Mr. Chairman, I should like to raise a matter which has become a serious problem in several urban areas in South Africa, and possibly also in smaller centres. This is the question of vagrancy. Vagrancy is, I suppose, found all over the world, particularly in urban areas. However, I do think that in South Africa this problem has reached an extent which should be worrying us and does deserve our urgent attention. It has become a serious problem and it is there for everyone to see. Investigations are conducted on a localized level, for example in Sea Point. According to an answer given to a question raised here in the House some time ago, vagrancy also seems to be an exceptional problem in Durban.

Let us have a brief look at how this problem is being dealt with at the present moment. In this field there is very little worth mentioning. In fact, in so far as vagrants are not being dealt with as petty criminals, they are not being dealt with at all, and as far as vagrancy is not being dealt with as a criminal problem, it is also not being dealt with at all. Vagrants are being arrested daily for petty offences, such as loitering, trespassing, drunkenness, public indecency and the like, as a result of complaints by the public. Very often they are released a day or two later only to return to their old miserable ways and often to be a public nuisance once more. This kind of approach is obviously ineffective. It is unsympathetic and unscientific. The problem has become one of national proportions and requires a nation-wide investigation and action on a national level. We need to investigate the problem of rehabilitation of these unfortunate people. We need to consider the possibility of creating institutions to provide long-term treatment in so far as treatment of a psychological or other nature seems to be necessary.

We also need investigation in order to put right what is wrong in our society, to put right a situation in our society which brings about this problem and which brings it about to the extent in which it exists in South Africa.

Very often vagrants are not quite alcoholics, not quite mentally disturbed or not quite criminals. Yet they are a tragic combination of all these elements. They are destitute people, people who could not keep up with the pace of life, people who fell by the wayside in the rat race of life. As a privileged society, as a rich society by all standards, I believe our duty is so much greater to extend a helping hand to those who are victims of the inability to cope with a system which offers a lot for the rest of us.

I am concerned that at least some of the local investigations conducted into this problem are somewhat superficial. Some of these investigations, even where they are well conducted locally, may not be relevant to other areas and therefore may not be of any use or helpful at all in other areas where this problem occurs. I want to make an urgent call on the hon. the Minister to institute, as soon as possible, an in-depth investigation into vagrancy, an investigation on a national scale, to be conducted by people with the correct scientific background and with the right amount of practical experience. In this respect I am thinking of people like social workers, psychologists and the like.

I do not believe that any level of government other than the national level has, at the present time, the resources to investigate effectively and to act in connection with this problem. I believe we should take action in this regard as soon as possible. Let us by all means obtain the cooperation of the lower levels of government, local authorities and voluntary associations, of charities and so forth. However, the final onus, the final duty rests with this level of government, particularly with the department of the hon. the Minister. The investigation which I envisage can take note of the work done by lower levels of authority, as well as of voluntary bodies.

I may just mention that two night shelters for vagrants in my own constituency, one of them run by Nicro and one run by a number of church organizations, can do only a limited amount of rehabilitation work. However, I am satisfied that they do have a limited success in the work they are carrying out, a success achieved against great odds. If those institutions could achieve success, even on a small scale, with the limited resources available to them, I believe this should serve as an encouragement for us and should also prove that if this problem is tackled on a national level, with the right amount of money and with more specialized knowledge, there is no reason why we cannot at least improve the situation in which these people find themselves. There is also no reason why we cannot limit the extend to which these people cause problems to others in our society.

I should like to make this urgent call upon the hon. the Minister and I hope I shall receive a favourable response.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank hon. speakers on the other side as well as on my side of the House for their contributions up to this stage. I think it will be best if I reply now to a few of the ideas which were raised here.

The hon. member for Bryanston raised certain matters which, in my opinion, require answers from me. He said that the pension increments which we announced this year, are too low. He did not tell me, however, what he wants. He did not say how much it should be. The tax-payers are the Government’s financial source, and the increment of R9 per social pensioner already amounts to R21,5 million. The increments for all population groups amount to R98 million, which is R2 million less than R100 million. What the hon. member did not emphasize, was that pensions have already been increased, by 177% over the past few years. The economy is subject to limitations which cannot be exceeded. At this stage, the economy is already over-extended. We would of course like to do much more if we could, but we do not have the means. I think he and I are in agreement that one has to do one’s best for one’s aged people and for those who are unable to help themselves.

The hon. member also said that the means test should be abolished. If we scale down the means test as he wants it done it will cost us an additional amount of R250 million, reckoned against the amounts which will be payable on 1 October of this year. Ninety percent of our pensioners already receive the maximum pension, irrespective of the means test That 90% will therefore derive no benefit if the means test were to be scaled down; it could only benefit those people who do not need it most. The poorest of the poor will derive no benefit from it. I have already explained to the hon. member why we do not have more money at this stage. Surely we cannot pay pensions to our exceptionally rich. A pension is something for the destitute person, that person who is unable to look after himself or whose relatives are not prepared to look after him.

The hon. member also raised another important aspect, and that was the appointment of a commission of inquiry into a national contributory pension scheme, as he calls it. The hon. member will remember, however, that such a committee was appointed as long ago as 1976. I should just like to read out its terms of reference to him—

Sections (a) and (b) of the terms of reference form a part of the first phase and are already being investigated in conjunction with people from the private sector who are thoroughly conversant with these matters and who are experts in this field. I expect a report on that in the course of this year. Section (c) of the terms of reference will be investigated after completing (a) and (b).

A national contributory pension scheme is, however, not the magic formula some people imagine it to be. A minimum period of time has to expire before membership will have been paid and benefits can be paid out. It is unavoidable that this should be the case. I want to point out to the hon. member that we will not be able to establish such benefits and relief overnight. Consequently we shall still be dependent on social pensions for years.

The hon. member for Brits spoke about our aged people as well as the increase in their numbers. The aged form a continually growing percentage of the whole population. It is something which requires new initiatives from us on the medical as well as the social terrain. The hon. member spoke of six million aged people, i.e. people who are older than 60 years—by the year 2020. That figure seems a little high to me, but on the other hand the figure should rather be too high than too low, for then we can prepare ourselves for it.

The hon. member pleaded for forward planning. If he had studied the welfare legislation we passed last year, he would have found that the object of that legislation was specifically to cause forward planning to take place at the right stage. In that way, we want to cope with the demands of the future. The aspects which he said required our attention, are already receiving our attention in the planning stage, although we cannot now discuss its feasibility.

I fully agree with the hon. member that the remaining ability of handicapped persons should be exploited. I think we followed an incorrect policy by always wanting merely to help handicapped people. We stressed the fact that such a person should be helped and we never thought that such a person has, as some people say, dormant or concealed abilities which can be developed so that he can regard himself as being a fully developed human being, so that he can regard himself as being a useful person and as someone who has a role to play in the community. We did not always take into account the very fact that that feeling is important to every human being. That feeling is just as important to the paraplegic or someone who is handicapped in some other way, as it is to a normal person. I think it is very important that we should make the remaining ability of a handicapped person the subject of special attention. I can give the hon. member the assurance that the department will continue to work unswervingly in that direction.

I agree with the hon. member for Umbilo that the drop in interest rates creates a particular problem, but unfortunately that is something the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions can do nothing about. The erosion of the value of money and the diminishing purchasing power of money, together with the dropping interest rates are matters which affect the aged in particular.

That is why we have asked for a relaxation of the means test.

I shall come to that in a moment. The fluctuation in interest rates is simply one of those things with which all of us will have to contend.

The hon. member has referred to the adjustment of the means test and he has drawn our attention to certain anomalies. It has become popular to blame the means test for well-nigh every financial hardship experienced by the aged. The means test does set certain limits. There is no denying that. Those who fall outside those limits do not qualify. At times we do feel that they are therefore at the shortest end and perhaps it is justified to have a lot of sympathy for them. There will always be borderline cases. Even if we introduced some kind of scale according to which the means test could be relaxed, we would have the situation that a person could qualify for a pension as low as R2,50 per month by reason of his other sources of income. What would such an amount be worth to him especially if his other income is in the order of R1 600? Is he really the type of man who is in need of R2,50? Is it worthwhile?

Yes.

If we relax the means test, we would receive many more requests for old age pensions. At the moment it is absolutely impossible for us to determine the financial implications of such numerous requests. It is unfortunate, but we inevitably have to draw the line somewhere.

Another matter which was raised was that if civil pensions were raised, that should not affect the social pensions. But simply to ignore such increases is, I fear, no solution to the problem. One will be creating greater problems…

I do not want them to be ignored. I want the means test adjusted on a sliding scale.

I think I have dealt with that I think that could lead to discrimination between pensioners. The same argument applies here. There is no justification for ignoring part of the income of one pensioner while all the income of another pensioner is taken into account. Although I agree with the hon. member that we have a problem in this regard, I think we have to try to find another way to get out of it. I am not unsympathetic with regard to the problems raised by the hon. member and I shall apply my mind to them.

A lot has been said in the past—and this matter was also raised by two speakers in this debate—about the national pension scheme and the transferability and preservation of pension rights. I have already elaborated on that and will leave it at that.

*The hon. member for Middelburg asked why pensions could not be paid out at the housing schemes for the aged. He said that a hall could be made available for that purpose and that it would be a great help. Pensions could be paid into the savings bank or other accounts of aged people, which would of course make a visit to the post office unnecessary. It is obvious, however, that there are risks involved in carrying around and paying out large amounts of money. One really needs a big organization for that purpose. With all due respect to the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, I want to say that we are already paying the Post Office 20c for every pension which is paid out, and I think that the Post Office will raise that amount when they have to pay out pensions in remote areas where it would create difficulties for them. I think that we should allow the circumstances to determine how we must act in this regard. I do not believe I can commit myself at this stage as to precisely what will be done in particular cases.

I think that I have now replied to all the hon. members, except for the hon. member for Green Point. With regard to the matter he raised, I want to say that an inquiry is still in progress at this stage. I can say that the department is investigating the whole problem of vagrants of all races throughout the country and the possibility of legislation in this regard. Actually this department only deals with White vagrants, of whom only approximately 350 have been found in the whole of the country. There are approximately 103 of them in Durban, as I said yesterday. Therefore, it is not a major problem in any case. It is not always all that easy to identify a tramp or a vagrant. We have acted in respect of the cases in Durban and we have put a number of them in certain places. We allowed others to go. Only 30 White vagrants could be identified in Cape Town. So the hon. member was therefore knocking on the wrong door. I realize, however, that this department, as the mother department cannot forget its overall responsibilities in that respect. We shall speak to the departments which are really involved here and we shall do our best to see what can be done in future. As I said, it is really more their task than ours.

I think it would be best if I gave an outline of the policy of the department so that hon. members will know that I am not going to do anything drastic. Practise makes perfect. I have learned a lot in the few months that I have been in this post. I have set myself a few ideals and I have worked out an overall plan in co-operation with the head of my department, just as we did in the case of the Department of Health where we were clearly able to show, after five years, what we had achieved in respect of legislation, etc. The Department of Social Welfare was established on 1 October 1937. I shall more or less adhere to the policy as I heard it from the Secretary and after I had discussed certain small amendments with him, certain things I think we should try to achieve in the years that lie ahead. In 1937, the task of the department was mainly to determine the nature and the causes of conditions which gave rise to the social maladjustment of families and individuals; to plan measures to counteract these conditions, in other words, preventative measures; to treat the socially maladjusted family or individual in the community with the aim of social rehabilitation; and to co-ordinate the activities of all Government departments which are also aimed at achieving this purpose.

In 1958 pensions were added to the department. That is why it is now known as the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. At the moment, the purpose of the department can be defined very briefly as follows: To improve social stability. In pursuing this objective we initially carry out the tasks and the functions which are expected of us and which have been allocated to us. Furthermore, we deal with the civil and the social pensions and everything in connection with them. It is true, and I want to repeat it, that our function is at this stage actually confined to the White population group. We have a special relationship with instances in the private sector. Welfare work is traditionally, in South Africa as in certain other parts of the world, a partnership between the Government, churches and voluntary welfare organizations. They work together, and we are not going to deviate from this traditional pattern. We are going to continue to co-operate. We are complementary to one another and everyone must try to improve his actual share. Everyone renders more of less the same services to the community, but strangely enough, I think that the focal point should remain with the private sector—as is still the case at present. We can only support it financially, under certain conditions. In this respect, the policy also remains as it is at present. We shall continue, with possible minor deviations, to do so.

Social welfare deals with the welfare of the individual; not only with his illnesses and his hardships, but with the welfare of the individual from the cradle to the grave. The whole life cycle, from infancy to old age, is our function and our responsibility, and no facet of life of the individual releases us from the responsibility of pursuing a dynamic welfare policy. We must save whatever there is to save and we must attempt to uplift whatever can still be uplifted. We have to take from the past that which is good and build upon it for the future. While some people object to the peace which reigns here, I want to say to hon. members that if people work hard, work together and are inspired and emphasize their common humanity—and there are departments like that—we shall achieve what we ought to achieve, viz. to bring about social stability in the final 20 years of a man’s life, his later years, and in the life of the child. We can further the welfare of our people. We fulfil a task and sacrifice other things. Each one of us is perhaps two kinds of person in one. On the one hand, one is a politician to some extent, and on the other one is a father or mother. We are responsible people and realize these things. Those are the matters we have to discuss here, matters for which there is not always the interest there should be. In future we shall continue with this sort of thing. We shall make changes.

