particularly interested in agriculture, that we must bear in mind that the development of secondary industry is closely linked up with the development of agriculture, and that the two must go hand in hand and develop together. Other countries in older parts of the world, like Britain and Belgium, have built up a big industrial economy on the basis of providing cheap food for their workmen. That has meant that their agricultural industries have been grossly neglected. We here do not want our secondary industries to flourish at the expense of a languishing agricultural industry. Far from it. We are aiming here at a balanced economy, and that can only be brought about by both sides doing their utmost to reach a high state of efficiency. Another aspect affecting the development of industries is the fact that we are, and we hope we shall remain, a large exporting country in respect of primary products—gold, diamonds, base metals, wool and so on; and we shall continue to export those products, both agricultural and others, for many years to come. In fact, we must do so, and if those exports are to be maintained they have to be paid for and therefore that is an angle that must also be borne in mind by the Tariff Board. Other angles are associated with industry itself. One of them is the point to which my hon. friend referred in his Budget speech, that is the high wage structure we have built up in this country. That wage structure can only be maintained provided the highest possible level of efficiency is achieved and maintained by the people earning those wages. The Agricultural Requirements Commission has dealt at length with that point. Another problem is the smallness of our internal market. Until the purchasing power of this country and of our people as a whole is increased, the internal market to which industry must look as their mainstay is a very small one. There is also, of course, the international aspect. Our industries will have to face, in the immediate post-war period, competition both economic and uneconomic, that is to say dumping, from overseas. There is, too, the problem of the Atlantic Charter to which reference is frequently made in this House. As this House knows, I do not take the pessimistic view of the Atlantic Charter which some members are inclined to take. I consider what we have done there is to agree to endeavour to raise the standard of living for people all over the world. We have agreed that freer international trade means better trade domestically as well, and we have agreed to try to co-operate in trying to devise means to bring about freer international trade, with the object not of destroying our own industries but with the object of increasing trade, international as well as domestic, and so to bring to all greater wealth and a higher standard of living, which is the operative sentence in the whole Atlantic Charter. I do not believe any country, certainly not ours, will willingly—nor do I think it will be called upon—but I am sure they will not willingly sign any convention or agreement which is calculated to thwart or prevent the fullest development of its domestic national economy, including its legitimate secondary industries, especially those based on the raw materials and natural resources of the country. I see nothing contradictory to the Atlantic Charter in planning and developing our secondary industries to the utmost, always provided it is done on sound economic lines, and that is the function of the Board of Trade. I do not want to go into details on this point. I only mention them to point out what wide issues are involved in the development of secondary industries, with which the Board of Trade is charged; and secondly, to make this point that when you consider the difficulties, there is one fact that stands out clearly, and that is that if our secondary industries are to succeed in making that contribution to the welfare, wealth and prosperity of the country, which we hope they will, a mere tariff barrier will not be enough. They can only succeed if the highest attainable level of efficiency is reached and maintained, and that applies to the use of capital, to the management, and to the workers as well; and they are all factors which the Board of Trade and Industries has to take into consideration in framing its report, and its recommendations to the Government. And, Sir, if industry is called on thus, and it is being called upon, to put its house in order and to establish itself for reaching the greatest possible level of efficiency, then industry is entitled to ask that the Government machinery which is intended to supervise and encourage and protect it, should also be efficient as well, and that, Sir, is the object of this Bill. There are other steps in contemplation for assisting industry to reach that level of efficiency, but this Bill is the first one. The Bill aims at overhauling and strengthening the machinery of the Board. It gives the Board no extended powers which it has not had before; that has not been found necessary. The powers of the Board are extremely wide now, and incidentally the opportunity is taken to consolidate the two old Acts in the existing Bill for more efficient handling. Certain provisions in the old Acts are brought up to date as far as procedure and administration are concerned, and the phraseology is changed here and there. But the provisions remain basically the same; for all practical purposes there is no change. But the new provisions are as follows. In the first place, we propose to increase the number of members on the board from four to five. It may be questioned whether by adding one member to the board we are going far enough. Well, sir, we have gone into it as carefully as we can, and our opinion is that the addition of one extra member, with the other things I am proposing, the board will be competent to carry out the work with which it has been charged. It may be that in time to come the board will be further enlarged, but in the meantime we are satisfied one additional full-time member is sufficient. The second provision is that we propose to extend the period of office or appointment from three years to five. Members of the Board of Trade are on contract; they are not members of the Public Service, and it is felt desirable that we should try to ensure greater continuity of office and to avoid frequent changes as far as possible. Therefore we are extending the term of the appointment to five, years instead of three. Next I want to provide for the appointment of temporary members to assist the board in an advisory capacity. That has two objects, first of all to enable the board to avail itself more freely of technical advice. The ramifications of industry, the wide field which the board has to cover, makes it necessary to have expert and technical advice of different kinds on different occasions, and at different enquiries; and by being enabled to appoint additional temporary advisory members the board finds that it is greatly assisted in its enquiries, and its investigations. The second object I have in view is by this means to enlist the co-operation of industry in enquiring into its own affairs. I am most anxious that industry should feel that in the development of secondary industry there is a Common problem before the Government and industry, and that the closer they can work now the more likely are the results to be fruitful. In this connection I may say that the enquiry that is at present being made into the engineering industry has acting on it in an advisory capacity representatives from the Railways, the Mines and the South African Federation of Engineering Trades, together with Prof. Walker, the chief professor of civil engineering at the Witwatersrand University. They are all acting in an advisory capacity in this investigation, and the results are so far proving most helpful and most satisfactory, and I am hopeful that as a result of that enquiry we shall get a report on the engineering industry from the Board of Trade, which has been thoroughly gone into not only by the engineers themselves, but by the principal users of engineering products as well, and that of course would add very very much to the value of the report if a unanimous report could be brought in in which all sections of industry are agreed on the state of the industry, and the kind of assistance required to enable them to carry on and flourish. The other provisions, in Clause 5, provide for the appointment of committees on which at least two members of the Board shall sit. The first object of that is to enable me to establish a standing customs tariff advisory committee. Provision is made in the Bill for a deputy-chairman who shall preside as chairman of that committee, and I also propose to appoint onto that standing advisory committee temporary members representing both commerce and industry. The purpose of that standing committee will be to deal with specific applications of the tariff, and such questions as applications for increases or reductions in duty, questions of dumping, and to review the tariffs as applied to any particular industry, and to speed up generally the supervision of the application of tariffs framed to assist industry. At the present moment the Board itself carries out the detailed investigation into an industry. That may occupy months of its time, but in the meanwhile the tariff is being applied to many other industries, and there is no proper machinery to enable the current application of the tariff to be watched and studied whilst the Board is busy; and the whole idea is to enable the Board to function more easily and more efficiently. So the objects of the Bill are threefold: To make the Board a strong and well-informed body with adequate machinery to enable it to acquire the necessary data so that it can advise the Government on policy; secondly, to enable it to watch the results of the application of that policy and to recommend such amendments as they may think necessary; and, thirdly, to make it a body in which both the Government and the industry will have confidence, and which will form a strong link between them, and to facilitate that cooperation which we believe is most desirable if that result is to be obtained. We do not want the Board of Trade and Industries, as it develops its wider functions, to become an Olympian body on which industry looks with awe. If it is going to fulfil its function, it can best do so by working in close cooperation with industry. I may say that industry is responding very well to that line. In connection with the present investigation the Federated Chamber of Industries have appointed a strong standing committee, which is at the Board’s disposal to give it any advice or assistance it can, and generally—and I believe this last point is of great importance—I am very hopeful from all the signs so far, that industry is of the same opinion as myself. Time will show whether the proposals contained in this Bill go far enough. It may be that as the problems grow and become clearer, we may have to improve the machinery from time to time, but I and my department have examined the whole question closely for many months, and we are satisfied that the machinery set up by the provisions in this Bill is sufficient for our present needs. I hope the House will think so too and allow the Bill to go through without much amendment.

I am very pleased to be able to take part in the discussion on this Bill, especially when I cast my mind back to the year 1924 when the first permanent Board of Trade and Industries was brought into being. You will remember, Mr. Speaker, and perhaps other members in this House will also remember, that in those days there was not a great deal of sympathy shown towards the idea of a permanent Board of Trade and Industries. The previous Board of Trade and Industries was established in 1923, but it was only a part time Board and consequently we have had no experience of the activities of such a Board, and in this House, to the discredit of some hon. members, the proposal to establish a permanent Board of Trade and Industry was ridiculed to a certain extent. The scoffers are no longer with us, but let me remind hon. members of the way the Board was in those days referred to in this House—it was called the Kindergarten. That is a name which in those days was often applied to it, and I was glad today to see the amount of respect with which the Minister spoke about the Board of Trade and Industries; I was also pleased to note the respect which hon. members have for this body once they know it. I want to avail myself of this opportunity to say that there are very few members in this House who really know what the Board of Trade and Industries has meant to this country since its establishment in 1924. One of the first duties entrusted to the Board related to the new industrial policy decided upon by the Government of that time. The Board of Trade and Industries in conformity with that protective policy had to frame our Customs Tariffs, and it was one of the huge undertakings of the Board, on which we are still building today. And although the Board of Trade and Industries is not entitled to all the credit for the development of our industries because the Board of Trade and Industries assisted in carrying out the Government’s policy, together with others in this country—I say although the Board cannot claim all the credit for the tremendous industrial development which has taken place, we would be lacking in our duty if we did not recognise, and if we did not show proper appreciation of the work which the Board of Trade and Industries has done to put the protective policy into practice, and if we did not show our appreciation of the attention which the Board has been giving all these years to questions relating to our tariffs, the increase of tariffs, the reduction of tariffs, exemption from tariffs and all the other matters which afterwards required its attention, such as for instance the functions of the country’s industries to provide work for the population, both for the civilised and uncivilised class of the population. I want to express my appreciation of the remarks made by the Minister regarding at least one member of the Board. I am in entire agreement with him, that the Chairman of the Board of Trade and Industries has contributed largely towards promoting the Board’s work, but I think we would be lacking in our appreciation if we did not say a few words about all four original members of the Board. Two of them are no longer with us, may they rest in peace. Two of them are still living and both of them occupy very responsible positions. I therefore think the remarks made in this House at that time were irresponsible, thoughtless and ill-judged. Over a period of some twenty years an amount of work has been done by the Board of Trade and Industries which I am convinced is not fully appreciated. The Minister spoke about several hundred reports. Over the past twenty years 241 reports have been produced—a record for any Board that has been in existence over the same period of time. Those reports cover practically all subjects dealing with the whole of the country’s economic activities. They deal with commerce, industry, agriculture, and a whole lot of other aspects of our industrial life. I want to repeat that I do not think there is any other Board which can show such a record. I do not want to indulge in any discrimination here, but I think that if there is one Board in the country which the House and the people as a whole should be grateful to for the services it has rendered, it is the Board of Trade and Industries. Let me mention just a few of its reports. At the moment the House is considering a Bill for the promotion of the fishing industry. One of the foundations for that Bill was laid through the investigation by the Board of Trade and Industries which was held several years ago. The Board has reported on afforestation; there are reports about the various branches of the Iron and Steel Industry, and these various branches of the industry are in a sense the product of the Board’s work. It is not only the comprehensiveness and the importance of the work, but I also want hon. members to remember that all the reports, all those 241 reports, were written by members of the Board itself. The Board never had a staff to assist members of the Board to draft the reports. That is why I am entirely in agreement with the Minister’s proposal for the expansion of the Board of Trade and Industries. We are all in agreement that after its twenty years’ service, and after the tremendous amount of work the Board of Trade and Industries has done we should now have it laid down in the Law that the Board must be extended. As we have evidence of the usefulness of this Board in the past I feel we can look forward to the future with the same confidence, knowing that the Board if possible will be even more useful, and that we shall get even more service from it than we have had in the past. But the Minister will realise that the usefulness of any body giving advice must depend on the policy of the Government under which the Board serves. The Minister will realise that if the Board of Trade and Industries has no clear conception of what the Government’s policy is, then that Board cannot render as useful service as it has done in the past. The Minister has referred us to the immediate future, and to the part which the Board of Trade and Industries will have to take in giving advice to the State and in regard to the supplying of data on the basis on which the State can act. I am in entire agreement with him. If the future is to be realised, if the future which we are all striving for is to be realised, and if the ideas which have been given expression to in the past few weeks are to be realised in the future, then the Board of Trade and Industries will have to play a very important part. But this cannot happen if there is any doubt on the part of the people or on the part of the Board of Trade and Industries as to the policy of the Government. It is not the function of the Board of Trade and Industries to go into questions of policy. During the time that I had the privilege of being a member of the Board many questions of policy were raised, and we always said that it was not the Board’s function to decide on policy, and that we had to understand clearly what the Government’s policy was so that we might give effect to it. It is not the Board’s function to decide on policy, and that is why the Board must be perfectly clear on the Government’s policy. That is necessary to enable the Board to carry out its duties. I shall later on have an opportunity of drawing a deduction in connection with the Atlantic Charter, but the Minister himself knows that there is a feeling of uneasiness in industrial circles which are discouraged as a result of the contents of the Atlantic Charter. In that connection I want to make a request to the Minister and I want to ask him not to leave any doubt as to what the Government’s policy is going to be regarding the application of the Atlantic Charter. It would have a damping effect on the spirit of enterprise and that should not be the case, particularly at this time, because this is the time when we should have courage, and confidence in the policy which we are going to follow in future. In welcoming the proposed expansion of the Board of Trade and Industries most heartily I want to say at the same time that I am disappointed in the proposals regarding the expansion itself. The Minister proposes practically three things. First of all he proposes that there will be an additional member appointed to the Board. Secondly, he proposes to have a committee, and then in paragraph 8 provision is made for the appointment of what are called nonmembers of the Board. My objection is based on this: First of all, one additional member is not sufficient. From what the Minister said I deduce that this proposal is tentative or experimental. Let me assure him in advance that if this Board is to function properly, and if the work for which it is brought into being is to be done, and for which provision is made in clause 8, he will have to appoint more than one additional member. Now, the extra provision is in regard to committees. I fully realise that there are certain matters which require continuous and persistent attention. There is, for instance, the question of customs tariffs which has already been touched upon. Now, with the experience which we have had it is essential that we should either have a sub-committee or part of the Board should continually give its attention to that question. Now I want to add this: I do not believe that temporary members from outside the Board will be as valuable to the Board as the Minister hopes. First of all the work of the Board is of such a nature, as the Minister quite rightly said, that continuous attention, continuity of attention, must be given to matters, and we must make it possible to create that continuity. If we want to achieve that object then the members of the Committee must not be temporary members. The Minister provides for two. My attitude is that we should have more permanent members because the work of the Board varies in its extent from time to time, and if there is no work for the committees they can always do other work as members of the Board. I therefore feel that to have temporary members will not answer the Minister’s expectations. The Minister remarked that he was anxious for those committees to have members representing commerce and industry. I also want to state that commerce and industry in the past have contributed very greatly towards facilitating the work of the Board of Trade and Industries. They were always willing and anxious to contribute and to help in the Board’s enquiries, and to assist in finding a reasonable solution of problems. In that respect I agree with the Minister and with him I want to assume in advance that the co-operation of commerce and industries in future will also be exemplary and that we will be able to rely upon that. But where the Board of Trade and Industries acts through its committee, it will, in the interest of the State, have to act as a whole, and if ad hoc members are appointed to represent definite groups, the committee and the Board of Trade and Industries in their decisions will have this difficulty, that these outside members may be personally called to account by the interests they represent. It will be very difficult for the committee in the first instance—I won’t say to obtain impartial decisions, but decisions to which there can be no question of possible influence by one or other party. When I was a member of the Board of Trade and Industries the objection was never raised that the Board had been unfairly influenced by commerce or industry, and I want this impartiality to continue; that is why I do not want to see temporary members representing commerce and industry to be members of the committee of the Board. The co-operation of commerce and industry can be obtained even if their representatives are not members of these committees. That co-operation was obtained in the past and I am convinced it can also be obtained in future. These two matters which I have touched on are evidence to me that the Minister himself is convinced that the Board which he is now proposing is not strong enough. He provides for one member but he also provides for committees containing outside members. Our experience in the past has been that a body like the Board of Trade and Industries has to work, and must work, in sections, and that will also be our experience in future. In clause 8 the Minister provides for the appointment of nonmembers. So in the first place there are permanent members, then temporary members, and then also non-members, on the Board, according to the Minister’s proposals in this Bill. Those provisions in the Bill prove that the Minister himself feels that at this stage already the Board must be strengthened. There I entirely agree with him, but to provide for temporary members and non-members in order to achieve that object, well, that shows that the Minister has not tackled the subject with that courage and conviction which is required in order to expand the Board in the way it should be expanded. If we expect the Board to carry out its work and its functions as defined in clause 9 of the Bill, then we must realise that the extent of those functions is such that we shall require a much bigger full-time Board with a much larger staff, and that those functions can be pereformed with greater benefit to the country by such an extended Board.

