Mr. Speaker, I move without notice—

1. (a) notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No. 33, Government business shall have precedence on Friday, 7 March 1980;
2. (b) notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No. 31, private members’ business shall have precedence from 11h00 on Friday, 21 March 1980.

Agreed to.

As far as the business of the House for next week is concerned I wish to point out again that the Additional Appropriation Bill will be dealt with on Monday, 3 March. The Railway Budget Speech will be delivered on Wednesday, 5 March. However, the Railway Budget debate will only commence on Monday, 10 March.

The Third Reading of the Part Appropriation Bill will be taken on Thursday, 6 March.

The private members’ motions which were to have been discussed on Friday, 7 March, are being postponed to Friday, 21 March. I just wish to point out that the private members’ motions are not merely being moved forward, but that those which were to have been discussed on 7 March are being postponed to 21 March. On Friday, 7 March, the House will consider the report of the Cillié Commission.

For the rest we shall continue to follow the Order Paper, as printed. I trust that hon. members will have a very interesting time next week.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

I am particularly grateful to have the privilege of moving this very important motion here this morning. It deals with very important and very fine people in our society. When I say that these are important and fine people—those who are 60 years and over—I am not saying they are important merely because they are being discussed in this debate this morning. During the Second Reading debatenor on the Part Appropriation Bill over the past week, I have been present in my bench as regularly as possible. It was a pleasure for me to hear how virtually speaker after speaker on both sides of this House raised this subject in their speeches. Consequently I want to thank every speaker who, earlier this week, has already in advance and by implication pledged his support for this motion. Nor does this motion deal with these fine people merely because they have been discussed during the past week. This group of people is discussed from generation to generation, for it is they, after all, who have laid the firm foundations on which we are able to build today. It is they who were very important in the eyes of one of the greatest poets of all times. When he observed these people growing old he felt compelled to capture their image in beautiful poetry. He made use of the finest imagery from nature to describe these people.

So this poet, when examining a human being from head to foot, saw that the first faculty to change as one grew older was the eyes. The eyes of young people may be compared to the sun, the moon and the stars that glitter brightly. As age advances it is, he wrote, like a shower of rain and a cloud that dulls the eye. This poet compared the powerful arms of the young man and the arms of a middle-aged man and one who had become weak and old to the keepers that proguarded the house in days gone by. He wrote that the legs of the strong men become bowed in their old age. He saw the ears of man as the door of the house that is opened to be able to catch the grinding of the mill, the sounds of the street and of birds singing. But later these doors shut for man. This poet was a marvelous man who perceived many things, even the smallest things in life. So it did not escape his notice that the whitest blossoms of all are those of the almond-tree. So when he described the elderly person he compared his grey hairs to the blossoms of the almond-tree. He described the last chapter of an old person’s life as a silver cord which is loosed. He sees man in the prime of his life as a golden bowl, broken in his old age. He also saw the life of a person as a wheel constantly turning until it eventually stops. He wrote as follows about the people with whom this motion is concerned—

He continues—

That is why it is a great privilege for me this morning to refer to the first part of this motion—

We thank the Government for its continued concern for the interests of these people. At present approximately 300 000 White men and women in the Republic of South Africa are over the age of 60 and 65 years respectively. Of this number approximately half receive old-age and ex-servicemen’s pensions from the department. Of the total budget of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions, i.e. R499 710 000 for the financial year ending on 31 March 1979, approximately half, i.e. R225 million, was paid out in social pensions and grants to White beneficiaries. It is interesting to know that when the old-age pension scheme was introduced in 1929 the maximum pension was R5 per month compared to the present R97 per month. The Government has also seen to it that the increase in pensions has kept pace with the increase in consumer prices. So, for example, pensioners received a maximum pension of R41 per month in 1972. According to the information at my disposal, the consumer price index figure rose by 119% between 1972 and 1 October 1979, while social pensions increased by 136%. Consequently this represents a gain of 17%. Unfortunately, however, there are spheres in which this 136% is not applicable. One of these is the tremendous increases that have taken place on the local government level. I have in mind here the municipal obligations which have increased tremendously, to such an extent that some elderly people believe that they are being taxed out of their homes.

I want to make it very clear that the local governments do not deliberately want this state of affairs. They do not simply tax persons according to their own wishes and desires, but are dependent on rates, the collection of electricity and water tariffs, etc. The sources from which these local managements purchase water and electricity, such as the Rand Water Board and Escom for example, are constantly increasing their prices as well, and then local governments are compelled to adjust to them. Consequently tariffs then have to be increased and this hits particularly the aged, the pensioners, who do not have a large income, exceptionally hard. It is in this regard that I want to make a suggestion to the hon. the Minister today. I do not believe in playing Father Christmas either, or suggesting that the hon. the Minister should be one, but what I want to suggest for his consideration is a direct expenditure which can subsequently be recovered.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister something. During the discussion of his Vote last year I made the same request and the then hon. Minister was sympathetic and well-disposed to my request. So he told me afterwards. My request is that a housing grant or housing subsidy be paid to social pensioners who live in their own homes, in their own environment and in the area in which they may have grown old, as it is being paid to the aged who are accommodated in old-age homes. I am now referring to the normal aged, not the infirm aged. It could be something like R10 per month per person or R20 per couple. This could cost the department in the region of R7 or R8 million, or at most R10 million per annum. However, I want to say with conviction that the department will be in a position to recover that amount of money by a saving on the establishment of old-age homes. If this is done, the department will gradually find that the demand for the establishment of homes for the aged will decline and that they will save that expenditure.

One should like to keep these fine people with one in the community as far as possible. I can call to mind a few of them in my community. All hon. members will have them—characters, the wonderful old people. I am thinking, for example, of Mr. Willem Dohman, an ex-serviceman of the Second World War. Unfortunately he does not qualify for a pension. Mr. Willem Dohman frequently comes to me and says he wants to go and fight on the border. I always tell him—“But Sir, you can’t do that, you are too old.” And he replies: “My dear fellow, let me assure you that every shot I fire will be right through the head.” This is the patriotism of these people. This old man does not qualify for a pension and therefore I feel that I should break a lance this morning for the ex-servicemen who fought in the Second World War and have reached a certain age. Their position should be reassessed.

These people also set us a magnificent example of thrift. So, for example, I am thinking of “Oom” Gert, who regularly comes to have a cup of coffee with me in the mornings when I am at home. At a stage when postal tariffs were increased—I think it was from 2c to 2½c—“Oom” Gert arrived at my house one morning with a huge sheet of postage stamps in his shirt pocket. I found this a little strange. I asked him: “But do you write so many letters?” He replied: “No, my friend, but you are a member of Parliament, surely you know that the price of stamps is going up next month?” He had bought himself a good supply. [Interjections.]

I am thinking of Jock Forsythe, the old Scot who came to South Africa from Scotland at the age of 18 and became a wonderful citizen of South Africa. He became as it were a patriot of South Africa. This old Scot is very dear to me because every New Year’s Day he would put on his kilt and come up my driveway in his motorcar at two o’clock in the morning. He would knock at my door and when I opened it “Oom” Jock would be standing on the stoep with his bottle of Scotch and two glasses. When I invited him in, he would tell me “Let us drink to the New Year, which is only two hours’ old.” This New Year’s eve was different, because we buried “Oom” Jock last year.

Now my request is that in these times of prosperity we are experiencing we should give special consideration to these people. We should bear in mind that 30, 40, 50 years ago it was these people who kept alive the wool-sheep flocks, the Merino flocks on the scrublands of the Karoo so that their offspring could subsequently continue with this fine industry. It was this generation of people who, when maize was 50c per bag, were not afraid to throw the yoke over the shoulders of the oxen, tighten the strop around its neck, sink the plough deep into the soil entrust the seed to the good earth, despite a poor production price. From that they left their heritage to us. It is also this generation of people, many of them from the year 1933, who could not hold out in the rural areas. They had to make their way to the cities to try and find a new livelihood there. When they arrived there, they found that they had again lost their way in a new and strange world and had to struggle to find their feet. They found their feet, and it is they who turned to industry and who helped to keep the wheels of our country’s growing industries turning. It is they who, when the gold price was so low, kept open the stopes and the tunnels, thousands of feet beneath the earth’s surface so that we today can see how gold glitters in all its facets, and the finest facet to us is the wonderful gold price. They made this possible for us.

That is why it has been a privilege for me to move the motion this morning. I did not deal specifically with certain aspects because other speakers, I trust on both sides of this House, will do so. I simply want to conclude by saying that while we are in this position, while these people are with us, let us associate ourselves with the poet who said—

Mr. Speaker, I think one will have great difficulty in finding anything really on which to differ with the hon. member for Meyerton in so far as his plea for the aged is concerned or in so far as his approach to the subject of the aged is concerned. Whereas I was on the one hand impressed with the poetic manner in which he projected what he said, I was perhaps more impressed with the sincerity with which he said it. I appreciate the approach he has adopted to this subject.