There is such a thing as community development Community participation in community development is absolutely essential. People must be motivated to take part in community development. It is a sine qua non, a necessity, an inevitable requirement. For that reason, every community in every area must be motivated. This is where the new National Welfare Act, the regional welfare boards come in. We can expect these people to plan for their community. Planning comprises investigation and involvement and requires one to apply one’s mind, to do research and to find out what is going on, not only to attend a meeting every week and read the minutes drawn up by the secretary. That is a different matter altogether. In terms of the National Welfare Act a task has been entrusted to regional welfare boards, a task which they have to perform. I think that the regional welfare boards can play a very important part in terms of the new Act. We have started a project in the Vaal Triangle. It has been proved there that collective action stimulates social stability and local interest. In the second half of this year it will be possible to put this legislation into operation. We shall then be able to start the newly constituted regional welfare boards functioning. We shall have to get to work early in the coming year and determine the most important welfare needs of every region systematically and purposefully. Then we shall consider how the needs of the people can be met.

Many people will now ask me whether we are going to concentrate on the White group only. No. This task will have a wider effect. Just do not ask me how it will be done. I believe, however, that this is a matter which affects the whole South African community. We have to do all we can to enable the regional welfare boards to fulfil their function. At the moment we are still doing it on an ad hoc basis. When one acts on an ad hoc basis, one is unable to plan and one might not obtain the necessary results. With this new approach, we shall be able to come to our own. I should like hon. members to take cognizance of the fact that a revolution has taken place, first in the legislation, and now with the action which will be initiated. An academic once said that community organization is a process with which a community identifies its needs, determines its objectives and states its priorities. This comprises, inter alia, the provision of information which is necessary to foster the interest, trust, enthusiasm and desire in the community to participate in achieving the objective. A community must constantly adjust itself to conditions and in that way develop and encourage a sense of responsibility, co-operation and coordination. Those are things which are so often lacking in the case of developing nations. We have no excuse. We know the concept. These things only become apparent from one’s plans of action and from one’s activities. These are primarily the tasks which are envisaged for and expected from the regional welfare boards under the new legislation. I think we are going to extend our welfare task, and I think we are going to avoid many social problems, because we are taking preventive measures here. We shall have to concentrate more on prevention, just as in the case of health, than to continue with the battle against social ills by means of curative treatment. Once the decay has set in one has to perform a far more onerous task. Therefore I want to stress community involvement on the planning level. We are not going to duplicate our efforts, we are not going to waste our welfare potential, but we shall harness our forces and accept the challenge of the times with the new laws.

†An hon. member spoke about the care of the aged. The ideal is that every person in this country shall be properly housed. We as a department, in 1971 or thereabouts, expounded the policy that the aged should be made an integral part of society as long as it is possible. We should not rush him off to an institution the moment he becomes ill, the moment that one feels that there are too many arduous duties that will fall upon one’s shoulders. One should first wait awhile. He may get well again, and it is best for him to live in his own community among his own people, because if we have his interests at heart, he will realize that security and the feeling that he is amongst his own people do make life really worthwhile. Each and everyone of us is going to get old. Some are already over the line and a few are well on the way to reaching the final post. In any event, we should remember, each and everyone of us when considering these matters, that we must not deprive our senior citizens of their independence. We must try to help and assist them to realize some of the capabilities, some of the attributes they still harbour within them, capabilities that they can apply for their own benefit and for the community as a whole. We must not deny them the privileges of living within a community and not be too ready to discard them. It is absolutely impossible to accommodate all 380 000 of our aged persons in our institutions. We have done our best and yet we can only accommodate about 24 000 at the moment in about 300 old-age homes. Therefore the policy will be to keep the aged in the community as long as it is possible and to render to them home services so that they can maintain an independent way of life, which is very important. If they should require institutional care, that could then be much more readily available. Sometimes they do need suitable accommodation. We must apply our minds to providing suitable accommodation for old people. They sometimes like to live together.

There is room for improvement in this respect. We are in the position that we can agree that there is room for improvement. I must tell the House, however, that we are already in the position where about 7% to 8% of our aged citizens are living in old-age homes, while it is generally accepted in the rest of the word that a percentage of 4% to 6% is already high. Only about 1,5% of all aged people are housed in accommodation that is specifically designed for them. This is an important factor. I think this is a situation that we should explore. There is really a task ahead of us in that respect. Especially in the urban areas there is a demand for institutional care for a certain type of old person, those who can otherwise fend for themselves.

In regard to service centres, I can only say that we want them to have the privilege of consulting service centres, and we want them to lead a normal life. That is important. We have 12 service centres at our disposal and these have to cater for approximately 5 000 people, and we realize that things have not gone the way we had expected. Yet, we are continuing our research work, we are doing our best and we are learning from our mistakes. We are going to promote the need for the extension of these service centres for aged people. At these centres even the aged person who is not in an old age home, can avail himself of the amenities that is usually present at a service centre. This is, to my mind, very important. We should not forget the aged person or the very old person who finds himself economically in a sound position, but who feels himself isolated, needs companionship and wants some place to go where he can meet people of his own kind, of his own age and people who understand him. General needs of the aged are security and an adequate health service. That is very important.

Hon. members can perhaps understand why I am particularly referring to the matter of health services to the aged. I feel that we have already done much in this respect, by way of mobile dental clinics and by way of the Department of Health investigating the fact that we should at least try to afford the geriatric patient, the old-age patient, a very special place in our health care set-up. We have already appointed a subcommittee for geriatric care and in due time the two departments are going to hold a symposium to determine with whom the responsibility of geriatric care lies. I think it is going to be seen as a complementary service, and will not be placed upon the shoulders of one department alone. Nevertheless, there still remains a lot to be done in so far as health services for our elderly people, our senior citizens, are concerned. I think we must also prevail upon middle-aged people and upon hon. members to try, if possible, to save for a rainy day. So many people today have simply forgotten to prepare for a rainy day. They have not prepared sufficiently for their getting old, nor for their day of retirement. I think we should also look into that matter so that we can prepare our people for that. As leaders of the people, one of our three goals in life must be to see that our old people are free of want in the years when they need security, good health, attention and when their declining powers make it impossible for them to fend for themselves. When one is economically, mentally and physically active, then it is the time to provide for one’s old age. I feel that I might perhaps be preaching a little now. I think there is no better investment than investing for old age because by doing so one paves the way for a comfortable old age. If one does not provide for this early on, one will have to pay the price at a later stage, when it is impossible to rectify the situation.

*I should also just like to say a few words about child care. It is clear to me, from the small amount of knowledge of this matter that I have gained during the past few months, that the approximately 50 000 children in our country who are in need of care are in such a position because their parents do not fulfil their obligations or do not have the means to do so. It is, to my mind, one of the heaviest burdens which rests upon the community. I am of the opinion, with the greatest respect, that our divorce legislation does not always take the interests of the child into account in all respects, those interests which are affected when parents go through the process of divorce and then go their own way. The child may bear the stigma of a child who is in need of care as a result of the process of divorce. We have to develop our children correctly. I think that the idea of children’s courts, where the whole family is involved and everyone’s duty is clearly stated to him and the parent is made to understand very clearly his particular responsibility towards his children, is a very important idea to which we should pay much attention in future. We shall have to think about amending our Children’s Act so that we can move in this direction. After all, our children are the people who have to ensure us of a secure future one day. We have to do all we can to protect family life, and in the process we should remember that the child occupies as important a place in our thoughts as the parent.

I should now like to say something about care of the handicapped. We have in South Africa, percentagewise, approximately half a million people of all races who are handicapped in one way or another. Most of these people have not made much scholastic progress, but they do have capabilities which can be developed. I dealt with this aspect a little while ago when I replied to the speech of the hon. member for Brits. These people are able to make an economic contribution, but we have never exploited it. In a recent survey, it was found that 76,3% of the group of handicapped people whose cases were investigated, were unemployed, but that 37,8% were fit to earn wages in their immediate environment while 17,5% could even be employed elsewhere. However, those people are still sitting there in loneliness and they cannot get jobs. It is true that handicapped people with a low educational level create problems for us. Perhaps a change is in order at this stage. The handicapped people will have to be noticed. They will have to be seen as being an element of our society which can possibly be exploited—in a nice sense. We have to make happy citizens of them and if we are careless about that, we are not fulfilling our obligation as people who ought to be concerned about our fellow-men. The handicapped person must remain an integral part of the community. A working person is a happy person. A person who feels he is useful—and it becomes more of a need as one grows older—is a person who fits into the community and who will pull his weight—as we always say in our part of the world—to the end. It is our sacred duty to cause him to achieve that sense of usefulness.

There are a great number of things which I could have discussed. I have stressed only a few aspects here just to point out to hon. members that certain things concern us and that I have come to a clear realization of it. Because we are a dynamic community and because special demands are being made on us in South Africa with its heterogeneous population, we must always be vigilant, always receptive to new ideas and we must never forget the interests of those in our lives who need our help.

That is all I want to say for the present.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister made several statements here. Although he has been a member of the Cabinet for a long time now, he is really acting as a new broom in the discussion of this Vote. It was interesting to listen to what the hon. the Minister had to say with regard to the nature and character of the department’s activities. I believe that hon. members of my party actually agree with many of the things said by the hon. the Minister. However, I should like to elucidate three of them in particular.

In the first place, there is the emphasis being placed on welfare as such, i.e. the prosperity of the nation. Then, too, it cannot be stressed too much that community involvement is of the utmost importance. In the third place I want to focus attention again on the prevention of social retrogression and decay. We therefore agree with the hon. the Minister when he states that we should in fact take preventative measures in this regard and not first wait for problems to arise before seeking solutions for them.

With regard to the appeal made by the hon. member for Umbilo, the hon. the Minister said that he would, in fact, examine the means test again. However, I must point out that it has become a habit of hon. members opposite, when discussing salary adjustments and salary increases, to refer to the cost of living index and the increase in pensions and salaries. I should like to see the hon. the Minister, when he introduces these adjustments, when he considers the matter again, feeling it incumbent upon him, to again take the cost of living index into account and compare it with the increase of 0% in the means test over the past seven years. In view of the lack of a compulsory contributory pension scheme, drastic changes are essential. Merely to make small changes to the ceiling, would therefore be of no use whatsoever. Incidentally I just want to make it very clear that I do not really accept either that the cost of living index is the only valid comparative method in accordance with which adjustments ought to be done. The fact remains that, for the pensioners as such, the cost of living index merely comprises a portion of their total cost of living. We have also found that the increase in the cost of living over a period of years in actual fact always hits the pensioner hardest.

However, today I specifically want to direct the spotlight at the approximately 72 000 pensioners known as the civil pensioners. Approximately 39 000 of them date back to the period before the 1972 adjustment. When one speaks of pensioners, people are often inclined to see no further than the fortunes of the social pensioner, while for convenience sake, or simply owing to indifference, they forget about the civil pensioner. Some municipalities do grant certain privileges to pensioners, it is true. But these privileges are restricted to social pensioners only. Civil pensioners are simply excluded.

In my opinion this is something which can no longer be tolerated. Consequently I want to make an appeal to municipalities and local authorities to design a system in terms of which they can allow real privileges to be given to civil pensioners. It sometimes happens that, owing to the application of the means test, the civil pensioner is in actual fact worse off. Consequently a new type of means test, based on the real monthly income of the people in question, will perhaps have to be introduced if need be, a test which can differ from place to place depending on the finances of the various local authorities. In this way the existing discrimination could possibly be eliminated.

While I am discussing civil pensioners, I also want to point out that in the past I have spoken to and made appeals to predecessors of the hon. the Minister to design a system of gradual, regular and automatic adjustments of the pensions of civil pensioners. I now want to reiterate this request The system I have always had in mind, a system which I believe also enjoys the support of certain organizations, is a system in accordance with which the pension is directly coupled to the post or salary which a person had previously been paid. Then, when general salary adjustments take place, a pro rata adjustment is made to the pensions of persons who were in similar posts before their retirement.

This year we again had an ad hoc type of adjustment, viz. a 10% increase with a minimum of R25 per annum. From experience we know that salary adjustments and the restructuring of posts are only carried out once the cost of living is such that such measures are essential. However, if the salaried person is struggling, the pensioner is struggling even more. The argument which is, of course, always being advanced, is that the civil pensioner of today contributed small amounts in the past. As far as I am concerned this argument is totally invalid. We have to realize that although small amounts of money were perhaps contributed, they nevertheless had to pay money which, relatively speaking, was worth more, not the type of monopoly money we have today.

No.

The hon. member says “No”, but it already looks just like monopoly money, the R5 in particular. [Interjections.] If the hon. the Minister is not prepared to link pensions to salaries, he will at least have to consider a specific annual adjustment according to some formula. To go on as we are doing now, is, I think, inadequate and unacceptable.

Pension funds have statutory restrictions which, for example, oblige them to invest money in Government stocks, with their low interest rates, and in the stocks of local authorities, and in that way, of course, the growth of the pension funds is limited. Therefore the argument that the pension funds cannot afford it, or that it cannot be expected of the existing contributors to the funds to maintain the workers of yesterday, is really not acceptable. The Government cannot be exonerated of its responsibility with such arguments. The pension funds which have been built up by the pensioners of today, are being utilized at low interest rates to build up the country economically and in this way to create employment opportunities and advantages for the salaried people of today. This is therefore not a question of just one being asked to assist the other, for example the salaried person who is going to be asked to assist the pensioner. The fact that pension funds are being invested in Government stock at low interest rates, means that both the pensioners and salaried persons of today are assisting each other.

There is another reason, too, why I feel that the question of regular and automatic adjustment should be reconsidered. I am referring to the fact that rent control is virtually going to be abolished within two years time and is going to disappear completely. The protection to be afforded persons in the lower income groups—and a large percentage of them are civil pensioners—is that a means test will be applied so that they may, in fact, remain in the flat concerned and enjoy rent control protection providing their income falls below a certain notch.