When business was suspended I was trying to assure the Minister how welcome his proposal to extend and expand the Board of Trade and Industries was, but that I objected to the manner in which he wanted to do so. When the House rose I was trying to prove or justify the appointment of a bigger Board than the one proposed by the Minister. I referred to clause 9 in which the functions of the Board are set out—those functions are already set out in the existing law, and they are also defined in this Bill. According to that series of functions there is work, continuous work, for a full time Board of five, six or even seven members. There is always work, and if the Minister were to withdraw one of the provisions of the existing Act, namely that the Board can only act on instructions from the Minister, so that the Board will be at liberty when it has no urgent work to proceed with pending work, there will be continuous work for such an increased Board, and the Board will then be in a position to more systematically carry out the country’s work. I also want to ask the Minister to somewhat amend the clause which lays it down that the Board can only act on instructions from the Minister, so that the Board can act on its own initiative. I do not want to propose that the Board should act without the approval of the Minister, but there should be contact between the Minister and the Board so that there can be a continuous enquiry into matters which are not of immediate and urgent importance. One of the main arguments which I consider as being a further justification for the expansion of the Board is that it will do away with the duplication and the overlapping which we have from time to time owing to quite a number of bodies being appointed to make investigations which could have been undertaken by the Board of Trade and Industries. When I was a member of the Board I felt, and the Board also felt, that the Government was appointing commissions to consider problems falling within the functions of the Board, and which could have been carried out at least as well by the Board. I contend that the Board of Trade and Industries is in a position to do that work which is closely related to its particular activities better if it has a sufficient staff, and provided its technical staff and other staff is supplemented, and I contend that with the statistics which the Board already has at its disposal it can do this work better and give more satisfaction than some of the bodies which have been appointed. If the Minister were to give effect to the plan of appointing a larger Board the expense of many of the commissions which have been appointed in the past could be saved. With all due respect for the work of commissions I do not think they are able to function better than the Board of Trade and Industries, and if the work is done by the Board of Trade and Industries the expense will be less. We have numerous existing Boards, and with all due respect to the members of those Boards, I would like to refer to one Board which is now also asking for statutory powers. I am referring to the Social and Economic Planning Council. We do not doubt the efficiency of the staff of that Board, but a part time Board cannot function properly. This Board in its first report has suggested that it should be made a permanent statutory board, and it has included a draft Bill in its report. In paragraph 4 of the report we find set out the activities and functions of such a Planning Council, and we find that quite a number of the activities and functions of the Board of Trade and Industries are also mentioned as activities and functions for such a Planning Council. If necessary let us merge the two Boards. I don’t say that we must have fifteen or twenty members. That would be wrong, but let the one Board be extended, let the one Board which has achieved most and which has the best background, and which has most statistics at its disposal, be extended. Enlarge that Board, and although I do not want to refer to policy here, such a Board can then develop into a central economic board of the Union, such as we are anxious to have. The background of the Board of Trade and Industries is well suited to that purpose. There is no reason why that cannot be done if the members are appointed in such a way that an eye is kept on the importance of the work they have to do, and on the great object which we have in mind. Being convinced that the expansion of the Board of Trade and Industries must be more extensive than what the Minister proposes here I want to ask him to consider two further ideas which I have in mind. The first is that the technical staff of the Board must be considered. In the past we only had a secretariat. It is true that a cost accountant has been provided for by Parliament, but the work may become so extensive that the Minister may be forced to give the Board its own cost accountant. The Board, furthermore, in those circumstances will also have to have its own statistician. I hope the Minister will give his attention to these two matters. So far as the staff of the Board is concerned I want to say that I have every respect for those colleagues of mine with whom I have co-operated for six years, but the Minister will have to see to it, in order that the best possible services are rendered to the public, that every member of the Board is bilingual. I do not want to make any reproaches. Although I was not forced to do so I drafted all my reports, with the exception of memoranda, in English. I was not compelled to do so, but I did so out of respect for one of the members of the Board who did not understand Afrikaans, and if I had drafted my reports in Afrikaans it would have meant that we would have had to translate them into English before they could be dealt with. The members of the Board must be absolutely bilingual. In the second place the staff must be selected for their technical ability and their judgment. In the past attempts were made to bring influence to bear on the making of appointments. I do not want to say I was an exception when I used that argument. I know that influence has been brought to bear on Ministers in the making of appointments. It is a matter of the greatest importance to the Minister and to the Government not to allow any political considerations to enter in the appointment of members of the Board. The Board is too important., and the staff of the Board must be above suspicion. I therefore hope the Minister will give his attention to these few ideas which I have expressed. I want to say that I welcome what is being done, but. I feel still more can be done to make the Board more effective and to give it a greater opportunity of being even more useful to the public.

May I say at the outset that when the Minister introduced the Bill I was very interested indeed. I looked through the Bill very carefully, and I can assure the House it will have my wholehearted support. I feel at the present juncture when we are dealing with the rehabilitation of the people of this country, and when people are talking very light-heartedly about the increase of production, it is very very necessary from an economic point of view that we should have a connecting link between the Government and these industries and the economic system of this country. For that reason I welcome the reconstitution of the Board of Trade and Industries. Looking through the Bill I think the powers vested in the Board are admirable, for the simple reason that in Clause 9 the Bill, in my opinion, gives the Board power to enquire into all those matters as far as the economy of our country is concerned. Furthermore, the Bill sets out that that Board as reconstituted shall have extended power in certain functions that it has, that it will have the power to call witnesses, to demand records and documents and to call on any technical advice that may be necessary. I do not know whether those powers existed before, but I do think it is necessary in this reconstituted Board that those powers should exist, because it has often happened that when a governmental department has had to carry out an enquiry into the economics of an industry, it has been faced with some difficulty, and if the Board of Trade and Industries was not vested with these mandatory powers to call for documents in connection with an industry, that industry would very often be able to get away with something it should not get away with. I am of opinion that when we are dealing with the question of the economics of an industry, it should put all its cards on the table whether it is agriculturists, or manufacturers, or the consumers whose interests are at issue. For that reason I do welcome this Bill, and the reconstitution of the Board of Trade and Industries. I say this advisedly, because in my public experience I have had quite a lot to do with the Board of Trade, and I know what it has meant to certain industries. I am myself connected with an industry regarding which the Board of Trade and Industries carried out certain enquiries, and it is only the efficiency of their enquiries which has enabled the industry to be maintained at an economic level, and which has enabled it to be not only of the greatest assistance to the country, but to the consumers as a whole. I think that the Board of Trade and Industries is one of the most important organisations in the country today. I am quite a new member in this House, and I welcome anything of this nature which is designed to strengthen industry. It has been somewhat of a revelation to me in this House, after a period of about six weeks, to realise the amount of time that is wasted on things that do not count at all. I think that if we could contribute a little constructive criticism on things that matter, it would do far more to promote the future welfare of our country. As the Minister has rightly pointed out, we have to realise that we must be very careful indeed as far as our future price structure is concerned. We have to see that the cost of manufacture and the cost of production in this country are such that they come within the economic framework of the post-war period. I am not very good at Afrikaans, but I understand that the last speaker who was on his feet was rather apprehensive as far as the working of the Atlantic Charter is concerned. I was not one of the framers of the Atlantic Charter, but the Prime Minister, who is conversant with the matter, can tell us. I feel that the position is this. In this new world, when we are endeavouring to bring about the rehabilitation of the peoples of the world as well as we can, South Africa, too, will be called upon to play its part. We shall, I know, as far as our agricultural products and our manufactured products are concerned, have to face up to competition with other countries, countries with a far larger population and whose price structures are much lower than ours. As I pointed out in my first remarks in this House, we are working with a non-homogeneous population, the greater proportion of which is on a low wage level, and we must not forget that the economic structure of South Africa has been built up on that economic wage level. We have also to remember that our efficiency with that low wage level is also very low. We are probably at an advantage in that there is a possibility of increasing that efficiency, though I may say, having had considerable experience of non-Europeans, it will be a very difficult matter. But the Minister has to see that we do increase that efficiency; otherwise I am afraid we shall not be able to play our part to any measurable extent as far as the Atlantic Charter is concerned. But there has to be reciprocity. South Africa will have to play its part in that. We had the budget speech yesterday, and I notice that when the question of £225,000 to be paid for the relief of nations was mentioned there was a general whistle from my friends opposite. But do not forget whether there is a whistle or not, the fact remains that we have to play our part, and we can only play our part by reducing our price structure and increasing our efficiency. I do think we should realise we have that part to play, and that we should do anything we can to play our part in the world movement. If we are going to achieve any advance as far as our economic basis is concerned, if we are going to progress in the development of industries in this country within the framework of our economic system, it is to the Board of Trade we shall have to look as a connecting link between those industries and the Government, and as a connecting link between the industries and the Government on the one side and the consumers of the country on the other. I welcome the Minister’s remarks about reciprocity and the inter-relationship between agriculture and industry. I wholeheartedly agree with the Minister. Even we agriculturists, and I am speaking as a farmer, not as a statistician, I say we have to play our part; we have to take that raw material into the factory at as low a price as we can, and we have to feed the people of the country as cheaply as we can. At the same time we have to build up industry within the economic framework of this country. We have to try to increase our spending power. If we tackle these tasks with a common outlook and purpose between industry, agriculture and labour, it is possible that we shall make progress in the future; but we shall never make progress if we take things lying down, and spend 95 per cent. of our time in discussing matters that don’t count. We have to put our shoulders to the wheel, and for that reason, Mr. Speaker, I give this Bill my wholehearted support.

The hon. member who has just sat down (Mr. Morris) told us that he had no share in the framing of the Atlantic Charter. In view of the concrete suggestion he has made I am sorry he was not asked by the two gentlemen who drafted it to take part in framing the Atlantic Charter. The Minister is to be congratulated on the Bill as far as it goes, but he can come forward with as many Bills of this kind as he likes, so far as this side of the House is concerned they will continue to be patchwork. He can come along with measures of this kind, he can increase the powers of the existing Board of Trade and Industries, he can increase the staff of the Board, but no matter what he does in that regard he will get nowhere near what this side of the House stands for, and what he eventually will have to do, that is to create a body which will be there as a link between the Government and our economic national life as a whole, a body already mentioned by the hon. member for Ceres (Dr. Stals), a big central economic council. The Minister may no longer occupy the position he now holds but he will have to realise some time that this side of the House is right when it says that our economic life can only be placed on a sound basis if we have a body which can serve as a link between the Government and our economic national life as a whole. It must not be a Board which just touches the fringe of the question, a Board just to serve the Government by giving advice on certain subjects referred to it, as is the case today, but it must be a big central economic council which on the one hand will study all the branches of economic life from time to time, and which on the other hand will serve the Government with advice in regard to the potentialities of South Africa’s resources for systematic industrial development. That is where this Bill falls short. I am glad the existing Board is to be given greater powers. It should long ago have been given greater powers, and it should have had a larger staff at its disposal. I hope the Minister will take steps in that direction at some future date. If he is not prepared to listen to the comprehensive plan put forward by this side of the House, let him in any case allow the Board to have a sufficiently large staff to do the difficult work entrusted to it. We have at the moment a multifarious concatination of boards. I do not know whether there is any other country in the world which has such a large number of boards as South Africa. Perhaps there is one other country, but it would be an exception. It is astounding that a small country like South Africa, with its small white population, should have round about 40 Boards which are there to advise the Government on a multiplicity of subjects. All the expenses connected with such. Boards have to be paid for, and if one thinks it over one must come to the conclusion that in regard to our industrial development, in regard to our economic life in South Africa, there must be tremendous amount of overlapping, and a tremendous amount of watertight compartments which must cause other countries, with a very much more highly developed economic basis, to smile, and look down upon us with contempt. I have taken the trouble to write down the names of a number of boards, and it is interesting to see how South Africa has dug itself in so far as its economic and social life is concerned, and especially its economic life, behind a large number of boards. We have the Farmers’ Relief Board, the Brandy Board, the National Research Board, the National Board for Physical Education, the Fuel Research Board, the Perishable Products Control Board, the National Marketing Council, the Producers’ Advisory Committee—which in actual fact is also a Board—we have the Consumers’ Committee, the Dairy Control Board, a Tobacco Control Board, a Mealie Industry Control Board, a Wheat Industry Control Board, a Dried Fruit Control Board, a Deciduous Fruit Board, a Chicory Control Board, a Citrus Control Board, a Meat Industry Control Board, a Wool Control Board, a Wool Marketing Committee, a Hide and Skin Control Board, an Egg Levy Board, a Veterinary Board, a Statistical Board, a Medical Council, a Public Service Commission, a Central Housing Board, a Nutritional Council, a Wage Board, a Labour Advisory Board, a Miners’ Phthisis Board, a Central Land Board, a Central Road Transportation Board, a Railway Board, a Shipping Board, a Tourist Traffic Board and so on. We have all sorts of “Rade”.

And a Government “Sonder Raad”.

The hon. member has left out the Board we are now dealing with.

I am coming to that.

What about the “Kerkraad”?

The hon. member will never be elected to that. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, I left out one, „die radelose Regering.” I think we should try and do something in South Africa to make ourselves less ridiculous in the eyes of the world so far as our economic life is concerned with the enormous number of Boards we have. No matter what the Government does, it will eventually be compelled to accept our suggestion and that is the appointment of a Central Economic Council or Board, a co-ordinating body, which will act as a link between the Government and our economic national life. I am pleased the Minister said a few words about our industrial development, although he did not go far enough. On a debate such as this there is an opportunity for the Minister to tell the House something—to take the House into his confidence regarding South Africa’s industrial development during the past few years, and the development which the Minister thinks will take place in the future. The Minister had the opportunity of giving us a little more information, and I feel the country is entitled to a few more details. The man in the street knows, we all know, that of late years, due to war conditions, there has been a tremendous industrial development in South Africa. The number of companies registered with the Registrar of Companies has even exceeded the numbers registered from year to year in the last war. What does that signify? It signifies that the war presents an opportunity—as probably it does everywhere in the world—for industrial development, and it presents that opportunity to South Africa especially, as we are today deprived of import facilities; consequently in a time of war we must expect everything possible being done to enable us to stand on our own feet. It is due to that that industries have sprung up in such large numbers. But what we have not been told by the Government is whether it has any definite plan to do everything possible so far as a number of the industries which have arisen are concerned, and so far as war industries are concerned to enable them to carry on after the war. If South Africa is to develop more and more in the direction of independence so far as industries are concerned and so far as our economic life is concerned, then South Africa must avail itself of the opportunity which war offers the world—which war offers neutral as well as belligerent countries, to develop industries. The opportunity must be taken to keep alive industries which have come into being during abnormal times—the opportunity must be taken to keep those industries alive after the war wherever possible. Do not let us develop all those industries now and allow a large proportion of them to collapse when peace comes owing to lack of Government support or Government advice. The Board of Trade and Industries, if it is extended, will be able to give a considerable amount of practical assistance in that direction. I am sorry that the Government, during the last few years, has followed a policy of indifference towards the Board of Trade and Industries—a policy of fobbing off” the Board. At a time of great industrial development the Government curtails the activities of the Board of Trade and Industries in the most disgraceful manner although that Board very definitely has to deal with these questions of industrial development. First of all the Government allows the members of the Board to leave, and it does not appoint any new members, with the result that valuable investigations which the Board has had to carry out have had to stand still for some considerable time. The Government went even further, and it suspended the publication of the journal of the Board of Trade and Industries. If one goes to the Parliamentary or Public Library, or any bookshop one is astounded at the type of publications for which paper is available, but the Government actually suspended the valuable publication of the journal of the Board of Trade and Industries. It gave as its reason the shortage of paper. The Secretary of the Board of Trade and Industries was so deeply concerned by the action taken by the Government that in some introductory remarks in the last issue of the Board’s publication he expressed his deep disappointment, at such a thing having become necessary under war conditions. What was the necessity for it? If we look round and see the purposes for which paper is supplied, and we find that the Government suspends the official journal of the Board of Trade and Industries—a most valuable monthly journal—one fails to realise what is going on. Here we have a link between the Government and our economic national life, and at this period of time the journal is suspended, a journal which for a number of years has tried to keep the public informed not merely of the local development of industries, but it has also contained reports received from our representatives abroad, and reports of researches and investigations made. The Government in its wisdom—I don’t want to blame the Minister personally—suspends the publication of that journal. The Secretary for Commerce and Industries in his introductory remarks in the last issue which appeared in April, 1943, Said that this suspension of a paper which for five years had served South Africa so well was a direct result of the war. I fail to understand it and I think the people as a whole will take the Government’s action very much amiss. I hope the Minister will at once see to it that the publication of this journal is re-started. There are one or two other matters in connection with our industrial development which I want to refer to. The first is that the people know too little about the potentialities of our industrial development. In this respect the Board of Trade and Industries can be more helpful than it is. As we are turning over a fresh page now and starting off with an almost entirely new membership of the Board, we can ask them, in addition to what already is being done by the Planning Council and in addition to what has already been done by other bodies in the immediate past, to take the public more into their confidence in regard to South Africa’s resources, especially those resources on which South Africa’s future depends. I do not know whether I am putting the position correctly when I say that I am of the opinion that South Africa’s eventual industrial development lies in the exploitation of base minerals. South Africa has ample base minerals to enable it to take up an independent attitude towards other countries. The gold mines, according to investigations taking place from time to time, are deteriorating—mines are being worked out, and in days to come we shall be dependent on coal, iron and other base minerals as the corner stones on which our development will have to be built. Now, our people do not know very much about what is going on in that respect. Surveys have been made, but I definitely feel it is the Government’s duty to remove overlapping, particularly at a time like the present when industrial development is taking place. We do not want to curtail development, we do not want to curtail healthy competition in South Africa, but on the other hand we say that the way in which licences are at the moment being arbitrarily issued to commercial concerns, can only lead to overlapping which will lead to over-production in certain respects. It is in this direction that the Board of Trade and Industries, weak though it may be at the moment, can be of great service to the country by keeping us informed from time to time of South Africa’s commercial development, by keeping us informed of the direction in which we should develop in order to do away with over-production without in any way handicapping sound competition. How can South Africa develop its industries, how are those licences to be issued, how can South Africa deal with the registration of companies with a view to removing the possibility of over-production of certain goods? There is another important point in regard to development and that is the question of our vocational training. I am sorry the position in South Africa is still such that for specified work people still have to be imported mostly from elsewhere because of a lack of intensive industrial training in this country. In this regard we have been asleep too long. We have done a little bit in regard to industrial training. We have a number of technical colleges for the towns, we have a number of trade schools, more particularly for the platteland, we have industrial schools for what are called committed children, we have a number of special schools for defective children, but after all those schools aim at training boys and girls in South Africa who are suitable for our apprenticeship system, and our apprenticeship system is totally antiquated and obsolete. These schools I have mentioned, which have to give industrial training in South Africa, in a young country whichis waiting for industrial development, have to arrange their training in such a manner that they can fit in with a modern apprenticeship system. What is that system? It is a producer of robots. On the one hand it produces people who are not equipped for production, and on the other hand it produces apprentices who are automatic machines and who are only suitable for one small class of work.