In the light of that particular approach, we would like to be perhaps a little more specific in regard to some of the things we would like to do. Therefore I would like to move an amendment to the hon. member’s motion as follows—

1. (1) to review immediately the means test applicable to aged social pensioners;
2. (2) to introduce an indexed bond which protects the cash invested therein against inflation;
3. (3) to increase social pensions;
4. (4) to place pensions in respect of war veterans of past wars on the same basis as the present pension available to members of the Defence Force.”.

I propose to motivate this. I want to start off by saying right away that we have an approach to the whole subject whereby we would like to create a society in South Africa which is a society that cares, a society that is concerned about people, a society that is not prepared to stand by and say that some must suffer because that is the way the cookie crumbles, some must suffer because that is the way in which the economy works. The economy does not have to work in such a way that people have to suffer. If one has a correct approach to the economy one will in fact not have such suffering taking place. I venture to suggest that the judgment of a society is based not on how it treats the rich, not on how it implements income tax, but on how it treats and is concerned about aged people and the infirm. That is the way in which one judges, viz. a determination of whether one actually treats underprivileged people in a manner which is in accordance with the respect they deserve.

What can we actually do in order to implement these specific things? There can be no question about it that the first issue—and the hon. member for Meyerton referred to it—is that provision has to be made for aged people when they can no longer work. There are a number of ways of doing that. The one thing that quite clearly needs to be done, and needs to be done with a degree of speed, is that there should be a contributory pension scheme for all South Africans. Every person should, in accordance with what he earns, contribute to such a scheme, so that provision can be made for old age as a result of the contributions of an individual—not as a result of an act of charity, but as a result of a contribution which each individual in the country makes to a contributory pension scheme. That seems to be a basic essential in South Africa and is a requirement for a society that cares about people.

The second point which needs to be dealt with is in respect of private pensions which exist. Nobody wants to suggest that there should not be private pensions. On the contrary, that is an integral part of any such contributory pension scheme for the country as a whole. There must, however, be transferability of pensions. There can be no question about it, because without transferability of pensions there is a tremendous handicap when the day comes when people have to live on their pensions as such. One of the very real problems which exist is that there is always a real gap between what a man or a woman earns while they are working and what they in fact have when they retire. In the United Kingdom there have been plans in order to try and close that gap, and we too should also try and close that gap. We can only do that by this type of pension scheme that we are suggesting. I want to give some examples. The figures for the United Kingdom indicate that in 1973 the pension for a single person was just over one-quarter of the average take-home pay that he received, but it was almost one-third by December 1975. The pension for a married couple in 1973 was 41% of the take-home pay. By 1976 this figure had risen to 49%. This is very important, because there is no reason why living standards should dramatically drop upon retirement. There is no doubt that in our community living standards do drop for many people when they retire. This is an unjust concept, because one should try to keep to a standard that one has had all one’s life.

I also want to touch specifically on the means test. I will do so very briefly because one of my colleagues will deal with this aspect in detail. There is no doubt that the means test needs to be looked at urgently and it should be looked at in the budget, because inflation is a factor which has made the means test as it exists in South Africa utterly irrelevant. If we do not look at the means test in the coming budget, all the fine words of the hon. member for Meyerton, who is a member of the governing party, are meaningless and are ashes unless the means test for pensioners is looked at in the budget. I think it is priority which needs to be dealt with and something we cannot leave alone. However, the comment I have received on virtually every letter that I have ever directed to the hon. the Minister and his predecessors in respect of pensions, is that the social pensions are not intended to provide all the income for the individual, but that people must make provision for their own old age. That is the answer I get in every single case that I put to the hon. the Minister. How does one, however, make provision for pension in your old age if you are required to save and if you are hit by inflation at a rate at which we are being hit at the present time? There should be no misunderstanding about it that I think inflation is not going to go down. In the years that lie ahead, with the problems facing the Republic, with the question of increased defence expenditure and all that sort of thing, nobody can be optimistic with regard to the rate of inflation. If one is not optimistic in regard to the rate of inflation, what is being done in order to make sure that the people being encouraged to save in South Africa have purchasing power left at the end when they have to use their savings for their retirement? I have pleaded here repeatedly, and I want to plead again today, for the institution of an index bond for the aged so that there will be provision made for people in their old age.

I do not pretend that this is something new or unique. It has been done in other countries. It is being done at this very moment. Let me give an illustration. I have with me pamphlets of two schemes which exist in the United Kingdom. Let me quote from one of them—

Is that a Government scheme?

Yes, it is a Government scheme. I shall give the hon. the Minister the certificates, as I have given them to the hon. the Minister of Finance. The hon. the Minister of Finance is Mr. Goldfinger, but he does not want to part with the gold. I think the hon. the Minister has a softer heart.

The hon. the Minister may have the heart, but he does not have the gold.

Yes, Sir, I understand that problem. I am fully aware of it.

Sir, as I indicated, there is another scheme, also a Government scheme, in terms of which one saves a regular amount every month. The amount saved then goes up by the amount of the increase in the consumer price index so that when one retires, the money is available for one and it will have the purchasing power one wanted it to have when one saved the money. This involves, I agree, a commitment on the part of the Government to make money available to meet this kind of commitment. It is, however, done in other countries. It is done in the United Kingdom and in Europe. It is not something that is abnormal. The basic concept behind it is that one reserves the purchasing power for the time when the man concerned retires. That is what is behind it and I think it is fundamental.

Let me put another scheme to the hon. the Minister. Let him see whether he can get some of the gold which colleagues of his in the Cabinet have. Why not have a gold certificate in South Africa in terms of which there will actually be no cost to the State since what it will involve will be buying gold at the current price. That certificate can then be used and cashed at any time against the gold price as it is then.

Who buys the certificate?

The saver buys the certificate. He goes to the post office and buys a certificate which represents an ounce of gold, half an ounce of gold or whatever it may be. When it comes to cashing it, he will find he has some protection against inflation. Admittedly, he takes a risk in respect of the gold price.

That is the point.

Yes, but it is exactly the same as buying a Kruger rand. Here, however, is the rub: At the present moment when one buys or sells Kruger rands that is taxable. The attitude adopted by the hon. the Minister of Finance is that one is to be taxed on it even if one has saved it for one’s old age. What we need is a means whereby people can save for their old age and which is not taxable. The truth is that when the gold price goes up, a very substantial part of any increase is purely the result of inflation. If one wants the proof of that, all one has to do is to compare the graph of the increase in the gold price in Swiss francs and the DM with the increase in the price in dollars and in rands.

That is the truth of it. Gold does not go up in price because it has some magical quality. Gold goes up in price because we are living in an uncertain and inflationary age. One of the reasons why we cannot get this across to the Government is because we in South Africa have actually been tremendously lucky, throughout our history, in that we have never had the kind of inflation that we are now starting to have, the kind of inflation that other countries in the world have had. I just want to give one simple example, that of Israel in its present situation. There the rate of inflation is such as to make it impossible to cater for the situation with local currency. As the result of the removal of exchange control because of free market people going overboard, if one may use that term, people are now allowed to hold dollars and everybody in Israel wants to hold dollars, not Israeli pounds, or shekels as they are now going to be called. How does such a situation develop? Let us take the situation in Germany. Germany has had two waves of inflation which completely destroyed its currency. Let me furnish a few figures to illustrate this. At one stage, at the end of the First World War, the dollar was equivalent to 4,2 marks. It then went to eight marks, then 290 marks and then 9 150 marks. It continued in its upward trend until eventually, in November 1923, the United States dollar was equivalent to 4,2 billion marks. That is the kind of thing that people with a continental background think about. That is the problem one has to protect oneself against. That is why, when one asks people to save today for a time when they will have to use their money to maintain themselves, one must give them an opportunity of investing in a medium which gives them complete security, or if not complete security, at least the closest a Government can come to that.

Was the dollar not very strong in those days?

That is right.

So could they not link their savings to the dollar?

In Germany, however, the people who invested in gold in those days were the people who survived the kind of inflation that hit Germany in 1923. Not that I smoke cigars, but at home I still have a cigar-box full of notes, tens of billions of Deutsche marks emanating from that period. That is what happened to currency. It is not a question of linking it to the dollar. I am not suggesting that certificate is linked to the dollar.

Did your family then invest in the dollar? But where are you getting those dollars from?

Where am I getting them from? My family unfortunately suffered from that inflation. That is why I am able to tell the hon. the Minister today that he should take those precautions. Funnily enough, I actually know what it means to be hungry. Perhaps the hon. the Minister has fortunately enough not had that experience, and I do not wish it on him either. That is, however, what happens at such a time. That is why one can speak with a degree of feeling about the fact that there must be protection against inflation if one is asking people to save. I should now like to deal with some other matters in relation to this, if I may. There are, in fact, two further matters.