The system of ad hoc increases which the government comes up with from time to time, will mean, however, that certain pensioners will become victims in the sense that that protection will be removed. By means of an ad hoc grant a person could perhaps be lifted just above the maximum notch, and in this way he could lose the protection which he previously enjoyed. However, a person may then remain on the same notch for a considerable number of years, as we know from experience. If automatic adjustments can take place, greater security will be afforded, because even though a person becomes a victim at a certain stage because he is above the maximum notch, his future position will improve and he can at least keep abreast of the increase in the cost of living over the period as a whole.

There is a further point which was raised by the hon. the Minister. He said that one should keep the pensioners in the community as far as possible. This is something with which we are in complete agreement, but it is something which gives rise to tremendous problems. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to join other hon. members who in the course of the debate participated in the discussions and conveyed their congratulations to the hon. the Minister on his handling of the Social Welfare and Pensions portfolio. We are particularly pleased about the sympathetic way in which the hon. the Minister has dealt with the people who are served by the department.

Owing to various factors, among others the lower birthrate of our population and the dramatic progress of medical science over the past few decades, we are dealing with a community which is steadily becoming older. The ranks of our aged are growing more rapidly than the ranks of any other sector in our society. This is consistently substantiated by statistics, as the hon. member for Brits indicated. Naturally this state of affairs places an increasing burden and responsibility on the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. The Department has had outstanding success in carrying its increasing burden and responsibility with the funds at its disposal. This statement is illustrated by the total estimated expenditure of the department which has risen from R449 million last year to R475 million, as announced by the hon. the Minister of Finance this year. Together with the thousands of pensioners throughout the country I want to express my appreciation to the hon. the Minister for the increase in pensions. I want to express the hope that it will be possible in future to provide assistance and relief to an even greater extent to our fellow countrymen who are in the twilight of their lives. It remains our bounden duty to care properly for such people who have, after all, devoted their lives and strength to this country. If it should turn out that greater economic prosperity should come our way, our aged also deserve a share in such prosperity.

The problem of the care of the aged is considered so important that the Tygerberg Hospital, as its contribution to the Health Year, devoted a whole symposium to the care of the aged last week. On that occasion Prof. Wicht, Head of the Department of Community Health stated, inter alia—

I should like to refer to one aspect of care of the aged, viz. to our State-subsidized old-age homes which provide a service of inestimable value to our society. The increasing need for such facilities is illustrated by the fact that the number of inform aged in these old-age homes has risen from 6 352 in 1974 to 8 879 in 1977, while the per capita subsidy to old-age homes rose from R5,1 million in 1975 to almost R8 million in 1977.

In this regard I want to pay tribute today to organizations such as the S.A. Vrouefederasie and others that perform the management function of old-age homes and in this way render service of the highest order to their fellow man and the community. One need only visit one of these old-age homes to see how many of our aged countrymen who have no other place under the sun or in the community, are being cared for with warmth and affection by people with a sense of duty and a love for this cause.

However, certain problems still exist. I should like to bring them to the attention of the hon. the Minister. In December 1978 the department decided to divide old-age homes into three categories for subsidy purposes, i.e. categories A, B and C. For the sake of uniformity it was decided that board and lodging would be paid in accordance with the following formula: In the case of old-age homes in category A, 66% of the maximum pension of R88 per month is payable in the form of board and lodging; in the case of old-age homes in category B, 75% of the maximum pension is payable; and in the case of old-age homes in category C, 90% is payable. In respect of the third category, then, the amount is R79,20 per month out of the maximum pension of R88.

The old-age home in Pietersburg, the Martha Hofmeyr home, is classified as a category C home. All the inhabitants of that old-age home are therefore required to pay an amount of R79,20 per month, out of a maximum pension of R88. I have with me a petition from 20 inhabitants of that old-age home in which they make an appeal for relief. If one examines the handwritings, one sees that some of them are very shaky and almost illegible while others are still beautifully even and firm and still testify to a little strength, a little vitality and joie de vivre. I cannot see how these people will be able to provide the simplest daily requirements with the remaining monthly amount of R8,80 in the present circumstances. On this occasion, therefore, I want to address an appeal to the hon. the Minister for a concession for these people.

A second matter which I should like to touch on in this regard, is whether subsidizing on a unit cost basis is still adequate in view of the present rapidly rising cost of living. The subsidy payable, is subject, inter alia, to the condition that these old-age homes should provide at least one qualified nurse for every 15 infirm persons. The managements have to attract these nurses from the private or provincial sectors and they are finding it more and more difficult to keep pace with the salary adjustments. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister that the department take a careful look at this cost factor.

While discussing nurses, we must at the same time link this up with a proper medical service. It is natural the elderly person who has to depend heavily on the advice and support of his or her house doctor. To many of these old people it is the most important matter left to them. Their whole realm of thought is centred around their health and their doctor. In terms of the Health Act of 1977 the provincial authorities are responsible for personal health care. But to expect these old people, who are sometimes very infirm, to be accommodated on an out-patient basis or to have to be dependent on district nursing services alone, is, I think, inadequate. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether the doctor and his surgery cannot be brought to our old-age homes instead. This can be done on a sessional basis and could be done by a district surgeon or by hospital staff. I think it would be possible to do this. It would undoubtedly fill a deeply felt need in our present system. One fully realizes that the extension of services is being impeded by a lack of funds. However, I wish to appeal to the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions as well as to the Department of Health, both of which fall under the jurisdiction of this hon. Minister, to it, that positive attention be given to this extremely important matter. Our aged deserve this attention. We who are sitting in this House, should remember that our time also passes, and when one day we need assistance and affection from those who follow us, we in turn should be entitled to lay claim to that. We should never lose sight of this.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to associate myself with the congratulations the previous speaker conveyed to the new hon. Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions. On behalf of this side of the House I also wish to express my thanks and appreciation to the hon. the Minister’s predecessor, the present hon. Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, who over a short period rendered yeoman service to the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions and displayed loyalty to the department. We are greatly indebted to him. We can see that the hon. the Minister has the right feeling for the job and the creed he has just held out to us, bears testimony to the fact that he is going to be a great success in his new department. Moreover, Mr. Chairman, like you and I, he is fortunate in having the right surname. I have no doubt that the hon. the Minister is going to achieve great success.

There is a time in the life of every person when he has to prepare a list of priorities for himself. When such a list of priorities is considered, the farmer will say to himself that his calling is priority No. 1 because he believes that he feeds and clothes the nation and they cannot do without him. The teacher will state that his educational task is priority No. 1 since he fosters knowledge and discipline and has to convey these to the youth, the nation of tomorrow. The policeman and the soldier will say that after all it is they who are responsible for the safety of our country and for security on our borders. The doctor and the nurse will say that it is they who care for the health and the lives of the people of the nation. On reading the excellent annual report of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions, I reflected on what should be priority No. 1. I said to myself this annual report read like chapter 13 of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. I came to the conclusion that the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions rates very highly in my list of priorities.

The annual report reflects the deep respect, affection and loyalty which the department manifests towards elderly people in our society. We see how this department cares for the less privileged, for those people who are physically and mentally less favourably endowed in many respects than we are. We have a high regard and appreciation for what the department is doing for these less privileged people in our society.

The annual report mentions that as at 31 December 1977, 137 829 elderly people received old-age pensions. That gives us an idea of the excellent work the department is doing among our people. On this occasion I wish to convey my personal thanks to the hon. the Minister, the Secretary of the department and his officials for the understanding, helpful attitude they display every time I approach them with applications and re-applications. I can tell hon. members today that a few of the cases I handle, are turned down by the department. Therefore, on behalf of the elderly people and the less privileged in my constituency, I express my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to the Secretary of the department and to his officials.

The town of Meyerton in my constituency has applied for the building of a home for the aged. The application has been approved. The terrain has been approved and the plans drawn up, and now we are just waiting for the allocation of funds. We should be truly grateful to the hon. the Minister and to his department if they could assist us by expediting the acquisition of the necessary funds.

In conclusion I wish to make a suggestion to the hon. the Minister and his department, namely the introduction of a rates subsidy for our elderly people. The demand for old-age homes in our country is great. The demand for old-age homes is great, and this is necessary. It is true that in our community we have elderly people who are fortunate enough still to be able to live in their own little homes. However, on account of the cost pressure on the part of the local authorities it is becoming more and more difficult for them to continue staying there. The rates that have to be paid in our urban areas and municipalities have become high. When the elderly pensioner has paid his water and electricity account, his assessment rates and his sewerage account, there is not much left for him to live on.

Now, it is true that the Government has to build homes for the aged to provide accommodation to the elderly people who apply therefor. When the home has been built and the elderly people are accommodated there, the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions pays a per capita subsidy in respect of each elderly person in that home.

I wish to know whether the hon. the Minister could consider transferring this subsidy or part thereof to those elderly people living in their own little homes in a town or city. That would relieve the pressure on and the demand for old-age homes. It would entail that the subsidies which are in any case paid in respect of the elderly people in the old-age homes, will be transferred to elderly people living in their own homes. As the hon. the Minister has correctly stated, there are elderly people who are fortunate enough to live in their own communities and who prefer to remain there. If such a rates subsidy is awarded to them, it will be possible for them to stay on in their own homes and then the pressure on and the demand for old-age homes will decrease, with the result that the State will save a great deal in capital investments.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words about the problem of alcoholism in South Africa. The hon. the Minister’s department made an amount of R1 859 022 available last year as a subsidy for the combating of alcoholism in South Africa. In the same year, the four centres under the control of the hon. the Minister’s department spent an amount of R795 528 on the treatment of alcoholics in four rehabilitation centres. In the registered and unregistered rehabilitation centres, 5 478 White men and 1 130 White women were treated in 1978. I should like to measure the action launched by the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions with the aid of these appropriations against the whole problem of alcoholism in South Africa. It is a problem which is a source of great concern to us all.

I should like to make a plea in this connection and to make a proposal to the hon. the Minister. When one looks at the total picture and problem of the supply, consumption, excessive-consumption and abuse of liquor, and eventually of alcoholism in South Africa, it seems that the State is not doing enough to go to the root of-the problems in this connection and to eradicate them. When one looks, for example, at the magnitude of the problem of alcoholism in South Africa, and one thinks of the fact that 100 000 Whites in South Africa are alcoholics, that the absolute alcohol consumption per White person in South Africa is 11 litres a year and that 75% of the White adults in South Africa are alcohol consumers, of whom, it is alleged, 6% to 10% eventually become alcoholics and abusers of alcohol, one realizes that this problem has assumed very serious proportions among the Whites of South Africa. Furthermore, we must take into consideration that it is not only the question of alcoholism which is giving cause for serious concern, but also the question of excessive consumption of liquor and liquor abuse, which are actually just preliminary stages of alcoholism.

However, what fills one with much greater concern and anxiety in South Africa is the question of liquor abuse and alcoholism among the various non-White peoples and communities. When we look at the position among the Coloured population in South Africa, we see that 22% of all Coloured people over 20 years of age are alleged to be either alcoholics or over-dependent drinkers and abusers of liquor. Therefore the total number of Coloured people who are abusers of liquor works out at about R161 000. We see, therefore, that this problem is assuming very serious proportions among the Coloured population. Among the Black population, for which no statistics are available, we see a situation which is so disturbing that the Government should, I believe, view it in a much more serious light. In a place like Soweto, it is estimated that more than one-third of the young Black people are abusers of liquor. When one considers the fact that the Administration Boards rely so heavily for their finances on the selling of liquor, one sees that the State has a function to perform in this connection. There is good reason for feeling concerned about this. Let us look at the young people. At the finals at the Free State stadium the year before last, I was personally absolutely shocked to see how many young people were guilty of the abuse of liquor on that occasion, so that one could only ask: What on earth is becoming of our young people? When we look at our student communities at our universities—I do not label all our students with the same tag—the abuse of liquor is something which must be a source of great concern to us all, including most students. I do not think it is in the interests of the future of those people or of anyone else that we should consume liquor in South Africa in such a way. Let us see how many man-hours are lost in South Africa every year. In October last year, a conference of industrialists was held, and at that conference, it was said that approximately R500 million a year was being lost through lost man-hours resulting from the abuse of liquor and alcoholism. The National Road Safety Research Institute of the CSIR declared last month that alcohol played a role in more than half of all serious road accidents in South Africa. When we look at the way people are maimed and when we consider the thousands and thousands of hours spent on this by our hospitals, we see with what an enormous problem we are faced. When we look at the families that are broken up, at the personalities that are maimed—if one may put it that way—it is easy for us to say that all this is caused by the abuse of liquor, for one must consider the fact that every alcoholic really affects the lives of eight other people through his drinking habits. We see how the personalities of young children are harmed in the process, as a result of which they find it difficult all their lives to fend for themselves, and then one realizes that this is a matter which merits very serious attention.

