Order! Before the House proceeds to the Order Paper I should like for the information of hon. members and the Press, to deal with the question of the discussion in this House and elsewhere of matters which have been referred to Select Committees and in particular the Reports of the Auditor-General.

In giving my ruling I have been guided by previous Speakers’ rulings, especially the rulings given on 27 February 1952 and 4 March 1952.

The Report of the Auditor-General, although referred to the Select Committee on Public Accounts for consideration, is available to the public and it is in order for the Press to publish such extracts therefrom as it considers would interest readers. However, while the various matters reported upon form the subject of inquiry by the Select Committee, it seems to me it is in all but the most unusual circumstances highly undesirable for newspapers to comment upon the propriety or otherwise of the actions criticized by the Auditor-General before the Committee has been able to hear evidence and submit its findings to the House. Such comment in anticipation can only prejudice an impartial inquiry by the Committee and prejudge the issues involved.

†With regard to debate on matters in this House which have been referred to a Select Committee for inquiry and report, it must be stated that the House always retains the overriding authority to debate on proper occasions any matter which it has referred to a Select Committee. Exceptional circumstances could easily arise when the House might deem it in the public interest not to await the findings of the Committee. On the other hand, if it should become the practice for members in debate in the House to prejudge the issues involved in a matter which the House has deliberately referred to a Select Committee for inquiry, it can only prejudice an impartial inquiry and undermine the authority and the proper functioning of Select Committees. Members of the Committee having committed themselves in the House or having heard conflicting opinions voiced on the floor of the House, would afterwards in the Committee find it difficult to hear and to sift with an unbiassed mind the evidence to be given by witnesses. While always anxious to assist in maintaining the ancient right of the elected representatives of the people to freedom of speech in this House, I feel it my duty to appeal to hon. members to exercise that privilege with the utmost caution when the House has referred a matter to a Select Committee for inquiry.

With regard to statements by hon. members outside the House, these same guidelines apply. As in the case of the Press, hon. members are free to give factual information from the Auditor-General’s Report, but any comment thereon must of necessity be premature because the facts are not yet known and must still be established. Such comment may in addition, as I have already indicated, prejudice the inquiry.

While it is thus clear that discussion in the House or elsewhere of matters referred to Select Committees is permissible, I want to take this opportunity to impress on hon. members and the Press the necessity, in the interest of Parliament itself and its procedures, to avoid commenting save in the most exceptional circumstances, on matters which have been referred to Select Committees, such as the Auditor-General’s Report.

*Such comment also places the responsible Minister in an invidious position in that if he replies to comment either in debate or in the Press, he must of necessity furnish information which has not yet been laid before the Select Committee concerned, which would obviously to a large extent negate the object in referring matters to Select Committees of this House.

I am sure that, as always, I can rely on hon. members and the Press to act in the spirit of the remarks I have just made.

Mr. Speaker, I move without notice—

Agreed to.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

In this Bill, additional appropriation of R29,946 million is requested, bringing the total estimated expenditure for the 1978-’79 financial year to R1 073,578 million. Particulars of the additional amounts required under the various services and items appear in the estimates of additional expenditure, which has been tabled.

The amount of R29,9 million, which represents an increase of only 2,8% over the original estimates of R1 043,6 million, is regarded as very reasonable and is indicative of effective financial planning. The comparatively small additional amount which is being requested, is especially significant if it is taken into account that the largest single portion thereof, namely 42%, resulted from the general sales tax which placed an additional burden of R12,7 million on the Post Office.

The remaining amount is necessary to provide for interest payments on higher savings bank investments, R5,l million; higher fuel and transport costs, R0,7 million; new cable works for Soweto and other non-White areas, R0,7 million; increased departmental contribution towards the Pension Fund, increased overtime rates, etc., R6,5 million; the expected higher shortage in the SWA Post Office Account arising from cost increases similar to those in the Republic, R1,8 million; and the purchase of a budding in Pretoria to serve as a regional head office and executive post office as well as for other urgent building projects which, in the interest of better service to the public and more favourable working conditions for the staff, could not be postponed until the next financial year, R2,4 million.

Hon. members will observe from the annexure to the estimates, that I have authorized building services to the value of R2,682 million in terms of section 12F(5) of the Post Office Act I am, however, requesting that an amount of only R2,4 million be voted as the remainder of R282 000 will be defrayed from savings on other services.

The expenditure mentioned above has only become known after approval of the main budget in March last year and could therefore not be included at that time.

As far as the financing of the additional expenditure of R29,946 million is concerned, I should like to mention that according to our latest estimates the revenue we shall obtain from our operating services will be R25,868 million higher, whilst the increase in the investments by the public in the Post Office Savings Bank and National Savings Certificates will be R65 million higher than the amounts originally budgeted for. We shall therefore have no problem in financing the additional expenditure.

Mr. Speaker, I want to respond to the hon. the Minister and thank you for the privilege of being permitted to speak from this bench in which I sojourn at the moment. In this additional appropriation an amount of R29,946 million is asked. It is interesting to note that for two years we have not had a debate on an additional appropriation for the reason that last year the amount appropriated for was less than 2% of the total budget and was therefore taken up into the main budget. This additional appropriation represents an increase of 2,8% over the original estimates. It is therefore 0,8% higher than the 2% of last year and that is why there has to be an additional appropriation debate.

This amount, as the hon. the Minister has pointed out, is indeed a small amount in relation to the total overall sum of R1 073 578 000 plus the additional amount to which he referred. We do not regard this amount as being unreasonable in the circumstances. It certainly is not unreasonable and is indeed an improvement on the year before when an amount of R54 million had to be appropriated on a budget of R553 million, i.e. an increase of 10%. I should also like to comment favourably, in passing if I may, on the format of the Bill and the addendum which we have received and which set out very clearly and in a lucid way the additional amounts that are required in globular sums as opposed to what was required before.

In dealing now in more detail with the additional estimates before us, may I turn firstly to “Operating Expenditure: Item 1.1— Staff Expenses” where the hon. the Minister is asking us to approve of the additional amount of R6 470 000. I have not received all the detail from the hon. the Minister with regard to this amount, but I do note, however, that, according to the staff establishment in 1977, there were 53 732 people employed in the Post Office, as opposed to 53 955 in March 1978. The number of people who are employed seems to remain fairly constant, even taking into consideration the loss of some 180 people when Bophuthatswana became independent in December 1977. Most, but not all, of the posts have been filled and the question of staff is not altogether unsatisfactory. The authorized establishment shows an increase as at 31 March 1978 of only 223 posts, an increase of 0,42%. While the number of people being employed in the department remaining fairly constant, why was this extra expenditure not anticipated at the time of the budget? I presume there must have been unforeseen factors, details of which have not been stated here today. Salary increases are not a factor as that may only come in April this year, and that will obviously fall into the budget that' follows. This prompts me to ask what liaison really exists between the Department of Posts and Telecommunications and the Treasury when the budget is framed. Is it not a fact, does it not happen, that the budget of this department is submitted to the Treasury who can thus be aware of the overall budget and at that stage include in the overall budget any increases in expenditure, such as taxation, sales tax or general sales tax which should be taken care of in the budget? I would venture to suggest, that better liaison should exist between the Department of Posts and Telecommunications and the Treasury to additional expenditure of this nature.

Turning to two aspects of staff employment itself, I should in the first instance like to refer to the question of married women. Generally speaking, a married woman is on the same salary scale and is given the same opportunities as a married man in the department, but it is a little disturbing to see that when a woman marries she does not have quite the same status and may lose unless the department agrees to keep her on in the same position which she occupied before marriage. In many places, particularly the smaller places, I have noticed that there are many women who are postmistresses—very important positions. Obviously they have got there because of their long experience and their knowledge of the Post Office. We obviously need experienced people in those positions, and I believe that that is a factor which should weigh heavily when decisions relating to staff appointments are made. I would urge the hon. the Minister and his department to remove this discrimination which exists against women in so far as appointments are concerned. If hon. members refer to page 38 of the annual report of the Postmaster-General for 1978, they will see a reference to the number of married women appointed and the posts in which they have been appointed, and also the advancement of those who were engaged in temporary employment.

The second aspect to which I wish to point with regard to staff is the need to employ our boys returning from the border. At this particular time, when we are running into an unemployment problem, we notice with some discontent and alarm that after the discharge of so many of our young men returning from the border, they are struggling to find jobs. It obviously strikes one that here is an opportunity for young men who have difficulty in obtaining jobs to enter this particular service where they can be employed, where they can be given technical training and where according to their level of education—be it Std. 10, Std. 8 or even Std. 6—they could be employed in various capacities.

I would therefore urge the hon. the Minister to embark upon a very serious recruiting enterprise throughout the Defence Force so that, prior to the discharge of large intakes of army trainees, such as we had again at the beginning of the year, he could be able to provide employment opportunities for those young men. I believe that we all agree this is a duty we owe them.

I refer now to item 1.11, on page 2 of the estimates. This item concerns the cost of loans and interest payments. Here the additional amount to be voted exceeds R5 million. This means, as the hon. the Minister has also indicated, that there has been an investment of an extra R65 million with the Post Office. The original estimate budgeted for last year was R95,6 million, representing the interest payable on these various investments. It now appears that the amount required will be R100,75 million, which means an increase of 5%, which is not unreasonable in the light of the present economic situation, and also when taking into account the state of liquidity presently existing in South Africa.

When a new company was quoted on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange recently, that particular company was 19 times oversubscribed because of the liquidity of individuals who, I was given to understand, were standing right there with cheques for vast amounts ready to make application for the issue of shares to them. There is a lot of money around and I believe the Post Office should gear itself to meeting the same situation in the year to come, because according to forecasts by economists the year awaiting us is likely to be the same. I believe we should take this factor into account. Although there has been a drop in rates of interest, it has been the experience, particularly of building societies, that vast amounts of money are being deposited with them, especially in the form of pension funds and the like. Therefore I believe we should take advantage of this situation so that we, in turn, when we reinvest with the Public Debt Commissioner, can be sure that our interest accumulates accordingly.

I also notice that an extra amount of R2 million is asked to be voted in respect of an increase of standard stock. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether the maintenance of cables, which obviously falls under this particular item, will be carried out and whether it refers to the towns listed in the Annexure on page 3, or whether it merely refers to an original underestimate with regard to maintenance and cables required. Is it not perhaps, as I hope it to be, the situation that the Post Office has, by virtue of its good administration, been able to fulfil all the contracts and obligations undertaken and that it now finds that it requires this additional amount for spending during the coming fiscal year?