Firstly, I think that there are some other benefits that aged people should get in South Africa. Because the hon. the Minister is also Minister of Health, the first I want to refer to is the plight of the chronically sick aged in South Africa. This plight is one of the most serious imaginable. The provisions for the chronically sick aged in South Africa are completely and utterly inadequate. I wish I had more time to enlarge on this, but I do appeal to him to make provision for the chronically sick aged. The second aspect I want to mention is the fact that aged people require medical attention in a very real sense. We do have a hospital service in South Africa, and there is a degree of free hospitalization for those who cannot afford treatment in South Africa. My appeal, however, involves the fact that the aged have particular problems with sight and hearing ailments. I should like to see the old-age pensioners in South Africa being allowed to get their spectacles and hearing aids free of charge, without having to suffer a certain degree of humiliation. That appeal I also want to make to the hon. the Minister.

There are two further aspects I want to mention. The first is the question of housing. The hon. member for Meyerton correctly points to the good work done by the old-aged homes. I am all in favour of that. I am also all in favour of greater expenditure, but I do regard institutionalization as a last resort for old people. I should like to see housing for elderly people provided in the environment in which they are accustomed to live. I should like to see housing provided for them in an area in which they are used to the amenities and where they are in close proximity to where they want to be. The concept of providing the housing there is, to my mind, fundamental.

There is one last thing I should like to discuss. That is the plight of the war veterans. The 58th congress of the S.A. Legion was held in April 1979. On that occasion the legion expressed its concern with the delay on the part of the Government in equalizing war disablement pensions and allowances between member pensioners and consolidated pensioners as well as widows. Attention was also drawn to a whole series of facts, all of which I can give the hon. the Minister. Unfortunately I do not have the time now to read them all out I put it to the hon. the Minister, however, that war veterans of World War I and World War II cannot be left in this state any longer.

What is remarkable is that as recently, I believe, as the beginning of February this year—and I do not blame this hon. Minister for it—the S.A. Legion had no response to their request on this matter, no indication of what was going to happen. That does not seem to me to be right.

Do you have all your facts correct?

I have it here in writing. It was given to me up to date. The date here is 8 February 1980. I quote from this letter—

Now, if that is wrong, I accept it, but that is the information given me. That is not the issue, however. The real issue here is that we have war veterans who are not being treated as they should be treated, people who volunteered for service in the defence of their country, and I make the point that the way in which one treats the veterans of past wars is psychologically important for people who are expected to fight present wars. Therefore, I conclude by appealing to the hon. the Minister to do something for the people who volunteered to defend South Africa in World War I and World War II.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I am very disappointed in the hon. member for Yeoville. [Interjections.] I shall tell him why. I ask the hon. member just to give me the chance to do so. The hon. member for Yeoville placed a motion on the Order Paper which should have come up for discussion on Friday, 7 March. However, at the start of the discussion of the motion by the hon. member for Meyerton, we learned that the hon. member for Yeoville had withdrawn his motion. However, believe it or not, he has now moved that motion of his as an amendment to the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton! The hon. member for Yeoville did not have the courage to move his motion here on 7 March so that we could face him man to man. Now the hon. member wants to distract attention from the fine motion of the hon. member for Meyerton. The hon. member for Yeoville went on a tour.

Order! The amendment of the hon. member for Yeoville is in order. I have accepted it as such.

Mr. Speaker, I accept that. I accept that the hon. member’s amendment is in order. However, by changing his motion into an amendment, I say that the hon. member is trying to distract attention from the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton. [Interjections.]

In any event, we shall confine ourselves to the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton. The hon. member for Yeoville, however, went on a world tour. This is typical of the hon. member, however. He makes pleas and gives the impression of being a champion of the system of free enterprise. However, every now and again we see socialism creeping into his ideas. I want to put it to the hon. member for Yeoville that South Africa will not become a socialist State; nor will South Africa become a welfare State. We are giving attention to many of the things that the hon. member mentioned, for example the means test, the increase in old-age pensions, which takes place annually, etc.

I am very grateful to the hon. member for Meyerton for this motion that he introduced. I am grateful that this House can spend time on the welfare of our aged. It is a good thing for a nation not to forget its aged. A nation that forgets its aged, is an ungrateful one. We cannot forget the buildings of yesterday, and therefore we cannot forget those who built them either.

I accept that it is not an easy time in one’s life. There is the knowledge that one’s period of service has ended and the knowledge that one is no longer so involved in the activities of the community. Then there is also the loneliness which arises as one’s circle of friends becomes ever smaller. We have the teacher who year after year stood in front of his class and sent people off on their journey through life, and now he has grown old and no longer has that contact. There is the journalist and the editor who regularly regaled their reading public with all the information and news. There is the politician who only has a vague recollection of the audiences he addressed and the applause he received.

In the Word of God, the Bible, we find the lament of the aged person. We find a beautiful lament in Psalm 71, verse 9—

This is a cry of lamentation to the Almighty, but now I also want to present it as a cry from the aged to the community. This places an obligation on each of us, not only on the State, but also on those who are younger and have the ability, and it also places an obligation on the many welfare organizations and other organizations that exist in this country to provide that charitable service and to pay attention to our aged. Everything must not simply be left to the State, as the hon. member for Yeoville requested. We must also involve the community in the care of the aged.

I want to point out three things now. I believe that our aged must have an adequate income in order to provide them with the necessities of life. Firstly—one is grateful for this—there are the old-age pensions granted by the State. On 31 March 1979 there were 137 000 beneficiaries of old-age pensions and an amount of R142 million was paid out in this regard. Since 1968 there has been an increase of approximately 40 000 beneficiaries and the increase in the amount being paid out totalled approximately R107 million. Therefore, I conclude that the State effected an increase in old-age pensions which was within its capability and the means at its disposal. We on this side of the House would very much have liked to have given more to our aged, if we only had the means to do so. From 1976 to 1 October 1979 there has been an increase of 37,5% in old-age pensions.

However, we are not only paying old-age pensions. There are also civil pensioners and I should like to put in a word for them now. There were increases in their case as well. On 1 October 1976 there was an increase of 10% and a minimum of R25 per month was laid down. This happened again in 1978 and 1979. My conclusion is—the hon. the Minister can assist me if I am wrong—that the civil pensioner has not received all those benefits in the same proportion as the old-age pensioner, that his income has not been increased and adjusted to the same extent, and that it is those people in particular who are having a very hard time today.

There are also the aged who have to live on the interest that they earn from their investments. Now we are faced with a drop in interest rates, which means a decrease in the income of these aged people. I take my hat off to them. These are people who worked very hard and educated their children under very difficult conditions when bursaries for university and college education were not as readily available as they are today. Today, we find the children of those people in top positions in this country. However, they have purchased homes for themselves.

I want to associate myself with the words of the hon. member for Meyerton and say that these people are suffering as a result of the increase in rates and in the cost of services that must be paid in the community in which they are living. I want to give my enthusiastic support to the hon. member’s plea for a housing grant. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to do everything in his power to help these people. We deal with aged people in our constituencies every day, people who, as I have said, worked hard and purchased a house with their savings, who gave their children a good education, but today, as a result of the increase in the cost of living, find it very difficult to keep their heads above water.

Apart from the fact that the aged must be assured of a good income, I also want to ask that our aged be provided with good health services. I am grateful for what is being done in this respect, but I want to say here this morning that the increased medical tariffs must not stand in the way of good medical care for our aged.

Another question is that of housing. In this regard I want to endorse the standpoint of the Government and the department that aged people must remain in the community for as long as possible. Aged people are part of the community and not a separate group. The problem, however, is that there are many aged people who are no longer able to live in a family context. They are lonely. We can very easily argue that their children should accommodate them, but the children lead completely different lives to those of these aged people and they are simply unable to do so.

I am grateful that the department has community centres that provide the aged with various services. For instance, there is the provision of meals, which is being done in my town too. Then there is the provision of information, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, dietetic services and many others. Another important function is to provide amusement and recreational facilities for the aged. Consequently, these centres are simply places where community services are provided for the aged. There are already 19 centres of this kind, while another 19 have been approved. During the 1979 calendar year, R277 000 was paid out in subsidies in this regard. This is a fine opportunity for organizations to contribute their share.

I want to make specific mention of the ACVV, the Afrikaanse Christelike Vrouevereniging and the work of the Christelike Maatskaplike Raad. There are more of these organizations who have arisen spontaneously in communities to provide the aged with these services. Therefore, we are not asking the State to keep on giving more, but we want the community and its organizations to become involved in this matter.

I also wanted very badly to say something about old-age homes, but unfortunately my time has almost expired. Therefore I shall content myself with saying that our old-age homes fulfil a very great need.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion I should like to point out, with your permission, that we as members of Parliament are privileged to have retired people as service officers. These are elderly people who are working here and who are grateful for the income. I believe I am speaking on behalf of all members when I thank them for their friendliness and the service that they give us every day.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Oudtshoorn dealt with a number of subjects affecting the aged section of our community. I agree with him to a large extent on the various pleas he has made to render assistance to certain deserving groups.

I should also like to congratulate the hon. member for Meyerton for the manner in which he introduced this motion this morning on a very important subject and one which is becoming increasingly important as the number of older people in our community is constantly increasing. As a result, the challenges are becoming increasingly greater to try to meet the situation so that the aged section of our community are able to maintain a reasonable standard of living.

