I should like to know what the Minister’s policy is and what the policy of his department is in regard to the construction of telephone lines in the various districts? We have a few instances, especially near Klipplaat, where applications were made years ago for the construction of a line. The department replied that the line would be constructed but it is continually being put off, and every year one asks for it one gets the assurance that it is being favourably considered by the department, but that is the end of it. I am also thinking of a line in the Aberdeen district. You cannot get the department to build a line. I can quite understand the Minister or the department saving that we are at war today and that these things will have to wait until after the war, but I want the Minister to understand that these people in the districts are stuck there without any connection with the towns and the markets. The Government asks the farmers to produce, and the farmers want to produce, but it is very difficult for them to know where to send their products if they cannot get into touch with the markets. In some instances applications for telephone lines were made years and years ago. Cannot something be done in those cases where the construction of the lines has practically speaking been approved of by the department? I want to make an appeal to the Minister to see whether it is not possible to construct these lines in the interest of the country and in the interest of those people. It will naturally also be in the interest of the department to construct those lines.

On previous occasions I have drawn the attention of the Minister to the necessity of expediting the completion of the many applications which are still standing over in the Eastern Province and in the Border areas for telephone services, and unless that completion takes place at an early date, it is quite apparent that it will take years before these people and especially present-day applications can get this essential service. At first we were told that it was a question of lack of material; now we are told that it is a question of lack of funds. In connection with the plea of lack of funds, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that in many cases where a short line is required the farmers have offered to undertake the erection of such line themselves. They have offered to erect the line themselves on receipt of the materials and free of cost to the department, but for some reason or other the department will not agree to it. I personally cannot see that a linesman of the postal department has any particular claim to be able to erect a line better than the ordinary farmer would, and I cannot see why there should be this tangle of red tape. I submit that in the case of a short distance line the department should allow the erection to be made by the applicant farmer subject to certain conditions, and if those conditions are complied with, I submit that a good deal of the excuse with regard to the lack of funds could be met. What sense is there in refusing such an offer? I would therefore like to ask the Minister, first of all, to procure increased funds to obtain the necessary development of telephone services and secondly to get rid of this idea that it is only the department’s linesmen who can put up the line. If that is taken cognisance of, a good deal of the arrear work could be overtaken. Then I would like to raise this matter. In the small towns, such as Seymour in my constituency, there is usually only a postmaster and a telephonist. The extra work which is now thrown on the country postmaster is so abnormal that he simply cannot cope with it unless he gets assistance. In order to do that work now, he is obliged to call in the assistance of the telephonist. That means that she has to leave the telephone exchange, much to the annoyance and inconvenience of the telephone subscribers. I submit that a post office learner could be appointed at these country post offices to relieve the postmaster of the hundred and-one items of routine which fall on his shoulders, namely the issuing of petrol coupons, the payment of pensions, allowances, the issue of stamps and so on. I submit that today you are throwing a far greater volume of work on the shoulders of the country postmaster than he can bear. I think the Minister should review the position and make provision for the appointment of learners in those post offices where the postmaster has no clerical assistance and to which I have referred. Then there is another matter which I do not think has previously been raised in. this House, and that is the efficiency and the courtesy which we receive from the staff of the Parliamentary Post Office. I would like to voice my appreciation, and I would like the Minister to know that members appreciate their services, efficiency and courtesy very much indeed.

I want to support the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. G. P. Steyn) in the appeal he made to the Minister for the construction of telephone lines. It is difficult to understand why the Government cannot step in and construct these telephone lines for the people who need them so badly. We are not going to talk about the benefits of a telephone line; the Minister should know what they are. If a farmer cannot get into touch with his markets his whole business is interfered with. What we do not understand is this: If the Government has not got the money why don’t they borrow £1,000,000 or £2,000,000? It would not be a waste of money—every penny of that money would come back. If there is one account which the farmer pays regularly it is his telephone account because he knows if he does not pay his ’phone will be cut off. The Government can therefore depend on this money coming back. And that is why one does not understand Why the Government does not step in and provide these telephone services. I think the Government should step in now and give these people telephones. I also want to support what the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Mr. V. G. F. Solomon) said about the staff in the post offices. In the platteland dorps there is as a rule only one post office official, and one only has to go there on the 1st of the month when pensions are paid out, and on the 6th when petrol coupons are issued, to see how much work that official has to do. It is impossible for him to do all the work. The post office staff, despite many hours of overtime, cannot cope with all the work. I have seen my own postmaster going off to work at 6 o’clock in the morning and having to work the whole day long. He works almost as hard as a farmer himself has to work. In the circumstances I think the Government should consider their position a little more favourably than it seems to be doing today.

I would like to pay tribute to the post office, particularly the workers in the telegraph department. I can speak from experience, as in a long life of journalism and even today, I think I can say that I have sent more words over the telegraph lines than any other man in South Africa. The efficiency which is shown in sending these press messages is equal to anything in this country. I would like to say that publicly, and on behalf of a large number of newspapermen who have always found friends in the telegraph department and in the Post Office. There are major developments taking place at the present time in wireless telephony, and I hope the Minister will lend me his ear for a few minutes. The Minister knows that there are excellent radio photographs being taken in Johannesburg today. The United States War Information Department there is turning out some remarkable pictures through a machine which I think would cost about £1,000 and which I hope the Minister will keep his eye on so that one day we shall be able to put this machine in every newspaper office.

There is nothing to prevent it.

But there is danger ahead; there is very great danger ahead. I would like to see these machines used as the newspapers use the teleprinters today. I do not want to discuss the radio pro grammes. They do not interest me, because I know that if I do not like the South African programme, I can always turn on to any other programme in the world. But may I say this. The Broadcasting Corporation in this country is faced with many difficulties. In the first place they are working in a small country, where there are few people who can turn out scenarios. I do not think there are more than two men in this House who can write a proper scenario—the hon. member for Winburg (Mr. Swart) and myself. Most of the politicians have to have their broadcast stuff rewritten. I think in the circumstances our broadcasting programmes are very good. They are quite equal to anything in any other Dominion. Major Caprara has done extremely well in the difficult circumstances which prevail. I now wish to talk about the development in radio photography, and I hope hon. members of the Opposition will support me in this respect. I believe there are plans in South Africa at the present moment to get radio photographic transmission in this country into the hands of private monopoly, and I want an assurance from the Minister on these two points—I will read them: Will he as Minister of Posts and Telegraphs assure this House that the sending and receiving of radio photographs will be a public service so that every individual or any small newspaper may avail itself of this service in the same manner that they can today send a telegram from any post office in the country? Will the Minister further assure us that this service will not be curtailed or hampered as the result of private companies in South Africa buying up the patent rights, not with the object of using them necessarily but in order to prevent others from using them? And I want this assurance from the Minister. Can he give us an indication that his department is alive to the implications of this technical progress. I have a letter here from a man who is very well known to this House, in which he writes to me—

I have heard the farmer members get up in this House and talk about telephones. I do not know whether they have ever listened in to the U.D.F broadcasts; but if the Postal Department carries things to a logical conclusion, as they should in this country, if the Government of this country makes up its mind to take possession of the Beam Service Overseas and run it through the Post Office or Escom, we shall have a “walkie-talkie” in South Africa. It is now being used in the war, where, as the Minister knows, one tank can communicate with the other; there is no reason why men in the Bushveld should not be able to communicate with each other. Farmers in the platteland will be able to communicate with one another. I am not talking as a scientist. I know nothing about science, but I am talking as a newspaper man who has had to suffer and suffer very greatly on account of the monopoly which we have in South Africa in connection with news and the obtaining of news. We must have “walkie-talkies”; that has been shown to this country at the recent Cavalcade. Then we have the development in television. I think that the daily newspaper has run its course. I believe that in future this Government, under our present Prime Minister, will protect this country so that we will have television in our House and get all the pictures and all the news. But I do not want the Minister to carry on as he is carrying on today. Let us take the South African Press Association, “Copyright Reserved,” Directors of the SAPA, “Copyright Reserved,” if it were run in America as in South Africa, would be put in gaol. The Associated Press of the United States tried to carry out exactly what the South African Press Association, “Copyright Reserved,” is doing here, and it has not been allowed in the United States. May I tell the members of this House that if the Nationalist Party tomorrow, or the United Party, endeavoured to start a daily newspaper they could not get the news from the South African Press Association, “Copyright Reserved,” or from Reuters. I will tell the House why. They have the Nationalist Party newspapers on the one side—not the United Party newspapers because there are no United Party newspapers as such. All the big newspaper groups have formed a combination. The hon. member for Waterberg (Mr. J. G. Strydom) is in that combination. This is the combination which in Johannesburg rules it so that an English daily newspaper and an Afrikaans newspaper—“The Transvaler” and the “Rand Daily Mail”—can have the South African Press Association news and Reuters news. But if I were to start a daily morning newspaper tomorrow I could not have it. “The Star” and “Die Vaderland” can have the SAPA news, but if the Minister of Finance wishes to turn “The Forum” into a daily evening newspaper, he cannot get it. The “Cape Times” and “Die Burger” can have it. If I want to start a daily newspaper here I would not be able to get it. I brought this matter to the attention of the late Gen. Hertzog, and he was alarmed about it. I hope the Prime Minister will be alarmed about it, because the big newspaper groups may turn on him one day. When I brought this matter to the notice of the late Gen. Hertzog he promised to legislate on the question, then the big break came. We should legislate on the lines of the United States’ legislation.

Order, order! The hon. member cannot advocate legislation in Committee of Supply.

Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the hon. Minister on what conditions he agreed to reinstate the messengers who were on strike on the Wit in his department. I want to know whether he agreed to accept every one of them back into his service, and I hope I will get the support of all hon. members in this House in seeing that every one of them is reinstated in the service, and on conditions not less favourable than they enjoyed before they went on strike. If that is not the case then I want to point out to the hon. Minister that it will be the first case of a strike in my time or in the history of South Africa where victimisation started at the end of the strike. Unless the Minister promises us that every one of these men will be reinstated, then 1 say his department is committing victimisation, and I hope the Minister will not allow that, and that he will give the assurance to this House that every one of them will be reinstated. I hope I am wrong when I say that I believe these youngsters have been bullied since they went back after the strike. I believe that they are being bullied, and I want to ask the Minister to also give us the assurance that when the strike is settled and everybody is reinstated, that everybody will get his fair share. I understand that they have been told to come back, but everyone must now start right from the bottom of the ladder again. If that is correct, then I think that is another form of victimisation and punishment of these men, which I do not think they deserve. Whenever a strike is settled it is for the employer to show goodwill, and if these are the conditions under which these men have to go back to their employment, then I say it is not showing goodwill in any way. I hope the hon. Minister will correct me if my impression is wrong, and I will be only too glad to hear that my information is not correct. If it is correct then I hope the hon. Minister and hon. members will support me in my plea; firstly, that they must all be reinstated, and secondly that none of them must be reinstated on conditions worse than they were in before they went on strike. I appeal to the House to give me its support. I do not want to mislead the House, but that is my information, and the Minister is the only one here who can say whether my information is correct or not. Then, Mr. Chairman, I also want to join in the plea for the 1933 recruits. The hon. Minister will remember that there are a number of hon. members of this House who every year put up this plea asking the Minister to reconsider their case. The reply of the Minister of the past was that he cannot help it, that the conditions, the wage scale and everything had been settled or regulated by the Public Service Commission. This House is just beginning to get tired of the Minister trying to shield himself behind the Public Service Commission. The Minister is under fire all the time. The Minister is responsible to the Government, and the Minister is responsible for the policy laid down in his department. I am asking these questions on behalf of many hon. members when I ask who are the Public Service Commission to make conditions which are not subject to the final approval of the Minister? I insist that the Minister himself should have the final say and not try and shield behind the Public Service Commission all the time. We do not want to repeat this plea year after year. In the postal department all the other employees in every case were considered, and as far as I know they received justice, but I do not see why these 1933 recruits should be singled out in spite of the plea of this House, in spite of the unanimous feeling of this House and why the Minister always comes along and says he cannot help it. I submit this year that the Minister should say he has given the commission time enough to consider that matter of giving justice to these men. The Minister should say they have failed in their obligations, and seeing that the Minister is under fire every year and the injustice still remains, the Minister should now take it upon himself and say that this is the last time this House should ask for these men to be given what they are entitled to. That is all I have to say, until I have had the Minister’s reply.

I want to take the Minister back to the question raised here yesterday afternoon by the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop), viz., the broadcasting of the results of rugby matches. The reply given by the Minister to the hon. member for Mossel Bay amounted to this, that the Broadcasting Corporation would broadcast all rugby matches as they were supplied by SAPA. Now I should like the Minister to reply to this: Why did the Broadcasting Corporation last year fail to broadcast the results of the Western Cape Rugby Union matches? Was the sole reason the fact that SAPA did not supply the results, or was there another reason? And if SAPA did supply the results why did they not broadcast those results? If SAPA did not supply the results I want to know whether the Broadcasting Corporation is tied to SAPA for what is broadcasts?

But you are SAPA.

We are asking whether the Broadcasting Corporation is governed by a news agency like SAPA? Before I discuss the matter any further I shall wait for the Minister to give me a clear reply to my question. I just want to ask this further question : In the event of SAPA this year refusing to supply the results to the Broadcasting Corporation, what is the Minister going to do? He is responsible to Parliament for the Broadcasting Corporation rendering proper services to the country as a whole, and not merely to a section of the population. In regard to telephones I again want to draw the Minister’s attention to the fact that in my constituency, in the Bushveld areas, there are places which are fairly densely populated but which yet lack the ordinary amenities. Take the postal agency at Overyssel which is about 120 miles from Nylstroom, and Villa Nora, also about 120 or 125 miles from Nylstroom. Those postal agencies have no telephone connections. Neither the police station at Overyssel nor the postal agency have telephone connections. To extend the line to Overyssel would only be a matter of a few miles. There is another postal agency, Kraiingen, which is about three miles from the telephone line from Nylstroom to Vaalwater. Representations have been made to the Minister to provide a telephone connection there, but we are told every time that the necessary materials are not to be had. But now I want the Minister to tell me whether no other lines have been constructed on the platteland. Near Kralingen, in the neighbourhood of Rankin’s Pass, there is an old telephone line which has not been used for years. The poles, the wire and the posts are standing there and are not being used. Why cannot they be used to connect up the postal agency at Kralin gen? The distance is only three miles. These areas are thickly populated and they are a long distance from the nearest town. And if the Minister says there is no material then I want to ask him whether during the last year no rural lines were constructed in my constituency or in other constituencies? If so, where did the material come from?

I want to avail myself of this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to the Minister for the post office which is being constructed at Rustenburg. We have been pleading for years for a new post office, and fortunately it is now being put up. I want to associate myself with other members who have appealed to the Minister for the construction of farm telephone lines. The first one I want to mention is one from Rooibok kraal to Cumberland, down in the Bushveld. A lot of people have moved in there in the last five years, between 50 and 60 families. It is no longer a wild country there, but you get progressive cattle farmers among the people there and they need telephone connections. Another line which is needed in the same area is the one from Matlabas to Rooibosbult. The same argument applies there. This is a new part of the country, which has been opened up, and a lot of people have moved in there. I want to put up an earnest plea with the Minister to construct telephone lines there. Cumberland is an important police station on the Union-Bechuanaland border and cattle are being continually smuggled across there, and it is a matter of the greatest importance to have a line constructed there to connect the police with other stations.

Mr. Chairman, I want to revert to the question of broadcasting, particularly because of the remarks of the hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Barlow), who rather suggested that because it was possible to tune off any station here the matter was of little importance. I want to suggest that, on the contrary, broadcasting today has become a factor in the life of the people, and it is quite immaterial whether you can tune off or not. It plays, in fact, a tremendously important part in South Africa. One would not be blamed, however, for imagining by virtue of the quality of the programmes that it had not reached that degree of importance. In fact, the advancement in our broadcasting service is not commensurate with the development of broadcasting in recent years, and for that I think a number of factors are responsible. Obviously in the first place if you have the management of broadcasting in the hands of a body which is neither energetic nor well qualified in respect of broadcasting, you must expect poor programmes as a result. One is reluctant to say so, but the present board has not shown a capacity to interpret the wishes of the public, nor has it shown an ability to decide what the public ought to have. One, of course, makes due allowance for the difficulties which obtain as a result of the war, but taking these difficulties into account and making full allowance for them, I think it is still fair to say that generally our broadcasting programmes are colourless and insipid. Again, speaking in general terms, it seems to me that our broadcasting staff produces its programmes in a sort of mechanical spirit, and a want of enthusiasm, and I think it is as well to enquire what the reason for that is, if there is a reason. I am not competent to make any concrete suggestions in regard to broadcasting programmes. I am not competent to discuss the delicate problem of crooning. I leave that in the competent hands of Mr. “Noel” Sauer. One can suggest, of course, that some of our parliamentary debates might be broadcast—not for their educational value— but there again there is the danger that some listeners might imagine that the broadcasting station was Zeesen and not Cape Town. It is not necessary for anyone of us to make concrete suggestions in regard to programmes. We have on our broadcasting staff a wealth of talent which is not being used today. If that talent were used to the full it would be reflected in the programmes, and we would have programmes worthy of our corporation. The broadcasting staff, instead of being encouraged to use its initiative and its ability, is on the contrary being cramped and inhibited. Now one of the reasons for this —I say this with regret—is the fact that there is a want of sympathy between the broadcasting staff and the director. The director’s ability to mishandle a staff problem was shown in the recent unfortunate dispute with Mr. Cecil Wightman. Now Major Caprara, of course, is not the only trouble; the Information Bureau has also contributed. If Maj. Caprara enjoys the confidence of the staff in a small degree, the Information Bureau enjoys none at all. The Informaion Bureau has arbitrarily made itself responsible for the talks that are put over the air, and it does that without any reference at all to the technical advice that is available there all the time. It shuns that advice. That might be prudent if the Information Bureau was itself capable of deciding what should go over the air, but it is not. The Minister may be curious to know what is the source of my information that the Information Bureau does not seek advice, and I shall tell him. I listen in to these talks, and you have only to listen to them to see that the Information Bureau acts independently without advice; without the benefit of technical help and advice. Now these talks are all designed for a certain purpose, and if they do not achieve that purpose they fail. I say quite emphatically that taken by and large the great majority of these talks fail in the purpose, but they would not fail if the Information Bureau collaborated with the staff, who are competent to advise them. Now I want to make one suggestion which I consider of importance, and that is that there should be a clear-cut division between the clerical staff and the strictly broadcasting staff, which is not the case today. That will make for greater efficiency. You cannot expect one person to do two jobs which are very far from being related. In conjunction with that I want also to draw attention to this position in regard to the staff. Some of the announcers prepare material which either they themselves put over or others put over the air. For that they get no pay at all; it is regarded as part of their job. If somebody else were to prepare the selfsame talk that person would be paid for it, and I say that that is neither common justice nor does it make for efficiency. It does not encourage the talents which these people have. Why should not the man who does an extra job be paid for it? I think the whole question of the grievances of the staff, the atmosphere —not the atmospherics—in Broadcast House is a national problem, which might well be investigated by the Minister, who has already shown his very strong desire to come to grips with any problem which can be remedied.

