Mr. Chairman, as hon. members know, a White Paper on Defence is tabled every other year. This year is one of the years in which a White Paper has not been published. However, I consider it my duty to inform hon. members about a number of matters before they begin the debate.

In the first place, I want to make a short statement in connection with the cancellation of Navy contracts. As far as our foreign shipbuilding contracts are concerned, the French authorities have forced us, by refusing the delivery of corvettes and submarines which had been ordered, to cancel contracts. Although considerable amounts of our progress payments have already been refunded to us, the complicated process of cancelling the contracts has not been finalized. However, we have been assured by the French authorities that the Republic of South Africa will not suffer any financial losses in the process.

Furthermore, we have come a long way towards satisfying our own needs with regard to the patrolling of our coastal waters by the S.A. Navy. I hope to furnish more information on this later in the year.

At the start of this Defence debate I should also like to put the size of the defence budget in the correct perspective. The inference could be drawn that the budget will be smaller this year, in real terms, than it was last year, and the question could therefore be asked whether such a tendency is realistic, in the light of the fact that the threat against our country has increased. Hon. members must realize that the department’s budget is based on programmes and that the funds which are appropriated are therefore related to the flow of obligations, and not necessarily to the delivery of products. During this financial year, in fact, more is being processed and delivered in value than is being budgeted for in cash.

Apart from this, I should like to bring to the attention of hon. members three factors which have had a positive influence on the budget. In the first place there is the factor to which I have just referred, i.e. the cancellation of contracts with France. In terms of this, spent and unspent funds amounting to R128 million are automatically transferred from the budget for 1977–’78 to the budget for 1978–’79, serving to reduce the latter.

†Secondly, I wish to announce that the Cabinet has accepted my proposals that Armscor, like other State corporations, be allowed to enter the capital market this year. The reasons for this step are obvious. Firstly, sophisticated facilities require heavy capital and industrial investment, apart from increased operating funds already provided for in the budget. Secondly, investments and the extension of such strategic facilities provide a greater subcontracting to private industries, with the result of greater employment in this field. Thirdly, there are the opportunities offered for the first time to the financial sector to contribute also towards the establishment of national strategic assets that can be utilized by future generations, because these assets do not imply a duplication of facilities existing in the private sector. The capital market will be entered in the near future by means of loan effects at competitive rates supported by State guarantees. Such investments will qualify as so-called prescribed investments.

*In the third place, I should like to mention the steady progress which has been made in recent months, after it was agreed with the Treasury that Armscor would henceforth be able to commit itself to medium and long-term contracts in delivering munitions. This arrangement is having a substantial effect in promoting better planning on the part of the Defence Force as well as our local industries, and is resulting in a more systematic provision of funds than in the past.

The net result of these factors is that last year’s budget, taking into consideration the cancelled Navy contracts, has been reduced to R1 526 million, and that the budget in 1978–’79, taking into account the acquisition of capital and long-term obligations, is increasing to approximately R1 780 million. This means a net difference or growth of approximately R250 million. In all seriousness, however, I must warn that this kind of growth rate is not unrealistic, but even conservative, and that we must accept that an amount of at least R2 000 million may be probable in the near future, especially in the light of international arms actions which will have to be countered. In all cases we must assess the relativity between budgets on the basis that a large part of the annual budget consists of investment in essential equipment and supplies, investment which is constantly raising the level of preparedness of the Defence Force.

†Further, I wish to say a few words in connection with the project of the Council of ex-Service Organizations to regularize and control the practice of hitchhiking by national servicemen proceeding to and from leave, something which has become a rapidly increasing public danger, both to the motorist and to the serviceman, and of great concern to parents of our national servicemen. The Council of ex-Service Organizations has taken the following action: During the first phase the co-operation of the Ministry of Transport has been obtained with a view to amending the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act, and thus indemnify the driver giving a lift—in the event of an accident— from consequent claims by national servicemen involved. The amendment, as hon. members know, has already been passed by the House.

The second phase, which is dependent upon the success of the first phase, involves the arranging of personal accident cover for national servicemen who might be killed or disabled as a result of accidents. Members of the Insurance Association have proposed a scheme which will cover national servicemen to an amount of R10 000 in respect of disablement. The scheme, which will probably eventually be accepted by the SADF and the SADF Fund, will require national servicemen to contribute a premium of R1 a year. The Fund will underwrite any balance that may be required up to R50. Convenient, suitable and safe pick-up points at filling stations will be allocated through the Motor Industries Federation, many of whose members throughout the Republic have already agreed to the use of their filling stations. The erection of suitable shelters and identification signs will be the responsibility of the Oil Companies Association. Some members of the association have already indicated that they will co-operate in this regard. Lastly, members of the Council of ex-Servicemen’s Organizations have agreed to organize the control of the lifting of national servicemen by appointing marshalls to ensure, as far as possible, that national servicemen do not accept lifts on unsafe vehicles or in vehicles with unsafe drivers, such as a driver who is obviously under the influence of liquor. Members of the council have also agreed to arrange for refreshments to be made available at pick-up points which merit this service. No lifter will be rewarded for lifts given, and no charge will be made for refreshments.

In conclusion, the whole package deal is proceeding to finality as expeditiously as possible. The SADF has been brought in in order to decide where pick-up points are required and to co-ordinate the efforts of the Council of ex-Service Organizations. All organizations involved have been most cooperative, and it is interesting and gratifying to see ex-Servicemen being so keenly involved in the interests of the serving soldiers, in addition to their traditional role of looking after ex-Servicemen. It is felt that the project, which is known as “Project Safe Ride”—or “Veilig Ry”—besides being a morale-booster for national servicemen, will also go a long way towards satisfying parents that the SADF, together with ex-Servicemen’s organizations, are doing everything in their power to look after their sons who are in our care as far as this particular facet of their service is concerned.

*Finally, there are a few other announcements I want to make. Apart from the Army’s task of combating terrorism, it is also essential for the Army to maintain and improve conventional combat tactics and skills. For this reason, it has been decided to establish a combat school at Sishen. Here the Army will be able to improve standards of preparedness, in co-operation with the Air Force. The intensification of practical training of officers, combat groups and combat formations will take place here. With this, a further important training institution is being added to our existing colleges and training schools in the S.A. Defence Force. A large part of the land required for this has already been acquired.

A further Army base is being developed at Phalaborwa. It is expected that construction will be completed during 1978. It will be possible to occupy the base early in 1979.

In the Northern Transvaal, too, developments are under way. An Air Force base is being developed at Hoedspruit in the Transvaal Lowveld. The first phase of that development will be completed before the end of 1978. In connection with the combat school I just want to mention, by way of illustrating the role of the combat school, that this school will soon be able to handle large-scale exercises, such as the exercises of 72 Infantry Brigade, for which the troops are already being called up. These exercises take place in the area I have already mentioned, near Kimberley and Sishen.

There is only one further announcement. With a view to the important part played by practical mobility in a large country such as South Africa, it is necessary to expand the parachute capacity of the South African Army. Recent re-organization and retraining of citizen force parachute battalions was the first step in this direction. It must be possible for paratroopers to be called up at short notice and to act effectively when that happens. In order, on the one hand, to establish a large full-time parachute capacity and, on the other hand, to obtain larger Permanent Force involvement, 1 Parachute Battalion at Bloemfontein is being expanded, and with a view to the good operational service rendered by the Cape Corps in combat capacity in South West Africa, a start will be made before the end of this year in composing a Cape Corps parachute company and training it as a part of 1 Parachute Battalion. Furthermore, it is intended to establish a full-time parachute brigade headquarters at Bloemfontein as formation headquarters for this mobile reaction force of the South African Army.

I felt that I had to make these few announcements so that hon. members might be better equipped to take part in the debate.

Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour. In reacting specifically to some of the matters which the hon. the Minister has just raised, may I choose one, and that is the question of the raising of funds for Armscor by means of a public loans issue. The importance of this is that whoever subscribes to these loans will, in fact, be directly subscribing for the purpose of the defence of the Republic. This puts these bonds in exactly the same category as the defence bonds were placed. We have, of course, had some interesting experiences— and I use the word “interesting” deliberately—in regard to defence bonds being taken up by certain institutions which are controlled by companies which are overseas companies. The most remarkable aspect of this is that whereas any Government stock of any kind can have its proceeds partially used for the defence of the Republic, when it comes to a specific issue, those bonds have become a political issue. I only hope that now that we are to have another issue, which will also be specifically allocated for the defence of the Republic, we are not going to have a repetition of the escapades in regard to the defence bonds. It should be appreciated that any money which is invested in any Government stock in the Republic may well be used—and undoubtedly some will be used— for the defence of the Republic, and therefore this type of escapade we have witnessed should not be repeated.

Secondly I should like to react briefly to the arrangements which we announced in connection with the so-called hitch-hiking. I think that tribute should be paid to the ex-service organizations which have taken the lead in this regard. I think that the ex-service organizations have done a great deal of good for ex-servicemen as a whole and are amongst the organizations in the Republic which, entirely divorced from politics and sectional interest, have contributed towards the welfare of people in South Africa. I should like to add my tribute to the work they have done in this field.

I should like to deal with the other matters individually as I go along, but the hon. the Minister must please forgive me if I leave them for a little later in the debate. I think that the truth of the matter is that South Africa is under attack. The question that should consequently be asked now is whether we are adequately armed, not only to resist, but also to succeed in defending ourselves against the attack that has been launched against us. This, I believe, should be the theme of this debate.

Our troops are at present involved in protecting the South West African/Angolan border. They are under attack by Swapo insurgents. They seek to maintain law and order as a whole in South West Africa. Our Air Force is transporting troops and supplies, it is lending support to ground operations and it is engaged in sea reconnaissance. Our Navy patrols the shores of South Africa. Our long borders need patrolling and they need protective works. The eastern Transvaal and the northern Natal Zululand borders are areas of potential danger. Urban terrorist actions have occurred and threats and warlike noises are made by hostile organizations and nations. An arms boycott has been imposed upon us and trade boycotts are threatened against us. In all this no other nation in the world stands alongside the Republic. A long and difficult period has started for the Republic and in all the world no nation is our ally and few even care to be named as our friends.

Are we equipped to meet the challenge and to survive? In the type of onslaught the Republic has to face, arms and men to bear them are certainly needed, but are they the only weapons? Let me quote the words of Sir Gerald Templar, dating back to 1952, words which have often been quoted, viz.—

Thanks to the courtesy of the hon. the Minister of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force I have recently had the opportunity of again visiting the South West African/Angolan border. Here I and other members of the group saw that our soldiers are not only defending South West Africa, and so South Africa, but that they are also through civic action programmes seeking to win the minds and hearts of the people. Those soldiers teach children, they help in the fields, they repair tractors, they provide medical treatment and still more. All of this work we commend.

However, there are other lessons which we learnt. Where there is already a high intensity of terrorist activity, it is not possible to carry out this civic action work in the normal manner. If a “dominee” needs a military escort to visit a church, a soldier on his own can no longer teach in the school. Patrols can, of course, still help, but the effort becomes more hazardous and more difficult. The question I want to pose today is whether we are not leaving too late the work of winning the hearts and minds of all the Republic’s inhabitants. Is there not a lesson for the defence of South Africa’s own borders to be learnt from what is happening in South West Africa at the moment? If I may, I should like to quote what John Adams wrote in 1818 about the American Revolution—

That is what John Adams said in writing of the American Revolution. The question is: Are we not leaving it too late in South Africa? Good behaviour by troops towards the local population, gestures of assistance and friendship are necessary and laudible, but is it enough to commence with this when the war has already started? Is this the soldier’s or the politician’s task? The lonely soldier standing on guard in the dark in the bush to protect his tired and sleeping colleagues is doing his share. But is the public doing its share to remove potential friction between the races in South Africa in everyday life, and are the politicians doing their share? When trouble arises on our own borders, will the insurgent guerrillas, in the words of Mao Tsetung “be like fish in water”, i.e. be operating with the support of the local population or, again as Mao said, will they die “because the water has been removed”, i.e. because the local population and the Army operate together because they have the same interests? I believe that “operation minds and hearts” must begin now for South Africa. It must begin before the war begins in South Africa; otherwise, when the history of this age is written, it may be said that the Whites realized only too late that alone they could not meet the onslaught. The example of the Army in South West Africa in regard to its civic operations is an excellent one and yet it has not received the publicity which it deserves. Why, however, is there no action on a large scale in South Africa itself? Why do we not have an “operation harmony” in which a specially trained peace corps type or organization can play a part in showing the Army is for the people and is part of the people? In such an operation the public can participate to make South Africa a place in which race friction is eliminated. This is not a substitute for the politician’s task, but I believe it can play a major role in understanding.

As I have said, we stand alone without allies. For White South Africa, however, there is an ally that can be brought to our side and with whose help we cannot be defeated. I am referring to the Black, Coloured and Indian population. If we make their cause our’s and they make our cause their’s, then, in fact, together we will be invincible in the fight that lies ahead.

In the fight that lies ahead the question of conscription becomes an important issue. Conscription of young White youth has been accepted by the community, but now the public debate has again commenced as to whether the burden of defence should fall purely on the Whites of South Africa and as to what the implications are if the burden of defence continues to be imposed purely on the Whites of South Africa as ever-increasing demands are made upon manpower in this regard. We have a proposal which comes from a certain public sector organization. The proposal was made recently—a matter of a week ago—and it was said that compulsory military service should apply to the Coloured people. It is therefore perhaps appropriate that we should debate this issue as well today.

Let me state what our attitude is in this matter. We believe that our Defence Force should contain men and women of all races in South Africa. We have consistently encouraged the recruitment of men of all races. The image of a multiracial as opposed to a White Army is essential for the successful defence of South Africa. We believe there must be no discrimination based on colour, in pay or in other conditions of service in our Defence Force. Opportunities for advancement must be equally available to all. We welcome the fact—I congratulate the hon. the Minister on it—that service allowances payable on the border are now equal, irrespective of the colour of the person concerned. We believe, however, that for South African soldiers there must be equal pay for equal rank and work irrespective of the race or colour of the individual.

Can the question now be pose, however, whether the Government can conscript persons who are not White? The Erika Theron Commission recommended military service for Coloureds and the Government has already stated that it accepts the principle that there should be compulsory military service. We were told that when facilities are created and recruitment of Coloured youth is of sufficient volume, further consideration would be given to this. The question must be posed—in fact, I put it to the hon. the Minister: Does the principle of compulsory military service not also have to be tied with the enjoying of full citizenship in South Africa? The Government has recently accepted this very principle in respect of White immigrants and the hon. the Minister has made it clear that citizenship is relevant to compulsory military service when it comes to White immigrants. What, therefore, is the impact of the commitment of the hon. the Minister of Plural Relations and Development that, in so far as South Africa is concerned, the Blacks of South Africa are going to cease to be South Africans and are going to cease to have the citizenship of this country? That stand was endorsed by the hon. the Prime Minister who even went further and indicated that in his view Blacks had never enjoyed full citizenship within the true meaning of the word in South Africa.

How do we reconcile that with compulsory military service? Are there not very serious implications for the S.A. Defence Force in that? Black units are in the S.A. Defence Force at the moment and they are acquitting themselves extremely well. Black units in the S.A. Defence Force would, however, under that system be units which would be consisting of foreigners and not of citizens defending their fatherland. What are the implications of such an action for the hearts-and-minds campaign? To defend South Africa, all its people are needed: people with a stake in the country, people who have the citizenship of the country, people with the desire to protect what they have and what they hope to have in South Africa. Not to give full citizenship to any of our people is therefore, in the view of the Official Opposition, a major hindrance to the defence effort not only because it prevents national service for all, but also because it is a major obstacle in the campaign to win the minds and hearts of all the people of South Africa.

I would also like, if I may, to deal with the issue of the conflict which presently rages in South West Africa and about South West Africa. There is an impression abroad that South Africa needs a few soldiers on the South West Africa border to keep at bay a few badly armed terrorists who are not very well trained, undisciplined insurgents who periodically try to lay a mine or try to ambush a patrol. If this is indeed the impression amongst a section of the population, it is important that it be dispelled at the earliest opportunity. The public must realize the realities of the situation in South West Africa. The territory is vast. The borders are lengthy. The bush is dense and the terrain is most difficult. Also, there are not merely a few terrorists: Swapo forces are numerous, trained by communist experts and they possess modern arms. Our soldiers are good, much better than their opponents, but the enemy should not be under-estimated by the people of South Africa. The view of the South West Africans, as I understand it, is that if South African troops are withdrawn, particularly from Ovambo, Kavango and the Caprivi, then it will be impossible to conduct fair elections there. Not only will there then be intimidation in the ordinary sense of the word, but there will be bloodshed and turmoil. UN troops in this terrain and under existing circumstances, in their view and in my own, cannot provide the substitute for the S.A. Army. Not only will free elections not be able to be held, but if a non-Swapo Government were elected, I do not believe that it could survive for any length of time if Swapo continued to be armed and if there were no adequate military forces to support the new régime. It seems to me therefore, and I think it should be made clear so that there can be no misunderstanding in so far as the public is concerned, that it is the thin brown line of South Africans which stands between bloodshed, disorder and a Marxist-supported take-over on the one hand and a stable, free and independent Namibia on the other. It is that thin brown line which stands between turmoil and true voting in South West Africa and majority rule. To our mind that is the situation as it exists there.

Another matter I want to discuss, is the question of the actual defence of South Africa itself and the troops to be deployed. The defence of South Africa involves thousands of kilometres of border. If all the homelands become independent, it will involve nearly 14 000 km, and even if the new independent homelands, which we hope will remain friendly, are excluded, there still will be thousands of kilometres that have to be defended. We need defensive works on the borders. Just recently we passed legislation to deal with one aspect of this matter. I am not a great admirer of the East Germans, but perhaps we might look at the works on their frontiers to see how effective defence works on borders can be. In that case the works not only managed to keep people out, but unfortunately also to keep people in. We need strong points on our borders as headquarters. We are going to need more and more patrols and, above all, we are going to need highly mobile forces, forces that will have to move quickly at very short notice to danger points.

We have national servicemen, but if we look at the figures which the hon. the Minister recently gave here in the House, we notice that the total intake is only approximately 27 000 per annum after allowing for the deferments and exemptions, and once the two-year period is fully in operation, about double that figure would be available. A certain portion of those men would, of course, be under training for a period of that two-year period and would therefore not be available for actual active service. The call-up of Citizen Force units is without a doubt, however necessary it may be, economically disruptive and, as has recently been demonstrated, it certainly cannot be done in secrecy. On the contrary. Only yesterday I read a newspaper issued at an university in which reference was made to the call-up itself, the date of the call-up, when they would be expected to be back and that they should not ask for deferment. If that is secrecy with a call-up, then I certainly do not know, and I should like to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to this. So, certainly, one cannot call-up Citizen Force units in secrecy.

The 1977 White Paper tabled by the hon. the Minister, in outlining military policy stated—

We challenge the military and economic efficiency of a policy which limits the Defence Force, in particular the Permanent Force, in this manner. We consider that the Army needs a mobile, highly armed Permanent Force and striking force. This force would be professional, could include volunteers for all races, would be highly trained, would have sophisticated arms, would be permanently available, and would be capable of being moved speedily and secretly to trouble spots at short notice. This force would not be a substitute for national servicemen, nor for the Citizen Force and commandos, but the need to call up commando units and Citizen Force units would be lessened and the more sophisticated operations could be left to the specialists. We believe this expansion of the Defence Force is absolutely essential for the task which lies ahead. We again want to make the plea today—the hon. member for Wynberg will take this matter further—that the hon. the Minister should review his policy in this regard.

At this stage I should also like to deal with one other matter, i.e. the position of the servicemen themselves. Some of us have taken the opportunity of looking at the camps under the courtesy extended to us by the hon. the Minister and the Chief of the Defence Force. What we have done is to have taken the opportunity, unannounced, to go and look at the kitchens, the living-quarters, the recreation facilities and the food of the servicemen. I want to say here and now that no Army is perfect. The S.A. Army is not perfect, but I want to say one thing and that is that I think in the circumstances in which the campaign is being fought, the provision of the services as they are, certainly is more than reasonable. From experience some of us can say that it is a lot better than it was during World War II. I think we should give the parents and the wives of those young men in the Defence Force the reassurance that not only are the conditions, on our own examination, reasonable, but also the morale amongst the troops is high.

At the same time I should, however, say that we have seen things that are not as we think they should be. We have made suggestions in this regard and all those suggestions have been received in the correct spirit by the authorities. As I have said, nothing is perfect and improvements can come about. However, there is one matter I should like to raise with the hon. the Minister. When we were discharged at the end of World War II, there was an organization called the DSDC. For those of us who needed help, because we went straight from school into the Forces, had our businesses harmed or had difficulties in finding jobs, there was in fact an opportunity through that organization to receive assistance. That organization gave assistance to people in finding a job, in establishing themselves in business, in creating some degree of financial stability, in helping them pay for higher education, and in obtaining apprenticeships and articles when they had difficulty in finding them. It helped them to be absorbed back into the community. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister that that organization or an organization of a similar kind should be brought into being and should be voted funds from the State in the future. With an escalating military situation such as organization should be made available on a formal basis. Assistance should not merely be given by voluntary organizations; there must be a proper State-organized scheme. Today I can still pay tribute to what was done for me as an individual when I was demobbed at the end of World War II. I went to university—I make no secret of the fact that my parents were unable to afford it—on the strength of financial assistance from that organization. Money was lent by them and had to be repaid in reasonable instalments. I think there were thousands of servicemen who were given that chance in life. A view to the escalating military situation and the greater disruption of the lives of individuals which will of necessity be brought about, I hope that we shall again in the years which lie ahead create such an organization in South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I want to tell the hon. member at once that it is quite obvious that the last matter he referred to is already receiving attention. I refer to a reply which the hon. the Minister gave on 24 February 1978 to a question put by the hon. member for Durban Point, viz. whether provision had been made for demobilization committees in cities and towns to arrange employment opportunities for national servicemen on completion of their basic service. The hon. the Minister replied as follows—

The hon. member took this further and related it to study opportunities, and so forth. I want to refer the hon. member to the actual arrangement at present in operation, viz. that inquiries are made among national servicemen while still in service as to their interest in further study. I think the hon. member himself studied in this way. I think that facility has already been made available to 2 900 national servicemen and many hundreds have already taken advantage of it. The hon. member did make out a case for it but unfortunately did not refer to the fact that this was already receiving attention. But I know he meant it sincerely and he meant well in respect of our men in the Defence Force. I want to add to this that our whole society is beginning to develop a sensitivity in respect of the needs of our national servicemen. This is apparent, for instance, from a series of articles that are presently appearing in Rapport in which an indication is given of how one should behave towards people returning from border service. This is being done on the basis of experience gained during the Second World War. So I want to say that that war was not fought in vain.

It is a fact that the soldier is the most important key to and component in this situation. I hope to be able to return to this again.

The hon. member for Yeoville referred to quite a number of matters. Inter alia, he referred to the total onslaught as being one which made it necessary for us to convince people, by influencing them, that the ideology emanating from across the border was not acceptable and that the ideology we follow within our country holds out better prospects for them. We could argue about this matter. We must always try to keep these debates neutral. But one thing we must not do and that is to create the opportunity, in a discussion such as this, for a political party which is not in power and which has only a limited representation, to put across a point of view in this House. I think this can only make confusion more confounded among the people it is aimed at, the people who must be won over. That is why I say to the hon. member that we can discuss this matter, but on condition that he does not try to propagate a point of view which in any event does not amount to very much. So I ask the hon. member to try to persuade those hon. members who follow him not to continue with this line of thought because if they do they will turn this into a political debate. I want to leave the matter at that.