It is an important subject, because in recent times we have seen a tremendous deterioration in the position of the aged section of our community.

When I say “deterioration”, I of course mean deterioration as far as the financial position is concerned, and in this respect their whole standard of living has dropped considerably in recent times. This morning we have with us a new Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions, and we in these benches would like to welcome him in his new portfolio. This will perhaps be the first occasion for him to participate in a debate under that portfolio. We know that he has a tremendous responsibility on his shoulders, where many thousands of people are looking to him to come to their assistance as far as relief is concerned, particularly when the budget is presented at the end of next month. Let us hope that the hon. the Minister will also bring a new approach to many of these aspects concerning social welfare and pensions which have arisen in recent times. Some of them are, of course, issues that have been with us for many years. The hon. member for Yeoville referred to a number of matters. He also moved an amendment in which he indicates various aspects in regard to which he believes action should be taken. Obviously we in these benches support that amendment, because some of these matters have been raised on numerous occasions already, both in budget debates and in discussions of the Vote of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. We can therefore find no fault with the amendment, which is directly in line with the notice of motion of the hon. member for Friday, 7 March 1980. I think, however, that the one aspect of major importance in considering the position of the aged section of our community is the urgency of the problem. I therefore wish to move as a further amendment—

The reason for this amendment is to emphasize the urgency of the problem and the fact that immediate steps are required. We have seen, as time has passed, the various steps which were taken by the Government. I should like to admit straight away that the Government has taken steps in an endeavour to meet requirements and to grant assistance where it was asked for and where it was necessary. However, the Government still has a great deal of ground to cover. There are still an enormous number of issues which require urgent attention. One does not only look to the Government alone for assistance. As the hon. member for Oudtshoorn has also indicated, there is community participation, and we know, of course, that the historical background of social services in South Africa has been to involve the community as well. Therefore it is pleasing to see that a number of welfare organizations—and certainly the one that I am connected with in the Durban area—have appointed community social workers for the very purpose of involving the community. I know that social workers are similarly involved in the same kind of work in the Witwatersrand area as well. This is an important aspect, and I hope the Government will encourage arrangements whereby community involvement will indeed be a vital factor in bringing about a greater degree of security amongst the older people. The urgency of this matter therefore rests on certain aspects. There are many pensioners involved, not only the social pensioners, but also the civil pensioners, Railway pensioners and private pensioners who are trying to live on their private pension. They have to meet this tremendous increase in the cost of living. We know that the cost of living has escalated. Last year the increase in the cost of living was in the region of 14%. We also know that the Department of Statistics issued some figures recently which showed that the cost of living in South Africa had increased by 75% in the past five years, and that the food price index alone had increased by 72% over that period. Consequently we are having to meet a situation where the people who are now living on pensions, whether they are private pensions, social pensions, or another type of pension, have to meet these tremendous increases in the cost of living. This leads me to the aspect which I should like to put to the hon. the Minister, and that is that although the granting of a bonus to certain social pensioners in December was indeed welcomed, they still had to wait for it.

They have had to wait until 1 October to receive the normal R9 increase which was granted to them in terms of the 1979 budget. During that period the cost of living had also escalated considerably, and I therefore do hope that the hon. the Minister will make the strongest representations to the hon. the Minister of Finance to see to it that when increases are granted that those increases are granted from 1 April each year, viz. the beginning of the financial year, so that the group of social pensioners who receive the lowest level of pension should not have to wait a full six months before receiving those increases and so still have to bear the brunt of escalating costs during the six months which they have to wait. Therefore I do hope that the hon. the Minister will give consideration to that particular aspect, because many of the factors which are involved are ones which directly affect the standard of living and the quality of life of the aged section of our community.

We have also seen increases in other costs, such as increased rents. Almost on every occasion that rents are increased it affects a large number of pensioners who are living in the older buildings, the rent-controlled buildings, and we know that with the consternation and worry of living in buildings which are rent controlled and rent control is then phased out, has resulted that many of these people are unable to survive and to remain within the community. After all, it is the very policy of the Government to see that the older folks, the aged, the senior citizens of this country, are enabled to remain within the community for as long as possible. But to do so they must have a reasonable standard of living and they must have a reasonable amount of income to maintain themselves in that situation. Consequently it is absolutely imperative that the hon. the Minister gives urgent and immediate attention to the means test, which has remained unaltered since 1972. This, I think, is something which is causing tremendous hardship amongst a number of our older people, particularly those living on small, private pensions. They have carried out the advice of the Government in that they have belonged to a pension scheme, if it was possible to do so, particularly where a widow is concerned. Her husband paid into a pensions scheme, then went on pension and subsequently died and she receives a small widow’s pension. They also made certain savings. I want once again to highlight the problems and difficulties of these people, because when one meets these pensioners they are now reaching a state of despair because they cannot survive financially. I know of a case of a widow receiving a small widow’s pension of R85 per month over the last 10 years who is still unable to qualify for any form of assistance as far as a social pension is concerned because her income limit exceeds R82 per month. That R82 per month income limit for a single person has remained unaltered since 1972. Hon. members have heard of the increases in the cost of living since that period. Surely we cannot expect those people to have to look after themselves without some form of assistance. Some of these people are of course appealing to welfare organizations. It is the only means whereby they can receive some additional support. Some, of course, have children who are able to assist them from time to time. Those are the fortunate ones. But there are others who have no children and there are others whose children are unable to give them that support. I therefore think this should be a top priority as far as the new Minister is concerned, viz. to see that there is a full investigation and to see that immediate steps are taken to ensure that those income limits are amended and certainly relaxed. I am not alone when I say this, because I know that the National Council for the Aged and many other organizations which are finding an increasing demand being made on their services, have also appealed to the hon. the Minister to relax the income limit. The welfare organizations are facing a growing demand because they are the only people to whom many of the aged can appeal. They then have to provide a service for those people, and that service is becoming a tremendous burden on many of the welfare organizations.

We know that there are service centres which are rendering a magnificent service, which are providing meals and meals-on-wheels for those who are room-bound, and a home-help service. Here again, this service is also restricted because the basis of the subsidy which is paid through the service centre subsidy, does not anywhere near meet the demand or the cost of the service that is being provided by the welfare organizations. The welfare organizations should be extending their field of service, and they are endeavouring to do so, but they are restricted as well to certain limitations as far as finance is concerned. We know that the position of these organizations in trying to render that service has also meant that the position as far as admission to old-age homes is concerned has grown enormously. The Government is of course helping by making available subeconomic loans at 1% to these organizations to build homes for the aged. This is, however, not the entire answer. There are many people who do not want to go into a home for the aged. There are many people who wish to retain their existing small home, however humble it might be. So there are those who do not wish to go into those homes, but in spite of that fact there are long waiting-lists. Indeed, in some organizations the waiting-lists have been closed. It is not possible to obtain any form of admission through a waiting-list, particularly for the older group. Some organizations will not take people if they are over 80 years of age. After all, many of those over 80 years of age have exhausted their savings trying to meet the shortfall between their income and their expenditure. They are in dire need of some form of assistance.

The other aspect with regard to keeping people in the community for as long as possible, and which I believe the Government has not taken due cognizance of, is the question of the attendant’s allowance paid in certain circumstances. The attendant’s allowance was welcomed by all members of the House way back in 1965, when it was instituted on the basis of the person who could produce a medical certificate stating that they were unable to look after themselves in their everyday needs. It was then possible to qualify for an extra R10 per month. Can one believe that R10 a month is still paid today as an attendant’s allowance? Here we are trying to assist people to remain within the community. They have failing health, but we can only give them an extra R10 per month. Here too I believe the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions, who is new to this portfolio, should give immediate attention to the attendant’s allowance paid to those persons who qualify for it.

As far as the person who is struggling to meet the situation—and it changes from time to time—is concerned, I am pleased to say that the new hon. Minister did make a concession where a person received an increase in his/her private pension which increase resulted in a loss of his/her social pension. Such loss will now no longer occur provided that both types of pensions were being received on 1 December 1979. Here again, though that concession is welcomed, it does bring about another anomaly, because one will find that a person just prior to that date had received an increase in their private pension and lost their old-age pension, and because they were not receiving both pensions on 1 December 1979, they are still unable to obtain any assistance from the Government. So, the position of those who just missed the concession highlights the importance of amending the present means test limit.

Another anomaly which can exist as far as the concession is concerned, is in the case of a married couple whose income limit is R164 per month and where the increase was granted prior to the qualifying date. They are unable to qualify and, in addition to that, if the widow’s pension is more than R82 per month on the demise of the spouse, it would appear that she is also still over the means test limit and would therefore also lose her pension. So, a concession is welcomed, but at the same time I believe it highlights the anomalies which exist as far as the means test is concerned. I know we will have an opportunity when the Vote of the hon. Minister is discussed to discuss many other anomalies that do exist, and I hope we will be able to receive some encouragement from the hon. the Minister in this regard.