Mr. Chairman, I feel I ought to intervene now, otherwise I may forget some of the points that have been raised by the various speakers. The hon. member for Wolmaransstad (Gen. Kemp) raised the question in connection with country telephones. Well, the trouble is that not only the country telephones but the town telephones are very much behindhand, and it is going to take us a very considerable period before we overtake the position. I should like hon. members to realise what the Postal Department has done during the past ten years. Ten years ago we had 1,500 farm telephones waiting for attention, and 5,000 town telephones. Since then over 100,000 telephones have been installed. I forget the difference between country and town. Today, Mr. Chairman, there is a lag in telephones awaiting attention in the country of over 4,000 and in the towns of over 18,000. The post office is doing all it possibly can to make up the leeway. Of course, naturally there is delay and people complain. I do not take the slightest excep-, tion to the remarks made by various hon. members who are pleading for special telephone lines. They all recognise it is impossible for me to know what particular lines they are mentioning, but I ask them if any hon. member, including the member for Waterberg (Mr. J. G. Strydom) will make an appointment with the Postmaster-General and myself during this session, we will let them know the layout for 1944-’45. I want to admit frankly and candidly that we have connected up many farm lines during the last year with the material and money that was available, and we are going to do some more in the coming year.

Which particular lines did you join up in my district?

I do not think it is quite fair to ask me that question, and I invite the hon. member and other hon. members to come to the office and we will let them know exactly what is contemplated. Fortunately, some hon. members of the Opposition have been to the office and they have had that information. We have explained our difficulties to them. That is the only way the hon. member can get the detailed information he is asking for.

I merely want the reason for the discrimination.

I want to say frankly and candidly there is no discrimination. The hon. member may not agree with the attitude adopted by the officials in connection with the matter, but there is no question of discrimination. Time and time again I have said that we seem to be getting further away from giving everybody what they want, notwithstanding the installation of over 12,000 telephones a year. The policy of the post office is that everybody should be connected, but the difficulty is to carry out that policy. As I say, we have installed over 100,000 telephones in the last ten years.

Do we not make our own telephones here?

No.

Cannot you import them?

We import all we can possibly get. If hon. members will look at the loan estimates when they come before the House, they will see we have made provision this year for a good many farm telephones. The other question was with regard to this split that has taken place in the football world. For years the Broadcasting Corporation has broadcast the results of the Western Province Rugby Football Union. When this split took place they were not prepared to intervene, because they hoped that somehow or other this matter would be settled, but there is now no hope of it being settled.

Why cannot they broadcast both?

They will broadcast both. If SAPA carries out its duty and supplies this information it will be broadcast. And I am going a step further in connection with the matter. If SAPA is going to boycott this, then the information ought to be sent for this particular section direct to the Broadcasting Corporation for the purpose of having it broadcast. The hon. member points out that the Broadcasting Corporation must not get mixed up with the troubles and disputes in connection with the matter. These people have agreed to split, and I understand there will be no difficulty, because SAPA has published it as news.

Throw SAPA into the sea.

I am not all-powerful, and I do not think the hon. member will want me to say very much so far as SAPA is concerned. The hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Barlow) has raised a very important matter, and I am very glad it has been raised, because it is a matter that I have been considering with the Postmaster-General for the last eight or nine months. Had we been able to obtain the apparatus or the machinery necessary in connection with these photos, we would have done so. The Americans have a machine, and hon. members will realise it would have been a dog-in-the-manger attitude to take un if we had adopted the policy that these photos should not be made available, because we could not circulate them ourselves. We gave permission for these photographs to be received and distributed, as they are by the American Government for the duration of the war. So far as I am concerned, I want to say that this question of radio photography is one that the Government should absolutely control, and it should be available to the Government either in the shape of a public utility corporation or it should be under the control of the post office for the purpose of distributing these photographs to people who may require them. I hope I have covered all the points the hon. member raised with regard to this particular business. Now I come to the general question of the Broadcasting Corporation, but all the hon. members who dealt with the matter are absent. However, it is their misfortune. All I wish to say with regard to the criticism of the various hon. members who spoke with regard to the control and the conduct of broadcasting is that if they would read the reports of the Broacasting Corporation of 1942, which I laid on the Table of this House, and the report that I laid on the Table for 1943, they will see what other methods could be employed to give hon. members and the public of South Africa more information. I frankly and candidly admit, as I have done on previous occasions, that I do not approve of many of the items in the programmes that are put on, yet in my own family they want those items. It reminds me of a point in Lord Reith’s original report, which we took over when we established this public utility corporation. He said then, and it has remained the truth since, that it is a moral impossibility for any broadcasting corporation, even from Heaven itself, to give out a programme that would give 100 per cent. satisfaction. Complaints have been made with regard to the artists that took part in connection with this matter. Well, they have put over the broadcasting some very fine things — one of the finest I have ever heard was what went over on Good Friday night, the dramatisation of the crucifixion, one of the finest things I have ever heard put over by a South African artist. I think it is Maclear who is responsible for it, and I have heard others too. We have talents and I think they should encourage those talents. I cannot reply to the accusations made by the hon. member for Castle (Mr. Alexander), or by the hon. member for Durban, North (The Rev. Miles-Cadman) about the fees, but as hon. members know, the South African Broadcasting Corporation is a public utility organisation and they must take cognisance of the criticism levelled here. I think it would not be a bad idea if we had a Select Committee of this House where some of these questions which I am asked to reply to here — although I have no actual control — could be put to the members of the Board and particularly to the Director and the Managers of some of these stations.

Yes, broadcasting is a very big thing in South Africa today.

I cannot go much further, except to say that each branch manager is in control of his own station with regard to programmes, and is given a great deal of liberty in connection with the matter. There is a certain amount of supervision from Johannesburg. But they are given as much local control as is possible. I had hoped when we gave them these local committees dealing with broadcasting that they would prove to be of great assistance. At any rate this debate will have been useful to members of the Board who will see what members of Parliament say, and they will probably benefit from the remarks made here. Now, the hon. member for Cape Town (Castle) talked about the amount which is in reserve, and let me say that the Corporation is doing the proper thing there. I hope that very shortly they will start building their studio in Cape Town. I agree with everything the hon. member for Durban (North) said about it. The present studio should have been scrapped years ago, and you would have had a first class studio had it not been for the war. I have refused them permission up to now to put up a new studio but I am reconsidering the matter and I am considering giving them permission to build the studio they require. It will take from 18 months to two years. In Durban they have been trying to get permission for two years to build. That permission has been refused and it will still be refused because they can carry on, and the same applies to Johannesburg. Now, in view of the development contemplated, a tremendous amount of money will be required, and although they have a reserve of nearly £400,000 it will not be enough to provide them with all that is necessary. The hon. member for Castle complained that the increase in the number of subscribers was only 10,000 as against more than double that a few years ago, and he also complained that 20,000 had given up their licences. I am surprised that there is still an increase in view of the difficulties which people are labouring under in regard to spare parts. I have actually intervened with the suppliers in order to keep the sets working. Hundreds of people—where the men are on active service—are not renewing their licences simply because they are not using their sets.

What about the messengers?

I am coming to that. The hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Mr. V. G. F. Solomon) made a suggestion that farmers and others could be helpful in providing material, etc., in connection with these farm telephones. We use to the best of our ability any help that can be given in that direction, but it is the technicians who are required to make the connections, and it would be impossible for amateurs to make these connections. I can assure the hon. member, however, that the department is only too willing to co-operate, especially in regard to the supply of labour and transport, two things which are very necessary. Now, I hope that hon. members who are dealing with farm telephones will accept what I have said without my mentioning their particular lines. I want to repeat again that I have asked those interested to come to the Post Office. There is nothing to hide. We shall show what is done and listen to the urgency of the various claims. Now, I come to the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. Van den Berg). I must say that I am surprised he should have mentioned this matter in the House. I had a meeting with the Trades and Labour Council half an hour before I came here and I discussed this question with them. The position is this : Five or six months ago the messenger boys in Johannesburg went out on strike without notice or anything else. They made certain demands. So far as I was concerned as Minister of Posts and Telegraphs I supported the depart ment in the attitude they took up, that these were a lot of silly little youngsters— if they did not want to work, well, let them stay away, but if they came back, they would be taken on again. Now, that strike went on for six or seven days, when the Trades and Labour Council and some members of Parliament—they are not present in the House at the moment—interviewed me and asked me to treat these boys differently from what was contemplated, and I agreed to take them all back, without any victimisation, and to pay them actually for the days they had been on strike. We did so. There was no victimisation, and the Postmaster-General in the presence of Mr. Briggs, Chairman of the Trades and Labour Council, warned these youngsters that the department was not going to tolerate anything like this in future.

Did you carry out your conditions?

We made no conditions. All we agreed to do was to take cognisance of the request which they had made to improve their position. Now, let me explain that. These telegraph boys were getting £8 9s. 6d. per month, plus a bicycle allowance and uniform, and time off for their education, There was one point they raised, and which we complied with — we became responsible, if their bicycles were stolen, to replace them. We fulfilled all these conditions. But last week, on Wednesday or Thursday, they paraded before the Left Club with banners flying — they marched through Johannesburg and came to the Post Office and they handed their demands to the Postmaster, in which they said they wanted this that and the other. The Postmaster quite correctly said: “Unless you go back at 11 o’clock, consider yourselves as having left the Service.” Half of them went back — the decent fellows went back, the others did not.

Why do you say the decent fellows?

Well, I am glad the hon. member pulled me up. I did not mean it in the sense he is taking it. Rather let me say, the sensible ones went back.

Why do you say the sensible ones?

I am glad the hon. member pulled me up on my remark, the “decent” ones. I don’t want to draw a distinction about decency, but I say that the sensible ones went back. They did not want to lose their jobs, and they are back at work now. The others have stayed away. Now, as Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, I must support the Department to maintain discipline. If you are going to allow a lot of youngsters to defy authority, discipline will go by the board.

You are talking like an old Tory now.

Nothing wrong with that.

I had this discussion with Mr. Briggs and two other members of the Trades and Labour Council and I told them that I would do what I could but I would not give the undertaking, which the hon. member wants, that we should take all these people back.

Is not that victimisation?

These people by their own action, wrongly advised or otherwise, have placed themselves in the position in which they are.

Let them join the Association and they will not be exploited any longer by the Left Club.

How can you stop it?

What do you know about the Left Club?

Order! Order!

If I am allowed to go on now—all I wish to say about that is this, that the postal youths tried to form an association of their own—boys under 18.

Well, boy scouts do it.

And the authorities rightly and properly refused to recognise a union like that because the next step for these youngsters is to go into the Postal Union, and that Union was agreeable to take these youngsters in in a different category from other members, and also to allow one or more of them to be on the Committee. I want to say with all the emphasis I can that we have done all we can in connection with this matter, but we have to maintain discipline. There was no necessity for this demonstration, and unless we maintain the attitude which we have adopted, it will mean the end of discipline, not only in the postal service but in the Trade Unions as well. It seems to me that this was the beginning of something similar to what had happened in England, when people ignored their trade union leaders. I want to support the trade union leaders, and I advise hon. members opposite to leave this question where I have left it with the leaders of the Trades and Labour Council. Now, the hon. member for Cape Town (Castle) (Mr. Alexander), the hon. member for Durban (Point) (Dr. V. L. Shearer), the hon. member for Mossel Bay (Dr. Van Nierop) and the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. Van den Berg) have referred again to this question of the recruits of 1933. When this matter was debated last session I told them that the Public Service Commission had refused to grant their request on account of the repercussions in the Service. I gave them the assurance that this matter would be brought to the notice of the Cabinet As hon. members know, the Public Service Commission makes its report, and if the report is not acceptable the only way it can be altered is to take it to the Cabinet. The Public Service Commission pointed out that these people were engaged at £96 per year, and by the time they got to £120 the Government had decided that the new recruits were to come in at £120. To come along now and give these people the advancement as though they had come in at £120 would have altered the position completely. I took the matter to the Cabinet and the Cabinet supported the Public Service Commission. Last year we recruited men and women—say boys and girls—for the Service at £140 per year, but from the beginning of this year instead of starting at £140 they start at £140 plus the first notch. What about the position of all these people who have joined the service in the last eight or nine years? The Public Service Commission brought it home very forcibly to me that they knew more about their attitude and their position than I actually did, because my sympathy was with the 1933 recruits. But their attitude was perfectly correct. The people who joined the service in 1943, in January‧ and February, 1943, are no further advanced in regard to salary than the people who joined in January of this year, and I think in the circumstances the attitude adopted by the Public Service Commission is the correct one.

We naturally realise that there is a good deal of trouble on account of the shortage of poles, wire, instruments and all the rest of it, but the question I want to raise is one which has been raised before, viz: the matter of telephone extension in the North Western areas of the Cape. In the past it was not a matter of a shortage of material and wire. Here we are concerned with a part of the country which is ignored, not only by this Government but also by former governments. I say so outright—those areas have been completely ignored. It seems to me that the idea has taken hold that telephones should only be supplied in a closely populated area, and further that telephones should be put up in those areas where the distances are not so great. But I want to say here that to my mind the comfort of a telephone is most necessary in those far-flung areas of the Karroo and the North West. I am referring particularly to two districts in my constituency, namely Sutherland and Fraserberg, where we are faced with tremendously long distances, and where the people have not got these many comforts and conveniences which they have in the thickly populated areas. This also applies to other parts of my constituency. I know that the argument put forward is that telephones in those areas will cost more money, but we have the same principle in regard to the Railways, that roads are constructed and motor services provided for those people who are cut off, and will continue to be cut off. I don’t only blame this Minister, but also previous governments, for those areas having been ignored. But I want to ask the Minister to give preference to the Karroo and North Western areas where the people live far away from each other and where telephone connections have become a necessity—I ask him to give those areas preference when the necessary material again becomes available, and when a start is again made with the building of telephone lines. I ask the Minister to give more attention to those areas, and not to give so much attention to the thickly populated areas where the people have all the other amenities.

I don’t want to go into all the old arguments which we have had before, but I do want to ask the Minister this question : I want to know from him what use his department is going to make of short wave to establish contact between various parts of the Union? It should be quite as easy for two farmers in the remote bushveld of the Union to make contact by means of short wave as it is for two tank commanders out in the field. I wish to return to the South African Press Association, “Copyright Reserved.” I don’t want to accuse any journalist or man working on the South African Press Association in any way whatsoever. They are hardworking men doing their job, but I challenge the South African Press Association to publish in the daily newspapers my speech of today. I had asked the hon. member for Waterberg (Mr. J. G. Strydom) to remain in the House while I was speaking.

He had something better to do than to listen to you.

The hon. member for Waterberg is Chairman of the Directors of the “Voortrekker-pers” and as such he is one of the leading partners of the South African Press Association—his company is a partner in the South African Press Association; with the “Argus” and the “Cape Times”—which the hon. member for Beaufort West (Mr. Louw) does not like—and other big newspaper groups he is the owner of the South African Press Association. That is so. And, Mr. Chairman, it is a conspiracy. Let me say this, the House is going to suffer and the country is going to suffer as a result of that conspiracy.

I suppose you are going to suffer too.

Oh, never mind about the hon. member there who only knows about mealies and wool—who continually smiles like a Cheshire cat. Hon. members over there always talk about capitalism. Now, here you have the capitalistic South African Press Association and the hon. member for Winburg (Mr. Swart) who is a good journalist though a very bad politician, must realise the danger of the position. That capitalistic organisation has the country just like this—in the hollow of its hand. And it has the House just like this. You take the reports of the South African Press Association as they go out of this House. Do the Nationalists get their fair deal?

No, but you do.

Do the Labour Party get their fair deal? Do the Dominion Party, or the natives representatives get their fair deal?

More than their fair deal.

Now, this is important, because what is heard in this House does not matter, but what is published outside does matter. Parliament today is not getting a fair deal through the South African Press Association. Who is responsible for it? Take the newspapers of South Africa in which the Nationalist Party has a very big interest through the “voortrekkerand “Die Nasionale Pers.” The S.A. Press Association belongs to them—they are the people. I say that the Government must once, and for all, lay it down that South Africa must deal with this matter—the Government must establish a Utility Company in this country which controls the dissemination of news, whereby the Labour Party, the United Party, my friends on the right—the Dominion Party—or anyone who starts a newspaper, has the right, if he pays for it, to get all the news. Do you believe that at present, Mr. Trollip …

Mr. Chairman, you mean.

Oh, no, Mr. Trollip, I am absolutely in order. Do you think, Mr. Trollip, that in this country today you are getting the news which you should be getting here in regard to the war, or in regard to anything else?

Not as regards the war.

Do you believe you are getting the news which other parts of the world are getting? You are not, because the whole thing is in the hands of Reuters, of the Press Association, the Beam and the Wireless. I appeal to the House. I have had to suffer through it as a newspaper man.

Hear, hear!

Yes, I thought the hon. member would say hear, hear, but I have sidetracked it by establishing my own paper.

What a pity.

But you cannot do that. First of all because you have not got the intelligence and secondly, because you do not know how to go about it. I challenge the S.A. Press Association, and I say that the time has come when the Government should take control of this Press Association and of Reuters. As a matter of fact Gen. Hertzog was going to do it. The Government must take control so that the people shall have the news—they are entitled to have the news. It is impossible for the Labour Party to start a daily paper; they are excluded. It is not fair—why should they not be allowed to get the news? Now, I appeal to the Government and I say we are playing with fire, and I also appeal to the Nationalists, and I say that as long as we allow this big Corporation to control our news we shall be completely in their hands. Let us do what they did in New Zealand. There they faced the issue. There was a complaint in New Zealand that members of Parliament were not being reported. So they put in the wireless. That wireless could be controlled, and if there was a secret debate on all Mr. Speaker would do was to press a button and it would not be broadcast, but otherwise the speeches would go right through and could be heard anywhere in the country. Farmers bought new machines so that they could get the speeches in Parliament, and let me tell you that it has been an enormous success. The result has been that everyone in New Zealand can hear everyone else speaking.

Can they switch off when they want to?

And that is what we want in South Africa. We want the speeches made in this House taken to the Bushveld, taken to Bloemfontein and anywhere else, where anyone wants to tune in. It is not for the benefit of members of Parliament that that sort of thing is done; it is for the benefit of the country. Today’s position in this country is not fair to members of Parliament—it is not fair to this side of the House, it is not fair to the Opposition—the way the speeches are reported today is definitely not fair.

What have you got to complain about?

I don’t worry about my own speeches, this is my last race in Parliament, I am going out. But take the younger members. A young speaker, a young member full of enthusiasm and ambition makes a good speech, an outstanding speech, what does he get? If he is lucky he gets two lines. Well, this sort of thing must come to an end. We must smash it. You go to the public. They are interested in the speeches made in this House. An excellent speech has been made—many excellent speeches may have been made by a particular member—the public say: “What about So-and-so·, he has never spoken?” It is all in the hands of the Press Association and of Reuters. I say that if you live in a democratic country you must have a democratic system of disseminating your news. And you must widely spread that news. Now, let me say a word to the Minister. He did not reply to the matter I raised. When is the Government going to take control of the Beam system, and of all these new gadgets which are coming in now-a-days? If the Minister thinks he can get away with it by talking about these telegraph messenger boys who are not “sensible” at 18 years of age, he is making a big mistake. Let me tell the Minister this, boys of 18 years are today fighting in the front line for South Africa, and boys of 18 years here at the home front, are entitled to have their own trade union. The members of the S.A. Federation of Trades and Labour are a conservative lot of old jossers. I want these boys to have their trade unions and I want their trade union to be recognised by the Postmaster-General. Now, what is the position in which these boys find themselves? They get into a cul-de-sac. And it may interest hon. members on the Opposition benches to know that most of these boys are Afrikaans-speaking boys. They come from poor people. The Afrikaner who is coming from the platteland has had to send these unfortunate boys to work. What do they get? They get £7 per month and a bicycle and they get no further. How much further can they get? They may become postmen, but that is all. Yes, the Minister should make some notes—I see he is calling for more paper. I want specially to hear these boys speak—I did not interfere, and they spoke from their hearts and their stomachs, and their stomachs were empty, and their families’ stomachs were empty. They were white boys and let me tell the Minister they will fight to the end. There is no doubt about it. Don’t let the Minister be blind to this fact. We want these boys to be properly clothed and fed, and have their proper bicycles—we want them to have decent wages—not the £8 per month wage— we want them to be properly looked after as they are entitled to be looked after—and I want the Minister to put that into his pipe and smoke it.