Therefore certain questions occur to one. The State receives more than R400 million annually from the sale of liquor. About R1 500 million is spent on liquor by the consumer in South Africa every year. Then one asks: What is the role of the State and what is the strategy of the State? I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister in all politeness that the State should very seriously consider making a comprehensive report available to the public and ensuring that there is some co-ordination. The Department of Social Welfare and Pensions works with the problem of the combating of alcoholism. Other State departments deal with this matter among other population groups. The Department of Health is concerned with it, as are still other Government departments. I believe that we should consider the full scope and intensity of this problem on a coordinated basis and that we must make it quite clear to everyone in South Africa that it is the policy of the State to combat excessive consumption and abuse of alcohol and alcoholism. In doing so, one is absolutely convinced that we must also state it to be the declared Government policy that we shall not stimulate the liquor economy in South Africa by causing people to drink too much and to abuse alcohol, thereby ruining the future of an enormous number of young people through excessive consumption and abuse of liquor. The State must make it its declared policy to educate the people of South Africa, especially the young people, through the churches, television, newspapers and every other conceivable method and to bring home to the public the danger of excessive consumption of liquor, of abuse of liquor and alcoholism in South Africa. 29,4% of the Whites in South Africa, 41,4% of the Coloureds, 38% of the Asiatic population and 41,9% of the Blacks in South Africa are below the age of 15 years. When we consider the question of liquor consumption in South Africa, we see that we must have the future perspective and task of educating our people, of helping them and protecting them against this problem in South Africa. I believe that every young person, every person in South Africa, has the right to be protected against the danger of the abuse of alcohol and against alcoholism, and I believe that it is the duty of the State to help protect them. I hope that it will never be possible to say of this Government, of any future Government in South Africa, with regard to the question of alcoholism, the abuse of liquor and excessive consumption of liquor, that we have too much work today because we did too little yesterday. I consider it to be of vital importance that we should realize the full seriousness of the problem and that we should not simply accept the realities and expectations of the liquor trade and of the realities and expectations of liquor production, thereby forgetting the problems with which we have to contend. I am absolutely convinced that the abuse of liquor in South Africa and the tendencies which we are experiencing in this connection at the moment pose a threat to the community and to South Africa as a whole on the road that lies ahead. We must also see the excessive consumption of liquor in the light of the African perspective in which we live. After all, there are a great number of undeveloped Black people in South Africa and a great number of undeveloped and developing Brown people, and I believe that we have a duty and a responsibility towards these people in this connection. When I see how liquor is romanticized and glorified by means of television advertisements and when I hear the way our people talk about it—as if it were a wonderful virtue and should become such a part of our culture that its harmful implications will perhaps be disregarded—then I ask myself: Have we done our duty in every respect? I am sure that the hon. the Minister and his department, when they consider the full magnitude of the problem, will constantly be convinced of the fact that the small amount which is being appropriated to inform people about this problem is very definitely not enough.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Innesdal on his particularly fine speech. I have a great deal of sympathy for the case he has put forward and I do not want to detract from his speech at all, but I do wish to remind him that the Third Reading of the Liquor Amendment Bill is still in the offing. [Interjections.]

How did you vote?

There are many of us who did not vote for the Second Reading of that Bill.

This speech by the hon. member for Innesdal would be a valuable contribution to the Third Reading stage of the Liquor Amendment Bill and I trust he will keep that in mind.

On behalf of my colleagues on this side of the House I also wish to welcome the hon. the Minister in his new capacity. We are fully confident that he will acquit himself well in this new office and we trust that when he leaves this portfolio one day, the elderly people will be sorry to see him go. I have no doubt at all that he will pull his weight.

†The hon. the Minister gave us some very sound advice here this afternoon. While doing so he looked particularly towards the Opposition, but I think he was talking to all of us when he suggested that we should all save for a rainy day. I want to remind the hon. the Minister that some of us here in the Opposition benches were actually born on rainy days, and it has been raining for us ever since. So I have my doubts whether we shall ever be in a position to save for a rainy day, because it keeps on raining for us.

*The hon. the Minister has also referred to the contributory pension scheme and has stated in that regard that there is no magic formula The hon. the Minister is quite right—there is no magic formula. I do not believe anybody expects a contributory pension scheme to solve our problems overnight. That is impossible and it cannot even happen over a period of five, ten or 15 years. However, if we do not start a contributory pension scheme at some stage we shall never reach the stage where there will not be a problem. We must introduce the scheme now so that we can reap the fruits thereof 30 or 40 years hence.

There are two aspects with regard to our elderly people which I wish to deal with briefly. The first is the financial aspect and the second the mental and physical aspect. These two aspects are interrelated. When a person has no financial worries, he has no mental or physical worries either. The converse is also true, because when a person fares well spiritually and physically, he normally sees to his own financial position.

I agree with the hon. member for Pietersburg that there is sincere gratitude in South Africa for the increase in pensions that will become effective in October. Nobody can find fault with that. However, I do want to state that there are some elderly people who will actually not see that additional amount because it has already been absorbed. I am not saying this by way of criticism, but merely because it is a fact that I wish to substantiate. I wish to do so on the basis of a particular case in an old-age home in Port Elizabeth. The old-age pensioner involved will receive the increased pension in October, but the board and lodging at that institution was increased by R12 per month in April. However, even though she is a pensioner, she is able to remain at that old-age home because she has a small investment. She has already been advised by her bank, however, that as from October the rate of interest will be lower. That is something the hon. the Minister has also referred to and it is a problem which some of our pensioners have to face.

Up to now I have been dealing with people who receive a pension, however small or insufficient it might be. These people are grateful for the fact that they are receiving something. However, there are people who receive nothing. The hon. member for Pietersburg has also referred to the contribution these people have made and to the sacrifice of their lives and energy. We are greatly indebted to them and we owe it to them to do something for them.

As far as the means test is concerned, the difference between a person who receives a pension and a person who does not, is very small. The hon. the Minister is correct when he states that there will always be people who miss a pension by the skin of their teeth. At present a small amount of R1 or R2 per month can make a big difference, however, in the sense that the person who receives R2 per month less, will qualify for a minimum pension of R48, whereas the person who receives R2 more, cannot qualify for that pension of R48. I now wish to suggest, and I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for Bryanston, that there should be a fullscale inquiry into the means test. I have wondered whether we could not do away with the means test altogether. After thorough investigation it should be ascertained what is the minimum amount which a person needs to be able to live a reasonable life. I am not even referring to luxuries…

How are you going to establish what he possesses?

I can see immediately that the hon. member already discerns the problems. However, I can also discern them and I therefore suggest that we should have a fullscale inquiry instituted. If it is found, however, that an unmarried person requires RA, however small the amount may be, and a married person requires RB, that amount must be made up if the person’s income is not equal to that amount. If the person needs RA but receives R50 per month less than RA, that R50 should be granted to him to bring him up to that level. If the amount of his shortfall is less, he can receive less, and the converse also applies. If the person has no income at all, the minimum amount he requires should be granted to him. The means test then falls away and the person who receives or earns only a few rands more than RA, whether by way of pension or otherwise, knows then, as is now also the case, that he is not entitled to a pension. I think that would be much more fair. As and when the cost of living increases, that amount can be increased from time to time. In that way there will be far less dissatisfaction.

I wish to conclude with a matter which the hon. the Minister has referred to, namely that our elderly people should be kept occupied. Recently a small group of us had the privilege of visiting the Disa Centre in Gardens. It was explained to us how the service centre operates there, how the elderly people, even those who do not live in the centre, can go there to have their lunches, how they find companionship and social intercourse there.

The Algoa Bay Council for the Aged in Port Elizabeth also has such a service centre. In this regard I wish to express my thanks to all the officials of the department. We experience only kindness and excellent treatment from them. I also wish to thank them for what they are doing in this respect, for making it possible to make such a centre available to elderly people where they can come together. However, I do wonder whether we should not consider establishing a type of bureau—call it what you will—where some of the elderly people who are still strong and healthy and still want to work, but who cannot obtain employment on account of their age, can be kept occupied. So many elderly people address their complaints to me and, I assume, to other hon. members as well. These are people of 58 or 60 years, who are healthy, but can no longer be retained in service by their former employer. In the meantime their income is not sufficient and they want to perform some kind of work to supplement that income. They seek assistance, but their age counts against them. As far as I am concerned, this type of service centre is perhaps the right body through which matters of this nature can be investigated. We should investigate whether we cannot establish such an organization which can assist elderly people who still want to work, in their quest for a position of some kind. It does not matter if it is even a part-time occupation, as long as they can find something with which to keep themselves occupied and earn part of their income themselves. That would mean a very great deal to them. It would benefit them physically and mentally. After all, that is what we want.

Mr. Chairman, I also wish to say a few words about our senior citizens, but before proceeding, I should like to put a small request to the hon. the Minister. In his reply earlier the hon. the Minister was very careful and used the term “senior citizen”. I think he did so correctly.

I also note that the annual report continues to refer to the “aged”. In Afrikaans it refers to “bejaardes”. Whether we like to admit it or not, the term “aged” implies that a person has reached a stage of uselessness in his life. I think the same applies to the term “bejaardes”.

Good grief, you understand that! [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, I am not specifically referring to the hon. member for Umhlanga. [Interjections.] That hon. member has already passed the stage of old age; he now finds himself in the decrepid stage. Politically, he is in a decrepid stage anyway. [Interjections.] However, I want to ask the hon. the Minister and his department to proceed, as he has done so very carefully in this debate, by referring in future reports to “senior citizens” or “senior burgers van die land”. It is obviously wise because with a longer life expectancy enjoyed by people today it can hardly be said that a citizen is old when he reaches the age of 65 years. When we look at the annual report we can see how the number of pensioners in the age group between 70 and 80 years has increased, an increase that continues year after year, it is evident that there are many senior citizens who still have a useful life ahead of them after the age of 65 years, which is normally accepted as the retirement age.

I am also particularly delighted—and it is a point of view I have held for a very long time—that the hon. the Minister has pointed out that there is only one principle in terms of which we consider the position of our senior citizens today. That is that they must form an integral part of our community at large. Any considerations we give and any policies we develop must be based only on this principle. This principle, however, has only been accepted in recent years. In the past the emphasis in all our programmes was placed on providing housing. That is why South Africa is probably the Western country with the highest percentage of senior citizens housed in homes, and I think the hon. the Minister quite correctly pointed that out. It is, of course, shown in the reports of the department and in other relevant documentation. From the concept that a senior citizen is an integral part of the community, we should go on to contemplating how he can play a part as a useful member of the community. The point I want to make is that if the senior citizens still have a role to play in the community, the most important factor is what type of housing we are going to supply to those senior citizens.

The greatest percentage of citizens housed in our registered homes are senior citizens who are infirm, and the latest report of the department indicates that there is to be an increase of 84 homes in the current year, bringing the total to more than 287. Those infirm senior citizens are people who cannot entirely look after themselves, and there is no doubt that they receive some of the finest community attention of any group of citizens in our community today, and I am referring to both departmental assistance and assistance from various voluntary bodies who display a keen sense of communal responsibility.

The vast bulk of our senior citizens, however, live alone. I take my facts from information I have been able to glean from departmental reports and certificates. 55% of our senior citizens live alone in rooms or flats with a minority of 4,3% living in rented houses. The vast bulk of these senior citizens, in fact 57,4% of them, live entirely alone. I emphasize again that these percentages I have gleaned, so as to be as exact as possible, from departmental reports. The reason why I am raising this matter is because it is a problem in my constituency, the central area of Johannesburg. I think I can say, without fear of contradiction, that this area contains probably a larger percentage of senior citizens than any other metropolitan area in our country.

Those senior citizens live in blocks of flats for a particular reason. They do so in the first instance because in this way they can acquire low-rental accommodation. There are, however, other reasons why they live there. They also live there because they do not want to be divorced from the community. They want to continue as a part of the community. They live in these closely-packed metropolitan areas because they feel that by doing so they are still part of the community. It is inevitable, however, that we are going to be faced with increasing numbers of these people in the future. At present approximately 8% of our population fall into the category of senior citizens. By the year 2000, however, they will constitute approximately 12% to 15% of our total population. One only has to look at the continually increasing overall sums voted for old-age pensions by this House. Inevitably some sort of policy will have to be developed for providing further low-cost accommodation for this increasing sector of our population.

The best method is in my view—a view I think that is accepted by many Western countries today—to create what are called group dwellings with suitable living units for these people who are either widows or widowers, have no partner whom they live with or who, because of circumstances, no longer live with their families. As I have said, from the facts available at present we know that 57% of them live entirely alone. The development of the principle of group dwellings brings certain aspects to the fore. Such dwellings would give the senior citizens a sense of self-respect since, because of the low rental, they can have their own housing. Above all, it provides the senior citizen with social intercourse with his fellows, something the hon. the Minister emphasized in his reply today. I think that, as far as senior citizens are concerned, the aspect of loneliness is their greatest worry.

We should cease thinking in terms of homes for the aged which has always been our predominant way of thinking in this respect in the past. I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister today where reasonably priced group dwelling units can be developed in our modern cities. In many of the metropolitan areas there are old buildings certain of which—and I think the hon. member for Hillbrow can support me on this—have been condemned by the municipalities concerned because of the low rental factor and the fact that the owners do not have the capital to restore those buildings. There are several of such high-rise buildings. These could be acquired by the Government at reasonable cost and converted into group dwelling units. I direct my plea to the hon. the Minister although I am well aware that this also relates to the Department of Environmental Planning and Energy and…

Should such buildings not be handed over to welfare organizations?

The hon. member suggests they should be handed over to welfare organizations, but the capital responsibility for the conversion of such buildings into useful units cannot be carried by social welfare bodies. A considerable amount of capital is required.

That could be obtained by way of a loan.

It will, however, represent a saving of capital to the Government in so far as they will not have to start with the basic structure and related costs. They will only have to cover the cost of converting those buildings.

We would not like to see them run by the State.

That will not necessarily happen. Even though the State would provide the building, a welfare organization could take over the management and control of it. It is as simple as that.

Knowing Johannesburg well, I can tell the hon. the Minister that there is what one might call a voluntary corps of social workers in Johannesburg. I refer to the caretakers of the high-rise blocks of flats. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I must thank the hon. member for Von Brandis for his very valuable contribution. I think I should not forego the opportunity of inviting his senior constituents rather to come and live in Pietermaritzburg. I think they would be much happier there than they will be living in the centre of Johannesburg.

People in the know regard Pietermaritzburg as a model city as regards the care of the aged. Clear proof that their assessment cannot be wrong is to be found in the fact that more and more senior citizens are settling in Pietermaritzburg to spend their retirement in that fair city. The city’s population of White aged is estimated at approximately 6 000. This means that approximately 12% of the city’s inhabitants are aged. This is almost double the figure for the country which is approximately 7% to 8%. When one looks at the natural surroundings of Pietermaritzburg, the lushness of its evergreen plants and trees which truly make of it a garden city, the atmosphere and character of the city which, although it is modern and has all the amenities of a metropolis, does not have the nerve-racking pace and if one has regard to its reasonably temperate climate, it is to be expected that people will flock to Pietermaritzburg to spend their old age there. The community of Pietermaritzburg also sets an example to others when it comes to the care of the aged. The main attribute of this community in this field is that they are prepared to contribute handsomely towards this cause. As a result it is not unduly dependent on State aid in this respect.