In my view the hon. member quite correctly saw our present position against the background of a threat from elsewhere. But not once did the hon. member refer to communist imperialism. Not once did he actually touch on the sort of warfare being waged against us. I know he did not mean anything by that. That is how we know him. But I do think it would have been easier for him to promote our case if he had agreed with us that what is involved here is the total communist strategy, a strategy born from a desire to dominate the world. That is why I want to pause here for a moment so that we can have a better understanding of what the hon. member tried to tell us. I just want to supplement what he said. What is involved here is the objectives that are formulated in Soviet Russia. None other than Prof. Lucius Beebe of the Military College of South Carolina said the following in a periodical—

This brings us back to the point raised by the hon. member, viz. that there are divergent points of view. This professor shows us that these anti-government points of view can be manipulated and, in fact, are manipulated. Therefore, when we discuss this matter, we must do so against the background of the ability to manipulate politically, nationally and internationally, an aptitude which Russia has developed to a fine art. The same professor shows us that at the present time Russia has a dire need to show some sort of achievement to cover up its internal differences and that it has identified South Africa as a suitable target. Russia, in fact, has failed elsewhere with its manipulations. I think of the Middle East. Even in Europe she has not made overall progress. Therefore it is as well for us to know that Russia has now chosen South Africa, and it is as well to know that we are in a position where we must evaluate the question: Can we withstand this assault? I say unequivocally: “Yes,” and I should like to explain this.

The professor says further that Russia, knowing that we are strong militarily, has followed the strategy of including us in a group consisting of Mozambique, Rhodesia— may Russia’s strategy go away here!— Angola, and, of course, the venture in Zaïre. Up to now it has succeeded. As far as South Africa is concerned, it has embarked on a hellish propaganda campaign. Hon. members on this side of the House will deal further with this aspect.

But we should remember that Pravda recently made the following statement, and I quote—

These are serious words. It is a serious foreshadowing of what is planned. That is why I say to the hon. member for Yeoville— with reference to his first statement—that we must develop a communal and total counterstrategy, a counter-strategy in which the Opposition must not attempt to promote its own viewpoints at the cost of South Africa.

The hon. member for Yeoville saw fit to refer to a few other matters. Inter alia, he referred to the situation in South West. I want to support the hon. member by saying that it is our desire to have a stable neighbour. But I shall say no more about this matter.

As far as the actual defence of South Africa is concerned, we do need a full-time Defence Force. Do we not, in fact, have a full-time Defence Force? I am referring to the Permanent Force. I refer also to the fact that we envisaged a full-time Force … [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, I rise to give the hon. member the opportunity of completing his speech.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the hon. member for Pinelands. I also refer to the fact that we envisaged a full-time Force and that we are in fact in the process of bringing this about. I find it strange therefore that the hon. member for Yeoville, when pleading this cause, did not refer to the very important step taken in establishing a brigade headquarters for paratroopers in Bloemfontein. The hon. member did not refer to the hon. the Minister’s announcement. I do not raise this because the brigade headquarters are in Bloemfontein. But I do think this is an important step in the right direction.

I also want to tell the hon. the Minister that any discussion we may have today regarding the establishment of a full-time Force, will to a large extent already have been met. We know now the line of thought the hon. the Minister is taking. We also know how the supreme command of the Defence Force are thinking.

As far as the establishment of a full-time Force is concerned, there is another aspect I should like to discuss. This is that last year we held the view that we wanted to support the Permanent Force by a comprehensive system of national service. By withdrawing certain units from the citizen force and the commandos, it was implied that we needed an effective leadership corps. It was in this way that the short service system came into being.

Perhaps the hon. the Minister will have the time to tell us about the success of the short service system. But when we talk of the short service system the focus falls at once on the very important objective of this particular system, viz. the recruiting of junior leaders to act as section leaders and to take command of larger units. This brings me to the corporal. It is a fact that when we get complaints from parents, complaints in regard to service— something which foes not happen often— reference is sometimes made to the corporal. I want to say unequivocally today that Armed Forces, a periodical I should like to recommend to the Opposition, has my wholehearted support when it says—

Sir, this is a corporal’s war. These people who have to act as officers in charge of a section hundreds of kilometres from headquarters have to take decisions equal in responsibility to those of a general. They are the people in charge of our boys’ weal and woe. These are the people who have to be psychologists and who have to do far more than was expected of them in a conventional war such as the Second World War. These are the people we want. These are the people we get, and these are the people who are going to win this unconventional war for us.

In the Second World War there were a lot of dangerous corporals! [Interjections.]

It is a fact that national service affects every home, and hon. members on this side will have more to say about national service. It has come to our notice that there is still a lack of clarity on this matter, which is actually inexcusable. These problems occur among the public and so I thought fit to ask the hon. the Minister to enlighten us in regard to a few of these issues. For example, there are questions as to the use of soldiers in professional capacities. There are also questions regarding the policy of awarding commissioned rank in such cases. It seems that such people with professional qualifications are being trained as riflemen. Has there been a change of policy in this regard? What is the present position?

A question has also been asked regarding our students. The question has been asked whether, in the case of the call-up of our graduates in the July intake in the year following completion of their studies, there has been a change of procedure as a result of the most recent announcements. I believe this is so. We should also like to know what the position is in regard to students who, after their studies have been completed, are called up for the January intake without the option of further deferment. Perhaps the hon. the Minister can enlighten us in this connection.

Sir, I should like to make use of this opportunity to congratulate Admiral Walters, who is present here, on his promotion. I should also like to congratulate the Surgeon-General, Gen. Nieuwoudt, on his appointment as chief of our medical services. I am confident that both of them will be most successful in their posts; in fact, we have no doubt about it.

In conclusion I want to come back to the few matters the hon. member for Yeoville raised. Regarding hitch-hiking by servicemen, he quite rightly thanked the service organizations. I should like to add that the Department of Transport and the Minister of Transport have played their parts in this respect. We should at the same time like to express our appreciation to them.

I see from the newspapers that the hon. member joined parliamentarians on a visit to the border. I do not know whether he was aware of the fact that other people accompanied him. In any case, we do not mind saying that we were there with him! [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, I claim the privilege of the second half hour. In the first place I should like to associate myself with the congratulations offered by the hon. member for Bloemfontein West to the new Chief of the Navy and to the Surgeon-general. I would like to wish them the very best as members of a distinguished supreme command. It is a supreme command in which South Africa can have tremendous pride and for which I believe all South Africans should be very grateful, bearing in mind the times we live in and the dedication with which they carry out their duties.

If one looks at the amount of time allocated to my party for discussing the budget which we are dealing with now, one sees that I am addressing the House at the rate of R66 000 per second or R4 million per minute.

Why do you not take more time?

I wish I could, but that is the time that has been allocated. At R4 million per minute it is obviously impossible to give the kind of consideration one wants to give to the widespread distribution of the R1 550 million involved. I think this emphasizes the need—and I am not going to argue the case again—for another forum where we can get down to dealing with this sort of detail. Therefore, although I am not going to try to deal with the specific items of expenditure which are set out, I do want to state certain general principles.

Because this is the first Defence debate in which we are participating as the NRP, I firstly want to put on record that we are totally and unequivocally committed to the defence and security of South Africa. I do not think I need say any more than that because our bona fides, I believe, have been shown.

I also want to express my appreciation to the hon. the Minister and the Chief of the S.A. Defence Force for the visit on which I also “accompanied the hon. member for Yeoville”! There were a number of us there, and I want to express appreciation for the opportunity for that and other visits which I have had the privilege of making. I also want to express appreciation for the briefing which gave those of us in the defence groups an insight into some of the real problems which we face. Those are insights which we obviously cannot debate across the floor of the House, but it is important that we should have this kind of information and that we should have such opportunities to enable us to evaluate the situation, thus enabling one to come here, as I do today, to say that we give full and unquestioned support for the amount we are being asked to vote.

In fact, if anything, I regret that there has been a reduction in the amount which is being voted. I believe that we should perhaps have used the savings on purchases of heavy arms for improving the lot, for example the pay and allowances, of the men who are serving in our Forces and for meeting the new situation that has arisen as a result of the two year service period. When a man was called up for one year, that was a year he gave as a sacrifice and he somehow battled through. When a man is called up for a two year period, however, the situation is somewhat different. That person sometimes has a wife and children to maintain, and the pay of just over R1 and the R3,90 odd dependants’ allowance is not enough to maintain his family. Since there is money that we have saved, I would have thought that South Africa would not have begrudged that money being diverted to the men themselves, for their family allowances and for closing the gap between the White soldiers and the soldiers of colour who serve side by side with them in the field. If there is a surplus this year, it could well be spent for that purpose.

The hon. member for Bloemfontein West and also the hon. member for Yeoville dealt with the threat against South Africa. I want to say at once that I do not intend to enter into the political debate as to what caused that threat and led to the increased need for defence. I believe we had an opportunity for that under the hon. the Prime Minister’s Vote last week and we will have more opportunities when we discuss other Votes. In the discussion on this particular Vote, I want to concentrate on Defence as a national issue affecting us all and not on the political problems and difficulties which lead to it. There are certain broad aspects which I think we must face. The threat to South Africa from outside the country is common cause. I do not intend to waste any of my time at R4 million per minute on discussing that this afternoon. There are, however, two new elements which have been introduced over the last two years and those two elements, to my mind, require of us to take a new look at the possible strategy of our enemies. I am referring to the coming into being of the two independent States of Transkei and Bophuthatswana.

I wonder if there is not evidence of a new strategy in some of the events that have occurred in recent times, a three-pronged strategy, of which the first aspect is the creating and instigating of internal unrest and violence in South Africa; the other two prongs being to seek two parallel Red belts across Southern Africa, one linking Angola to Mozambique and the other stretching across the centre of South Africa lower down and striking, I believe, at the soft underbelly of our security, thus creating for us thousands of kilometres of new boundaries which we have to protect. If this two-pronged attack, with the third prong of internal unrest, should be coordinated and should succeed, a glance at the map of South Africa will show us the military difficulties which we face. I should like an assurance from the hon. the Minister that the possibility of a Red belt north of us and a Red belt of independent states through present South Africa is one that has been adequately considered in our strategic planning and in our future thinking.

The hon. the Minister has talked of a total strategy to meet and counteract a global attack against South Africa. The hon. member for Yeoville referred to this, but I want to emphasize that the essence of a total defence, the essence of a total South African strategy, rests on the words the hon. the Minister used recently when he spoke of “fighting shoulder to shoulder”. I see it as the essential element of our security that we should have all the peoples of South Africa standing shoulder to shoulder in defence of our country. I think it is also necessary to say to the radicals, White and Black, who rattle sabres and talk wildly, that if there is to be a civil war in South Africa, there will be no winners of that war, only losers. Some of the wild talk we have heard lately makes one shudder to think of the possibility of a war in which our peoples will be divided and will not stand shoulder to shoulder. I do not need to remind the hon. the Minister that it is accepted and axiomatic that the military forces can account for only 20% of the struggle, that 80% lies in political solutions, and that the objective of the Army is to buy time for the internal settlement, the internal political solutions. In this context I welcome the greater involvement which there has been of non-White troops. In this regard I refer particularly to the 21st Battalion whom we were privileged to meet, who have been given good publicity in the latest issue of Paratus, and who are the first troops of the S.A. Black forces as opposed to homeland units, to see action following of course the Cape Corps, who have been doing border service, and South West African Black units. This is a welcome move, but I still believe we are moving too slowly and we are not going far or fast enough. I know it has been one of my hardy annuals for years. Slowly we are moving in the right direction and we are starting to see the value of this, but is the time not ripe for us to say: We have experimented, the chaps are proving themselves; let us embark upon a larger scale to make fuller, greater use of all our people fighting shoulder to shoulder?

I want to turn for the rest of the time available to me to the more human problems and aspects of defence because the man has always been and will continue to be the most important element in our Army and therefore in our security. In this connection I should like to welcome three positive steps for which I have campaigned for a long time. The first is the public announcement by the hon. the Minister of the “veilig ry” operation. The hon. the Minister will know that I first wrote about this in June 1976. It is a great pleasure for me, after nearly two years, to welcome the birth of this project along very similar lines to those I suggested, and to express appreciation to the ex-servicemen’s organizations which have combined to play their part in this. Those ex-servicemen’s organizations have done much more than this. They have played a part in fund raising for the SADF Fund, in the administration of funds, as the S.A. Legion does, for the Sunday Times Border Fund and in the administration of various other funds, not just for the ex-servicemen themselves and their dependants, but also for the new generation of servicemen serving now. They operated through various regimental associations in looking after the families of men who are on the border and in dealing with problems arising from Citizen Force 12 weeks’ service. In all these fields the ex-servicemen’s organizations have played a major part and therefore I want to associate myself with the tribute that has been paid to them.

Another step forward which I welcome is the establishment of the demobilization committees which I suggested in August last year. I could not understand why the hon. the Minister, when I asked him whether consideration had been given to the establishment of demobilization committees, said: No, a start was made, however, with committees for the readjustment of national servicemen. As I see now in Paratus these are, in fact, a form of demobilization committee which I welcome very much since they are going to deal not only with “heraanpassing”, but also with employment and they will also assist national servicemen leaving the service in all other fields in which they have problems. I welcome this very much as a further step forward.

The third one with which I shall not deal in detail is the forthcoming establishment of a statutory SADF Fund.

I must turn, as is our duty as an Opposition, to what are one or two problem areas. The first is to say that to my mind there has been far too much uncertainty in the minds of servicemen over the last seven or eight months or even the last year. When we passed the amending Bill last year, the hon. the Minister said that men would be called up for 18 months although he had the power to extend this to 24 months. I and the hon. member for Yeoville queried this at the time and I said that inquiries to the Forces revealed that they would be called up for 24 months ab anitio. The hon. the Minister said that he had made his policy clear and, to my mind, this was the start of unnecessary confusion. It took far longer than the promised three months to advise men called up in 1977 of their status and how long they would have to serve. On 6 October of last year and order was issued by the Chief of the Army setting out, for the first time, clearly and unequivocally what the liability would be of every group called up right back to 1967 and before it. At last there was clarity and the people knew where they stood. People could then get on with planning their future. Within weeks it had been suspended, however, and we were back to square one with total confusion. I have a letter here dated 5 April of this year which says that this October order has not yet been cancelled, that it is still there, but is not being applied, and that the matter is being studied. Certainty of a man’s position is one of the essential elements for good morale. When men do not know where they stand, when they do not know what their liabilities are and cannot plan, when their employers cannot plan for leave periods or for replacements when they do not know when they are due to be called up, and all this uncertainty exists, it affects and undermines morale. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to please let us have clarity in this delicate situation and to remove the uncertainty.

In the moment or two left to me I also want to appeal, accepting all the difficulties and pressures under which the Exemption Board works, for more consideration to be given to the few special cases which should not be treated under the blanket overall refusal procedure, and to recognize that there are some cases which deserve compassionate attention. Similarly, when dealing with people in difficulty, through the SADF Fund, I believe that those who deal with them should realize that these people are providing a service to South Africa and that they are not seeking charity, but that they are going for help because they are in difficulty. I believe a more humane and more understanding attitude to the genuine cases, although not to the chancers, is needed.

I had wanted to deal with the question of graduate and postgraduate people who, encouraged by the SADF, first took their degrees and are now subject to the two year call-up instead of the original year. A colleague of mine will take this further, but I want to raise the matter now because I believe a look should be taken at the position generally of graduate students employed now in the Army. I say this particularly in the light of the brain drain which we are experiencing in S.A.

Finally, I want to raise the question of the Pro Patria Medal which has not yet been issued to all the men entitled to it. If the hon. the Prime Minister can have 30 000 medallions struck with his face on to celebrate his party’s 30th year in power, I believe we can strike the medals …

I am not striking them.

Well, somebody has to strike them. If South Africa can strike the hon. the Prime Minister’s face … [Interjections.] … I mean on a coin. Many would perhaps like to do it otherwise! I believe it is not beyond our power to strike medals for men who have risked their lives for South Africa and I would ask the hon. the Minister to please deal with that.

Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to learn from the hon. member for Durban Point, the leader of the NRP, that they are unconditionally committed to the defence of South Africa. It was also a pleasure to listen to his speech which evidenced a sense of responsibility as well as an awareness of the problems facing us. I cannot reply to the hon. member in regard to all the matters he raised because of the limited time at my disposal but as regards, the possible danger which may arise in the two independent States, namely Bophuthatswana and Transkei, whose independence we initiated, I can tell the hon. member that that is a calculated risk every country takes when it grants independence to another state. Naturally, it also depends on the attitude and behaviour of the mother country towards the independent state as to whether such a state will or will not be hostile towards it. That is all I wish to say in connection with the speech of the hon. member for Durban Point.

On page 8 of the White Paper on Defence which was published last year, the national objectives of the State are given as follows. Firstly—

and secondly—

In view particularly of the arms boycott which the UN Security Council has imposed against us, I should like to say a few words in connection with our aim to achieve maximum self-sufficiency, particularly as far as armaments and other military equipment are concerned.

Sir, you will allow me to deal for a moment with the Security Council resolution to boycott us in this field. Because the RSA is branded as being a threat to world peace and, because the resolution to boycott us was taken in accordance with Chapter 7 of the United Nation’s Charter, all member states are compelled to enforce the boycott, and this action against South Africa should be regarded as being of a permanent nature. I use the word “permanent” because only a resolution of the Security Council can reverse this decision, and one cannot even imagine Russia not exercising her veto right should the Security Council try to pass such a resolution. The fact that the so-called Western friends of South Africa allowed this resolution to be taken by the Security Council without exercising their veto right, is absolutely beyond one’s comprehension. A few years ago the UN decided that an arms boycott should be imposed against South Africa and many countries associated themselves with that resolution. Take a country like England which for years now has refused to supply us with arms. On the other hand, a country like France paid for less attention to that resolution and we still obtained a considerable quantity of our weapons, military equipment and electronic apparatus from France. That is why there is such a very strong French element in all our defence equipment. This attitude on the part of the French has also benefited us in another important respect in that it has enabled us because of this co-operation to acquire the necessary ability and skill to design and build sophisticated weapons ourselves. It has also enabled us to acquire licences to manufacture other sophisticated weaponry. This co-operation—particularly on the part of the French but on the part of certain other countries as well—has also greatly assisted us in striving for and achieving our military objectives, as indicated in para. 24 of the White Paper to which I have already referred. This co-operation has also given me rise to the fact that the Defence Force of South Africa is following the military policy as set out in the White Paper, as follows—

That has placed us in the fortunate position of being so completely self-sufficient today in respect of the anti-insurgent and anti-terrorist struggle that we have even been able to enter the export market as far as certain weapons are concerned.

However, we should always remember that this onslaught against South Africa is a total onslaught and is actually of a dual nature: Firstly, there is the terrorist and insurgent onslaught and, secondly, the conventional onslaught which will undoubtedly be launched if Solodovnikof, the Russian Ambassador in Tanzania and former director of the Africa Institute in Moscow, attains his objective. As I have said, as far as the struggle against insurgency and terrorism is concerned, we are completely self-sufficient, but in respect of the second onslaught against us, namely the conventional onslaught, it is generally known that South Africa has no permanent military alliance and that she is alone in the world today, branded as a threat to world peace. I do not say this is a spirit of pessimism because experience has already taught us that South Africa is able to adapt her structure, doctrines, strategies, and so forth, to the type of military equipment and weaponry which she can still obtain or produce herself. Her ability to produce what she requires is increasing day by day. We have the human material—the young men and women—who are willing, motivated and trained to make the supreme sacrifice in defence of their fatherland. As far as this is concerned, one must also take into account the large group of people of a different colour, a group that may perhaps be much larger than is generally realized. This large group of people of another colour is motivated and inspired to defend this country against foreign attack, as has already been proved by the Black and Coloured people who have been trained by the S.A. Defence Force and who have already had experience in the operational area.

In this connection one question arises in my mind to which I should like the hon. the Minister to give his attention in due course, and that is the position of the Chinese South African citizens who are also anxious to defend their new fatherland.

No country in the world—and this includes the super powers—is totally self-sufficient as far as its armaments are concerned. This is impossible in the true sense of the word because every country, even a super power, does not have supplies of certain elements and of certain raw materials it requires for the manufacture of armaments. It is therefore dependent on other countries for those raw materials. If we are not self-sufficient, it is therefore only a relative concept.

As far as self-sufficiency is concerned, one reads on page 26 of the White Paper, inter alia, as follows—

I also quote from paragraph 105—

Unfortunately, we in South Africa do not have an established tradition in respect of armaments production. Peculiarly enough, during World War II a fairly successful armaments production industry came into being. For some unaccountable reason this ability on our part was permitted to be dismantled completely with the result that no such industry exists today. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, …

Does the hon. the Chief Whip also want to have a shot?

I do not wish to be regarded as one of the main speakers on military matters in the House. However, I do not apologize for taking up a few minutes of the time of the House in order to raise a small matter. Because the hon. member for Durban Point has raised the matter, I just wish to remove any misunderstanding that may exist by stating quite clearly that the time allocated to every party for discussing every Vote is determined by the relevant Whips of the various parties.

I am not arguing about that.

I am not making it a debating point but then the hon. member must not come along and cry on my shoulder about it.

I also want to refer to the announcement by the hon. the Minister in connection with the extension of parachute training and the opportunity the Coloureds will in future have to be trained as paratroopers. That is really a welcome announcement and one that will be very popular particularly among the enthusiastic supporters of the Cape Corps throughout the country. Neither can I neglect to say that one is becoming increasingly aware of the important role and part which the non-White troops are already playing in the South African Defence Force and also as far as the Armscor section of the whole set-up is concerned. Only certain sections of defence fit certain people like a glove. The hon. member for Yeoville has referred to the visit he and other hon. members paid to the operational area. He spoke about the areas of dense bush which had to be patrolled. One hon. member told me that he asked a Bushman sergeant where he preferred to be, at base or in the bush. Unhesitatingly and unequivocally he replied that he preferred most of all to be in the bush.

During the past few years there has been a greatly increased awareness in respect of civil defence among the people, and one can but express one’s appreciation for what has already been done throughout the country in organizing civil defence, and particularly for what local authorities and voluntary organizations are doing in this connection. Good organizations have been established in many centres and they have been successful in instilling and maintaining intense interest in civil defence among many people. In many centres the organization is not as good as it should be and in some centres nothing happens. A great deal depends on whether or not there is someone in the community who has the knowledge and training to give the necessary guidance. Large local authorities can afford to employ people for this purpose on a permanent basis, but the smaller local authorities cannot afford to do so. Civil defence services can be organized on a decentralized basis among local authorities but I think there is a serious lack of coordination and specialized leadership. That is why I want to make an appeal that civil defence should be extended and incorporated in our defence set-up as a full-fledged arm of it. That does not mean to say that it should become a military unit. Just like Armscor it can become an integral part of our defence set-up from which the necessary co-ordination, specialized leadership and assistance can emanate in order to place civil defence on a proper basis in the country. I have another reason for saying this, Sir, and that is because fire-fighting services in South Africa are so closely linked with our civil defence services. Fire-fighting services are a basic necessity in such defence. I do not think I am hurting anybody when I say that there is a shocking lack of co-ordination and control in respect of our fire-fighting organization in the country. I know that the Provincial Administration of the Cape Province has assumed legislative powers in order to take action in this regard. Fire-fighting services and equipment are very expensive and many local authorities cannot afford to give the standard of service demanded of them. That is why it is necessary, in the first place, that fire-fighting services in South Africa should, as far as possible, be standardized and, in the second place, that the equipment should be manufactured in South Africa. There is no good reason why expensive fire-fighting equipment should be imported. I am informed that we can easily manufacture such equipment locally to the extent of between 70% and 80%. If need be, we must manufacture that equipment here in South Africa under the guidance and with the assistance of Armscor.

Another important aspect is that firefighting training should be properly organized. There is a dire need for the establishment of a fire-fighting training college where fire-fighting personnel can receive their basic training before they are appointed elsewhere. That is why I think firefighting services, as an arm of civil defence, should eventually be co-ordinated and controlled by the Department of Defence. It is too important a part of our civil defence structure to be allowed to continue to operate as loosely as has been the case.

I want to say to the hon. the Minister that civil defence was given a great fillip when the Civil Defence College was established at George. That undertaking eventually expanded and today covers a much wider field. I want to make an earnest appeal to the hon. the Minister to consider the establishment of a fire-fighting college along the lines I have just indicated. If he is amenable to the idea I undertake to try to persuade the Parow Municipality to make the necessary land available for the building of such a college, because I believe such a fire-fighting college should be situated within an urban complex so that cadet firemen will be able to undergo the necessary practical training.

Mr. Chairman, in the very few minutes available to me I want to say something this afternoon about the role that has been played since World War II by the S.A. Navy, and about the role which, I think, the S.A. Navy is going to play in the future. I believe one could best sum up the role we have played to date as being part of the Western defence system for the South Atlantic and the Indian Oceans. That is to say, we made our contribution towards the protection of the Cape sea-route, and, as far as we ourselves are concerned, the defence of our own coastline. It seems to me then that one could describe it as helping to keep open the Western sea-lanes and the self-defence capability of the Republic.