I want to reply to the hon. member for Beaufort West (Mr. Louw) and tell him that it has already been decided that in the North West area a complete survey from a telephone point of view will be undertaken this year—it will take four or five months to do that.

I hope you will act on the survey.

Well, we shall get the survey anyway. Now, the hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Barlow) raised the question of the use of the shortwave. The Post Office is very keen in watching the progress in connection with this matter, and we have at present one of our senior officials in England obtaining all the latest information in connection with this matter.

Are you going to legislate to take these things over?

Which things?

Good heavens!

If the hon. member asks me a plain question whether I am going to legislate to take over the Beam or Reuters, I am not going to say that. I have told him without hesitation that so far as the pictures are concerned, there is no monopoly started in connection with that matter, and we are going to keep control of that. The others are matters of high policy, and I am not, as Minister holding this portfolio, I am not going to give him a reply. It is not fair to ask me.

On a previous occasion in this House I discussed the question of the telegraph messengers after the recent strike in Johannesburg. I quoted figures to show that these young fellows were being paid what was practically a starvation wage. I pointed out that some of these young fellows stated that they were getting about £8 per month; they had to pay for their board and in some cases they had to keep their parents. I disclosed other facts in connection with the whole matter, and I warned the Minister that if the position was not remedied he would have further trouble. I must say I am bitterly disappointed at the attitude of the Minister, who today described these boys as a lot of silly youngsters. I am deeply disappointed. The Minister got up here and said that they had been stirred up, but who is the cause of it? Who were the members of the Left Club? The Minister will not tell us although I think he knows it. It is the Communistic Jews. The Minister knows it; but altogether apart from that I want to ask the Minister whether he thinks these boys can live on the salaries they get. Is he prepared to say here this morning that he can build up a happy South Africa if conditions like that are allowed to prevail? I am glad the Minister admits that there are difficulties in the Post Office. In the press report today we find that there are difficulties, that the press went for information to Mr. Altona, the postmaster, but that the postmaster refused to give any information. I want to know what right he has to refuse to give information to the press about such an urgent matter which affects the public? Does not the Minister realise the seriousness of the question? Does he not realise how serious it will be if we again get a situation where thousands and tens of thousands of telegrams —perhaps urgent telegrams — are not delivered? And does he not realise the inconvenience the public may have to suffer if they have to wait for the telegrams to be delivered to their post boxes? The Minister has no right to talk about these boys as a lot of silly youngsters. Many of these boys have taken their junior certificate and they come from good families. They are fully entitled to feel aggrieved. On a previous occasion I pointed out that in Grade II there are as many as 282 messengers, of whom 159 are coloured and getting exactly the same salary as the white boys. It is a scandalous state of affairs. These boys feel aggrieved, and they are entitled to feel aggrieved. I asked the Minister to place these white youngsters on a higher economic level but he did not reply. I hope the Minister will reply today, and I hope he will tell us that he will consider the matter. We have the same position in the other grade. There is a further grievance I want to refer to. In Grade I and Grade II you have have postmen who are doing the same class of work. I asked the Minister what the difference was between Grade I and Grade II. We do not yet know, and the Minister still owes us a reply. They do the same work, and a further grievance is that the Minister shuts the door to them and prevents them from making progress or receiving promotion. I asked the Minister whether he would be prepared to amend Regulation 142 and I want to know whether he is prepared to give an undertaking that he will give these young men a proper chance in life. The regulation provides that a postman under 19 years of age cannot be promoted to the clerical division, nor can he be promoted to the clerical division if he is over 24 years of age and draws a salary of £200 per year. The result is that competent men leave the service. I want to ask the Minister to take a serious view of the position. It is an alarming state of affairs to find that out of less than 600 members of the staff in the Johannesburg Post Office 142 resigned last year. The position is untenable, and the service is suffering in consequence. The postal service is of the greatest value to the country, but the Minister cannot possibly defend the position under which white youngsters have to work on the same salaries as coloured boys. These young fellows have to do something—they cannot help themselves. If they are driven into the hands of the communistic agitators the fault lies with the Government. The Minister is laughing. I hope he won’t laugh in future when he sees what these things may lead to. It’s no use saying that these are a lot of silly youngsters. The Minister will have to admit that no young fellow of that age can work on a salary of £108 per year. I am grateful for the increased cost of living allowance, but it does not remedy the position. We saw what happened last year. The Chairman of the Postal Officials Association, urged a general salary increase of 20 per cent. That was all they asked for at the time. The Minister replied that it would cost the country £2,000,000 and that the State could not afford it. Are we to assume that the State can afford to waste £100,000,000 per year to let people be killed, but that it cannot spend £2,000,000 to keep 30,000 householders alive? The public appreciates the services of the Post Office but the situation today is untenable. We want to know whether the Minister will see to it that these young fellows get a proper increase in salary, such as they are entitled to; and secondly, whether he is going to draw the line and give the white messengers and postmen higher salaries than the coloured people who are in the service with them. In the third place we ask whether the Minister will give an undertaking to amend Regulation 142 so that these young fellows can make a decent living and have an opportunity of being promoted to the clerical division.

In reply to the hon. member for Westdene (Mr. Mentz) in connection with the salaries of these boys, I was discussing this matter with the Trades and Labour Council, and I asked if there was any trade in South Africa where juniors of 16 and 17 started at £8 19s. 6d. plus the allowance for uniform and boots that we give them, plus the other facilities and plenty of time for them to continue their education in order to enable them to pass the junior certificate and matriculation. That is what the post office does with these boys; so don’t go and say we are treating them scandalously. No junior in any trade that I know of starts off at that. The hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Barlow) said that they only can go up to £240, but some of these juniors by diligence and hard work can go in their own grade to £700 a year.

How can they do that when …

Don’t drag other things in; the salaries of postmen were £240, and today the salary is £300 and it goes to £330, and from that they have got a uniform grade. When a boy reaches the age of 18 he becomes a postman. I wanted to give the hon. member the whole picture, which is not nearly as black as he painted it. These boys are very well treated, and they should not have acted as they did. If it will satisfy the hon. member, I won’t call them silly youngsters in the sense it is being interpreted; I do not intend that. But they have to be taught a very severe lesson. Nobody could have been more considerate of them then I was and the Postmaster-General, and all the postal officials in regard to that first strike. They were warned definitely. If you have a child you pardon the first offence, but you say that if that is repeated there is trouble ahead. That is what we did; we must have discipline in the post office, and this was not a case of a few but of hundreds. Let me tell the hon. member this, that if we had acted differently I would not be surprised if we had the whole post office up in protest.

Mr. Chairman, I will get up and protest against the Minister’s declaration. This is the first time in the history of this Government that there has been this victimisation following a strike. It is against the law of this country, and it is going to have far-reaching repercussions in the Union.

What about discipline?

If you insist upon enforcing discipline in this way then every striker should be victimised as soon as the strike ends. I do not blame the hon. member because, he does not realise the striker’s point of view. A striker is a man who fights for a principle, and if you victimise him then I say it constitutes a breach of faith, which the workers cannot accept. I am surprised to hear the hon. member talking about discipline. I challenge any member in this House to tell me of any strike in regard to which, after it was over, victimisation took place as a means of punishment and discipline. This is the first time in my life time I have heard of that. I hope the House will insist that the Government shall not adopt this kind of victimisation. There is no single member who will justify that. If that is the conception of my hon. friend, then he has got a lot to learn.

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

Afternoon Sitting.

Mr. Chairman, with regard to these 1933 recruits, the Minister now comes along with a new story; he now says that a number of people were, recruited subsequently. Since 1935 year after year a number of members in this House have pleaded on behalf of these 1933 recruits, and the Minister now comes forward with a new excuse. In the past he has always said that the Public Service Commission was responsible, that that commission laid down the scales of these men, and now today that we demand from the Minister to take a strong line and override the Public Service Comission, he now comes along and says that a number of new men have been recruited subsequently. That is no excuse, Mr. Chairman, and what is more, the number affected is so small that it would not take a lot of money to meet their wishes. I am convinced this House will never let this matter drop; we will continue to plead for these men until one day the Government must give way and adjust the wages of these 1933 men. Speaking on behalf of myself, and I know there are others who feel the same, I shall never stop pleading this case. I know that the Minister time after time has said—I hope I interpret him correctly—that he is not in agreement with the Public Service Commission’s attitude, and if he could have his way he would have the matter rectified at once. Well, today I think this House would give him its unanimous support in rectifying the matter. Now, however, he is finding a new excuse, he says a lot of new men were recruited subsequently and he finds it impossible to do anything, and it will be a long drawn-out business if he does interfere. I hope the Minister, before this debate closes, will give us the assurance that he is going to meet the case of these men. If he does not he can rest assured that we will never let this matter stand where it is but will protest until the case of these men is reconsidered and any decision made retrospective.

Mr. Chairman, there are one or two items I would like to bring before the Committee. The hon. member for Somerset East (Mr. Vosloo) and other hon. members having dealt with the extension of telephones, and the Minister having replied, I will not pursue this question any further. But there are two items which I consider important to which I would like to draw the attention of the Minister. The first is the case of the men who are in the Post Office today and who are working overtime and subjected to a great strain owing to the shortage of men and the enormous amount of work placed on their shoulders. You are going to have a breakdown in the health of many of them, just as you had after the last war. These men automatically will be retired, and they will go out of the service with their health in such a condition that it will be quite impossible for them to re-enter the service. I know of a number of instances where such men retired after the last war. One is a man with 46 years’ service who will be retired again this year on a pension of £7 and some odd shillings. I want to ask the Minister to take into consideration these cases and make the necessary provision therefor. The other matter is the case of the unfortunate girls in outlying sub-post offices who are called upon to furnish a doctors’ certificate when they go sick before they are allowed to draw their pay. In many instances the doctor’s expenses amount to more than the girls are receiving per month. I understand it is a fairly simple matter to get a certificate, but if there is stupidity on the part of the official demanding it, there is difficulty. I think the time is ripe for asking the Minister to remove that stupidity on the part of officials who demand certificates in all circumstances. Another point is the issue of petrol coupons. I want the Minister to allow the issue of these coupons from outlying post offices, and thus save people travelling 25 to 30 miles to get their coupons from the nearest post office issuing them.

I want the Minister to know that we all Want to be proud of our Broadcasting Service, and now I want to draw his attention to a subject which is not of a political nature, but in respect of which the service can be improved. I took a good deal of trouble last year to listen in to the Dingaan’s Day broadcast, but we got practically nothing of the celebrations. The result of the Dingaan’s Day Handicap was broadcast and other sporting events were broadcast, but there was very little about the celebrations. We were compelled to listen to Zeesen which broadcast a magnificent programme on Dingaan’s Day, and it is really a disgrace to South Africa that they do not broadcast a decent programme on Dingaan’s Day. The Afrikaans-speaking population constitutes a large section and is very proud of Dingaan’s Day. It is a historical day, it is the equivalent of St. Patrick’s Day in Ireland and of St. George’s Day in England. A lot of criticism appeared in the Afrikaans Press in regard to this matter but possibly this never came to the Minister’s notice.

There was dissatisfaction about the broadcast on that day, and I want the Minister to give it his attention. It would be a good thing if the proceedings were broadcast under the aegis of the F.A.K. The F.A.K. is not a political body and it has the confidence of the Afrikaans-speaking population. If they were to handle the programme and the broadcasts were conducted under their guidance and approval it would undoubtedly improve. Even people abroad in England, and men in the army, would like to listen to a decent broadcast. I want to ask the Minister to give this question his serious consideration.

I think the Postal Department should offer many avenues of employment for the Africans of this country, particularly in the native areas. Today I believe there is one African postman in the whole service. There are a number of native postboys. They start at £2 per month, and I believe they can eventually reach £84 per annum. I hope hon. members will agree that there is not much incentive for these people to join the Postal Service under present conditions. I appeal to the Minister to improve the position. I want to remind the Minister that we have large native reserves and there is plenty of room for development in the Postal Services. I don’t think the Minister can realise the conditions under which postal services are carried out in the Transkei. I also want to appeal to the Minister to consider the question of appointing educated African to work at the counters in post offices in various parts of the country where Africans have to be attended to. Today it is very difficult for Africans coming to the post office to make themselves understood. In the native areas you should have native men attending to the counters. And I feel that that would go a long way towards finding employment for a large section of our African population. I also want to ask the Minister to have a survey made and see in what way the postal services can be improved and developed in the Transkei. Finally, I want to draw the Minister’s attention to the question of a greater use of wireless. The radio should be used extensively in adult education and in the dissemination of health and other instruction. The people could be gathered at convenient focal points. So too in the administration, thereby eliminating the present wasteful method whereby the people as a whole are gathered at one spot after travelling long distances at the expense of their employment.

I wish to support the hon. member for Cape Town (Castle) (Mr. Alexander) who pleaded yesterday for an improvement in the salary scales of the lower paid postal officials and I wish to appeal to the Minister to give this matter his immediate attention and not to wait for this proposed commission’s report. The matter is urgent, and in support I would like to say that in examining the remuneration of the clerical staff and of the post and telegraphs assistants in the grade II offices I find that the average earnings are only £22 per month, which is in my opinion not an encouraging salary at all, and I am very surprised that with such low wages we have such an efficient service. But I really wish to plead for a certain class of employee who is worse off—the employee whom I consider as totally underpaid, and that is the postmen whose average earnings are only £18 per month, and that is for the combined grades. If this is the average for all postmen the position must be very much worse in the second grade offices where the maximum is only £20 per month. Although I appreciate the relief which was granted just recently whereby the employees are now able to attain the maximum one year earlier—and I am sure the employees are very grateful for that consideration—I am nevertheless very disappointed with the maximum, as I feel that £20 per month is insufficient for any family to maintain a decent standard of living, no matter how small that family is. However odious comparisons may be, I cannot refrain from comparing the salaries of these employees with the salaries of those in clerical positions in commerce, mines, and other industries, where £25 per month at the age of 25 years is considered a very moderate income at a marriageable age. And this salary is also paid to the clerical staff as far as posts and telegraphs assistants in the service are concerned. If this figure then is accepted as a minimum wage for the upkeep of a family then surely these postmen are entitled to £25 per month after 10 years service, or are they not supposed to marry? They may not have the educational qualifications of the clerical staff or they may not be able to apply, or they may not have received the opportunity to apply their educational qualifications to the clerical side of the service. But they have nevertheless specialised in their work, and we must not forget that they are also associates of the other employees. If this standard is accepted provisionally until such time as the commission reports then the other classes within this grade, or the other grades, can be adjusted according to the categories in which they fall, and here I plead for the inspector class in the grade II offices, and the postmen in the grade I offices who are indeed entitled to a higher maximum than is laid down in the present schedule. I sincerely hope the Minister will give effect to our plea and not wait for this proposed commission’s report.

The Minister probably thinks that because there has been so little criticism of the broadcasting programmes this Session, that the public are satisfied with them. He is making a very big mistake. The programmes of the South African Broadcasting Corporation have become so puerile and fatuous that critics have become completely desperate in hoping that there will be any improvement. To sum up the programmes of the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation they are nothing but yap, yap, yap and blah, blah, blah, talk, talk, talk, and propaganda, propaganda, and propaganda. Now the hon. member for Christiana (Mr. Brink) touched on a very important point. He said we are not only driven to desperation, we are driven to Zeesen.

Not driven—you go there voluntarily.

Hon. members should realise what that means. It shows the fatuousness of our South African programme. I much prefer listening to a South African programme than to Zeesen.

Zeesen is “blah, blah, blah.”

Yes, I know, but it is not such a terrible blah, blah, blah as we got here. It is a question of degree. We get a kind of sandwich at Zeesen—we get something good in between.

You should know.

But the hon. Minister for Posts and Telegraphs gives us nothing in between—he gives us a sandwich with nothing in between. At a quarter to ten we get the so-called news, copyright reserved by the S.A. Press Association.

It starts at 7 o’clock in the morning.

I don’t listen in as early as that. But at a quarter to ten we get it. It is a sort of a rehash …

You are wrong, it is at 10 o’clock.

It does not matter, it is just as bad. It is not worth listening to this rehash or this sort of ante-hash of Daventry.

Is it not a Hamburger?

No, it is not a Hamburger— a Hamburger has something in between. And then we listen to this ante-hash of Daventry in Afrikaans or in English. As soon as that is finished they start giving you the same story all over in the other language. And then we get a talk by some unit. I don’t know what these units are— they are not very good from an entertainment point of view. Some of them come on to the air with a programme taken some where in the desert on gramophone plates— and a lot of sand has got into these gramophone plates. And then we get this for about ten minutes, and then they decide to give you a little good music. Well, when they have given you about ten bars of good music you get a post-hash from Daventry, and then we get the same news all over again from Daventry. In my own family we used to be quite enthusiastic listeners in. We have one listener in left—one of my daughters, and she turns on the wireless in the hope of getting something good—she adopts a sort of Micawber attitude—she hopes that something may turn up, but nothing ever does turn up. It is terrible. Cannot something be done? We had a commission some time ago. They brought out a report. What has been the result? Things have got very much worse. And subsequent to the issuing of that report a number of the best broadcasters have left the Corporation. For what reason? Here we had two excellent features, Kriekbult Roep and Snoektown Calling. Probably the two best we had. Where are the two begetters of those programmes—they have left. They left in disgust. And why did they leave? They left because the conditions were made impossible for them in the Broadcasting Corporation. There is no place for brilliant people in the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation for various reasons. Ons is that the artists are paid too little. That has been said many times, but that is only one of the reasons. What the main reason is why your brilliant programme people are leaving the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation I don’t know, but they are leaving. I think that the result of the previous commission’s report was so poor that it is time we had another investigation into the affairs of the S.A. Broadcasting Corporation to see that good men are got and kept. That conditions are made so that a good man does not want to leave at the first opportunity he gets, and secondly, to see that we get decent programmes. We used to have jolly good programmes before the war. I often listened in to Daventry and must say that I preferred our South African programmes to the Daventry programmes. Daventry would get a good story but would run it to death. It lasted so long that you got tired of it. Our programmes were infinitely preferable to Daventry programmes with all their reputation and money, but today we get a lot of twaddle over the wireless and nothing else. We pay the same as we paid before, whether we listen in or not. We are not getting value for what we pay.

They have never even asked you to broadcast?

No, never.

They would have got something snappy anyhow.

This has become past a joke, and I think a thorough investigation of both the management and the programme should be made, and something should be done to return, as far as conditions will allow, to the standard of programmes which we had previously, which was very high, and also to see what is wrong with the management of the Broadcasting Corporation, to see why they cannot get good people.