I want to draw the hon. member’s attention to Order of the Day No. X for today, viz. the second reading of the Apprenticeship Bill.

Then I shall not go into that point any further except just to point out to the Minister that South Africa in this regard is very backward in comparison with most countries in the world because our system tries to make small machines out of our apprentices. Now, in conclusion there is one other point. In regard to the development of our key industries this Government is falling short. The Government should make use of this opportunity which presents itself for industrial development first of all to give a lead, but also to take a part in that development. What the hon. member for Ceres has said is true—we have at the moment an Industrial Development Corporation, but South Africa has for some considerable time been demanding industrial development of a kind in which the Government has to invest public money. It will not help Parliament to sit and wait for the Industrial Development Corporation. The Industrial Development Corporation has unfortunately got out of hand and it is carrying out the 1940 Act quite wrongly. Let me just tell the House what the Industrial Development Corporation is doing now—whether it has deliberately misunderstood the law or not—it only has time for big things. This body was established in 1940 for the very purpose of handling the industrial development taking place during the war, and for the purpose of steering it in the right direction. But what is it doing? It invests its money in all sorts of things. We cannot get any definite information from the Minister on this point, but we have to be told outside about all the concerns in which this organisation invests its money. We know that this corporation has already invested £700,000 in industries and that its commitments amount to about £1,400,000—money which it has promised to invest in enterprises. What does it invest these large amounts in—these large amounts which are largely State funds? The Corporation was established with the object of fostering large but particularly small industries in South Africa, because the big industries are assisted by the Government by means of legislation. Parliament assists industries, such as the Fishing Industry, Iscor, or the Electricity Supply Commission. If the Government wants to support a big industry of that kind it comes to Parliament and we vote the money for it, but we established this Industrial Development Corporation in 1940 with the object of encouraging small industries, but now we find that the Corporation only has time for big concerns. If anyone applies for £50,000 for a smaller industry the reply is: “No, you must take £100,000 or more because we are not interested in small concerns.” I feel the facts justify me in making these remarks, and I say it is high time the Government gave its attention to this matter. The Minister must either introduce legislation to amend the instructions of the Industrial Corporation, or otherwise he must introduce legislation in respect of special industries, and in that respect the Government is falling very short. It is a good thing to develop the fishing industry; it is most praiseworthy, but surely that is not all we need in South Africa. South Africa’s great future in the industrial sphere lies in the direction of the development of base minerals and the Government is doing practically nothing in that regard. It leaves it to an organisation like Iscor, and I should like to know how Iscor can do that in an impartial manner. We welcome this Bill, but we say it only touches the fringe of the subject, and we say we shall be compelled to bring into being a comprehensive, national economic council to co-ordinate our industrial activities and our general economic activities.

The Bill now before the House is much more important than the House apparently thinks. I say so with all modesty, because I am not trying to teach the House anything from the back benches. I feel, however, that we in South Africa are continually asking: “Where are our industries, where are our factories, why have we no factories?” There is not a single subject on which the public is less ignorant than this very question of the industrial development which has already taken place in South Africa. If we take into account the fact that the Board of Trade and Industries which was permanently appointed in 1924 has perhaps played the biggest part, by far the biggest part, in the development of the country’s industry it becomes clear how important this legislation is, as it deals with the activities and the composition of the Board of Trade and Industries. During the past few years the Board of Trade and Industries has laid on the Table of this House no fewer than 279 reports. Some of those reports are bulky volumes which have taken years of hard work. Apart from those reports the general public does not know—but the Minister knows it very well—that the Board of Trade and Industries prepares memoranda on subjects which are not seen by the public. If we take into account the fact that the industrial development of our country is practically laid down on the basis provided by those reports of the Board of Trade and Industries and that the industrial development has already reached its present limits, then it must be very clear to us how important the work of this Board is. I want to associate myself with what the hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. F. C. Erasmus) has just said, that it is really deplorable that we have so few statistics about industrial matters in South Africa, and that at a time when industrial development during the war and in the post-war period is brought so pertinently to the notice of everyone taking an interest in industrial affairs. I hope the Minister will find it possible, even if he cannot publish it, to give the House the necessary information to show what the position in the country is today in regard to our industries—what our industrial production is, how many people are employed by the industries—even if he only gives us the globular and more important figures. All the figures in the last report only go as far as the year 1939, the year before the war, and if we take those figures we find that an amount of £113,000,000 has been invested in our industries—that is the capital invested. More than 350,000 people are employed by those industries and our industrial production has reached about £200,000,000. The result was that even before the war industries occupied the premier position in South Africa. The contributions of South Africa’s secondary industries to the total national income were bigger than those of the mines, much bigger than those of agriculture, or of any other group in the country. I repeat, we are ignorant when we ask why South Africa has not yet been industrially developed. On the contrary, our industrial development in some industries proceeded to such a stage that the country could no longer absorb the products of those industries. The Minister will remember the difficulties there were about the products of the boot and shoe factories and also of the clothing factories. There were more factories in the country and the potential production of those factories was larger than what the country could absorb. South Africa has therefore reached a point, not merely in a few industries but in numerous industries, where it produced more in its secondary industries than the country was able to absorb, and that being the case it is of the utmost importance to us to find a market abroad for our products. It is generally agreed that the other parts of Africa will provide the most accessible markets for our industries, but the market in the rest of Africa is an open market, and unless we develop our industrial policy in such a manner, and arrange our cost structure—which in South Africa unfortunately is very high today—so that we can compete on an equal basis with the products of other industrial countries, we have no hope of being able to sell our products in the rest of Africa, or in any other country where we have to compete with the products of other big industrial countries such as England or America. I think it is quite clear that it is not merely a question of the quantity which we are able to produce in this country. Quantity is not as important as quality, and when I speak of quality I do not merely mean the quality of the products, but also the quality of the industrial machine, the efficiency as as it is called. That is one of our most important problems—that we must get our efficiency in industry to the highest possible point and I look forward with alarm to the day when the war is over and we shall again be faced with the problem which faced us after the last world war. We are very conscious of the fact that the world economic machine at that time completely collapsed and caused a severe shock to South Africa’s secondary industries, and had it not been for the definite and effective protective policy adopted by the Government in 1924 things would have gone very much worse with our industries. That policy gave our industries a certain amount of protection and contributed to the development which we have had in our industries since those days. Although our industries have developed to the stage where they are now, the most important thing of all is henceforth to get the absolute maximum of efficiency, possibly by cutting out unnecessary competition, or by introducing rationalisation in our industries, and by going thoroughly into the question as to what can be done to make the very best of a relatively bad case in every respect in regard to South Africa’s industries which are handicapped by serious difficulties such as a small local market and long distances. At the moment the Board of Trade and Industries is engaged on a comprehensive enquiry into this very subject which I am now discussing. I therefore feel I can associate myself with what the hon. member for Moorreesburg said when he pointed out to the Government that the Board of Trade and Industries had of late years been treated indifferently by the Government. It is no use throwing away a boot which has served us for many years and putting on a boot which we do not know. So many boards are being appointed, there is such a wealth of boards that they almost fill one with despair. Among other boards we have this Social and Economic Planning Council. With all due modesty I want to say that it is an irony—almost humorous irony—to call it an Economic Planning Council. I do not know why it is called by that name. There are very efficient men on that Council but there is not a single economist on it. And surely, or rather in all probability, economic matters have to be decided on, otherwise the Council would not have been styled Economic Planning Council. We feel in connection with these questions of industry, in connection with commerce and general economic affairs, that there is only one board which has the necessary experience, which has a record, and which has a long period of thorough experience behind it; that is the Board of Trade and Industries, and it is for that reason that we welcome this Bill which is before the House today. We welcome the proposals to extend the Board’s powers, and also to extend the Board itself, but I feel that the methods by which the extension is to take place will in very many respects perhaps not have the desired result. There is one small point which in passing I should like to refer to in that respect and which is not generally known. It is that in the Marketing Act under which the Central Marketing Council is constituted there is a clause which lays it down that the Board of Trade and Industries is to be consulted when prices of agricultural products are fixed by the Central Marketing Council. The Board of Trade and Industries is in close contact with the consumers in South Africa and I am personally aware of the large number of cases where these two boards have come together and have consulted for days to arrive at a price which would be acceptable to the producers and also to the consumers in South Africa. That is a task performed by the Board of Trade and Industries—which protects the consumer in South Africa more than the consumer himself is aware of, and such cooperation between the various boards should be encouraged in every possible way. Not only should it be encouraged, but I think the Minister should give it his attention and compel the various boards to co-operate. I should like to know how much co-operation there is between the Economic Planning Council and the Board of Trade and Industries. So far as I am aware there is very little. A point already dealt with is that in the case of big industries and machinery set up by the State and working with State funds, the Board of Trade and Industries is apparently completely ignored. In the first place we have the Industrial Development Corporation. Then we have this tremendous concern, Iscor, and then we have the Electricity Supply’ Commission. I have glanced through the reports of those undertakings and I am astounded at the huge amount of State funds invested in those concerns—funds which to all intents and purposes have been placed in the hands of one or two industrial dictators. I don’t want to say we have no confidence in them but it is impossible for such a dictator to maintain contact and to know what becomes of the money which is invested in these big organisations. The time is more than ripe for those organisations to report to this House as to what has happened to their financial affairs. I feel this question is really beginning to cause alarm, and I hope the Minister will listen to what we have to say on the subject. It is our duty, if we expend the country’s money on such big commercial undertakings, and if the Board of Trade and Industries is not in any way consulted, to find out in this House what becomes of that money. A further point I want to deal with is the publication of the reports of the Board of Trade and Industries. If the Government thinks it worth while to let this Board carry on and expand, and if the Government is prepared to incur the heavy expenses which are every year connected with such a body, then I think it is highly necessary that the reports of that Board should be published. I feel that in the past insufficient attention has been given to the importance of those reports, and that they have not been made available to the public in the way they should have been. There used to be an arrangement whereby those reports were published in the Department’s journal, but the publication of that journal has also now been stopped, and I want to underline what the hon. member for Moorreesburg has said, that there are other places where paper can be saved. The country cannot afford to save paper on important matters such as the publication of the reports of the Board of Trade and Industries. That Board is a body which first of all has to advise us as to how we should carry on our industrial development during and after the war. Then there are a few points in the Bill itself to which I should like to refer. First of all I notice in Clause 3 that the period of service of members of the Board is extended from three to five years. I don’t want to say too much on that question itself. If the Minister wants to keep the present members of the Board—I am speaking with all modesty because I used to be an official of the Board—then I feel that the Minister should give us the assurance that if he is going to appoint those men for five years they must be thoroughly bilingual. The Board of Trade and Industries is there not only for the protection of secondary industries, the Board often has to enquire into protective tariffs in connection with agricultural products. Tariffs and rates in regard to agricultural products are enquired into year after year and every year the Board perhaps meets a hundred people from the platteland who are Afrikaans-speaking. Unless the members of the Board are bilingual it is impossible for them to get all the information and to understand the position as clearly as they would do if they were thoroughly bilingual. Then there is the question of the temporary members of the Board of Trade and Industries. I feel the Minister must give this matter his serious attention. I am afraid it is possible, by appointing a large number of temporary members from the business or the industrial world to the Board—although they have no vote on the Board—to bring about such a position that the Board itself may be overshadowed and the weight of their arguments may possibly steer the Board of Trade and Industries in the wrong direction. Then there is the question of the committee on tariff matters. I look upon this as a most important matter because our Board of Trade and Industries in South Africa to all intents and purposes does the work which the Tariff Commission does in Australia, or which the Tariff Commission does in the United States of America. The Board of Trade and Industries largely is our Tariff Commission, and it is essential for it to keep in constant touch with tariff matters. After the war especially it will be even more important to keep contact with the development of tariff affairs in other countries. This is one of the most complicated matters in the world so far as commerce and industry are concerned. It is quite easy to levy a rate, but once a protective rate or a protective tariff is imposed or levied then, as Prof. Taussig once said, it becomes like a snowball. It rolls and automatically becomes bigger and bigger. For that reason it is essential to keep constant contact with tariff matters, and it is highly necessary that the people handling those matters are people specially trained for that purpose. It is essential that they not only have experience but special technical training for that purpose. We cannot lay it down too strongly that one of the most dangerous things that can be done is to appoint people who have not the necessary technical qualifications for the work, and it is in this connection that I feel the Minister must be very careful because the post-war tariffs will be much more complicated than those we have had in the past, more complicated than anything we can speak of at the moment. If temporary members are from time to time appointed to the Board of Trade and Industries, I feel difficulties may result. The Board of Trade and Industries to a very large extent enquires into confidential matters and heavy fines may be imposed on any member of the Board who discloses confidential information. How is the Board going to exercise control over the temporary members? Assuming the representative of a large steel factory is appointed as a temporary member. He comes into touch with all the information and all the data of other steel factories. He gets all the information in regard to his rivals. It is unfair to them because he can make use of that information to benefit his own factory. I am afraid this is going to cause serious dissatisfaction and I feel the Minister must be very careful in dealing with these specific points to prevent dissatisfaction arising among industrialists as a result of the appointment of temporary members to the Board—temporary members who through being appointed in that way obtain confidential information which they should not have. Then in this Bill we have this question which is already in the existing Act, that the Board of Trade and Industries has to advise in regard to combinations, trusts, monopolies and restraints of trade. The Board of Trade and Industries is compelled to give advice in regard to restraint of trade, but the time is long overdue for proper legislation dealing with restraint of trade. I want to point out that the law is of such a nature that practically nothing can be done to prevent restraint of trade where it occurs. The Board of Trade and Industries has in the past not once but hundreds of times investigated this question of restraint of trade in connection with the liquor trade, and I know of practically no case where such an investigation, in spite of recommendations made, has led to any useful results, simply because the law in this country is so feeble on this particular point. Then I notice that in Clause 9 (h) the supply of raw materials, labour and technical knowledge for industry, and the encouragement of the investment of capital in industry, are referred to. Is it not on this very point that the Board of Trade and Industries is going to clash with the Economic Planning Council? Is there any proper definition of the functions of that Council? The duties and functions of both these Boards are of such a nature that it would appear to me that it is on this point that they will clash with each other. Both are either going to do the same work or they are going to tread on each other’s toes. In conclusion I should like just to touch on this point—that if the Minister wants to have people on this Board of Trade and Industries who are able to do the work expected of them, and who will be in a position to give the country the best possible advice, then I feel the Minister should raise their salaries, because he will not be able to get suitable people at the present salaries. I had an unofficial discussion a few days ago with the Chamber of Industries on this subject and those people shrug their shoulders. Which man with the necessary technical training and with the necessary experience will do temporary work for that salary? I can only again appeal to the Minister to try and get the very best Brains Trust in the Board of Trade and Industries. That Board has to advise on that section of our economic life which provides the greatest contribution to South Africa’s national income. If the Minister does not have the best brains there, and if the Minister does not extend the Board and supply it with such technical staff as to enable it to do its work thoroughly, then it is not worth while having the Board at all. I therefore want to emphasise once more that these people should be paid the best possible salaries because they are the people who have to decide what is going to be the best for the Union of South Africa, not only for today but for the future and for posterity.