I refer now to capital expenditure, on page 2 of the estimates. In item 2.1 reference is made to telecommunications, and the amount required to be voted is R11,175 million. This mainly pertains to the provision of services, and I note that an amount of R482 000 is involved for the same purpose. That is indicated on page 3, and the amount I have just mentioned is arrived at when all the amounts required for the building of telephone exchanges are added together. It is pleasing to note that Iketlo, Kwa-Xuma, both in the Soweto area, are now being catered for and that attention is being given to the needs of Blacks. It is also pleasing to note that the Coloured residential areas Alabama and Bethelsdorp are both included now. I should like to emphasize, however, that there is a great need for speeding up the provision of services in the areas mentioned here. Soweto is a target area. It is an area which is difficult to police. It is an area where ambulance services cannot readily be supplied. Although the Baragwanath Hospital is not very far from Soweto, it is nevertheless very difficult to reach the Black residential area by ambulance. Particularly now, with a new policy having been announced by the Department of Plural Relations and Development to relax restrictions on businesses within townships mainly to expand as far as partnership is concerned, to expand as far as the ownership of other businesses is concerned, to form companies and to expand generally, it must be emphasized that there is a great demand for telephones in these areas as well as a need for a telephone service.

Besides that, we have seen from difficulties experienced in these areas that every possible element of discontent should be removed. Because one of these problems is the telephone service, the department should concentrate on providing a satisfactory telephone service in this area. I am pleased to note that the hon. the Minister’s department has in fact concentrated upon eliminating the backlog here. Operation Commando is something that the hon. the Minister can be proud of. His predecessor embarked upon a scheme of this nature in order to fill the gap which obviously needs filling in this area.

We note that as a result of this the position in the Witwatersrand area has improved. Turning to the figures of 1977, we notice that outstanding applications then amounted to 35 344. In March 1978 it was 21 644 and at the 30 September 1978, 10 013. We note and note with pleasure the fact that these figures have been reduced, and we trust that the department will continue as expeditiously as possible to wipe out the outstanding applications and provide the service. There is also a need in less privileged areas, Coloured areas such as Mitchell’s Plain and Bethelsdorp. We have read with interest of the five-year plan to spend R126 million, and we take it that the money now appropriated will fit into this.

However, there is one problem which I must touch on in connection with the telephone service in these areas. That is the problem of vandalism. The solution of this problem lies with the installation of table telephones in shops. This will serve a dire need of those who have not got telephones at home, and there are thousands. But since shops are closed at night and during weekends we have somehow to find a solution to this problem so that in an emergency—and there are always emergencies in a township— access can be obtained to a telephone. I hope the hon. the Minister and his department will give very serious consideration as to how to solve this problem. Perhaps the matter can be referred to the Select Committee on Posts and Telecommunications. Perhaps this committee should give this matter its attention so that we can put our heads together and see how we can best solve this problem. It is also necessary to consult the mayors of the townships, as well as those living in the areas, particularly the chairman of the Urban Council, for ideas as to how this problem can be solved.

The department was no doubt able to keep up the pace during the year, and I take it for granted that all of the R279 million has been spent and that this R11,1 million will be spent in time to the best advantage of the areas referred to.

There is another item on the same page and the hon. the Minister referred to it just now. This refers to the R2,2 million concerning the important regional head office in Pretoria. As far as this is concerned, we have in our ranks the hon. member for Johannesburg North, who has over many years had experience in regard to Church Square, with the problems existing there and in particular in connection with regard to the post office there. This hon. member will address the House on this particular subject shortly.

Turning to item 2.2, which concerns the land, buildings and housing, here there is a request for an additional amount for R2,4 million, and I ask the hon. the Minister how this is to be spent and why this amount is necessary.

Turning to item 2,3, namely the question of vehicles, we have here an amount of R952 000 on the additional estimates that would bring the total amount spent on vehicles during the year to R7 566 000. The question that is obviously occupying everyone’s mind at this stage relates to the amount of money which is going to be spent in order to acquire additional vehicles. In 1977 the hon. the Minister’s department was able to tell the public that they had used 21,3 million litres of fuel, which meant that they had been able to save 22 000 litres—a very commendable performance.

In the light of high oil prices looming upon the horison and the difficulties pertaining to the supply of fuel in general, I think the hon. the Minister and his department must now investigate, as a matter of priority, ways and means of travelling less, thereby saving fuel. I believe that this department could be the first Government department to put forward a clear and positive plan and set an example to the other departments, industry and trade and to the public in general as to how they could save fuel. In this regard I think of schemes such as lift-club schemes. Closer co-operation with public authorities in regard to the utilization of public transport by workers employed by the Post Office could further add to the saving of fuel. Another issue that can help in this respect is the saving of daylight.

Another important issue that I want to discuss relates to certain shortages that are being experienced in South West Africa. The hon. the Minister prepared for a loss of R8,3 million and now has to provide for a loss of R10,2 million. It is obvious that the Post Office services in South West Africa is a service that we are obliged to continue for as long as the territory falls under the jurisdiction of the Republic of South Africa. It is a service in which the highest possible efficiency is required and for which the most sophisticated material must be provided. The loss in regard to postal services in the past was approximately R30 million, and no doubt a considerable portion of this R30 million— as a matter of fact, it amounts to one third—is suffered in South West Africa. It might be our duty to provide the best services to the territory, but we must anticipate the changes that will hopefully take place when South West Africa becomes independent. Our investment in the capital goods there must be substantial.

I should like to ask the hon. the Minister certain questions in this respect. In the first place: What is the total capital investment by the Post Office in South West Africa? Secondly: What is the breakdown of that investment? Thirdly: What will the savings be in salaries, maintenance, telecommunications, vehicles and generally when South West Africa becomes independent? Fourthly: Has any agreement been entered into by the Republic of South Africa in anticipation of this event? Fifthly: What will the effect of this agreement be on the Post Office budget itself?

Order! Those are matters that can be discussed during the Post Office main appropriation debate.

I accept your ruling, Sir, and will proceed to my next argument. In terms of the report of the Wiehahn Commission, the Post Office is a business enterprise and should be run along business lines. This is being done. The Post Office service should be streamlined and equipped with the latest electronic equipment. Microelectronics and computer technology must be provided for and we need to know more about potolin, the Post Office Teletronic Institute, its activities and its progress. We need to know more about the new regional system and its area managers.

Last year there was no additional appropriation debate, but this year we are privileged in being permitted to discuss the affairs of the Post Office. The total amount is R29,9 million, which is more than 2,8% of the total Post Office budget, and therefore we shall support the Post Office Additional Appropriation Bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to the hon. member for Hillbrow for delivering such a positive speech here this afternoon and also for supporting this additional appropriation. The hon. member put quite a few questions, questions which the hon. the Minister, my other colleagues and I shall attempt to answer. I find it somewhat ironic that the hon. member referred to something here this afternoon about which I put a question in this House a few years ago during the discussion of the Post Office Appropriation Bill. In this regard I am thinking of our national servicemen returning after the completion of their military service. At that time I made the appeal that our national servicemen—they were not yet going to the border at that stage—complete a part of their training in the Post Office, particularly because the Post Office had so much trouble with staff at that stage. It is ironic that we should both think of this idea.

The hon. member also asked whether the Department of Posts and Telecommunications consulted with the Treasury on the estimates. We know that the Post Office can obtain money from the State when there is a shortage of loans. Over the years since the Post Office has become independent, and particularly since we got the Post Office Savings Bank under the control of the Post Office, the Post Office has never found it necessary to approach the Government for loans. The hon. Minister will be able to tell the hon. member that there is constantly consultation between him, the hon. the Minister of Finance, the Department of Posts and Telecommunications and the Treasury in order to co-ordinate matters. Therefore, the hon. member does not have to be concerned about that. The co-ordination exists and it is done very well.

As far as the hon. member’s question about South West Africa is concerned, I wondered whether he is already able to see when there will be independence. That, of course, is a question which is difficult to answer. It is not crystal clear at the moment, but it is as well already to begin thinking along those lines.

The hon. member also put questions about the regional head office in Pretoria and the executive Post Office. Fortunately I have all the details here because I was very interested in those purchases. The building is situated on the comer of Pretorius and Van der Walt Streets. It is the old Volkskas building. It was my privilege, when I began my practice in 1950, to have an office on the second floor of that Volkskas building. I had my practice in that building for many years. It gives me pleasure, therefore—I spent many pleasant years there—to know today that that building is in the possession of the Post Office.

It is a building of seven storeys and is very centrally situated on an outstanding comer. It is opposite the Strydom Square and everyone is aware of the tremendous development which has taken place on that square. At present there are many other developments in that vicinity. There is also a huge building being erected between Church Street and Pretorius Street. The building extends from Van der Walt Street as far as Central Street. On the other side, in Prinsloo Street, enormous buildings are being erected. I want to say to the hon. the Minister and the top management that if ever the Post Office made a wise, brilliant and outstanding purchase, irrespective of price, it was the purchase of the Volkskas building. Whatever one does in the world, wherever one goes, and whoever one is, one must constantly make use of Post Office services. The concentration in the Volkskas building is to the advantage of the Post Office and the whole of South Africa, and it is particularly to the advantage of the community concerned.

The costs of that building will be R2 million. An additional amount of R200 000 has been voted for certain changes, adaptations and so on. The municipal valuation of the ground alone is R1 090 000 and the improvements are valued at R760 000. We know that the municipal valuation for improvements is far below the real price—in other words, the building with a municipal valuation of R1 850 000 is now being purchased at a cost of R2 million. I think that is a very reasonable price.

The surface area of that stand is 1 418 square metres. The total surface area of the accommodation in the building is 8 505 square metres. It is very interesting to examine the figures if one compares the price of the building with other buildings and also calculates the rental. The cost of the building is approximately R1 million and the land costs approximately R1 million which gives us a total of R2 million. For the 8 505 square metres this works out at a cost of R118 per square metre. If the economic lifetime of the building is taken as ten years, which is a very short period—I estimate that the lifetime will be much longer—this works out at R11,80 per square metre per annum. I am not including interest in the calculation of this amount. The capital costs compare very favourably. If one examines the rental elsewhere in Pretoria, for example at Munitoria, we see that at the moment the rental is R39,6 per square metre per annum. Just around the comer, in Central Street, where the existing Post Office is situated, it is R90,24 per square metre per annum.