Through no fault of our own the West has cancelled agreements and understandings with the Republic. This is not new. It started some years ago, I think, firstly, with the refusal during the early 1960s of the Americans to allow their warships to visit South African ports, and subsequently, by the breach by the British of the spirit and the terms of the Simonstown Agreement and the refusal to supply us with vessels, with maritime aircraft, and more particularly, with spare parts. That was followed by the formal renunciation by the British of the Simonstown Agreement and the withdrawal from the Republic of the British naval presence.

More recently we have had the arms embargo by the Security Council of the United Nations and the refusal by the Western powers to exercise a veto which, perhaps, a few years ago they might have exercised. Most recently we have had the refusal by France to fulfil the contracts for the supply both of submarines and corvettes. The consequence of this has been that our naval role has, in my opinion, changed completely. The hon. the Minister of Defence recently said—I believe he said it quite correctly—that our role in future was going to be the protection of the South African coastline and of our harbours, and that Western interests were no longer our immediate concern.

It cannot be said that South Africa has not carried out her obligations. We have, as part of the then combined Western defence system, entered into considerable expense for the provision of submarines during the last 10 years, as well as for the attempted provision of the corvettes and further submarines. At Simonstown we have entered into very considerable expense with extensions to the dockyard, as well as with the communications system at Silvermine, near Simonstown. As part of the scheme to be part of the larger Western defence system in respect of the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans, we have seen fit to move our headquarters to Pretoria. Some matters that I have in mind, I find it necessary to discuss with the Minister privately. Some of these matters are, I think, cause for concern, and I shall deal with them privately, because I do not believe that at times like this matters of controversy should be raised during the discussion of a defence vote in Parliament. I am therefore going to confine myself just to one or two problems that have arisen as a result of the move to Pretoria.

I think it is common cause that the move of the naval headquarters to Pretoria has been very much more substantial than was ever contemplated at first. At first it was thought that a small naval staff, which would act as advisers to the Chief of the Defence Force and which could also take part in joint defence planning and strategy, would move to Pretoria. I think most people imagined that the Chief of the Navy would remain in Simonstown, in touch with Pretoria through our modern systems of communication.

In actual fact, what has happened is that the whole top command of the Navy and its infrastructure, as well as the Chief of the Navy, have gone to Pretoria. Now, Sir, I refer to the diminished role the Navy is going to play, as I see it, in the future. If I am correct in saying that it is to play this diminished role, I should like to ask whether we can then afford a top-heavy naval infrastructure in Pretoria, and whether consideration cannot perhaps be given to a phasing out or reduction of that presence in Pretoria. The move to Pretoria has been an enormous one. I want to make a plea to the Minister today to give consideration to the possibility of investigating whether special compensation cannot be paid to some of the naval families for the exceptional hardship that has resulted from the move to Pretoria. There has been exceptional hardship, with which I am completely familiar. There have been broken leases, houses have been sold in the Simonstown area at a loss, and other houses have had to be bought or leased in Pretoria at inflated prices. There have also been other side-effects which I should like to refer to briefly. One of these has, I think, been the effect on the morale of many people who joined the Navy to have a sea-career. It seems to me as though much of that career is going to be spent in Pretoria. The Minister should give consideration to this, because I think this may have a deterrent effect on future recruitment to the Navy, unless he is able to spell out very clearly exactly what the role of the Navy is to be in the future.

As part of my plea for compensation to be paid to those who have suffered exceptional hardship in moving to Pretoria, I should like to ask that some consideration be given by the Minister to the payment of compensation to those naval families who had to move to France in anticipation of taking delivery of the submarines and corvettes. They were brought back almost overnight, and I am hoping that the Minister might see his way clear to appointing some sort of investigating commission to consider whether compensation cannot be paid in these two specific cases. I think a case can be made out for it. The Minister has given an assurance that the French are going to pay adequate compensation for the breach of contract as the result of the non-delivery of the corvettes and the submarines. I am very pleased that he has given that assurance because a lot of people have been wondering exactly what the position is.

Sir, may I touch on just one other topic. I know that the Minister is aware of this matter. I refer to the question of the future of Admiralty House in Simonstown. It has been occupied recently by the top serving naval officer in Simonstown. His rank is such that he cannot keep up Admiralty House in the way in which it has been kept up in the past. At this stage, I think all South Africans should pay tribute to Adm. Biermann and to Adm. Johnson for the way in which they entertained visitors to South Africa in Admiralty House in the past. In fact, they performed a very valuable service to the Department of Foreign Affairs in the way in which they dealt with so many important visitors to our shores. They were able to give them a good impression and a good insight into South Africa by having them as guests at Admiralty House. Consideration should, therefore, be given to the continuance of the use of Admiralty House, if necessary with the assistance of a subsidy, for this purpose by those who can perform this very good work started by the two admirals I have mentioned.

As to the future of the Navy, I suppose we would be right in assuming that the Navy is going to have to assume responsibility for the patrol of our extended fishing waters. Possibly some form of coastguard system can be incorporated into the activities of the Navy, although I have, in fact, suggested this as a possibility under various other departments. At this stage, however, the hon. the Minister must make a statement to the public of South Africa indicating how he sees the role that the Navy can play in the future.

As far as I am concerned, there are two cardinal matters that have to be attended to by the Navy at the moment. I am one of those who are pessimistic enough to believe that South Africa is going to be the subject of a blockade sooner rather than later, and I believe that the naval role in the combating of the worst consequences of a blockade is essential. In this particular instance I am thinking, for example, of immediate attention being given to a mine-laying system around all the coastal ports in South Africa. I have made a plea under the hon. the Minister’s Vote once before for the intensification of the fortification of the harbour system along the coasts of the Republic. There are many different interests involved in the harbour network along the coasts, and I think that their defence should be very much more seriously considered than is the case at the moment.

In conclusion I want to say that as part of the hon. the Minister’s overall review—which I hope he will give soon—of the future of the Navy, it is important that he should make clear what he sees as the future role to be played by Simonstown, our premier naval base, in the light of changed circumstances and the changed role that the Navy is going to have to play in the future of the Republic.

Mr. Chairman, apart from the question of the transfer of Naval Headquarters to Pretoria, which I do not want to debate with the hon. member for Simonstown, I have no fault to find with his speech. In fact, I agree with the larger part of it, and he and I will probably find common ground in our speeches.

But there is one matter regarding the transfer of Naval Headquarters to Pretoria in regard to which, in my view, he is not quite correct. He said people had to buy houses at inflated prices in Pretoria. But as far as I know, a good buyers’ market is prevailing in Pretoria at the moment, and this was the case last year as well. So I do not think there should be any problems in this connection.

It is very clear that the intensity of the assault upon South Africa is still not on the decline. In fact, it is increasing and, as has been pointed out often by the hon. the Minister and other speakers on this side, there is a total onslaught against South Africa at the moment. By this total onslaught is meant an attempt at just about every level to overthrow the existing legal State of South Africa that is recognized under international law and to establish it in a new form with a new name. This undoubtedly is the objective of the Marxists and we also believe that this is the objective of the Carter-Young combination. The total onslaught envisages that South Africa will be so weakened, demoralized and White-outed other than by military means that its overthrow by force of arms, should this be necessary, will only be the final phase. Most of the spheres of this total onslaught were touched on by my colleague, the hon. member for Cradock. These include spheres such as the diplomatic sphere, the psychological sphere, the economic sphere and the military sphere which time does not permit me to deal with now. But I do believe that at the present moment the total onslaught manifests itself in the threat that the West, viz. the USA, under the leadership of the USA, will no longer lend a hand to protect South Africa. As the hon. member for Houghton suggested during the budget debate—

If our perspective in this regard is not right, the warning of the hon. member, or the threat—however she intended it—will certainly be spine-chilling.

What must we tell ourselves in this connection? Firstly we have to admit that it would be nice to have allies, allies of the calibre of South Africa in two world wars, during the Berlin airlift and in the Korean war, people one could rely on at all times. It is tragic but it would appear that that sort of ally is no longer to be found in the West. I think the Chinese of Free China, the South Koreans, the South Vietnamese and the Somalis would be able to tell us something about this, and so would the Israelis. Secondly, I think that if that sort of ally is not available to South Africa at present, we should rather say to ourselves: It is better to stand alone without allies than to rely on so-called allies who will leave one in the lurch at the psychological moment. Thirdly, we have to tell ourselves that South Africa is not the first small country to endure such an onslaught. In fact, it is not the first time that South Africa itself has had to endure such an onslaught. And South Africa will not be the first country to survive it either. In Malaysia the British survived a 12 year onslaught by communist terrorists and eventually established a non-Communist state there. Nationalist China has withstood Communist China’s attacks since 1948 and is still a flourishing and developing country. Then there is little Israel which is encircled by a sea of hostile Arab states, backed by Moscow, and which celebrates its 30th anniversary this year.

Fourthly we have to tell ourselves that South Africa’s Defence Force, having regard to its numbers and taking our financial ability into account, is one of the most formidable in the world today, if not the most formidable. South Africa’s Defence Force will not brook any opposition. Those people who were on the other side in Angola when South Africa was involved there know this only too well. Fifthly, we say to our erstwhile allies: It is tragic that you have permitted the Marxists to manoeuvre you into your present attitude towards South Africa; it is really pathetic and we really pity you. But together with the hon. the Minister of Defence we say: Because of your attitude you must not now expect South Africa to act unilaterally in your interests; if you apply arms boycotts against South Africa, what moral claims, what claims of any sort can you make to any support or service of a military nature by South Africa? Together with the Minister we say: No arms, no service! We say to our erstwhile allies: As you know, South Africa has the most sophisticated alarm system in regard to the Southern Hemisphere’s sea and air routes which are invaluable to you. Do you expect South Africa to continue to supply you with this information while you threaten us and boycott us, while in fact you are collaborating with the Marxists against South Africa? We say “no”, and to the hon. the Minister we say that as far as we are concerned—and we think most of the country supports this—nothing should be asked of South Africa except on a quid pro quo basis.

Lastly, we tell ourselves that present times call for the involvement of everybody in South Africa. It is no longer the concern only of the hon. the Minister of Defence or the Chief of the Defence Force or members of Parliament. It calls for the involvement of every citizen in the country, man and woman. It is time for our defensibility to become a national priority. I am not speaking in the hard mobilization sense of the expression; I am referring rather to a mental approach regarding the defence of the country and in respect of the situation and the people around whom the defence of our country revolves. I think we are doing well in South Africa. If it is in fact true that our standard of living has declined, it is not visible. I think we can attribute this mainly to the fact that we are as militarily prepared as we are at the moment. For the security, progress and prosperity we still enjoy, we must express our gratitude particularly to those people who 24 hours out of 24 for the past three years have served on our borders or elsewhere, as well as to those men in other spheres and at other bases who have kept the whole, great military machine in operation. Without them we should long ago have had to forgo the progress, prosperity and security that we have enjoyed up to now. Without them the Cape Sea route would not longer have existed and our mineral resources would no longer be available to the West. That is why I believe that the whole South African nation should take the Defence Force to its heart, hold it in its hands and keep it in its prayers, from the most junior national servicemen to the Minister at the top. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, at this stage I should perhaps reply to certain points which have been raised. Then the debate can move on to other matters. Firstly, I should like to thank hon. members for the positive speeches made on both sides of the House and for the assurance given to the Defence Force that Parliament as a whole is behind it in its defence of the integrity of our country. The hon. member for Yeoville said that “South Africa is under attack” and he has also put the question: “Are we properly armed in the light of the arms boycott?” He also asked: “Are we not leaving the work of winning the hearts and minds till too late?” The hon. member has also referred to other aspects, which I shall return to presently. The hon. member for Durban Point, the hon. member for Bloemfontein West, the hon. member for Cradock, the hon. member for Waterkloof and the hon. member for Simonstown have all referred to the position in which we find ourselves as far as the West and its attitude towards us is concerned. To begin with I want to say a few words about that this afternoon.

Firstly, I should like to refer to the resolution relating to the arms embargo which has been adopted by the UN. I think it is only fit that on an occasion like this, where we are conducting a debate on defence, the country should be properly informed about the implications of this decision as adopted by the Security Council. In this decision it is stated, inter alia—

These are the first phrases with which this arms boycott is justified. It is a false image and contrary to the truth as far as South Africa is concerned, because if ever there was a country where people are helped to achieve a higher standard of living, where they receive medical services and social services out of proportion to that which they receive in the rest of Africa, then that country is the Republic of South Africa. That is why I am saying that the first phrase of this arms boycott decision are based on a false projection of our country. The second phrase reads—

Against which neighbouring States have we ever taken aggressive steps? I know of only one occasion in recent years when we crossed a border and that was in the case of Angola when we did so with the approval and knowledge of the Americans. But they left us in the lurch. We are going to retell that story: The story must be told of how we, with their knowledge, went in there and operated in Angola with their knowledge, how they encouraged us to act and, when we had nearly reached the climax, we were ruthlessly left in the lurch by an undertaking that was broken. It is necessary that we should say this. This resolution reads further—

Other people may produce nuclear weapons; South Africa may not!—

Where have we launched such attacks? We have here a so-called responsible world body—the West also serves on it—which bases their decisions against South Africa on false grounds and on a lie. It is therefore necessary that we should take into account the premise which forms part of this arms embargo, this resolution, which is nothing but a false premise. It is taking place in the face of what is going on in Africa, viz. an arms build-up on an unprecedented scale by Russian interference in Africa. I do not want to produce my own evidence in this regard. I want to quote from the work of an authority which indicates how much Russia has spent in this respect in the past year. I am referring here to one of the latest editions of Conflict Studies in which the whole situation is expounded. They say, inter alia—

$12 000 million has been ploughed into Africa by Russia. I must concede, however, that for the most part it was second hand and poor arms. But it has been done nonetheless. I quote further—

In four years’ time Russia ploughed more than $5 000 million worth of armaments into Africa. They gave arms instead of food, medical services and other assistance which should put Africa on the course of development. In the face of this, the Western countries vote for the adoption of a resolution like this in the Security Council, a resolution in which South Africa is condemned while Russia is left to continue its diabolical work in Africa.

Secondly, I should like to point out that Marxism in South Africa is not fighting a military battle only. They are not merely fighting to obtain key positions in order to execute their “grand strategy” for Africa. Russia is also conducting a propaganda campaign, and I am afraid that much of the Free World has fallen victim to this propaganda. Russia is, however, also waging a psychological and economic war. It is—as the hon. member for Durban Point has remarked—a total war which is being waged against us, and one is amazed that the so-called free West allows itself to be used for the intensification of these efforts on a continent such as Africa.

One can understand this attitude, however, when one sees that prominent advisers of Western leaders state that their approach is to create a new order in the world. Dr. Brzezinski, an advisor of the American president, has made it very clear that a totally new order has to be created in the world, an order which will be completely different from the one which the West has known until now. As far as South Africa is concerned, Dr. Brzezinski said—

I say today that this standpoint which Dr. Brzezinski advocates, cannot be the standpoint of any one of us in this House. If we should accept this standpoint, it would not only be White authority, which the hon. member for Yeoville referred to, that would be jeopardized, but also the rights of self-determination of each Black nation in this country, the cultural wealth and the historical possessions of the Black peoples, as well as the survival of minority groups like the Coloureds, Indians and others. If that should happen we shall all become slaves under Russia’s policy of conquest. If the West, and Dr. Brzezinski in particular, succeed in getting these philosophies accepted, they will be playing into the hands of Marxism in Southern Africa.

A prominent European has recently quite correctly referred to this fact. He has sent me one of the speeches which he delivered in his Parliament and I want to give a few quotes from it. I am referring to the standpoints put on behalf of Southern Africa and the RSA, as he sees it, by Dr. Franz Josef Strauss in the Parliament of the Bonn Republic. I am not going to give you long quotes. There are, however, a few paragraphs which to me are relevant and which I want to quote. Firstly, Dr. Strauss says—

He continues and comes to the following conclusion—

Finally I should like to quote the following from his speech—

It is a wise person who speaks in those terms in the councils of the world and who tells the West that they cannot follow Russia like a lot of blind moles in Africa but must call a halt somewhere. If this debate can contribute one thing then that is for this Parliament to tell the West on behalf of South Africa, and with the unanimous voice which has been evident so far, that they should not ask us to come to a halt. We are prepared to think, but they should also think for once. Allow me to say why they should think for once as far as we are concerned.

The day before yesterday a speech delivered by Gen. Haig, commander of Nato, was broadcast on the radio. He told the West that they should not think that the ramifications of Russia’s policies in Africa are to be viewed as in another continent of which they need not take notice. What Russia achieves in Africa, concerns the security of Europe. People like the chief of Nato, Dr. Franz Josef Strauss, Sir Walter Walker and Barry Gold-water are warning them. We are living in times when the West is able to read the handbooks of the Russians. And surely they are reading them, but they do not believe them. The Russians’ whole strategy is spelt out for them in those handbooks and by the Russian Defence Minister, who told the world how he wanted to use the Russian Navy to intimidate in order to make their foreign policy possible and ensure that they remained in control. It was spelt out by Mr. Brezhnev when he said that what their policy amounted to was that in future, they wanted nothing to happen on the face of the earth without their being consulted. This is spelt out to the West, but they continue to boycott South Africa. South Africa is the enemy. We trample upon the rights of our neighbours. We kill people. Where do they get these things from? They get a great deal of this information which they use so falsely against us from traitors from South Africa. Therefore it is as well that this Parliament should speak up about this today.

During the First World War this country brought upon itself a bloody civil war in which some of the best people of South Africa died as a result of our participation on the side of the West. That was the price which South Africa paid: Civil war and insurrection because the interests of the West had to be served. 190 000 White soldiers took part in the First World War on the side of the West. 60 000 non-Whites took part. 12 450 died in battle. During the Second World War South Africa once again stood on the side of the Allies in spite of discord and divisions within its own ranks. South Africa supplied 400 000 soldiers. 12 000 died. Then came the Berlin Airlift. In the Berlin Airlift 10 South African crews of three men each undertook 2 500 flights and delivered 8 000 tons of supplies to West Berlin. Then came Korea. South Africa made 800 members of the airforce available to Korea. Thank God, Korea still has the decency to invite us to its festivities and we shall attend them. All these are South Africa’s contributions to the West.

The Republic of South Africa has always been of the utmost importance to the West, and this applies to maritime affairs as well. For example, during January 1978—to take just one month—393 ships passed Cape Point, 208 of which were tankers. Do hon. members know what a prominent American wrote in a magazine? I do not want to mention his name, because it is not necessary. He says that the sea route round the Cape would not be so unsafe if South Africa did not stand guard there, because south of the Cape there was still another 1 000 km where ships could sail. One would swear there was another piece of land in the South, apart from Antartica. How many of these tankers have not been in trouble and have had to be helped by us? In the past few years 68 people have been saved by South African helicopters, people who have got into trouble at sea.

South Africa has a Decca navigation system which is being maintained by the South African Defence Force. We have this system all along our coastline and it serves ships up to a distance of 240 nautical miles. All the ships equipped with it are utilizing it. But do you ever hear a good word about us in this regard from Western circles? The signal station at Silvermine is important for the safety of ships of the organization known as Automated Merchant Vessel Rescue. Of the 74 signal stations for merchant ships which this organization has around the globe, the Silvermine station is the second most powerful in the world. We handel an average of 6 000 position reports of ships per month. But do you ever hear the West telling the world that we are an important country? Our harbours and our shipping repair facilities are also deserving of mention. At Simonstown alone we have in the past few years built a submarine base which is one of the most modern in the Southern Hemisphere, a submarine base which could be available to the West. We did not build it for ourselves alone. We have tripled the capacity of the harbour at Simonstown. Therefore the harbour can now accommodate three times as many ships as during the period of British command. The dockyard has been modernized in many respects. Do we ever hear this mentioned? No. We are only belittled by those who are holding up the Free World to us. If the Free World is so dishonest, how is one to become enthusiastic about it?

We are also rendering valuable services in the hydrographic field. One of the southern oceans has been called after the present chief of the Navy because of the work done by us in the hydrographic field, work which we did with the aid of our modern vessels. Our long-distance reconnaissance has to a large extent been equipped for and aimed at being of assistance to the West. Do we have the prospect, however, when our long-distance reconnaissance aircraft are withdrawn from service one day, of once more obtaining the assistance of the West? No. Instead, what we get is a venomous resolution like the one which has been adopted by the Security Council. It is as if these people have been struck with blindness. In that resolution we are accused of attacking our neighbouring States and murdering their people. In 1976, helicopters of the S.A. Air Force transported 400 tons of food to Lesotho, food for the starving people of Lesotho in its snow-covered mountains. Is a fuss ever made about that?

I am delighted that all the parties in this House today spoke up and told the West that they could not go on condemning us and think that we shall just go on tolerating it. South Africa is a country with self-respect. We are surely not a third-rate country which can simply be pushed around by others as it suits them. Is it us who have become bad in the Western community or has the Western community in many respects accepted different standards for itself? If the West, because of the lack of strategy, succeeds in placing Russia in a position of power in Southern Africa, it would be a case of putting the cart before the horse, because in order to put Southern Africa on the road to prosperity, economically and technologically, they need the Republic of South Africa. The stability of Southern Africa cannot be guaranteed by destroying the Republic of South Africa. Southern Africa can be put on the road to prosperity in every respect only by accepting the leadership of South Africa.

For that reason I have stated recently that if we are continually insulted in this manner, we shall be forced, in the first place, to look after our own interests.

We were prepared to co-operate in the community of nations. We are still prepared to do so. But then it must take place on a basis of mutual respect. If there is not mutual respect, we shall go ahead on our own and look after our own interests. We are not a country of grovellers. None of our population groups have ever been grovellers in their history. Our Black people were not slaves; they have not been exterminated with liquor and they have not been hunted with guns, either. Their numbers have not diminished. On the contrary, their numbers have increased. As against that the number of people outside our country and in those countries which now condemn us, decreased.

As the hon. member for Durban Point as well as other hon. members emphasized today, we realize that it is a total conflict. It is a battle which is waged against us in the propaganda field, and therefore each one of us as members of Parliament has the responsibility to think twice about what we say because propaganda is sometimes made against us on the radio on the basis of the things we say in this House. I receive those propaganda reports. I receive a monthly propaganda report of what is broadcast about South Africa and many quotations are literally taken from things which are said in South Africa when South Africans try to get the better of one another.

It is a psychological struggle as well as an economic one. It is a diplomatic and military struggle. Therefore it is a total struggle. For that reason I have quite correctly, as the hon. member has said, advocated that we develop a total strategy. It is not the task of the Government alone to establish a total strategy. A total strategy presupposes that the State, private enterprise and the citizenry should be clear about their aims, in the first place. In the second place, they should formulate those objectives, and after those objectives have been properly formulated, in spite of minor differences among themselves—they can still exist—a strategy should be formulated in pursuance of those set objectives. The strategy should then be carried out. Within the Defence Force we have made considerable progress in this regard. With the aid of other State departments we have made considerable progress in obtaining co-operation. The hon. member for Yeoville referred to that when he mentioned the civil action we are conducting. This takes place in co-operation with other departments.

However, I should like to refer to another aspect this afternoon: We should not overlook or underestimate the inherent strength of South Africa. I should like to convey a personal word of gratitude to our universities, colleges, the various statutory and other institutes and to our country’s industry as a whole, all of which, not for personal gain, but as a contribution to the preparedness of our country’s defence, are doing their share. A special word of thanks to our universities and colleges for the real participation of students and lecturers in our military preparedness.

A special word of thanks and appreciation to our statutory and other institutes for the fine way in which the scientists and research workers of the country are involved in solving defence problems. A special word of thanks to our industrialists in general for the utilization of expertise and manufacturing acumen to help in solving our logistics problems. I think it is necessary that a word of gratitude be conveyed to these institutions and persons. There is a phalanx of them assisting in making our national strategy a practical reality.

†The hon. member for Yeoville referred to the Black, Indian and Coloured population and said that there should be common cause between them and the White population. I agree with him. We have a common cause. The first common cause is that we do not allow other people to poke their noses into our internal affairs. Secondly, we are quite capable of ironing out our problems constitutionally by conferring with one another in round-table conferences, something we are indeed doing. We might disagree as to the various roads we want to travel, but I think that we have it as a common cause that we do not need Marxism in Southern Africa to solve our problems.