I want to refer somewhat briefly to a matter which has been emphasised very considerably in this House during the Session. It arises again in connection with this Bill, as to what is the real economic policy of the Union at this juncture. What is the economic planned framework of our country? The Agricultural and Industrial Requirements Commission set out for us an excellent outline of an efficient, planned organisation. First in importance, it put the Cabinet, representing the Government, as the sovereign authority in the country. Second in order of importance was the Social and Economic Planning Council, recommended as a permanent body for coordinating and investigating economic activities. The third body was the Industrial Development Corporation, designed to provide the long-term capital for industry, and to undertake rationalisation schemes. The fourth in importance is the body which is referred to in this Bill, the Board of Trade and Industries, it was considered an advisory body, to deal with protective duties and customs, and matters of industry and commerce which might be in restraint of trade. This seems to me to be a very clear demarcation of function: a desirable and essential organisation for a planned economy for South Africa. Yet this Bill, which we are considering today, is going to charter the Board of Trade and Industries with all-comprehending authority and powers. That, I think, is clear from Clause 9 (1) which states—

That is all-comprehensive. The Board will be a totalitarian body. It means in fact that we shall give to the Board of Trade and Industries both competitive and overlapping powers as against the Industrial Development Corporation and the Social and Economic Planning Council. This proposal therefore raises the question what is the Government’s planned framework of economy for South Africa? Are we going to have a planned economy, or are we simply drifting, patching here and there, and hoping ultimately to arrive? The Hon. Minister deprecated this course when he visited Durban recently and spoke to the Chamber of Industries. I may say that he and his Department created a most happy impression in Durban. He stressed in his speech to the Chamber the need to deal with industries in this country as a group, as a collective economic unit and not as individual competitive units. Now I want to submit, for the Minister’s consideration, that this Bill, in so far as it will shear the Economic and Planning Council of its chief work, will go against the very principle that the Minister laid down in that address to the Chamber of Industries. The country wants the whole position cleared up at once. An assurance is required that the Government really has a planned economy, but one which will not confer, as does this Bill, autocratic powers over industry and trade, powers to be exercised by the civil service under a Minister. The country believes that Parliament and the civil service are not organised so as to be technically capable of developing industrial and administrative and managerial technique. Organised trade will, I am convinced, accept planned direction by the State, in consultation with an expert body, for example, such as that which was designed by the Prime Minister when he set up the Social and Economic Planning Council. I hope that this Bill will go through, but I would like the Minister to confine the reconstituted Board of Trade and Industries to advisory functions only, specifying categorically what those functions shall be. The guide for that is in the sub-heads in Clause 9; they cover the field of activities which I have in mind.

The hon. member who has just sat down seems to forget that the Board of Trade and Industries is a body that was established some 20 years ago, I should think. Actually it was established as a result of our experience during the last Great War. And, Sir, speaking as an industrialist, I must say that I reckon that the Board of Trade, and Industries, as it functioned up to the beginning of this war, guided and helped to develop the industries of this country in a very excellent manner. My trouble is that when this war broke out the Government or the Minister in charge, for some reason or other put the Board of Trade and Industries into cold storage. I have time and again in speeches in this House deprecated the action, but there it was. I should personally welcome the action of our new Minister of Commerce in bringing this Board, so to say, more into line with modern requirements, and any detailed criticism I have to offer I shall make in the Committee stage later. I am now concerned to know whether or not he has yet given sufficient powers to this Board. I have felt during the whole period of the war that the industries of this country were very handicapped indeed because the Board of Trade had really ceased to function. We, of course, were told that when the Industrial Development Corporation Act came into force, that this would very largely make good all that the industrialists in this country felt was missing because of the fact that the Board of Trade and Industries was not functioning. But we soon found out that the Industrial Development Corporation has a very limited authority, that it had not enough power to carry out what this House had in mind at the time when the Bill was passed, and consequently it largely broke down. I have suggested time and again from the floor of this House that the Board of Trade should be brought into action again, and in such things as taxation, for example. The Minister of Finance was constantly being criticised on the ground that many industries that might have been started were not started because of our system of taxation. It was also alleged again and again that the established industry could not possibly develop because of the incidence of taxation and so on and so forth. And it was perfectly useless to go to the Inland Revenue Department to put cases before that department, because after all said and done, that department is not interested in the industrial policy of this country. Once this House gives it power, the Inland Revenue Department is there to extract every shilling of revenue under the Act which it can possibly extract. If in doing so there are casualties in industry or in our economic life, that is just bad luck, but it has nothing whatever to do with the Inland Revenue Department. In practice that is what happens. That is their function. In these circumstances my contention always was that we should have a Board of Trade functioning in a way that it had never functioned before, that is to say, an industrialist hit by taxation could go to the Board of Trade, put his case before it, and if the Board of Trade agreed, representations could then be made to the Minister of Finance, and the Minister, with that recommendation from the Board of Trade and Industries, should then do something about it. That is one of the biggest difficulties we have had during this period of the present war, when we have not had our Board of Trade functioning properly; and when you come to criticise the Industrial Development Corporation in the things it has not done, it should be remembered the Industrial Development Corporation was met with a similar set of circumstances to an ordinary industrial organisation. Because of taxation in certain directions the ordinary industrial establishment would make representations to the Inland Revenue Department. Well, as I have said, the Inland Revenue Department is not a bit interested in an industrial organisation except as a milch cow, and all it is interested in is getting as much milk from that organisation as possible. Furthermore, it may take milk from a cow today and kill it in the process, but again it is not its function to take any further interest. The Industrial Development Corporation was met with the same difficulties. The hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. F. C. Erasmus) has talked about the little help given to small people by the Industrial Development Corporation The difficulty was that because of our taxation system during the war, these industries could not be started. In other words, the Industrial Development Corporation, working with Government money, was not prepared to risk the Government’s money in these undertakings during the period of the war with the system of taxation we established.

We have said that all along.

In these circumstances the Industrial Development Corporation had to do something, I submit, and in the circumstances they helped already-established organisations, industrial organisations with large pre-war earnings and profits. It must either do that or do nothing at all.

The Imperial Cold Storage for instance.

I am dealing with the case objectively, and sometimes I wonder whether hon. members on the other side are capable of dealing objectively with any subject. Also the remarks I made about taxation are purely objective remarks. We come along now with the Board of Trade to reorganise it and to give it more power. I also notice under Section 9 how very fully it is laid down there that they have powers to deal with the tariff position, powers to make representations to the Minister of Finance in so far as Customs are concerned. In a sort of incidental way in Section 9, subsection (i), they mention—

I do not know if that gives them power to deal with the South African Railways. Any man who has studied the history of industrial development in South Africa knows very well that the Railways and Harbours have had more to do with breaking or making industry, than any other organisation. Take, for example, shipping. In South Africa we would have had a thriving coastal service here for years and years, but the South African Railways did not want it. They started their so-called sea competitive rates, and they killed the shipping trade. We could go on mentioning case after case where actual industrial policy in this country, was, so to say, in the hands of the Railways and Harbours. We have the case of rural industries being established here. The hon. member for Humansdorp (Mr. Sauer) who is now going out, could send 100 lbs. of fresh fruit up to Johannesburg for 1s. 6d. If he is very enterprising, he can start a factory on his farm and cook and can that same fruit. He then adds labour costs to the cost of the fruit; he puts it on the Railways and they charge him perhaps something like 10s. per 100 lbs. for the same fruit. Then obviously the factory cannot stay on in the orchards. It goes up to Johannesburg for example and there you will find that fruit that was preserved a day after it was picked has one kind of flavour and when it is preserved a fortnight after it was picked it has a different flavour. Sometimes, as a matter of fact, we give a bad name to South African preserves, simply because of the Railways in this country. Now I want to know whether in the reformation of the Board and the extended powers given to it, that Board has power to make representations to the Railways. Representations have been made to the Railways for years and years, with no effect or with very little effect, and I would like to be sure that this innocent sub-clause really means that you can deal with the Railways. This clause is framed in rather suspicious language. We might later be told that the transport and markets referred to has nothing to do at all with Railways. I would like that altered in the Bill. Of course, one knows that there are various kinds of transport, so let us have no doubt about this matter. So far as taxation is concerned, as far as I can see, in this Bill we have not the necessary powers—and here I speak subject to correction; I should like the Minister to be very clear about this thing—let us assume that this Board functions and we have these industrial organisations that are pestering the Minister of Finance and the Inland Revenue Department. They complain that their representations are always turned down. Now I want to know from the Minister, if these smaller men or bigger men, as the case may be, can go to the Board and have an expression of opinion from the Board. The Board says: “Yes, you have a very good case and we will make representations in the proper quarters.” When the representations are made in the proper quarters, I want to be sure that those representations will be listened to. I know that existing Government bodies, and others which we have, have made representations to the Treasury about various matters and the Treasury wins the argument every time and usually they lose the case. What we want is a body that will win the case for us.

We cannot have it.

The hon. member says that we cannot have it. We have not had it. A body such as this has no executive powers, but we want a body that will have influence with the Government. Take, for example, the functions of the Board of Trade in the old days. When the Board of Trade reported on the sugar industry in this country, they made almost revolutionary suggestions, but the Board of Trade in those days had such influence that the Government paid attention to their recommendations, and we have the sugar industry organised as it is today largely because of the old Board of Trade, and, as a matter of fact, I think they called the arrangement that was then made “the Fahey Agreement”, Mr. Fahey being the Chairman of the Board of Trade and Industries at that time. We badly need a body like this today, and if we needed it years ago, we need it more at this juncture of our economic life. I consider that if we have a properly constituted Board of Trade with functions given to it that will enable it to influence policy and see to the industrial development of this country, then we will have achieved something in passing this Bill through the House. I want to congratulate the Minister on bringing this Bill forward, and I hope that he will consider the few remarks which I have made, and that in the Committee stage these instructions, as I have indicated, in the sense of adequately dealing with Customs, with taxation as affecting industry and adequately dealing with the Railways, will be incorporated in this Bill.

I too wish to congratulate the hon. Minister on his Bill, because I think it has very far-reaching effects. We have watched the industries in this country develop in a sort of spasmodic way. There does not seem to be any proper collaboration but things just happen, and then after a time the people are discouraged because they have not been taken up as they should be taken up and their industry fails. A case that was brought to my notice a little while ago illustrates this very well. It was in connection with bricks. I know something about bricks although I do not own a factory. There are two classes of bricks which are burned today, the down draught kiln and the clamp kiln bricks. The clamp brick is a very rough brick, but a very sound brick if it is properly burned, but the down draught kiln looks very much better because it is smoother. A certain amount of ash has to be added to the clamp brick. It is a very sound brick because the fire has gone right through, whereas in the case of the down draught brick the fire does not always go through it as well as it should; because some clay contracts more than others, the manufacturer does not put enough fire to it because he is afraid the brick will contract too much. But the appearance is all that can be desired. In one particular case, it was a Corporation that was building two-roomed cottages for coloured people. Because the bricks were very good looking, I would not like to insinuate that the architect was thinking about his fees on the total costs; that might have had something to do with it. But he bought down draught bricks at £6 10s. per 1,000 when he could have got the clamp bricks at £2 per 1,000. The place was plastered over so that the appearance of the brick did not make any difference at all. Then there was another case. The smaller men, being unable to sell their bricks some time ago, brought their case to the notice of the Authorities, requesting that the Defence orders should be shared, and in consequence of the war and their request, being disregarded many of the smaller places contracted their output very considerably indeed, and the result was that after a time, when a large quantity of bricks was required for Defence purposes, there were not nearly enough bricks available in the Cape Peninsula, and the bricks had to be railed from Pretoria, which had a large number of bricks at the time, owing to building being stopped. Those bricks had to be brought down at enormous cost and at great inconvenience to the Railways. If this Board had operated with its satellite committees, it would have been possible for these smaller men to have represented their case to the Government in time. They would have had ample supplies and all these disruptions to the Railway service and heavy costs of transport could have been avoided. I want to bring this forward as proof that a Board of this kind, with its attendant committees will be of ’great use indeed. These committees might also be of great use in connection with the post-war activities of the Government. It might be possible by means of this for these committees to acquire sufficient knowledge of bricks with regard to the works which must be proceeded with after the war. There is a great lack of co-ordination between the Municipalities, the Provincial Councils and the Union Government, and perhaps even some of the big industrial corporations with regard to the work that could be proceeded with in various ways. If we could have committees like this they might co-ordinate that work, and instead of the works being rushed helter-skelter, these works could be spread over a long period, ensuring work to a large number of people over a long time, and a stop can be put to the dislocation that takes place when the works suddenly come to a standstill, because you could have the co-ordination and the continuity in your plans which would certainly be of material benefit, not only to the workmen concerned but to all kinds of industries. Apart from that, it might be possible then to co-ordinate your work in such a way that when you see depressions coming, the Government, knowing that certain things would be required—a hospital here, a school there, a railway line there—all these things could be foreseen and during the depression the people could be kept in employment by doing these works, whereas at present we have got no machine of that kind, and everyone does as he pleases, with the result that there is no co-ordination. Instead of that you get a good deal of double work done, because there is a great deal of overlapping. I am particularly interested in the question of hospitals, because I can foresee the time coming when we shall have to increase our hospitals, particularly in the Cape Peninsula, and if we have co-ordinated schemes, those schemes might be added to the general scheme, and then we would see some prospect of its being attained at some time or other. So I hope that this Bill will go through without amendments. I hope that we will find that after a time the Minister may have to co-ordinate to an even greater extent, and that he may have to have more expert advice given to him through those committees, whereby he can steer a course so that we will ensure labour for the people at all times, and will ensure buildings and other works being created which are so necessary for the development of the country.