Therefore, however one considers the matter, the rental the Government is going to pay, is a very low one. I am very pleased about that because I am in favour of the Government purchasing its own buildings wherever possible. I say this because too often one sees that where the Government hires buildings, the lessor sometimes becomes lax. The lessor does not always honour the conditions of a long-term lease and does not always keep the building clean, neat and in order so that it can be pleasing to the public at all times. For that reason I hope and trust that with its additional adjustments, etc., this building will be beautified to such an extent that it can be a source of pride to the Post Office, because if everything is taken into consideration it is a very good building.

I now just want to take a brief look at the appropriation itself. I want to agree with the hon. member that this is an excellent additional appropriation. If one examines it, one sees that the additional revenue this year will be approximately R25,6 million, as the hon. the Minister has already told us, with additional expenditure of R29,9 million. That means in reality a difference of R4 million which we now have to budget for in addition. As opposed to a budget of R1 073 million this speaks volumes for the efficiency of our top management. Last year’s budget was indeed a brilliant budget My hon. colleagues will indicate how costs, etc., have risen recently, and it is an excellent achievement that the top management in conjunction with the hon. the Minister and the department, could draft a budget in such a way that after all these price increases there is only this slight difference of R4 million. This also attests to excellent discipline on the part of the staff. If such discipline did not exist throughout the department, we would not be able to boast of such a fine additional appropriation here this afternoon.

There is another good characteristic which we can also ascribe to the staff, and I should like us to tell the world about it. We must proclaim it to the world. This does not only concern other Government departments, those of us present here and those in the private sector. Everybody must take note of this. The characteristic I want to mention, is the motivation of the Post Office staff. Apart from fuel conservation, Post Office officials have been working overtime without compensation for years now. They have never complained or grumbled for additional compensation. From start to finish they have contributed their share, not only in the interests of their own future, but also in the interests of the department and of South Africa.

For that reason it is a great pleasure for me to lend my full support to this additional appropriation. I want to thank the hon. the Minister, the Postmaster-General, the top management and all officials sincerely for our being able to boast such an excellent additional appropriation today. We look forward to the next budget because we are sure that it will be just as brilliant.

Mr. Speaker, we are again sailing on calm waters here this afternoon—I am reminded of the recent Railway debate—and in this relaxed atmosphere I think it is nice to be able to exchange a few pleasantries across the floor of this House. The first pleasantry I should like to exchange relates to the hon. the Minister himself. I want to congratulate him on the introduction of his first budget, albeit a mini one. I think he is a man of tremendous good fortune. He has a lot going for him. He is a man who, we feel, is going to do a good job in the position to which he has been elevated. His good fortune lies in the fact that he has behind him the Postmaster-General and his entire staff—and by “entire staff’ I mean the entire staff.

Sir, we all have aims in life; we all have targets we sometimes set ourselves. When one looks at our Civil Service and its various departments, I think I can say without any fear of contradiction that of them the Post Office is the pacesetter. I believe the men and women of the Post Office are the people in the Public Service who are setting the pace for other departments. I know that comparisons are often said to be odious, but I believe this is a comparison that must be made so that all other departments can aim for the degree of efficiency the Post Office has managed to achieve. You see, Sir, progress is the name of the game. Progress and the constant improvement of services is what is required. Just a few years ago we on this side of the House could not find a tremendous amount of good to say about our postal services. Today, I admit, we have difficulty in finding bad things to say. We nevertheless find them. I must warn the hon. the Minister that when his main budget is introduced here we are going to look for the bad things, we are going to seek them out and we are going to high-light them because that, after all, is our function, it is what we are here for.

It is, however, gratifying and pleasant for someone like myself as official spokesman on posts and telecommunications in the NRP to be able to pass on the kudos when the kudos are due—and they are due in this instance. We do not believe by any manner of means that the Post Office is perfect, but there is more than sufficient evidence of a constant effort being displayed towards attaining perfection, and this is important I want to say to the hon. the Minister that if he does nothing else, he must continue to lead this team of his in a constant striving for perfection, because postal and telecommunication services are, I believe, the life-blood of any country and it is possible to attain perfection in that field.

I should like to reply briefly to what the hon. member for Sunnyside had to say. He spent much of his address on dealing with the purchase of the property to serve as a regional head office in Pretoria. I am grateful to him for the details he provided, because this is one particular item of expenditure on which I was going to join issue with the hon. the Minister. R2,2 million is a lot of money. The one matter I wanted to investigate was the municipal valuation of this particular property. However, the hon. member for Sunnyside has already given us that. I felt that in his speech he was seeking justification for this purchase and that has aroused my curiosity. I was quietly amused at the casual way in which he brought the figure for the building down to R1 million and also brought the figure for the land down to R1 million, making a total of R2 million. That is, however, not the figure. The actual figure is R2,2 million. I can also round off figures. If I round off the municipal valuation at R1,8 million and the purchase at R2,2 million, the difference is R400 000 which is nearly half a million rand. I should like the hon. the Minister to tell us whether that is the total expenditure on this building and what additional cost is going to be required in order to equip that building and adapt it to suit the needs of the Post Office. Are there any major works required, for instance knocking down walls internally and structuring the interior or in respect of cable laying or halls? We do not know, but he may envisage this.

The percentages applicable in respect of the additional amount to be appropriated make very good reading when measured against the original estimates. The additional amount required works out at 2,86%. This is good budgeting. The percentages in respect of individual items, however, vary to a great degree and I believe that some require an explanation. Staff expenses vary by as little as 2% and the cost of loans by as little as 5%, but the increase in standard stock has been 40%. I believe that that is an area which requires closer examination. In the case of telecommunications there has been an increase of 2,5%. This is a very satisfactory state of affairs. The increase in the case of land, buildings and housing has been 10%. This is why I have raised the issue of that particular building. It is one of the items contributing to that increase of 10%.

One thing that disturbs me is that there has been an increase of 14,5% under the item “vehicles”. I know there has been a tremendous escalation in the cost of vehicles, but are vehicles being purchased according to a carefully budgeted plan? Is the Post Office also following the practice that is common in business, namely to replace a vehicle when it becomes redundant. People do not often look closely enough at the necessity of replacing a vehicle. Is it always necessary? Can we not do two jobs with one vehicle instead of just willy-nilly buying a replacement unit?

I spent many years in the motor trade and in this particular area I know what I am talking about I do believe that in big business today—I look upon the Post Office as being just that: a big business—there is the tendency to buy vehicles just for the sake of replacing one which has been taken off the road. I should hate to think that the Post Office was falling into this particular trap.

It is not my intention to initiate a full-scale discussion on this measure before us today. We shall have time to do that when the main budget is presented. However, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that it has been a good dummy run.

I should just like to turn my attention to the speech made by the hon. member for Hillbrow. I should like to assist him. He raised the matter of the erection of call boxes in Soweto, a matter which is very worthy of consideration. In this respect he has the wholehearted support of the NRP. However, I must point out to him that he cannot raise that issue in the Select Committee, because the Select Committee deals with Post Office accounts. I sincerely want to suggest to him to raise that issue the next time we discuss Post Office affairs in this House, because I am afraid that in a Select Committee—a body which discusses only Post Office accounts— he is going to find himself out on a limb.

As I have said to the hon. the Minister, it has been a very good dummy run. When we see the real thing, we are going to have a healthy debate across the floor of the House. I want to warn him that at that moment we may not be so kind with him, but will probably deal with him a great deal more harshly than he has been dealt with today—unless he manages to emulate his predecessor and not increase postal rates.

Mr. Speaker, in contrast to the hon. member for Hillbrow, the hon. member for Umhlanga at least had the decency to congratulate the hon. the Minister on his first additional estimates. We are grateful for that. But when the hon. members of the Opposition praise the Post Office and the hon. the Minister, I get such a hollow feeling on my stomach, however, because I fear that those hosannas will change in a moment to cries of denunciation. The hon. member for Umhlanga has already pointed a little finger in that direction. True, they are now praising the hon. the Minister, but in their hearts they are seeking crosses and nails with which to crucify him. I, therefore, have a hollow feeling about these expressions of praise from the hon. member for Umhlanga. I do not think that the Post Office needs such expressions of praise. I think that the past of the Post Office speaks for itself in respect of its deeds in the past. I think that the annals of the Post Office have been written and make fine reading.

Mr. Speaker, I think you will allow me to quote just three examples to indicate how well the annals of the Post Office read, particularly over the past few years. If we examine the years 1976, 1977 and 1978 and the profit which the Post Office made during those three years, we therefore see, respectively, R82 million, R76 million, the most recently, R68 million. If we examine the second example and examine the loan redemption capacity of the Post Office over that period, we see that for the same period it was respectively R19,5 million, R43,3 million and R22,2 million. If, however, we examine the last example and we examine the capital contribution which the Post Office made from its own funds to finance its own capital, we see that for the three years it was respectively R58,2 million, R23,4 million and R41,7 million. To any economist, to any business economist, to any industrialist, to any dealer, this history and these annals read like a fairy-tale. If we may use the old expression, I think that the Postmaster General laughs all the way to the bank, if one examines the past of the Post Office.

If we project this onto the additional appropriation before us, we also examine the history of the additional appropriations. We see the following figures for the same years: 1976, 1977 and 1978. In 1976 the additional appropriation was R54,1 million as opposed to R550 million capital, a percentage of 9,8% to be precise, and not 10% as the hon. member for Hillbrow said. If we analyse that additional appropriation, we see that the part over which the Post Office had control, was a mere 5,8%, viz. R22 million less. In 1977 it was not at all necessary for the Post Office to submit an additional appropriation to the House. If we examine the picture in 1978, the amount as the hon. the Minister mentioned, amounted to R29,94 million, as against a total capital budget of R1 034 600 000, a mere 2,87%. I want to reiterate what I said in this House two years ago, viz. if a budget is examined and the accuracy and perfection with which it has been drafted is noted, anyone who knows anything about the drafting of appropriations of this quality, must concede that an appropriation with a deviation of R2,87% is actually very near to perfect.