Then, concerning the question of the taxation which is paid by persons who are receiving social pensions, I believe it is also a matter which should be taken up with the hon. the Minister of Finance by the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions. It is a great shame when one takes into account, and reads, some of the pathetic letters that all members must be receiving at this time, in regard to the plight of many of the older folk. The volume of this correspondence has grown enormously. I would like to mention just briefly this one aspect of taxation, because I feel it does indicate that, as far as the Government is concerned, urgent steps are required to change the situation. I have here a letter from a person receiving a disability grant. He says he receives R97 per month and lives in a boarding house where his board and lodging is R80 per month. It leaves him with R17 per month to buy toothpaste, blades, soap, washing powder, and clothes, etc. Naturally he is unable to exist on this amount of R17 per month which is left to him. One of the reasons he is unable to exist is that he is also liable for tax. As an unmarried person he was assessed with R37,16 for the tax year 1979. This man is having to pay income tax on the R97 per month he receives as a disability pension. He is now paying off at R3 per month what the Government is taking back from him as income tax. Here we have a situation of a person living under these conditions also having to pay general sales tax on the few items that he has, of necessity to buy as well as having to pay income tax to the Government at the rate of R3 per month. There are, of course, numerous complaints from amongst the older folk which show their problems and difficulties. I was hoping the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens would be in the House as I have a letter here which arrived on my desk last week from his constituency and in which a pensioner complained bitterly about his quality of life at the present time. The letter consists of 31 pages and I hope the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens will read these pages to see the problems of a pensioner living in his constituency.

The whole question of trying to improve the quality of life of our senior citizens is a vitally urgent matter. I know, and admit, that the Government have taken steps to try and alleviate this matter. That is why I welcome the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton and his plea that, as a result of the sound economic climate, this assistance should be further extended. This gives us an opportunity today to state some of those problems and needs of the aged section of our community that require urgent and immediate assistance, assistance which can come from the Government in certain spheres, but also of course from the community as well. They too have to make a contribution towards working out a system whereby those people who really deserve and need assistance will be granted more adequate assistance. I have tried to indicate those aspects which I believe require immediate and urgent attention and I have moved the amendment in the hope that the hon. the Minister will be able to give us some indication that he will bear in mind and take action to try to improve the quality of life of the aged section of our community.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Yeoville, who is unfortunately absent from this House at present, said that “we must create a society that cares”. He also said that we should steer the economy along such a course that some people do not suffer. In the absence of the hon. member I want to say that when we are dealing with matters such as pensions and the care of our aged we should preferably be careful about making such statements as these because the impression could be created—and I almost suspect that he wanted to create it—that the Government does not really care for a part of the community for which it is responsible.

The hon. member for Umbilo said a great deal with which we can agree. I know him to be a person who has not only made a study of this subject, but who can also discuss it with great compassion.

At the outset, because I think it has perhaps not been done yet, I want to wish the hon. the Minister who has now taken over the portfolio of Social Welfare and Pensions everything of the best. We believe that just as with the Health portfolio, he will establish the kind of conditions for the aged in South Africa that will fill them with great satisfaction.

The care of the aged in our society and throughout the world has become a science. One must view it against the background of the tremendous increase in the number of elderly people, a subject which I shall have a few words to say about during the course of my speech. The elderly people in our society have made their mark in fields where we still have to find our feet. We as Government members, and I am certain the rest of this House as well, wish to pay tribute on an occasion such as this to all the social and civil pensioners who have throughout their lives, and in the education of their children, laid the kind of foundations for us as a community and as a society on which we can continue to build with stability. We regard those old people as part of our society, and in terms of our policy we should like to retain these people as part of the community and not set them apart in such a way that they feel lonely and they become isolated. That is why the Government considers the care of the aged to be a partnership between the State, the Church, the welfare organizations and thousands of individuals throughout the country who have the welfare of our aged at heart. On a day such as this, all of us sitting here think with compassion of these people in our own constituency. In my own constituency there are two old-age homes, i.e. Ons Tuis, which is maintained by the church and the old-age home Sassar, which is maintained by the pension fund of the Railways. I should also, because it is appropriate, like to convey my sincere thanks to the staff of those places and of all the old-age homes throughout the country, people who, together with the officials of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions, toil and labour day after day to look after the interests of these people in such a competent way. Not only do they give the aged joy, but all of them are in fact doing the country and our future a great service through what they are doing. Let me say—perhaps this is not always said—that the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions with its more than 500 officials at head office and its more than 1 700 officials in regional offices, strike us, as national representatives as being the kind of people who always look after the interests of those people with great dedication in the service they render.

Sir, as I have said, the hon. member for Yeoville tried to create the impression that we are not doing our duty. The fact of the matter is that in South Africa 7% to 8% of the elderly people are already in old-age homes while it is accepted throughout the world that if 4% to 6% of the elderly people are accommodated in old-age homes, it is a high percentage. In a certain sense, therefore, we have more than done our duty. Nor are we afraid to carry on with this work in future.

We see age as part of a cycle. We do not consider the elderly people in society to be a burden. We see their lives merely as a completion of the meaningful lives which each one of us would like to live on this earth. I saw the other day that Winston Churchill was elected Prime Minister when he was 77 years old. Dr. Albert Schweizer won the Nobel prize when he was 68 years old. Here in our own ranks we have a Senator who began to preach again at an advanced age. Therefore I see great hope, even for us in this House. All of us still have a very long and promising road ahead of us. It is important that we should consider those people who may perhaps be less privileged.

Sir, to me personally it is astounding how many of the children in society, if I may put it this way since we are now discussing the aged, neglect their fathers and their mothers in many respects. Sometimes when one visits the old-age homes one asks whether the children take any real trouble and display the necessary interest in the elderly. Seen from that angle I think that each one of us has a great task to fulfil.

When we consider everything that is being done in South Africa, we see that the sphere of social welfare and pensions is a very wide one. We can spend a long time covering the entire ground. If we consider civil pensions, social pensions, care of the aged, health services, the service centres which are being established and all the support services, we see that a vast amount of work is being done, for which the hon. member for Umbilo rightly expressed his thanks. We also want to say thank you for those services. The amounts being spent on these services are not small. They are vast amounts. Last year the means test was relaxed to a degree to afford relief to those people whom the Government considered ought to be accommodated. I believe that, as the State finances allow, any Government with sound common sense will go out of its way to help elderly people to the best of its ability. We must simply accept that we in South Africa cannot succeed in accommodating all 380 000 elderly people in old-age homes. That is a completely superhuman task. Consequently each one of us must do our duty.

Mr. Speaker, the prices of almost all goods and services have shown a sharp increase over the past year. There is no doubt about that In places there was a dramatic increase in the prices of consumer goods: Clothing, footwear, housing, etc. During the nine years since 1970 the consumer price index rose by an average of 9,58%. The food index on the other hand—and this is very important—rose by 10,22%. This simply means that our pensioners, and particularly the civil pensioners, are experiencing enormous problems in their daily struggle to subsist. We will have to admit that during the past few years, the erosion of the value of money, the erosion of the buying power of money, has caused large numbers of civil and social pensioners in South Africa to find themselves in very dire financial straits. I consequently believe that it is not inappropriate that we should on this occasion express the hope and the confidence that the hon. the Minister will on his part exert the necessary pressure so that, when the budget is presented this year, we will be able to tell our people with gratitude that they have once again been looked after well. Pensioners are far more drastically affected by a sharp increase in the cost of living than is the case with other members of the population. On this occasion we may also say that great progress has been made in raising pensions. Unfortunately time does not allow me to go into this matter in full. However, there is no doubt about it.

When we consider the increase in the consumer price index, and also take cognizance of the increases in civil and social pensions during the past few years, it is clear that the Government has more than simply done its duty. On the road which lies ahead the Government will have to build on this achievement.

We must view the entire question of the aged in South Africa against the background of the process of the aging of our population. Perhaps we could glance quickly at the position throughout the Bill. In 1970 there were 26 million people who were older than 80 years. In the year 2000 there will be precisely as many people over the age of 80 in the developing countries. Over the same period the number of people over the age of 60 will have increased almost twofold, from 304 million to 581 million.

If we were to estimate this at an increase of 114% per annum in South Africa, the number of men and women over 60 years, in South Africa alone, will by the year 2000 number approximately 2,9 million, and those over the age of 80, approximately 350 000. These are Whites as well as non-Whites. The total estimated White population in South Africa in the year 2000 will be approximately 6 280 000, of whom 3 130 000 will be men and 3 150 000 will be women.

If we consider a further future projection, it seems as though South Africa will in future become a real widowers paradise. In the year 2000, out of a total of 660 000 people over 60, there will be 287 000 men and 348 000 women in South Africa. Consequently, in the year 2000 there will be 61 000 more women than men over the age of 60 in South Africa at that juncture will be a widowers’ paradise. Unfortunately many of us will no longer be here then. [Interjections.]