I wish to support the hon. member for Cape Town (Castle) (Mr. Alexander) and other hon. members in the matter of the 1933 postal recruits. As has been said, this is a very old case. Year by year it has not merely been argued, it has been clearly proved. As long ago as 1939, when I had the honour of sitting immediately behind the Minister, he himself expressed his certainty that the men had a just claim, that there was a case to be met, and moreover, that they had his personal sympathy. Now, since that time five years have passed and nothing whatever has been done. I say it is a sorry commentary on our democratic Government when a Minister is unable to run his own Department consistently with his personal sympathy and his stated knowledge of what is right. Why cannot he do what he wishes to do and knows to be the right action? Is it the Treasury which gets in his way, is it the Public Service Commission, or is the fault after all with the Minister? We are entitled to know. We are entitled to dig out the nigger from the woodpile, and having so done to deal faithfully with him. I say we have this right, because I re-assert that this Parliament, and not departmental officials or any appointed commission, should govern the country. I admit that in the “off season” the Cabinet should administer it, but their duty is to administer it in accordance with the wishes of this House. This House has clearly expressed its wishes with regard to the 1933 recruits, and we intend that notice shall be taken of the ten years of speeches which we have made. What is the sum of money involved? This is important, because it is the consideration of money which has held us up so often. Precisely what is the sum of money which is at stake? £3,000 per annum; which is a negligible amount from the point of view of the nation, but to these postmen spells the difference between happiness and despair. A complete change has come over public sentiment with regard to money during the past three years, and that applies to this House, too. In 1941, when the hon. member for Fordsburg (Mr. Burnside) and myself argued that we should adopt the New Zealand system of social security, and I ventured to say that the cost would be £30,000,000 per annum, the Minister of Finance was very kind but inclined to be jocular. And presently he came over to my bench and said: “Did you really say £30,000,000?” I admitted the soft impeachment. In his reply to the Budget speeches the hon. gentleman made this statement: “If I had made that promise, the hon. member would not have believed me.”

I think the hon. member is getting off the point.

I am very sorry because it is a most interesting point, on which the House would, I hope, have been prepared to sit! I will only add this, that quite recently £30,000,000 was an awful and impossible amount to ask for social security, but this year a committee representative of the Minister’s own party, and of Government officials, recommended £50,000,000 for the same purpose. So, what is £3,000? I want to tell the Minister another thing. I want to get his sympathy now. These postmen have an average wage of £18 per month. We get certain figures from the Government to the effect that the increased cost of living is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 28 per cent. It is much more than that—it is in many instances more than 50 per cent. And in regard to some commodities it is more than 100 per cent. For an article to cost three times its pre-war price is not unknown. Let me tell the House this if a soldier comes back from the North and he wants one inch of ribbon for the Africa Star he is charged 7s. 6d. for it. Money has lost its value to a large extent, and these low wages mean actual poverty and want. Now, in regard to these men I have been speaking about, they have been very reasonable. They only ask for their status to be made absolute as from now. They are asking from this present date for an average of £1 6s. 8d. per month more. Surely that is not much? I say the whole amount—that is £30,000—which is retrospectively due over ten years—should be paid out. And these men could do with it, and the State would never miss it. Now I am going to make a suggestion. I have already laid down that Parliament itself should run this country. As long as there have been parliamentary institutions this principle is supposed to have been upheld—there shall be “no supply without redress of grievances,” and I suggest that if half a dozen people in this House feel that this is a grievance which should be redressed, we should hang on to it and not pass this Vote until this particular wrong is set right and this grievance has been removed. I am prepared to be one of the six. I am willing if need be to talk right through the alphabet on this Vote. We have a certain amount of power even yet. We have the right to say whether these sums of money shall be granted or not, and we shall have to insist on this amount of money being paid to the 1933 recruits, even if we have to debate it for the rest of the week. Now, I want to say something more.

May I mention one other Department in the Minister’s postal staff, where the employees are having a very bad. time indeed? I refer to the telephone operators. I have a letter here from a very intelligent man, a Scots man—that proves the point. He is the secretary of a very big farmers’ association in this country, and he says this—

We know the Minister’s goodwill and that he is a very busy man. These things are not always known to him. His Department is accused of using cheap labour on a wholesale scale. In one post office I know of, a telephone girl, the wife of a soldier up North, is doing a job which three people should be doing—two in the day time and one in the evening. Here is a girl doing three people’s work for half of one person’s pay. If we employ soldiers’ wives, surely we should give them a chance of earning a decent living, and not ask them to do the work of three people and pay them the merest pittance of a salary. It is not right. [Time limit.]

I am very glad that the hon. member for Durban (North) (The Rev. Miles-Cadman) at the end of his speech referred to the case of women telephone clerks, because I wonder if the Minister is as well aware of what is happening among the girl telephone operators in Johannesburg as he seems to be aware of the facts in regard to the telegraph messengers’ strike. It would appear that when the telegraph messengers struck—as they did with some justification—attempts were at once made to meet them and alleviate the position, but on the other hand when the conditions for the women telephone operators in Johannesburg are so bad that the clerks are seething with discontent, nothing whatever is done—unless they were to strike. And I therefore desire to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that the telephone operators in Johannesburg are consistently working hours and hours of overtime. It is true that they are paid for that overtime, but I say that a telephone operator cannot work efficiently if she is consistently asked to work overtime, nor can the general public get the services which they are entitled to. Therefore I would ask the Minister whether he will not undertake immediately to make some enquiry into the conditions that are prevailing in connection with the consistent amount of overtime that is being worked by these girls. Another point is this and here I wish the Minister could experience the same delays that I have experienced in dialling 0 on various occasions.

Our experience is just the same.

I would like to tell the Minister what actually happened not long ago. I had occasion to dial 0 and after waiting for some five minutes I was asked to give a number. I gave the number I wanted, and then asked how long the call would be delayed. The operator said curtly dial 95, and so I proceeded to dial 95. I waited 15 minutes by the clock while the buzzer went and at the end of 15 minutes I put the receiver down and then dialled 93 i.e. complaints. After about five minutes I got 93.

You were lucky.

I think I was lucky. I was then informed “Oh well, I can do nothing; you will just have to take your turn.” I asked if taking my turn involved waiting another 15 minutes. The operator said yes, probably half an hour, and that he could not help that. I then proceeded to dial 95 again and this time after a 20 minutes’ wait, I got 95. Now if that is the kind of service the public get then it is time some change is made in the administration. Oh yes, I know there’s a war on but it should not be made an excuse for such delays. I do not say the girls are not doing their best, I think they are, but judging from· experience I think they are just being worked beyond their capacity by consistent overtime and when we get such a state of affairs in the post office it is time the Minister knew about it and took some steps to alter the conditions, so that the telephone operators can cope with the work, and also that the public may get some proportion at least of the service for which we continue to pay at pre-war rates. Now as regards this question of broadcasting, I am not prepared to go to lengths that the hon. member for Humansdorp (Mr. Sauer) did in describing the programmes. There are a good many bright spots in them from time to time, but I do agree with him that the pre-war programmes were infinitely better on the whole and that a good many people find themselves now doing what I do, and that is listening for a few minutes and then switching off. But I do want to support what the hon. member for Umlazi (Mr. Goldberg) said in regard to the relationship between the Bureau of Information and the broadcasting. There seems to be a sort of armed truce between the two bodies, with the result that neither party seems to be able to co-operate effectively. It appears to me quite clear that one of the main defects of the Bureau of Information is that while the material in the talks is most times very good it very often happens that the broadcasting of these talks, the way they are put over on the air is not nearly up to the standard that the talks demand. Lots of people write a good talk but broadcast it badly, the country does not get the value of the labour put into them. That is one thing, but on this question of co-ordinating the relationships between the Bureau of Information and the Broadcasting Corporation, I suggest that something be done by the Minister, that an effort be made so that the two bodies can work in greater harmony.

I would be failing in my duty if I did not rise to thank the Minister most sincerely for the promise he made to give us new buildings at Swellen dam. The Minister agrees that it is necessary to give us new buildings and I understand he is now going to have the buildings put up. I just want to ask him to do so as soon as possible, before we have trouble with the existing buildings which may collapse. Let him see to it that the work is tackled as quickly as possible. In regard to all his difficulties with the women and men in the telephone and telegraph division let me tell him that he can solve these difficulties by paying them decent salaries. I had the same experience as the previous speaker. One evening it took me three hours, from 8 to 11 o’clock to get through to Robertson. It is a disgraceful state of affairs. I made a complaint and was told that the salary scale was so low that they could not get the right type of women with the necessary education which was required for the work, and even those they did get usually accepted other posts at higher wages as soon as they learnt the work. It is hard work and the pay is very, very poor. If he increases the pay all his difficulties will disappear. It’s all wrong that the post office should have to collect millions of pounds to pay for other services. The people who earn the money for the post office should be paid salaries which would enable them to live a decent life.

I want to bring a few points to the Minister’s notice. The hon. member for Humansdorp (Mr. Sauer) complained about the broadcasting service. He is, at any rate, lucky that he can hear something over the wireless at his home. In the Northern Transvaal people are forced to turn off their wireless sets so far as South Africa’s broadcast service is concerned because they can hear nothing. There is something wrong and I am afraid we are driving people to listen in to Zeesen. They can hear Zeesen but they cannot hear Johannesburg. Something must be done so as to give the people a chance at least to hear something. I am not only thinking of news just now, but also of broadcasts of an educational value. The people in these far distant parts can keep themselves informed in that way. I think I should also associate myself with what the hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Barlow) has said. His remarks deserve the serious attention of this House. It has surprised us newcomers that when the morning papers are published here in Cape Town one sees in “Die Burger,” for instance, that the people who support “Die Burger’s” views perhaps still get a little write up, but the newcomers—and not all of them are weak—hardly ever get a write up of their speeches. The hon. member for Hospital has already referred to the position in the English Press. Even if a man raises a good point in this House he only gets a line or two. This is a very serious matter. Surely the people who are in the front line of civilisation in South Africa should get the opportunity of hearing what goes on in this House. They should even have the opportunity of listening in to the debate, so that they may know what goes on and thus convince themselves of the truth. In regard to small salaries I want to make an appeal to the Minister in regard to the people running those postal agencies outside. They get £1 10s. per month. I think it is a disgrace. Today he has other people in the service issuing petrol coupons for motor cars, and I want to ask him to make use of the people in the districts for this work and pay them higher salaries. They are doing very fine work in those far-distant parts. Some of those places are 150 miles from the nearest post office. Today there is a shortage of tyres and petrol, and not only this Minister, but other Ministers too, should assist towards getting an extension of telephones throughout the country. The position today is that people in the outside districts have to travel a long distance, and use up a considerable proportion of the little petrol they get to go and fetch their coupons from the post office. Why cannot those postal agencies, which are perhaps 150 miles away from the nearest post office, issue them? In any case it is a disgrace to pay those people £1 10s. per month. It is a disgrace to a civilised country to offer a man or woman £1 10s. per month. It is true that they are not full-time officials but they render a great service to their district and they are willing to serve the public at all hours to their own detriment. I want to ask the Minister to have an immediate enquiry made in regard to these far distant parts so that he may be convinced of the fact that the position today is unjust towards the public and towards the people who are rendering these services today. Something appeared in one of the papers in Cape Town the other day. I shall quote it—

It is a peculiar phenomenon that in that area one can grow vegetables and fruit out of season. Those people living in these areas are completely shut off from the rest of the world today. They want to have the opportunity of hearing over the wireless what the prices are and where they can send their products, but they have no telephones either. I therefore want to urge upon the Minister to have those services extended to these areas. The consumers will then be able to get fresh fruit and vegetables at a time when they cannot get them from other parts of South Africa. The Minister should induce the Cabinet to open up those far-distant parts of the country. During the war the prices of land have gone up there from £1 to £20 per morgen, because it has been proved that products can be grown there at a time when they cannot be grown in other parts of South Africa. The Minister must not prevent the consumers of South Africa from getting these goods. They will be able to get them from those parts in the best possible way—they will get them fresh. But the products are grown there in a tropical part where it gets very hot, and if those products are not immediately sent to the market they go off. It is therefore essential that telephone connection should be provided, also a proper broadcasting service.

I had not intended speaking on this vote but I have received telegrams from my constituency and if I do not say anything my constituents may perhaps imagine that I am not attending to their interests. I have made repeated representations to the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs about applications from Petrus for telephone services. The Petrussteyn Farmers Association has made application for a proper telephone service. The reply I received from the Minister was that under existing conditions, owing to lack of material it was not possible to undertake the work. Several speakers have drawn attention to the absolute necessity of telephone services today. People cannot get motor tyres, petrol has been restricted and they are handicapped in every possible way in the services which they need so urgently. The Minister rightly said to the hon. member for Beaufort West (Mr. Louw) that they were now doing work in that area and I have been informed that at Steynsrust telephone lines are to be built on a large scale. Applications in those areas have been outstanding for a long time, and as it is in the immediate neighbourhood I want to ask the Minister to see that these applications for telephone connections are complied with. I also have a telegram from the Edenburg Farmers Association asking for better telephone services. The people in Steynsburg, Petrussteyn and those areas are asking for the service to be extended and improved. Many of those people pay as much as I do for telephone hire. I have a night and day service, even on holidays and Sundays, but those people have not got that. I have raised the matter with the Postmaster-General because these people are very dissatisfied, and I should like the Minister to go into the question and comply with their requests.

I am quite content to leave the question of the Telegraph Messengers Union where the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. Van den Berg) left it, excepting in so far aS the petition is concerned which was circulated and to which 2,542 signatures were obtained in the short space of a day and a half. I do, however, want to deal with the general question as to the manner in which the postal authorities are dealing with the establishment of a Telegraph Messengers Union, and to claim for them the right to belong to an organisation of their own choice, and in order that members of the House may know exactly what the position is and how to this very day the position remains unsatisfactory. I want to read from a letter from the Telegraph Messengers Union addressed to myself, in which they say that the Public Service Commission suggests that the Postal Association should accept the telegraph messengers into their organisation. The telegraph messengers quite justly say the members of their union refuse to become members of the Postal Association as that body scabbed upon them and delivered telegrams whilst the messengers were on strike for better conditions. I can readily sympathise with the telegraph messengers in their lack of desire to be forced into an organisation whose members scabbed upon them while they were out on strike, and I claim for the telegraph messengers the right to have an organisation of their own choice. Pressure is being applied to these people directly and indirectly to become members of the Postal Association, an organisation to which they do not wish to belong for the reasons they have stated. The petition, Mr. Chairman, which is signed by 2,542 signatures, is addressed to the right hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs and reads—

and this is the important point—

Workers do not lightly and readily come out on strike, they only come out on strike when they have reached the stage when they feel it is the last resort to remedy a grievance, and the mere fact of their coming out on strike is a sufficient indication that there was discontent which had reached a stage at which they were compelled to take such a step as a means of redressing grievances. Since that strike took place they returned to work under certain conditions contained in a letter addressed to them from the PostmasterGeneral. Many of the points raised in those conditions are not yet redressed, but this is the main thing which has forced the messengers out on strike again. They say their letters to the postal authorities are simply ignored. They say: “We feel that this is a very high-handed attitude. We are messengers, we are workers, and as such should be treated with respect by our superiors.” Let me indicate the extent to which their claim is justified not only with the Postmaster-General but also with the Public Service Commission. On the 19th February they received a reply from the office of the Public Service Commission to their letters of the 20th January and the 3rd February, in which in the penultimate paragraph they say: “A further communication will be addressed to you in due course.” That was on the 19th February. While they were waiting for this further communication the Telegraph Messengers Union replied to that letter on the 1st March, asking for the further communication as soon as possibe. The House may take it from me that when the messengers came out on strike again last week the letter of the 28th January, after two and a half months, still remained unanswered. The postmaster says that the Union should be registered under the Industrial Conciliation Act. That Act is quite clear. It requires any body of workers combining together to form an organisation to notify the Industrial Registrar that they are forming such a trade union, but the Industrial Conciliation Act does not necessarily require them to be registered. The primary value of a Trade Union being registered is that it permits such a Union to become a party to an Industrial Council and I am sure the Hon. Minister would not like to see the Telegraph Messengers Union pursuing a demand by an Industrial Council. The point I want to emphasise is that in spite of what the Minister says there are some grievances connected with the strike which took place in November of last year that have not been satisfactorily disposed of, and that the messengers, after a lapse of four or five months waiting in expectation of having these matters satisfactorily settled, and being unable to get answers to the letters which they have addressed to the authorities, perhaps quite foolishly—I am not pre pared to condone the strike—engaged on a second strike. I want to resent the innuendo in the remarks of the Minister that the Left Club was responsible for urging the messengers to strike. I do not know what happened in November, but I have sufficient experience of the working class movement to know what probably did happen in November when the telegraph messengers came out. It was commonly accepted that it was a spontaneous strike on the part of these youngsters, and it was only after they had come out that there was any organised effort on the part of the Left Wingers. It is part of the principle of trade unionism to assume that a strike is justified and to give aid without questioning the reason, which is assumed to be a just reason. The Left Club was not responsible, I am quite sure, for urging them to come out on strike this last week. I may say that they were perhaps not justified in coming out on strike the second time, but might have remained a little longer, and I ask the Minister as speedily as possible to give his consideration to the questions which are outstanding from the dispute of last November.

I was very pleased to hear the hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Barlow) criticising the press of South Africa. I would like to associate myself with his remarks where he expressed serious criticism of SAPA and the press generally of this country. I am perfectly certain that if effect is given to the hon. member’s suggestion that the press should be allowed to print in the newspapers only what hon. members say in this House ….

Order, order! I cannot allow the hon. member to pursue that subject.

May I respectfully sugest to you that you allowed the hon. member for Hospital this morning to talk for ten minutes, during which time the hon. member made a vigorous attack on the press of South Africa.

Order, order. The hon. member will recollect that I twice reminded the hon. member for Hospital that he could not make any suggestion that would require legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I am not going to suggest legislation. I merely want to convey to the House that as the Minister can deal with the press under the emergency regulations under this vote ….

I have nothing to do with the press.

Order, order. What item does the hon. member propose to discuss?

Telegraph propaganda.

That is newspaper propaganda.

Under salaries then, Mr. Chairman. We have an item here in respect of the registration of newspapers.

Which item is that? I hope the hon. member will not pursue this matter.

May I just say this then. I do not propose to delay the House, but I think it would be a pity if hon. members were not allowed to reply to the scurrilous attacks made on them by the newspapers.

Order, order! The hon. member must not evade my ruling.

I have no intention of endeavouring to evade your ruling. I can quite understand that the Government in power laps up all the support that the Press can give them, but I am prepared to leave that. I neither seek the assistance of the Press nor am I prepared to use their columns ….

The hon. member is evading my ruling, and if he continues to do so, I shall have to order him to withdraw from the House.

On a point of order, may I ask your guidance. If the hon. member makes an attempt to reply to a statement made by the Press in regard to his statement in this House, is the hon. member entitled to refer to Press comments on his speech?

The hon. member is entitled to do that at the proper time and in the proper place.

Will the Chairman tell me which is the proper time?

On a point of order, is the hon. member allowed to discuss the registration of newspapers? A newspaper can be sent through the post office for a farthing if it is registered by the post office as a newspaper. The post office must register that newspaper. The “Cape Times” registers its paper with the Postmaster-General and they pay a farthing stamp. Cannot the hon. member ask why that farthing stamp is put on and then go on to say why the newspaper should not be allowed registration?