An important matter which I want to mention here today and of which we must take cognizance, is that we as members of Parliament should note the conscientiousness with which the Post Office has looks after its financial affairs. If the Post Office did not examine its financial affairs with absolute conscientiousness, it could not come to this House with such a small amount. I think this is a very important matter which should serve as an example. The voter in the street must take note that this is an example of the way in which this department and most other Government departments in general look after their financial matters conscientiously. I think this is very reassuring and I think it is important that the voters take cognizance of this matter.

Having read the annals of the Post Office— and they make pleasing reading matter—we return to a few of the details of the additional appropriation now before the House. I do not want to discuss the wider spectrum at this stage. Basically, I want to note one or two aspects. I want to refer to the amount of R29,9 million. I think it is important that we briefly analyse this amount and examine how it is made up. I only want to amplify one aspect of it. It is an aspect to which the hon. the Minister has also referred. It is this, that 42%, or R12,7 million, of this amount is a result of the introduction of the general sales tax. It is of course an amount of which the Post Office had no knowledge at the time of drafting the budget for the current financial year. For that reason it could not be budgeted for.

It is always pleasant to do arithmetic, particularly if the answers to one’s sums are to one’s taste. Now I want to do a little arithmetic with regard to the general sales tax, a little arithmetic which will really be to our taste. When we now examine the R12,6 million—an amount completely beyond the control of the Post Office when drafting its appropriation for the current financial year— and subtract it from the total amount of R29,9 million, we are left with an amount of R17 million. That represents a mere 1,63% of the total appropriation. Now we ask ourselves what, in fact, this means. What does the figure of 1,63% of the total appropriation mean to us? It means that it brings the additional amount over which the Post Office did have control, within the requirements of section 12F(5) of the Post Office Act, 1958. According to this section of the Act the Post Office does not have to come to this House to request additional funds, if the additional amount amounts to less than 2%. In such a case the Post Office can include the amount in its main appropriation for the year, in terms of the provisions of section 12 of the Post Office Act.

It is encouraging that we are able to say that the Post Office, theoretically speaking, has for virtually two years now succeeded in controlling its funds in such a way that it has not had to come to this House for additional funds. However, when we examine the one large amount in this appropriation, viz. the amount of R11,175 million requested for telecommunications—and that is the amount about which the hon. member for Hillbrow expressed concern—we can, of course, harp a little further on the string of the general sales tax.

If we analyse the amount of R11,175 million a little further, we note that R8 million of that amount is in regard to general sales tax. We also saw that R2 million of that R11,175 million must be utilized for price increases. When we examine price increases, we must accept that we are living in a period of inflation, inflation which is present not only in South Africa, but throughout the world. We are saddled with the problem of foreign exchange fluctuations which are announced from day to day, and we should note that the general price increases of a great deal of the equipment which the Post Office has had to purchase during the past few years, have been as high as 20%. The prices of vehicles have increased by up to 30%. In view of these factors we can say that virtually the entire amount of R11,175 million is the result of factors over which the Post Office as such had no control.

I should like to conclude by referring to an activity, also falling under this item, to which, incidentally, hon. members opposite have also referred. It concerns what the Post Office calls Operation Commando. The task of Operation Commando was to examine the system capacity of the Witwatersrand as such because there were bottlenecks. The hon. member for Hillbrow referred to this. It was also instituted to examine the cable programme of the Witwatersrand and particularly the Black areas, where services can be rendered.

I think that the Post Office should be congratulated. This congratulatory message also goes to the worker of the Post Office because this operation was so successful that the programme could be completed more quickly than was budgeted for time-scalewise. The system capacity of the Post Office has, therefore, already been extended, the cable programme has been completed and the result is that services are much more readily and easily available in those areas where there were bottlenecks. As proof of that we need only examine the item Telephone Services on page 1 of the additional appropriation in order to see that in this connection an additional amount of approximately R16 million is requested. This is basically the result of the fact that this Operation Commando was completed so successfully.

At the moment the Post Office is building up and maintaining a telephone network and service for South Africa while at the same time they find themselves in a technological evolution on account of their having to change over from the absolutely mechanical system which we have installed up to now to the electronic digital system. No Post Office of the size of our Post Office has ever experienced such an evolution before. We must have the people to be able to do it. In the process of preparation for the integration of the system, provision has to be made for prevention of an interruption in the supply of Post Office services such as telecommunication services. I think that we as the House of Assembly have one obligation in this regard: We must congratulate the hon. the Minister sincerely on the fine manner in which he has controlled this system and on the small additional appropriation which they have submitted in its preparatory stage. I think that the Postmaster-General and his staff should also be congratulated on this achievement.

With these words, on behalf of this side of the House, I want to tell the hon. the Minister that we support the additional appropriation with a happy heart, with a slightly hollow feeling about the expressions of praise uttered by the Opposition.

Mr. Speaker, at the outset I want to give the hon. member for Wonderboom the assurance that he has an unnecessary fear of words of praise coming from this side of the House for a well deserved achievement by the Government or one of its departments or its officials. The hon. member can be assured of the fact that where we utter words of praise, they are sincerely meant without any qualification or underhand idea. It goes without saying that there may also be points of criticism. I shall raise a few small points in connection with this appropriation which do in fact involve criticism. But before I deal with that I should like to associate myself sincerely with the sentiments of all the speakers who have so far spoken after the hon. the Minister, and who praised the good management which has now almost become a traditional feature of the Post Office’s activities.

It is not only a case of good financial control and everything coupled with that, as the hon. member for Wonderboom suggested: if one takes a look at what is happening behind the scenes, it is very clear that as far as the Post Office is concerned, this very important principle holds: Plan for the future. Short- and long-term planning are clearly two watchwords with which the heads of the Post Office are well acquainted. We have here not merely a vigorous effort to make up leeway, as far as services are concerned, during the present degree of economic recession, but also a vigorous effort to prepare for the future when we hope—let us hope that this is not false confidence—that the country’s economic position will improve, when the Post Office will have to compete with the private sector for the services of staff and when a tremendous expansion in the demand for the services of the Post Office will take place. I reiterate that short- and long-term planning are watchwords of the Post Office and this deserves praise from all the hon. members in this House.

I wish to devote some attention to the question, as raised by the hon. member for Hillbrow, of the post office in the city centre of Pretoria. I do not know to what extent the hon. member is conversant with the history attached to this Post Office matter. Time and again, before and also after I had the privilege of taking my seat in this House, it was a matter of concern to me that the hon. members who represent constituencies in Pretoria and its vicinity, had apparently not acquainted themselves with what is and was going on in the Post Office set-up in the city of Pretoria. [Interjections.] If they were aware of it, then they maintained a right of secrecy and silence on the subject in this House.

Just like certain people on certain other matters!

Such as? [Interjections.]

Such as Information!

Yes. We should rather not discuss secrecy and secrets further and I shall leave it at that.

What I do want to say is that as far back as 1963, one of the Deputy Postmasters General took me and a few other members of the Church Square Commission to examine and experience the conditions under which employees had to work in existing post offices in the city centre of Pretoria. In 1963 it was already perfectly clear that these people worked in highly unhygienic conditions. Indeed, and I say this in all humility, it was clear to me that if those employees had to work in a private undertaking and hygiene control came to hear of it, the owner and the manager would probably have been rapped over the knuckles and perhaps fined. That situation continued from 1963 till 1979; a period of 16 years. When I inquired, it was clear that even long before 1963 serious representations were made by the Post Office asking that the working conditions of their employees should be improved as a matter of urgency. In this regard I have in mind in particular space required for certain sections such as the Sorting Section. This had to be done for the sake of greater efficiency and also for the sake of simple human compassion. In the meantime, 16 years have elapsed since I personally noticed this, and although we will not go into the whole sad story today, I would, however, appreciate it—I think the hon. members who represent Pretoria constituencies, would also appreciate it—if the hon. the Minister could give us a complete account of this long and sad story, during the discussion of the Post Office budget, or during the main budget, when the “Department of Public Works” vote is discussed. Apart from these miserable circumstances in which these people had and still have to work, he must also tell us how it came about that a solution has now been found, suddenly and unexpectedly, for a scheme in which millions upon millions of rand were involved. For the edification of the hon. member for Umhlanga I also want to ask how this whole problem was solved with the expenditure of the meagre amount of R2 200 000. This is a problem which has dragged on literally for decades.

The hon. the Minister must also explain to us how this was possible and who is implicated or guilty or is to be held responsible for this matter. The matter will be raised at that stage. We now have an outstanding opportunity to congratulate the Post Office and its chiefs on the purchase of the Volkskas building, which at once solves several problems. In the first place it solves the question of space. As I see it, with the aid of this new building, which according to my information was purchased at a very reasonable price, together with the improvements which will be effected in the city centre on Church Square, there will now be space for extensions over several decades, so that there will never again be a repetition of the situation we have had over the past two or three decades in Church Square.

In the second place, the purchase of this building solves a great many of the problems surrounding Church Square. This is not the appropriate occasion to discuss this. However, I do want to point out that by purchasing this building, and despite the alternative plans for tower blocks and the fantastic schemes in the air earlier, there is now going to be a definite direction in which to work on the northern part of the west façade of Church Square; not only for the important extension of the post office’s facilities, but also for the public, and—what is in my opinion more important—for the question of the preservation of important historical buildings on the western façade of Church Square. The Post Office is to be congratulated on this solution of its specific problems and on the tremendous effect it will have on the question of Church Square, the city centre of Pretoria and the preservation of the core of the city. For that reason I gladly associate myself with the other hon. members who in certain or all aspects congratulated the Post Office on the way in which they control their finances, the way in which they plan and the tremendous success they have achieved in improving an absolutely essential service to the public. One should never lose sight of the fact that the Post Office is probably one of the departments which has the most contact with the general public. To a large extent they are a link between the Government on the one hand and the public on the other and reflect the public’s appreciation for or disapproval of the services rendered by the Government.