The total number of White people in South Africa over the age of 80 will number 69 000 by the year 2000. Of these 24 500 will be men and 44 000 will be women. Consequently there will then be 20 000 more women than men over the age of 80 in South Africa. All these things present us with a tremendous challenge. The general aging of the population poses a tremendous challenge to the State and its planning for the future. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to undertake a large-scale information campaign, in co-operation—I think the previous Minister indicated that this was possible—with other Government departments. In this way the entire population can be well-informed as to future developments and planning as far as the problem of the aged is concerned. There is no doubt that the tremendous increase in the number of aged is going to make heavy demands in future, not only on the finances of the State, but also on the partnership between the State, the Church and welfare organizations. It is also going to make heavy demands on all of us as individuals to try to make a contribution as well and cause our economy to develop so rapidly that all our people can benefit from it.

In various spheres we have done a great deal. Nevertheless I should like to make a brief request to the hon. the Minister and the department to institute a very probing inquiry in future into the position of the civil pensioner. In our major cities in particular these people are waging a tremendous struggle to make ends meet. I think there are just over 71 000 civil pensioners in South Africa. If we take this into consideration we see that those who retired prior to 1 July 1963 in particular are finding it a tremendous struggle to keep pace with the rising cost of living. The fact of the matter is that those people were members of a pension scheme. The pension agreement with them is being complied with. They are not being stinted according to the agreement. The improved pension scheme which came into operation after 1 July 1973 benefits new pensioners dramatically more than those who occupied similar positions upon retirement prior to 1 July. The improvement is such that the vast majority of those who retired prior to 1 July may with complete justification ask whether it is fair to them, after all the years in which they rendered their service to the State.

I wish to advocate that we should give specific consideration to the position of these people, particularly in view of the housing problems which many of them are experiencing, and the general cost of accommodation, taxation and everything that goes with it. I beleive that not only should they be rewarded for what they have done, but that their position should also afford each one of us in South Africa who are approaching old age the certainty that we will have a peaceful and happy old age in South Africa. I should like to support the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton in the knowledge and the confidence that the hon. the Minister and the Government will never fail in their duty in regard to our elderly people.

Mr. Speaker, it is gratifying to see that there is so much interest in the aged. This is timely because I think that people are generally aware, at the present moment, of the fact that we need to do something about the problems facing the aged. What I would like to try to do today is to comment on some specific points, because I think all of us in this House are genuinely concerned about the problems of the aged. I can give a personal example of the interest that there is in this question of the aged. I was involved in starting a small quarterly news-sheet called Plan Ahead—Beplan Vooruit for people who were retiring or were about to retire. This news-sheet achieved a circulation of 25 000, despite the fact that there were no efforts made to market it extensively. I may mention that there was no charge for it, and this no doubt explains some of its popularity.

Send me one.

I shall take down the names just now. When we call for assistance for the aged we must be very clear in our own minds about the objectives we hope to achieve with such assistance. The hon. member for Innesdal pointed out that in the year 2000 we are going to be faced with tremendous problems in regard to the aged, partly because of an increase in the actual number of aged people and partly because their proportion of the population will be increasing. In the light of this we must see that assistance can have both positive and negative repercussions. For example a system which penalizes those who try to provide for their retirement would have a negative effect Such a system would encourage some to make no provision at all for their old age. This arises when a person who tries to provide for his old age is placed in a worse position than someone who has made no provision at all.

Today I should like to concentrate on those things that could have a positive effect in solving some of the financial problems of the aged, and I should like to distinguish very clearly between two specific aged groups. Firstly there are those who, for various reasons, have been unable to make any financial provision at all for their old age. They have to rely entirely on their old-age pension to live. All we can do to alleviate the problems of these people is to increase the old-age pension wherever possible. There is, however, a second group of people who need our assistance. I refer to those people who have tried to make some provision for their old age but who are now struggling to make ends meet. It is these people who form the backbone of middle-class South Africa. The workers who have paid off the bonds on their houses and have tried to set aside some money for their retirement. These people also need our assistance. These are the people who often, through no fault of their own, are struggling to make ends meet. These are the people who, when they made financial plans for their retirement, never anticipated that inflation would be running at such a high rate. A rate of inflation of 3% per annum means that one would need R134 in 10 years’ time to buy what one can now buy for R100. At an inflation rate of 5% per annum one would need R163 and at 10% per annum one would need R259 in 10 years’ time to buy what one can buy now for R100. All of us in this House know that if one had received no or very small salary increases in the past five or ten years, one would be financially hard pressed today. For many of these people the situation is even worse, for in recent years many of them have seen their incomes actually decline as interest rates have fallen. I am not blaming the Government for the decline in interest rates, but the point I want to make is that the way we treat these people is of critical importance. We must show them that we are aware of their problems and that we are willing to do something about it If we want to assist these people, we should send out a message which says that people will not be penalized because they have had the foresight and the determination to try to make some provision for their retirement. Today I should like to make some recommendations with regard to the means test, recommendations which I believe would have the desired effect of helping those who have tried to make some provision for their old age.

Firstly, as the hon. member for Umbilo has quite correctly pointed out, there is the need to eliminate the bias against income in favour of assets under the means test. He has pointed out that under the present means test an aged person who earns R83 per month by working, can be worse off than a person who does absolutely nothing to provide for himself. On the other hand, one can have assets of up to R34 400 and still qualify for an old-age pension of R57 per month. A system which penalizes those aged who try to provide for themselves by working, can only have negative repercussions on South African society as a whole. In South Africa there are thousands of aged people who are still willing and able to contribute to the development of South Africa. In a country that has a shortage of skilled labour we cannot, as I have pointed out in my maiden speech, afford to waste the talents of these people. I therefore ask the hon. the Minister to lift the income limit at which a person forfeits his old-age pension. Let us place any forfeiture of a pension on a sliding scale. Let us accept as a principle that an aged person who is prepared to work ought never to be worse off than if he did not work at all. The hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions recently introduced a much-needed concession with regard to those in receipt of a private pension. I welcome this and thank him for this concession, but I should also like to ask him to bear in mind the point made by the hon. member for Umbilo that people who retired at a certain date are losing out. Could he perhaps not see his way clear to extending the same concession to those aged people who are still working in order to supplement their incomes?

My second point with regard to the means test relates to the valuation of an owner-occupied dwelling. Many speakers today have made the point that it is better if we housed the aged in the community where they live. At present the maximum value placed on an owner-occupied dwelling is R9 800. I believe and agree that where we can, we must let them live in their own residences. It was the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs who said, and I quote from a report in Die Burger of 2 May 1979—

If we encourage aged people to own their own dwelling units, we achieve three things. Firstly, we save taxpayers the cost of having to provide accommodation for those people. At the end of 1978 we had 294 State-subsidized old-age homes. They housed 15 400 people at an average cost of over R700 per head per annum. Of the 15 400 housed in these old-age homes there were 6 421 who were not infirm. Secondly, I believe it is much better for the aged to continue living in the society of which they are a part. This gives them an incentive to continue living. Why should they be treated as if they were lepers? Thirdly, if an aged person owns his own home he pegs one of his major expenses. In a highly inflationary period this is of critical importance. I would therefore ask the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions to exclude, if possible, the value of an owner-occupied dwelling entirely when evaluating assets for means test purposes.

The hon. member for Yeoville made the point and asked how relevant is a means test established in 1972 in today’s conditions. Is it not excluding, because of inflation, people from receiving old-age pensions who would have received them in 1972? Is this perhaps the reason why there were fewer Whites receiving old-age pensions in 1979 than there were in 1978? This means test also has the detrimental effect of discouraging people from saving for their retirement. They are inclined to say: “Why should I save if I shall never get the benefit of it?” While on the question of the means test, will the Minister concerned be prepared to give some concession to those aged people who hold taxable Government and semi-Government stock? Will he consider allowing each person to hold R10 000 in such stock and exclude it from the valuation of that person’s assets? This will encourage people to hold such stock. Someone said that the Minister might have the heart, but not the gold, but if he could do that, he might find some of the gold. I know from experience that many people when they retire are inclined to invest in tax-free investments. A person with a pension of R200 per month and R20 000 to invest will invest that money in tax-free investments. In that case his total income will be R3 800 per annum and he would pay no tax at all. But if he should invest that money in Public Corporation stock, his total income would be R4 300 per annum. He would pay R126 in tax, so that there will be an increase in income for the Fiscus, but after paying tax he would still be R374 to the better.

We must never forget, as some speakers have pointed out, that the problem of the aged is not the problem of the State alone. We must also not lose sight of the fact that the problems of the aged are not only financial problems. It is a problem which affects all of us. I am truly grateful for the various organizations who do yeoman work on behalf of the aged. The Retirement Association provides courses for pre-retirement. Then there is also the Citizens’ Advice Bureau in Johannesburg, which brings out an excellent publication on concessions to old-age persons. Some companies are also prepared to make special concessions to the aged. Certain municipalities have also been good enough to allow social pensioners some concessions on rates. Ultimately, however, we come back to the point made by the hon. member for Yeoville, namely that we must aim in South Africa at creating a situation where every working South African will contribute to a pension fund and ultimately derive the benefit from those contributions.