I do not rise to offer any criticisms, but I wish to ask for certain information. I should first like to say that I agree with the hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. F. C. Erasmus) that boards are becoming too numerous in this country. There are so many boards that people are beginning to doubt whether they serve any real purpose or not. I happen to be a member of some of those boards. I am a member of the Producers’ Board, and two years ago we were called together once; the Board was obviously just put up as a smokescreen to satisfy the producers that such a Board did exist. I feel these Boards should have more opportunities for functioning, and that they should be made to feel that they have been entrusted with responsibility; that is the only way in which you can make a board effective. I should like to know from the Minister why the Industrial Corporation was really started. As far as I know the object was to de-centralise industries, and not to centralise them in the big centres. I should like to know in what respect this Corporation has really carried out its functions so far as decentralisation is concerned. So far as I know, everything has been centralised. I remember when we all advocated that industries should also be started on the platteland so that an avenue for employment could be opened up to the youth of the platteland, and thus avoid the necessity for many of them streaming into the cities. So far as I am aware, this policy has never been carried out; on the contrary the system appears to be developing into one of complete centralisation. One point I am very interested in is in regard to what the Industrial Corporation has done in the case of the Imperial Cold Storage. I doubt whether the Industrial Corporation was ever meant to expand old-established industries. In this case I find the circumstances are these. At one time the shares of the Imperial Cold Storage stood at a very low figure. Then the Industrial Corporation invested something like £96,000 in the Imperial Cold Storage, and all of a sudden their shares soared to a high level. I should like to know from the Minister what the intentions of the Industrial Corporation are, seeing that they have driven up these shares to these heights. I should like to know whether they are going to buy out the shares at the ruling prices today, and whether the Industrial Corporation is needed in the meat industry. If they are going to buy up shares it is a deliberate crime perpetrated on the producer. If the object is to take over the Imperial Cold Storage at a reasonable figure, we welcome it, but if the Industrial Corporation is going to give more power to interests like the Imperial Cold Storage, which has always been the exploiter of the farmer, we definitely object to that policy. I should like to ask the Minister to make a statement to this House. There is a tremendous amount of unrest in the country on this matter. We definitely want to know where we are. I want the Minister to tell us what is the policy of the Corporation in regard to fostering the establishment of rural industries. If the farmer starts up a cold storage in the platteland, is the Industrial Corporation going to assist in the construction of cooling chambers? I think if the Industrial Corporation will help us in that way it will be doing something towards the object for which it was originally founded, but I am afraid, Mr. Speaker, that the Industrial Corporation has made us very suspicious. The Industrial Corporation were prepared to put £250,000 into a wool factory in this country, if the wool farmers also put £250,000 into that factory; but the Corporation specified that they would only do it on condition that they had a controlling interest in the factory. It seems rather curious that they should invest their money in the Cold Storage if they had not got the controlling interest in that concern. What was their object? This is something we want to know from the Minister. I should like to ask the Minister, too, how far the wool factory has gone, whether he has given permits for the importation of machinery to start that factory, or whether it is true that the British Government have stated that they are not anxious to export the machinery, because they want to retain the market on their own behalf after the war? And if the British Government have taken up that attitude, whether the corporation have tried to import this machinery from some other part of the world, for instance America? We are very anxious to see that wool factory started. If the Government is in earnest and if this is not the usual sort of talk, they should tell us something about these matters. I have also been informed that certain machinery in this country was sold to private enterprise, instead of the wool industry. This machinery was carding apparatus. We should very much like to know what attitude the Minister has taken up in that connection. I should also like to know from the Minister if big carding machines can be imported into this country for the sum of £9,000, whether it would not help to foster private enterprise in this country in the direction of our women being able to use that carded wool for home consumption? We all know that it is difficult for women to card the wool with small machines, but if you have the proper machinery to card the wool and then sell it in this country, I think it would be a big step forward for industry. You could also have every woman in a home and the children in the schools doing spinning, and I think by working along those lines we would very soon be independent of importations of wool from overseas. I would like to know what the Minister has done along those lines. We should also welcome information from the Minister in regard to base metals; what steps is he taking in this connection? I remember the last occasion on which we asked him to investigate the base metal position in South Africa. We told him also that it was quite likely oil could be produced in certain areas in the Cape. I believe that some drilling is going on, and I would like to know the result of that drilling. I believe the borehole has been sunk to a depth of 8,000 ft.

That is the Minister of Mines.

After all, it is Industries too.

After he strikes oil.

Then I think there should be a system of co-ordination between primary producers and secondary industries. There is no doubt that sooner or later we shall have to ensure co-operation between the producers of raw material and the secondary industries, and information will be welcomed on what steps the Minister is taking to secure this co-ordination.

I am very glad the Minister has introduced this Bill because it would appear from the Bill he is keen on promoting industries and industrial development generally. We are also glad to notice that when members discuss this subject, members like the hon. member for Vasco (Mr. Mushet) for instance, they discuss it objectively; and we find that the hon. member for Vasco for instance fully agrees with us and that he has become a convert to the policy which we have been advocating for years. If it had not been for the establishment of the Board of Trade and Industries the industry with which he is concerned would not have been in such a flourishing position today. In the past it was the importers who opposed local industries and who did not want the Government of those days to go to the extent of introducing protective tariffs to encourage the development of our own factories which could employ our own people. I have got up for two reasons. First of all I notice that the Minister proposes increasing the number of members of the Board by two.

No, only by one.

I should have liked to have seen him increase the membership by two, and let me say why. I consider there should be a definite provision in the Act laying it down that one of the members must be an industrialist from the platteland. We had a Commission several years ago which investigated the possibility of the establishment of rural industries. The report of that Commission, which was fairly bulky, has been shelved, and we have never heard any more about it. I want to tell the Minister that it appears to me that after the war the development which will take place will be in the direction not of centralisation of industries but in the direction of establishing industries all over the country. In all countries in the world it has been found that the population should not be concentrated in a few towns but should be spread all over. One can only do this by systematically spreading the industries throughout the country. In consequence of the railway rates to which we have raised objections from time to time, and which the hon. member for Vasco also discussed today, industries are not being established on the platteland today. But I particularly want to draw the Minister’s attention to the Congress which he attended at Kimberley in the beginning of November. Representatives of the North West on that occasion met at Kimberley. Unfortunately I had another appointment and I was unable to attend, but I have been able to get hold of the report and I fully agree that that part of the country, so far as industries are concerned, has been treated in a stepmotherly fashion. Kimberley used to be a progressive town where thousands of people were able to make a living. When the diamond industry goes, however, Kimberley will also go. The revival which is taking place today is of a temporary nature and we in the North West have no industries although we have the raw materials. The Board could give its attention to that aspect of the matter. The Government has established a big iron and steel industry in Pretoria, and we are told it is also busy establishing a big iron and steel industry at Vereeniging, but it is in the North West, especially in the area of Postmasburg, that we have the very best ores for the production of iron and steel, and if one takes into account the fact that the ore has to be moved from Postmasburg, and that the manganese also has to be transported by rail to the various factories in existence today, then these materials might just as well be taken to Kimberley at very much lower railway rates. If that were done Kimberley could also have a big iron and steel industry. I have a pamphlet here dealing with that whole question. We find for instance that if coal is sent from Wasbank to Pretoria at Us. 2d. per ton, it can be sent to Kimberley at 14s. 2d. per ton; from Glencoe to Pretoria the rate is 11s. 1d. per ton, and to Kimberley it is 14s. 3d. So far as coal is concerned the railway rate is more expensive, but now let us come to the other needs of the industry. Take for instance white lime which has to be transported from the Union Lime Works to Pretoria at 12s. 3d., while the railway rate to Kimberley is only 3s. 10d. per ton. From Taungs it can be transported to Pretoria at 11s. 1d. and to Kimberley at 4s. 11d. And thus we find that manganese is transported from Postmasburg to Pretoria at 13s. 9d. per ton, whereas it would only cost 7s. to take it to Kimberley. The people in those areas who are interested in the matter have made a careful survey of the feasibility of establishing a big industry at Kimberley and I hope the Minister will give instructions to his Board, to the enlarged Board, to enquire into the desirability of establishing such an industry at Kimberley. It will provide an enormous amount of employment and it will create a market for people who are today hundreds of miles away from their nearest market—I am particularly referring to such parts as Vryburg, Postmasburg, Gordonia and Kuruman, and even to areas like Hopetown and others. I hope the Minister is not going to leave it just at the speech which he made at the Congress, but that he will really do his best and prove that he is trying to give economic assistance to those parts of the country which so far have been treated in a stepmotherly fashion. Now, there is another matter I want to say a few words about. We have set up an Industrial Development Corporation in this country. That Corporation was established to enquire into the feasibility of the development of industries in this country, and also to determine where such industries should be established, and to what extent such industries would be an asset to the country. We therefore feel the Board should give its attention to all the areas where industrial development is possible, including the native areas. I have in mind for instance areas such as Tembuland in the Transkei which has a dense native population, a population which today has to live on the country. The result is that a great many natives from that area drift to the mines and return with miners’ phthisis. I have travelled through those parts of the country and I have noticed that there are large numbers of natives in and about the kraals who cannot find suitable work. We also know that in days gone by there used to be certain native industries. There were such industries as basket making, skin curing, pottery making and so on. These are matters which the Board of Trade and Industries should look into. They should enquire into the possibility for instance of establishing an industry which would manufacture native goods, say at Umtata, a place which is well supplied with water, or in Zululand or elsewhere—they should enquire into the possibility of establishing industries for the manufacture of articles which the natives need, and which we, the Europeans, may also want to buy. It would be worth while setting aside an amount of say £100,000 for the development of industries in native areas. We on this side of the House say that it is our policy to look upon ourselves as the guardians of the natives, and we are prepared to see that guardianship maintained and applied in respect of commercial matters. I therefore say that the possibility of the establishment of such industries in native areas should be enquired into. If that were done there would be no need in future to spend thousands of pounds on charity for the natives. The natives will become productive. I am sorry the Board of Trade and Industries have not yet given any attention to that aspect of the matter. We could even give educated natives the opportunity of being directors of such an industry, and I hope the Minister will give his attention to this particular aspect of the whole question.

There is just one matter which I should like to bring to the Minister’s notice and which I hope he will consider, and that is the desirability of providing that the keeping of statistics is to be part of the Board’s activities. We realise that general statistics have to be kept by the Census Office, but I think that if the Board is to function properly it should keep the essential statistics itself. May I point out that I asked the Minister a question some time ago about the number of factories in this country, and from his reply it appears that neither the Minister, nor his department are able to give us any idea of the number of factories and industries in existence in the country, or the number of workers employed in those concerns, or the amount of capital invested. As industries are one of the principal veins of our whole economic life I am afraid the Board of Trade and Industries will not be in a position to formulate a proper policy unless it is thoroughly conversant with the industrial development that is going on in this country, and unless it has as a background the necessary statistics for the formulation of such a policy. I hope the Minister will give this his serious consideration. While speaking on the subject I also want to advocate the suggestion that industries should be spread as much as possible all over the country. I am thinking particularly of Pretoria. Too much centralisation is bad. Our industries should be spread all over. We have suburbs of Pretoria for instance, such as Pretoria North and Daspoort, which offer potentialities for sound industrial development. I hope the Minister will also give this his serious consideration.

I should like to deal with two or three aspects of this Bill. First of all I want to congratulate the Minister on the step he has taken and on the objects which this Bill has in view. Let me say, however, that one cannot help feeling amused at some of the remarks which have come from the Opposition benches on this Bill. It is peculiar to see that while the Government is blamed so often for doing nothing, when something really effective is done, all kinds of complaints are raised. Thus we had the complaint this afternoon that there are too many Boards. If we work without Boards we are told we are autocratic. I should think that if we studied the past history of the Opposition, we would find good grounds for accusing them of autocratic or dictatorial behaviour. I was particularly amused at the hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. F. C. Erasmus). In this House, and on the platteland, we have been told so often about this terrible war destroying the country, and we have so often been told that South Africa cannot benefit by taking part in the war. The hon. member for Moorreesburg especially has condemned the Government’s war policy from beginning to end; and yet in spite of all his talk he now comes here with the statement that the war has really benefited South Africa, and that as a result of the war great industrial development as taken place.

I said in neutral as well as in belligerent countries.

The hon. member must not try to run away from what he said. He spoke of the tremendous development in industries because of the war.

As a result of the war but not because we have taken part in the war.

Hon. members of the Opposition always try to talk their full forty minutes, and by all their talk they try to stop the Government from doing things, and they continually repeat themselves. In any case the hon. member has admitted that this war is creating great opportunities in this country for industrial development.

In neutral countries as well as in non-neutral countries.

The hon. member is only trying to make excuses now. Anyhow I am glad to see that he is giving us credit for what we have done. Here we have a constructive Bill, and that is what we all want. We are very anxious to see something done to promote the economic interests of South Africa.

May I draw attention to the fact that there is no quorum. [Quorum restored.]

I hope that that newspaper magnate will see to it in future that his Party is present when such important matters are under discussion. I shall now leave the Opposition to its own devices for a little while, and I shall deal with a few aspects of industrial development, more particularly in connection with this Bill. The powers given to the Board are fairly wide. I am convinced that the Minister at some later date will find it necessary to make these powers even wider. Industries in South Africa are young. We can say that they are in the experimental stage and this legislation now before us is to a certain extent also experimental. The first aspect of our industrial development about which I want to say something, concerns industrial development immediately after the war. I believe that those industrialists in South Africa, particularly those who have fully and completely thrown in their lot with the Government, and who have done their utmost to make a success of our war effort, are very concerned what is going to happen after the war, and the next lot of people who are concerned about the future are the workers who are employed in industries today. As a member representing both sections, industrialists and employees in industries, I feel that I am entitled to place that aspect before the House. The industrialists do not want to be forced to close their doors immediately the war is over, nor do the workers in industries want to be thrown on the streets as soon as the war is over. I want to express the hope therefore that even at this stage practical steps will be taken to make arrangements so that existing factories will be able to produce goods which can be used in peace time, goods for which there will be a demand. I want to go further and I want to say that it is desirable to place orders in advance even now and I think it is desirable that the Government itself should place orders in advance, especially for agricultural implements. In this regard there is considerable room for improvement in South Africa. Many of these industries can manufacture some of those articles, but we must take steps in good time. In other words, orders must be placed in advance on such a scale that when the war is over the factories can start immediately to carry out those advance orders and thus avoid a dislocation in our industries and not have unemployment here. I hope the Minister will give the Board of Trade and Industries powers in that respect, and that he will bring this aspect of the matter pertinently to their notice. I was glad to hear the Minister say that agriculture also was part of our industries, or rather that agriculture, together with our industries would have to undergo great changes, and in that connection I should like to mention another aspect, and that is the question of the distribution of our industries. South Africa is a very big country. Transport facilities are difficult under all circumstances, and it costs a lot of money to provide those facilities. We have no natural transport, such as navigable rivers, like America and parts of Europe have. Consequently, we have to pay high rates for the little bit of transport which we have in South Africa. And what is more all this contributes towards raising the cost of industry. For that reason I want to express the hope that the Board of Trade and Industries will pay attention to the establishment of industries as close as possible to the natural resources connected with those industries. If the industry is engaged in the processing of fruit, it should be established in a fruit centre; or if it is an industry for the processing of minerals it would be best to establish that industry as near as possible to the area where the particular mineral is found. There are other difficulties, of course. Electric power is always a big difficulty in connection with industrial enterprises, and so is water supply. But I think that in most of our platteland dorps where raw materials are available, the necessary facilities can be provided. Then there is the question of labour, and this is an important aspect of the whole matter which I want to emphasise very strongly this afternoon, and which I want to bring very pertinently to the Minister’s notice. As hon. members know, on account of the country’s peculiar history and also on account of contributory factors, such as drought, lack of educational facilities in the past, and I also believe, the absence of the necessary attention to education even on the part of the people themselves and not on the part of the Government, the Provincial Councils or the Town Councils—as I say as a result of these contributory factors we have this position today, that a large proportion of our white population consists of unskilled labourers. We still get people here who say outright: “Why should we have our son or daughter taught anything; Pa did not go beyond standard VI, but he can read the Bible and that’s quite good enough”. I say that because of our peculiar history and also as a result of these contributory factors we have in this country a large element of unskilled white labour. These people are suffering great hardships today. This unskilled white labour has to compete with unskilled native labour, and in many respects their labour is practically equal to native labour, or it would be equal were it not for the protection they are afforded. Now that man is not given the necessary opportunity to become a skilled worker or to take his place with others and do skilled work. Why is that so? We have trade unions in this country and I am speaking as a trade unionist. These trade unions protect their members very strongly. They are afraid of the competition of unskilled labour, and I feel that at the present moment that sort of thing is not in the best interest of the country. We find that those unskilled labourers are too old for apprenticeship under the Act; perhaps they are slightly over the age at which people usually enter industry, but in spite of that I feel that it should not be very difficult to give those unskilled labourers an opportunity to take part in our industries and in our various concerns. And what is more, I think I am correct when I say that a movement in that direction will have the full support of our trade unions. Although in the past the trade unions stood for a policy of protection they have now changed their opinion somewhat and I think they will support the Government in an attempt to assist the unskilled white labourers to take their place in industry. Then there is also the question of a market for our industrial products. The provision in the Bill refers to the development of our markets. There is a tendency in some parts of the House to go forward in a spirit of isolation, even in regard to the northern territories. I believe the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop) or some other member of this House said the other day that the Government was subordinating our interests to the interests of Great Britain, and that for that reason it did not want to encourage our industries. What the hon. member seems to have forgotten is the possibility of the development of markets in those parts of Africa to the north of the Union. I think that that will be one of the most important tasks of this Board of Trade and Industries and I hope that somebody with the necessary knowledge of the northern parts of Africa and also of foreign countries, will be put on the Board, so that we may be able to develop our foreign trade. I am convinced that in ten or fifteen years’ time, after the war this will be an important factor in our commerce and industries. In conclusion there is one other aspect of the matter to which I want to draw attention. I notice that the Minister has not included one particular function among the Board’s other functions; this is an important matter, and perhaps he has not included it because this is an experimental Bill, but we hope it may still be included—I refer to the question of securing land for industries, and there is reference to that in this particular provision. There are parts of this country such as the Witwatersrand where industry finds it particularly difficult to secure the necessary land for its purposes. Sometimes it is left to private enterprise and the whole matter is left in the hands of people speculating in land. The result is that industries sometimes have to pay huge amounts for land. I am making these remarks not just to plead for people who want to start industries, but we should remember that our industries are still in their infancy; many of them are young and need encouragement. In South Africa we have this position—and that position also prevails in the Transvaal, that, to put it colloquially—we have land to burn. Large areas are entirely bare yet industries often have to pay huge amounts for a plot of land, and that often is the reason why they are unable to make a start. I think it is a sin to have this handicap put in the way of new industries. Experience has shown us that an enterprise sometimes has to pay £4,000 or £5,000 for an acre of land. In Johannesburg industrialists often are quite willing to nay £10,000 for land which of course, means that the capital expenditure of the enterprise is raised beyond what it would otherwise have been, and an expense of that kind is like a millstone round an industry’s neck. It is a stumbling block in the way of its development because it increases its costs of production. I feel that this aspect should be remembered. This Bill to me is proof that we are on the right course, and I want to express the hope that in the industrial sphere South Africa will make great progress in days to come.