If the hon. member wishes to criticise the administration of the post office or the registration of newspapers or letters, then he is entitled to-do so, but the hon. member for Durban (Central) (Mr. Derbyshire) did not attempt to criticise the administration of the post office. What he attempted to do was to criticise the Press over which the Minister has no control.

Is not the hon. member allowed to say that the Postmaster-General should not register that paper and then proceed to give his reasons for making that statement? We can ask the Minister why he allows the newspaper to pay one farthing postage. Then the hon. member could go on to discuss the rotten things they say in that newspaper.

If the hon. member wishes to discuss the question of the administration of the post office he is entitled to do so.

I notice that as I have been watching the clock, you have also been doing so, and I hope these interjections will be taken off my time. It is highly desirable, when discussing the rate at which newspapers are allowed to pass through the post office, that hon. members should be allowed to point out to the Minister why those newspapers ought not be allowed to pass through his department.

The hon. member is now trifling with the Chair.

I assure you that ….

Order, order!

Am I allowed to say anything, or can the Chairman interfere with everything that I say?

Order, order! The hon. member is not entitled to say anything on a particular matter which the Chairman has ruled cannot be discussed on the question before the committee.

You have already ruled that a member would be allowed to discuss papers passing through the postal department.

I have ruled that proposals that require legislation, such as a proposal to control the Press, cannot be discussed in Committee of Supply.

But this does not require legislation. You do not require legis lation to decide what papers can be allowed to pass through the postal department during war time. The legislation is already there. The Minister of Posts and Telegraphs can say tomorrow that the “Cape Times” is publishing material that he is not prepared to allow to go through the post, and I suggest that if we members of Parliament are to have no protection whatsoever against the scurrilous and unnecessary attacks made on us by the Press, then I do not know where we are going to get that protection.

I have already told the hon. member and I will tell him now for the last time that he can discuss that matter at the proper time and in the proper place.

Will you tell me this, Mr. Chairman? There have been so many rulings, and it seems to me that this is a case of kisses going by favour ….

The hon. member must withdraw that.

May I say this ….

Order, order!

I withdraw that. You would not permit me to say that I much regretted that the hon. member for Hospital was allowed to make an attack on the Press in general for ten minutes ….

Order, order !

…. and I am not allowed two minutes. At the appropriate time I hope to be able to put myself right with the public outside, and I am not concerned with the “Cape Times” or any other paper. All that I require is that they repeat in the papers what I say in the House, and I shall be perfectly content. [Time limit.]

I would like to criticise the hon. Minister’s policy in so far as it relates to the construction of public buildings under his Department. I refer to the construction of post offices and other public buildings. The hon. member for Swellendam (Mr. S. E. Warren) expressed his gratitude to the Minister for a promise which he had made in connection with the construction of public buildings in Swellen dam. I want to tell the Minister that if the hon. member for Swellendam has to wait as long as I did for that promise to be fulfilled, he will be one of the most deceived members of this House.

You ought to deal with that under capital expenditure.

I am criticising the Minister’s policy, as far as his recommendation is concerned in connection with the construction of public buildings. If the hon. member for Swellendam has to wait as long as I had to wait for the fulfilment of the promise which the Minister made here, he will be one of the most deceived members in the House. What is the procedure which has to be followed by a representative of the electors in order to have justice done to his constituents as far as the construction of buildings in his constituency is concerned. He comes to the House and, in the first instance, to facilitate matters for the Minister and the Department, he makes representations to the Minister—and he does so verbally. But because I had a suspicion that the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs could easily put us off by making promises, I did not confine myself to verbal representations only. From time to time I made my representations in writing, and I also kept the written replies of the Minister and of his Department. I just want to touch on the position in order to prove my case to the Minister and to the House. On the 15th September, 1938, I got up in this House and made representations to the Minister personally; I have his written reply here. I made representations in regard to repairs to the present post office at Harrismith; and may I just say this to the Minister: Although Harrismith is today looked upon as the fourth town in the Free State, it is a first-class town with first-class inhabitants in the town as well as in the district. This is what the hon. Minister wrote—

That was in 1938. We waited because he said that we must not make further representations immediately. The following year he wrote as follows—and he signed this letter personally—

Here he stipulates a definite period of fifteen month. This letter goes on to say—

We again waited, and in the same year, a few months later, he sent a further reply to the representations which I had made, as follows—

Now I want to ask the Minister this. If in 1939 he addressed a letter to me which was signed by himself and which I gave to my municipality, when the condition of our post office was such that it could not even be repaired, must we in Harrismith in the year 1944 still live on premises, after all the representations which were made to the Minister and to his Department, and after all the promises which I had from the Minister and from the Postmaster-General and his Department? We approached him from time to time, and the excuse was always that there was a war on. The municipality of Harrismith is becoming impatient. The town council has now informed me that if I do not succeed in influencing the Minister to fulfil his promise, they will be compelled to send a deputation to Cape Town to see the Minister. I then wrote to the Minister again. We get nothing but promises, however. In a letter dated 25th March, 1944, signed by the Minister, he writes as follows in reply to the representations—

Here the Minister admits that he wanted to make a start with the building of a new post office at Harrismith in 1939. He writes further—

He again makes this promise. He promises that provision will be made on the Estimates of 1944-’45. Is this again an idle promise, which I have to convey to my constituents? Is this the promise which I must convey to them after representations have been made to the department for six years? I heard the hon. Minister making promises to other constituencies. Smaller towns have received promises of public buildings which will be erected. On behalf of the Town Council of Harrismith and on behalf of the public of Harrismith generally, I want to extend a friendly invitation to the Minister to visit Harrismith as soon as possible, and I can assure him that we will give him a warm reception in Harrismith in the right sense of the word; and then he will see for himself that I am entitled to make a plea in connection with the construction of a new post office in Harrismith. But it is not only Harrismith. I made a plea in this House for the construction of a post office at Warden, and I have here a letter which I received from Mr. Lentin, the previous Postmaster-General. This letter was written on the 19th August, 1938. I have here the correspondence which passed between the municipality and Mr. Lentin. I keep these letters so that I can show my constituents what happens. This is all I have to protect me. This is what Mr. Lentin wrote in 1938—

And this letter was written in 1938. What must I do when I receive a letter like this? I convey this promise from the head of the department to my constituencies, and what must they think of it? In this letter the Postmaster-General states in the first part of the letter that this matter has been referred to the Department of Public Works. On the 9th March, 1939, the Secretary for Public Works wrote to me as follows—

A moment ago I read a letter from the Postmaster-General in which it is stated that provision will be made in the Estimates for the following year. The Department of Public Works refers me again to the PostmasterGeneral. So we are sent from pillar to post, and eventually we get nothing but idle promises. [Time limit.]

I want to get up and reply at once to the hon. member for Harrismith (Mr. E. R. Strauss). The hon. member is perfectly correct, but he must not forget that after 1939 until about nine months ago precious little Government work could be undertaken. I myself went to Harrismith and condemned the building. There is no question about the importance of having a new building at Harrismith. The only question is to find the money. The object in writing these letters to the hon. member was to put him right with his constituency. We wanted him to be able to show those letters to his constituency, but there is no doubt that Harrismith is entitled to a post office and will get it as soon as we are able to give it, and instead of having a hot reception that the hon. member predicts, I know that the people of Harrismith will be very pleased to lay the foundations when I can authorise it.

If and when.

He said a warm reception.

I take no exception to the remarks the hon. member made. I can understand the hon. member being bitterly disappointed. But I can assure him that he is no more disappointed than I am; and unfortunately Harrismith is not the only place that finds itself in this position; there are other places. I wish I could wave a fairy wand to bring these things into existence. We are going to do all we possibly can. Materials will be required to build satisfactory Government buildings in all these places. In Harrismith the necessary alterations would no doubt have taken place long ago; but first of all they took a long time to enquire into it and then they condemned it. Do not think that I want to back out of the stand I took in this matter. The fact that a new post office has not been built is due to circumstances beyond my control. The hon. member for Durban (Umbilo) (Mr. Wanless) has again raised the question of the resignation of the postal people. I do not regard the action of these people as a strike. More than half of our postal messengers did not go out on strike; they are working today.

You told us that the whole lot had walked out.

No, half of them did not go out. I found that the parents of a number of others came pleading to the PostmasterGeneral in connection with the matter. Some got a good old sjambokking from the parents. The post office carried out all their undertakings to these youngsters. What the Postmaster-General undertook to do has been carried out and the boys have been well treated. I do not think hon. members will take exception to the statement that they are better treated than many other youngsters of their age in South Africa. I do not want to go into the question of farm telephone lines. No one appreciates more than I do the necessity of having telephones on the farms, but I do appeal to hon. members to find out what we can do in their districts by calling at the office of the Postmaster-General or at my office, when we can go into the plans and see what can be done. In some of the areas surveys have taken place, because you cannot undertake this sort of work haphazardly. But again I must point out that there are thousands of telephones which have to be connected. The hon. member for Zoutpansberg (Mr. S. A. Cilliers) spoke about the difficulty of getting reception. The same thing applies in that connection. The Broadcasting Corporation knows the difficulty that is being experienced in some parts of South Africa to get reception. They have been trying to cover it, but they cannot succeed. The difficulty is that you cannot get the material. The policy is to cover the whole of South Africa, so that every one will be able to hear with out any difficulty. The hon. member for Humansdorp (Mr. Sauer) again criticised the South African Broadcasting Corporation. I do not take any exception to his remarks because I personally feel that there has been a reduction in the quality of the broadcasts as compared with the pre-war broadcasts, hut hon. members must not forget that the Broadcasting Corporation is not in a position to carry on as it would have carried on if there had been no war. In this report to which I referred this morning, it will be seen that they were bringing out various artists and bands to give music to South Africa. They hope to do that when the war is over. The hon. member for Christiana (Mr. Brink) raised the question of special programmes on Dingaan’s Day. I shall send that recommendation to the Broadcasting Corporation. The hon. member for King williamstown (Mr. C. M. Warren) spoke about the excessive overtime. We will do what we can to meet that position; and with regard to the medical certificates of these women, the postmaster has the power to dispense with a certificate. I quite agree that it is ridiculous to insist on a medical certificate in every case. I do not know the particular case to which he referred, but if what he says took place, I will see that the matter is rectified if he brings the facts before my notice. The hon. member for Transkei (Mr. Hemming) raised the question of further employment of natives in the post office. Well, I can assure him that we are going to do all we possibly can in connection with the matter. The one difficulty is to put a native at the same counter as a white man. In some places we have got native postmasters, and we want to extend that in the locations as well as in the Transkeian Territories. I am one of those who believe that there should be a proper and correct field for the advancement of natives to serve their own people. I cannot say at the moment what has taken place, but there is a movement, in that direction; and the same applies to the Indian community and, to a smaller extent to the coloured community. With regard to the distribution of native letters, that is purely a question of whether we are able to do so. The hon. member for Jeppes (Mrs. Bertha Solomon) raised the position with regard to the telephone operators and certain difficulties and delays. There is no question about it that these delays do occur, but I have made enquiries in connection with the matter. I have suffered the same inconvenience as hon. members have suffered in connection with the matter, but it is due to the abnormal growth of our trunk service, and it cannot be relieved from that point of view.

It is because the people can no longer travel that they use the telephone so often.

That is so. I myself have had to wait 20 and 25 minutes. I have rung up No. 93. Hon. members will remember that I anticipated trouble so far as hon. members are concerned. Then I wrote to the Clerk of the House, and I am very glad to find that there is not very much complaint from hon. members with regard to telephoning from the House. But these girls are getting the best treatment that we can give them, and they are all getting overtime, and I want to pay tribute to them for the work they are doing under difficult circumstances. The Post Office has had over 2,000 men at the front. All kinds and classes and conditions of work have been thrust on the Post Office foreign to what the Post Office is accustomed to do. The issuing of petrol coupons is one. A very important responsibility was thrown on the Post Office with regard to the allowances for soldiers’ wives. Hon. members know the difficulties that were experienced at the beginning, but since the Post Office took it in hand I have had no complaints, and they have been helping thousands of wives and dependants. But I want to say that the Post Office has reached the limit of the work which it can do for other Departments. I think I have covered all the points raised in connection with this debate except that raised by the hon. member for Durban (Central) (Mr. Derbyshire). Well, all I want to say to him is that I am certainly not going to interfere with an ordinary matter of procedure so far as the question of the registration of newspapers is concerned. If I started to interfere in that direction many newspapers would not be circulated.

I have no wish to add to the manifold difficulties of the Minister, because apart from carrying into effect the many points raised on his vote, I feel sure that it would take some considerable time to give attention to all these points raised. Notwithstanding that; I cannot help drawing his attention to a matter which I have raised on previous occasions. I do not know if it is going to mean a serious inconvenience to the Broadcasting Corporation but I should like to learn from the Minister whether it is not possible, if it is practicable, to give us the Afrikaans news service between 12 and 1 o’clock instead of at or after 1 o’clock. May I be allowed to point out to the Minister that the rural population as a rule start work very early, much more so than the urban population; and consequently they have their lunch hour between 12 and 1 o’clock instead of between 1 and 2 o’clock as is the custom with the urban population. Now, during the news service in the morning they are at work already. Their lunch hour is between 12 and 1, so when the news service comes through on the B programme they do not hear it. By that time they are back at work again. In the evening, when the news service comes through they are still at work.

Never, they are in bed.

I beg your pardon, that may apply to the urban population but not to the rural population. They do not get any news service under the present system. We know that things are developing very fast in world affairs and that everyone likes to keep in touch with what is happening, and you can imagine the inconvenience to which the rural population are put if they have no means of hearing the news service and are— as they often are—deprived of their newspapers; they often do not get newspapers for days, or weeks in the far off parts of the back veld. Now, if it is not going to be of great inconvenience to the Broadcasting Corporation I want to ask if it would not be possible to give us one news service, preferably on the B programme, between 12 and 1 o’clock. I have raised this matter before and I do not know whether there are certain difficulties on account of which it cannot be granted, but I want to make this appeal to the Minister in all sincerity, that he should try and give us that service between 12 and 1 o’clock. As far as the urban population are concerned they have their news services, and most people understand both official languages. They also have all the other services at times convenient to them. But the rural population, and particularly the farming community, have not got that privilege, so I would make a strong appeal to the Minister to make that essential alteration and give us a news service between 12 and 1 o’clock. Even if it is given a quarter of an hour earlier—so long as we can have it during our lunch hour. Then, I want to ask why it is necessary to give us a City Hall Orchestral concert on Tuesday and Thursday evenings. Let the Broadcasting Corporation understand that we are not all classically minded, so why should that programme be forced down our throats for two hours on these nights? Music is music, whether it comes through on the A or B programme. Why not at least give us something different on one of these wavelengths. Give us something lighter so that these people who are not classically minded can have something to listen into on Tuesday and Thursday nights while the classical programme is in operation. There is one other little matter on which I want to support previous speakers, and that is in connection with the out of the way post offices, the wayside post offices. These are often run in conjunction with shops or some other business, and it is surprising to see the amount of work which these postal officials, part-time officials, have to shoulder. A previous speaker mentioned that they were getting £1 10s. per month; in many cases they only get £1 per month which is practically nothing. In view of the amount of revenue received and the amount of business done in the interest of the general public, and the services rendered, I think it is essential that the system should be reviewed by the Minister and let these people at least get something which is a fair remuneration for the services they are rendering.

I just want to draw the attention of the Minister to the report of the Auditor-General in connection with the Fidelity Trust Fund. It would seem that this is the only department which has a fidelity trust fund. Do the Minister’s officials contribute to that fund, and why is this department the only department, as far as I know, which has a fidelity trust fund? Probably it is due to the fact that the officials of the post office are underpaid. What happens? We who practice law know that prosecutions on charges of embezzlement are frequently instituted, also against officials of the Minister’s department. According to the report of the AuditorGeneral, something like £3,000 had been paid out of this fund up to last year, and this fund was apparently established only recently. This paragraph reads—

What does that mean? It is a sort of blot on the department. It shows that even the officials of the department feel that they are underpaid, and that there is embezzlement in that department on a larger scale than in other departments. It may be small amounts. For that reason the officials are apparently asked to contribute to the Fidelity Trust Fund. If that is the case the time has arrived for the Minister to give his attention to this matter, because the postal officials are living under a cloud. Their salaries are very meagre, more so than the salaries of the officials of any department in the Civil Service. They deal with big amounts, and recently we had a case almost in the heart of Cape Town where a large amount was embezzled by one of the Minister’s officials. The argument is regularly advanced by the defence that these people have to deal with large sums of money, that they have to work overtime, and that their pay is too low. I hope the Minister will give his attention to this matter. Then there is another matter, and that is the probationers’ hostel in Johannesburg. It seems that the Minister’s department opened a hostel of this kind in Johannesburg. We heard today that youngsters in the post office in Johannesburg receive £8 per month. They cannot exist properly on £8 a month, unless they live with their parents; and if the Minister and his department want to make it possible not only for boys in the cities but also for boys in the platteland to undertake that work he will have to establish more of these hostels in the large cities of the Union, like Cape Town, Port Elizabeth and other places. If a boy of fourteen or fifteen years—I do not know how old they have to be before they are taken on, but I think it is fifteen years—is engaged as a probationer and he is enabled to obtain cheap board and lodging in a state-aided institution of that kind, it will greatly assist the boy of the platteland.

It was with that object in view that we started this.

In that case you must take this matter further and extend these institutions to other centres, because we who come from the platteland feel that it is an experiment which ought to be extended so that the less privileged boys of the platteland will also have an opportunity.

It is a success in Johannesburg, and I see no reason why it cannot be extended.

I want to ask the Minister to extend it. These are the two matters which I wanted to bring to his notice. The Minister promised me in Upington that attention would be given to the post office.

It is the fault of the people of Upington that they have not yet got another post office.

The Minister bought land there at a central place, and the time has arrived when the Minister should give Upington a modern post office. The town is expanding and there is a great volume of business. The officials in Upington work under very difficult climatic and other poor conditions. The building is far too small to house all the officials and to enable them to do their work properly.

One’s time is rather limited and does not really give one the opportunity of dealing with important matters such as the one now before the House. In view of the importance of the commission the appointment of which the Minister announced yesterday, I think no good purpose would be served by discussing the question of salaries in detail, so I shall have to content myself by saying that the scale submitted by the Postal Association cannot be regarded as being unreasonable, and I hope that when evidence is presented to the Commission these scales will be accepted. To my mind they are very conservative—they should have been much higher. But these people have always been very reasonable. As far as the Minister is concerned he, too, has tried to meet them as far as possible within his limited powers, but if one looks at the memorandum one sees that they ask for two things—the one is better salary scales, ond the other the amendment of the Public Service regulation No. 142. I hope the Minister will give attention to this matter and if possible make this subject one of the terms of reference of this Commission. Now, I just want to read an extract from this memorandum to show what these people say about the amendment of regulation No. 142—

1. (1) not be less than 19 years, and not more than 24 years of age;
2. (2) he must not be in receipt of a salary of more than £200 per annum.

My submission is that that is not much to ask for, and I sincerely hope that that consideration will be given to the men. A lot has been said about the 1933 recruit’s case. The Minister has replied to that point. Unfortunately, being called away to the telephone, I did not hear the Minister’s reply. But a great point is made of the fact that the Minister was debarred by the Public Service Commission from dealing with the matter. I agree with the hon. member who said that Parliament should be supreme—and Parliament is supreme. The Public Service Commission should not have the last word.