I agree with the hon. member that that there should be an increase in the employment of Coloureds, Indians and Blacks, as far as possible in different fields of defence. I agree with him. It is being done and it is done on a properly organized basis, after proper selection and on the basis of decent training. I can tell the hon. member that from 1 April 1977 to 24 February 1978 the Army alone had an increase in Coloureds of 40,6%.

In absolute terms, however, the figures are small.

Yes, in absolute terms. I agree that we are not dealing with vast numbers, but there is a gradual increase and a gradual development. The South African Cape Corps, for example, has never been in a better fighting spirit, more disciplined and of a greater pride to the nation than it is today.

The hon. member referred to the question of mobility. During the past few years we have continuously gone out of our way to bring about the greatest amount of mobility for the Defence Force. The hon. member, who is well informed, knows that we have made great strides in this connection with the placing of our bases, the training of our Permanent Force, the training of our commandos and the availability of certain armaments, which I do not want to mention in public. But I do think we have made great strides in bringing about greater mobility.

*The hon. member said that he should like to see an improvement at some bases. We should all like to see it, but I am satisfied that good food is being provided at our bases. I make it my business to see to it myself. I think the food is of the best quality. Our people get the necessary health services and I think they all sleep well, when they can sleep, that is. It is true that some of our advance bases do not have the facilities which one would have under normal circumstances, but I think that we have nevertheless made a lot of progress in improving the conditions there.

†The hon. member also referred to the question of a bigger Permanent Force. He mentioned increasing the numbers in the Permanent Force. I have, of course, never been against this principle, and as far as I am able to make money available to the Defence Force, I shall work in that direction. The hon. member knows that as far as the Air Force is concerned, we lay stress on permanent members. This also applies to the Navy. As far as the Army is concerned, where one has to deal with greater numbers, there are difficulties in introducing a Permanent Force immediately. With the announcement I made this afternoon, however, and with the development of our reconnaissance forces and other units, I believe we are gradually moving in the direction of a bigger Permanent Force. I shall come back to other points made by the hon. member later.

*The hon. member for Bloemfontein West referred to the question of the Permanent Force, to assistance to servicemen who return, to short service and to study facilities. I should like to say a few words about that. First of all I want to say that the manner in which the Permanent Force is working overtime, is a source of much gratification to me. I should like to thank the Permanent Force today for the example they are setting to the country in this regard. Recently I requested the relevant figures for the period 1 October 1976 to 30 September 1977. Over that period of 12 months the Permanent Force has worked more than 1 million hours overtime. The figures which were given to me, were split up for the different services: The Army; the Air Force; the Navy; the Surgeon-General; the Chief of Staff—Operations; the Chief of Staff—Personnel; the Chief of Staff—Information; the Chief of Staff—Logistics; the Chief of Staff—Finance; the Quartermaster-General and the Chaplain-General’s division. The figures consistently reveal the impressive overtime service rendered. I should like to convey my sincere thanks for this to the Permanent Force today.

The hon. member for Bloemfontein West and the hon. members for Durban Point and Yeoville, have referred, inter alia, to the system of national service and the question of after-care for soldiers when they return. Some of them also referred to the opportunities for study. A question was also asked about short service. It has been shown that recruiting for the Permanent Force, in other words long service, has been more successful than the short-term system. The recruiting target set for 31 March 1978 for officers and men for short service was 1 200. We got 800. Therefore the real recruiting was 66⅔%. We did very well, however, in our recruiting for the Permanent Force. There seems to be a trend towards long-term service in the Permanent Force under present circumstances.

The hon. member has also put a question relating to study facilities. I should like to shed a little more light on this matter. National servicemen who have indicated in their questionnaires that after Matric they first wish to study further at a university or other recognized educational institution, are allocated to the June intake. Then, at the beginning of March, they have to submit to the Exemption Board written evidence of the fact that they are enrolled students, after which they are given exemption for that year. If they cannot prove it, they are called up. Students must complete a questionnaire every year, and the same procedure applies for the second and subsequent academic years. Students that fail, are warned by the Exemption Board that unless they make satisfactory progress in their studies, further exemption will be refused. There have been cases of people coming to me and asking me to intervene after action has been taken. I regret that I cannot act in these cases. It also happens that students who do not meet the conditions of the board, are assigned to the January intake before they have completed their studies. I think hon. members will agree with me that that is only fair. Students should keep the board properly informed, and if they do not seem to make any progress at university, I do not see why any further exemption should be given to them. Secondly: All students in their final academic year are put on a separate list and, according to the requirements of the fighting units the professionally qualified national servicemen are allocated—for example doctors, dentists, engineers. In other words, those people about whom we have information, we allocate to those services in the defence set-up requiring professional services or leadership material. In most cases the supply exceeds the demand for a single intake. Thus, for example, 150 doctors might be available for a particular year. They are divided, according to the requirements between the January and the July intakes of that year. It has also been found that there are more doctors than we need at present, and consequently, in consultation with the provinces a formula has been found in terms of which we can place some of those doctors in hospitals. I must point out, however, that the number of doctors required at a time like this, is most probably much smaller than one would in fact need as the threats increased. Therefore there should always be flexibility in the allocation in this regard.

It has been arranged with Unisa, after consultations with the Vice-rector, that national servicemen who are in a position to study further, can obtain study facilities through Unisa. I should like to point out, however, that the utilization of most national servicemen is aimed, in the first place, at serving the interests of the Defence Force and the security of the country, and that consequently we cannot give study opportunities to everybody.

The hon. member for Bloemfontein West further pointed out that it was customary in the past to use national servicemen as far as possible in their professional capacity and also to grant most of them a commissioned rank. An investigation into that is being conducted at the moment in collaboration with the manpower board, and we expect that the manpower board, on which the Defence Force is represented, will be able to reach a decision on this matter before the end of the month. In the meantime I can say that our policy on this matter has not changed. It must be understood, however, that the interests of the country and the military needs should enjoy priority here as well. The fact remains that there is only a need for certain categories of professional people under the 24 month system of national service, while certain other professions are temporarily exceeding the demand. There is an urgent need for junior leaders in the Defence Force, as the hon. member knows. I think we can use many of these people as junior leaders. Without junior leaders—and the hon. member for Yeoville has interjected quite correctly that a good corporal is necessary. He apparently has experience of that…

I am afraid of some of the corporals.

With the correct training these servicemen can make a valuable contribution. That is the answer, in my opinion.

The hon. member for Durban Point touched on two matters of importance. Firstly, he asked me how it was that I had envisaged an 18 month period of service. I did not propose it as specifically as that, however.

†What I said was that if possible we would limit it to 18 months. The idea was to call them up for 18 months, but the escalation of the threat would determine the position. That is the reason why we introduced a maximum period of 24 months.

You said 18 months would be the initial period.

Yes.

*In addition I said that this was a new system we were introducing, and that it would have teething troubles and would cause problems. If we had not used the 1977 intake and called them up as well—that is really where the bitterness originated—we would have had to keep on calling up a far greater number of Citizen Force and Commando members in future.

I do not want to pretend for one moment that we are going to completely eliminate the calling-up of the Citizen Force and the Commandos. I only want to pave the way for it right away. We must bear in mind that the successful implementation of this system, namely the 24-month system can under the present pressure only be achieved if we are prepared to keep the Citizen Force and Commandos in training and not use them for these services. They cannot be eliminated 100%, however. I want to make that very clear. I admit that there were teething troubles with the system. I myself have inquired about these teething troubles from the Defence Force. I requested the Chief of Staff of the Defence Force to submit a report to me in this regard, which he did. He explained his problems to me and, being someone who knows that in such a big organization unforeseen problems sometimes crop up, I am prepared to admit that circumstances have forced us to extend the call-ups to older men than we originally intended.

Can you indicate when we shall have finality about the call-ups of the older men?

It will depend on the threat. The hon. member will know that we have sophisticated material and that the less trained the people are, the less capable they will be to deal with that sophisticated material and equipment. I believe that priority number one should be the interest of the Defence Force and proper protection of our sophisticated equipment. I have no doubt that the hon. member will agree with me in this regard. I am not prepared to say …

I was referring to the Army Command which determined what intake would be given what credit and when they would be discharged after a period of 10 years.

We are at present busy with that. I am informed that we are at present investigating that and we shall be able to make a proper statement in that connection in due course.

You have already had five months’ time.

Yes. We have a great deal of work to do, however, and we are also waging a war. Surely the hon. member should be aware of the problems which the Defence Force has to contend with. We are not sitting and twiddling our thumbs. Indeed, I have just indicated how the Defence Force is already working overtime.

The hon. member also brought up the question of assistance to returning national servicemen and to handicapped people. I think the difference between the hon. member’s viewpoints and my own is to be found in the wording of my reply. What the Defence Force and I had in mind when drawing up that reply, was that we do not want to establish a separate organization to handle these matters. What we wanted, under the co-ordinating guidance of the Defence Force, was to involve all local institutions concerned with welfare and with the public …

And the employers?

Yes. They are also involved in this. We also want to involve the Department of Labour, church organizations, service organizations and women’s organizations. For that reason we have set up the committee system. It is not a separate organization, but a co-ordination of already existing services. The Defence Force tries to coordinate these services and to involve the mayors and town clerks of our towns in this endeavour. The Chief of Personnel will be responsible for the overall co-ordination and the implementation of the system. In my opinion we have made considerable progress with the preliminary steps in this regard. I also hope that we shall all, in our own areas, stir up enthusiasm for this effort to involve the whole population in this after-care and employment of national servicemen in civil capacities.

That was my original suggestion.

Then the hon. member can see that I am always prepared to accept a good suggestion. If the hon. member feels happy about it, I have no quarrel with him.

The hon. member has also referred to the intake of Coloureds and Indians in the Defence Force. I can give him the assurance that we are trying to double the present number before the end of the year. However, this must take place in an orderly manner, with proper training and under capable leadership. One cannot go about it in a reckless manner.

The hon. member for Cradock has asked some questions in connection with the position of Chinese in the Defence Force. If there are South African Chinese who volunteer to serve in the South African Defence Force, the S.A. Air Force is specially geared to create service opportunities for them. They are therefore free to report.

The hon. member for Parow referred to the question of civil defence. His speech was very original. It seems to me that his visit to the operational area with other hon. members has done him good. At the moment the position is that there are 29 local authorities in the Western Province whose planning with respect to civil defence has already received an A-grading, in other words, these 29 authorities have been examined and have passed the A-test. In the Western Province another 31 local authorities have a B-grading, in other words, they have not been tested yet, but there is hardly anything lacking in their planning. In other areas the position is as follows: In the Eastern Province, three A and 11 B gradings; Natal six A and 22 B gradings; The O.F.S., one A and 26 B gradings; the North Western Command, 39 A and 24 B gradings; Northern Transvaal, six A and 10 B gradings, the Witwatersrand, 19 A and 16 B gradings, the Southern Cape, nine A and 13 B gradings and South West Africa, three A and 16 B gradings. In other words, there are 169 organizations which have already received a B grading. This proves that progress is being made.

I should just like to add that a coordinating body has been established consisting of the various State departments, viz. the Departments of the Prime Minister, of Plural Relations and Development, of the Interior, Foreign Affairs, Health, Social Welfare and Pensions, Transport, Coloured Relations, Indian Affairs and Justice, as well as the Public Service Commission. These departments are represented on the coordinating committee on Civil Defence, and this committee meets on a regular basis in order to look at aspects of civil defence.

Furthermore, we have a Directorate of Civil Defence within the Defence Force, under the leadership of the Chief of Operations. As hon. members know, we have amended the legislation in order to obtain the assistance of the Administrators of the provinces so that the civil defence action could be speeded up. Most of the provinces have adopted ordinances to this effect, and the regulations to be made on civil defence, have by now almost been finalized. The provinces, like the S.A. Police, the Railways Police, the United Municipal Executive and the Chief of the Army are also represented on this coordinating committee. The Defence Force provides the Secretariat. The hon. member requested that we should choose Parow as a training centre for firemen. They would supply the land. It is a fine offer, and I shall refer the matter to the Defence Force. We should investigate the question of the training of firemen. I agree with him that this is a very important element. Although I do not want to make any promises, I do promise him that we shall look at his speech to see what there is that we can use.

The hon. member for Waterkloof pointed out that we should be careful not to jeopardize our country’s military effort by what we do or say. I want to thank him for that.

†The hon. member for Simonstown raised the question of the Navy. I am afraid that at present I deem it necessary that the naval headquarters should be in Pretoria for reasons of co-ordination and proper planning. I was against it originally. I thought it would not happen in my term of office, but eventually I was convinced and took the step. I think we must now give it an opportunity to prove itself. It is of course not the first time the naval headquarters are moved to Pretoria. It happened in the past too.

The hon. member also raised the matter of the Admiralty House.

I raised the question of compensation to families who moved to Pretoria and to those who had been to France.

I am coming to that. I shall go into the merits of the case and reply to the hon. member at a later stage. I cannot commit myself at this moment.

*In the past, as the hon. member has mentioned, Admiralty House was used by the then Chief of the Navy to entertain foreign visitors. I do not think that that arrangement will be changed, because the Chief of the Navy intends, after consultations with the Chief of the Defence Force, to change Admiralty House into an officers’ club for senior officers. I believe it would serve that purpose very well. Visitors from abroad could also be received there, as in the past. I shall, discuss the matter with them further, however. I know that the hon. member takes a special interest in the future of Admiralty House. I want to give him the assurance that it will not be neglected.

There is only one other matter which I have to refer to. The hon. member for Durban Point said that we should use the money paid back to us as a result of the cancellation of foreign contracts, to improve the working conditions of people. According to my information we have in fact used it to finance other priorities, such as for example the landward defence, which must enjoy higher priority at the moment. I have also been told that R5 million of these funds is destined for improvements in the pay of national servicemen. Therefore something is being done in this direction.

I believe I have now dealt with most of the matters raised.

Mr. Chairman, I want to react immediately to what I think is the gravamen of the hon. the Minister’s speech, viz. the attitude which he took towards the Western powers and, with justification, the complaints that he made in certain directions. I want to say right away that the claims for understanding by the West of South Africa’s situation which the hon. the Minister made, I think are readily understood and supported, because our history shows that we have always been on the side of the West when they were in need, and obviously we can be a tremendous asset to the West.

The case which the hon. the Minister made out in respect of the Marxist threat in Africa is also one that one must support, and one must accept that that is the reality of the situation. But, with respect, the same mistake that the hon. the Minister made—and I say it kindly—has also been made by other speakers, and that is that we are not actually understanding the reasons for the West’s attitude at the present moment, and because we do not appear to understand that, we do not seem to be able to counter the situation that has developed. I would like to try and put this case here this afternoon.

The difficulty in which South Africa is presently placed is that the West is seeking to complete with Soviet Russia for the support of the Black majority Governments that they believe will exist in Southern Africa. They are today seeking to compete with them in order to achieve that situation. They seek to compete with Soviet Russia in order to achieve change because they believe this is the only way that Southern Africa can be kept non-communist. The difficulty in which South Africa finds itself is that we are making change an issue instead of making violent change as opposed to peaceful change the issue. I believe it is quite clear that the case that we can sell to the West is that if there is violent change in Southern Africa it will bring with it Marxism, whereas if there is peaceful change, that will result in Southern Africa being kept on the side of the West. What we have to show and what we can demonstrate is that there is a thin brown line of South Africans, which is the line between violence and peace. That thin brown line is the line between violent change and peaceful change in Southern Africa. That is what I believe we have to accept in the present situation. We have to accept the situation that however much we think the West is wrong, the reality of the situation is that in the short term we cannot get the arms boycott reversed. The reality of the situation is that in the short term, if anything, the attitude of Western nations towards South Africa is likely to get worse. I believe that it will get worse before it gets better and I believe it will get worse before we get to the next American presidential election, because all the signs are there that in so far as Southern Africa is concerned it is going to be used as an issue in the next presidential election in America in order to seek to keep the Black vote on the side of the incumbent president. That is the reality of the situation. That is why I believe the relationship between the West and Southern Africa is going to get much worse before it gets better. What we have to do is to make sure that during this period, when things are bad and difficult in relation to this position, we actually survive, that we live through that period and that we live through it with strength until such time as the attitude of the Western nations changes. I believe it will change and that they will eventually see the change if we tackle it in the correct manner. However, what we must bear in mind is that in this fight the Whites of South Africa have only one ally, viz. the people in South Africa, all the South Africans. That ally is available to us. We have to make sure that there is a united nation in order to meet the threat which faces South Africa. We talk about the attitude of the West and we talk about the Soviet threat, but what we are not dealing with are the promises which are also made to the Black people of Southern Africa by the Marxist philosophy, the promises that can never be honoured, but which can be made because they have not experienced it. That is why one of the efforts which we have to make is not only to show what life would be like under a Marxist regime, but also in reality to deliver the goods, because this is the régime under which people are living now. We have to show in reality that there is something to lose by not defending a situation against Marxism. We also have to see to it that that change is brought about by peaceful means in Southern Africa. That is where I doubt whether at the present moment everything that should be done is being done. That is why it does not help to complain that the West is wrong. Of course, the West is wrong in taking this particular attitude. However, we have to win the West back. It is no use merely crying about it. We have to make a positive effort in order to sell our case to the world of today.

The hon. the Minister spoke about the fact that we are increasing, in terms of percentage, the number of non-White people who are serving in the Forces. May I, however, direct the attention of the hon. the Minister to two things. I do not know the correct figures pertaining to every White and every non-White person who is serving in the Forces. I would nevertheless like to put it to the hon. the Minister that if the figure—as I believe it to be—is that about 2,5% of the whole of the Defence Force consists of non-Whites, the hon. the Minister will agree with me that that is far too low. He will agree with me that it is too low.

That is not the correct figure for the operational area.

I am talking about the Defence Force as a whole. I am not talking about the operational area.

I am talking about the operational area.

I am talking about the Defence Force as a whole.

All right.

My contention is that it is 2,5% of the Defence Force as a whole—I am referring to the number of non-White people serving in the Defence Force— the percentage is far too low. However, I want to give the hon. the Minister another figure, a figure which, I believe, he is obliged to explain to the House. If we look at the budget we find that the amount which is set aside for the training of non-Whites has actually been decreased this year. It has been decreased from R11,35 million to R9,1 million. I would have imagined that the hon. the Minister would want more money for the training of non-Whites. If we find ourselves in a situation in which we have a major conflict developing—and that is a possibility we cannot ignore—I believe we have to move rapidly and forcefully to a situation in which there are more non-White people involved in the Defence Force than are involved at the present moment.

The one matter which the hon. the Minister failed to reply to—and I am sure it was by accident—is the question of the salary scales of Blacks. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that I do not believe that there is a feeling in the South African Defence Force which is related to colour. I would like to tell a story here which, I believe, illustrates this. When I spoke to one of the corporals and asked him what he thought was the relationship between himself as a White man and a Black soldier, he replied: “Meneer, daar is nie ’n verskil nie. Ons veg almal saam vir dieselfde doel.”

*I then asked him what he suggested we should do. His reply was: “There is only one thing we must do. The Black man is entitled to the same salary as that which I receive.” I wish to put it to the hon. the Minister that if we find that that is the attitude of a farm lad defending his country, I think the time has come that we should pay equal salaries to all our peoples.

†Except for the salary situation and except for minor things which can be removed, I do not believe there is discrimination in the Defence Force. However, when other people point a finger at us, perhaps I should also today point a finger. I would like to refer, if I may, to the 1975 Army report on Race Relations and Equal Opportunity Programmes and Annual Assessments for the United States Army. In this it is said—The researchers who have studied the Army have found what they call institutional racism, not a conscious policy, but institutional procedures that result in Blacks being denied the same chances as Whites. That, interestingly enough, comes from a nation who themselves have pointed a finger at us. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, what we had here for the greater part of the afternoon was truly an experience not to be missed. I should like to tell the hon. member for Yeoville and all his colleagues on his side—I mean what I am going to say now—that it really is wonderful to be able to sit here and discuss matters together as patriots. I could hardly believe my ears, but this is so and we appreciate it.

As far as the West is concerned, I should like to ask the hon. member for Yeoville whether he thinks it is worth the trouble to woo a West which is so weak that it allows Russia to blackmail it. The West has many good examples in the form of the results of the operation of Marxism on our eastern and north-western borders. If the West wants better examples of famine, oppression and misery, it must have its head read. I do not believe there are better examples. However, we had no hand in it, and this will be evident from investigations which they could make with the greatest objectivity imaginable.

After the hon. the Prime Minister, the hon. the Minister is known as the chief exponent of the total onslaught which is being launched at our country, an onslaught which began at Yalta. It was suggested that the next thing to be tackled as world enemy No. 1 was the Red Army. No less a person than Churchill suggested this. However, his offer was refused—Churchill was given the cold shoulder—and then the initiative went to the Russians with their Marxism. Marxism then created and expanded the UN as its chief instrument, with the OAU as a satellite instrument. Marxism emerged in Angola, Mozambique, Gogh Street, Port Elizabeth and last week in Hillbrow, with its whole disgraceful, contemptible method, a method of mental subversion as founded by its creator. This agrees with what Krushchev said in his short summary of the communist world plan—

This is the slogan, the standard, the legend inscribed above this onward march and the West knows it as we all know it. Karl Marx once summarized his communist aim as follows—

Years ago the communist leaders launched a psychological attack on the West; not with weapons against weapon and army against army, but with psychological weapons aimed at the heart of the people. This is the total onslaught and nothing less than what we are experiencing in our country today. Lenin, the father of Soviet communism, said as far back as 1919—

Joseph Stalin, Lenin’s successor, took it further. His point of departure was the following: Change the West into a meaningless vacuum in order to bring about a world State under communist control without a war. Cannot one picture the West nowadays standing on crutches or props with which it is trying to keep itself upright? Indeed, it is to a large extent a symbol of emptiness as regards spiritual force and decisive action. Lavarenti Beria, former chief of the Russian Secret Police, makes the following statement—

The onslaught on the youth was launched worldwide. I quote—

We have had this combination. We do not have to laugh about it because we had it at Rivonia. It is said “combine drugs and treason” and everything that entails. By making various drugs readily available, by praising wildness and stimulating people with sex literature, the psycho-political operator can create the necessary atmosphere of chaos, idleness and lack of values. In the midst of this the solution must be offered which will give the teenager so-called complete freedom viz. communism. After all, we experienced this in Soweto. What more evidence does the West or any patriot want in order to give substance to this striving towards world domination?

In addition to this, reference can be made to the communists’ subtle psychological strategy which is summarized in The Naked Communist and was placed on the U.S. Congressional Record by the field director of the American Security Council, Cleon Skousen. According to this the standpoint is also: the destruction of all moral norms by promoting pornography and immorality in books, magazines, films, radio, television and the free Press.

It has been scientifically established that 55% of rape crimes and 37% of sexual crimes are incited by pornography. We have tried to combat this, and we were accused of supposedly wanting to be too strict with our censorship, that we were making inroads on individual freedom and freedom of the Press. However, we want to talk here about a common enemy. The question is: What is our complicity in the creation of a milieu in which these malcontents, these seeds, can flourish in order to pollute and bedevil our pure spiritual and cultural background and idealism? It is a very serious question.

Then, too, I want to point out what assistance the ordinary community can offer to combat this offensive. The solution is to be found in spiritual preparedness, follow-up work, etc. We must oppose the impression that violence and rebellion are lawful aspects of the country’s traditions at our training centres and universities. I have heard these stories told in a very pious manner in this House and outside it. Those people are Freedom Fighters! The measures for combating mental subversion … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Witwatersberg will pardon me if I do not react to his speech, except for saying that what he has told us here is shocking.

The Republic of South Africa is involved in a situation which can be described as total war. It is a relatively new concept that the total onslaught on a nation can be conducted on a multi-dimensional basis and that it is not only concentrated on the military front, but on the psychological, economic and political fronts as well. Because this is so, it is essential for us to do everything in our power to enable our Defence Force to safeguard and defend our country to the best of its ability and with all the means available to it. This is also why we have a system of national service in terms of which we train our young men. This is a system without which no country can be prepared and which must provide us with the necessary manpower. I have little fault to find with the system of national service as it is implemented at the moment. I want to allege that it causes the least possible inconvenience in respect of our economy and all the other facets of our society. I also want to express my sincere thanks to the S.A. Defence Force for the efficient instructions which are issued to every serviceman before he reports for duty. If these instructions are closely followed by every serviceman, I believe that we shall have no problems in this field.