In the circumstances I would like to support the amendment of the hon. member for Yeoville.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate some aspects of the problems of the aged as the hon. member for Edenvale has described them here. At the outset I just want to refer to the brilliant and masterly way in which the hon. member for Meyerton uses our Afrikaans language. Permit me to quote from the Standing Committee on Social Welfare and Pensions, 1978, on this same subject. I quote from Hansard, col. 716, where the hon. member put it this way—

This is a brilliant example of picturesque speech and the attitude of this side of the House towards the aged of this country.

The problems of an aging society are symptomatic of developing Western societies, and in many respects this makes heavy demands of the authorities especially in regard to (1) medical care for these people, (2) their living conditions, and (3) the necessities of life to enable them to enjoy a dignified existence during the remaining years of their lives.

The increasing demands upon the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions are reflected in the fact that over the past decade the number of old-age pensioners has increased from just over 98 000 to almost 138 000, and there has also been an enormous increase in the State’s contribution towards the provision of pensions. We can expect these numbers to rise phenomenally in the future.

In the light of the motion, I should like to show how well the Government has succeeded in all three of these spheres, viz. medical care, livelihood and pensions, to keep abreast of the requirements of the times. Firstly, in regard to medical care, we see an increasing priority given to geriatrics in the overall spectrum of medical care in South Africa. We have training hospitals at the medical faculties in our country where special provision has been made for geriatrics.

Our doctors realize full well that because of improved socio-economic circumstances and the more sophisticated medical care that is available, we have an ever-increasing number of people with particular physical and psychiatric problems. This calls for special attention to improve the quality of life, rather than to try to prolong life itself. Let us think for a moment of the psychological effect a sudden uprooting or change of surroundings or the loss of one’s life’s partner in the evening of one’s life can have on one—the sudden change of the milieu in which one has to live. After a man has lived for years on a farm, in the open air and amid the beauty of nature, he has to endure the loneliness of a small room or an old-age home.

This is something that is not easy for those people to accept at that stage of their lives and it leaves psychological wounds. Just think of the numerous medicines which these people sometimes have to use and the depressing effects this has. To mention just one: The depressive effect which some high blood pressure medicines have on the takers. There is also the question of forgetfulness which is so characteristic at this stage of one’s life. Often these people are admitted to hospitals for treatment for poisoning caused by medicines. Think of the uncertainty there is when a person like that, at a relatively young age, has to retire while he is still healthy and in command of his senses. He misses the recognition which he no longer receives from society and the feeling of dignity which disappears. Uncertainty depresses him.

Then there is the wide spectrum of illnesses which increase in severity and appearance with age, or in any event are more complicated in the later decades of life. Treatment of these calls for special knowledge and special expertise in all the disciplines of medical science. That special knowledge and expertise is widely available in this country. That is not our problem.

If there is a shortcoming to which one can refer then in my view this is present in the front line of health care, viz. at the level of the patient and his house doctor, the intimate personal relationship between the patient and his sympathetic doctor which is of such vital importance to one at the end of this life. That is why I ask that we should not leave these old people to cold, impersonal outpatients’ facilities at a big hospital but transfer the consulting room of the doctor to the old-age home, with its nursing sister, to be in the milieu of the old people. We must have decentralized services so that a real patient-doctor relationship can be achieved. It often happens that these people come back periodically for an examination and never get to see the same doctor twice. That, I think, is a real shortcoming as far as health care is concerned.

In the second place I want to look at the accommodation, the homes of our 380 000 aged, who have to find a place to put their feet up. Today the Government subsidizes almost 300 homes for the aged in which about 24 000 people are accommodated. We must pay tribute today to the welfare organizations, churches and institutions who help with the erection and maintenance of such homes. They do valuable work. To the staff who work there, those who treat our aged with such loving care and sympathy, we can never be grateful enough.

I want to look for a moment at the accommodation of more than 90% of our aged who cannot adapt to life in old-age homes. I think the policy of the department is absolutely right in this aspect—to keep our aged in society as long as possible and, where possible, preferably to provide home services in the form of district nursing services so that they can lead an independent life as long as possible. That is the correct approach.

But in my view the difficulty lies in the fact that a large number of old people in the middle income group, people who in fact made provision for their old age in the form of a reasonable pension and reasonable accommodation, are now suffering because of rates levied by the municipality, the cost of electricity and water for their retirement homes, and the unexpectedly high cost of living—this has often been mentioned in this debate—to such an extent that some of them are simply forced out of a situation of independence and are deprived of that very feeling of security that is so vitally necessary at this time of life. I want to ask that we should give urgent consideration to the living conditions of this category of people because they form the vast majority of our aged in South Africa today.

In the third place I come to assistance in the form of the pensions that are provided. I think I speak on behalf of thousands of pensioners in thanking the Government for the large measure of relief that has been given in the past year. We see that there has been great relief. We think for instance of the provision where an amount of R9 800 is taken as the value of a residence for means test purposes. We think of the situation when on 1 October 1979 R9 a month was added to old-age pensions at a cost of R22 million to the State. In November there was a once only bonus of R30 which cost the Government R6 million. The decision of the Government was announced by the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions that people in receipt of a social pension on 1 December would not have their pensions reviewed should they be granted an increase in any other pensions accruing to them. We are all very grateful for this because this has caused all of us problems.

I want to refer again to the dilemma of the person who has been in a position to save and invest for his old age. In his opinion, when he invested, it was quite sufficient for a carefree old age. But what has happened in practice? The person who has led a highly productive life in the interests of South Africa and as a result has been in a favourable financial position and, as a responsible citizen has tried through investment to ensure an independent livelihood in his old age, is now beginning to suffer because his interest returns are not sufficient to make ends meet. With the present downward trends in interest rates, his position will deteriorate still further.

That is why I ask that we should give special attention to the position of that category of people; that we investigate the transferability of pension schemes of, for instance, government bodies; that we should also look to private institutions, private bodies, so that when it comes to changing jobs, arrangements can be made. Even the possibility of a national State-aided pension scheme must be considered within the framework of a capitalistic system.

It remains our duty to look after the active and productive citizens of our country, those who before us cared for the country and helped it grow, so that they can enjoy peace of mind without want and a happy life in the country of their birth. For that reason I want to associate myself wholeheartedly with the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton now before us, and I believe that the further extension of assistance which is asked for will become a reality in the coming financial year.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the hon. member for Pietersburg has raised an aspect of the matter here which we can probably never fully appreciate. That is, the psychological effect it has on an aged person when he suddenly finds that he is no longer fully a member of the community; when perhaps he discovers that he is suddenly alone and in addition dependent on others and is perhaps worried about tomorrow and the day after. The one thing we must not do is give these people false hope. I believe that hon. members who stand up here and talk about the plight of our aged feel sincerely for these people and that under no circumstances would they create false hope for these people. That is why I was particularly disappointed in the hon. member for Yeoville today.

That is a big surprise.

The hon. member should not be surprised. This morning when the hon. member for Yeoville started his speech, he said that they had an approach to create a society that cares. For one moment I was very worried that he was going to say that he was wanting to create the impression that he was the only person who cares.

He did not say that though, did he?

The hon. member did not say it, I did say I was for one moment worried that he would say it, because in anticipation of this debate today, and in anticipation of the possible Press publicity he expects to get, he published a letter yesterday in the Eastern Province Herald, and I have a faint suspicion he may have published it in all local newspapers.

I would not be surprised.

The hon. member describes himself—under the heading, of course, “New Note of Sympathy for the Old”—

It is absolutely true.

It may be true but the hon. member is not the only one.

He did not say that.

The hon. member also published a letter which the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions wrote to him. I do not know whether it was confidential. He published the full text of the letter and then he comments—

[Interjections.]

A nice snack prepared for the Minister.

It may be so. [Interjections.]

*My problem is that something might happen so that the additional benefits for the aged which he says will be there might not be available.

Whose fault will that be?

We know whose fault it will be. The position is, however, that he has given false hope to thousands of pensioners that there will be something for them and, if it is not forthcoming, he has the newspaper report available to show that he advocated relief.

You are apologizing in advance for the NP Government. [Interjections.]

We have faith in the hon. the Minister. Do you?

I have complete faith in the hon. the Minister but I have very little faith in the hon. the member for Yeoville.

Trust us rather. We shall help you.

There is no doubt that the Government is giving relief to our aged. Last year the pensions were increased by an amount of R9, but I want to add immediately that we must not forget that our aged have also had to pay the 4% general sales tax. The result has been that of the R9 increase granted to pensioners, the State has already recovered R3,88 in general sales tax. This has meant that the pensioner has only retained R5,12 of the original R9 for himself.

That is if he spends his whole pension.

Yes, but we must accept that a pensioner will spend his full pension.

That is when he spends it on goods on which he has to pay sales tax.

I concede that. But the amount is R3.88. The percentage which he would not pay out on items not subject to sales tax is probably very small.