You think so?

Well, if Parliament cannot have the last word then we shall see to it that it does have the last word. May I respectfully ask the Minister to include that particular case in the references to the proposed commission? I am sure the Association will be only too pleased to present a case and will succeed if they do present it. Now, it will be of interest to the Minister that only 150 of these men are left, and that the amount involved is only £3,000. Then another point which was discussed at some length here this afternoon is that of the messengers. We have heard the history in connection with these messengers and some time ago certain concessions were granted in regard to messengers becoming members of an association. The Minister agreed to allow these young messengers to become members of the S.A. Postal Association. As a matter of fact he said he liked to deal with a body of men instead of with individuals. It has been alleged here that the Postal Department refused them permission to join the Union, or to have a union of their own. Let me tell hon. members who make these statements that it is beyond the powers of the Post Office Department to make a decision of that kind. It is in the hands of the Department of Labour and it is when the Department of Labour refuses such a thing that members can raise the point here. Just before coming to this Session we formed a union for the unskilled labourers in Government service, and we had every support and co-operation from the Public Works Department and the Post Office Department. Now, I want to take strong exception to the accusation made by an hon. member here that one of the unions had scabbed on the messengers. That is not correct. On the contrary, at the time the postmen wanted to come out on strike in sympathy with the messengers.

That is quite correct.

And here they are accused now of scabbing on the messengers.

No, they did not scab.

It is not right to make such accusations, particularly across the floor of the House where one is protected. Now, if these messengers can form an organisation on their own legs let them have it. My own view is that their interest will be better protected by their belonging to the S.A. Postal Association. These men are very young when they join the Post Office Service and in the second place they will move from their position of messengers into the position of postmen, and so on. And their interests become identical, and my submission is that they will be better protected by the other Union. But the trouble is that attempts have been made to exploit them politically. And let me say this: That no one’s stomach has ever been filled by politics. And that is my warning this afternoon, even to these boys. Don’t allow yourselves to be exploited; keep out of politics. Keep to your Trade Union and if you want a union of your own keep it out of politics. The question of privileges has been argued as well. Well, I have been associated with these people for a long time. I used to teach them at the Technical College. This opportunity they have of attending classes is a big consideration so far as they are concerned because they know that they can improve themselves there. The whole question of their salaries must be taken into consideration in conjunction with that of the adult messengers. We know what the salaries of these adult messengers are—they go from £150 to £220. Now, my submission is that the £120 should be for the junior messengers. Anyhow, when the commission sits these men will be able to give evidence, and they will be able to plead their case then, and I am sure they will plead it very effectively. [Time limit.]

I would like to make a friendly request to the Minister. Frankfort is a town which, I think, has the same status as Heilbron and Vrede, but unfortunately the telephone hours are such that the service closes at 9 o’clock in the evening. We admit that the position is difficult, but I should like to ask the Minister whether it is not possible to give Frankfort a service up to at least midnight. I made representations to the Postmaster-General, and I understand that everything depends upon the number of subscribers, but I want to give the Minister the assurance that near Frankfort there are two small towns, Tweeling and Villiers, and that explains the fact that there are less subscribers at Frankfort. The position is very difficult in Frankfort, because it has a telephone service only up to 9 o’clock, and I want to ask the Minister to extend the service up to at least midnight. At the moment we are faced with a shortage of tyres and petrol and that causes great inconvenience, because there is no hospital at Frankfort. I would like to extend an invitation to the Minister to visit Frankfort so that he can convince himself of the facts. I am convinced that Frankfort will in the future become one of the most beautiful towns in the Eastern Free State. It is becoming a pleasure resort, and the visitors, too, experience difficulty because the telephone service closes so early. I hope the Minister will grant this request on the part of Frankfort to extend the service from 9 o’clocy to 12 o’clock. Then I want to associate myself with those who have made a plea for the young girls who are employed in the telephone exchange. They are doing difficult work. They are sometimes far from their own homes. They do their work very well, and we want to make a plea that greater consideration be shown to them, so that their work can be facilitated as much as possible, and so that they can feel happy in their work.

I should like to associate myself with the remarks of the hon. member for Transkei (Mr. Hemming) in connection with the increased employment of natives in the postal services. I noticed recently that 30 natives had passed their B.A. We have hundreds passing their matric, their school higher and their junior certificate, but at present practically the only field open to these natives who have had a course of higher education and who have taken these examinations is that of teachers, In the Transkei we have secondary schools and unless something is done to provide employment for this type of native who is being educated the country will be faced with a serious position. We shall find all these natives drifting into the towns and I think we have quite enough in the towns at present. We should do our best to see that the better type of native, or rather let me say the higher educated native, is employed in his own area, and a start should be made in the native areas. The Minister has promised to give this matter his consideration, but I have heard that promise when I was sitting on the benches over there 15 years ago. I have made the same appeal without practical results. I hope that this time the Government will take a determined stand. It is being done in the Native Affairs Department. Some of the responsible posts are given to natives in the native areas and I am speaking here specifically because I know of one particular instance which I want to quote. Recently in one of our districts we had a trader who carried on a postal agency. Owing to the war his assistants left him and he found it impossible to carry on the agency. He served about 10,000 natives there. He closed up the agency and the natives raised a protest. I have had a communication from the Civic Association representing traders there asking that the Government should take steps to appoint a postal agency. The native as a rule cannot be trusted with a large amount of money, but I do suggest that in cases of this nature the authority might co-operate with the trader there and appoint a native as postal agent placing him under the supervision of the trader, so that proper control may be exercised over the man and any money that is paid in. It is only along lines of that nature we can instil a sense of responsibility in the native. To go on as we are doing, simply saying we cannot trust a native with money will not carry us anywhere at all. The native is becoming more and more educated, 40 per cent. to 50 per cent. of the natives coming into the towns are able to read and write, and you only have to go to one of the post offices in the Transkei and see the tremendous number of letters that are being received to realise that. I think the time has arrived when the Minister and his department should realise the situation and face up to it.

Mr. Chairman, I am surprised to find the hon. member for Umbilo (Mr. Wanless) putting up a plea for the telegraph messengers being allowed to form their own union. The hon. member knows only too well that these employees are what one may call juveniles, and I do not think that throughout the Government services or in any trades union movement one would find individuals of under 21 years forming their own organisation. The right channel for these individuals to belong to is the postal association the Public Service Commission has now agreed that they should join, and I think, Sir, it is only right to clear up any misunderstanding when a member of this House makes a statement giving the impression that the responsible Minister or the Public Service Commission is trying to prevent individuals from belonging to any particular organisation. I would like to appeal to the hon. Minister to reconsider the case of the 1933 men. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Public Service Commission cannot make such an adjustment. If one examines the grading for these individuals prior to 1923 and again in 1933, it seems to have been a question of juggling with the minima and maxima. It was first £96 to £240, then £120 to £240; again in 1933 back to £96 with a maximum of £240, and then in 1936 £120 to £240. I quite understand the reason for it, Sir, because during the depression the minima of grades was reduced. It would not be creating a precedent if the desired adjustment were made for the simple reason that something similar took place in the railway service, where there was also a reduction in grades; and in the case of men with the longer service the original grade was restored. New staff were taken on in the interim but there was such a thing as a relief grade making up the difference in favour of the longer service man compared with the scale for the individual taken on just prior to the introduction of the higher scale. I would appeal to the Minister to seriously consider this matter. He personally, according to his statement this morning, is very sympathetic, and if that is so it would not be breaking any regulation in the public service to grant this additional increment. It can be done in my humble opinion. I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to what is regarded as a grievance on the part of the public. As we all know, urgent telegrams may be sent away by paying double the ordinary rate. It has been brought to my notice that there is considerable delay in delivering the ordinary telegrams. Indeed I have been a victim in that I received a telegram sent on a Monday advising that certain people were coming down from Pretoria to Cape Town, and they arrived here before the telegram was actually delivered. Also, telegrams handed in at post offices at ordinary rates have never been received by the individuals to whom they were addressed. I have had personal experience of that since I came here to Cape Town. I sent a couple of telegrams to Pretoria, but they did not reach their destination. I am not casting any reflection on the courtesy and civility of the staff as a whole, but there are individuals who treat the public with indifference. A reminder to such staff that the public are entitled to courteous treatment is necessary. A lot has been said about the broadcast programmes. I appreciate what the Minister has said to the effect that what is meat to one man is poison to another. I myself, Sir, cannot say that I enjoy the Sunday music. In view of the war and the various difficulties encountered, may I suggest to the Minister that he might meet the criticism from certain members of this House and enliven the programmes by making use of parliamentarians who have criticised the programmes. I suggest, Sir, that with the co-operation of parliamentarians we might be able to introduce sketches entitled—

1. (1) The Hobenstein and Guttersnipe Press Menace, by The Low Yankee Failure or Snow White.
2. (2) Commissions and Omissions by “Derby” the Butch.
3. (3) Politician’s Murky Past by Oom Arthur the Thrasher.
4. (4) The Indian Squeal by A. Neat Cutt at Dominion Smashing.
5. (5) Bla-Bla—Oom Snoek—by Sauerkraut.

Under what item is the hon. member raising that?

Broadcasting.

Give him a break, Sir.

I only want to touch on a question of local importance. The staff of the Worcester Post Office is doing its best but it is housed under very bad conditions. It tries to serve the public to the best of its ability but the accommodation is hopelessly inadequate. The Minister and his department perhaps know it better than I do, and it is impossible under present conditions to attend properly to the public. The trouble is not that no material can be obtained because the position can be remedied by hiring a building until accommodation is available. The Minister would do a great service to the people of Worcester if he made arrangements for a little more accommodation to be provided for the place where the people have to be served.

I know that the small and insignificant amounts which are paid to postal agents have been raised, and I appreciate the difficulty, but I want to suggest to the Minister that he should differentiate between cases. Where a man conducts a business and gets a telephone largely in the interests of his business, that is one case and he need not be paid very much. But one finds so often in the outside areas that they have to engage a person, very often a girl, just for that specific purpose. She has to walk miles to get to the postal agency and has to sit there for the whole day, and she gets about £3 to £4. Surely it is in the public interest that a person like that should be paid a reasonable wage. There is another small matter, and that is in regard to telegrams. In rural areas it is necessary in order that a telegram may be delivered to the right address to use a number of words in the address. Now those words are really for the information of the post office, so as to make sure that the telegram will be properly delivered, and I suggest that as far as the address is concerned it should be counted as one word. Very often in the country districts a telegram has to be sent to a small farm and you have to give a lengthy address.

You want to have it all in one word?

Yes. Now I want to deal with a local postal question. Application has been made for a telephone line to a place called Dendron. I am appealing especially for this telephone line because it is not an ordinary little place. It has been a township for some considerable time, they have a central school there, and all the other conveniences. The place serves quite a number of people, and the telephone line is urgently needed.

I think that is one of the places they are surveying.

I am very pleased to hear that and I shall therefore not pursue the matter further at this juncture. I want to say a word about the parliamentary post office, in regard to which we have very few grievances. I want to take this opportunity, as Whip and on behalf of our Party, of paying a special tribute to the parliamentary staff we have had here, the staff that we have had in the past as well as the present postmaster, and especially to the lady assistant there. We have always been met with the best courtesy and attention, and we appreciate immensely the way we are treated by the local staff.

I have not got up to criticise the Minister, I have only got up to tell the truth. People talk about farm telephone extensions but it seems to me it is no use asking for the system to be extended at the moment. I ask the Minister not to forget Pretoria District. Let me mention a few facts in that connection and I hope the Minister will listen. I don’t think he knows the difficulties which we have to contend with in regard to telephones and post offices. It is surprising that so many people are charged with cruelty to animals but that nobody is charged with cruelty to people, because when I think of the post office at Bronkhostspruit I must say that the position there is scandalous. There is a man there who is being transferred on the advice of his doctor. He can no longer carry on in the building there. There is a building there but in winter conditions are so bad that the staff might just as well be outside, and if I or other members of the public send a telegram the contents are not private because the telegram is read out aloud in the very place where the public are attended. That is a sort of thing which is an injustice to the public; if I send a telegram it is not right that everyone should know the contents. The staff are not to blame, it is the conditions in which they find themselves that are responsible for it. The Minister said earlier on that we should come and discuss these matters with him. I have done so. I called on the Postmaster at Pretoria and asked for certain benefits or privileges for Rust-ter-Winter. I pointed out that the public there were isolated, they could not get tyres or petrol and there was no night telephone service. I personally enquired whether it would not be possible to establish a night service. It is possible. It is not a question of a shortage of material. There is a small building there and the necessary instruments are available. The place is used in the day time but at night the service is cut off. Why cannot the telephone be made available to the public after hours? I placed the matter before the Postmaster-General and his reply was that there was a war on. I know there is a war on, but surely in spite of the war we can make use of the materials which we have. It will perhaps also help to see the war through. I ask the Minister, on behalf of my constituency, to assist us so far as telephone facilities are concerned. One hon. member stated today that we should borrow £2,000,000 for telephone extensions. I don’t think we need borrow any money for that purpose. We only ask that the machinery which is available should be used. A telephone line has been constructed along the main road from Pretoria to Premier Mine. On behalf of my constituency I want to thank the Department, but it does not get us any further. We thought that the delays in the telephone calls would now have been cut out, but where in the past we only had to wait a quarter of an hour we now have to wait three hours. Instead of an improvement the position has become worse. We should like the Minister to go into the whole question. In the event of serious illness, where urgent calls have to be put through, private individuals have had to be called in to help and to take these unfortunate people to hospital, and by the time they got to hospital the telephone calls had not come through yet. I therefore want to ask the Minister to see what is wrong with the internal organisation. There must be something radically wrong.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote No. 28. — “Public Works,” £1,695,000,

Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to one section of this vote dealing with research work in building construction. We are all agreed that the problem of building on a large scale after the war is one of great national urgency, particularly as we must make up for the lack of domestic building which has fallen into arrears during the war. Then there is a pressing necessity to provide for 1,000,000 families who are not decently housed and for our demobilised men.

I suggest that the hon. member should discuss this matter under Public Health.

I was going on, Mr. Chairman, to discuss the vote in connection with research into building and building material; and I am giving a brief preliminary outline to show that the need is pressing. It is essential that we should know what is really being done in connection with research; and I hope I am in order in proceeding.

The hon. member may proceed.

The Minister has a research section in order to rationalise the colossal national building programme of housing and make it possible, in the interests of the country, without delay. The whole country is intensely interested in the Government’s post-war housing plan, and will welcome from the Minister a statement as to the progress that is being made with technical work and research in connection with building construction. In many parts of the world research into the best type of building for rapid construction has been going on, and there is a concensus of opinion that prefabrication is the most economical and efficient method. For example, in one case in California 1,000 houses were built in two months by 600 men. In Virginia a whole township of over 5,000 houses sprang up in the short period of three months. What I want to ask the Minister is this: has progress been made in connection with research, particularly that carried on by the with watersrand University, and specially in connection with pre-fabrication? Its advantages are obvious. We would be able to use South African material, and work to a large extent could be done by unskilled native labour or semi-skilled labour. In the face of the great national emergency in connection with this housing shortage, pre-fabrication does appear to offer an answer to the problem. No doubt the architects and engineers coming under the Minister’s jurisdiction have made definite progress in this matter, and in the interests of the country the Minister should let us know what is being done in regard to the pre-fabrication of houses. Again, can he give us any indication as to how far we propose to use our vast deposits of vermiculite? This substance can be used for general building, flooring, roofing and also in plastic form. Has the department considered the use of spongecrete now being used in Durban, I believe, under the control of the Durban Municipality for native houses? Then there was the experiment in Pietermaritzburg with asbestos cement buildings; and a further experiment conducted in many parts of Natal with steel framework on which was put a coating of cement plaster. I would again emphasise the need for a definite declaration from the Minister in regard to this research work in connection with building material. The time has come, indeed it has reached the danger point, when we should have a clear understanding as to how far the Government has gone in formulating a building plan, and in regard to the materials that are to be used. It is a matter of great national interest and the Minister must make it clear to the House how we stand today in regard to this research. The carrying through of a vast housing programme involving, as estimated by the Planning Council, some £15,000,000 a year for some years, would be a workcreating factor of enormous significance; and would, as Dr. Van der Bijl reminds us, lead to such an industrial programme in furnishing and equipping the houses as would be the most effective measure to bridge the transition from war to peace. The Minister’s declaration will be received with great interest.

There is one small point I want to raise on this vote. It concerns the night watchmen of the Department of Public Works. These people get a very small wage. I notice that it is stated here that they get 12s. 6d. per day, but I am told that they get 10s. for a shift of 8 hours. They get a uniform, but I have been asked to put a request to the Minister to arrange that in addition to the uniforms they may also be supplied with overcoats and boots. These people are doing difficult work, and in these cold nights in winter they have to stand about and look after the property of the Public Works, and these people naturally should be warmly clad. I want to appeal to the Minister to see to it, particularly in view of the approaching winter, that these people are supplied with good overcoats and good thick boots so that they can do their work properly on these cold nights.

The hon. member for Berea (Mr. Sullivan) would like to know what progress has been made in experiments with pre-fabrication of houses. I do not propose to trespass on the department of my colleague, the Minister of Demobilisation and Welfare in talking about the provision of housing, but in my capacity as Building Controller I want to give the hon. member such information as I possess. When the building control came into existence we formed an experimental section working through the Witwatersrand University, and they have done an excellent job of work. We erected outside Johannesburg what is known as an experimental house. In that building there are many types of substitutes for short supplies in South Africa. Our experience has been that so far as private building is concerned the experiments have not been a success. Poeple on their own will not avail themselves of substitute material. Unless they can build in the old stereotyped way they will not build at all. It is possible to go in for a national housing scheme with substitutes, and to a certain extent with pre-fabrication. I am not going into details. There need be no difficulty in providing material that we require for what were formerly known as sub-economic houses, which will now be known under the term of national housing. For the information of hon. members I want to say that we have been granting permits at the rate of about 900 per month for private dwellings, and we have been restricting the size of these dwellings to 2,000 square feet, and I have had many complaints, both from the Masterbuilders and others that we should increase the area. But if we did we should lose control completely. The whole idea of control has been to make provision for as great a number of buildings as we could possibly go in for. Then we also had to take careful note of the labour position in South Africa. By controlling the issue of permits in various centres we were watching the labour position and except in Cape Town where unfortunately a number of bricklayers are unemployed—and that is due to the fact that carpenters are engaged on war work, at the docks and so on—there is no unemployment in skilled labour. The demand for building permits is double the quantity we are issuing —almost treble, but we are watching the labour market. What we are also providing for is that if difficulty is experienced in connection with materials for national houses under the old stereotyped method of construction, substitutes can be made available just as cheaply, and the work can go ahead. But I want to ask the hon. member, now that he has raised that question, so far as the question of national housing is concerned, to raise that on the vote of the Minister of Demobilisation. I shall be pleased if the hon. member would see me or the Secretary for Public Works on these points he has raised, and I shall be able to give him much more information than I am able to do across the floor of this House. I shall be perfectly willing to give him all the information he wants. Then there is a point raised by the hon. member over there; they get a uniform. We have already asked for a coat and boots as well for these people.

What do you mean by that?

The Public Service Commission has to authorise it, but I am informed by the Secretary for Public Works that that application is already in.