Mr. Speaker, in this pleasant and restful atmosphere I wish to extend our sincere congratulations to the hon. the Minister, on behalf of the Select Committee on Posts and Telecommunications, on the introduction of his first appropriation. It is an exceptional budget All parties in this House agree on that score. I believe that it is a cornerstone and an exceptionally sound foundation, and may the hon. the Minister be spared to continue to build up on this sound foundation in the future. May he, as in the past, be assisted in an outstanding fashion by the Postmaster-General and his very able staff, and also enjoy the co-operation of all the Opposition parties as has been illustrated so clearly this afternoon. It is interesting to note that only about eight members of the three Opposition parties are present in the House. I believe that the absence of the other members can be excused by the fact that their absence is probably due to their making use of the very sound telecommunication services laid on in Parliament. As such that undoubtedly constitutes a further motion of confidence in the department and I believe that if we co-operate, as they co-operate in the department, we can develop this department into something even more exceptional than it already is.

What percentage of your members are present?

The hon. member for Hillbrow said that he would have liked this department to be the first Government department to strengthen the hand of the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs by conserving more fuel than any other government department. This is a good point which the hon. member raised and I should like to dwell on it for a moment. In the budget of additional expenditure, provision is made for an additional amount of R952 000 for capital expenses relating to vehicles. Of course, when one is dealing with a State department which possesses more than 10 000 vehicles, it is, in the nature of the matter, an extremely difficult task to exercise strict control over those vehicles, particularly their use and the prevention of fuel wastage. I therefore did a little investigating and found out that this department has indeed become a department, as the hon. member for Hillbrow wanted—which sets an exceptional example in comparison with other departments. It is an example of which we, the public, may take cognizance.

In the first place there is a special computer that is used to register all the details of fuel consumption of each of the more than 10 000 vehicles in the possession of the department. The moment any deviation is shown, an investigation is immediately ordered to determine what the problem is. This is a praiseworthy example.

The department also takes trouble to determine which vehicle can best answer to each specific purpose for which a vehicle must be used. This is best illustrated by way of an example. Last year the department devoted three days to carrying out tests on the Kyalami race track with its departmental vehicles, panel vans and trucks in order to determine which vehicle answered best to a specific purpose. One has to take into account that the department possesses more than 100 six-ton trucks, among others. When two such six-ton trucks of the same make are used for different purposes, with their engines tuned in different ways, during the life of such vehicles there can be a difference of R2 000 in fuel between the truck using more fuel and the one using less. That is why it is so illuminating that careful experiments are carried out in order to determine which vehicles answer best to a specific purpose. The department has also achieved exceptional success in the curtailing and co-ordination of journeys and in the tuning of engines in order to ensure optimum fuel consumption. This is also achieved by judicious management practices. As a result we find that over a period of four years, from 1974 to 1978, the fuel costs per kilometre have only risen from 6,21 cents to 7 cents. In the light of the various petrol price increases, this is a noteworthy achievement. We also find that since 1973, when the fuel conservation campaign was launched, there has been a saving in consumption of 21,2%. This is a noteworthy achievement which could be followed by the public to very good effect.

If one further analyses the items appearing in the additional budget it is interesting to note that the item for which the largest amount is provided, viz. more than R16 million, is that of telephone services. It is also illuminating that of this sum consisting of more than R16 million, an amount of more than R11 million is being set aside for capital expenditure on telecommunications services. It is also interesting to note that of this R11 million, no less than R8 million is being devoted to general sales tax. In the annexure on page 3 of the White Paper one notes that the additional amount required for telecommunications services is to a large extent being utilized for the establishment of effective telecommunication services for use by the Brown and Black peoples in South Africa. The hon. member for Hillbrow also referred to this aspect. One notes in the annexure that telecommunications buildings are being constructed at Iketlo, Alabama, Kwa-Xuma, Empanjati and Bethelsdorp. All these buildings are for use by the Brown and Black peoples. Therefore an infrastructure is being created of which the first step is the building, the second necessarily the cable network, after which the next step is necessarily the provision of the necessary electronic equipment. This infrastructure being created contributes and will continue to contribute, not only to reducing the waiting list, not only to facilitating and expediting the modernization of our telephone system in South Africa, not only to making provision even at this early stage for a possible and expected economic upturn, but also, in particular, to the rendering of services which are going to be vitally necessary, now and in the future, owing to Brown and Black demand. I believe that the very greatest challenge facing the Post Office is to make provision for the tremendous demand for telephone services from Brown and Black ranks. There is little doubt that this will be the case, particularly in the light of the new dispensation and the improved internal race relations in which the whole of South Africa shares. In this regard we are finding at the moment that greater business enterprise is being shown by Black and Brown businessmen and that the wage gap in general is rapidly disappearing and has already disappeared at many levels. Therefore, if the Post Office does not succeed in this tremendous task of providing a very large number of telephones within a short period of time on a very wide scale, we shall again build up a long waiting list which would not be easy to eliminate again.

It is illuminating that, as was mentioned in a press report, the chairman of the Soweto board said with regard to Soweto that it should be the ideal and it was vital that every house in Soweto should have a telephone. In this regard it may be mentioned that in Soweto alone there are already 3 500 waiting applications. The department has already made provision for this as well by setting aside R12 million for the installation of automatic telephones. It is with gratitude that one also takes cognizance of the fact that a great deal of progress has already been made with the cable network and that an additional 4 000 automatic telephones will probably be available for use in Soweto during the second half of this year. It is also a matter for thanks and gratification that the very first E-10 electronic exchange to be installed in South Africa, which will come into operation in 1980, will make provision, inter alia, for approximately 4 000 lines for Mamelodi and Atteridgeville. It is with gratification, too, that one takes cognizance of the fact that more than R100 million will be made available for telephone services for Brown and Black people over the next four years. I believe that the planning of the department has been remarkable and that we are engaged in creating an infrastructure to the best of our abilities within the confines of our financial ability. One does this because one realizes that the Department of Community Development built 39 000 dwelling units last year for Brown people and urban Blacks alone. It is from the ranks of those people that there will be a demand for telephone services. It is gratifying to take note of the fact that on Mitchell’s Plain, where 6 100 houses are under construction, provision is already being made, while services are being laid on, for the necessary pipelines for later cable-laying for Post Office purposes. It is also noteworthy that houses are being built there at present at the rate of approximately 1 000 per month. Another 30 000 houses are to be built at Mitchell’s Plain, and at Atlantis, where there are already 2 000 houses, another 6 000 houses are to be built. Owing to this building programme which will be completed in about five years, there will be a demand for more than 10 000 telephones. I believe that this department is creating an infrastructure to the best of its ability—and this additional appropriation forms part of that endeavour— in order to try to keep pace with that tremendous problem it will have to face.

I believe, too, that this department has become a model Government department and a model business enterprise and that it has endeavoured at all times to combat inflation, to combat tariff increases, as has been done over the past four years with great success, and by way of dynamic management to render an exceptional service to the consumers of the services of this department in South Africa. For that reason I believe that the public of South Africa takes cognizance of the efforts and the bona fides of the department. If, therefore, the department encounters a problem, as must necessarily be the case from time to time, the public will have understanding for that problem and the department will be able to enjoy the greatest possible co-operation and understanding on the part of the public. For that reason it is a very great privilege to support the Additional Post Office Appropriation.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to convey my very sincere thanks to everyone who participated in this second reading debate. I find myself in the rather unusual position of participating in a truly peaceful debate. I think it is the first time since my parliamentary career began that so much peace has prevailed in a debate in which I was involved. I want to give hon. members the assurance that I am not going to do anything to disturb that peace. To those hon. members who addressed kind words to me personally, I say thank you very much.

I should also like to say thank you for the kind words conveyed to the officials of my department, the Postmaster General and his staff, from the most important to the humblest official. Those words of praise are well-deserved. In the short time I have had the privilege of working with them, I experienced loyalty, friendship and dedication to their work to the highest degree. For that reason I associate myself with everyone in these expressions of praise and gratitude to the department, which made it possible for me to introduce this relatively small and positive additional appropriation in Parliament.

I hope that this atmosphere of friendliness will mark our relations throughout this year, when the main budget of the Post Office is discussed as well. I am not venturing any prediction, but I even hope that if it should be necessary after all to adjust the tariffs, hon. members will accord a hearing to and accept those steps which may perhaps be announced with the same understanding.

I should like to thank the hon. members on this side of the House—the hon. member for Sunnyside, the hon. member for Wonderboom and the hon. member for Durbanville— very sincerely for their very positive contributions, for the elucidations which they furnished in respect of fundamental aspects which I shall also have something to say about during the course of my speech.

The hon. member for Hillbrow raised a wide diversity of matters and I shall try to furnish him with replies on the fundamental aspects to which he referred. At the outset he asked ' for an elucidation of the increased expenditure in respect of staff, viz. R6,47 million. I want to tell him briefly how this amount is constituted. Firstly it consists of increased pension contributions as a result of the increase in the State contribution on every rand which employees contributed as from 1 April 1978. Previously this amount was R2,70, and it has now been increased to R2,85. This increase alone cost the Post Office R2,8 million. In addition overtime tariffs had to be raised in order to bring them into line with the increased salaries which have been applicable as from 1 January 1978. This entailed an additional R1,4 million. In this connection I just want to explain that the 1978 salary increase came too late to enable the processing of these more detailed calculations in respect of overtime in the budget of that year, and we had to include them in the additional estimates in this way. Then, too, the Witwatersrand allowance was increased. This is an allowance which we pay employees on the Witwatersrand because we experience particular problems in finding employees there. We find that the salary structure on the Witwatersrand is in general higher than elsewhere and that when Post Office employees are transferred to that area, competition with the private sector there is keener than elsewhere. Hence the introduction of a special allowance for workers on the Witwatersrand. The last time this amount was increased was in 1969, and we saw fit, owing to problems which once again arose there, to increase this allowance further as from 1 January 1979. This entailed an additional R½ million. It will amount to R2 million for a full financial year. I may mention, for the information of the hon. member, that the allowance for married persons was increased from R360 to R720, and for unmarried persons from R180 to R360, per annum. The remainder of the expenditure pertains for the most part to an improved dispensation which was created for technical auxiliary staff with effect from 1 October 1978 and which entails an additional expenditure of only R78 000 in the present financial year, as well as additional expenditure which was not foreseen and which results from the consolidation of salaries with effect from 1 January 1978. This is briefly how the amount in respect of staff services is constituted.

In this connection I can give the hon. member the further assurance that there is the closest liaison between the Department of Posts and Telecommunications and the Treasury. As he will observe from these items, not one of them is the result of a lack of liaison between the Post Office and the Treasury or between the Post Office and other departments.