We as parents play an important part, however, in respect of our sons who have to report for military duty. One regrets the fact that there are some parents who regard national service as a punishment rather than a privilege. Fortunately, these parents are a small minority. The influence of the parent plays an important role in creating the right climate and in motivating the boy so that he will have the necessary will to fight for his country. The enemy intends to undermine us psychologically. They know that we are physically strong, and therefore they have to try to destroy our will to fight for what we hold dear and what belongs to us. Accordingly, we must be on our guard to ensure that we do not collaborate in this knowingly or unknowingly.

I want to appeal to the public to look after the interests of young men who have to do their national service. The public can make a very positive contribution in this regard. In this connection I should like to mention my own constituency as an example. I represent a rural constituency in which there are many young farmers who have to report for national service from time to time. These young farmers have entered into great financial obligations and when they have to go off to do their national service, they find it difficult to leave all their obligations behind without anyone to look after them.

We have farmers’ associations all over our country, and I ask myself why these farmers’ associations cannot look after the interests of these young farmers who have to go and do their national service. Why can such a young serviceman not report to his farmers’ association, of which he should actually be a member, so that the association concerned may look after the interests of that young man on an organized basis while he is serving on the border or elsewhere so that we in South Africa may continue our activities in peace and quiet? I think that we owe it to these servicemen.

I should also like to refer to the economizing campaign in which the S.A. Defence Force has also participated and is still participating. No soldier can fight without equipment, and it is certainly true that the Defence Force has to deal with a great variety of equipment. Every year our Defence budget makes greater demands on the taxpayer. Equipment is becoming more and more expensive and is difficult to obtain. If equipment, buildings and so on are damaged, it means that we have less money for acquiring modern arms and other essential items. We cannot always replace the item which has been damaged, and the S.A. Defence Force has to get along without it. This plays an active part in preventing the S.A. Defence Force from doing its work and therefore endangers our country. The cost of repairing equipment can amount to two-thirds of the purchase price and it is clear that equipment has become tremendously expensive. At the moment, repairs are costing several millions of rands a year. The S.A. Defence Force has launched a campaign—and it is a fine campaign, Mr. Chairman—by means of which the need for and the importance of economizing have been brought home to all the parties concerned on the top level of management, the middle level of management and the low level of management. In the few minutes available to me, I cannot spell out all the things which have been done in this connection, but I should like to tell hon. members that this economizing campaign is a resounding success. In order to evaluate the success of the campaign, an effective measuring system was designed by means of which Defence Force section heads in particular are able to exercise control over real economizing down to the unit level and to take preventive measures if the targets which have been set cannot be reached. The campaign is a very large one and it affects many facets of the activities of the S.A. Defence Force. The normal growth of the activities of the S.A. Defence Force and the constantly increasing cost of manpower and materials must, however, be taken into consideration in determining whether or not it has been a success.

In order to illustrate the scope and diversity of the campaign, I want to give hon. members a few examples of actual economies which have resulted from the campaign and the ingenuity of the individuals and units during the past year.

As far as the S.A. Army is concerned, an amount of R108 000 has been saved in respect of the maintenance and construction of buildings from its own resources. The recycling of spare parts of vehicles which had been classified as beyond economic repair has resulted in a saving of R2 670 000. Savings effected in respect of vehicles, trailers, etc., which were rebuilt out of vehicles which could not be repaired and which would normally have been sold by auction, has amounted to R8 100 000. The use of an airlift instead of the Railways for conveying troops to and from the operational area has resulted in a saving of R2 400 000.

As far as the Air Force is concerned, the rebuilding of a Cessna aircraft at a cost of R30 000 by making use of spare parts derived from two aircraft which had been damaged beyond repair resulted in a saving of R13 000. A new aircraft, if available, would have cost R43 000. A burnt-out fuel tanker was rebuilt at a cost of R19 000, which meant a saving of R65 000, because a new tanker would have cost R84 000. The local manufacture of aircraft spare parts instead of their importation has resulted in a saving of R1 million. I could go on like this and mention many examples. These are examples which can be found in the official publication of the Defence Force, Paratus.

The enthusiasm, dedication and efficiency with which the campaign is approached and carried on by every member of the S.A. Defence Force are truly commendable and deserve the sincere thanks of this House. If the present pace and approach of the campaign is kept up, the future will prove that the S.A. Defence Force is able to live up to its motto of “We can, we will, we shall” in this great national task.

Mr. Chairman, it gives me great pleasure to be able to speak on the subject of defence this afternoon and I would also like to mention how pleased I am that this debate has followed a non-political line. To be frank, applying the military principle of “know your adversory”, I did some reading about the hon. the Minister’s background and I found that the adversary which I have before me is such a formidable one that I would not like to tackle him on the political platform right now, at least not until I have seen him in action in a few further debates.

He can be very tough!

The hon. the Minister has been described as a wildcat that one does not touch without gloves. Well, the use of gloves comes from experience in this hon. House and I have not gained enough of that yet.

I would like to raise two major subjects to which I would like the hon. the Minister to listen and offer his comments. These are positive suggestions and have no political connotations.

In the first place I want to refer to the training of NCO’s in our Army. In this regard I would like to go along with the hon. member for Bloemfontein West when he mentioned the importance of the corporal. I would like to agree with him in the light of the experience that we have had in the commandos, i.e. that the corporal has become the key to the success of the Army. I am not undermining the hon. the Minister’s generals who is sitting over there. As a very junior officer in the Army I am, in fact, standing to attention, as hon. members can see. These hon. gentlemen are as important as the corporal. The corporals in our Army are functioning very efficiently and well. They have to deal with a group of men over whom they have full control in the bush. In the bush they have no lieutenants, captains or senior officers helping them along the way. The corporal is solely in charge of the life of the men under his command. My suggestion is that these men, who number one out of every four men who enter the Army, need to be trained to the fullest extent that we can. The training which I am suggesting is that the university graduate should be looked at before he starts his basic training. He should be carefully screened, while at his university and prior to his basic training, he could be trained to become an officer. This is revolutionary in the sense that he is going to be trained to become an officer prior to ever becoming a soldier. At university he will attend class lectures on strategic and basic warfare. Fundamental warfare can be taught to him there. I suggest that it should be done on this basis—seeing that classrooms will be available there—that local commandos can assist in giving these lectures. I will gladly assist in Pietermaritzburg and I am sure there are many other members of the local commandos who would gladly assist these young men in how to become an officer. During his university career the young man can attend one such lecture a week, one week’s training during his July holiday and by the end of his course at university he would have completed a total of three years one-day per week lectures and he would have also completed three weeks’ training. All this would be specifically officer training. When he enters the Army after having completed his officer course, he will have a certain amount of ability over and above the system that we are employing at the moment. He will be about 22 years of age, slightly more mature, certainly more experienced and he will have a wider knowledge of the subject. The additional advantage is that he will do his basic training and after a period of, say, six months after having entered the Army, he could become a NCO, a staff officer or a lieutenant. This will enable the Army to have an officer for 18 months of the 24 months rather than the present period of 6 to 12 months out of 24. The present system whereby he completes his normal basic training, then goes to the officers’ school at Oudtshoorn and elsewhere and then continues as officer for the rest of his training allows him to operate as an officer for only 6 to 12 months. When I attended the Danie Theron Military School at Kimberley two years ago I found that the youngsters who were teaching us had not been fully taught the art of teaching.

These are well trained and capable young men, but they are 19 year old youngsters who have not had the teacher training and the experience of an older man which an university graduate would have. As they are, they are doing a remarkable job, but I believe that older men who are more mature and intelligent would do better than these young instructors. I think we could certainly assist the armed forces by utilizing the university graduates better. They could go virtually straight into the Army as NCOs or officers. All of them however will not necessarily qualify. The university could offer a psychological and aptitude test to these men to check whether they are suitable as officer material. The Defence Force could certainly make better use of these men when they are finished with university.

The other point which I would like to touch on is the question of volunteer commando training. Here I am speaking purely on behalf of the rural type of commando, in particular the volunteer commando units. The system which is employed in Natal is a very simple one and it works exceptionally well. The system involves a four-day camp and 15 one-day camps per year. In other words, the members of the commandos are required to do 19 days training during the year. I cannot quite understand why the major cities and other areas have not adopted the same method of training. The system has been working very well as it suits the farmer and the man who is self-employed to do his training on this type of system. One other point I should like to raise concerns a touchy and delicate subject which could be debated at length, i.e. Sunday training. In Natal the farmer has got a large labour force and is not always able to take time off his work. He wants to work with the Army, but he needs time off and the only time he really has is over the weekends, on Sundays. I am pleading for a system which will enable this man to complete his four-day camp over a long weekend—say the Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday—and then to do eight additional training weekends over the Saturday and the Sunday, which will allow him to have additional overnight exercises during the year as well. This view is shared by a large number of men in our units. In fact, we worked on this system until we found out that we were, in fact, contravening the Defence Act. We were told to stop the practice, after which we offered our men the opportunity to do it voluntarily. However, we were further informed that if an accident were to happen during such a voluntary training exercise on a Sunday, the man will not be covered by insurance and the officer in charge, in fact, will be liable. We therefore immediately ceased Sunday operations and carried on with the normal exercise. However, the men have asked to be allowed to operate throughout the weekend. I want to stress that I am only referring to the man who voluntarily offers himself and his own time to operate during the weekend. Such a system would allow more people to join the commandos, because there will then not be such a great loss of personal productivity, as well as financial losses as a result of such voluntary training. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North said at the beginning of his speech that he wanted to learn more about the hon. the Minister before he would tackle him. I merely want to give him good advice by saying to him that no matter how long he has been in this House, he nevertheless will have to be very careful before he tackles the hon. the Minister. I feel he is going to have the worst of it. [Interjections.] However, I agree fully with the hon. member that the commandos, especially in the rural parts—I shall not make an exception of Natal—are doing a very good job. I find in my area, too, that the service times are practical and that it works satisfactorily. I cannot agree with the hon. member about the question of training on Sundays, but I believe the hon. the Minister will reply more fully on that aspect.

I now want to deal with the question of the munitions industry. I want to refer briefly to the amending legislation which was passed here last year and in terms of which the Armaments Board and Armscor have been merged into one single compact unit. Today it is the job of the Armaments Corporation to supply South Africa with arms in the most efficient and economic way, as we need them from time to time. I have been told that the legislation of last year has been implemented with success, that its provisions work very well in practice and that it compares well with other models in the world. I have been told that the co-operation between the Defence Force and Armscor is of the highest standard.

In this connection I also want to welcome immediately the announcement the hon. the Minister made this afternoon about the additional means of financing for Armscor. I believe that this is a clever and timely step and that it will be welcomed from all sides.

As far as our munitions industry is concerned, I want to remind the Committee that a fairly strong munitions industry came into being in South Africa during the Second World War, but the industry came to a halt immediately after the war. It was only after the first boycott measures in the early ’sixties that there was a revival in this industry. A general industrial improvement also took place in our country during the early ’sixties. Because of this, there was strong competition for skilled manpower and good profits could generally be made in the industry with a minimum of trouble. In these circumstances it was difficult to build up a reliable, strong munitions industry. The Armaments Board found it difficult to persuade industries to exchange part of a comfortable living for the high technology, quality standards and risks involved in munitions manufacturing. The Armaments Board had to make concessions, for example, with regard to quality and delivery times. They used various techniques to get the industry going, for example by giving long-term contracts with guaranteed work-loads to industrialists, as well as by paying in advance and by granting interest-free loans. Thus a number of manufacturers gradually attained the status of major contractors and eventually they were able to design a product, to develop it, to industrialize and to manufacture it according to recognized military quality standards without help from foreign principals.

It is clear, therefore, that a country’s munitions industry cannot be built in the short term. Such an industry is built up—I want to emphasize the phrase—the way it was built up here in South Africa. The industry of a country cannot merely switch over to the production of munitions. As a result of under-utilization in certain sectors of the manufacturing industry, some people now expect Armscor to fill this gap with orders for munitions. It is difficult to convince such industrialists that their fairly unsophisticated facilities cannot be used for the complex jobs that have to be done. It should be realized that the choice of contractors is very important. The right equipment and capital are, of course, important, but more important are qualities like the flexibility of the industry concerned, the broad technological basis of the company, perseverance, the expert management and the history of reliability of the company.

The present position is that the munitions industry has reached a level where there are a significant number of products in which the country is not only self-sufficient, but also in the position to enter the export market, as we have also heard from the hon. member for Cradock. The arms boycott at the end of last year did not take South Africa unawares. Nor did it mean a turning-point in the activities of Armscor. The Republic’s arms requirements are still being met in the most efficient way. Boycotts and threats of boycotts were actually the big incentives for the comprehensive arms industry South Africa has today. We have already been successful in many areas.

Finally, I want to refer to the private initiative which is strongly represented in our munitions industry today. I think the hon. member for Cradock also referred to the fact that approximately 1 200 companies in the private sector are today involved in munitions manufacturing. This number is very high and very promising. The policy of Armscor and the Defence Force is, of course, to buy South African products wherever possible. Armscor itself and its subsidiaries only act in a small number of cases. It is only when it is uneconomical for private initiative to manufacture products, for example, if only limited quantities are required. Then, too, it only intervenes when it is necessary for strategic reasons that Armscor itself should handle something, for example, in the case of propellants and explosives or, finally, when the private sector does not have the necessary expertise. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the price of peace and freedom is eternal vigilance and preparedness. That is why we have to maintain a strong and vigilant Defence Force on a national level. That is also why our sons have to perform military service. That is also why we have to spend large sums of money on defence every year. That is why we have to pay taxes, so that we will be able to be prepared to guarantee peace and freedom.

Up to now there has been very little, if any, criticism of the amount which is spent on defence. The hon. the Minister of Finance said in his budget speech that it was his policy to establish a stronger economic power within our subcontinent. He also stated at the same time that military preparedness remains our top priority. The increase of 235% in our defence expenditure over a period of four years, is proof of that. The two ideas, namely that of a stronger economic power within our subcontinent, and military preparedness, are completely complementary, because the stronger the economy and the larger the budget, the more we can spend on defence. Even if the percentage allocation in the budget were to remain the same, the actual amount available would be greater.

If we look at the economy of West Germany for example, we see that that country spends only 18,6% of its budget on defence. But as a result of the size of its budget, the enormous amount of DM35 000 million is spent on defence every year. This year our defence budget amounts to R1 554 million. To that, one must naturally add the credits totalling R128 million, which are available in favour of our Special Defence Account. That must be added to the specific cash requirements for this year.

Perhaps some of the people who cancelled certain contracts, have actually done us a favour in this respect. The defence budget is part of the South African economy. Like the rest of the economy, the Defence Force has, during the past year, maintained a policy of economizing and import replacement—to the benefit of the South African economy. Without in any way sacrificing efficiency, certain economizing projects were launched with very great success, as the hon. member for Ladybrand has already indicated to us. He has quoted several examples. There are quite a few of those which one can really stress. I mention, for example, the re-circulation of spares, something which has effected a considerable saving for us.

As a result of local initiative and expertise, very expensive spares are today being repaired very cheaply, sometimes at only 12,5% of the cost of imported spares. I think the technicians deserve praise for this resourcefulness and initiative they have displayed.

The best means of economizing still remains the judicious and careful use of that which one has at one’s disposal. With that, I think, the Defence Force has been successful and ought to be congratulated. In Paratus of March this year, there is a very interesting article under the heading “The S.A. Navy knows how to economise”. The article describes how a very old vessel which was used in the harbour, has been repaired and renovated so that it is once again fit for many more years of service. The article concludes with these priceless words which I should like to quote here. The following was said about this old vessel—

That is what we shall do in future. We shall replace and repair without sacrificing efficiency. As a result of very extensive purchases we have made during the past few years, we now have to consolidate to a certain extent, but that does not mean that we shall stagnate. On the contrary. In connection with certain priorities, there is an increase in the defence budget. The new budgeting by objectives makes it so much easier, because it is now possible for us to see exactly what the money is being spent on. Programme 6 of the Vote is concerned with logistic support and as far as that is concerned, the budget shows an increase of R69 million. Programme 2 is concerned with landward defence and as far as that is concerned, there is an increase of R16 million. It is therefore clear that although there has been economics, we have certain priorities to which we give preference, and in those cases the requirements are satisfied and the budget is even increased.

A very important factor in our defence setup is the role which the private sector also plays in the financing of the munitions industry. Very important developments in our arms manufacture are not undertaken by the State, but by the private sector. Those are the benefits we are now reaping as a result of our policy of not nationalizing the munitions industry but involving the private sector in it as far as possible. Another important development is that Armscor is now able to enter the capital market itself to obtain funds for development. The hon. member for Yeoville has said that it falls into the same category as the Defence Bonds, but I think I differ with him there on that score because while Armscor is specifically entering the capital market, these funds are being specifically allocated for certain purposes.

The procedure according to which the Defence Force budgets, is a further important aspect when it comes to assessing the budget. In the first place, the S.A. Defence Force must be provided with sufficient funds to be able to function effectively, but in the second place, the S.A. Defence Force may not withdraw so much money and manpower from the normal economic stream that the economy suffers. To be able to maintain this balance, the Directorate of Programming and Budgeting has been established. The Chief of the Defence Force serves on the board of directors of Armscor and moreover it may be pointed out that by means of the Defence Planning Committee, there is the closest liaison as far as the requirements of the Defence Force and the financing thereof are concerned. I am satisfied that the priorities of the S.A. Defence Force are being properly determined, included in the consideration of policy, and programmed into five-year plans.

The Defence Budget cannot therefore be judged on the basis of a single year, but only in the long term. Since we are already involved in a war and are faced with arms embargoes and economic pressure, it is surely justifiable that, in the acquisition of arms, whether by purchases or by our own production, we should make use of unorthodox methods, eliminate red tape, and involve all sectors of the economy. I should like to repeat what I said during the Second Reading debate: I believe that we shall have to refine and process ever greater quantities of our raw materials to meet the demand for articles which are at present still being imported. For the sake of the ideal of a stronger economic power, we shall have to identify the requirements of our Defence Force, our communications, our transportation, our mining, our industries and our agriculture, and ensure that no duplication develops in the supply industries. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Malmesbury referred to the preparedness which is necessary to ensure peace and freedom, and to the spending of the taxpayer’s money on defence. I can give him the assurance that that is exactly what the greatest majority of responsible taxpayers want. It was therefore good news when we heard from the hon. Minister this afternoon that provision was being made for further trading facilities. It was a welcome announcement, and it fits in rather well with a proposal which I want to submit a little later on. It was also encouraging this afternoon to see that a measure of unanimity prevailed during this debate. This is the time now when we should have proof of solidarity, but it is not sufficient that there should be solidarity only in this House and during this one debate. I think the time has arrived when there should also be solidarity in connection with other matters outside Parliament. We are living in times in which we can no longer afford to be divided or even create the impression of uncertainty. We have confidence in the men on our borders and they expect in their turn to be able to have confidence in the men on the home front who have to look after their interests here.

We in South Africa are extremely fortunate. We have men of all ranks who are devoted and inspired with the highest ideals and an unflinching loyalty. We must pay tribute to them and we must give them the assurance that we appreciate it. There is a wonderful spirit of co-operation between the different language groups on our borders—we have heard it from certain members here this afternoon. Different race groups are also working together shoulder to shoulder and there is no sign of friction or despondency. On the contrary.

There is a spirit of great enthusiasm and a will to fight for South Africa. To say the least, there are signs that our men are itching to get at the terrorists. We who recently had the opportunity of visiting the border, can testify to that. We can testify that the experiment of involving the Blacks and even the Bushmen in our border service, has been a great success. We can also give the assurance that they are rendering valuable service.

I also want to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the hon. the Minister and his department for arranging this tour and for giving us an opportunity to keep ourselves informed of developments there. Personally, I found this tour very informative and I am now more than ever aware of the conditions in which our men find themselves on the border. We can give the parents the assurance—and here I agree with the hon. member for Yeoville—that their sons are doing their national service under the best possible conditions, that they are being well looked after, and that there is absolutely no reason for concern. The general impression is that the South African forces on our borders are not only responsible for security, but that they are definitely also a stabilizing factor in that territory in a time of uncertainty. The hon. member for Yeoville has also mentioned the different services which our forces are rendering there. Therefore I do not want to repeat them here. They are, however services which fall outside the scope of the Army, but it is being done because it is essential to render these services to those people. We pay tribute to our men for that. My impression is that the people of South West Africa—White and Black—are highly appreciative of the presence of the South African forces there. It is reassuring to them.

But the duty of South Africa does not stop at the present borders of South Africa. One shudders to think of it, but two factors make it absolutely essential that we should realize that the responsibilities of the Army and of the police are constantly increasing. The first is the possibility of urban terrorism, and that has also already been referred to this afternoon. It may perhaps increase.

Hear, hear!

The second is the developments in the Transkei which might shortly bring border duty right into our immediate vicinity.

Schoeman is in favour of urban terrorism.

No, I think the hon. the Minister was only agreeing with me that there will be an increase in urban terrorism, but he can speak for himself.

He was not listening.

That is what we normally get from the Official Opposition.

He said “hear, hear” at the wrong time.

The hon. member for Durban Point today referred to the fact that the solution of our problems is 20% military and 80% political. Although I agree that we must put our house in order, and that we must strive to achieve that 80% political solution, I am sure everyone will agree that, even if we were to bring about that 80% political change and put our house in order, the onslaught against and pressure on South Africa would in no way diminish, but would intensify. Who among us does not hope and pray that this will not happen? But we cannot close our eyes to the facts. We must realize that the Army can handle so much and no more. It can only do as much as the manpower permits, and no more. We must realize that every healthy man and woman, young and old, but especially those of middle age who are still healthy and able to do so, have a duty to become involved in the defence of South Africa in some way or other. They must equip themselves and get ready for any eventuality. It must be done now. It must be done before we are caught unawares. I am aware of the fact that the commandos render excellent service. But there is an opportunity for everyone to render service in the commandos on a voluntary basis. I am sorry to say that there are too many people who are indifferent to the realities of the times in which we live. Nobody realizes his shortcomings in connection with defence until he joins a unit and gets an idea of what he must know before he can defend himself.

I want to make an appeal not only to the hon. the Minister and his staff, but also to every public representative. I suppose we are fortunate to have so many young representatives in Parliament. The same applies to Senators, members of the provincial council and city councillors. I want to appeal to all of them to make themselves available. I had an hon. member like my bench fellow in mind, for example, and I was glad to hear that he had already joined a commando. Everybody can play a role in their respective communities. Public representatives are in the fortunate position that they can identify themselves with the commandos and that they can play a leading role in recruiting members. I should like to see that public representatives obtain full membership of the commandos. Unfortunately the position is that the general regulations of the Defence Force only permit affiliated membership. But there are probably good reasons for that. Still, I feel that we should accept full responsibility in this field, even if it is only by way of affiliated membership. Let us avail ourselves of that, in the first place to equip ourselves to play a role and, secondly, by our association with the commandos, to set an example to our respective communities and so to encourage others to join. Nor should we overlook the possibility of even extending the commando system to include the Coloured population. I think that they, too, will make good use of it and that if necessary, it will be possible to make good use of them as well.

Many people are still inclined to think that in all times of emergency, they need merely telephone the police and that in the case of a fire—we heard about civil defence this afternoon—they need merely telephone the Fire Brigade. Everybody will have to realize that in the times in which we are living, it is just possible that we will find that our forces will not be able to render services or provide protection on all fronts at the same time, that with the best will in the world, the Army, the Police, the Fire Brigade, the ambulance services and medical personnel cannot be everywhere, and that every man and woman will therefore have to do their share. I therefore appeal to all, and especially to all public representatives, to undertake motivational work and to encourage people to join the commandos.

I want to conclude with a further proposal. As you will know, Sir, there is nothing that evokes so much interest as demonstrations do. In the large centres and at different bases, Army days are held. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I really hope that the spirit which is prevailing in this House today is not a prelude to the abolition of the party system in this country, because that would really be a disaster. I agree for the most part with the argument advanced by the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central and for that reason I shall not follow up what was said by him with regard to that matter.