There is an amount on the estimates for the labourers at Westbrooke who have to keep the gardens in order. As everybody knows, Westbrooke is the place where the highest authority in the country resides, viz: the Governor-General — the Representative of the King. We now have an acting Governor-General there, and those people who work to keep the gardens in order up to the 1st October last were getting 5s. and 5s. 6d. per day. Since October they are getting 6s. per day. Since we have come to Parliament we have heard incessant talk of social security. I want to know what the Minister of Public Works and what the Minister of Labour think of this matter. The Minister of Labour is a man who is supposed to stand up for the underdog. He sits there, and he knows that these people at West brooke have to work for 6s. per day.

You can criticise me when you come to my vote.

I am going to criticise the Minister on every vote. Apparently the Minister’s conscience is already worrying him, that is why he is getting irritable. I want to ask both Ministers if they can imagine what must go on in the minds of these people when they see all the ostentation and all the display of the Governor-General while they have to work for 6s. per day. Do the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Public Works know what those people have to pay for house rent? If they know, let them reckon out what it means to these people if they have to deduct £4 or £5 for house rent per month, and how much they have left to keep a family of five or six. They can reckon out how much there is available for the keep of every member of that household. These people are here in Cape Town and if the Minister has reckoned out how much they have left over for food and clothes he will realise that they do not even have enough left to buy meat once a week. It is a tragedy to find that in South Africa, at the place where the highest authority resides, these people have to see all the ostentation and display while they are called upon to work at these starvation wages, and realise that their children are hungry and have to go to bed in these cold winter nights without sufficient covering. We have no right to talk about social security when things of this kind are going on in South Africa. Now let me ask the Minister this: Whether now that he has increased these people’s wages slightly, since the beginning of October, he proposes going further and raising them a little higher still? That is all I want to say. If there are any members left in this House who still want to talk about social security—if they are in earnest in their pleadings—there is only one thing which they and the Minister can do and that is before this Session finishes to see to it that the wages of these people are increased so that they can live like white men. I know of one instance where one of these people is living among the coloured community. Today he is working at Fernwood where we indulge in sport and where he has to watch scenes of extravagance and ostentation. There is no need to ask the Minister of Labour to do anything; he is only a rubber stamp. He has no heart for the poor man, and I therefore make my request to the Minister for Public Works and ask him to take steps to put an end to this tragic condition in our national life.

I want to draw the Minister’s attention to the fact that great difficulties are experienced on the farms in regard to building work and I want to ask him whether it is not possible to make more material available for the building of sheds for animals. We experienced a lot of trouble last winter and suffered a lot of damage owing to lack of sheds. Wood is available to a larger extent today than corrugated iron, and I want to ask the Minister if he cannot give us the opportunity, when the farmers want to buy, to obtain corrugated iron. Then there are also a few cases where families have increased and where it has been necessary for the farmer to enlarge his house. Certain material has been allowed but the controller eventually refused to allow the building to go on, with the result that the buildings could not be completed. I propose raising this matter personally with the Minister outside the House because I don’t want to mention individual cases. There is an instance of a man who is able to get his own material by demolishing an old shed but he was refused permission to do so. I want to ask the Minister to give his attention to this aspect.

In reply to the last speaker it is true that we exercise control in regard to the repair of houses but if the hon. member says that he has all the material for increasing the size of his house through breaking down some other place, that will be viewed sympathetically. We must, of course, restrict the size of houses to get as many houses built as possible, and that applies right through.

What about the sheds you built for animals?

Unfortunately the buildings the hon. member refers to should never have had a permit. That is perfectly correct. I don’t want to say any more about that. With regard to the hon. member for Colesberg (Mr. Boltman) the position of these people at Groote Schuur is that they start at 6s. and they go to 7s. 6d. per day and in addition they get £48 per annum local allowance, but I quite agree with the sentiments expressed by him. I want these fellows to have decent pay for the work they are doing and I shall go into this matter.

Last year I drew the Minister’s attention to the fact that labourers in the Department of Public Works got a holiday at the end of every year. Now-a-days their holiday is arranged in such a way that it includes public holidays. The Minister promised me he would go into the matter. It is most unfair that people who only get a few days’ holiday every year should get their holidays in such a way that they include public holidays. I hope the Minister will consider the question of giving these people a little longer holiday. If a man has worked right throughout the year and he has done his work well he should get his holiday, because the rest he gets during his holiday will give him courage to tackle his work again when he returns;

The report of the Social and Economic Planning Council deals with that question.

I have not seen that, and I hope that they suggest longer holidays for these people.

Yes.

Well, I hope the Minister will accept that recommendation.

I should like to make an appeal to the Minister for a little more sympathy than has been shown so far in respect of an application on behalf of Messrs. Johnson and Johnson for a factory plus housing to be erected on the boundaries of East London. I know that the Minister will say that they have been replied to, to the effect that they are prepared to permit them to commence with a certain number of houses, subject to the condition that they should be let as soon as they are completed. Considering that this is a complete model factory providing for the erection of houses for all employees, one can visualise the possibility of a conflict arising with the existing Rents Act. Assuming a house were let to anyone and the house or houses were afterwards required for the employees of the concern, it would be difficult to eject such occupants. So the offer made is of no valuable assistance at all. The only material, I am given to understand, which is actually under control at present is timber. All the other materials being readily available for both the factory and the houses. The timber is considered to be in short supply but I am given to understand from no less a person than the owner of a large timber yard in East London that he could supply ten times the amount of timber required for this factory and he would not even notice that it had been removed from his stocks. So the timber is readily available. Timber is also lying in the yard at Stutterheim− there is a large quantity of timber at the Government mills suitable for the erection of these houses and this factory. Now, I appeal to the Minister for this particular reason, that this is a factory which combines with the Government’s post-war development scheme. It is an ideal factory, ideal in every respect—conditions of labour, housing and so on. We considered in East London that it was a fair and reasonable contribution on the part of East London to have this factory established in time to fit in with the post-war reconstruction. East London has already spent £30,000 to supply the necessary water and power, to be available as soon as it is necessary. I know the Minister has a lot on his hands, being responsible for so many Departments. But I am sure he does not know exactly what goes on in respect of his controllers, and I want to make this statement, that it will take a lot to prove that a good many more permits have not been issued on the Reef in comparison with other parts of the country.

Yes, more than half the permits are on the Reef.

Yes, that is what I thought, and the others were not given any consideration.

None of these applications on the Reef were for Johnson’s factory, or for a similar factory.

No, they don’t build in two places at once. In regard to controllers, it is not a pleasure to have to interview them. If you have to go to see them you are made to feel just as welcome as the polecat at a cocktail party.

Surely that is not your experience with me?

No, the hon. the Minister is always very courteous, although he does not do what we want. I hope he will give consideration to what I have asked, otherwise there may be a lot of unemployment in days to come.

I want to draw the Minister’s attention to the delay which is caused by the Controller of Building Material, especially so far as the rural districts are concerned. We notice in towns and places like Pinelands that building is allowed to go on but on the platteland there is a tremendous amount of delay, and the people can either not get permits at all or they have to struggle for a long time to get permits. I have already brought one instance to the Minister’s notice. After I had discussed the matter with him he gave instructions that the permit was to be granted. I have now been informed that the permit has been granted, but it has been granted in such a way that the house will have to be much smaller than the application was for with the result that the place will not be big enough. The people will be cramped. Originally application was made for a house to the value of £2,994 and that was reduced to £2,000.

What is the size of the house?

I shall give the Minister the details. I just want to tell the Minister this: The man writes to say that the reduction in the quantities has been made in such a way that he has been forced to go to the black market. The department for instance reduced the quantity of glass but not the number of windows. Does that mean that the windows have to be without glass? They allow fifteen doors, but only six locks. It seems to me that there is no cco-ordination and I shall be very glad if the Minister will give his attention to cases of this kind. The people on the platteland are also very anxious to build better houses, and in a case like this the house is very badly needed. The man has inherited part of his father’s farm but not that part where the homestead is. Now for the second winter he has to go and live in an outbuilding which has no foundation, which used to have an ordinary earth floor which he has now covered with planks. This is in a wet part of the country, viz.: Rawsonville. Last year, as a result of the damp, he had a lot of illness in his house. He applied for a permit but there was a lot of delay in granting the permit, and now that it has been granted it has been granted in the way I have explained. This man must have a house; he is doing important farm work and he has to live in an outbuilding.

He is anxious to have a house and is prepared to pay for it. If we go to Hermanus we see magnificent palaces being erected there. If we go to Pinelands we see magnificent palaces going up there, so why cannot the people on the platteland also get decent houses, especially in deserving cases such as this? This man at the beginning of the war was not living in his own house but in part of his father’s house. His father died, however, and now he has to go and live on his own part of the farm where there is no house. He approached the department and the department has been holding him up for the last fifteen months. He could not get a permit, and now that they have eventually given him a permit they have given him such a ridiculous form that he is allowed windows but no glass and no locks for his doors. I hope the Minister will discuss the matter with his department. There is a feeling that it is a question of gifts and favours. We are told that people with capital are building in the towns and in the dorps with the object of letting their houses, but where a man wants to build a house for himself to live in he cannot get a permit. I have had evidence that people at Worcester get permits to build big houses, but the people in the districts cannot get permits to build decent dwellings.

I also want to make a request to the Minister; my request is for a police station at Villiers. This place is on the Vaal River and is a particularly cold place in winter. The police station is of corrugated iron and we know that the police there have to work under very difficult conditions. The railway passes the place and crime is on the increase. At lot of things are stolen on the trains and even on the farms, and the police have to do a lot of work. They are therefore entitled to have a decent office where they can go when they return from their work. I have been there in winter, and at 10 o’clock in the morning if one walks into the police station it feels like an ice chest. I want to ask the Minister to build a decent police station there for these men. They deserve a decent station. The farmers are grateful for˙ the services they give, and want to urge the Minister to do something for their comfort.

I think the Minister knows what I am going to say now.

Then why say it?

Well, if he will say that he will grant my request I shall sit down at once. I want to refer to the correspondence I have had with the Minister since he let his Government down when he gave his blessing to what he called “posterity house.” Does he think anyone was so foolish as to say that he could build that house for £1,500?

If you had been in this House you would have known what I said.

I hope he agrees with me that he let his Government down that day. I think he agrees with me that his controllers and their men who gave him the advice to do such a foolish thing let the Government down. On the advice, I suppose, of his controllers, the Minister told the public that this was a house which could be built under present circumstances, making the public believe that he recommended it because it was impossible to get the necessary timber to build private houses. The Minister knows that that is not correct. If he would only enquire and go into the correspondence which his office had with the timber growers of South Africa he would know at once that there is more timber today waiting to be sold than we have ever had in the history of South Africa. I admit that a few years ago that was not the case. Because a couple of years ago when the Government was building fortifications and such things, timber was short. But the timber growers today tell you that they have hundreds of tons of timber lying there ready to be sold. But it cannot be sold because they cannot get permits to sell it. But they tell you they are prepared to sell it to you cheaper than the importers of timber are prepared to put it on the market, and if that is so then it is high time the Minister reconsidered his control policy and the personnel of his controllers. That policy, of course, suits the importers of timber very well. Because if the war stops tomorrow there will be ample shipping space to import timber from all parts of the world. But it is not a policy which will suit the requirements of the public. Nor will it suit the requirements of the timber industry which is a young industry. I don’t know whether the Minister has made a statement on that yet.

No, I have not dealt with that.

I want the Minister to be good enough to inform this Committee whether it has been brought to his notice that there is a very large quantity of timber that is available for sale today. All that the timber merchants require is a permit. The building contractors who want to build say that they are perfectly prepared to buy the timber at the prices asked for, but again it is a question of permits. On the one hand we tell the timber growers that we love them so much and on the other hand we refuse to issue permits for the sale of their timber. I cannot understand that policy. That is the policy that has been carried out.

No; I will deal with this question if you will give me a chance.

I would like the Minister also when he deals with this point to deal with the letter which is in the possession of his Department from the master builders of South Africa. They say that they are ready to build, that the demand is there, that the material is there but they cannot get the permits. I do not want to discuss the merits of the action of the controllers; I do not think they are worth discussing in this House. I agree with my hon. friend that the first thing these controllers should learn is how to practise courtesy. It was the first time in all my dealings with Government Departments that I was treated in the discourteous way in which I was treated in the office of the building controller. I would like the hon. Minister to allow private builders where material is available to proceed with building. I have several letters from people in this country asking me whether the Government will allow them to build houses. It is the Government policy not to give a permit for the building of big buildings. One can still understand that, but I believe I am fully justified in saying that in spite of that policy a number of flats and hotels are going up.

No.

It is no good the Minister saying “no”, I have seen it myself. If the Minister has the time to go to the Witwatersrand I will show him hotels that are being built today. That surely justifies me in asking these questions to the Minister. I was told that no hotels or flats will be allowed until the position improved, but that only buildings of a smaller type will be allowed. The Controller tells you that he cannot grant a permit for the building of hotels or flats, yet in Johannesburg one sees huge buildings going up when one drives through the streets. Am I not justified then in asking the Minister why this is happening? These buildings are going up today.

They are for the rich people.

Not only for the rich people but for privileged people. I hope I am wrong, but it appears to me that certain privileged people are allowed to build while other people who are not as privileged are not allowed to build. These people can do what they like but they cannot get a permit to build. If it is laid down by law or by regulation that the controller must be strict and he is absolutely strict, in all cases, then one would admire his action, but if one is told that one cannot get a permit and one then sees someone else putting up these buildings, one is justified in asking why there is this discrimination. I repeat that if those buildings have not yet been completed. I will show the Minister that these buildings are going up. I do not care what the controllers tell him. I am telling him something that I saw with my own eyes.

Take him out to Green Point. There is an hotel going up there.

I am only talking about things that I have seen and I want to confine myself to buildings that I personally saw. When other people came to me and told me that this was going on, I could not believe it. I told them that I could not believe it because I was told that no hotels or blocks of flats were being allowed. I was then taken through the suburbs of Johannesburg and to my astonishment I found that it was absolutely correct. I believe the Minister is in a difficult position. He is in a difficult position because he is under the fire of criticism and he will have to explain these things. In the same way as the country was let down with austerity building, so I fear the Minister has been let down badly in this case.

I cannot allow the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. Van den Berg) to make wild statements in the manner in which he has done without attacking him. I say here and now, since my control started, no permits for an hotel have been granted; that is nearly 18 months ago.

On a point of order, I said that buildings are in the process of going up today ….

Order, order! That is not a point of order.

I do not want to misrepresent what the hon. member said. I said that I make the definite statement that no permit has been granted since my control started for an hotel, licensed or otherwise. I say that definitely. If anything like that has taken place, it is contrary to my knowledge and contrary to the knowledge of my deputy I have had more than a dozen people to see me in connection with hotels and other projects, including the hon. member for Krugersdorp I do not say that sarcastically, but the hon. member is one of many who have approached me personally in connection with hotels, and they have all had the same answer. As far as flats are concerned, they were taboo until about 12 months ago. We decided to allow the building of austerity flats. The builders in Johannesburg laughed at me. They said no one would go in for these flats. We allowed austerity flats and more than a hundred of them have been built. We allowed this to ease the position. The demand then came for six-storey flats. A certain proportion could be built and we asked people to send in their applications for six-storey flats, and we promised that we would see that a permit was given for a lift. To my surprise applications to the value of over £1,500,000 came from Johannesburg. The rest came from Durban and Pretoria, but nothing came from Cape Town. The Control Department is going into these applications for the purpose of allowing flats to go up in places where they will ease and relieve the housing position. The hon. member talks about the poor old timber merchant. Today he is quite correct. There is a good quantity of timber. I am not stopping the timber merchants from selling their timber. It is quite true that under austerity conditions eight or nine months ago we did restrict the quantity of timber that could be put into a house. Today there is no such restriction. The Controller saw me and pointed out that there was a huge black market boom, and that the real genuine timber merchants who were observing the law were being badly hit. That was all withdrawn. All we are dealing with today is the size of the house and the question of materials and the question of windows. The hon. member for Gordonia (Mr. J. H. Conradie) complained about giving six locks in a house that has 15 doors. There is a short supply of locks, sinks, etc. It was only last week that I had a long conversation with my colleagues and Dr. Van der Bijl on this question. The difficulty today is not the question of timber. It was in the days when this control started. In fact the position was so serious 18 months ago that the Quartermaster-General did not want us to give permits for any buildings of any description. But that was too drastic. We cannot give more permits for building than we are giving because there are not the artisans to do the work. In Johannesburg and Pretoria too many permits are already being granted. They have not got the skilled labour to carry it out.

Oh yes, they have.

Cape Town is the only place in the Union and to a certain extent Port Elizabeth where skilled labourers are out of employment.

They have got it in Port Elizabeth.

In Port Elizabeth, there are about 70 carpenters and 80 bricklayers out of work, and in Cape Town there are 300 bricklayers and 200 plasterers out of work but no carpenters. That is what this control is doing. The first and primary object is to see that our labour is properly employed. The bulk of it is in Johannesburg. More than half of the permits issued have been issued in Johannesburg. Now let me come to the point that was raised by the hon. member for East London (City) (Mr. Latimer).

May I rise on a point of order. Did I understand the Minister to say that there are no carpenters unemployed in Port Elizabeth?

Order order. That is not a point of order.

I said that there were 70 carpenters unemployed in Port Elizabeth. I have gone out of my way as building controller to see if we could not help East London to get this wonderful factory. But the circumstances were against it. We got dozens and dozens of similar applications from other parts of the country. What the controllers agreed to in connection with factories and things of that description was this; from the austerity point of view, they had to get a certificate from Dr. Van der Bijl as Director of War Supplies that that factory was necessary and essential in the interests of the war effort. If Johnsons can get that certificate, that factory can be built.

What about the South African babies?

Johnsons have factories in Durban and Cape Town but they wanted to concentrate. I assure the hon. member that all my sympathies are with Johnsons. When it was suggested that permits should be granted for the building of houses, I went out of my way. I said that permits would be granted if we could be satisfied that those houses would be occupied, but the request was hedged round in such a way by the department concerned that they were afraid to proceed. But please accept my assurance that as soon as it is possible to grant permission for factories like Johnsons, you will get it. It is a justifiable request. I am very sorry indeed that you did not get the applications. The hon. member for Frankfort (Col. Döhne) raised the question of the police station at Villiers; I have taken a note of it.

What about granting doors without locks?

What I said was this. It is impossible to give an applicant 15 locks when he has 15 doors. Locks are in very short supply. We are trying to augment the supply and I hope we shall be successful. We are watching this position.

What about windows without glass?

I do not understand that. There should be no difficulty about glass. It seems to me there is something wrong there, and I will have that investigated. In regard to the question of delays, I am sorry if there are delays in connection with this matter. I have had complaints and I have investigated them; I have had members of Parliament bringing people along. When I asked them whether they had applied for permits, it appeared that they had not even made application. Well, there are certain forms to be filled in and they have to go before the local people.

Why do you have a local board in Cape Town?

We are trying to decentralise and expedite matters as much as possible. But the hon. member is perfectly justified in saying that it delays things, and I have had to intervene and cut out the local board in some instances, and I want to assure hon. members that everything that can be done is being done. It is not a sinecure to be building controller in South Africa, with all its ramifications, and I say without hesitation that I have kept the country informed from time to time by statements in the press as to the position.

You were misled by your controllers, so we forgive you.