The constituency of Pietermaritzburg North has 12 old-age homes housing more than 800 senior citizens. Pietermaritzburg also has a number of very active associations catering for every need of the aged. One of the organizations is the Pietermaritzburg and District Care of the Aged. This organization has a membership of approximately 1 500 people and was the first in the country to provide a service centre for the aged. I should like to mention a few of the activities of this service centre. It has a senior citizens’ club which caters for the social needs of the senior citizens. It also has a home help service, with a nurse and helpers going out to the homes of the aged to provide them with semi-medical services. They put the senior citizens to bed, they bath them, clean their houses, provide them with fresh linen and even go out and do shopping for the aged. This senior citizens’ club also provides meals-on-wheels and a check-up service for senior citizens. This is all done to allow the aged to remain in their own homes and surroundings for as long as possible. I can talk for hours on this subject to illustrate the good work this society is doing, but that is not my intention.

Another certain indication that the people of Pietermaritzburg provide not only for then-own senior citizens, but also for their own old-age, is the fact that a recent national survey has indicated that of all the major centres in the country, the households of Pietermaritzburg devote the highest percentage of their household expenditure to income tax and insurance. They devote 25% of their total household expenditure to income tax and insurance, compared to the national average of 22,9%. This also indicates of course, that the people of Pietermaritzburg are the most honest in the country!

Another certain indication that the people of Pietermaritzburg are very savings-conscious is the fact that this survey has also shown that the households of Pietermaritzburg derive the highest percentage of their income from indirect sources such as dividends and interest. In this regard the percentage is 16,7%, compared to the national average of 14,3%.

I am pleased to see a former member of Parliament for Pietermaritzburg North, Mr. Howard Odell, in the public gallery and I welcome him here. He was, in 1963, one of the first English-speakers to join the N.P., starting the avalanche of English-speakers who have since joined. [Interjections.]

I should like to pay tribute today to a person who has, over many years, played a monumental role in the field of social welfare and care of the aged. I am referring to Mr. Albert Allison, who died about a month ago, aged 87. Mr. Allison had a long and distinguished public career few will be able to equal. He was MPC for Pietermaritzburg North for 32 years. He was town councillor for 19 years and mayor of Pietermaritzburg for five years. In 1949 he was made a freeman of Pietermaritzburg. But I believe that his endeavours in the social welfare field, and especially in the field of housing for the aged, will go unrivalled. At the age of 37 he left a successful business to devote his entire remaining life on a full-time basis to his public career and to social welfare. He was indeed a one-man social service and must have assisted thousands of people materially and spiritually in his career. To mention all his projects would be impossible, but I could perhaps mention his greatest contribution, and that is the founding of two old-age homes in Pietermaritzburg, namely the King George V Memorial Home for Couples, which was founded in 1936, and the Queen Mary Place Home for Women which was founded in 1940. Since 1936 these homes have grown from a few cottages to complexes housing more than 240 senior citizens today. They are unique in many respects and have been copied in many parts of South Africa and overseas. The homes provide a separate cottage for every aged woman or couple. Each unit has its own garden and one can say that all the units are set in a big garden of flowers. The person in each unit can furnish his cottage in the way he wants and make his own food. The people stay in these homes completely free of charge. The building expenses in respect of these homes were met completely out of funds provided by donations and bequests. To this day not a single cent of State money has been used.

One of the many letters in the Press over the years congratulating and thanking Mr. Allison for his contribution in this respect, ended in the following words—

I should like to quote a poem which was written at the time when Mr. Allison was made a freeman of Pietermaritzburg—

Finally, I should like to quote a few sayings Mr. Allison used each day. The first was—

[Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have no quarrel with the approach of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North to the aged and I shall not comment on it. However, we have a responsibility towards the aged. What we are particularly discussing here today, is the question of pensions, particularly social pensions, for the aged.

The hon. member for Bryanston has moved that a commission of inquiry be appointed. I want to support that and I thank the SAP for their support. What we need now is an entirely new approach. It is all very well for the hon. the Minister to say in all sincerity that the pension was R79 in October 1977 and R88 in October 1978 and will be R97 from October 1979, and to tell us that he has budgeted for something like R159 million to meet the requirements of the 136 042 pensioners who will be receiving that, but that is not the answer. The question we in the House must ask ourselves is whether this meets the exigencies and the demands of the people who are receiving these pensions. I say: No, it fails miserably. To support my case, I can quote from many letters I have received. I encounter the same problems as the hon. member for Von Brandis who’s constituency is similar to mine. These problems are the problems facing the urban areas, the cities of South Africa. To illustrate my point, I have selected just a few of the letters. I have received from people who are in this plight. I want to quote from a letter, dated 3 April 1979, I received from a certain lady—

She attached her budget to this letter. According to this budget, her anticipated monthly income next year will be R99, the rent R96, the electricity account R3, her insurance R4, the telephone account R4,50, her food bill R27, sundries R3, a visit to the hairdresser R10 and her laundry bill R2, adding up to a total expenditure of R150—the deficit is R51. In passing, I want to ask whether hon. members can tell me how one can provide oneself with three daily meals on less than R1 per day. She spends R27 on food which has to last her 30 days. How does this lady live?

I want to illustrate my point with another case. I want to quote from a letter, dated 21 March 1979, which was sent to me by a saleslady who was retired after 19 years with a firm—

That is the problem facing us. One might well say that her rent is too high and that she should move to sub-economic or economic housing where she pays only 25% of her income. But the hon. the Minister himself has said today that these people must remain in their own environment, in their own society and with their own people. This was supported by the hon. member for Meyerton and the hon. member for Von Brandis and I think it is supported by every other hon. member of this House. What is the answer? Short of doubling the pension, we are not going to meet the situation. If we double the pension to meet the exigencies, and not just the cost of living and the high rate of inflation, we shall have to find R318 million. From where are we going to get the money? Is the hon. the Minister of Finance prepared to give it to the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions to meet this problem? He has a difficulty. Therefore, I am afraid we have no other choice but to take drastic steps to meet the exigencies of the situation. For a Government which has already morally committed itself to totalisators, horse racing, Defence Bonds and the extension of liquor outlets, there should be no moral difficulty to institute a State lottery in order to obtain additional funds required. If the question of a State lottery affords any kind of difficulty because of its name, I have a very simple alternative to offer. Let us then introduce social bonds which can be sold at R1 each. We need not then give away prizes of R35 000 at a time, but let us once a week give away prizes of R5 000 and use these bonds for the welfare and benefit of the aged in the form of pensions so that they do not have to suffer in the way they are suffering at present. They can then have security for the future and we can discharge our obligations as South Africans to those South Africans who have given their whole working lives to enable us to enjoy the benefits which we are deriving today.

There is another matter to which I wish to refer in the time at my disposal, namely the question of the National Welfare Act, the Fund-raising Act and the Social and Associated Workers’ Act which we discussed at great length last year. To the best of my knowledge, the provisions of these Acts have not yet come into force. However, I understand that they may come into force later in the year. This is referred to on page 31 of the annual report which is before us. What is going to happen to the Coloureds and the Indians with regard to the welfare they are to receive in this respect? I submit that, because there has been some delay, there is still time to refer this whole matter to the Joint Committee which was recently appointed by this House to investigate the new constitution for South Africa and which can therefore see how the new Acts will fit into the structure of the new constitution.

I want to appeal to this House today to hold up the promulgation, the implementation and the State President’s authority to enforce these provisions until such time as the matter has been referred to the Joint Committee and they have come to a decision on it. The regulations, as the hon. the Minister knows, have been published in the Gazette, No. 6202 of 3 November 1978. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether there has been any reaction to these regulations. I am referring to the draft regulations which have been published. Did people report by 31 January and what has been the reaction? With regard to the National Welfare Act and Regulation 18 which has a bearing on that, it is said that people must comply with all the laws. What does that mean? What does it mean that they must be able to comply with all the laws? Secondly, it is said that social workers must keep a diary. This needs explanation as well. Perhaps the hon. the Minister can explain this to us. As far as Regulation 9 in respect of the Fund-raising Act is concerned, what is the policy with regard to the agreement referred to here? Is it the policy that as regards fundraising a trust can be established? Can the money be used for investment? Can shares be purchased? Can the interest be paid over to the fund-raising organization from time to time? What is the policy? When will the agreement be considered by the department, and how long will it take? There are many questions that I could ask. I do not know whether we are going to get an opportunity to debate the regulations before the position is made final. I hope, however, that in terms of the discussions we had last year, something of this nature will happen.

I now wish to turn very briefly to the subject of child battering. I am most disturbed and it hurts me, as I think it will hurt all hon. members, to read that there were 1 144 cases of child battering in 1976 and 1 086 cases in 1976-’77. These figures include cruelty to, ill-treatment and neglect of children by their parents. Child battering is indefensible, and I believe that, in all cases of child battering and particularly in regard to infants, the social worker must bring out a report advising the court whether, if the parent is found guilty of child battering, that parent is fit to retain those children.

In the minute or so left to me, I want to refer to the category of drug abusers known as smokers. According to the provisions of the National Welfare Act, alcoholics can be referred to places like crisis clinics and rehabilitation centres. I also want “tobacco-holics” to be referred to an institution like the crisis clinics. An institution set up by the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions where treatment can be given to cure people of this drug in cases where they are so heavily addicted that their health is being affected. These “tobaccoholics”, like alcoholics, are in need of help, and I believe it can be done in this way.

Social workers also have a very important role to play in regard to prisoners. Although we have places like Elandia, Erica, Protea and Swartfontein, to what places can members of the Black population be referred? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it seems that the hon. member for Hillbrow wants to solve all his problems by means of State lotteries. He also wants to solve the problem with regard to old-age pensioners with a State lottery. I want to ask the hon. member for Hillbrow as well as the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central: How much is enough? They say one should pay enough, but how much is enough? The other question I want to ask them is this: Where is it to come from? Which department’s budget are we to curtail in order to give these people more?

I want to say this afternoon with regard to the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions that I think the hon. the Minister is very fortunate in having such a department. I have already said that it is a dedicated department. It is also the complaints department, the department which has to listen to all the complaints and problems. In spite of this, the officials of the department do not become morbid, but continue to render the very best service.

I do not believe there is a single hon. member of this House who does not want financial contributions to welfare services and to the care of the aged to be increased. We have a sympathetic Government, and the evidence of this is everywhere. More than 20 members of the NP belong to the Social Welfare and Pensions study group. This proves again the interest and sympathy which there is for welfare work.

Hon. members of the Opposition have said, among other things, that the means test should be abolished. If I understood them correctly, they advocated the unqualified abolition of the means test, but do they know what that implies? It would mean that the poor man would to a large extent pay for the rich man. Surely this is so. People with an income of approximately R15 000 a year would then receive a pension to which people with an income of only R10 000 a year have also contributed in the form of income tax. This is a fact which cannot be argued away. Surely it is absolutely ridiculous to say without qualification that the means test should be abolished.

The means test is revised from time to time and will certainly be revised again. That is as far as the Government can go. However, there is a difference between accepting responsibility for something and simply advocating tilings which are impossible.

The latest statistics as on 31 March 1977 show that there were 139 634 old-age pensioners. There were 13 971 war veterans’ pensions. There were 25 340 people who received disability grants. There were 799 blind people receiving pensions. Maintenance allowances were paid to 20 545 people. Fortunately there was a drop in the number of family allowances, and on 31 March 1977 only 394 people were receiving this. All these allowances and pensions were paid to a total of 200 683 people.

During the period 1973-’78, the basic old-age pension rose by 107%, while there was a rise of only 72% in the consumer price index. The hon. member for Durban Central does not agree with such a comparison; he says these things are not comparable. What is comparable, then? I ask again: What is the minimum amount on which one can live? An immediate increase of 10% would mean an annual expenditure of R21,2 million, and that for Whites alone.

As far as the means test is concerned, it should also be noted that 82% of the old-age pensioners receive the maximum pension. This means that only 18% of the old-age pensioners get less because of assets and other income. There are 24 000 old-age pensioners who have assets to the value of between R9 800 and R34 000. It is only when one’s assets exceed R34 000 that one is excluded from an old-age pension. This is the position in this connection, and I must add that an old-age pension is not a right. There are many people who think it is a right, but in actual fact it is a privilege.

I am in favour of the payment of old-age pensions, because I am also growing old. We are all interested in this matter, and if I could quadruple the amount paid out in the form of old-age pensions, I should very much like to do so. However, it is not so simple, because there are two parties involved. There is the party to whom one must give, the party that must receive, the party that must be given assistance in order to live, but there is also the party that has to foot the bill for those people who have to receive that money.

I have a few problems in connection with old-age pensions, and one of them is the fact that there are just as many different circumstances as there are old-age pensioners. Another problem I have is in connection with the question of how many people have become old-age pensioners because they gave their property to their children. After a certain period, namely five years, the child requests the parent to sign away his life-interest on the property. That parent then becomes, as it were, a beggar from the State. I know what I am talking about, because I often speak to such people. Do hon. members know who the people are who complain? The people who are housed by means of a State subsidy and subeconomic housing? No, it is not the people who really need assistance and for whom we have great sympathy who complain. Those people are grateful. The people who complain are those who were used to a very good life, who were used to owning certain properties and maintaining a very high standard of living. Now, however, they are dependent on an old-age pension, which they receive from the State. On top of that, it is said—and I think this is disgraceful—that they are now being pushed into a comer. Those are the people who complain, not the old-age pensioners, not those who have really been in need of assistance or those who have been unable, because of a variety of circumstances, to provide for themselves. This is something to which we shall certainly have to give attention.