I feel that a start has been made with a healthy industrial development in South Africa. That being so, and as we are on the eve of great developments, we want those developments to take place on a sound basis. I therefore feel that from the very start the idea put forward by this side of the House should be considered, namely the establishment of a Central Economic Council. I am glad the war has awakened us, and I believe that many industries have come to stay. We have many industries today, and the future of those industries is an encouragement to young South Africa. Industrial development is the blood vein of a country’s life. As things in this country are today, industries come first. In the past the farming industry was No. 1, as the backbone of the country, but I believe industrial development in South Africa today stands paramount. The farming industry comes second, and mining development comes third. The reason why I say so is this; the European population of South Africa is between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000. We can find work for those people but we should not forget that there are 8,000,000 non-Europeans, and it is becoming more and more difficult for those non-Europeans to find a living. They are looking to us for work, and if we do not want the non-Europeans to die of starvation in days to come we shall have to develop industrially as fast as we can, and as strongly as we can, because it is only in that way that we shall be able to give employment to the non-European population. A country which imports everything has no future, it is doomed. Only that country which has its own industry has a future because that country can attend to its own needs so far as employment is concerned. That country keeps its money. If industries are established on a sound basis, then there is no need for a country to import, and in that case the country is able to exist. I say that I am glad the war has awakened our country industrially, and that industry has revived and developed, but I am afraid when peace comes again we shall have a repetition of what happened after the last war. I am very much afraid that the little fire which has been kindled, and all these fine predictions regarding South Africa’s future, will go up in smoke. I am afraid our present prosperity is only temporary and that when the war is over we shall have a relapse. When peace comes I am afraid we shall fall back on our old habits of importing everything from abroad. I want to draw the attention of the House to the fact that South Africa has suffered tremendously in the past through our not having our own industries in working order. Let hon. members cast their eyes about this House and see all the things we have imported. Even the clothes we wear, the rings we wear, the watches—all these things are manufactured in other countries, and we have to send our money out of the country to get these things. All these articles can be manufactured here, and if they were we would be able to employ large numbers of our own people. Ours is a young country and it is our duty to start giving this work to our own people and thus keep our money in our own country. Take all the goods which we consume. No matter how trivial they are, we find a tab on them, “Made in England,” “Made in America,” or otherwise “Made in Japan” or “Germany.” Why? We supply those other countries with bread, we give life to those countries, yet we are starving here. No, it is a fine idea to support and develop our industries in this country by means of our own efforts. There is another point in regard to our industries—it is a point which has many dangers in it—I am referring to the money from this country which is invested in industries in other countries. Certain people in this country have invested large sums of money in industries abroad, and these people are trying to destroy the valuable development of South African industries because their interests are abroad and not here. We do not know anything about these unholy understandings in foreign countries—we are not familiar with the details of investments made by influential people in foreign industries, and we are not familiar with the arrangements and undertakings between those people and foreign governments to exploit and destroy the industries in this country. I think the Minister should pay attention to this aspect, and I feel that the State should take steps completely to prohibit investments of money abroad, especially in industries, so that certain people cannot use their influence and their money to destroy our own future and our own enterprises. The economic independence of this country must be our aim. We shall never be able to achieve that until such time as we use all our efforts for the development of the potentialities of this country. I have drawn attention to what the country has already lost through having waited for so long. We are comparatively poor in South Africa today owing to the State having lost so much in that respect in the past. Money has flown out of this country and the little we have manufactured here is of very slight importance. I feel that this matter is just as serious, just as far-reaching so far as South Africa is concerned, as it was to other countries in the world; just as serious as it was to Germany, Japan, America and other countries. Just as important as it is to those countries to be economically independent and only to import certain things which they cannot manufacture themselves, just as important is it that we should adopt the same attitude. Whatever we can manufacture in this country should be manufactured here. I say we have a wide field for development in South Africa. We have our iron and steel industry. Progress is being made at Vereeniging in the manufacture of our own engines. We can go further and manufacture our own rolling stock, such as wheels and axles. And we should go even further than that and give serious thought to the question of manufacturing our own motor cars—our own motor car engines. There is no need to be dependent on foreign countries seeing that we have all the facilities in this country, seeing that we can do so many of these things ourselves. In spite of that, however, we continue to be dependent on foreign countries. I am glad to see that we have an industrial development here and that we are on the eve of great enterprise. I congratulate the Minister and I hope he will give his attention to the question of setting up a comprehensive Central Economic Board. If such a Board is set up we shall have a powerful body which will develop our strength. I feel that there is no need to have all these boards which we have at present. Possibly we may be able to concentrate our strength into one great body, if the animation and the spirit is there; and if the spirit of enterprise is there, so far as the Government is concerned, then we shall be able to make a success of South Africa’s industries.

I should like to say a few words in regard to the manufacture of railway material. We succeeded in establishing a steel industry in our country, and we have had great success with it. We are very grateful for that, and during the war period we succeeded in extending our steel industry to such an extent that today we produce from 100 per cent. to 150 per cent. more than before the war. We are grateful for that. But we find nevertheless that the Railway Administration, which requires 70,000 to 100,000 tons of rails every year, is able to obtain only one-fifth to one-quarter of that quantity from the iron and steel industry. The balance still has to be imported every year. We have the steel and we have the industry. We have the raw material, but notwithstanding that we have to import from overseas 70 per cent. to 80 per cent. of our rail requirements every year. Is it not possible to develop this industry; and even if were only to provide the rails for the Railways, would not that be of great assistance to our country? During war time we require 70,000 to 80,000 tons. As soon as the war is over and development takes place, the requirements will increase. New lines will have to be built and old lines will have to be shifted; we shall have to improve all sorts of railway services throughout the country, and many more rails will be required. There is, therefore, great room for improvement and development of this particular industry; but the price presents a difficulty, of course. Before the war the overseas article kept the price of our own rails somewhat low, The steel industry, of course, wants its pound of flesh from the Railway Administration, and within my memory there was a certain amount of friction between the Railway Administration and the steel industry in regard to prices. I understood that one of the reasons why the production of rails was kept on a low basis, was that it was found by the steel industry that the profit on rails was not as big as the profit on the other articles which they can manufacture. That is a very important point. Higher profits or no higher profits, I feel that an institution like Iscor has to provide a national need. It is a national institution, and it must be the aim of such an institution to provide the national needs. Not a single sleeper is made there, and we import millions of sleepers. The manufacture of sleepers is a very important matter. No railway line is safe if there are no sleepers, and here we have an industry which can be extended into a new branch of the iron and steel industry. If Belgium, Germany and England can manufacture sleepers from steel, and export them to this country at a profit, it ought to be possible for our own industry to produce that article. That does not apply to sleepers only. The hon. member for Namaqualand (Lt.-Col. Booysen) correctly spoke of the manufacture of rolling stock, which in these days is made exclusively of steel. This is an essential industry which has to be built up. We will be pleased if the Minister will exert his influence in that respect, so that as far as the Railways are concerned, at any rate, we shall be completely self-supporting and independent of the overseas countries. We have seen how critical the position becomes in a time of stress if we are not self-supporting and if we have to be dependent on overseas countries for our locomotives and other material. It is not only a question of locomotives and rolling stock. After this war there will be a big programme of expansion of road motor services. If we want to keep pace with the development of the country, if we want to develop our country to be able to provide employment to returned soldiers, whom we would like to see return to their former employment, we must absorb them not only in the industries which produce goods, but we can also absorb them in the road motor services which are further developed. As far as the road motor services are concerned, too, I should like to see us become independent of overseas countries. The road motor vehicle is just as important as the locomotive, because we have small scale farmers in our country, men who have a few cows, who have to send away a small quantity of cream, a few eggs or a little fruit—-and to the man who farms on a small scale the road motor service is very useful, because he has no vehicle and the road motor service fetches the produce at his door. This brings money into circulation and creates a market, and it also renders a great service to the consumer who in that way is brought closer to the producer. But we cannot extend and expand the road motor service if we cannot get our road motor vehicles locally. Even before the war it was difficult for the Railways to obtain sufficient vehicles from overseas to meet our heeds. The result is that latterly we have experienced difficulty in getting the farmer’s produce to the train. The Government has used Defence vehicles to convey wheat and mealies to the train. That was done, and in doing so the Government met the appeal of the farmers. Nevertheless we know that grain rotted on the land because there was no means of transport. It was fortunate that it was possible to make that arrangement with the Defence Department. They came to the assistance of the Railways and conveyed thousands and tens of thousands of tons of grain to the Railways. After the war, this means of transport will no longer be available. It will be an important matter to the country, and also a necessary step, to manufacture these vehicles. Today there are 14,000 miles of railway track in South Africa, and road motor services over more or less the same distance. I think it will be to the advantage of the country not to have 14,000 miles of road motor service, but 40,000 miles. The road motor service is a profitable industry which stands on its own legs. It can be extended. But good and solid vehicles are required for that purpose, and we ourselves must manufacture those vehicles in the country, even though it may be necessary at the outset to import the machinery from overseas. Not only that, but in modern farming tractors have become indispensible, and I feel that it is of the utmost importance that tractors be manufactured in our country and delivered to the farmers at a cheap price. It is therefore of importance that tractors be standardised, and that the spare parts be standardised. We would then render a great service to the country even if we have to import the machines. But not only tractors. I agree with the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. Van den Berg) that we must manufacture our own farming implements in this country. It is imperative that we should do so. We have the steel industry, which should be extended in that direction, and the Government should see to it that farming implements are standardised and that spare parts are standardised, so that the difficulties which have arisen in the past as a result of the duplication of spare parts will be eliminated. Today we have various types of cultivators. You may have one farmer who uses three or four different types of cultivators, and when a spare part breaks, the spare part of one cultivator does not fit the other cultivator. It would be of immense value if the cultivators and other farming implements were standardised, and if they could be delivered to the farmer at a reasonable price. It would contribute in making the farming industry more efficient. Apart from that, just think of the fencing material, wire and poles. Thousands of tons are imported. Today we have a steel industry and, if necessary, it must be doubled and trebled. It has proved to be profitable. Why cannot fencing material be manufactured and delivered to the farmers at a reasonable price? Just think of the problem which faces us today in connection with fencing material. If there is one article of which there should be no shortage it is fencing material, because the better one fences off a farm the better one can regulate the grazing, and the better one regulates the grazing, the better one can produce. We want to ask the Government in all seriousness to take steps to manufacture our own fencing material. I was pleased to hear from the Minister of Lands a few days ago that they are going to produce boring machines and build them on motor vehicles, so that they can move on their own power. If ever a progressive step has been taken, it is this step, and we welcome it. But do not stop at bores. Do not be niggardly in connection with expenditure in making boring machines. We will never be saddled with them. If there is one matter to which the country should give attention it is the conservation of water and water production. Without water the country is powerless, and if there is one matter which must be undertaken it is the production and conservation of water. In large sections of the country one cannot conserve water because the rainfall does not permit it. Water must be produced; that water is subterranean, and machines have to be used. There are thousands and tens of thousands of square miles in our country where there is either no grazing or disadvantageous grazing, because the subterranean water is not brought to the surface. It is an industry in itself, and we shall be glad if the Government will not be niggardly and stingy with regard to expenditure in connection with the construction and acquisition of boring machines, and not only that, but the Government should also apply itself to making the boring machines, scientifically, the very best that can be made. If that is done, a great service will be rendered to the country.

It is very pleasant, if in a previous debate in this House it was necessary to criticise the Minister, to have the opportunity of being friendly towards the Minister, and congratulating him on a measure. This Bill, if I read it correctly, is one of the measures to which the country looks forward today; it is one of those measures which is absolutely essential and that is why it is pleasant to be able to say a few words to the Minister in a friendly spirit. In the first place I want to say that I appreciate the difficulties in which the Minister and the Government find themselves, under existing conditions, with regard to industrial development. I think I am aware of the fact that there are interests in the country which have always intimated that the Government should not interfere with businesses and the development of industries, that everything should be left to private initiative. If we were to accept that attitude, the development of this country would be very poor; and in that case industrial development on a proper scale would not have taken place in any direction. It is the State which has to give the lead. As soon as the State gives an indication that it is going to give the lead in connection with some industry or other, the private undertaking immediately gains confidence in that direction. I want to say to the Minister: As soon as the State gives the lead it is as though people who are looking for an investment for their money, at once gain confidence in that direction. I need only refer to the iron and steel industry. I think that if the State had not taken the matter in hand years ago and given a lead, there would never have been people who would have been prepared to invest money in this venture. But without indicating in detail today the spontaneous success which has been achieved by that industry, I do want to emphasise that today it is one of the greatest assets of the country. I want to say that I hope that the present position will not lead to a repetition of what we had in the past five years in connection with the Industrial Corporation. I am sorry to say it, but in my opinion it has not helped the country at all. I am pleased that the Minister of Lands is in his seat, because I believe that I am going to get his full support in what I propose to say this afternoon. Perhaps I shall be regarded as an “irrigation maniac” if I deal with this subject, but the Minister recently made a statement in connection with big irrigation schemes, and I want to point out—and I think I shall get the Minister’s support—that the greatest problem of ultimate water schemes in South Africa rests on a system of turbines, in parts where irrigation by means of dams is not possible. Now you may ask what this has to do with the Bill. It concerns the Bill to this extent, that in South Africa today there is a demand for greater production, but one cannot produce unless certain conditions are created. The great potential demand which there will be for foodstuffs is stressed; it is pointed out that we shall have a large potential market for foodstuffs, but today we are boycotted by the absence of certain machinery in connection with production. The turbine is a simple form of machinery, but our engineers who can make these turbines are not allowed to do so; War Supplies forbid them to do it. Our water is running into the sea. The Government is insisting on increased production, because food will have to be supplied to the world when the war is over. We do not possess the necessary machinery. We are not allowed to make it in this country and it cannot be imported. I have, however, made enquiries and the majority of factories in South Africa which are concerned with machinery are prepared and willing to manufacture turbines immediately, because the machinery is of a simple nature. They will be prepared to manufacture these turbines if only they are given the right to do so. But they are not given that right. Here we have the position that there is a very essential article which we cannot import, which can be made here, but War Supplies stand in our way. Now I want to point out to the Minister that a great task will rest on our shoulders in providing for the food requirements of the Union, but also for portions of Africa and portions of Europe which are starving, and one of the essential requirements with a view to increasing the production, is this simple machinery which is so necessary for that purpose. These turbines can be manufactured in the country, and the people who can make them are prepared to do so. I hope the Minister will appreciate the importance of this. The farmers are being handicapped. They need the machcinery. Our engineers can and will make them, if only they can get a permit from War Supplies. It is of very great importance, because the absence of this machinery acts as a brake on the producing portion of the population; and I want to draw the Minister’s attention to the fact that this is one of the first things to which the Board of Trade and Industries can give its attention under this Bill. I hope that the Minister will draw their attention to the fact that under Clause 9 of the Bill, it is one of the things to which they can immediately give their attention. Furthermore, I wholeheartedly support the views which have been expressed in connection with the manufacture of agricultural implements. Let me once again draw the Minister’s attention to this fact: If one buys a piece of land today, whether small or large, and one wants to cultivate it properly, the agricultural implements cost one more than the land itself. This is one of the factors which is today making agricultural development impossible; and the point is that these implements can be manufactured here. Now the Minister will say that this is the old story again. Those people are afraid to manufacture agricultural implements, because they are afraid that after the war they will not be able to compete with overseas manufacturers. Even in peace time when we had all the shipping facilities we wanted from America, Germany and England, the prices of agricultural implements were so high that the farmers could not exist. It must not be argued therefore that they can manufacture these things so cheaply and export them at such prices that our factories will not be able to compete. What they did do was to create such a condition in the country that the producers had to pay so much for implements that they were never able to compete with other countries, like the Argentine and other parts of America. Then they come along and say that they cannot compete with producers in other parts of the world, but in the meantime the South African producer has never had an opportunity of buying his implements as cheaply as the overseas producer. If you want to increase the production in the country, you must enable the producer to obtain agricultural implements at a reasonable price. Up to the present our producers have had to pay three times as much for agricultural machinery as the overseas producer. Here we have an opportunity under this Bill. Here we can establish an industry for the manufacture of our agricultural implements, which could then be made available to the producer at a reasonable price. The price of agricultural implements must be reasonable, because the producer is already paying a high price for his land and other requirements. If the Government does not give the lead, private undertakings will never gain confidence. But as soon as the State gives the lead, confidence is created. Now I want to say a few words in connection with Clause 9 of the Bill, which deals with the duties of the Board. The first paragraph reads as follows—