†The Prussian general, Gen. Von Clausewitz once wrote—

How on earth can anyone make us believe that the onslaught against us is for any other motive than a desire for our territory, our markets and our wealth? Some countries, and even people in our own country, suggest that the onslaught against us is an ideological one, an onslaught which has as its main aim to free the so-called under-privileged Blacks of this country and to establish full citizen rights. Even political aspirations are drawn in as an additional motive. Countries of the West and people who are so naive as to believe this, are living in a fool’s paradise and are simply playing into the hands of our enemies and, for that matter, into the hands of the enemies of Western civilization and culture. I make this statement because the history of Europe and the history of Africa, especially immediately to the north and east of us, must be seen in their true perspective. It is all part and parcel of a subtle, and sometimes not even so subtle, Marxist strategy and their hunger for world domination. It endorses fully the words of Gen. Von Clausewitz.

Russia needs our country on account of its strategic position and it needs our country for its wealth in mineral resources. People who still believe that there is any other motivation and who try to create a feeling of distrust and disloyalty towards the country and its Army, are doing this country and its people a great disservice. Do they prefer chaos, famine, economic destruction and disorder to a well-fed, well-clad, orderly and disciplined nation?

*This obliges me to agree with quite a number of hon. members who have already spoken in this House today about national service and its motivation. I do not think one can stress sufficiently how we ought to motivate national servicemen in this regard. At times when one hears complaints from parents and others, two questions arise: Are all our people at all times fully aware of the total onslaught against our country? In the second place: Has the prosperity which our country and its people have experienced, so dulled our people that they cannot read the signs of the times properly? Mr. Chairman, prosperity can sometimes be the cause of superficialization in people—superficialization in respect of culture and religion, but also superficialization in respect of loyalty and service to one’s country. One is so involved in one’s own welfare that one forgets at times that as a citizen of the country one also has an obligation to render service to one’s country. To me, the most important task we have as parents as far as national service is concerned, is the motivation of our children in respect of their task and calling towards their country.

The Japanese has a philosophy of life. He works, firstly, for his country; secondly, for his firm, and, thirdly, for his family. I think we in this country can learn a great deal from the Japanese in this regard so that we may also adopt the philosophy of life that one works, firstly, for one’s country, secondly, for the person whom one represents, and, thirdly, for one’s family. Then it would not be necessary for us to talk in this House about the parent and the motivation as far as national service is concerned.

Mr. Chairman, I know you are probably going to interrupt me since it is almost dinner-time, but I should like to refer to an article which I read in Paratus this morning and which really impressed me. The article is entitled “Haar grensdiens verdien gewis ’n medalje”. I am very pleased that Mrs. Botha is present to hear what I want to say about this article. She wrote the following—

Order! The hon. member has displayed remarkable perception, because I am going to interrupt him and suspend business for dinner.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, just before the House adjourned for dinner I was reading a quotation from the latest issue of Paratus, in which Mrs. Botha said—

That is the spirit in which parents ought to approach military service in this country. We experience no problems with servicemen who come from homes where they have had discipline and motivation. But I have also seen the other side of the matter—for example a boy coming to me and saying I should please not take any notice of the representations made by his parents, because he had a duty towards his country and wanted to perform it. Hence Mrs. Botha’s statement that we on the home front are sometimes weakkneed. I therefore venture to say that the primary requisite for a successful system of military service, is motivation by the parents.

In the second place our schools, too, have an important task. Teachers have an important task in this respect and ought to give special priority to the cadet system as part of the youth preparedness programme. Cadet training at schools should ultimately be regarded as the forerunner of the system of national service. In my view, the objectives of cadet training ought to include the following: Pride of his section and his equipment should be instilled in the cadet. He ought to be armed with knowledge of national security. Physical hardihood and fitness are prerequisites for total preparedness. He should be given an opportunity of handling and looking after arms and other military equipment. The value of group action for national security should be impressed upon him. Knowledge with regard to survival, map reading, fieldcraft, etc., must be taught to him. Qualities of leadership ought to be developed.

In the third place, I believe that the task of the business undertakings is also very important—as has already been mentioned by the hon. the Minister, among other things. I want to repeat what I said in the House last year, when I referred to the engineering firm of which the engineers work an hour longer when one of their colleagues has to perform military service. That, in my view, is the spirit which our people ought to display.

In the fourth place, the agricultural unions also play an important role. The hon. member for Ladybrand referred to that when he explained what was being done in his area in connection with the farmers who have to perform military service. The declared policy of the S.A. Agricultural Union and its affiliated bodies in this connection is very clear, namely that all farmers should also make their contributions to military service.

We sometimes have to listen to a great many complaints about border duty, and I wonder whether they are justified. I want to quote from a very informative article written by the chairman of the Association of Chambers of Commerce after a visit he had paid to the border. I quote just a few portions from it—

He goes on to say—

He concludes with the following words—

That is the view of a group of people who visited the border under the direction of Assocom, and in view of the fact that one sometimes hears complaints, I venture to say that if these are the statements of people in the front line of the business world in our country, our men on the border are doing their bit and developing everything to the full. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it gives me pleasure to be able to participate in this debate again tonight. I am also pleased that the speakers who have participated in the debate so far, have avoided politics. I am grateful for this, because we are here tonight not only as the NP, but as a nation which is being threatened. All the parties are included in this, and it is the task of the various parties to make their contribution to the debate, and we are grateful for this.

Mr. Chairman, you will also allow me to thank the hon. the Minister, and especially those men sitting behind him. It is encouraging to hear from the hon. the Minister about the many hours of overtime which those men work. This does not go unnoticed. We say thank you to the Defence Force which works overtime in the interests of its people and its country which it loves and makes the sacrifices which are asked of it. I think this must be an example to many others in our country who are so often inclined to ask the undertaking for which they work: What will you pay me for the overtime which I work? In these times in which we are living, it is not asking much of each one of us who want to survive to put one’s shoulder to the wheel and not consider the remuneration which one receives or the overtime which one works. Through the hon. the Minister we thank the department very much for the fine results which they have achieved.

This evening I should like to dwell for a moment on the question of the attitude of the parents to national service. I feel that all parents who have one or two sons who are capable of beaming arms in order to serve his country somewhere in the Republic today, should consider it a privilege. I cast my thoughts back tonight to an old lady whom I visited a year or two ago. The only politics which I want to bring into this debate, is to say that when I went to that old lady’s house to ask her for a donation for the NP, she told me that she could not give me anything because she had nothing. She told me that she had sent her two sons who always made a contribution, in the interests of the NP, but also in the interests of the country which she loved, to the border. I then said to her. “Madam, that is the finest donation which you can give your country.” She was willing and motivated enough to send those who were dear to her as well as the breadwinners of the house, to the border.

We thank those mothers and fathers, but unfortunately there are also those who have come to me, and probably to other members of Parliament, and of course the hon. the Minister and his department as well, with any excuse to try and get their son, who was called up for June, to be called up in January. One hears all sorts of excuses and complaints: Why should he go now; his father needs him on the farm? Why should Jan go to the border; he is his father’s right-hand man and he needs him in his only one-man business? They then offer the excuse that there are many others who can go. Yes, Sir, we always look to others and not to ourselves. I want to make a request in the House tonight to the parents in the Republic of South Africa to motivate their sons and daughters for the struggle which lies ahead. Even though we may be short of weapons, we can nevertheless win this struggle through faith. If the national serviceman does not have the faith, motivation and inspiration of his parents, we have lost the struggle. After all, it is an honour to serve one’s country. I have one son only, and if he should be called up today, I would be grateful. However, I should also be grateful if a provision is inserted in the law for men of my age also to do military service one day. I hope this will happen soon. Hon. members will ask me why I say this. In 1936 and 1937 I underwent a period of service and I was attached to the Service Battalion under command of the well-known Pappa Britz. Today I think back to that time as having been some of the happiest years of my life. I had no money and I was always being chased around, but I shall always remember those years when I also did that military service for my nation.

The hon. member for Ladybrand made an appeal to the agricultural unions in the rural areas to co-operate to bring relief to farmers whose sons are called up for military service and therefore cannot help them on the lands.

However, this matter does not concern the rural areas only and I therefore want to ask the Chamber of Commerce and Kamer van Koophandel—these are two different bodies—also to make a contribution in the cities towards helping those who have a one-man business and are called up for national service. Instead of closing his business or having to offer the department excuses as to why he should be exempted, those organizations can come along and tell him that they will look after his business while he goes to do his national service for his nation. Not only the agricultural unions, but the businessmen too, can make a great contribution. After all, there are big companies which make large contributions by paying their employees well during the period in which they are doing their service, because this is their duty. If they fail to do so and are selfish, this country and everything which we possess, will ultimately be lost. However, if we stand together like one man with the faith that we will not go down, but will be able to word off these attacks against us, we will be able to stop the Marxists and tell them that although they have the confidence in their struggle to be able to conquer, we have confidence in our Creator which will enable us to conquer them. If I have that faith, trowel in one hand and gun in the other, if my eyes are raised to Heaven and God is with me, whom should I fear?

Mr. Chairman, last year, and again today, the hon. member for Yeoville has made an appeal for the expansion and strengthening of our Permanent Force. I read the debate in last year’s Hansard with interest, and I notice to my concern that after the hon. member for Yeoville’s speech last year, there was an attempt to give that debate a political colour.

Mr. Chairman, I feel that when the Defence Vote is being discussed, hon. members must resist the temptation to drag in politics. I think that the question of the defence of our country is too important for this. After the hon. member for Yeoville had made his contribution this afternoon, I was rather disappointed to hear that the hon. member for Bloemfontein West was once again wanted to drag in politics to a certain extent when he said that the Official Opposition was favouring its own point of view to the detriment of South Africa by saying what the hon. member for Yeoville said. I differ with him in that regard. Mr. Chairman, I think you will agree with me that it is expected hon. members in this Parliament to state the standpoint of their party frankly and without fear. I believe that the hon. member for Yeoville did so in all honesty and in all sincerity, and he definitely did not try to drag politics into this debate.

I myself said in my first speech in this Parliament that it was necessary to establish a larger voluntary professional Permanent Force. On that day, the hon. the Minister invited me in a very friendly manner to state my point of view once again at a later stage. I appreciate this invitation, and I appreciate the opportunity to do so in this debate. When the hon. the Minister announced that the facilities of the parachute battalion are going to be extended and that the Cape Coloureds are also going to be trained in this capacity, I was pleased to hear this and I welcomed it. It is a step in the right direction. When a request is made for a larger voluntary professional Permanent Force, I want to state very clearly that no reflection whatsoever is cast on our national servicemen. On the contrary, it must be said, and I am pleased and proud to say it, that we can be proud of the service which young South Africans have given in the past and will probably still give in future. Senior Defence Force officers with whom I have had the privilege of speaking, have had the highest praise for the disposition amongst national servicemen and their willingness to make sacrifices for their country.

Furthermore, parents and wives of soldiers who have been wounded or killed have accepted their fate with a great deal of courage and understanding. This is true. Therefore, if we on this side of the House ask for the Permanent Force to be expanded, we are not doing so because we have no confidence in our people. We are doing so because we want to make it possible to establish an even more effective Force than there is at the moment. The Force which exists at the moment, is a very effective one. However, improvements are always possible. Hon. members will agree with me that the times in which we are living are dangerous and that the threat beyond our borders is going to increase rather than decrease. I think hon. members will also agree with me that the Marxist forces in Africa are going to be increasingly better armed and more skilful in the use of their armaments, and that we must therefore keep our own Defence Force absolutely prepared in the technical sphere at all times. What I am saying, is that not only is it of importance for the soldier of today to be prepared to serve his country, but he must also have the technical skill at his disposal to be able to carry out that duty. That is why I think there is a trend towards a growing professional force, and the soldier himself must become more and more professional.

I feel that in South Africa’s case, we shall have to depend increasingly on the man who wants to make the Defence Force a career, for the reasons which I have already pointed out. Apart from the additional technical skill of the professional soldier, there are also other important advantages which we must mention when we talk about a larger Permanent Force. A Defence Force based on national service is a citizen force in which all the political differences and division of the community are reflected. When I say this, I want to add at once that I do not see this as being a problem in South Africa. However, it is a fact that in general, this is the case.

On the other hand, it has been discovered that a Permanent Force in all its branches traditionally does not participate in any political activities and is consequently entirely neutral politically. The economic problems and losses caused by the annual call-up of thousands of young men, are difficult to determine. That problems are caused, is certain, although patriotism and a willingness to make sacrifices, mean that objections are seldom raised. On the other hand, the young man who joins the Permanent Force causes as little economic disruption as the young man who, for example, joins the Police Force on a permanent basis.

Another statement which I want to make, is that the national serviceman is normally called up for a relatively short period. In our case it is now 18 months or two years. However, a considerable portion of that period must of necessity be devoted to training, leave, travel, etc. Consequently, the soldier serves a relatively short period in a fighting unit. On the other hand, the professional soldier joins up for a fairly long period, and since it was his desire to be a soldier in the first place, after completing his training, he will be able to serve in a fighting unit for a considerable time. As regards his military contribution as a fighting soldier, he will also spend a relatively long period in a fighting unit, in comparison with his training period. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we on this side of the House appreciate the attitude which the hon. members for Yeoville and Wynberg display towards the Defence Force. It is just that we should like to have heard the same from the hon. members for Pinelands, Houghton and Groote Schuur. We expect them to show the same attitude towards our Defence Force and our national servicemen.

Mr. Chairman, on an occasion when our State President presented medals at the Voortrekkerhoogte Army College to the next-of-kin of soldiers who had been killed in the operational area, he said the following—

Sir, these are the words of a head of State of a nation which is already involved in a struggle for freedom, a struggle for survival against the forces which seek its downfall and its total obliteration. These are the words of a head of State of a nation which carries within it that will to stay alive and has the ability to survive that threat. In order to survive this threat, we need a strong, effective Defence Force today, coupled with political stability and a sound, growing economy. In other words, it demands of us a broader, total national strategy at all these levels of our society in order to guarantee the security of all our population groups in South Africa.

If we look at the essence of warfare over the years, then in our modern history, it has slowly shifted from a mere conflict situation of one army as against another, to an integrated total national action directed at the society, the economy and the Defence Force. That is why the communist-inspired aggressor directs his onslaught against all these components of a total defence strategy. The aggressor has the advantage of choosing his time, place and weapons, while the defender has to be prepared every moment of the day and night. Henry Kissinger spelled it out as follows on one occasion—

Against this background, South Africa is involved at the moment in a war of low intensity which threatens its continued existence, and is at present strengthening and steeling itself in every component of a total national strategy. This evening I want to refer to only two components.

In this country, South Africa, there is unequalled political stability. That stability was achieved on 30 November last year when the NP entered its 30th year of rule with the greatest victory in its history. A nation is now united as never before in its history. They are united behind their political leaders on this side of the House. If I look at the meagre numbers opposite, it appears that political stability will reign in this country for a long time in the future.

The effectiveness and strength of our Defence Force is built on the cream of our young national servicemen, thousands of young men equipped with discipline, loyalty, awareness of duty, physical and mental fitness, the spirit of sacrifice, self-respect and patriotism. There is a comradeship amongst them which is born of the threat of a common enemy and a common love and loyalty towards one fatherland, South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to dwell briefly on one of the most important supporting services of the S.A. Defence Force, viz. the S.A. Medical Service, which received full recognition from 1 April this year as an independent auxiliary service of the S.A. Defence Force, under Major-General N. J. Nieuwoudt, Surgeon-General of the S.A. Defence Force. On the one hand I want to congratulate General Nieuwoudt and his officers on this new status and wish them everything of the best for the new responsibility this involves. On the other hand, Sir, I should like to draw attention to the scope and quality of the S.A. Medical Service.

On a recent visit to 1 military hospital, Voortrekkerhoogte, and the S.A. Medical Service Training College, we became acquainted with the comprehensive professional coverage which every soldier in the S.A. Defence Force can depend on, from help from his comrades, medical orderlies and medical corporals, who serve on the battlefield, the field ambulance service, the transport service to the front hospital, to one of our military hospitals where the most sophisticated, modern intensive care units are available to deal with every possible wartime casualty effectively. The condition of our wounded soldiers who are still lying in hospitals there, testifies to this. Their physical and mental condition endorses this fact. With the aid of physiotherapy, psychological reorientation and excellent welfare services, which extend to the entire family circle of every wounded soldier, he has the best chance of taking up his full place in our South African community once again. If there is one thing which struck me as being an excellent characteristic of our medical service, it is the intensive personal involvement of the commander who knows every wounded soldier by name, knows his history and his physical condition in the greatest detail, to the welfare worker who is intimately involved with the social adjustment problem of each patient. These people go out of their way to give every wounded soldier only the very best which is available.

However, there is one shortcoming which I should like to point out here. We do not have enough voluntary women doing national service in the S.A. Defence Force, young women who are so necessary in the nursing, welfare services and paramedical services and who must be considered indispensable for the men in uniform. Recently, on the occasion of a passing-out parade of professional National Service officers, General Nieuwoudt said, inter alia, the following—

In pursuance of this I should therefore like to make an urgent appeal to the women and mothers of this country tonight, they who have never let the men of this country down. I want to say the following to you tonight. Come forward now and help the Defence Force to form a united front in the front-lines, together with our young men, against those who are plotting on our borders. Today, our nation is in a very similar situation to that of Nehemia and his people at the time of the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem when his enemies plotted against him, the walls of Jerusalem which also formed part of a total defence strategy at the time. At that time he said, and I quote from Nehemia 4:14—

And then he goes on to say the following in verse 21—

This is the case with us, too, today. Half of our men have to keep the economic wheels spinning while the other half stand with spears in hand, our young men on our borders with spears in hand. However, today this watchfulness must be maintained throughout the darkness of the night until the red day dawns, the red day of peace, security and prosperity for everyone in this fine country, South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, in recent times it has been very clear that the enemies of South Africa are engaged in a total onslaught on South Africa in every sphere, and when a country and its people are engaged in so insidious a struggle, there are two all-embracing words which should be written, not only across the face of the Defence Force but also across the whole of South Africa with all its people and its activities, and those words are “total preparedness”. When we speak of total preparedness, we mean military preparedness, psychological preparedness, cultural preparedness, armament preparedness and economic preparedness. Above all, because we are also Christian people, we also refer to individual preparedness in the Faith and faith in God.

This evening I want to add two new concepts of preparedness. The first is Press preparedness and the second is political preparedness. However, I am not going to discuss politics now. I merely mention it. The Press in South Africa must really refrain from subverting peoples’ psychological, mental and moral standards. It must refrain from participating in the psychological onslaught on South Africa. Let me quote examples. You will excuse me, Sir, if I do not mention any newspapers by name, because to me the issue is not one of specific newspapers, nor one of confrontation with the Press: To me the issue is one of co-operation with the Press in this connection. The first example I want to quote is a report which appeared in a newspaper on 14 February 1978 under the banner headline: “Agony of young soldiers.” The report reads, inter alia, as follows—

It is this kind of reporting that I am referring to. Let me quote contrasting reports. On the one hand we have a report which appeared on 26 February 1977 entitled “Another muzzle”. This relates to something which took place during this session. I quote—

In contrast one reads in another English language newspaper which appeared on the same day, under the heading “Troops need protection” the following—

That is the contrast and that is what I mean by Press preparedness. I want to appeal to the Press to set a watch on their pens. I want to appeal to them to adopt a slogan which may read: “Do not discuss troops and armaments unnecessarily.” Let their political pen write “South Africa first”.

As far as political preparedness is concerned, I want to say that it is important that South Africa be prepared on the political front as well. The onslaught on us is Marxist-inspired. Mr. Chairman, we as politicians have stood before your Chair and sworn an oath to South Africa. That oath we must honour and uphold in a worthy fashion. There is no point in our discussing the Defence Force and South Africa in loyal and pious terms in this debate on Defence Force matters, while using the kind of language outside the Defence Force debate which the political enemies of South Africa can regard as sympathetic. I want to appeal to hon. members to see to it that we as politicians set a political watch before our mouths in all circumstances.

On 4 November 1977 the UN imposed an arms embargo on South Africa, an embargo which could have had far-reaching consequences for South Africa and which will test South Africa’s manufacturing potential to the very utmost. I think that we as a Committee should take cognizance this evening of the fact that the hon. the Minister and the men from the Defence Force and the armaments industry who are attending the debate have given depth to the manufacturing industry of South Africa in both private enterprise and its subsidiaries with far-sightedness and vision, by means of outstanding long-term planning and with the sound policy of involving the private sector and private enterprise in the manufacture of armaments. These people have provided depth as regards skills across a wide spectrum of armaments in the private sector and the subsidiaries, and have done the same in the capital-intensive manufacturing facilities of hundreds of industries in South Africa. These are industries which are reaping the dividends of 80% of the capital utilized on armaments in South Africa.

These manufacturing services are far from perfect, but already comprise a powerful basis which have already achieved so high a level of viability that they will be capable of surviving the onslaught of the arms embargo on South Africa. It is as well that this Committee should take cognizance with appreciation of the loyalty to South Africa and the co-operation shown us by private entrepreneurs in this field. The arms embargo also cuts very deep into the substance of the private entrepreneur. To indicate its true implications I want to quote what is expected of the private entrepreneur as far as this embargo is concerned and the kind of undertaking they have to give to the supplier of manufacturing facilities which they order from the outside world. For example, they have to undertake the following—

That is the kind of guarantee which is expected of the private entrepreneur in South Africa. This particular entrepreneur refused pointblank to give such an undertaking because he said that it could have far-reaching implications for him as an entrepreneur if he were to give such a guarantee. I think that we should take cognizance with appreciation this evening of this far-reaching, far-sighted and outstanding long-term planning and also of the loyalty and co-operation afforded the Defence Force and the armaments manufacturing industry in South Africa by private industry.

Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the hon. member for Wonder-boom to excuse me for not replying directly to what he had to say. I have a long list of things I want to put to the hon. the Minister and I am quite sure that the hon. member for Wonderboom, being an engineer, will appreciate one of the matters that I shall raise. Most of these problems primarily concern the utilization of university graduates in the national service. A number of problems have been brought to my attention and I sincerely hope that some of them will be sorted out in due course. In particular I would like to refer to the training and utilization of graduate engineers. My colleague has brought to my attention that late in 1977 there was consultation between the S.A. Council for Professional Engineers and the S.A. Defence Force in order to try to obtain clarity on the approach of the Defence Force to the training of engineers who are doing their national service. As a result of this a memorandum was produced by the Council for Professional Engineers and this was circularized to all students who were due to graduate in order that they would know exactly what they must expect when they start doing their national service. I am happy to say that there was general acceptance on the part of the engineering faculties at the universities and the students. However, on 9 March, on completion of the basic training of the 1977 intake, a representative of the Council of Professional Engineers visited the School of Engineers at Kroonstad to find how things were going. I believe, Mr. Chairman, it is very good that we do have this liaison between the professions and the Defence Force. I regret to say, however, that he found that graduates from all five engineering faculties were intensely dissatisfied with what appeared to be their future training course. They had been told that the course which they were about to embark on after having completed their basic training, was not the type of course which was agreed to by the S.A. Defence Force and the S.A. Council for Professional Engineers as was indicated in their particular memorandum. The course had been altered to include a 13-week junior leaders course in addition to the 20-week candidate officers course which had been planned for these university graduates. They found that the 80 graduate engineers would be included with an additional 100 non-graduate young servicemen.

I think the hon. the Minister will appreciate that the graduate engineers, whoses average from 22 to 26, are far more highly qualified persons than non-graduates, whose ages are in the vicinity of 18 or 19 years. I know the hon. the Minister is aware of these details and I sincerely hope that he will do something about the matter, because this is causing a lot of dissatisfaction amongst engineers who are undergoing their basic training. These are men who—let us face the fact—can make a major contribution not only in the Defence Force, but certainly also later on in life in the engineering profession.

Now one has to supervise the cutting of the lawns.