I have another problem. This is the question of the number of old-age pensioners who are being forced out of their city properties to municipal housing, subsidized by the State, by municipal rates and even by income tax. How many of those people are being forced out of their own homes to become beggars from the State for their means of livelihood? Someone has already said that we should investigate the possibility of a subsidy which can be paid to such people in certain cases. This would in any case obviate the need for the provision of expensive housing at interest rates of one-twentieth per cent.

Then I have a further problem. How many people are being forced by the means test to accept old-age pensions and cheaper housing? It is in this respect that the means test has to be revised from time to time. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hercules has made a very fine speech. However, I want to discuss another aspect in connection with the pensioners. This is the question of whether one has to prepare oneself for the day of one’s retirement. Logically speaking, one’s life can be divided into five principal phases. The first phase, or the first 20%, is arranged and planned by one’s parents. The following three parts, or 60%, are arranged and planned by every person for himself and for his family. Then he also has the privilege of arranging and planning the first 20% of their lives for his children.

The last 20% of one’s life is a period which people are inclined to forget about until the eleventh hour before they begin to plan for it. Everyone would like to stop working. Everyone would like to retire on pension. However, everyone loses sight of the fact that that day is an absolute watershed in one’s life. People do not realize the implications which such a total change can have. Such a sudden change in the pattern of one’s life can have dangerous psychological consequences if one does not give attention to it and plan for it in good time.

A man likes to do his work and to receive recognition for it. He likes to belong to a group, and to feel satisfied with himself sometimes. In the process, he is an important cog in the labour machine of his employer. He sometimes has to perform important tasks. He sometimes has to take a lead. Sometimes he has to assume command. Therefore, when a man suddenly finds himself unemployed, or when he has reached retirement age and has to stay at home, while his wife and family are still going about their normal activities, he is bound to feel like Job in his state of desolation.

Preparation for the day of retirement is an obligation which every person ought to take into consideration at an early stage in his life. Every person ought to start planning for it in good time. People should begin to look forward at an early age to the privileges which they are going to enjoy in their riper years. They must plan to enjoy to the full the pension period to which they have been looking forward for so long. We must remember that man is basically a companionable being. Even if he makes all the necessary provision for accommodation, for money, for luxuries, etc., his old age will be monotonous and lonely if he has to spend it without any friends. Of course, loneliness is one of the greatest fears among old people and it leads to enormous frustration. It is essential that people should realize even in the prime of life what man’s basic social needs are. I should like to mention five which I consider the most important.

The first is a desire to be acceptable, and perhaps also attractive, to other people. This really amounts to the art of making friends. This is truly the golden key to a happy old age, an elderly people should always be encouraged to get to know people and to belong to clubs, even if it is a patchwork club, because in this way one builds up a circle of friends which can never become too large. Surely it is only logical that the older one gets, the more often one’s friends pass away.

The second need relates to the person’s knowledge of his environment. Many people buy or acquire a small house or a farm or a house at the beach in which to retire, and then they move there immediately after their retirement, only to find out that they cannot adapt to their new environment because it is not so easy at retirement age to make friends in a new environment It is difficult to advise others, but it is very advisable to test carefully the adaptability of a new environment before venturing to make such a complete change.

Man’s third basic social need is to receive recognition for what he does. Whether grandmother bakes a cake for the women’s association or for the church or whether she goes to fetch the mail of the old-age home or makes a contribution to the cultivation of the vegetable garden, she is looking for recognition as we all do. People should therefore know when they retire whether people in their own environment will appreciate them and whether it would be advisable for them to move to a different home at that stage.

There is also the need to have new experiences. Strangely enough, the desire to experience new things becomes stronger as one grows older. A need arises to visit new places. It is simply essential for the pensioner to join new bodies such as senior citizen clubs or some voluntary welfare organization.

The need for security is very important to every person. There is a great need to know that one will not have to live in poverty in one’s old age and will be able to preserve one’s independence as long as possible. This is really the most basic need. When one has worked hard for three-fifths of one’s life, one wants security. The slightest uncertainty causes anxiety.

Even tramps seek security in their old age. From the nature of my previous profession, I knew many tramps, of course, tramps who had much bigger bank accounts that I could ever dream of having. During the past election I went to canvass the vote of one of them in an old-age home. He told me that he had never done a day’s work in all his life, but that he was staying in the old-age home because there was more security for him there.

This is the way we look upon the matter. This is the way we see the pensioner and this is the direction in which we should like to guide him.

However, how does the pensioner see us and how does he see himself from his own vantage point? I wonder whether it is asking too much to request the hon. the Minister to make a survey—not an expensive one; perhaps through the circulation of questionnaires—to ascertain the true feelings and needs of pensioners, seen from their own point of view. The provision of such information could be invaluable to voluntary welfare organizations.

We must accept that our pensioners are the jewels in our community, people who have made their full contribution to the development of a people, a country and its economy. It is our duty to ensure that these people need never develop a feeling of inferiority. In fact, it is our duty to ensure that their life retains its meaning and that they remain happy up to their last day.

What can we do? We must try to restrict their worries to a minimum, and one of their greatest worries today is the rat of inflation which is eating away at their pension privileges. Whether we shall ever catch the rat I do not know, but we shall certainly have to take cognizance of it We have to take cognizance of the fact that people are living longer today than they did 70 years ago. In 1904, elderly people constituted 2% of the White population; today they constitute 7% of our White population. It would seem to me that most elderly people still prefer to live in their own houses as long as it is at all possible. Schemes such as the Kruger Resort houses for the elderly in Springs and Geluksdorp for the senior citizens in Port Elizabeth are becoming more and more popular. Voluntary welfare organizations and local authorities would do well to take cognizance of this.

Children, and especially grandchildren, must never underestimate the contribution they can make to the joy and happiness of the pensioner. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the last three speakers in this debate have dealt with a large variety of subjects, but basically they dealt with the position of the senior citizens in South Africa, and I want to pursue this matter further. I am quite sure the hon. the Minister will answer the various questions that have been raised by the former three speakers.

The hon. member for Hillbrow raised the matter of State lotteries. This matter has, of course, been discussed and debated over a number of years, but I should like to remind hon. members that only some two years ago a petition signed by more than 24 000 people was tabled in this House requesting that a State lottery be instituted so as to provide additional funds to assist social pensioners. This view is held by a considerable number of people. As was mentioned earlier, we have at present, the bonus bond system which has become virtually a lottery. We know, too, that there are many other lotteries which take place. Those of us who occasionally take a jackpot ticket for the races at Kenilworth or Milnerton realize that that, too, is purely a lottery.

I do not, however, intend pursuing this matter because, when the hon. the Minister replied to the debate earlier, he made certain observations that I would like to deal with. I am grateful that the hon. the Minister intends once again to look at the position as far as the means test is concerned, because there have been numerous requests over the past few years for a complete revision of the means test, particularly in view of the fact that it has remained virtually unaltered since 1 October 1972. One must also take into account the anomalies that exist. I would like to mention just one such anomaly. At present a widow with assets of R22 400 qualifies for a maximum pension of R88 per month. The additional R9 will bring this amount up to R97 and, if she is over 64 years of age, she can receive up to R108 per month. But a widow whose husband paid into a pension fund, even though she may not have any assets whatsoever, does not qualify at all for an old-age pension if her widow’s pension exceeds R82 per month. So we have this wide difference and disparity in that persons who have paid into private pension funds and who receive small pensions, are precluded from receiving any sort of old-age or social pension whatsoever. I believe this is a matter which requires urgent attention, because obviously we have to try to find ways and means of improving the position.

The hon. member for Hercules asked what we consider to be an adequate pension. We consider a pension to be adequate if a person is able to maintain a reasonable standard of living in retirement and is not driven to poverty. Unfortunately, the situation has developed that there are people who do not qualify for any form of social pension while their income is extremely low since their salaries were low and they paid into private pension funds. Widows in particular in such cases qualify for small widows’ pensions which often just exceed the R82 per month ceiling which has remained unaltered since 1972. It is the question of qualifying for something that is important The hon. the Minister asked: What is the good of it if a person just qualifies for a small pension of, say, R2,50 per month. There are great advantages in qualifying for that pension. For instance, by qualifying for that basic pension, they could receive a supplementary allowance of up to R11 per month depending on their age and the date of application. If they were not in good health, they could obtain a medical certificate and receive another R10 as an attendant’s allowance. Such a person’s pension could therefore be increased by at least R21 per month. This also means that a person could qualify for various benefits and concessions such as travel concessions and medical assistance from a district surgeon. As far as entertainment is concerned, we know that a large number of organizations provide entertainment for pensioners who can produce the green pension card. There is no doubt about it that, if one qualifies for a social pension, one can take advantage of concessions such as radio listeners’ licence concessions. These concessions are granted to people as a result of which they are in some instances in a better financial position than those who fail to qualify for a pension. I believe this is an anomalous position. I think the hon. the Minister should give particular attention to this aspect of persons who receive a small pension from another source. Particularly in view of the trend today for the creation of more pension schemes, we shall eventually have a situation in which very few, if any, will qualify for social pensions. We look forward to the day when everybody will be covered by a pension scheme, but I am afraid that, until such time as the Government takes active steps to institute a pension scheme to provide for those who do not belong to a pension scheme, we are going to have to contend with the means test.

The question of keeping people within the community is another vital aspect which is of the utmost importance in respect of caring for the senior citizens. I should just like to say that the hon. the Minister is absolutely 100% correct in this regard, but then the people have to receive assistance in order to be able to remain within a community. This is the point, because there are people who, as a result of small pensions, are unable to exist within the community. They have to seek accommodation in a home for the aged. Some of them are physically well, but because of their financial circumstances, they have to seek such accommodation.

I next want to refer to the question of an attendant’s allowance in the case of a person who is not well and who produces a medical certificate showing that he is unable to continue attending to his everyday needs without the assistance of some other person. This attendant’s allowance amounts to only R10 per month and has remained unaltered since its inception in 1965. Surely, if we want to help people to remain within the community and not to have to seek accommodation in homes for the aged, we shall have to provide supportive services to assist those people to remain within the community. As the hon. the Minister is also the Minister of Health, I am sure he must agree that the attendant’s allowance of R10 per month paid to those persons who are frail and who require assistance, is in today’s circumstances hopelessly inadequate—and it has remained unaltered.

I now want to refer to the position of persons seeking some form of employment. The means test again militates against the person accepting some form of small-scale employment to try to supplement his social pension, because the limits that apply are so low. A single person accepting any form of employment for which the emolument is more than R42 per month will face a reduction in social pension if that person is a woman under 65 years or a man under 70 years of age. If the remuneration exceeds R82 per month for a single person, he would lose his social pension. This does not encourage those people to seek some form of employment. The self-employed person, even if that person is a man of over 70 years or a woman of over 65 years of age, is also discriminated against in that the profits derived from such self-employment are fully taken into account. These are aspects which I believe deserve serious consideration by the hon. the Minister when various funds are made available to him. One is fully conscious of the fact that his hands are tied by the availability of funds. The whole question centres around the position of the person who tries to remain within the community and then finds he is unable to do so. This means that he must apply for accommodation at one of the central homes for senior citizens.

We know how frustrating it is for a person to have to go from one organization to another trying to find such accommodation. There are long waiting lists at almost all the homes that do provide accommodation for our senior citizens. This position is going to be aggravated. The fact that people are unable to obtain additional funds, receiving only small private pensions and finding that increases in their rent and hotel tariffs—if they are living in hotels—make it necessary for them to find some other means of existence, somewhere else to live, will result in increased pressure on accommodation for those people in our homes for the aged. This means that these homes will have to be enlarged where it is possible for them to be extended. Therefore the question of existing buildings is an important one. In the Durban area a number of organizations have been fortunate enough to purchase buildings, sometimes by means of a loan from the Department of Community Development, and seen to it that those buildings are renovated and altered to meet the requirements laid down by the Department of Community Development and the regulations of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. It is therefore a feasible proposition to encourage the purchase of such buildings to ensure that the old people are provided for.

The whole question of the subsidization of these homes is, however, a matter which is causing a great deal of concern. Last year, when the hon. the Minister of Finance made his speech, he indicated that there would be a change in the system of subsidization and also referred to file marked improvements in the subsidization of homes for the aged and for the handicapped and for children’s homes. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I have many pensioners in my constituency and I think I know their circumstances fairly well. Therefore I should like to convey their sincere thanks to the Government for the increased allowances and pensions which they have received as a result of the recent announcement. Of course it will not be enough, but I think it is a very considerate gesture and improvement on what they have received and are presently receiving. The social pensioners realize that they do not have the right to demand anything, and therefore they are always grateful when their situation is reviewed. For the civil pensioner, there is an increase of 10% or a minimum of R25 a month, which is really most welcome.

Naturally, there always remains the third category of pensioner, namely the long-retired civil pensioner, who believes that he has a claim to something better than he has already received and will receive. The previous hon. Minister assured us that they would look at the situation of these people on an ad hoc basis and that it could not be solved on a firm policy basis. We understand the problem involved in this matter, but we do want to express the hope that the position of these people will be reviewed regularly, because we believe that they have a good case.

I want to dwell for a moment on the officials of this department. I think they are sensitive people who are attuned to the needs of people from all walks of life. I have always found them very sympathetic and helpful. I wonder how many requests they receive every day from people who find themselves in need. Because they are sensitive people with a feeling for this work which they are doing, I suppose that they often spend sleepless nights worrying about the cares of the people who look to them for help, because there are many sad cases. This is a department that works with the aged, or, as they say, the senior citizens of the country, with widows and with children. It is, in other words, emotional work which they do. On the one hand, they must also ensure that the books of the department balance, and therefore they must often be thick-skinned, no matter how sensitive they may be, and they may be regarded as unsympathetic, just because they cannot offer any help, no matter how much they would like to. In my opinion, this is in a certain sense a thankless task, because there are few people who ask for assistance who are really satisfied with what can be done for them. Therefore, I want to thank this staff this afternoon for what they are doing and especially for the way in which they are handling the affairs of this department and looking after the interests of our voters.