The time has arrived for the State to reconsider its bounties, or whatever they may be called. We must encourage our industries, those industries which are of benefit to South Africa, even though it be on a subsidy basis. That has not been the case in the past. The State has subsidised here and there, but that subsidy policy has not been effective in the past, because the subsidy policy has been tantamount to this, that the man who could stand on his own legs derived greater benefit from the subsidy than the man who required the assistance most. The man who most required assistance derived the least benefit from the subsidy. Then I should like to draw the Minister’s attention to (b)—

Let me show how foolish our policy has been in the past. Machinery which is very essential, not only to agriculture but also to industrial development in the country, has always been heavily taxed, because in this country especially we have not only large undertakings but quite a number of small undertakings which have to use imported machinery for their business. We come along, however, and impose a levy on the machinery at such a high rate that it sometimes results in the downfall of the small undertakings. We sometimes systematically raise the price of the machinery to such an extent that it becomes difficult or impossible for the man to compete with overseas manufacturers, because we make the primary costs of his industry so high by the imposition of taxation. I say that in the past we have followed a policy which defeats itself, which defeats its own object. On the one hand we impose taxation on a man’s machinery which he imports from overseas, and on the other hand we come along and give him a certain amount of protection. Do not forget that many of these industries are small beginnings, and we then follow a system of protective taxation. I am in favour of a protective policy, but in the first place we defeat the policy by taxing the primary article which the man requires, namely, the machinery. We make it so difficult for him in the commencing stages that he cannot compete with the overseas manufacturer. This Clause 9 refers to it. In my opinion it will be the first duty of the Board to allow all the machinery which is necessary for industrial development in the country, to enter duty free. You must help the man at the outset, because at the rate we tax the machinery, we kill the people’s spirit of enterprise. Do not tax the commodities required by the young industries at such a high rate that you make it impossible for the beginner to carry on. Then I want to refer to (e)—

There we have the same. I do not want the House to look upon me as a man who represents the wine industry in this country, but we have a responsibility for the welfare of South Africa, apart from our responsibility to the constituency which we represent; and in my opinion this form of taxation requires revision, with a view not to protecting the South African producer With whom the imported article competes, but with a view to relieving him of unnecessary taxation which is levied on him. Here again you defeat your own object. On the one hand you say that you want to encourage production, and on the other hand you introduce a system of taxation which has the very opposite effect. Instead of being encouraged the industries languish through the form which our taxation takes. The next paragraph to which I want to refer is sub-paragraph (f)—

These are also things which the Board must consider from time to time. With regard to “restricting production” I hope that the opinion is not held that one must sometimes restrict production. I do not know whether I understand the position correctly, but I want to issue a warning against restricting production. If there is one thing against which South Africa must conduct a campaign, it is against the restriction of production. This was applied in America, but it had nothing but a deadening effect, and if one restricts production, one immediately kills the initiative of the producer. He does not know what is going to happen; he does not know where he is. The agricultural industry especially is subject to so many incalculable factors, that one cannot in any circumstances take the risk of restricting production. You naturally have setbacks, plagues, and numerous other difficulties, which in themselves are sufficient to restrict production. The only solution is the solution which has latterly come to the fore in South Africa, and here again the Minister has an opportunity of encouraging industrial development, and of assisting the producer and the consumer alike; I refer to the process of dehydration. If, as far as foodstuffs are concerned, one undertakes this process of dehydration and canning, etc., one solves one’s marketing problem, one’s control problem and one’s transport problem. Once the food has been processed and put into tins, we would not only be able adequately to supply the South African market; we would not only be able to regulate the market and fix prices, but we would also be able to supply other parts of Africa. The Minister of Commerce and Industries was absent from South Africa for some time, and he may not have been here when I emphasised how detrimental and deadening it is to South Africa when vegetables are imported into our country in tins. That same afternoon a few members said that we would never be able to make sweetcorn in this country. They said that our climate wasnot suitable, that our water was not suitable, etc. That same afternoon a man who was Sitting in the gallery came to me and said: “They say you’re talking nonsense, but within three years we shall prove what can be done.” Does the Minister know of a single tin of imported sweetcorn which is today consumed in South Africa? But one always finds this type of propaganda andthis type of story, and in the past we were only too inclined to believe it. I want to refute those stories once again. There was a time when we exported meat from SouthAfrica, and when we subsidised cattle for export; I believe up to £7 10s. per beast. They were sent to the London market. But during the same year we still bought canned Argentinian corned beef at 1s. per tin in South Africa. Then it was also said that our type of cattle was not suitable, that the water was no good, that our climate was not suitable. We listened to that propaganda, but it has been proved totally false by the circumstances prevailing today. I think we are all convinced that our corned beef is just as good as that of any other country. We are now using our own meat, our own tins, our own labour. Instead of sending the money overseas it is kept in the country and spent here, and we are providing employment for our own people. In that way reciprocal prosperity is created which is also reflected in the budget speech to which we listened yesterday. Here the Minister has a golden opportunity. I am not quarrelling with the Minister, but I want to impress upon him that this measure must not be undertaken half-heartedly, but that this must be the beginning of the development which is absolutely essential in South Africa and to which we all look forward—the producer, the worker and the industrialist—and once the lead has been given, the people possessing the necessary capital will come forward. Then I should like to say a few word in connection with (i), because this, too, is a matter about which I am deeply concerned—

This is also one of the functions of the Board, and I cannot let this opportunity pass without again pointing to the necessity of so arranging the marketing system in South Africa that not only must there be a survey from time to time of what is going to be produced, or what the expectations are as far as the crop is concerned, but that there must also be a proper and scientific survey of what the whole country’s potential consumption of each article is. At the moment we know that in normal circumstances in South Africa so much meat, so much butter, so much milk, so much of every kind of food, is consumed, but that is not the only important point. There must be a survey which will show us how the different markets are spread over South Africa; where 1,000 bags are required, where 1,000 slaughter cattle are required, where other commodities are required. I believe that such a survey has never been made, but it is very essential, and if it has not been done in the past, it only testifies to neglect of duty. If we had this survey, we could arrange for a proper distribution of our products to the various places. We have heard here time and again that there are people in certain parts of South Africa who have never tasted fruit. There are districts in South Africa where people do not know what a pear looks like, where children aged eleven have never seen a pear, and where children of six years have not even seen grapes. Why do I mention this? Because I say that we have never undertaken a proper survey in South Africa, with the result that we have not supplied the different parts of the country with the various commodities. I do not know whether the Minister realises how seriously I look upon this matter, but in my opinion he could bring a great blessing to the people of South Africa by means of this measure. If he gives effect to this Bill in the right spirit, in the spirit in which I should like to see it carried out, then it will be possible to solve 75 per cent. of South Africa’s potential difficulties. But if it is going to be a Bill which is going to insist on the letter of the law, we are not going to make much progress. I want to tell the hon. Minister that here he has an opportunity to make use of this Bill, once it is on the Statute Book, in order to supply South Africa with something to which we have looked forward for a long time. Since I have now spoken of industries, I also want to raise this point. The opinion has already been expressed that the municipalities should in the future act as agents between the producer and the consumer. I think there are municipalities which welcome this. But the municipalities are looking to the hon. Minister for a lead in order to show them that such a scheme has his approval. I say that here the Minister has an excellent opportunity. Here is an opportunity to encourage the municipalities—who can act as the promoters of distribution—to undertake this scheme. Here he has an opportunity, and I make bold to say that the majority of the municipalities in South Africa will be prepared to undertake this. There will, of course, be some municipalities which will not be prepared to do this. But there are municipalities who have seen time and again how their markets are overloaded with certain products at certain times, followed by a week or a month when those products are not obtainable at all. I need only refer to the Johannesburg market in support of what I am saying. It happens on the Johannesburg market that during one week there are hundreds and thousands of bags of potatoes, and then one goes to Springs or Brakpan or Krugersdorp, and there one may find only a few bags of potatoes. If there were a proper system of distribution, and if the municipalities were to act as the promoters of distribution in their own area, it would be the easiest thing in the world for the municipalities constantly to remain in contact with the various control boards and to tell them what the local marketing requirements are. Here the Minister has an opportunity of placing a function on the shoulders of the willing city councils, who will willingly carry out what the control boards have not been able to carry out up to the present. That is what I read into this Bill, and that is why I stress that this should be done. We are talking about industries now. May I, at this stage, draw the hon. Minister’s attention to the fact that there is a great tendency in South Africa, and on the part of some of his colleagues, to concentrate everything in Cape Town, Johannesburg or Pretoria. That is a wrong policy.

What about Krugersdorp?

Krugersdorp and hundreds of other places must share in this. May I just say this to the hon. member who has interrupted me. A scheme was drawn up, and I think the hon. Minister even wrote a foreword in connection with the brochure which was drawn up. But my complaint is that where an opportunity presents itself for encouragement by the Government, that encouragement is confined only to Johannesburg or Cape Town or some other big centre, while eighteen miles from Johannesburg we have all the necessary facilities. There we have electricity, water, the labour and the ground; the necessary stands are offered to the people; but what I expect is that the Government will show the industrialist that the establishment of the industry concerned will be in the interests of the country. I should like to see that the Government has confidence in the local authority which offers the necessary facilities. I should like the Government to say that it is more desirable—that it is more sound from the national point of view, to distribute the industries over the length and breadth of the country, and not to concentrate all industries in one area. In that respect, too, the Government can give a lead. It is difficult for me to understand why the industrialist prefers to have the same amount of money in Johannesburg rather than in Krugersdorp or Roodepoort, for example. But. I think it boils down to this. Many of those undertakings are financed by big financiers who are concentrated mainly in those big places and who want an even bigger influx into those places, because it is all a question of wheels within wheels. The bigger they make the concentration in one city, the more benefits they derive from it in the form of trade. The Government ought to show that it is its policy to distribute industries throughout the length and breadth of the country, and not to concentrate them in one place. Where all the industries are situated in one centre, the State has to make provision for train services. All this involves great expense. In Johannesburg today one sees that the trains are packed to capacity, and many people have to travel 30 or 40 miles in order to work in Johannesburg. All this is an unnecessary waste of money, an unnecessary concentration. Instead it should be stated that the industries ought to be distributed over different parts of the country. If that were done, we would get a sound state of affairs in this country. When a city becomes too big for a country like South Africa—I cannot speak here as a man who has a great deal of knowledge of cities—but Johannesburg has become top-heavy, and I feel that the population in Johannesburg should no longer be increased, but that the other parts of the Witwatersrand should be enlarged, and not only the other parts of the Witwatersrand, but also the other parts of the Transvaal as a whole, and the Free State as well. The population in those parts must be increased. For example, I cannot see any reason why a small town like Wepener in the Free State cannot be used for the establishment of a wool-washing factory, but it is for the Government to give the lead. Have you ever thought what would happen if, for example, anything were to go wrong with the involved machinery of the Witwatersrand? Fortunately nothing went wrong with the dams during the war, but if anything had gone wrong with those dams, the whole Witwatersrand, the whole of Pretoria and the whole of the Transvaal would practically have been out of action, and what would have happened then? No, I insist that we must lay down a policy that our industries should be established where the natural facilities exist in the form of water and other facilities, but we must not at all costs concentrate our industries in the big cities only. That is a wrong policy; and my last request to the hon. Minister is this, whatever his policy in the future may be, that he should follow a fixed policy which will no longer be influenced by overseas propaganda which says that we cannot do anything in this country in competition with overseas concerns. I want to remind the Minister that whatever we have undertaken in this country in the industrial sphere, we have carried out with a fair amount of success, in spite of all the arguments which we have from time to time, I want to say this to the hon. Minister: Atlantic Charter or no Atlantic Charter, our first duty is towards South Africa. I know that there are factories overseas which want to feather their nests here in preparation for the post-war period. If they succeed in squeezing us out of existence, it will be our trouble and not theirs. If the iron industrialists in America kill our local industry, it will be our loss and not their loss. I want to ask the Minister, therefore, not to take any notice of that propaganda. We are big and we are strong enough to look after ourselves. If those industrialists were to say to the Minister: “We are too strong for you; we shall squeeze you out of existence,” I want to ask the Minister not to pay any attention to that type of propaganda, and to tell them that it is our concern and not theirs. I do not think that South Africa need be worried about a market. I repeat that as yet we have manufactured nothing in this country with which we have been saddled. A few years ago one of the important English agents was here, and he said that the only market in the world which had not yet been exploited was Central Africa; and that is where the natural market for South Africa lies. If it is decided that South Africa should become the workshop of all Africa, then we must undertake this matter without fear, but if we allow ourselves to be influenced by the fear of overseas competition, then we are allowing ourselves to be frightened by nothing but propaganda. Those overseas industrialists only want to milk us when they please and as much as they please. There is a movement afoot in this country to establish our own wool factories. Let me give a little advice to the farmers of the country. I want to say this to them: “Do not you allow yourselves to be put off by this type of propaganda.” If the farmers abandon those plans to establish our own wool factories, the overseas manufacturer will come along after the war and offer them just what he pleases, but if they say that they are going to undertake it themselves, that they are not going to accept the meagre price offered, they will in that way attain stabilisation of prices for our wool in South Africa. I want to make an appeal to the farmers not to allow themselves to be put off by overseas propaganda. I want to advise them to make a start with that wool factory. That will be the first milestone which the wool farmer in South Africa will reach.