That is a case in point. While talking about the utilization of university graduates, I want to refer to the civil action duty which a lot of servicemen are doing on the border. In this regard I refer particularly to the No. 2 Military Area in the vicinity of Oshakati. We agree that this civil action duty is a most valued duty and I believe it has tremendous potential not only in assisting the local people, but also in gaining their respect and confidence. From the feedback that I have heard, however, there are quite a number of problems which have been reported to me. In one case a graduate teacher is teaching at a school some 10 km from his base camp. No transport is provided for him other than the school bus, which means that immediately after the class has been dismissed, he has to return to his base camp. I have been led to believe that at these base camps there are absolutely no facilities for these teachers to do such things as marking examinations and tests and preparing for the next day’s work. I am also led to believe that they actually do this work while sitting on their beds which, to my mind, is not conducive to good teaching operations. In addition—and I think we all accept this—the teachers doing duty at such schools in the border area are doing a rather dangerous duty in that at any time, as we have read in the Press, terrorists can come into a school and kidnap the school-children. As a result of this the teachers have been instructed to carry their R1 rifles with them at all times. That means that it should be carried within the classroom itself as well. I am quite sure the hon. the Minister will appreciate the difficulties a teacher will have in trying to teach while at the same time carrying his rifle. The answer to this problem is to prop the rifle up in a comer of the classroom. I have been told, however, that some of the high school students range from 18 years to 22 years of age. There has been some concern expressed that if one of these pupils sympathized with terrorists, he could then make a dive for the rifle. I believe that these teachers have asked for side-arms rather than having to carry an R1 rifle. They have been told, however, that since they are not officers, they are not allowed to have a side-arm. I would like the hon. the Minister to look into this problem I have raised as a result of some of the feedback we are getting. These chaps are operating in a rather sensitive area and I believe that some consideration should be given to them.

Another problem is that teachers, although they have graduated and some have the higher educational diploma, are not considered for commissioning as officers. They are classified with other NCOs and the complaint we are receiving is that the graduate with the higher educational diploma is not considered for a commission while someone with just a degree is. This is discriminatory and is causing a lot of dissatisfaction amongst some of the servicemen in the border areas.

Another aspect which I would like to mention is the inequality of leave in the border areas, especially between the civil action servicemen who are serving either in No. 1 Military Area or No. 2 Military Area. I believe that as far as these civil action chaps are concerned, those in the No. 1 Military Area get 14 days leave every 12 weeks to three months, with travelling time included, whereas as in No. 2 Military Area they get seven days leave at home—travelling time excluded—only every six months. Here again we have an anomaly which is causing dissatisfaction.

While we are talking about university students, I should like to refer to something which the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South mentioned earlier on, i.e. the possibility of students doing some of their service while at university. I should like to make a suggestion to the hon. the Minister that he should consider setting up an officer training corps, designed to coincide with university training. I should like to suggest that this should be voluntary and that it should be arranged on a selection basis. My proposal is that during the student’s first year at university he should be approached and be given the option to investigate the corps and make his decision towards the end of his first year at university as to whether he wishes to join. Should he decide to do so, and be selected, the student could put in his basic training at a camp during his first long summer vacation. During his second year at university, he could—say for one night in the week as suggested by the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South—attend lectures concerning officer training. During his second long summer vacation I suggest he goes on a candidate officer’s course, while he can take corps training at one parade per week during his third year. I am thinking of training in the engineers, artillery, etc. During his third long summer vacation he could actually do corps training at a camp or training establishment; so that when he graduates after his fourth year he could receive a commission, and then having received the commission could then do his next full year either in the Defence Force or be allocated to some State or semi-State organization that can use his services should he be an engineer or have had a similar type of training. I think this programme has decided advantages. I am aware that some years ago the United States had a similar programme, called the Reserve Officers Training Corps and in Canada the Canadian Officers Training Corps, which worked along the lines which I am suggesting. I have experience of the Canadian Officers Training Corps because I volunteered to serve in this corps when I was studying in Canada. It worked very satisfactorily indeed. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member will forgive me if I do not follow his arguments directly. Several hon. members tonight and earlier this afternoon mentioned the fatalness of the struggle in which South Africa finds itself, the struggle between the two great ideologies of our time, and pointed out that because of the times and our place in history we were inextricably interwoven in that struggle. The fact is that we live in an extension of what is an international ideological war. This hydra-headed monster, with tentacles reaching into every part and fabric of our life, has become very, very real. It reaches into the economic—an hon. member mentioned this earlier—the diplomatic, the cultural, the military, the semantic and the psychological areas of our society. I think it is vital that we understand, that the South African people understand, just what we are up against. In a psychological war the biggest danger, the biggest fear is, of course, the danger of fear itself. When I was researching what I was going to say today, I interestingly enough came across the book by Collins “A History of Warfare-Montgomery of Alamein”. On page 554 the author says—

He goes on to say—

It is clear that the national policy of the Soviet Union involves the destruction of our country and the subcontinent in which we live. To that extent it has become a matter of supreme importance to us. There is nothing particularly new to this situation. One can read about it in the Book of Kings in the Bible. Alexander’s campaigns in India are an example of it. Cortez and Pezzaro conquered Mexico and Peru each with fewer than 1 000 men on horseback and equipped with fairly old-fashioned fire-arms. They impressed their adversaries by playing on their superstitious fears. They acted like strange White gods wildly wielding instruments of thunder and lightning. The Indians, of course, capitulated.

Martin Blumenthal of the US Army Department said the following of psychological warfare—

It is good that we look at what media and methods these people use. The news media are commonly used in an attempt to bias and influence opinion, both externally and internally, as we South Africans know only too well. In our country there have been attempts by, e.g. Rabkin and Holliday, to infiltrate the major newspapers. Leaflets and pamphlets have been used as a second method of subverting opinion, for instance in Soweto and in the streets of Cape Town. All of us have come into contact with people distributing leaflets and pamphlets. Bucket bombs have been used to distribute them, etc.

Radio Moscow is beaming its messages across our continent. Lady Haw-Haw of Radio Luanda tried unsuccessfully during the Angolan campaign to demoralize our young men.

Then there is the spreading of vicious and dangerous rumours. We must differentiate between the young man who returns from the border full of braggadocio and tells his awestruck parents and his girl friend of his experiences, and the genuine rumour monger who is the enemy in our midst I believe a psychological attack is being made by this group on our Army. I believe it will grow and will also be directed at our civilian population on an increasing scale. A great deal of false information is being spread at the moment. The gentlemen of the Press perhaps come more into contact with this than most of us. For instance, rumours are spread around that our boys do not have enough ammunition, that there are too few troops and that those that are there can easily be overrun, that fantastic casualties are taking place on the border, that people are killed and so one is told, and that a great number of people get out of doing military service. These are all rumours which can lower morale. A rumour we have heard recently—the newspapers are aware of this—is that Clemens Kapuuo has been assassinated by Government agents. So these wicked and false rumours are spread around, rumours which are designed to sow panic, unnerve the population, weaken morale and reduce the capacity of the population and the armed forces to resist. These rumours are aimed at destroying the credibility of the Government and of our leaders and to reduce confidence in the security of the country and of the security forces. The answer is not that we must reduce our people to the level where they snoop on others or overhear other people’s conversations to find out who is guilty of passing on these rumours. That is not the kind of society which we are used to or that we want in South Africa. There is nothing so lethal to a rumour as facts. I believe what we need is more counter-information. If the information is available, the public must avail themselves of it.

So I would appeal to the public that when they hear a rumour, or become the victim of a rumour, they should first of all ascertain whether the rumour is true or false and, secondly, they should not pass on the rumour. Thirdly, they should check it out with their nearest, relevant authority. Fourthly, they should not worry or scare themselves. As I mentioned earlier, the greatest fear is the fear of fear itself. Fifthly, people must not overreact to news. They must understand the news media and develop a sense of balance in respect of the news they hear. In the years that lie ahead, our society will have to develop greater self-discipline and greater mental toughness. I am grateful for the knowledge that the armed forces are superbly led by the hon. the Minister of Defence. His staff are aware of this and are doing many things which need to be done in respect of this kind of psychological war. The attacks upon us are enormous, but I believe, as the hon. member for Stilfontein said, that if we deepen our faith, develop our mental toughness and strengthen our resolves, we can stride into the future with confidence.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Maitland will excuse me if I do not follow up his argument. I want to make mention in passing of a very praiseworthy custom which has developed among the members of the Nasionale Vroueklub of Parliament. I am referring to the making of rag dolls by the members of that club. The aim is to sell them at a later stage and donate the proceeds to the demobilization fund of the Defence Force.

The rag doll has a special symbolic significance, in particular from those days of suffering in our history when the child of the pioneer had a rag doll as her only plaything. The members of the Nasionale Vroueklub want to bring this symbolic significance to our attention once again. I should very much like to convey, from the ranks of this House, our thanks for these efforts on the part of the members of the Nasionale Vroueklub.

I should like to cause the spotlight to fall on the youngest wing of the S.A. Defence Force, namely the Chaplains’ Corps. The development of this corps deserves high praise from all who have the good of the Republic of South Africa and its people at heart, because it attests to the realization among our military leadership that the man in uniform also has spiritual needs. The importance of this need has grown due to the increasing onslaughts in the world by Marxist forces, an onslaught which is directed not only at the body, but also the spirit. The godless ideology of Marxism, like a cancer, seeks to destroy everything in the pious person. In essence, the staff of the S.A. Defence Force is also facing the forces of Marxism. Thus far the S.A. Defence Force has been known as one of the best fighters in military history. In the air, on land and on sea our fighting men are known to be among the most motivated fighters in the world. This is a tradition which has been built up through a number of wars, from the earliest history of our country and its people. In all humility, I ascribe the striking characteristics of members of the S.A. Defence Force to the higher morale in the S.A. Defence Force. On analysing this morale one can only come to one conclusion, namely that the man in uniform has a solid spiritual foundation. Furthermore, in general, it may be stated that the inhabitants of the Republic of South Africa place a high premium on their sense of religion, their love of the Word and their appreciation of their church. The man in uniform in the S.A. Defence Force is not cut off from this extremely important facet in his personal life when he puts on his uniform; on the contrary, the S.A. Defence Force is blessed with a Minister and a military high command who adopt a positive attitude towards the spiritual care of every private in the Defence Force, irrespective of his religious denomination, his colour or his fighting unit.

It could so easily have happened that the people at the head of the Department of Defence could have been totally neutral to this important facet in the personal life of the men in uniform. No wonder, then, that the corps of chaplains, a corps established in 1946 with only two vacancies, is today manned by approximately 553 chaplains. That figure does not include 90 chaplains performing voluntary service. 92 different denominations are represented by the corps of chaplains.

Indeed, it is ensured that each member of the Defence Force is served in his own form of faith. Preaching the Gospel does not only take place in the peaceful atmosphere of a home base, but also in the heat of battle in the operational area. Together in the moment of light banter, together in the moment of peace in the lives of the men in uniform, but always, too, together with the fighting men in uniform, the chaplain stands by his men in the moments of tension and utmost danger. When the men in uniform defy the Marxist danger with arms, they are assisted by the chaplains with the weapon of the Gospel.

One would be justified in asking whether another reason ought ever to be sought for the awareness among the men in uniform in the S.A. Defence Force of their calling. As bearer of a message, the chaplain has become an indispensable partner of the S.A. Defence Force. In order that this task may be achieved there is an efficient training centre for chaplains comprising four sections, viz. a training wing, a religious preparedness wing, a publication wing and a communication wing. Here chaplains are not only trained but also oriented so as to adapt themselves at a later stage to the nature of their specific field of work. Professors, clergymen and commanders have rightly testified to the fact that this training system is very successful and serves a fine purpose. Of importance in this regard is the sound mutual relationship among the various religious denominations. In this regard, too, the tactful yet vigorous actions of the Chaplain-General are to be praised. His task is a thorny one, but the manner in which he performs it attests to a sound understanding and a clear insight into the necessity for wholehearted co-operation among the various denominations within the S.A. Defence Force.

Apart from the personal activities of the chaplain, a service fund for chaplains has also been established. From this fund, 74 000 bibles have been distributed among 13 ethnic groups in the operational area. Religious films are hired, short Scriptural messages are distributed in pamphlet form, youth periodicals from various denominations are circulated, audio-visual aids are purchased for chaplains, and attention is even given to Christmas presents for prisoners. It is important here to make mention of the activities of the Defence Force choir. During 1977 the choir gave 187 performances. They gave 28 performances in the operational area and at military bases. It is calculated that 70 000 people were made contact with in this way. Among our men in the Defence Force there are also those who land up in hospitals. In this connection I might just point out that 10 000 patients were visited by chaplains over the past year. The men in the detention barracks, too, are visited every Tuesday by a chaplain. The Chaplain-General and the members of the corps deserve the highest praise for the service they are providing and the spiritual care of our men in the Defence Force. It is a contribution which must not be underestimated when we sing the praises of our Defence Force with great pride and gratitude. It can be confirmed on behalf of the grateful parents of national servicemen that the presence of a chaplain is of very great value for the sons who are doing national service. The activities of the chaplain cannot be measured in concrete terms but in this very factor lies the strength of the message conveyed by the chaplain—the eternal Gospel which operates irresistibly like a leaven in the heart and mind of the member of the S.A. Defence Force and makes of him a man in uniform aware of his calling, to live and if need be to die for his country, South Africa. May this wing of the S.A. Defence Force, the Chaplains’ Corps, achieve ever greater heights in their praiseworthy work in the S.A. Defence Force.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. gentleman who has just sat down will forgive me if I do not deal with the arguments he has advanced in relation to the contribution of the chaplains to our Defence Force. I want to raise with the hon. the Minister an issue which is different in concept from those we have been dealing with this afternoon, and which relates to the deployment of our young people of all races in the struggle to secure a peaceful future for South Africa and to find real and lasting security for this country.

I think it is common cause—it has certainly been stressed by senior Army officers on more than one occasion—that South Africa’s security faces threats on two fronts. This was referred to again this afternoon. In the first place there is the threat to our security from external aggression, and secondly there is the threat of internal discontent, resulting in the danger of internal unrest. In other words, the key to the solution of our security problems in South Africa is not a military one only, but also a political one. Speakers in the debate earlier this afternoon indicated that the percentage could be something like 20% as against 80%, in other words, 20% of our problems could be solved as a result of a military solution, while 80% of the problems could be solved as a result of finding a political solution to the problems of South Africa. I do not want to get involved at this stage in a political debate. This debate has been free from politics until now. I do not want to get involved in a debate on in ideological or philosophical differences, although these are undoubtedly the major factors in our security situation. I want to confine myself this evening to matters which are common cause in considering the problems of South Africa. I think primarily of sociological problems, which are always a factor when there is political discontent. I think of the tremendous poverty gap which exists in South Africa between the haves and the have-nots. I think of the problem of underprivileged people and of the underdeveloped areas of South Africa. I think of the vast need for immense training programmes for our people and for the massive development of areas and amenities in order to cater for their needs. At the commencement of this session of Parliament I placed on the Order Paper a private member’s motion which it will unfortunately not be possible to have debated this session in terms of the rules of the House. The motion read as follows—

As I have said, it will not be possible to debate the motion during this session of Parliament, but quite clearly the thought behind the motion was the establishment of a force something along the lines of the American Peace Corps, and it is this idea I want to put to the hon. the Minister in the debate this evening.

I am aware of the fact that the hon. member for Yeoville referred earlier this afternoon to the civic services, as he termed them, being performed by the armed forces in South Africa, particularly in those areas adjacent to the operational areas. I think that people who have viewed these services, who have knowledge of these services, and who have viewed the television programmes which have indicated the teaching and training given by the armed forces to the indigenous population in these areas, must have been impressed, and I believe that the Army deserves the highest commendation for this very essential activity. Who knows, in the long run, this may be as important in the battle for security and survival as the defensive activity under fire in the front line itself.

There are, of course, examples of this kind of activity in other parts of the world. There is the example, as I have indicated, of the American Peace Corps which involves many thousands of young Americans in providing social services to under-privileged people in various parts of the world. Other countries have also endeavoured to provide similar services. There are examples of organizations sponsored by the British Government, which endeavour to provide similar services inside and outside the United Kingdom. These are basically volunteer organizations whose services vary between assisting under-privileged people inside the United Kingdom and going abroad to provide these services to developing countries outside that country. The assistance includes the provision of teachers and other people engaged in various activities, including social and community development, nursing, agriculture, engineering, etc., in areas which need these services very much. As I have said, these countries are not alone in that concept, and the South African Defence Force is certainly an example of what an Army is trying to do to assist indigenous people.

If one views the problems of South Africa and the threats to its security, one sees that much more is needed in this regard. I think there is a very great challenge to meet the needs of our own under-privileged people and our own underdeveloped areas in this country. I think these are factors that must be borne in mind in our attempts to achieve real and lasting security and real peace in our own country. As the hon. member for Yeoville has indicated, it is clearly common cause across the floor of this House that there is a need for all races to be increasingly involved in the defence of South Africa and for there to be a much greater sharing of responsibility in the defence of South Africa across the colour line. Although there are indications that there is an increasing involvement of all people in our armed forces, there is a very powerful case to be made out for an increase in the scope of the operation to include something like a peace corps or something else of that kind along the lines of the concept to which I have referred. I want to make it clear that I am not suggesting that this could or should be an alternative to national service as we know it at the present time, but rather that it should be seen as an additional aspect of it. I believe that, incidentally, it might provide useful avenues of service for those who are medically unfit or who for other reasons cannot be placed in active military service. That would, however, not be the prime objective. The prime objective, in my view, would be to provide a multiracial force of several thousand young people, many of them with skills at their command, like artisans, doctors, teachers and others, who could move into the underdeveloped areas and engage in the fight against poverty, disease and ignorance which are surely as much the enemies of South Africa as any terrorist organization must be. This is the perspective in which I want to put this. There is a need to try to involve our young people in engaging these enemies of South Africa as much as the enemies who threaten us from beyond our borders.

I believe this a concept that needs imaginative thinking and initiative. I cannot at this stage be dogmatic about the details, but it is a thought I want to leave with the hon. the Minister. With an expanded multiracial intake for national service, I believe we could find in South Africa the human resources for such a project and I believe that it could be treated as a vital ancillary part of our national service. In my view it will add a vital new dimension to the idealism of young people. The idealism involved in defending one’s country against external aggression, though necessary and laudable, is in a sense a negative idealism. I think that the added dimension of a peace corps concept could provide a positive idealism stemming from doing something constructive to secure the future of our country for all of its people. I believe that this sort of activity could have a tremendous impact on thousands of young South Africans who perhaps have professional skills, having been trained as artisans or in other spheres, and who could all be imbued with the ideal of improving the life of all the people within the community. These young people could move into areas such as Soweto and other underdeveloped areas in South Africa to help in the provision of better amenities and facilities for training people so that they can achieve a better way of life. I see this as a very positive contribution to the real security of South Africa from the internal point of view. I see this as an activity which is perhaps as important as defending our borders against external aggression. I believe that within the framework of the principle of national service the hon. the Minister and the Army authorities could do very much more in providing this type of force in order to cope with the second threat to South Africa which, as I have said, is the threat of poverty, ignorance and disease. I believe that this is an aspect which could fall within the purview of the department of the hon. the Minister, particularly if there is an expansion of our armed services, as there should be, to involve the activities of more and more South Africans of various racial groups. I hope the hon. the Minister will give serious and sympathetic consideration to the thoughts I have endeavoured to convey in my remarks.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Musgrave has devoted his speech to internal affairs in the Republic and more specifically to the underdeveloped parts of our country. I want to tell the hon. member that we are giving proper attention to these areas and these people in an orderly manner. I believe that the hon. member and his party can help us in doing this. I am satisfied that all the attention and all the funds available to us are being devoted to these areas. However, these people also have to be convinced of what their situation would be under a communist regime. We must create a feeling of solidarity among our people in respect of our aspirations and the struggle we are waging.

In my speech tonight I should like to emphasize the very good relationship which exists between the S.A. Defence Force and the South African citizen. It is true that the Defence Force is criticized from time to time. Some of that criticism receives attention, while some of it is not only far-fetched, but devoid of all truth. I believe that the S.A. Defence Force, like any other body, does not claim to be 100% perfect. However, the Defence Force certainly has the right to count on the understanding, the loyalty and the cooperation of every South African citizen. It is gratifying to know that it can in fact do so to an ever-increasing extent. The present circumstances in which South Africa finds itself and the protective action of the Defence Force naturally play an important part. The understanding for, the loyalty towards and the co-operation with the Defence Force which is found on the part of the South African citizen today were not born of fear in the first place, nor are they the product of the threats against the Republic. I believe that these things have largely been achieved by the actions of the Defence Force. There are many facets of these actions to which I could refer, but I do not have enough time for that. However, I shall be content to mention a few. Firstly, there is the appearance of the hon. the Minister of Defence and of the members of the General Staff on television, on radio, at military parades and on many other occasions. I should like to emphasize tonight that their conduct is strong, correct and positive and that it inspires confidence on the part of every citizen. It is this conduct of our leaders in the military sphere which appeals to every true South African and which serves to inspire the man in the street to serve his country as best he can.

Furthermore, there is the good work done by the various commands in the Republic. May I refer tonight in all humility to the Southern Cape Command, with its headquarters at Oudtshoorn? I should like to quote from a letter written by the commanding officer of that command, in which he says, inter alia—

Let me say at once that this goodwill does not come from one side only. This goodwill does not come from the side of the community only; the command participates and takes an interest in the activities of the community. In fact, this commander brings together the leaders of the community from time to time to furnish them with information and to reply to questions. It is positive conduct such as this on the part of a commander which appeals to a community and creates greater goodwill.

Then we have the national servicemen themselves, however. Through them, virtually every household in South Africa has become involved in the Defence Force. I am perfectly aware of the fact that our young men, and specifically the national servicemen, come in for a great deal of criticism. I not only want to confirm my confidence in these young men tonight, but I also want to state that with the quality of the young men available to South Africa, we can move into the future with confidence. Their motivation, their determination, their loyalty, their skill and their patriotism are above suspicion. A Defence Force with courageous young men is not easily brought to its knees. Such a one is the Defence Force of South Africa.

I just want to go back to Oudtshoorn for a moment and I want to refer very proudly to the Infantry School. The pride and the gratitude of the local community found an expression towards the end of last year when the Infantry School was presented with a standard and had the freedom of the city conferred upon it. We are dealing here with officers and young men whose quality could not easily be equalled in the world. I am convinced of the fact that parents—I am a parent too—and the public are inclined to judge the achievements of young people by their achievements in sport and in the academic field. I have no fault to find with that, but I believe that every parent should come to see his or her son at the Infantry School, because there he is a man amongst men. With his dedication and his disciplined behaviour he forms a corps, together with his comrades, which will make short thrift of the enemies of South Africa. When one sees these young men in action, when one sees them on parade, when one talks with them at home or in one’s car, one salutes these young men with an assurance, not only of goodwill, but, I believe—and this should be felt by all of us— of our strongest possible support.

There is another aspect to which I should like to refer, and this is the assistance rendered by the Defence Force with regard to the development and the activation of civil defence. As we know, the function and the purpose of civil defence is by no means that of military or armed action, but it is only an emergency action to combat or relieve the adverse effects of any form of disaster, and then only by way of supporting the normal emergency services provided by local authorities. In this connection I also want to refer to the assistance which has already been rendered by the Defence Force in times of earthquakes, floods and in saving human lives by means of their helicopter services. Here we have another indisputable proof of the fact that the S.A. Defence Force does not only concentrate on the defence of South Africa— although this remains its primary task—but also on the creation of communities in which the South African citizen may lead a happy life.

I want to conclude by appealing to every citizen and every South African in this connection not to adopt a casual attitude when it comes to civil defence, saying that someone is sure to help and provide. The message is that civil defence should be undertaken for the people by the people. In this connection I should like to refer to the excellent organization in Pretoria which every citizen is entitled to join. This is the kind of organization which we should extend to every community and to every citizen. I therefore believe that we do not have a panicky and a fear-stricken South Africa, but a South Africa in which the soldier and the citizen are ready to ward off attacks and disasters. I believe that we should do this in a spirit of mutual goodwill, because we are doing it for our beautiful country, South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Oudtshoorn must forgive me if I do not follow him as far as his home town. In any case, he made a good speech.