The hon. member for Umbilo has just made a plea with regard to the means test. I believe that we all agree with him in this connection. In fact, I should like to show him this page of my speech which I wrote before he spoke in this House, for then he will see that he really said what I also wanted to say. On the other hand, I believe, we agree that when we consider the ceiling of the means test at the moment, namely an amount of R34 000, one cannot imagine that we could tamper with that. It does not appear practical to me to raise that ceiling. However, I do wonder whether there is not a possibility of finding a new formula within the limits of that ceiling. At the moment, the limit is R984 a year, or R82 a month. If one receives more than this, one does not qualify for a social pension. Social pensions already stand at R88 a month, and after 1 October they are being increased to R97 a month.

An important aspect which must be taken into consideration here is the free medical services included in this social pension. This really places the social pensioners in a much more favourable position than the civil pensioner or the person who is self-supporting, but who has to struggle to make ends meet. It seems to me to be an indefensible inequality, and although we know that this matter has been pointed out to the hon. the Minister and the department in the past, we still wonder whether it could not be reconsidered.

I believe that provision should also be made for a certain measure of flexibility within that formula and under the existing ceiling. It happens, for example, that because a pensioner receives R2 a month more as a result of an increase in another pension he receives, he loses his social pension. All in all, such persons suffer losses of up to R38 a month. This is so, because I have handled such cases myself. When this happens, one really feels for those people. The only advice one can give in such a case is that the pensioner should request the giver of his other pension rather to withdraw the concession of R2. This is actually a disservice to the Treasury, but one finds oneself in the dilemma that one does not have any better advice for these people. I now wonder whether it may not be possible to see whether a certain measure of flexibility can be imposed below the present ceiling.

However, I do not think we should approach the matter only from a negative point of view. The hon. member for Umbilo, for example, mentioned one positive aspect, and I want to refer to a few others. I believe that we and especially the department itself should constantly encourage people who are still able to earn a living at this stage to provide in some way for their old age when they are retired. They must make extra provision, because in most cases, the pension funds to which they belong are in the last resort inadequate. This, in my opinion, is the positive message we should convey to them. Then the hon. member for Hillbrow will not have reason to ask how any person could live on the small amount of money which remains of his pension after he has deducted his expenditure. In my opinion, we should make a national attempt and give our people a recipe according to which they can make better and additional provision for their old age, while they still have an opportunity to earn money and perhaps to do something in this connection.

The other positive aspect is naturally the introduction of a national pension scheme, which I think should enjoy high priority. It is especially the compulsory transferability of pension funds which should receive attention in this connection. This would prevent people from drawing part of their pensions and spending it, with the result that their eventual pension is too small to live on. Many of us simply have to be protected against ourselves, and I believe that it should be done in this connection as well.

Another aspect to which I should like to refer concerns the social workers in our hospitals and old-age homes. I believe that these people perform a very important task there. In my constituency there are five old-age homes in the Strand, and I have a good deal of contact with the people who work there. One of these old-age homes is just for the chronically infirm aged. The Conradie Hospital offers hospitalization to many long-term patients, and they treat few acute cases. Then there are also the paraplegic patients. These people need much more help from a social worker than the ordinary patient. Therefore they receive much more time-consuming and comprehensive aid than the ordinary patient. One of the reasons for this is that their contact with their own people is usually very deficient. What parents, children, friends or family do for an ordinary patient, the social worker has to do for these patients. This requires much time and patience. I want to know whether social workers receive practical training as a part of their course to deal with this category of patients. My impression is that this is not the case. I do think that this kind of training should be included in the courses of social workers.

Secondly, I wonder whether the quota of social workers for these hospitals is adequate. I have the impression that it is too small, that there are too few positions for social workers at these hospitals, in some cases at old-age homes as well. The enormous amount of work which has to be done cannot be done properly, therefore, and justice cannot be done to the demands of the profession or to those of the patient. I should be very glad if the hon. the Minister would have this matter investigated. Many of these patients are barely conscious and their everyday care is not sophisticated. However, many are only physically disabled and intellectually quite normal. They need special attention and help to enable them to adapt and rehabilitate themselves. This is a slow process which must be handled by skilled social workers, and I have the impression that their numbers are too small.

Mr. Chairman, we have reached the end of this debate and I want to thank hon. members for their contributions. We had a reasonably fruitful and long discussion and touched on all the aspects of social welfare.

The hon. member for Durban Central, who spoke first today, discussed the annual adjustment of civil pensions, inflation, etc., and raised aspects which are of topical interest. Unfortunately it is impossible to take the cost of living as the criterion. We do to a large extent take into account the increase in the consumer cost. This is an aspect which received thorough consideration. However, pensions cannot be linked to a fixed formula, since there is no fixed factor in the increase of the aged. The Government must take into account the economic climate and can only allocate funds which are available to it. Since the hon. member for Durban Central mentioned the matter concerning civil pensions, I feel that I should say what we envisage with regard to certain civil pensioners and temporary non-White employees and what made us decide to introduce legislation. We want to bring about a consolidation of the old Government Employees Provident Fund and the Non-White Government Employees Fund. These two funds date from earlier years, but the payments are so inadequate that one feels that the Government is obliged to do something about it at this stage and to do it quickly. These people include foresters, people who worked on Government diggings, old road-workers, etc. They were temporary workers who worked for the State almost all their lives. Their annuities are estimated at 1/96th. Sometimes their salaries were small and then-terms of service not very long. Widows’ pensions which are being paid are so meagre that they really caused the Government to feel, after having attended to the matter, that these are two funds to which the Government has to give special attention. The Cabinet then decided that these two funds should be consolidated and that annuities should henceforth be calculated according to a formula in terms of which employees can retire after approximately 30 years of service and receive a pension equivalent to approximately 75% of their final salary. Naturally, the position of people with shorter terms of service will be less favourable, but, of course, the term of service has to be taken into account. The longer the term of service, the better the pension. We all know this. After approximately 10 years of service, the situation of these people will be improved by 35,71% after the two pension funds have been consolidated, and after 16 years’ service, by 62%. Of course, gratuities are being paid to them at the moment. However, these are also of a minimal nature, and for that reason we felt that we should rather abolish gratuities, that the State should make a contribution, that the workers should also make a slightly higher contribution, and that we would then find that after approximately ten years of service, a member who would otherwise have received an annuity of only R797 and a gratuity of R1 476, would now, if he were to invest that gratuity, receive an amount of R103 per month as well as an annuity of R696,72. This amounts to a total amount of R800,44. This is R235, or 35%, less than the annuity of R1 085 which he will receive in terms of the new scheme.

I have before me some of the aspects of the circumstances which have been investigated by the Government. We feel that with an annual contribution of almost R20 million by the Government, these people can be helped to receive a pension on which they can live in future. In that way they will be able to retire at the age of 60 years, or later, while they can continue working if they are physically capable of it. Their widows will all receive 50% of the aforementioned pension.

It is true that certain pensions and allowances were increased with effect from 1 April this year. However, the contributions which these people will have to pay are considerably less than the usual 5%. What is important is that parity has been created among all races. It now depends on the work that people have done and the salaries that they have earned. These measures will effect a considerable improvement in the circumstances of the people in question. As I have already said, this system in itself is going to cost the State R20 million extra from next year. I just want to emphasize that we are not indifferent to cases where the Government has a responsibility for matters which have to be rectified. We all know what the situation is, particularly in view of the current economic situation. Although there is a marked improvement in the economy, we cannot become reckless.

The hon. member for Pietersburg discussed State-controlled old-age homes. He made an exceptionally interesting speech and covered a wide category of subjects. I thank him for that. He demonstrated that he had made a thorough-going study of his subject. He also paid tribute to the organizations doing this type of welfare work. Of course we should never forget these organizations when we are having discussions of this nature in this House. They hear about it and this inspires them even better achievements. After the decision to deduct such a tremendously high percentage from the monthly pension of the infirm aged, it has now been decided to return to the deduction of 66%. This means that the pensioner will receive 33% again. Therefore this matter has now been rectified. I am glad, therefore, to be able to tell the hon. member that his problem in this connection has been solved. I trust too that our elderly people have been reassured in this respect.

I have already discussed the question of subsidizing on a unit basis with the hon. member, as well as with other hon. members. It is true that the new way of subsidizing means that a few of the welfare organizations are being deprived of the profits they used to make. A few welfare organizations made incredible profits owing to their low unit cost. I am told of one case where the profits of a welfare organization amounted to more than R100 000. However, the subsidy is now being calculated on the basic unit cost It is true, of course, that some welfare organizations are being penalized somewhat. Others, however, have gained. However, this is a matter which is being investigated. We are trying to solve this problem in the way in which this department usually solves problems of this nature.

He discussed geriatrics as well. I have already given some attention to that matter. I feel it is a matter I need not discuss any further because I think we have said enough about it.

This brings me to the hon. member for Durban Central and the question of pensioners who retired before 1973. Their pensions were also calculated according to their original salary, of course, and there have been increases from time to time, much better increases than under the old dispensation. There have been considerable increases and there are regular adjustments. We regularly adjust the pensions, but if we had to base their pensions on the present salaries, we would be heading for bankruptcy. Unfortunately, therefore, we cannot do it. The Pension Fund Act falls under the Department of Finance. My department does not administer it The hon. member will have to raise his problem in this connection elsewhere, and I am sure he will do so.

I want to thank the hon. member for Meyerton most sincerely for the good wishes he conveyed to us, and with that I thank other hon. members as well. Quite a few hon. members wished us success. I think we shall need it, and we appreciate it The hon. member discussed old-age homes and funds and proposed a tax subsidy for the aged. This is not a matter which falls under this department Perhaps it is also one of those matters which we can raise elsewhere. As I see it, it is a matter for the Department of Finance. At the moment, the Department of Community Development is paying subsidies on old-age homes, and we work with them. As I have already said, the subsidy which the hon. member has in mind is a kind of tax rebate. I am not unsympathetic towards something of this nature, but when one has class differences in one’s tax resources, one immediately creates problems. I have in any case taken cognizance of this matter.

The hon. member for Innesdal broached a matter which we also discussed earlier, and that is excess. We also discussed that when we were dealing with the question of butter, margarine, smoking, etc. The hon. member discussed alcoholism. I must say that the figures he mentioned can be misleading. Some figures are not scientifically founded. However, I do want to tell him that much more can be done. In the first place, I think an information campaign is necessary which will cover the whole spectrum of our people’s activities. The question of alcohol should be included in this. We are working in this direction. From time to time we have symposiums and conferences. In fact, the National Advisory Board on Rehabilitation affairs held a conference with the Department of Health some time ago at which I was present myself. I can assure hon. members that the results of that conference may very soon be visible in the form of definite progress.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central again raised the matter of a contributory pension scheme. I replied to that question in my initial policy statement. I explained what we were doing, so I am not coming back to that.

I agree with his remarks about the sufferings of the aged, etc. I think we are dealing here with a matter of common interest and that problems are being highlighted to which the Government is not indifferent. I have explained why we cannot do away with the means test. We do not know what the financial obligations would be and how many extra people would apply. Moreover, it is basically true, after all, that it would not help the poorest among the poor in any case. It would not help the really destitute people. In view of those uncertain aspects, some of these arguments are really not quite reasonable. On the one hand, we have someone who, for example, invests R24 600. That is calculated at 4%. On the other hand there is someone who receives R984 per annum, for example, and has no investment. If we now make a calculation, it appears that these two people have been equally well treated in the end. This is an interesting calculation and I should have liked to explain to hon. members how the department calculates these figures. It is not difficult to understand it. As I have already said, the one person’s income from his investment is calculated, an investment which gives him a return of R984 per annum, while the other man—the one who has no investment—is also entitled to receive only R984 per annum from the State. This is, of course, the marginal figure.

The hon. member also raised the question of the inquiry into the breadline, the minimum which one requires to remain alive. Over the years I have often been involved in this kind of investigation, but the moment one investigation has been completed—the Wages Commission of the University of Cape Town years ago is an example—one has to begin with a new one. One is never quite sure. We have to depend largely on ad hoc knowledge, on knowledge of the circumstances of the day. I agree with the hon. member that one cannot really live decently, according to our standards, on the normal pension of an aged person if that is all one has.

†I want to bring it to the attention of the hon. member for Umbilo that it has never been the intention that the payment of a pension means that the State is taking responsibility to see to all one’s needs. The idea of a pension has always been that it is auxiliary and should complement some other form of income that one should get from another source.

There are a lot of people whose pension is all they have.

Yes, I know that. At the same time it is for the State to decide how far it can afford to go. As far as its assessment goes, it takes the breadline as a base. It does take into consideration at least the bare necessities that are necessary, the lowest sum of money that is needed to enable a pensioner to live.

*Some people say we should improve housing so that we can also assist the people in this way. In this regard I want to tell hon. members that a Deputy Minister accompanied the Secretary for Social Welfare and Pensions to Johannesburg last year in order to assist people living there in deplorable circumstances by giving them better housing. This would also help them to utilize their pensions better. However, some of these people told the Deputy Minister and the Secretary: “You will have to remove me from here in a coffin. I simply will not leave.” They are all too firmly rooted there and they want to stay. We cannot get them away from there. This is a human aspect which we have to take into account in expressing opinions on matters of this nature.