In the second place the hon. member pleaded the case of female employees in the Post Office, to the great pleasure of the hon. member for Houghton. Basically the Post Office is as close to salary parity between men and women as one can be. There are minor differences, but in general one would be able to state that in the Post Office men and women are paid equal wages for equal work, with adjustments here and there as a result of particular problems.

†With regard to the position of married women, to which the hon. member also referred, the situation is that if an employee on marriage desires to stay on with the Post Office, our basic approach is to allow her to stay on wherever possible. But we have to keep our options open in this regard because we are duty bound to take into account the general situation on the labour market Should there be unemployment the breadwinner of a family should obviously be given precedence over a married woman whose husband is already in employment elsewhere. However, our general approach is to accommodate married women and to allow them to retain their posts after they get married.

*In the third place, the hon. member referred to returning national servicemen who now have to be accommodated on the labour market.

†In this regard I can give the hon. member the assurance that we undertook a special drive to advertise the possibilities the Post Office offers to prospective employees, and that we find ourselves in the position that we did get a fair share of those now entering the labour market although not as many as we would have liked.

*The hon. member went on to mention Soweto. I want to say that references to the telephone situation in Soweto and other non-White areas run like a golden thread through the debate, and consequently through the speeches of other hon. members as well. I am indebted to the hon. member for Durbanville for the exceptional elucidation he furnished here. In regard to Soweto I want to inform the hon. member in the first place that we are no longer working under Operation Commando now, but that when I assumed office we found the situation in Soweto so serious—and I observed in my department the same concern at the situation there—that I am able to announce today that we now have a permanent operation in progress, an operation which we refer to as Operation Soweto. With Operation Commando we succeeded in making dramatic breakthroughs. By means of Operation Commando the waiting list, in a relatively short period, was shortened from 35 000 to 8 556. However, this waiting list will grow longer again. This will happen firstly, because of the expected economic development and secondly, because of the rising standards of living of non-Whites which, so we believe, are going to cause an explosion in the demand for services in their residential areas. This will be the case in Soweto, as well as elsewhere throughout the Republic of South Africa.

That is why we are in fact at this stage according high priority to planning in order to cope with this situation of a radically rapidly increasing demand for services among non-Whites as it arises. Operation Soweto is the first example. That does not mean to say, however, that we are allowing the spotlight to fall only on Soweto, a mistake which is so frequently made in the political sphere. There are needs in other areas as well, and we are examining these thoroughly. At this stage, however, I can already quantify what we are doing in Soweto. During this financial year six mobile CP-24 semi-electronic exchanges have been put into operation in the Soweto-Nancefield area, and in a very short period services have been supplied to approximately 4 900 waiting applicants. At the same time the service of approximately 1 100 subscribers in that area has been converted from manual to automatic operation. In addition two new automatic telephone exchanges, with a joint capacity of 10 000 lines, will be installed in Soweto during the coming financial year while an exchange with a capacity of 4 000 lines will be put into operation in the adjoining Nancefield. If we make a calculation now we will observe that we have over a very short period of not much longer than a year already succeeded in, or are already at work at and are certain that we will achieve our goal of providing the people in those areas with approximately 20 000 new lines. During the coming financial year heavy expenditure will also be incurred elsewhere in respect of cable works and services in non-White areas. The priority we are according the expected demand is also reflected in the spending on buildings for which we are now requesting parliamentary authority by means of this additional appropriation. This is demonstrated by the fact that, apart from the purchase of the Volkskas building in Pretoria, to which I shall return again in a moment, most of the other buildings which are mentioned in the detailed elucidation are buildings which are situated in Black or Coloured areas. An example is Kwa-Xuma. In carrying out the directive to expedite the provision of telephone services in Black residential areas, and in particular in Soweto, we had to adapt the programming of the said buildings to suit the earlier delivery of telephone equipment. The buildings would originally have been completed in March 1982, but will now be completed in July 1979. This is a fantastic acceleration by three years on very short notice, which called for a great effort on the part of the department. It is difficult to try to convey to the hon. members what effort and planning it took to achieve what has been done in Soweto in such a short time. All credit is due to the department for this, particularly the technical officials in charge, they who had to undertake the planning, the direction and guidance.

Some of the other buildings are also connected with the priority we are according this matter and for which we are trying to plan in good time. In this connection prefabricated buildings have been erected at Alabama in Klerksdorp and at Bethelsdorp in Port Elizabeth which were urgently required in order to expedite telephone services to Coloured communities in accordance with the revised policy.

Thirdly, there was also additional spending on buildings at Sundra and Empanjati in Margate, the particulars of which appear here.

Finally, the hon. member referred to fuel saving. Some of the other hon. members who participated in the debate furnished certain particulars of what has already been achieved in this connection. Since we now find ourselves in a period in which fuel saving must be the absolute priority of every citizen, business enterprise and Government department, I should like to allow the emphasis to fall here on what is being achieved by planning on the one hand and the part of the Post Office has to play in regard to fuel saving on the other. We have succeeded, by using the computer to keep up to date and analyse on a monthly basis the on-going, detailed particulars of each vehicle and its fuel consumption, in building up proper records on the basis of which we can save fuel in a scientific way. Any departures from the set norms which emerge in this way are investigated and can be rectified. In addition we have changed over to light vehicles. The reason for that is obvious. We have made use of public transport to a greater extent, and internally, departmentally, we have encouraged and propagated judicious managerial practices. We have also succeeded to a great extent in curtailing and co-ordinating journeys and have introduced the regular tuning of engines to ensure optimum fuel consumption.

For that reason we have been able, during the period since we first had to accord priority to fuel saving—more or less five years ago— to effect a saving of 21,2%, and the present consumption is 18,67 litres per 100 kilometres, as against 23,7 litres per 100 kilometres five years ago. However, we have not yet reached the end of the road and shall continue our attempts to improve even further on this figure. In this connection we have a part which we should like to play in the interests of everyone. With a view to the saving of fuel in South Africa we want to attempt, by making use of existing channels of communication and by creating alternative channels of communication, which will afford additional facilities, to reduce essential journeys by others. The Post Office must be seen as an aid in the struggle to save fuel. We offer our services for that purpose, and our planning will also be aimed at achieving that goal. Although this cannot be done within a year or two we envisage providing facilities, inter alia, for holding conferences per telephone cum television as soon as possible. This will ensure that conferees can converse in a normal conversation situation and display documents to one another without any need to consume any fuel travelling a thousand miles to a central meeting place.

With that I have more or less replied to all the questions raised by the hon. member for Hillbrow, and I should now like to turn to the arguments put forward by the hon. member for Umhlanga.

†The hon. member for Umhlanga commended the department in particular because it is striving for perfection. I thank the hon. member for that and want to assure him that we are intent upon eliminating mistakes and improving standards and services. We realize that we are normal frail human beings, that we have many faults and that we can and will make many mistakes.

It is nice to meet normal people.

The hon. member for Umhlanga referred to standard stock and expressed the increase of R2 million in terms of a percentage, if I remember correctly. I think he made an error, however, because the increase should be seen as R2 million on R47 million, which is the total value of the standard stock. The percentage is therefore 4,3%, because the value of the standard stock has increased from R47 million to R49 million. I hope that explanation will clear up his particular problem in that respect.

The hon. member also referred to the purchase of the Volkskas Building.

*In this connection I want to furnish the hon. member with a few more particulars by saying that the basic purchase price of the building is R2 million and that R200 000 is being set aside for possible alterations and conversions. We intend to accommodate the present Central Street post office in that building. We already have a ground floor area which is fundamentally suited to that purpose, but certain alterations will have to be made to the counters, etc. At the moment I do not have full particulars of the other envisaged alterations, but this is actually a small amount which has to be spent, particularly in view of the number of people who are going to be accommodated there. In my opinion we were fortunate in finding a building in Pretoria which is so well suited and situated for the purpose for which it is going to be used. This building is situated in an area which is already becoming an historical place in Pretoria. The building is situated directly opposite Strydom Square, on the other side of which the large new opera building is at present nearing completion. When the post office building has been completed and when the Central Street post office is moved to the ground floor, we intend calling this the Strydom Square Post Office.

The hon. member also mentioned the municipal valuation and that possible differences could exist in this connection. I want to assure the hon. member that we are entirely satisfied in our own minds that even if the municipal valuation is being exceeded, we paid a fair and economic price. For example a large business undertaking purchased land in the immediate vicinity at more rands per square metre than the price we paid, while the building on the land which they purchased has demolition value only. Consequently they deemed the land alone— they can only recover a small amount from the demolition of the building—to be worth as much as the land plus the buildings which we purchased. Therefore we are perfectly satisfied that we made a good purchase here and that we assure our employees of good accommodation in a way which is absolutely justifiable from an economic point of view.

This brings me to the hon. member for Johannesburg North, who spoke of a long history of poor accommodation for Post Office officials in Pretoria. In this connection, of course, there have already been dramatic improvements. If the hon. member visits Pretoria again he is very welcome to come and see our new head office building. He will find that it is an effectively planned building in which employees can do their work effectively under really happy circumstances.

He also said that the purchase of the Volkskas building is a wonderful solution. However, we have not yet, through the purchase of this building, finally solved the problem. The hon. member is therefore making a mistake by saying that we have through spending R2 million solved a problem which might require R50 million. He also asked why we did not think of this solution earlier. A large number of our employees are not yet properly accommodated. We shall probably have to spend another estimated R8 million—the amount may perhaps be slightly less—to establish proper standard facilities at the Church Square post office. Our estimate of the total cost of the purchase of the Volkskas building, plus what we want to do on Church Square, will therefore be in the region of R10 million. But if we contrast this with the original plan for a large building on Church Square in which everything was to have been centralized, then it is a vast saving. The greatest optimists predicted that the cost of everything originally planned for Church Square would be approximately R27 million, while some people, who term themselves realists, argued that the cost would have been closer to R40 or R50 million. The fact remains that we are now going to assure all the employees of the Post Office in Pretoria effective accommodation for only R10 million.

With that I think I have replied to all the aspects that were raised, and I want to conclude by thanking all the hon. members who participated in the debate for the positive spirit which they displayed and for their appreciation of the Post Office. I want to assure hon. members that the department finds the appreciation which they received from the public and from hon. members in this House inspiring and will in that way be urged on to greater heights.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage

Clause 1:

Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of points I would like to raise. The first concerns married women and here I appeal to the hon. the Minister to remove what I call the discrimination against a married woman because she might well be the breadwinner of the family.