I am sorry that I have to disappoint the hon. member for Wynberg once again. He has already been disappointed earlier this evening. But I must refer to two remarks which were made earlier by the hon. member for Yeoville. He said, among other things, that peaceful change was required in South Africa to keep us on the side of the West. The hon. member also said he could not understand why those of us on the Government side could not see why the West was against South Africa. The hon. member cannot understand why we cannot see the reasons for America’s attitude. But we do understand it and we also understand that the USA and the PFP have the same objectives for South Africa, i.e. majority rule with all the practical implications of this. We also understand that those objectives differ from the objectives of the NP. Therefore we are on different wavelengths and we do not understand why that party, as well as the USA, refuses to accept that this party, with its policy, has been elected to govern South Africa. The hon. member also said, “We must win the West back.” We should like to do that with the help of the hon. member and his party, so we ask them to stop expecting from the Government what it cannot give and what its mandate from the electorate forbids it to give.

I should like to express a few thoughts about the Navy, and since this is the first budget in which Admiral Walters is acting as Chief of the Navy, I should like to avail myself of the opportunity of expressing my sincere thanks, in his absence, to Admiral Johnson, the previous Chief of the Navy, for the friendly way in which he often received us at Simonstown and elsewhere. I also want to thank him for having devoted his life to the S.A. Navy. We wish him a very pleasant retirement. In the same breath, I want to congratulate Admiral Walters on his promotion and to wish him everything of the best for the important position which he occupies at this stage.

In Die Burger of 4 March this year, a report appeared which began as follows—

The aim of the Russians is to conquer South Africa. With reference to the remarks of the hon. member for Musgrave and in the light of his story about the haves and the have-nots I want to ask him: What do we have in South Africa which Russia does not have? Do we represent the haves and does Russia represent the have-nots in this struggle? Is this really something for which this Government can be blamed? Surely this is what the struggle is about at the moment. This additional conjuring apparatus of facilities for Soweto and facilities for other people which are to be provided by a special peace corps is a miracle syrup which is served by that party with all food, whether potatoes, rice, meat or dessert. They pour it over every dish and over every speech which they serve up in this House …

Have you ever been to Soweto?

… while we are concerned here, as the Russians themselves spelt out to the Somalian President, with the attainment of Russia’s objective, namely to be in full possession of Southern Africa and South Africa as well. In the report in Die Burger to which I have referred, it also says—

When one considers that the sea occupies 70% of the earth’s surface, this immediately underlines the paramount importance of the oceans. We must also bear in mind that there are nuclear submarines today, which are not dependent on the earth’s atmosphere. These submarines have tremendous capacities, such as being able to descend to much greater depths, to remain under water for weeks on end and to circumnavigate the earth several times without taking in fuel. On top of that, weather conditions cannot impair their effectiveness and they are hidden, even from satellites. Furthermore, we must realize that the submarine has become the battleship of modern maritime warfare and that Russia is manufacturing these submarines on a fairly large scale. We must also bear in mind that Russia has approximately 60 spy ships covering the oceans of the world, including the Indian and South Atlantic oceans, and that these ships are provided with sophisticated electronic equipment which is able, not only to listen in, but also to receive or interfere with the receipt of signals. Furthermore, we must remember that the Cape sea route is on our doorstep. When one considers all these factors, one sees that the remarks made by Gen. Webster in Washington on 24 February are very true. I read a very short quotation from the summary of his speech—

With reference to what the hon. the Minister also said this afternoon, Gen. Webster asks—

Another prominent person emphasized the importance of the Cape sea route last year. I am referring to Col. Norman Dodd, a British naval expert, who pointed out in an American magazine that the S.A. Navy and the Cape sea route would always be vital to the West, whether or not there was an agreement between South Africa and the Western countries. He said that according to his information, more than 25 000 big ships sailed round the Cape in 1974, and this number would not go down, even if the Suez Canal was extensively used. He pointed out that more than 20% of the oil used in America was conveyed past the Cape and that in the case of Europe, this was true of 57% of the oil required by those countries. Later on in his article he also emphasized the fact that the Suez Canal could actually be closed at any moment. If we then remember that our order for corvettes and submarines has been cancelled, we realize that our own Navy has to act more independently and that we have to adapt our role to modern requirements. However, it remains an indisputable fact that the Navy still has a very important task to perform in South Africa.

For this reason I find it gratifying to know that R25 million was recently spent on effectively enlarging the harbour at Simonstown, increasing its capacity about threefold, that the work ought to be completed by August and that we now have a fine submarine harbour and repair yard there. So much has been accomplished that we can accommodate virtually any ship. During a war, the Navy and the private sector will be able to satisfy all service needs.

Another gratifying aspect is the incorporation of people of colour into our Navy activities in particular. On some of our minesweepers, Coloured people are virtually in the majority. There are other boats, too, which are manned partially by Coloured people. They are good sailors who work on a voluntary basis. All these things are very commendable.

When we think of our submarines, we think of the extremely expensive equipment which is required to give our men a proper training. There is, for example, the simulator which is used for this purpose. We think of the fact that our submarine crews also consist of volunteers. They receive very expensive training, so their period of service must be as long as possible so that the Navy may derive the maximum benefit from it. It costs approximately R23 000 to train a crew member for a submarine. The equipment and training are very expensive. The people who operate the equipment must also maintain it, and that is why the training is so sophisticated and expensive. The extension of the period of national service to two years therefore suits the Navy very well, although servicemen are only used to a limited extent in the submarines.

The Navy shipping yard at Simonstown has already converted minesweepers in order to improve their patrolling abilities. Obsolete minesweeping equipment has been replaced by additional and modern equipment. Frigates have been converted and modernized by the Navy personnel. Shipping repairs and the servicing of submarines are highly specialized tasks. Their weapon systems are very sophisticated.

[Inaudible.]

It seems to me as if the hon. member for Durban Point worked there himself. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for False Bay will probably forgive me if I do not elaborate on some of the arguments he advanced, because time is very limited. Unfortunately I was so enthusiastic about what I wanted to say that I did not reply to the arguments of the hon. member for Stilfontein either. I apologize for that.

I was putting the case for establishing a bigger professional Defence Force. I pointed out that the national serviceman who is called up for a short period spends a fair amount of that time on training and other things and therefore spends relatively little time as a fighter on the front line. On the other hand, I submitted, the professional soldier who joins on a fairly permanent basis after he has finished his training can serve for a relatively longer period. I said, furthermore, that because the professional soldier serves in the fighting unit of his choice, his enthusiasm and interest are sustained.

The next argument I want to advance is that the officers, non-commissioned officers and privates in a professional Force know from the outset that they will have to tackle the enemy together. This necessarily leads to the development of that mystical thing called esprit de corps, which is absolutely indispensable in a fighting unit. It is esprit de corps which makes a hero of an ordinary man. It is this same mystical thing which makes a nation under pressure invincible.

The last statement I want to make is in connection with the diversity of our population. I think it is common cause in this House that our Defence Force will increasingly reflect the components of our multiracial population in a Defence Force which should be as uniform as possible. I believe that by building up a voluntary professional Permanent Force, we shall be using the best fighting material in all our population groups. That can only be to the advantage of our common fatherland.

Mr. Chairman, I think we are nearing the end of this debate. There is nothing new I want to touch upon, except to have a few words with my friend, the hon. member for Simonstown, who unfortunately is not here now. I recall that my hon. friend from Simonstown feels unhappy about naval headquarters being moved to Pretoria. I do not think that this move has been detrimental to Simonstown’s effectiveness as a base. I do not think that this has had a harmful or negative effect on discipline at the naval base. Nor do I believe that that step has been prejudicial to the Defence Force as a whole— to its planning and its end-processes.

I want to take the opportunity this evening of mentioning the names of three admirals and other members of the Defence Force who played a part in these matters. I think that ex-Admiral Johnson—he was here today— Admiral Walters and Admiral Edwards are people whom we can trust. They are people who played a part in the entire process, together with their colleagues of supreme command. I think that while we have this situation in which we find ourselves, and until such time as we find that there are prejudicial effects for the Defence Force, the hon. member should rather reconcile himself to the existing situation. As a matter of fact I want to congratulate the Defence Force on the smooth transfer of the Naval Base headquarters to Pretoria. I went to have a look around and spoke to a few people, here and in Pretoria, and I think that as far as we are concerned we are satisfied that this was a good step. I think that at the outset there were people who were sceptical about this, but we do not all think alike.

You made the same speech last year.

Will the hon. member for Durban Point just give me a chance? He has already made three speeches today; now he can give me a chance to finish what I am saying. This task was a facet of planning strategy on which I want to compliment the Defence Force. My colleague, the hon. member for False Bay, spoke about Simonstown as a naval base. I wonder how many people know that Simonstown today is comparable, or is even better than Malta, Gibraltar and Singapore, which are all well-known naval bases. I think we can be proud of the Simonstown base. I think the day will come when many will want to make use of Simonstown, or will wish that they could make use of this base.

I do not think that the fighting potential of the Navy has been affected in any way by the fact that we did not get the submarines. I think the new standpoint of the hon. the Minister and the department to utilize our Navy for its primary purpose, viz. coastal and harbour defence, is a wonderful idea. In that connection the Navy will play a wonderful part.

Before I leave this topic of the Navy, there is just this one idea I still wish to express. During our recent visit to Simonstown I found it interesting to see that in the works branch, in which one finds mostly Coloured artisans and apprentices, there were Coloured artisans who had been promoted to the position of works inspector—this is very important and the hon. member for Durban Point should listen now—at the same salary as their White counterparts. I was proud of the fact, and grateful to hear it. There were also large numbers of Coloured workers, as well as highly skilled artisans—so I was told—working in the dockyard. I was informed, and this was confirmed during our discussions there, that there were even some of the Coloured artisans who were able to qualify for appointment as naval draftsmen and technicians. I wonder now whether it would not be possible, in those workshops in the dockyard as well, where only Coloured employees are working, to appoint some of these highly qualified Coloured artisans as supervisory foremen to supervise and to be in charge of their own people.

That is a good idea, Piet!

This is being done in the works branch, according to my information. If possible, I think it could also be done in the dockyard.

We have a small Navy, no stronger than we are able to afford with the financial means at our disposal. From my visit, however, I got the impression once again that our Navy is like a happy family. The people in our Navy—on sea as well as on land—all form part of a happy family. The same applies to those in Pretoria. This is saying a great deal. It motivates our people. When I speak of motivation, two other words immediately spring to mind. In this regard I just want to quote briefly what two famous military leaders in Europe had to say. And with that I want to conclude. The words “defensible” and “vigilant” are used a great deal today. I would suggest that the authorities, in this Parliament as well, are being subjected to close scrutiny today, that cognizance is being taken of what the authorities are doing in order to make South Africa defensible and vigilant. The authorities have a responsibility to themselves.

Something which was said time and again today, and which i want to emphasize once again, is the following. When I as an individual, in the same way as the authorities, am also willing to increase my defensibility and vigilance to the maximum I have no reason to feel concern about what would happen to South Africa if we find ourselves facing ever more hostile circumstances. Then I know that we shall accomplish wonderful things on that front.

I have a further word of praise, and it is for the hon. the Minister. I do not think that anyone will deny that the hon. the Minister has, in the course of the years, succeeded in obtaining the co-operation of the Press. Of course I do not want our Pressmen to be a lot of yes-men. But the people of the Press have learnt that it is important to co-operate with the authorities as far as defence matters are concerned. Secondly, they have learnt to inform the public positively.

I should now like to quote what was said by Admiral Isaac Kidd, Naval Chief of Nato. On the occasion of a recent Nato meeting in Iceland, he made the following important statement in regard to the threat and the power of Russia. This is what he said—

Then he uttered these significant words—

He said that we lacked vigilance. Coming from a military leader this is a devastating accusation. The West, he said, lacks vigilance. But then the former chief of Nato, Baron De Cumont, commented on the speech, and what did he say? This—

What charge was made by this Belgian general? His accusation was that the citizens of Western Europe were not being kept informed of the situation and the threats because the newspapers did not want to publish those things which were important. That is why I say this evening that I have the greatest appreciation for our Press in South Africa. There may perhaps be one or two exceptions, but I think our hon. Minister has succeeded in taking the Press in South Africa along with him so that we cannot level the charges the two generals levelled at the Press of Western Europe at our Press as well.

I do not want to say that our Press has been disciplined by our hon. Minister. I would rather refer to large sections of our Press as having been motivated and influenced by our hon. Minister as far as defence matters are concerned, so that our people may constantly be warned of the danger, may be motivated and may also be trained. Here I am not referring only to the soldier; I am also referring to the ordinary citizen who is also— figuratively speaking, of course—being trained and spiritually equipped. That is our motto, and I think we should convey this to the general public outside: Be prepared and vigilant. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I had no intention of participating in this debate, but it has just come to my attention that there is a very important matter which has not been raised in this debate at all.

Your men slipped up, didn’t they?

It is a matter of very great concern to our country. I am referring to the implications which the severing of diplomatic relations between us and the Transkei holds for us as far as the military aspects are concerned. I merely want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will take the opportunity to inform us about that. If I am correct, we helped to train the Transkei’s army, and now we find that the Prime Minister of the Transkei is talking in terms of war against South Africa. As far as I know, there are also certain treaties or agreements about the patrolling of the coast of the Transkei, and for this reason I shall be grateful if the hon. the Minister can inform us about the implications for South Africa of the breaking off of diplomatic relations. Who, in his opinion, will take our place if we are not there to help with training?

While I am on my feet, there is another question which I would like to put to the hon. the Minister. He recently made a speech in which he indicated that South Africa’s attitude would henceforth be one of neutrality. I presume that he did not mean or could not have meant that we as a country would also be neutral with regard to the communists or the communistic bloc. [Interjections.] Therefore I should be very glad— and that is why I have put this question—if the hon. the Minister could explain to us exactly what he meant by his standpoint with regard to neutrality. Where will our country find itself in future with regard to the power blocs which exist in the world?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Bezuidenhout has put some questions to the hon. the Minister, and they will be answered in due course. At this stage I only want to refer to something which the hon. member for Amanzimtoti said. It is a matter of deep concern to me.

†He said that graduate engineering students were put onto the same course with non-graduate members. I do have a little experience in these matters, and I can say that the mere fact that a person is a graduate does not necessarily make him a good officer. I would say that an officer is someone who is born to leadership. A person can only prove that he is a leader if he proves it amongst other men. He can not really do so whilst he is at university amongst his fellow students. He must be put amongst men.

Some prove it amongst women!

The Army is only interested in good officers, whether they are graduates or not.

You have missed the point entirely.

Not for the first time!

All right, you say I missed your point, but I made my point.

*I want to speak about the present onslaught on the will of our country to survive in these times. The purpose of the onslaught is to impair our will to uphold our Christian values in this country. Its purpose is to make us doubt the correctness of our undoubtedly pure moral standards. Its purpose is to replace South African nationalism with internationalism. Its purpose is to paralyse the will of this nation to survive.

We would do well to identify this onslaught at this stage. We only have to identify it a little better. In the first place, this onslaught does not only come from the ranks of the communists. It also comes, to a certain extent, from the so-called friends we have in the West. It also comes from speeches which we hear in this House and in the country outside. This onslaught comes from these markets but each of them has a different intention with the onslaught on South Africa. The communists’ intention with their onslaught on us is of course to make us vulnerable so that they can get us as their subjects. Mao Tse-tung once said: “Germany was made vulnerable not because it lacked weapons, but because it lacked the will to fight for the survival of its people.” What is the intention of the so-called friends of the West? The West is afraid of a confrontation with Russia and to buy time to be able to prepare itself for this onslaught, it has to look for a sacrifice. That sacrifice must not be strong enough to offer strong resistance. The onslaught made on us by the West is therefore aimed at weakening us in order to make us a convenient sacrifice. Then there are people in this House and in the country whose onslaught on us is motivated by the fact that the weaker our Defence Force and the weaker our will to survive, the sooner it will lead to Black majority rule.

People such as?

I do not want to talk politics. If the cap fits, wear it. The onslaught, therefore, is on the will of South Africa. We must establish at whom this onslaught is specifically aimed. We must identify the target of this onslaught. The onslaught is being made on the youth of South Africa, those people who are at present doing national service. We should say to them: The onslaught is aimed at you. A leading communist said—in this connection I associate myself with the hon. member for Witwatersberg—that there should be continuous propaganda to undermine the loyalty of the ordinary citizen and particularly of the teenager, the young man. I immediately want to say to my younger fellow South Africans that, in the first place, this beautiful country, South Africa, belongs to them. They should make no excuse for the fact that they are prepared to fight for the country. It is their country. No one should be able to give them a feeling of guilt in this regard. They should also be proud to wear the uniform of our Defence Force and to fight under the flag of our country, because this flag and this uniform have never been defeated. Our people should be proud. National service is essential for our young people. Why is it necessary? It is not because we have intentions of acting aggressively, but because we have enemies who want our country. National service is necessary because we have a cause which is worth fighting for.

We have a cause which is worth fighting for. Napoleon said: If a man has a good cause and good weapons, he must win. Tonight my message to our young men is: We do have a good cause and this House will see to it that you have good weapons under the leadership of the hon. the Minister and the gentlemen of the supreme command of the Defence Force. Our victory is assured.

I want to elaborate on my standpoint, but I shall have to do it carefully, because I feel that it is a matter that should be approached with circumspection. There are neighbouring States, there are people and there are leaders who behave towards South Africa in the way small jackals behave towards a strong buffalo if they think that that strong animal has been wounded. If a jackal thinks that that animal has been wounded, he will try to bite him. If one jackal has bitten him and the animal does not defend itself, the second jackal comes closer to bite him as well. I want to say that the time has come—I think our young men agree with us—that the world should not think that we are wounded in any way and that they can bite as they like. I want to express this by referring to the animal world: We prefer to compare ourselves to an elephant who is strong enough to pay no attention to the yelping of the jackals. We want to compare ourselves to a lion which attacks when it thinks the time is ripe and which then attacks fearlessly. We prefer to compare ourselves to an eagle who can strike fast. I want to mention a fact here which, in my opinion, should be mentioned. When I look at our young men and young women in their uniforms, and there is pride in their eyes, I say to myself: This country and this youth have the will to survive; this country, this youth will survive.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Yeoville could not be here this evening. He apologized to me for the fact that he would be absent. I shall therefore reply to the matters which he raised at a later stage.

I furnished an incorrect figure this afternoon and I apologize to hon. members for having done so. During my speech I referred to Korea and said that there had been 800 pilots in Korea. That was not correct. What I should have said was that there had been approximately 800 pilots and ground crew in Korea, and that approximately 200 of them were pilots. I omitted the figure of 200.

I also made a mistake when I referred to R4 million—it is R40 million per minute.

That is no exception. It is not the first time, Vause.

The hon. member for Durban Point says that he also made a mistake when he quoted the figure of R40 million.

Perhaps one ought to earn R40 million per minute when one speaks in this debate.

Yes. In that case it would be the best speech the hon. member made in his life. I shall begin by replying to the speech made by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. With the termination of diplomatic relations—or the suspension of such relations, as I understand it—between us and Transkei, our defence agreements which we have with Transkei still remain signed. Those defence agreements place responsibilities on Transkei and they place responsibilities on us. As long as those defence agreements exist, both of us have obligations, and I do not think that I should be expected to say anything more at this stage but that we shall abide by these defence agreements. If they are broken, it will not be we who do so. I wish to leave this matter at that. The hon. member also referred to the speech which I made on neutrality. If the hon. member had been here this afternoon, he would have heard what my reasoning was for making that speech …

I heard your introductory speech.

I am referring to the one which I made at a later stage during the debate. In that speech I referred to the arms embargo and the resolution which was adopted in that regard in the Security Council. I said that that motion was based on false accusations and that the West must have known that they were false accusations, for obvious untruths were stated there as the immediate causes of the adoption of that resolution. It was stated, inter alia, that South Africa was wiping out Black people in large numbers, that it constituted a threat to neighbouring States and was committing acts of aggression against them.

Constant attacks.

These are absolute untruths, and the West was aware of this. They should not have allowed their allies to make such accusations. However, the West went even further and allowed themselves to end up in an impossible position since the right of veto over that resolution is now in the hands of Russia and the West cannot get out of that predicament. I have already made the assertion in the past that the West has a vacillating strategy, a strategy of desperation. It is a wavering strategy and is directly the cause of its finding itself in such difficulties as those it is in at present. That is why i said that if the West should continue to apply these arms embargo proposals, which are based on such untruths, against us and if it should continue to boycott us in regard to facilities or equipment which we need to help it to protect the sea route around the Cape, it should not expect us to do so. We are going to look after our own interests instead. If they deny us those things which we need to occupy a proper position in a Western defence system, why should we then use our equipment and the money which we are spending in this regard on them? We would rather spend it on the safeguarding of our own country. Moreover, I also said that we should not be so readily available to the West as we were in the past. We simply allowed ourselves to be slapped in the fact and insulted, and did nothing in return. The West must now begin to realize that it needs us as well, and if it needs us, it must prove this, and not with words, specious arguments, soft soap and sermons; it must sweep before its own door first, for it also has a lot of skeletons in the cupboard and what is more the whole caboodle is in some areas more than a little shaky too. That is why I said that South Africa’s interests should be considered first and that we shall no longer rush into or plunge so readily into the quarrels of the West without South Africa’s interests being the deciding factor for doing so.

But has that not always been the case?

No. It has not always been the case. In the past South Africa helped the West far beyond its borders and surely the hon. member knows that it was not appreciated.

Was that not also in South Africa’s interests?

Was the hon. member in the House when I spoke this afternoon? He is asking me the same questions now. The fact of the matter is that we did not always, in the past, fight on the side of the West purely in the interests of South Africa. Did we fight in Korea purely in the interests of South Africa? Surely that was not the case. Surely we fought in Korea because we were asked by the West to make a contribution. What direct interest did South Africa have in Korea?

We went to fight the communists.

Surely we did not have a direct interest in the Berlin airlift either. It is a service which we rendered to the West. I have already said that the West no longer expects services of that kind from us.

Are we not part of the West?

Surely we are fighting the communists.

Sir, you see what is happening now? This afternoon the hon. member for Yeoville was entirely satisfied with my explanation. He spoke after me and intimated that he was satisfied. However, I am not all that certain whether the hon. member for Yeoville was speaking on behalf of his hon. leader and the hon. member for Pinelands.

I am merely asking.

Yes, but the hon. member for Pinelands is always merely asking, and there is a big question mark over why the hon. member is merely asking.

What do you mean by that?

Precisely what I say. Does the hon. member not understand English?

I do not understand the question mark.

The fact remains that those contributions which we made were not in the first instance contributions for the sake of South Africa’s own interests. They were contributions which were aimed in the first place at furthering the interests of the West and we made those contributions because we considered ourselves to be part of the West.

Let me give an example. The West expects us to exchange important intelligence with it in the maritime sphere. On what grounds should we continue to furnish the West with important intelligence if it denies us important intelligence? On what grounds should we furnish it with intelligence if it denies us the means of carrying out long-distance reconnaissance? What right does the West have to expect us to equip our Navy in such a way that the Navy is able to protect the interests of its sea routes, if it denies us the means to do so? That is the point I made, and I think the whole of South Africa should make it clear to the West that it cannot shunt us around as it pleases and think that we will simply say: “Yes, Sir: no, Sir.” Surely it is the mentality of a chicken to always want to crawl in under the wing of a bigger fowl. That is what I was talking about, and I hope the hon. member for Bezuidenhout is with me in this regard.

I understand it.

The hon. member understands it, but does he agree with me?

We must always preserve our independence. Surely that goes without saying.

That is correct. I appreciate the hon. member’s support in this regard. Therefore, because we should preserve our independence, the philosophy which should be applied in future in order to build up our Navy and the philosophy which should be put into practice in regard to maritime defence is a philosophy which is differently geared to the philosophy of five, six or ten years ago. Circumstances have entailed that the philosophy of our entire Navy should be approached and formulated in a different light. Surely that is clear. If we do not wish to accept that, we are admitting that we can simply be kicked and slapped about but will nevertheless continue to ask whether we may not please be allowed to keep on running after the West. I say that we are not prepared to do this. That is what I meant with that speech, and I stand by what I said. I shall now leave the matter at that.

The hon. member for Worcester referred to the question of the moving of naval headquarters. I am pleased that he has now got what he wanted with the moving of naval headquarters to Pretoria. I shall leave the matter at that.

There is something I still wanted to say in regard to one aspect raised by the hon. member for Simonstown, but I see that he is not in this House at present and consequently I shall not reply to it now.

Mr. Chairman, in view of the time and the fact that I still have to reply to quite a number of hon. members, I now move—

Agreed to.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.

The House adjourned at 10.21 p.m.