I do not think I was misled. I am not as closely in touch with my controllers at the moment as I am when I am in Pretoria. I hope this session will not last very much longer so that I can get back to Pretoria and check up, but I say without hestitation that the permits are being controlled to the best of our ability.

Do you give preference to the urban areas?

Cape Town, Johannesburg, Pretoria and Durban almost get what they want provided the labour supply is available. Permits are available, but it is no good granting a permit if the labour is not available. Every fortnight I get the statistics from the Labour Department showing what the position is. The statistics I got on Monday showed that there were 300 odd bricklayers and painters out of work in Cape Town and 200 plasterers. Three months ago there were a thousand unemployed, but the position has improved to that extent.

Have they died off?

No, they have not died. But the people have got employment. I am committed to the Broadcasting Corporation to put up their big building which they cannot get a permit for in Durban, and that was agreed to in con sultation with the Minister of Labour and the department, in order to find work here for the unemployed people. About 6 or 7 months ago there were 1,400 people out of employment in Cape Town.

Will you see that they expedite the country permits?

I agree with that. I am not finding fault with the criticisms of the hon. member when he says that there are delays. I will do what I possibly can to expedite this matter.

I hope the hon. Minister will admit that the house that was built at Cottesloe was not a success from an economic point of view. I would like to ask the Minister whether he had thought of trying to build concerte houses. That type of house can be built today in three or four days. In view of the large number of houses that are required and will be required for those who can afford to pay very little, this is a matter which should receive the Minister’s serious consideration.

No houses that you are talking of will be built by an individual, but the municipalities and the Government will build that type of house.

I thought the Minister’s Department might have built one as an example. I do a bit of building myself, and in my opinion the sample house which was built at Cottesloe recently was very dear. The Minister spoke of the scarcity of baths and taps and accessories. I would like to ask the Minister to help us in connection with the importation of accessories and to assist us to import these things direct. The great cry today is to do away with the middleman. There is a chance for the Government to show what can be done.

They are building houses of cement at Paarl at the present time.

I have built cement baths in the past and I can do it for you now, but you cannot make a cement tap. We have not got to that length yet, but we can make cement baths.

I am watching that position.

Then there is another thing I would like to say to the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. Van den Berg). I am quite sure that the Minister was correct in saying that no permits have been issued for the building of hotels. To substantiate that, I want to say that an application was made in Nigel for the building of five flats, but it was necessary to turn a garage into a club at a cost of £150 as part of the scheme, but the whole scheme would have cost £3,000. If that permit had been granted, we could have had five flats and the house where the club is housed today would have housed another five families, but the whole thing was turned down owing to a permit not being allowed for a club. I think a case like that should be judged on its merits. Then there is another thing to which I want to draw the Minister’s attention. I have had a letter sent down from Johannesburg with a statement that permits have been applied for to build houses but that those houses were not actually built and the stuff is sold on the black market. After a permit has been obtained, no steps are being taken by the controller to see that the houses are actually built. On obtaining a permit, the man can buy the stuff and sell it on the black market. There is no control. It would be easy to prevent that by having a man going round to see that the houses are actually put up. Then I heard the hon. Minister say that no flats have been built recently. I want to tell the Minister that luxury flats have been built.

When were they started?

I do know that these flats were in the course of construction when I left Johannesburg. A luxury block of flats was going up when I felt Johannesburg. I appreciate the Minister’s difficulty, but I do want to advocate that where a permit has been issued that permit should be followed up to see that the house is actually built. It is wrong that these men should be allowed to use this subterfuge. Then I want to repeat that if by bringing about a slight alteration a garage can be converted into a club and five flats can be put up in the same block, the permit should not be withheld. In this case it was part of the scheme to convert the garage into a club; if that permit had been granted, it would have been possible to put up five flats in the same block, and it would have provided accommodation for five families. That club is very necessary because there is very little accommodation in Nigel where a man can go and have a quiet one before he goes home. I do urge the Minister to give his attention to cases of this kind and to consider each case on its merits.

The trouble with the government is that everything is built according to fixed standards. When they build magistrate’s dwellings in Pretoria, Johannesburg, Muizenburg or Robertson, they are all the same. The type of dwelling which is built at Muizenburg may be quite suitable for Muizenburg but it is not suitable for Pretoria. Now the department lays down that only houses of a certain maximum size may be built. Has the Minister ever thought that the standard type of House may be suitable for a man with one or two children but it is unsuitable for a man with a family of ten? If the man has ten children, he will be run in by the magistrate for overcrowding. The municipality does not allow you to have more than a certain number of people to so many rooms.

We do make exceptions in the case of a man with ten children. I explained that.

I think the Minister is mistaken; I do not think you said so; you may have thought so, but you did not say it.

Order, order! The hon. member must address the Chair.

I have been in the House the whole afternoon and I do not think the hon. Minister said that. He said that the controller allowed the building of houses provided they were no larger than a certain size. My argument is that it is no good fixing that space and adhering to it strictly, because there is no provision for a man who has ten children. On the application form one has to state whether one is married, but they do not ask how many children one has. You cannot fix a maximum size and limit every man to that maximum size, because the building may be hopelessly too small for a man with a large family. Then I think that if the hon. Minister were to allow more buildings in the country instead of these six-storey and twelve-storey flats in the city, he would be doing the country a great service. To begin with, the government should not encourage the building of flats because flat life does not promote family life. The people in the country require the same accommodation as the people in the towns, and for heaven’s sake do not lay down fixed patterns on which these people must build. Find out what the man’s family is and relax the regulation where a man has a large family. I also want to endorse the remarks of the last speaker where he asked that each case should be considered on its merits. In regard to the case to which the hon. member referred, I would advise him to sell ginger beer on the premises, instead of asking for a club, and then he may get his permit.

You cannot even sell ginger beer.

In that case the hon. member should find out what the Minister’s favourite drink is and sell that there. I would like the Minister not to lay down hard and fast rules as to the size of the house. He must look at the requirements of the man for whom the house is built. I hope the Government will make some allowance for people in the country and premise us that building will take place in the country on the same scale as in the cities.

I want to support the hon. member for Swellendam (Mr. S. E, Warren) in what he said in connection with the building of flats. There was a time when I thought I was about the only person in the House who knew something about building, but now everybody seems to know all about it. I want to appeal to the Minister that he should instead of allowing so many permits for flats and buildings of that type, encourage the building of homes for the people. I know myself there are hundreds and thousands of people in Johannesburg who would have homes built for themselves if they could get not only a permit but building materials at more reasonable prices than they can get them at the present time. I refer to building material such as wood from Canada and even from South America, which is absolutely necessary to build a good, decent house. When Johannesburg was laid out first the timber used for housing was nearly all Oregon pine wood of that type. That is absolutely necessary to build a decently-finished house. But the price today has gone beyond all reason, and that is one of the things that is retarding building homes for the people. The ordinary householder wants electric fittings, baths and so on, which have been used in this country for many years. May I tell the Minister that I went into the price of these things and found that a very ordinary bath which could have been bought some years ago for £6 is now costing from £22 10s. to £25, and that for an article which will not last for about more than four of five years because the enamel will all be gone. These are the things that are retarding the building of houses for the ordinary family man. I will appeal to the Minister to see if he cannot allow the importation of these necessary things. There must be a certain amount of shipping available to import these building materials, and I hope the Minister will give these matters a little consideration and ease the position as far as possible. That will go a long way to help solve the building problem, and to provide the necessary homes for the thousands of people who need them.

I want to raise a small matter in connection with which I have received instructions from my constituency— it is in connection with the gaol. There is an urgent need for a gaol. The gaol which is there at the moment is very unhealthy and in a very rickety condition, and the people there have been trying for years to get it moved. It is in the middle of the town, right in front of the post office. Plans have actually been drawn up and the ground has been granted. So far as artisans are concerned, there are Italians twenty miles away at Andalusia. I don’t know whether we shall be allowed to use their services, but so far as material is concerned there is no difficulty in that regard either. Most of the materials of the old gaol can be used; everything is there.

Where is this?

At Christiana. That place takes the prisoners from four or five dorps and there is no proper accommodation. I want to ask the Minister to expedite the building of a new gaol.

Mr. Chairman, it was not my intention to take part in this debate because I have not got the papers with me this afternoon that will prove anything I have to say. But I must say I was surprised to hear the Minister speaking about unemployment in Port Elizabeth. One of the first jobs that came my way when I was elected to Parliament was to receive a deputation from the artisans of Port Elizabeth, who said that at that time there were 200 unemployed carpenters, painters, bricklayers and plasterers.

Perfectly correct.

I visited Pretoria and saw the Minister, who gave me certain assurances, and after seeing him I went to the controller in Johannesburg, where I got a different story. I was also told the figures I brought forward were not correct, and that instead of 200 unemployed there were only 147. When I went back to Port Elizabeth and asked the reason why the deputation had told me 200, I was told it was for political reasons, but that really 200 were registered in the city. I was told by the Minister that if we presented a list of buildings to be erected he more or less promised that those buildings would be allowed. I contacted immediately three of the principal architects, and each of them gave me a list of buildings required which I sent to the Minister; but that had little effect. Now this is the point I particularly want to make. I contend that there is a complex in South Africa; it is very evident in this House, and it was evident in the reply the Minister gave to the speaker on my right. The Minister said we will see what can be done in Durban, Cape Town and Johannesburg. That is a complex that used to exist in regard to sport and rugby test matches. At the time when I happened to be chairman of the Rugby Union I went into the figures of the population of Natal as compared with the Eastern Province, and I was surprised to find that the Eastern Province had double the population of the whole of Natal.

[Inaudible.]

If the Minister of Labour is chipping in I want to tell him that when he visited Port Elizabeth for the first time in ten years I went—he will remember it—I went down to his coach at the railway station with a deputation from the artisans, and he refused to see them. I challenge him to deny that.

What a Labour Minister !

I say definitely the Minister has still got the complex that the three big towns are everything, and other places do not matter. I hope the Minister, when he next speaks, will see that he gets a little further beyond Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg.

I want to bring the condition of the office of the Special Justice of the Police at Odendaalsrust to the Minister’s notice, because it is very bad. It is a wood and iron building which is at least thirty years old—in summer it is too hot and in winter it is too cold. We would like a permanent building put up because as it is today it is most unhealthy.

I shall enquire into the matter.

If a permanent buildings is put up we are anxious to have provision made for an extra room for the non-European interpreter who is there. Today we only have the magistrate’s office and two rooms, with the result that the nonEuropean interpreter has to join the office of the Justice of the Peace or the Clerk. Until recently we had a lady clerk there, and it is all wrong when the court is sitting to have this man working in the office of the Justice of the Peace or in the office with this lady clerk. I would appreciate it if the Minister would have a permanent building put up and if he would make provision for the nonEuropean interpreter.

I want to refer the Minister to what appeared in the “Star” on the 3rd February this year, and ask him to tell me what he is going to do about it. This paragraph appeared—

I will see what can be done about it. I will see the Justice Department about it.

Vote put and agreed to.

Vote No. 29.—“Social Welfare,” £1,858,000, put.

I move—

Agreed to.

HOUSE RESUMED:

The CHAIRMAN reported progress and asked leave to sit again; House to resume in Committee on 14th April.

I move—

Apprenticeship in this country is at present regulated by the Apprenticeship Act (1922). Minor amendments to this Act were effected in 1924 and 1930, but the Act has remained substantially the same for over 20 years. In 1922, when the Act was passed, the existing code of industrial legislation, with the exception of the Factories Act (1918) was unknown. Since then, we have developed and modernised our industrial laws and today the Apprenticeship Act is the only major piece of legislation which has not been brought into line with modern requirements. A Bill was introduced in 1940 but did not get beyond second reading. The object of the present Bill is to overhaul our apprenticeship legislation and to give effect to improvements suggested by Apprenticeship Committees and other interested bodies. The draft Bill has been in the hands of these organisations for some time. It has been thoroughly studied by them and by the Government Departments concerned. In October last, the Bill was endorsed by a large and representative conference, which spent two days considering the detailed provisions of the Bill. Only minor amendments were suggested and most of these have been incorporated in the Bill, which can therefore be regarded as substantially an agreed measure. The Bill does not propose any fundamental changes in the machinery for regulating apprenticeship. Fundamentally our apprenticeship system is sound. Very few countries plan their apprenticeship training schemes with the care and attention to detail which characterises the South African apprenticeship system. Very few countries have a statutory scheme of apprenticeship, under which the training of youths in skilled trades is the subject of State control and guidance in all workshops where skilled trades can be learned. Since the Act was passed, over 25,000 young South Africans have passed through the system and have entered the ranks of skilled workers in many industries—engineering, building, printing, boot and shoe-making, furniture manufacturing and the motor industry are the chief ones. The method of training adopted under the Act is of a twofold nature, viz., practical training in the workshops coupled with technical education. Apprentices are indentured to employers, the usual period of apprenticeship being five years. The employer is responsible for ensuring that his apprentices are given sufficient opportunity in the workshop to learn their trade. He must not, for instance, keep the apprentices employed on unskilled labourers’ work or allow them to work without adequate supervision by skilled employees. The employer is also required to allow his apprentices time off during the earlier years of apprenticeship for the purpose of attending technical classes. In addition, apprentices must attend classes in their own time. The detailed conditions in regard to training and attendance at classes vary in the different industries. The law fixes the minimum period of class attendance at four hours per week during the first two years of apprenticeship, half of this time to be during ordinary working hours. Apprentices are paid wages on a sliding scale which varies according to industry and area. In order to prevent exploitation of juvenile labour, the Apprenticeship Act prohibits the employment of persons under twenty-one years of age in any trade to which the Act applies, unless an apprenticeship contract has been entered into and registered. A probationary period of four months is allowed. The number of apprentices to be employed in any workshop is also restricted, according to the training facilities available. In the furniture industry, the actual number of apprentices allowed in certain areas has been fixed, on the basis of one apprentice to every three journeymen. In other trades, no fixed number or ratio is in operation. In the administration of the Apprenticeship Act, many technical problems arise which call for expert knowledge. In order to meet this need, the Act provides for the appointment of Apprenticeship Committees, consisting of representative employers and employees, to advise the Minister and his officials on all matters connected with apprenticeship. Such committees have been established in respect of all the industries in which the Apprenticeship Act operates, and they play a very important role in the administration of the Act. All matters affecting apprenticeship are referred in the first instance to the committee for the industry and area concerned. Departmental officials only intervene if the com mittee is unable to dispose of the matter, or if there is an appeal against a decision of the Committee. The most important functions of the committees are, to consider what number of apprentices can be efficiently trained in any workshop, to consider whether the Inspector of Apprenticeship should be advised to register any particular contract of apprenticeship, and to endeavour to settle disputes between employers and apprentices. Criticism of the Apprenticeship System centres round the following main points: Age limit. The Apprenticeship Act applies only to minors (i.e. persons under 21 years of age). The Act does not, however, prohibit the apprenticeship of majors, who may be and frequently are indentured under private contracts, approved by the Industrial Council concerned (if any). The Bill brings such apprenticeships under the scope of the Apprenticeship Laws. Clause 21 specifically permits of a person over 21 being indentured, if the Registrar approves. The real difficulty in regard to major apprenticeship is not any provision of the law, but the fact that adults cannot easily accommodate themselves to the position of apprentices, even at higher wages than those laid down. They are not so easily taught, and employers are reluctant to employ them. It is frequently stated that young lads from the countryside do not get the same opportunity of apprenticeship as urban residents. This is undoubtedly true, but again the difficulty is not due to the provision of the Act. The law does not limit the employers’ choice of an apprentice, provided the youth has the necessary age and educational qualifications (usually 15 or 16 years) and Standard VI or VII). The statement sometimes made that apprenticeship committees discriminate against country youths is false. In any case, the decision of an apprenticeship committee on such a matter is subject to appeal to the Inspector of Apprenticeship, a Government official who would never permit such a discrimination—it would in fact be contrary to law to do so. Judging by the ever-increasing proportion of Afrikaans names in apprenticeship contracts submitted for registration, it would seem that this difficulty is in any case fast disappearing. The criticism as to the alleged exclusion of non-European youths, is also based on difficulties which really do not result from any provision in the law itself. In so far as coloured boys are concerned, they still predominate in some trades in the Cape, such as baking, and there are a number employed in the building, furniture and leather trades. Some of the apprenticeship committees in the Cape include coloured men in their membership. Any difficulty experienced by coloured youths in obtaining apprenticeships, is due principally to the fact that many employers prefer to engage European youths, especially if their staffs are predominantly European. It is alleged that the period of apprentice ship (usually 5 years) is too long, having regard to the increasing mechanisation of industry. This is a dangerous generalisation. Each trade must be considered in accordance with prevailing conditions, and in some industries (eg., furniture), the period of apprenticeship has been reduced from 5 to 4 years. The Bill contains the necessary provisions to enable the period of apprenticeship to be adjusted as circumstances require. These criticisms are directed, not against the law itself, but to a large extent against human nature and other similar factors which can hardly be altered by legislation. So far as the Bill is concerned, it contains the necessary provisions to enable the Minister, the Registrar and the apprenticeship committees to adapt the apprenticeship system to the requirements of industry and of the community. The Bill will be administered by the Department of Labour, as in the past. Clause 3 provides for the appointment of a Registrar of Apprentices, who will perform the functions of the Inspector of Apprenticeship under the existing Act. In the Bill, the principle of administering the law in consultation with industry by means of apprenticeship committees is maintained. Tribute must be paid to the work performed by these committees, which consist of voluntary, unpaid members who carry out their functions in the interests of their trades and of the young people who are being trained to be skilled workers. The procedure in connection with the establishment of apprenticeship committees is to be altered. Under the present Acts the Minister can only appoint an apprenticeship committee in certain scheduled industries. The schedule of industries was drawn up in 1922 and is today out-ofdate. The schedule of industries will therefore be abolished, leaving the Minister free to appoint a committee for any industry or group of industries. This is important, as the appointment of a committee is the first step towards applying the Act in the industry concerned. Two years ago, Parliament approved a similar amendment to the Unemployment Benefit Act. Clause 5 of the Bill amplifies the existing provisions in regard to the constitution of apprenticeship committees, on the lines of similar provisions in the Unemployment Benefit Act. Members of committees will be appointed in equal numbers by the employers’ organisations and trade unions concerned, and the Minister has power to appoint members (who may be officers of the public service) in cases where there are no representative organisations or unions, or where they fail to make the necessary appointments. The chairman of a committee is appointed by the Minister, as under the existing Act. Section 11 (6) of the existing Act empowers the Minister to discharge a committee if it ceases to perform its functions, and to vest the committee’s powers in the Inspector of Apprenticeship. This provision has been found to be defective, and under the present clause 7 the Minister may disestablish a committee (which would have the effect of abolishing apprenticeship in the industry and area concerned). Alternatively, if a committee ceases to function, the Minister may discharge the members and vest their powers in an officer of the Public Service. In some instances, notably in the furniture industry, committees have been unable to function owing to disagreement between employers and employees, and in such cases the Inspector of Apprenticeship has been called upon by the Minister to exercise the committee’s functions, in order to keep the apprenticeship system in operation. Before disestablishing a committee, or discharging its members, the Minister is required to consult the trade union and employers’ organisation concerned.

At 6.40 p.m. the business under consideration was interrupted by Mr. Speaker in accordance with the Sessional Order adopted on the 25th January, 1944, and Standing Order No. 26 (1), and the debate was adjourned; to be resumed on 14th April.