The second point I want to raise concerns vehicles and fuel, which was mentioned by the hon. the Minister in his reply and also referred to by the hon. member for Durbanville. While we commend the department for the measures which it has instituted in the past for saving fuel, I want to ask the hon. the Minister and his department to investigate the possibility of using battery driven vehicles. Such vehicles are used successfully in the milk industry. They are silent, do not cause air-pollution and could be very suitable for the short distances that are normally travelled in a city. Although there may be other expenses attached to operating such vehicles and although they have the disadvantage that their batteries would have to be charged regularly, their use will, nevertheless, save fuel and combat air-pollution. I really think that is worth considering.

The third aspect I want to touch upon is Soweto. I want to thank the hon. the Minister for his sincerity of purpose and for the seriousness with which he is tackling the problem of the very dire need for telephone services in the areas occupied by the Coloured, Black and Indian people. The very seriousness of his attitude to this problem has been manifest in this House, and that is why we look forward to Operation Soweto and other operations in depressed areas being given top priority. I do not want to waste the time of the hon. member on my left, but I just want to mention in passing that I can tell the hon. member for Umhlanga that at the last Select Committee meeting the chairman did allow wider-ranging discussion. Let me also just take this opportunity of congratulating the hon. member for Durbanville who is the new chairman of the Select Committee, and I hope he will also permit such wide-ranging discussion of problems.

The last item I want to deal with, in the short time at my disposal, is the question of Pretoria, a matter I want to deal with very briefly. This is a subject that was raised by the hon. member for Johannesburg North and was also dealt with by the hon. member for Wonderboom and the hon. the Minister himself. What the hon. member for Johannesburg North highlighted for hon. members in this House was the history, since 1963, of the whole development of the Pretoria Post Office and the Church Square complex, involving the National Monuments Council and the attitude of the Administrator of the Transvaal. That is an aspect I have some knowledge of since, as hon. members know, I was a member of that body for some time. I was happy to hear the hon. the Minister say that R10 million was now going to solve the problem, a very definite problem since Pretoria has not previously had a satisfactory service. The hon. the Minister would, I think, be the first to acknowledge that fact. A city as large and important as Pretoria, however, certainly deserves a better deal than it has been getting as far as the whole development of post office services in the area is concerned. The purchase of the Volkskas Centre will, in fact, now allow a post office to be established in that part of the city, a post office which will serve the area around the Strijdom monument. That is all very well, but the old post office is still in the city centre, and the hon. the Minister knows that all the lawyers, conveyancers, professional people and businessmen, insurance companies and building societies, concentrated as they are in that area, need that post office right there. It is therefore necessary to develop that as quickly as possible. One would have thought that R40 million or R50 million would be necessary to solve the problem, but if the hon. the Minister says that R10 million can do so, that is indeed a great step forward. The hon. the Minister has, however, said there are still problems. What I therefore want to know is whether the overall problems are going to be solved. I can only say that I am surprised that the hon. member for Sunnyside and the hon. member for Wonderboom, who represent Pretoria in Parliament, have been so silent all these years and have not put their weight behind requests for a solution to the post office problem facing Pretoria. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is, in the strongest possible terms, going to tackle the little obstacles that are still in his way, obstacles which he has not taken us into his confidence about yet, though I have a good idea what those obstacles might be. I hope he will, in fact, give us an undertaking that he and the Cabinet will take strong action to solve these problems once and for all. I hope he gets the go-ahead to proceed with his plans for the development of the two post offices, the one being vital as far as the Church Square complex is concerned.

Finally I want to say, on behalf of the official Opposition, that we do appreciate the attitude adopted in this House by the hon. the Minister who has comprehensively answered the questions put to him by this side of the House.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member raised a few matters to which I think I should reply at this stage. Some of his other comments basically refer to what I said, and I shall not reply to that in detail again.

With regard to his proposal for electrically driven or propelled vehicles, I want to say that the postmen already use mopeds wherever possible. We find that they are very economical and I believe that the use of electrically driven vehicles for other purposes will have to be investigated by us at some later stage. I do not think that we can become leaders in this field. We have been advised of experiments that were undertaken elsewhere and which did not meet with great success. I am told that such vehicles sometimes lack power. My attitude in this regard is not a negative one, but we have evidence that such vehicles are not very practical and therefore we do not, for the moment, foresee such vehicles being taken into use. If the hon. member has any particulars available which may create renewed interest in this possibility, he is welcome to put those particulars before us so that we can have a look at them.

The hon. member also referred once again to the problems relating to Church Square, Pretoria. I want to state here clearly and unequivocally that the Post Office’s only interest in the matter is its interest as owner of a particular site on Church Square. I do not want to become involved in any argument about the rest of Church Square. We have an idea of what we are going to do. We are already looking into this and planning what we are going to do. A particular amount is going to be spent on the building as such behind its facade and the old ramshackle buildings on an adjoining site are going to be knocked down to put up new buildings which will be interconnected with the existing building and which will create the necessary better working conditions. The hon. member need not be worried about the hon. members representing Pretoria constituencies not being actively enough involved in this. I can assure him that members of Parliament from Pretoria have, in the past, been very actively involved in the situation in Pretoria and are keeping me on my toes. It is just that they do it through other channels than those used by the hon. member for Hillbrow, and I think he will appreciate the reason for that.

In conclusion, let me say that the hon. member once again referred to married women. Let me reiterate that we have nothing against married women. Whenever we possibly can, we keep them in our employment, but if we have to choose between a married woman whose husband is employed and a man who, without the employment, would be unemployed and whose family would suffer as a result, our attitude must obviously be that it is in the interest of all the people of South Africa that we rather employ the breadwinner than the married woman who just adds to the income of her family. Generally speaking, we have not had many problems in this regard and the married women working for the Post Office are very, very happy there.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 2:

Mr. Chairman, there is one question I should like to put. In paragraph (e) of clause 2 reference is made to a Post Office Chair of Telecommunications at the University of Pretoria. I take it that that university is turning out engineers who will be used in the Post Office and that for that reason the relevant amount is being safeguarded for them. Are there bursaries to send students to this university, and can we subsequently bind them by some form of agreement to work for the Post Office for a number of years?

Mr. Chairman, my answer to all the hon. member’s questions is “yes”. We have not only one bursary, but many bursaries and not only in the engineering field but in respect of all types of studies. We are supporting this particular Chair. Research is being done there on behalf of the Post Office and in co-operation with the department I have been through the laboratories there and can say that they are doing magnificent work. The reason why the university is specifically mentioned here is that we may not, in the additional appropriation, include funds in this respect, but must make special provision for that. I can say that we are doing a lot towards engineering the creation of engineers, if I may put it that way, who are then tied contractually to the Post Office.

Clause agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

The implementation of the Slums Act rests with the Minister of Community Development, but in practice, action taken to counteract slum conditions under the Act is in virtually all cases initiated and executed by local authorities.

In the process of declaration and clearance of slums, offences are created in terms of the Act and fines paid in this regard are deposited in the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The United Municipal Executive has made representations to the effect that these fines should accrue to the local authority concerned, since the implementation of the Act entails substantial expenditure in, for example, salaries, stationery, office accommodation and travel expenses. The Executive feels therefore that it is only right that local authorities should be partly compensated for this in the form of fines. There are already various precedents for this in legislation, e.g. the Health Act and the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act.

I agree that local authorities should be assisted. The Treasury does not object to this principle, a principle which, as I have mentioned, is already contained in other legislation. If the fines in question were to be paid to local authorities then it is probable that local authorities would take even more effective action against slums.

The fines provided for the Act in 1934 are at present totally inadequate and unrealistic and it is proposed that they be increased accordingly as indicated in the Bill.

As soon as the Bill has been passed by Parliament I envisage introducing a consolidating Bill. The principal Act has been amended on a number of occasions since 1934 and the Afrikaans text in particular needs to be modernized and overhauled due to obsolete language use.

Mr. Speaker, we find that the proposal made by the hon. the Minister in this draft Bill is reasonable and we shall support it.

These penalties were laid down in 1934, 45 years ago. I think that the requirements, which were laid down at that stage, are unrealistic and a little bit out of keeping with present requirements, hence these increased fines which are proposed in this Bill. These fines of R500 and R200 are, even by today’s standards, substantial ones; let us face it. We do, however, accept that these are serious offences. In terms of section 5(3) the owner of the slum is guilty of an offence if he fails to comply with a notice from the slums court directing him to remove the nuisance. Section 7(1) stipulates that the owner of the slum shall, within a period of seven days, deliver to the town clerk a list of all the occupants of the slum and that it is an offence not to comply with this provision. Section 7(2) stipulates that any owner who knowingly or negligently makes any false statement in any such list, shall be guilty of an offence. Section 12 stipulates that it is an offence to permit people to occupy a slum after the slums court has issued an order. Section 26 was repealed by Act 63 of 1975. We accept that these fines are reasonable. The fact that the United Municipal Executive, representing all the local authorities in South Africa, made these representations, is something that gives us heart and something which convinces us that this is a measure that is worthy of support.

The question of slums is indeed a very serious one in South Africa. Fortunately, not all areas are affected, but there are some areas which are affected. I can think of such places as Klipriviersbrug, which is in the Kliptown area, and Page View itself, which was an area for Indian occupation and which is now a White area. I think a heavy responsibility rests on local authorities to see that there are no slums in their area and to take every step to remove them if they are there. Slums lead to overcrowding and overcrowding in turn leads to ill health, a matter which receives the attention of the Medical Officer of Health. Before this Act originally came into effect, I had the privilege of serving as chairman of a slums clearance court and I also had the opportunity of accompanying the Medical Officer of Health to various slums and seeing the difficulties and the ways in which they were dealt with. These matters were brought before a court until they were taken away from the local authorities in terms of the 1965 Act and placed in the hands of a magistrate, where they are now. Nevertheless, we accept that it is the local authority, through its Medical Officer of Health and his department, which now has to carry out these functions.