As an industrialist who has been connected with industry for many years, I welcome the introduction of this Bill which gives greater powers to the Board of Trade. The Board of Trade has in the past done exceedingly good work for the benefit of this country. It has been the means of assisting industry in many respects, and I welcome the greater powers which this Bill gives to the Board of Trade, and which I think may prove to be still more beneficial to industry in the future than the Board’s activities have been in the past. Clause 9 is the one in which I am particularly interested. This clause gives the Minister the right to instruct the Board what it shall enquire into. Sub-clause (c) provides for the recasting and revision of the Customs Tariff, and Sub-clause (d) provides for the removal of anomalies in the Customs and Excise Tariffs. I am not interested in excise but I am interested in customs. One remembers that in the past, many difficulties have arisen between sections of industry and the Customs Department. As most hon. members know, we have in this country a rebate system, for the purpose of assisting industries, so that they will not pay the same Customs Duty for articles required for the purpose of manufacture, as the ordinary parties outside industry would pay. But, Sir, in the event—and it frequently happens—of two articles of a somewhat similar nature, both used for exactly the same purpose, one would get the benefit of the rebate and the other would have to pay the full rate of Customs Duty. Naturally industrialists have always resented this. They took the matter up with the Commissioner of Customs with a view to having the second article placed under rebate as the first article was done. But the Commissioner of Customs—and I am not referring to the present Commissioner of Customs but to the Department as a whole—the Customs Department has never shown very much sympathy for industry. The Department looks upon this matter from the revenue-producing point of view, rather than the original intention, that is, the encouragement of industry by giving it these goods which it requires at a reduced tariff. I think it is a very good idea that this should be handed to the Board of Trade for the purpose of investigation. The Board of Trade are a very much more competent body of men to decide a question of this nature than the Customs Department itself, and I think it will remove the cause of friction which had existed very acrimoniously in the past between the Customs Department and certain industries. Then there is another item in subclause (i)—

As I view it, if our industries are going to expand in the future to the extent that will be necessary to bring about that increased production which is considered so essential for the new ventures that we have in view, I think it is absolutely essential that we should have markets farther afield. In other words, we must not only be dependent on the Union of South Africa; we have to go to other parts of Africa, which should be our natural markets. But the question of transport has up to the present time been a very important factor and the cost of getting our manufactured goods to other parts of Africa has proved practically insuperable, and we have not been able to compete with overseas manufacturers. For example, it costs more to send goods from Port Elizabeth to Nairobi and places like that, than it costs to bring the goods from Europe. I take it that if we are going to open up these new markets, it will inevitably mean that transport for these goods will have to be subsidised. It is possible with the development of air transport planes that they may to a certain extent solve the difficulties, and it may enable South African manufacturers to get their goods to other parts of Africa, which in the past has been very difficult indeed. But failing that, I am inclined to think that the Board will have to go into the matter very carefully and see if some form of subsidised transport will not give our manufacturers the scope to place their goods. That is absolutely essential because we cannot depend entirely on the Union of South Africa for our market if we are going to increase production to any great extent. And as I see it, the only way is to give every facility to our industrialists to get into the other markets of Africa. Sub-clause (j) deals with—

That is a matter that I hope the Minister will refer to the Board of Trade at an early date. There is much need and scope for enquiry into a matter of this kind. One has known many instances where goods produced in South African factories and sold from retailers’ establishments have increased in price by 100 per cent. I have known of increases of more than 100 per cent., but I am taking 100 per cent. because I have seen many instances of that kind. If you look at it logically, it stands to reason that the costs of distribution of South African manufactured goods should not be as much as the cost of manufacture. For instance, quite a number of articles required in the manufacture of South African goods are imported from overseas. They are manufactured there, but they are the raw materials in many instances of our South African manufacturer; but despite the fact that these goods have to be brought from Europe to this country and the cost of transport paid for, plus the costs of the manufacturer, we find after the goods are manufactured and sent through the usual channel into the shops, that there is often an increase of 100 per cent. I do not say that it is always 100 per cent. but it is invariably more than 50 per cent. Mostly it ranges from 70 per cent. to 100 per cent. I consider that that is all wrong. It is no good for us to have protection for industries unless we see that that protection is extended to the fullest extent, so that the goods will reach the consumer at a reasonable price. If, for example, a shoe factory sells shoes to the retailer at 15s. per pair—I am only taking that as an example because I have known them to be sold for more and I have known them to be sold for less—but the point I want to make is when these goods get to the shops, the retailers have no right to sell them at 30s. I know of one case where a certain firm in Cape Town purchased ladies’ shoes from a firm with which I had the honour of being associated, for 13s. 6d. per pair—buying a quantity, of course. The new manager from the old country comes along and takes over the management of the firm. He called in my firm’s agent and said: “Look here, Mr. So-and-so, do you think that this is the class of shoe which our shop can sell at 35s. per pair?” The agent replied: “No, decidedly not; I do not think it is the class that you should sell at 35s. per pair.” He went on to say: “As a matter of fact you ought to be ashamed of yourself to ask that price for shoes which cost you 13s. 6d.” That gives you some idea what is taking place in regard to goods manufactured in this country, and I think the hon. Minister should ask the Board to investigate the question of South African manufactured goods to see that only a reasonable profit is charged either by the wholesaler or by the retailer or alternatively by both, otherwise I consider that the consumer is not getting a square deal; and it is such a body as the Board of Trade which can go into this matter very fully and place the question of the cost and the profits upon a scientific basis. Personally I would like to see South African manufactured goods stamped with the retailers’ price at the factory. If that could be done—I know there are difficulties in the way—but if that could be done it would do away with a lot of overcharging. But, Sir, as I have said, I welcome this Bill. I believe that the extended powers which it gives to the Board of Trade will prove to be very beneficial to South African industry and help to develop it to the extent to which we wish to see it developed.

I said this morning that this Bill had wide implications and covered a very broad field, and I think the debate that has taken place shows how right I was. The discussions cover a very wide range. We have been from Bitterfontein to the Belgian Congo, and really one wondered sometimes whether we were not discussing my Vote on the Estimates. I think in reply I must confine myself to the actual question of the principles of this Bill. A good many of the subjects that have been raised affect not only my Department, but I think every Department has been concerned with the discussions that have taken place this afternoon, and a good many of the other points that have been raised, should be more properly raised on another occasion, because they are only incidental in dealing with this Bill. The hon. member for Ceres (Dr. Stals) to whom one listens with great respect on this subject in view of his long personal experience with the Board of Trade, welcomed this Bill, I am glad to say. In fact, I think generally speaking it has been welcomed. Some of the praise with which it has been damned was rather faint, but. I think one can say that on the whole the House has accepted this Bill willingly. The hon. member for Ceres did, however, object to some of the provisions. He thought of increasing the number of the Board by one member only was not sufficient. He did not think that the establishment of committees was altogether sound, and he had grave doubts as to whether the appointment of temporary members would serve the useful purpose which I had outlined in moving the second reading. I think the hon. member is unduly pessimistic. In the first place the question of whether one member is or is not enough is, frankly a matter for argument. I can only say that we have examined the question very carefully and we have come to the conclusion that for the present at any rate one member is enough. I don’t expect to convince the hon. member for Ceres at this stage, I can only say that the increase of one has been arrived at after serious consideration. In regard to the question of the Committee, I think the hon. member has perhaps not considered the implications of it and the possibilities: What we are trying to do is to expand the machinery of the Board of Trade and Industries to enable it to cope with the increased work it has to face. By establishing this standing Tariff Committee to take away from the Board the routine tariff work we are also establishing personnel, staff to do the work of the Committee. In other words, side by side with the establishment of this Committee, the personnel of the Board will be increased and we shall have, I hope, one section of the staff devoting itself entirely to tariff work, and becoming highly specialised in that work, and I think that is a point which perhaps the hon. member might take into consideration in considering whether the establishment of this Committee with a permanent personnel, a permanent secretariat, is not likely to be of considerable use. He also expressed doubt as to whether appointing members of commerce and industry on that Board would be useful. He suggested that perhaps it might be rather difficult for them to be impartial. Well, I think that there may be a difference of view perhaps sometimes on the Committee, but I have no reason to doubt that their purpose will be completely honest and I feel that by asking commerce and industry to appoint advisory members on this Standing Committee we shall be doing a certain amount of educational work for commerce and industry itself. I want the commercial and industrial people to see for themselves the broad picture and have a first-hand knowledge of the difficulties and problems which the Board has to face, and I have that provision in mind—it is not in the Bill—I told the House that I propose to act in that way, and I think it will be useful. The hon. member for Ceres also doubted whether the temporary members would serve a useful purpose and he suggested that the fact that I wanted to establish committees and appoint temporary members was in itself proof that increasing the Board by only one was not sufficient. But I think the hon. member is not logical there, because you cannot expect the Board to be expert in everything. They must have technical advice and the idea of having temporary members is that they will be appointed in connection with a specific investigation, and they will be appointed by reason of their technical ability or knowledge or experience in that particular investigation. They are not just going to be appointed as temporary members—they will only be appointed for a particular, for a specific investigation, and the whole idea is to make available to the Board in a rather closer form technical advice and experience—experience which they have not always been able to get before. One of the hon. members opposite raised the question whether that would not be rather difficult in view of the secrecy of the information, but we find that that can be done. We find that by appointing these members in an advisory capacity there is a limit to the information which is available to them, but their advice is available all the time to the Board, and there has been no trouble at arriving at a formula under which the necessary secrecy is preserved, and the question of competitors not wishing to divulge information to temporary members of the Board is overcome. The other point which the hon. member made is this: He suggested that more initiative should be given to the Board under Clause 9. At present, as the House will have seen, the Board itself only acts at the request of the Government. It has no power of initiating enquiries. Now, the hon. member’s suggestion would be an entirely new departure in the policy in regard to the Board, and having regard to the enormous amount of work which the Board will have before it in the next few years, I do not think there is any particular object in taking that step. The hon. member also refers to the question of overlapping, and he referred to the Social and Economic Planning Council, and the hon. member for Moorreesburg (Mr. F. C. Erasmus) went further and read out a long list of Boards. Well, on behalf of the Board of Trade and Industries, may I say that this is about the oldest of the Boards, and whatever other Boards may have been formed since does not affect the Board of Trade and Industries. In the second place it is true that with the Social and Economic Planning Council and the Board of Trade and Industries there is the danger, unless intelligence is used, on both sides, of a certain amount of overlapping. That would not only mean double work, but it would also mean irritation on the part of people who do not want to have the same questions put to them twice over. But the Board is in close touch with the Secretariat of the Social and Economic Planning Council and every effort is made to avoid overlapping, and the data and information which the Social and Economic Planning Council require is available to the Board of Trade. It is not always possible vice versa. As far as the Board of Trade is concerned they are in close touch with the Social and Economic Planning Council. The liaison is very close and the collaboration is good. Then the hon. member for Moorreesburg and other members opposite raised the question of a Central and Economic Board, but I think that is rather beside the point today. It is a very interesting question to discuss and one which we shall be very glad to discuss at some time, but I do not think it really affects the passing of this Bill because the broadening of the Board of Trade and Industries as proposed here will not hamper the formation of a Central and Economic Council which may be decided on later.

You are attempting it in a small way.

Well, let us be thankful for small mercies today. If you are going to start talking about a Central and Economic Board to cover all Boards it will be a very complicated and a very comprehensive work which may take some time to do. I should say that the work of the Board of Trade and Industries, and of the Social and Economic Planning Council, apart from obtaining information, need not overlap. The Social and Economic Planning Council is concerned with long-term planning and the reconciliation of every aspect of our economic life whereas the Board of Trade at present, and for some time in the future, will be concerned with the actual problems facing us in the post-war period, so I think they are complementary to each other rather than overlapping. I agree that in the past the Board has been lacking in technical personnel. But that has been improved and under this Bill we shall have an enlarged staff, and we have provision now for our own cost accountants as well. I think I have now dealt with most of the criticisms of the Bill itself. In regard to the general question of asking for information as to the general state of the industrial position of the country, I would point out that since 1939 it is true that there has been a falling off of proper statistics—partly due to the lack of staff, and partly due to the fact that a good deal of industrial development has been for war purposes. But the investigations are now going on and are being brought up-to-date—that is to say, the information which has been lacking for the past few years is being brought up to date. What one can say at the moment is that we expect to get interim reports this year, and that we intend to preserve everything we can of the war-time industries which we have built up in addition to developing such new ones as have been awaiting the end of the war in order to get started. I may say that in that connection I have recently appointed a gentleman to act as technical adviser to my department in connection with the switching over of munition factories. I have appointed Prof. Sutton, Professor of Civil Engineering, at the Witwatersrand University. He is now acting as chief technical adviser on engineering and chemical industries in my Department, and he is going into the question of how best to switch over these war-time factories to peace-time employment. I think I have dealt with most of the points which are strictly germane to the Bill and I hope the House will now agree to the second reading. The other points which are not germane to the Bill we can deal with at some other time.

I move—

I think we have all felt for a long time that legislation of this type ought to be introduced. When I was Minister of Lands, I issued instructions that legislation of this nature should be framed, because we continually had the experience in the Department of Lands that small holdings were granted, and after the places had been cut up the Minister was compelled to give his approval. The department is practically a rubber stamp. Once the survey has been made, the Minister simply has to sign. In the case of Wolmanskraal I refused because I thought that the natives were too close to the town. They took me to court, to the Appellate Division, and the Government lost the case. I felt that the time had arrived to put a stop to that haphazard arrangement. But not only that. Those small holdings are given for purposes of speculation. People in Cape Town buy small holdings in the Transvaal, and the other way about. They buy without having seen the small holding, but once the small holdings have been granted there is no proper control over the streets, roads and health measures which ought to be effected. I believe that for those reasons, for the sake of the health and the convenience of the people themselves, it is necessary that there should be a body to assume the responsibility. These places are practically towns. The plots are only just bigger than the ordinary town plots. But there is haphazardness in the way they are laid out, and for that reason I think there ought to be control. For those reasons we on this side of the House have no objection to the Bill, and I only want to express the hope that the Provincial Administrations will see to it that a stop is put to the lawlessness which obtains there. I therefore support the Bill, which has been introduced by the hon. Minister.

I have already had the honour of discussing this question of legislation in regard to small holdings with the Minister of Lands. In the past I personally have had a great deal to do with this matter, and even today. We wholly agree with the Minister that legislation has become necessary to see that proper care is taken of and provision made for health conditions, questions of traffic, streets, public grounds, etc. There is only one matter which I should like to bring to the notice of the Minister. It is often said that these small holdings are cut up merely for speculative purposes. That may be so in some cases, but I can give you the assurance that in the majority of cases these small holdings—and if they are properly laid out, in all cases—serve a very useful purpose. There is an ever-increasing tendency on the part of working people and officials to get away from the cramped and dear city surroundings. As soon as traffic facilities are improved after the war, that tendency will, in my opinion, increase. Even under present conditions, with the difficulties we have in connection with traffic, there is still a great demand for these small holdings. If they had not met an economic need, there would not have been a demand for them, at any rate not from the type of person who wants these small holdings in order to build a house and to live there. In all friendliness I should like to bring it to the notice of the Minister that we would not unnecessarily like to lay restrictions on these small holdings. We do not want to apply unnecessary restrictions to them. I take it that that is not the intention. But if the Minister were to bring this matter to the notice of the Provincial Administrations, and inform them that he expects the law to be applied in a kindly way, we can take it for granted that the Administrations will not place deliberate restrictions in the way of the development of such small farms. If everyone of the four Provincial Administrations receives such powers, we can expect a tendency towards divergent development. We would have felt more at ease if the matter could have remained under the Union Government. The reason why it is being handed over to the Provincial Administrations is clear to me, however, but we would like the Minister, if it is possible, to draw their attention in a friendly way to the fact that they need only exercise supervision over these small holdings, just as in the case of any township, and that they must not place deliberate restrictions in the way of new development which is rendering an economic service to the country, and for which there is a demand.

I am very pleased that the Minister has introduced this Bill as at the moment I can give the House the assurance that the people on the small holdings have no opportunity of contacting anyone. I am therefore very pleased that this matter is to be placed in the hands of the Provincial authorities. I speak from knowledge and experience. I live there and I know the conditions under which these people are struggling, and I think the hon. member who has just spoken, if he knew the conditions prevailing on these small holdings, would appreciate what the Minister now proposes and would agree with the Bill before the House. He would not say that this matter should be left in the hands of a Central Government. I think the Provincial authorities can well see to this matter. If we go round these small holdings and see the way these people have to eke out a living, we must appreciate their difficulty. These unfortunate people try to make a living on these small holdings, but they have to carry on some other work as well, so as to enable them to put something away for a rainy day. Considering all things we must come to the conclusion that the time is overdue to do something for these people.

As far as I can understand this measure is aimed mostly at meeting municipalities and village management boards.

It has nothing to do with the municipalities.

This matter is left in the hands of the Provincial Administrations, but the Administration still has the right in a roundabout way to grant concessions in the planning of towns. I find in the neighbourhood of towns and in the development of small towns, that there is a shortage of land, and this measure is aimed at subjecting those small farms to the control of the Provincial Administrations, so that they can be placed under village management boards or under the municipalities. If I understand it correctly, if that is the case, then it is no wonderful concession. In that case it is not an act of mercy towards the small farms. Where at the moment they are only called upon to pay the ordinary taxes, they would then be saddled with village taxes. If that is so, it means that where formerly their taxes were low, they will now have to pay double taxes.

That has nothing to do with it.

They do not fall under the municipalities.

Then I am pleased to hear from the Minister that this Bill has nothing to do with the municipalities.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time; House to go into Committee on the Bill on 29th February.

Before we come to the next order, I want to make an appeal to the Minister of Finance to adjourn the House. We started with Government work long before the normal Government time this morning, and we did very well. I know the Minister would like to put the next Bill through, but it can also be done on Monday after the Budget speech of the Minister of Railways.

I shall only be a few minutes.

I move—

The Bill is entirely uncontentious, and I will in a very few words say what the objects of the Bill are. It applies to the Breede River Valley within which the Breede River Irrigation Board exercises jurisdiction in regard to irrigation matters, and the White River Valley within which the White River Irrigation Board exercises jurisdiction. The Breede River Valley is well known to every member of this House, but some of our Cape members may not know that the White River Valley is in the North-Eastern part of the Transvaal. The object of the Bill is to confer certain powers on the two Irrigation Boards concerned to enable them to control the waters flowing in their irrigation districts in a satisfactory manner. Notice has been given of the Bill in accordance with the requirements of the law to all parties that are concerned therein, and its only object is to preserve and look after the districts. If the second reading is adopted I shall move that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee, and then if any interests concerned would like to give evidence or to raise any objections, they will have an opportunity of doing so.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

I move—

I second.

Agreed to.