†The hon. member for Von Brandis spoke about our senior citizens and asked me to stick to the term “senior citizen”; I think this is the correct way in which we should refer to these people. The term “old-age person” generally implies that he is already isolated. He has not been thrown to the wolves, but is in any event no longer part of the community, and he should be part of the community until the end of his life. I therefore quite agree with the hon. member on that point.

*The hon. member discussed housing as well. He furnished figures which do not differ much from ours. At present, our department cannot solve this problem, although we do believe that much more thinking will have to go into this matter. We shall most definitely promote the provision of group housing for elderly people. In Disa House here in Cape Town, for example, people live in very pleasant circumstances indeed. I have already explained to the hon. member that there are people who create problems for us because they do not want to move out of undesirable accommodation. It is not always so easy to argue with an old person if he tells you that he has decided to stay there.

†The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North spoke about his model city with its 12% aged people. I think hon. members should take note of that. We like to have towns like that which are so hospitable and which welcome these people. We should like people to know about places where they are really welcome. So I am very glad he has made that offer. He spoke about the senior citizens’ club and he specifically lauded the efforts of certain people who made very large contributions over the years towards welfare. I am not thinking now of specific people, but the fact is that from time to time we should mention these people. This is the place to show these people that what they do is seen and appreciated at all times.

The hon. member for Hillbrow spoke about pensions for the aged. I think I have already answered that as far as it is supplementary assistance. He also spoke about a lottery. The Government is against any kind of lottery.

Any kind?

I should perhaps have qualified “any kind”. However, I do not want to go into that. This issue is very controversial these days with the Government having its defence bonds and bonus obligation bonds. From time to time people come forward with this idea. I do not really want to pursue it any further. I have stated what Government policy is. It is no use discussing it. We are not for a State lottery. We do not think that a lottery will solve the problem. I do not think we should discuss welfare legislation and regulations here. Regulations are really never discussed in this House. In any event, I think the matter was debated last year.

When do you anticipate the regulations coming into effect?

Towards the end of the year. They have been published. Hon. members can still comment on them.

Has there been a reaction?

They will eventually come into effect and be acted upon. The comments we have already received are receiving attention at the moment. I do not think it is going to take long before we would be able to promulgate the regulations finally.

I should like to have this whole concept to be referred to…

Yes, the hon. member did mention that, but it is not for me to say. Does that mean that this committee must now have new terms of reference? I cannot really answer the hon. member on that.

*The hon. member spoke of child-battering.

†He talked about the baby-battering syndrome. We undertook a very thorough investigation into that and I have received a report. It is something of which the incidence is perhaps slowly increasing. We have many instances of it in South Africa. On the basis of that report I shall gauge what actions I shall have to take. However, for the time being I can only tell him that this matter is receiving our attention. I am still going through the report. It is a very difficult subject. It has to do with the psychology of the family as such, with the psychology of very young parents and with many other factors.

*The danger signs are young parents who have a number of children within a short period of time, young couples who are constantly dependent on their parents for money and advice, repeated crisis situations, isolation of the family, over-critical parents, a child who is afraid of adults, compulsive parents without warmth, instable parents who are passively depressed, moody or immature, etc. We suggest special regional registers and compulsory reporting of these cases and, as I have said with regard to the Children’s Act, the establishment of special courts. We want to afford those people who report these cases, legal protection. In other words, we have many ideas about this, but we will have to have a multi-professional team who can test these parents, because they are psychologically aberrant. This is therefore quite a problem. Of course we also want to ask the welfare organizations to examine this syndrome further, because we have quite a number of cases of this in South Africa, but people are afraid to report them.

†Even medical men, when encountering such a case, used to remain silent in the past. I do not know what the attitude is going to be in the future. It is a syndrome, a sickness in society to which we should at least apply our minds. As far as that is concerned hon. members can rest assured for the time being that at the moment we are applying our minds and giving attention to this particular problem.

Mr. Chairman, may I suggest to the hon. the Minister the establishment of a clinic for tobaccolics.

I think we have had enough of tobaccolics and excessive tobacco smoking. I cannot elaborate now on the necessity of clinics for people who smoke too much. Does the hon. member realize what a furore I would create if I acceded to his request? Let us leave that for the time being. Let the people smoke in peace until 1982.

*The hon. member for Springs mentioned a very interesting matter. I have already referred to this and I do not want to go into it in detail now. But I have a number of notes on the matter because it is one of the things in which I am especially interested. It is not because I am old, but I think it is a very important aspect, geriatric medical services to which we should give attention with regard to preparation for retirement. In the Western World our people went through a process of going grey. Percentagewise they are growing much older. We should, however, remember that even if they go grey, even if they grow old, this is still part of the life cycle and is sometimes just as important as the time when one was a child. It sometimes comprises a quarter of one’s life and sometimes more than a quarter of one’s life. We do not always regard it thus. But I cannot speak about this at length again. We shall look after these people. We ordered a thorough investigation and have received a fairly good report on this. I am studying the report. It contains very interesting data. It indicates, amongst other things, how old people spend their time. 30,5% are still doing profitable work; that is, out of a group of high-grade officials of whom 1 300 have retired. Therefore this might not be completely representative of the general public. The figure here, however, is 30,5%. For gardening the figure is 21,1% and for other hobbies such as radio and TV, 10,8%—they do not say how many watch Heidi—reading and writing, 10,2%, etc. 57,3% of the group thought that they were prepared. I do not think that amongst the ordinary people on the much lower level there were as many as 57% who were prepared. They merely progress towards old age and usually wait too long before they decide to do something about the situation. In my opinion something should be done about this matter, but at the same time I want to say that I believe that it is the task of the Department of National Education to inform people in this regard. A Committee of Inquiry did, in fact, make certain recommendations in this regard: inter alia that an additional commission be appointed under control of the National Cultural Council and that this commission be called the Commission for Preparation for Retirement. The commission must consist of the representatives of various bodies concerned with preparation for retirement, as well as people who have expert knowledge with regard to the matter. The proposed commission must promote programmes for preparation for old age and retirement.

Without going into the merits of the report, we are agreed that the matter with which we are dealing here, is primarily an educational matter and therefore falls more into the field of operations of the Department of National Education and those of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions.

† We are not trying to pass the buck, but we feel that the Department of National Education is a more proper department to deal with this situation. Therefore it is more appropriate that they should attend to this problem.

*That department will probably take the matter further if the findings and recommendations of the committee are accepted. I do not believe that there is any reason why they should not accept them. In my opinion the report is important enough to be published, and hon. members will probably want to know now why we are not doing so, because it is everyone’s interests. But we must remember that it will have to be translated first and then we will have to find the funds for the publication. We do not have the funds to publish it whenever we want.

The hon. member for Umbilo once again raised the question of civil pensions. I believe that I would only confuse this House if I were to expound in detail the calculation to which I referred a moment ago. In actual fact it only means that the hon. member’s charges regarding civil pensions are not quite true. Therefore we cannot agree with the hon. member in that regard.

I spoke of social pensions.

The hon. member referred to civil pensions.

†The hon. member also referred to the fact that some people who receive civil pensions are at a disadvantage because if they receive R1 more a month, it disqualifies them for the social pension.

That is the case with private pensions. A civil pension is paid to a person who worked in the Civil Service.

Whether a person receives a civil pension or a private pension, I think it remains the basic right of a person to refuse a pension. But we did not always think that way.

*As regards the question of the survey of our aged, which must be carried out, as the hon. member for Springs asked, I merely want to say that I shall discuss the matter with him later on. I believe the hon. member covered a fairly wide field and I do not think it is necessary for us to go into the other matters he mentioned today. There is still ample opportunity for much research in the sphere of social welfare and pensions, as well as in regard to many other aspects in regard to which the State has to do its duty towards the public.

The hon. member for Umbilo, the hon. member for Von Brandis and others all referred to war veterans’ pensions and the attendants’ allowances. Just as in the case of the means test I want to concede in this regard, too, that we should perhaps start thinking about some of these suggestions. I am not going to reject them all out of hand. The attendant’s allowance which was increased in 1974 from R8 to R10, is only meant to be supplementary. Many of the people who receive an attendant’s allowance do not have attendants. It is merely intended to supplement their social pensions, as is the case with the war veteran’s pension. This is what it really amounts to. Because these people sometimes grow very old and have to receive assistance, one feels that one should reconsider the attendant’s allowance of R10. This is a matter we cannot consider this year, because the budget has already been presented. As far as war veterans’ pensions are concerned, there are at present 14 836 White war veterans and 9 300 non-White war veterans who receive a war veterans’ pension. If the war veterans’ pensions are increased by only R5 per month and those of non-Whites by R3, an additional amount of R1¼ million will have to be voted. Hon. members know how we shall have to plead for that. However, it will be necessary to think along the lines of increasing war veterans’ pensions in order to assist these people.

I feel that there is a category of war veteran that should be considered. I do not know whether you are going to agree with me about that, Mr. Chairman. They are the war veterans who fought either on the British side or on the Boer side during the Second War of Independence. It does not matter on whose side they fought We will not speak about that now. Some of these people are already more than 100 years old and I wonder whether there is not a general feeling that we should make a special concession to these people. If that is the general feeling, I know that I have a stronger case for obtaining such a special concession for them. They will not be with us for much longer and are disappearing fast. The means test is at any rate no longer valid in their case. There will, of course, immediately be stronger pressure. I see that hon. members opposite are already preparing to exert pressure on the next aspect as soon as they get the opportunity. I feel that one should not necessarily succumb to pressure. However, if one is convinced that the person who wants to convince one is right, that matter should be discussed with him. One should decide whether the person is right and then decide about the issue. War veterans of other wars perhaps have the same right to say that they made the same sacrifices. However, I am speaking here about a gesture to people some of whom are already older than 100 years. There are not many of them and therefore the financial implications are minor. If hon. members agree with me about this, I will also think along those lines. [Interjections.] There are only 240 of these people. [Interjections.] They fought in the Second Boer War and quite a few of them are older than 100 years.

I should like to mention the number of war veterans who receive an attendants allowance. I have mentioned what the position is with regard to those who receive attendant’s allowances, but I do want to say that if we now double that allowance—and to really improve it meaningfully, it has to be doubled—it will cost us about R1½ million per annum at this stage. Hon. members therefore have to agree with me that I also have a problem, like the hon. the Minister of Agriculture. I think, however, that he has many more problems. I spent half my time helping his farmers with margarine, smoking, etc., [Interjections.] At this stage we cannot do much about these two matters. However, they are matters which deserve our attention. Hon. members can rely on my support. I do not know whether it is necessary to take this any further.

The hon. member for False Bay, like other hon. members, made a very good contribution. He also conveyed his appreciation to the department and especially to the officials. I might just mention that this department often received more than 1 000 letters per day. All those letters must be attended to. I do not even want to say how many of those letters require my personal attention. This is a department that has expanded enormously, a department that makes heavy demands on its officials, and it does not have a complaining staff.

I want to congratulate the hon. member for False Bay on his speech. It was a very perceptive one. Some of the matters he raised are ones that he and I have already discussed. The question of flexibility is something that troubles all of us. For example, someone who receives a disability grant and is then prepared, in spite of his disability, to go and work somewhere, forfeits the social pension as soon as his income exceeds a certain amount. I feel that the fact that such a person is productive should count in his favour. However, this is a difficult matter. As soon as we lay down rules by which concessions are made possible in some fairly logical cases, it might create financial problems for us. I am very glad that the hon. member for False Bay mentioned this matter.

We should encourage all our people, especially middle-aged people. Now that we have accepted the amending legislation on the remuneration of members of Parliament and Administrators—which includes gratuities—this encouragement applies in our case as well. All of us should save something for our old age, especially because we do not know which financial problems the State may have in the future. We are living in a heterogeneous country, a country in which we as Whites will have to reconsider many things in future, including our standard of living.

The hon. member also raised the issue of the training of social workers. In the particular sense in which he referred to this matter, he can once again approach my department freely. This is a department which can always make meaningful use of knowledge and expertise with regard to nursing and social work.

With this I think I have replied more or less fully to all the matters raised by hon. members. Perhaps not all hon. members are satisfied. However, this is the best I can do at this stage.

Now I come to something which on the one hand is a pleasure to me, but on the other hand is something I regret. I want to pay tribute to Mr. H. P. J. van Vuuren, the Secretary for Social Welfare and Pensions. Mr. Van Vuuren is to leave the department in the foreseeable future because he has been chosen to occupy a higher post. Perhaps I might as well say it—surely it is not so much of a secret—that Mr. Van Vuuren has been appointed a member of the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Van Vuuren started his career in the Civil Service on 1 November 1944, in the magistrate’s division of the Department of Justice. Having served in various places in the country, he was appointed to the legal division of that Department on 1 August 1960, where he was for several years involved with the legislation of the department and played an important role in various very important measures. On 1 April 1968 he was appointed as Deputy Secretary to the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions and on 1 August 1970 as Secretary for this department. It was my privilege as a very young Deputy Minister to have met Mr. Van Vuuren during those years. By virtue of his office he was at the forefront of a whole series of important developments in the department, for example the development and expansion of South Africa’s measures for the combating and eliminating of the drug peril, the revision of all pension schemes controlled by the department and the restructuring of the department’s general welfare services, a step which last year led to the acceptance of three important measures, i.e. the Fund Raising Act, the National Welfare Act and the Social and Associated Workers Act Furthermore new areas were opened up under his leadership with regard to financing of welfare services by the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. Furthermore, his term of office with the department comes to an end this year with the acceptance of various measures relating to important pension matters. I believe hon. members know what I am speaking about I believe that on behalf of this House I can thank Mr. Van Vuuren sincerely for all the years he served this department. In future he will be connected with the Civil Service in a more indirect way. I believe that he will be in a position to utilize his undoubted talents fully and to good effect in that sphere as well. On behalf of this House I want to wish him and Mrs. Van Vuuren everything of the best for the years ahead.

Vote agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.