As far as I have been able to ascertain, there have been only something like 200 prosecutions for this type of offence over the last 12 months. Nevertheless, this is not a source of revenue like traffic fines, for example, to which local authorities can turn for additional revenue. Any income from this will merely be used to cover administrative expenses to which local authorities are subject under these circumstances. Therefore I think it is a good idea that the local authorities should receive these funds instead of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The hon. the Minister and his department are responsible for housing. Section 29 of the Act states that a declaration of premises as a slum, which is usually coupled with an ejection order, is not invalidated by the fact that there is no alternative accommodation available. This is, however, a matter which must be dealt with humanely. Although the accommodation may be very bad and may not meet reasonable standards, in order to remove that slum there is nevertheless a duty and an obligation upon the hon. the Minister’s department and upon local authorities to see that alternative accommodation is available. Laws which have previously been passed by this House place an obligation on local authorities to put forward their plans in respect of their housing requirements and there is also the programme undertaken by the Department of Community Development to see that alternative accommodation is provided. The hon. the Minister’s department has been kind enough to let me have figures of what their 1979 programme is. I note that there are serious plans on the drawing-board relating, for example, to Eldorado Park and in particular to a new area, Ennerdale, an area which created such difficulties in the past. I am pleased to see that the Ennerdale area is now going to be developed although it is very, very far from the centre of Johannesburg and also very far from the area where the people have to work. There are transport and other problems, but nevertheless, although these people will be far out, there will be accommodation for them. Page View presents a problem of its own because the Indian people living there in slum conditions have difficulty in finding accommodation in Lenasia. However, I understand that a programme has been drawn up to build 1 000 houses in Lenasia to provide them with better accommodation.

Under those circumstances and putting the whole matter into its correct perspective, we shall support this legislation and trust that the hon. the Minister, in making provision for these heavy fines and granting these great powers and these sources of revenue to local authorities, will couple this with a speeding up of the programme to provide alternative accommodation.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Hillbrow has indicated that he accepts the proposed legislation in toto on behalf of his party. I believe that if we are to form a correct judgment of this Bill, we must take two matters into consideration. In the first place, we must take into consideration that, as the hon. the Minister indicated, the principal Act, which came into operation on 23 June 1934, and has since been amended about nine times, actually forms the real statutory corner-stone, together with the Rent Act, the Housing Act and the Community Development Act, of our housing effort in South Africa. Because this is so, it is also obvious that the principal Act, together with the Acts to which I have just referred, will have to keep abreast of changing circumstances in South Africa. I believe that I can say very proudly this afternoon that the hon. the Minister and his department are fully acquainted, not only with our housing needs, but also with our housing ideals. This being so, it is understandable that we are dealing with this amending legislation this afternoon. The legal remedies available to the hon. the Minister and his department must be kept streamlined. In debating this proposed amending legislation, we must also consider the fact—and the hon. member for Hillbrow referred to this in passing—that the principal Act places very serious obligations on local authorities in terms of section 3 of the principal Act Briefly, the effect of these obligations is that if circumstances allow it, the local authority is obliged to provide housing to its people. In the second place— and this is more relevant—the local authority is obliged to prohibit nuisances in its area of jurisdiction. I therefore believe that we can rightly say that it is the duty of the local authority to keep a constant guard over the housing needs of its inhabitants. In terms of the principal Act, the local authority is in fact obliged, unconditionally obliged, to prohibit nuisances. This latter obligation is the most relevant in considering the statutory amendment before us.

In practice, it normally happens as follows. If a local authority finds that there is a nuisance in its area of jurisdiction, it directs the medical officer of health to investigate and report on the matter. If the report is positive, the local authority is obliged to apply the remedies laid down in the Act. This requires considerable administrative expense. If we say and accept that the remedies arising from this legislation must always comply with the needs of the times, it is interesting to take note, too, of the actual amended and proposed remedies envisaged in the amending legislation. In the main—and there is general agreement about this—the amending legislation really consists of only two facets. The first is the increase, as proposed, in the maximum fine. The second is the insertion of the provision that fines are to be paid over to the local authority within the district of which an offence has been committed.

Now it is also interesting to ask which offences are being referred to. As I said at the outset, it is a statutory obligation which has been placed on the local authority to ensure that nuisances are prohibited in its area. I think we can rightly say that the offences can actually be divided into two categories. In the first category there are the serious offences. With regard to these offences, provision has now been made for a maximum fine of R500. These offences are very clearly defined in sections 5, 7 and 12 of the principal Act.

It is interesting to note that when the owner of land on which a slum area is situated fails, after the legal procedure has taken its full course and he has been properly notified, to hand his title deed to the officer concerned or to disclose the names of the inhabitants of the slum area to the officer concerned, or if he fails to forbid further occupation of the slum area, he is guilty of offences in terms of this statutory provision.

The second category includes less serious offences and refers to offences in terms of other sections of the Act as well as regulations under section 32. For these offences, a maximum fine of R200 is being laid down.

By way of modernizing the remedies we are making available to our local authorities in terms of the proposed legislation—and I believe that we shall accept it here today—we are doing the right thing, and we shall be able to offer some slight compensation and assist them in the performance of their great task and in the fulfilment of their enormous obligations.

Finally, I want to express my thanks and appreciation to the hon. the Minister, who has indicated that he will soon, when the time is appropriate, consolidate the various amending Bills—and after today there will be 10 of them; i.e., 11 Acts if the principal Act is included. I believe it will be a source of gratification to everyone who is involved in the administration of this very active legislation. I also believe that it will be a great pleasure to them to learn of it.

Mr. Speaker, very often measures that come before this House, do not meet with the approval of the NRP. However, in common with the official Opposition, we would like to commend the hon. the Minister on this measure which is before the House today. Anything that discourages slums and results in revenue, well-deserved revenue in this instance, accruing to local authorities who always appear to have the headaches associated with slums, is to be welcomed. The NRP sees this measure as a great improvement. It is an updating of the Act which goes back as far as 1934. For these reasons we are happy to support the Bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity of congratulating the hon. the Minister on having seen fit to introduce this Bill to this House today by means of this step and this amendment by his department. Since 1934, when this Act was first placed on the Statute Book, it has played its part, in difficult circumstances as well—that was during the depression years. The Government of the day saw fit to place such an Act on the Statute Book. The House can only be grateful today for the fact that this was in fact done, and that this Act has been amended only 10 times since 1934 up to the present day. If then we consider the fact that this is a period of 44 years, it proves the splendid results which have been achieved in the past and will be achieved in the future as well. I am also glad that the local authorities have in the past taken charge of the administration and implementation of this Act. It is also a good thing that these amendments with regard to the fines and the benefits attached to them are correct after they have been paid over to the local authorities. That is not to say that the department has nothing to do with it, but the local authorities remain the watchdogs who have to ensure that the provisions of the Slums Act are enforced.

For this reason it is a pleasure for me, and I am very grateful to the hon. the Minister, to be able to express my heartfelt support for him and his department with regard to this Bill. I am also grateful for the fact that the Opposition parties support this Bill. I want to wish the hon. the Minister every success, and I hope that in the years to come, this legislation will very seldom be enforced as a result of the splendid scheme which the department has at the moment, and that eventually we shall no longer need it, so that it will be possible in the future to phase out the Slums Act.

Mr. Speaker, I should very much like to express my sincere appreciation to all the parties in this House for their fine, positive and constructive approach to this Bill today. Something which all of us in South Africa feel strongly about is the fact that we want to eliminate the mistakes made in the past, such as the obsolescence of housing, so as to reach the position as soon as possible where all the people of South Africa can be housed as decently as possible according to the needs and means of each. The Government attaches a great deal of importance to this, and if hon. members would read the document published during the election about the new proposed constitutional dispensation for South Africa, they would see that the Government’s ideal in this connection is to create a house-owner democracy in South Africa. This is what we are striving for and what we are trying to achieve with every housing measure which we bring to this House.

In the first place, I should like to express my thanks to the hon. members for Newton Park and Stilfontein for their fine contributions. I was particularly glad about the fact that both of them paid tribute to the local authorities of South Africa. It is my privilege to co-operate with 600 local authorities in the field of housing and I can testify to the fact that they are all keen, alert and determined to do positive work in this connection.

†The hon. member for Hillbrow and the hon. member for Umhlanga expressed their support for the Bill and I thank them for doing so. The hon. member for Hillbrow took the opportunity to emphasize the need for a humane approach in cases where people have to leave their homes because these have become slums and are then left homeless. I think the hon. member will agree with me that it has been the policy of all the Government’s of South Africa since 1934 that, although there is no compulsion upon the authorities to provide alternative accommodation for people evicted from slum dwellings, almost without exception the administrative practice is to look after people who become homeless as a result of slum clearance. The hon. member mentioned a case which is a classic example, i.e. Page View, where there was great resistance to the clearance of the slum conditions. It is now being done, and I have received nothing but appreciation and gratitude for what is happening there. These people have to be rehoused in their businesses, and for that we have built the Oriental Plaza at Fordsburg for them. This whole scheme is generally accepted as one of the greatest success stories under the Group Areas Act. The people there are content, successful, happy, relaxed and are also a little bit ashamed of themselves for having offered such resistance to the plan while it was still in progress. I think hon. members should know that now that these people are leaving their houses in Page View, what is being revealed there is absolutely shocking. I have described Page View as being one of the worst slums that I have ever seen, but it is even worse than I thought. 25% of these houses evacuated had no toilet facilities, and one cannot imagine how those people lived there. Yet there were hon. members on that side of the House who objected to the fact that I wanted to clear up that slum. They wanted it to remain. I hope that they, like the Indians at the Oriental Plaza, are now also a little bit ashamed of their attitude. I am not saying that in a nasty way. I merely want them to appreciate the fact that the Government will not arbitrary and wickedly deprive people of their homes and that eventually events and the facts will prove that the action which the Government takes, is well motivated and necessary.

The hon. member for Hillbrow should know that Ennerdale, about which he expressed concern because it is a long way from Johannesburg, is not intended to be a dormitory town for Johannesburg or any town on the Witwatersrand. Ennerdale, like Atlantis, is intended to be a city in its own right, with its own infrastructure, industries, commercial centres and service industries. It will eventually even have its own university. It is going to be a beautiful city which we will be proud of as we already are of Mitchell’s Plain and will become of Atlantis. It is a new town in the British sense of the word. It is a great experiment in creating a new thriving hub of life, creating activities and happiness for its people. I hope the hon. member and I will have occasion to share our joy in the achievements that will be reached in Ennerdale. I trust that I will have the support of the Opposition in taking all the stages of this Bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage taken without debate.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.