I want to raise a further point. I do not want to point a finger at the old-age home in which a pensioner whom I know lives but before that pensioner received the additional increase of R9, his board at the old-age home was raised by more than R9. I do not want to involve the old-age homes in this because they provide a very good service. I mention it merely to show what problems the aged have.

I am pleased that the hon. member for Meyerton moved this motion and that he asks for further assistance in the light of the present economic climate. The economic climate is ripe now for further assistance. I shall deal with how we can finally solve this problem when we discuss the contributory pension scheme motion which is on the Order Paper in my name. That is not at issue today but I feel that it is the only solution to the problem. I want to confine myself today largely to the old-age pensioners and I want to divide them into three groups. The first group are those whose only income is the old-age pension; that is, the group who have nothing to live on apart from their old-age pension. The second group are those for whom the old-age pension means the difference between simply existing and existing with a little more comfort than is available to the first group. They are the people who have an income of their own and who fall within the confines of the means test. The third group are those who do not receive an old-age pension and whose income is just above the limit of the means test. They are people who have to eke out an existence on their own income which is low.

Surely no one will maintain that R97 a month is sufficient for anybody to live on. I am sure that the people who receive this pension are very grateful deep down in their hearts and appreciate this assistance, but I do think we must look at the position. There are people who get their full old-age pension of R97 a month because they have no other income. But when a person receives R42 a month, it is supplemented to an amount of R139 a month. When a person is on the fringe of the means test, that is, he receives R82 a month, he receives an additional R57 to bring the amount to R139 as well. Now I ask if it is right that our aged who receive respectively R42 a month and R82 a month, actually receive an income of R139, while the person who has no income receives only R97. Should we not look at this situation and try to give some relief to those people who are in the greatest difficulty?

I want to suggest, as I did last year, that we should consider the possibility of laying down a minimum amount which one needs to live on. Let us take the amount of R139, for argument’s sake; that is, the amount which one receives as long as the means test applies. This means the person who has no income will receive that amount. The person who has an income of R20 a month will get R119. Somebody with an income of R130 a month will only get R9. What will that small amount mean to him? Unless we can get to the stage where we have established the minimum amount necessary to live on, that small amount will mean that as a pensioner he will be entitled to free medical treatment at our hospitals.

I think this is worth thinking about, especially as regards the man who has no income. I am convinced that some people will get a lot more but I should not be surprised if there were other pensioners again who got less. We shall be able to assist, and to a certain extent provide for, the person in the unfortunate position where the means test just does not apply and who can thus not get any assistance.

There is also a problem in respect of married couples. Let us take the argument that a man receives a pension from some or other firm. I know of these cases. I have been dealing with one myself where the pension put the couple jointly in the position of having an income which put them just outside the scope of the means test. They each therefore received an old-age pension. They lived in a very nice, neat home. It was their property, although there was still a small mortgage on it. But they wereunf able to afford it and maintain a reasonable standard of living. Then, unfortunately, the old lady died suddenly. Immediately the pensioner discovered not only that he no longer had his wife’s pension but that he had also lost his own. This sort of thing is very hard on people. This man had become accustomed to his standard of living. Has the time not arrived for us to consider the merits of these cases to decide if some special concession cannot be made to these people? That man cannot sell his house. Where must he go if he does so? He will have to look for accommodation and immediately become a burden on the State. That is what the means test does to these people.

There is another problem connected with the means test. I want to refer to the person who just falls outside the ambit of the means test and who has a private income. I am in fact thinking of a specific case, the case of a person who received a small pension from General Motors in Port Elizabeth. He applied for a pension and received it because he qualified under the means test. One fine day General Motors decided out of the goodness of their hearts to give him a few rand more per month. That few rand a month more meant that the means test again applied to him. Sir, do you know what happened in that case? He had to repay more than R300 in pension because he had received it illegally and was not entitled to it. Do you appreciate his problem, Sir? Not only did he lose his pension but he also had to repay a large amount. That all happened because his income was such that the means test applied to him. Hon. members will say that he should have notified the department immediately that he had received, say R2 a month more. Because he did not do it for two, three or four months, he was in trouble. But the question I want to put is this: When a person is a pensioner and his additional income just puts him over the limit, should we not decide a case like that on its merits?

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Speaker, before I go any further I just wish to avail myself of this opportunity to express my gratitude and appreciation for the fact that I have the privilege of being able to share in the proceedings in this highest assembly chamber of our people. I should also like to express my thanks for the kindness hon. members have shown me since my arrival here as a new member. For me as a newcomer it was very encouraging to be able to find the many friendly faces here, the kindness of the many helpful people who have helped me to take my first few steps here. Mr. Speaker, you will also allow me to convey a word of thanks and appreciation, on behalf of myself and my constituency, to my predecessor who for many years represented in this House—in a very excellent and efficient way—the constituency which I now have the privilege of representing. I also wish to place on record that he and his wife left their mark in my constituency, and did so of course in the national interests and for the NP. I should like to convey my sincere thanks and appreciation, on behalf of myself and my constituency, to the present President of the Senate.

In discussing the motion at present before this House I should like to express a few ideas on the elderly person and his problems, as I see them. It is true that the socio-economic needs of the elderly person are of such magnitude that I will only be able to discuss a few of the central problems affecting the elderly person. The crucial needs of the elderly person are adequate housing and an adequate income. Both of these needs are closely affected by the number of elderly persons as well as by their physical condition.

As background I shall first single out the demographic factors which indicate the magnitude and incidence of the latter components which determine the central needs. A longer life expectancy is a modern tendency if one bears in mind that in the year 1925, five out of every 100 people in the population were over 60. By the year 1970 this figure had doubled, and ten out of every 100 people were 60 years and over. Although it is generally accepted that this ratio will not increase considerably in coming decades, it is expected that the actual number of White aged in the year 2020 will be 1,5 million as against 81 000 in the year 1925. The people in our community who are 70 years and over were born in the decades prior to 1920 when the birth and death rates were considerably higher. The latest statistics indicate a decrease of 25% in births and 10% in deaths in comparison with the ’twenties. As a result the structure of the White population in respect of sex and age has undergone a drastic change. This change was further stimulated by a drastic change in life expectancy. Between 1920 and 1970 life expectancy increased as follows. In 1920 men had a life expectancy of 55,6 years, as against a life expectancy of 65,08 years in 1970. In contrast, women in 1920 had a life expectancy of 50.18 years, while women in 1970 have a life expectancy of 72,96 years. Consequently it is clear that as the natural population growth continued, the component of the aged comprised a relatively increasing percentage. It is estimated that an increase in the actual number of aged persons between 1970 and the year 2000 will be as follows. In 1970 the total aged population—i.e. people over the age of 60—was estimated at a total of 1 340 350. On the other hand, the aged population, persons over the age of 60, in 2020 will number approximately 6 million. Further analyses of data have shown that a far greater percentage of women than men reach an advanced age and it is expected that this percentage will continue to grow. This fact must also be borne in mind in the future planning of amenities for the aged.

Two important facts which emerged from the inquiry into the make-up of the component of elderly persons in the population is the following. There is an increasing number of retired people in their ’sixties and early ’seventies who are strong and healthy and capable, with their mature experience, of making a meaningful contribution. Secondly, there is a dramatic increase in numbers in the age group between 75 and 90 years. According to statistical sources elderly persons in this age category will total 1 246 000 by 2020, as against a total of 354 790 at the beginning of 1980. A large number of elderly persons in this group are dependent on a wide series of medical and social support services. Once again it is necessary to emphasize that this data must weigh heavily in future planning of services for the aged.

Statistics submitted to the General Assembly of the UN indicate that 291 million people of the total world population in 1970 were 60 years and over. Estimates in the report will have it that the total in 1985 will amount to 406 million, and in 2000 to 585 million. If the estimates are correct there will be approximately 3 million people in South Africa in the age group 60 years and over in the year 2000.

The question which inevitably arises is how these elderly persons will live. Will they be alone and isolated? How will they pass their declining years? Will they be able to keep themselves busy and productive in some way or other? Answers to these questions will depend on how the responsible organizations, including the State, are going to plan the future of the people concerned. A survey made among elderly persons in 1960 indicated that in the case of Whites, 67,7% of those over the age of 65 years were living independently in society. Of this total 5% were living in old-age homes, and 20% with their family or with friends. With the change in lifestyles it is discernible that elderly people attach particular value to their independence. Relief organizations also find that by rendering basic services to the aged, they are able to assist them to a great extent in achieving this goal. In this way the elderly person is kept in his environment as long as possible, which is the ideal situation.

Elderly persons cannot be classified into categories strictly according to age groups. They are individuals whose needs differ from one person to another. Elderly persons, such as those in all other age groups as well, give preference to the lifestyle to which they have grown accustomed. When services are being planned priority must be given to their effectiveness. A high priority must equally be given to the acceptability of such services to the aged.

The income problem of elderly persons will, I think, always exist. In most cases elderly persons find that when they retire they experience problems in adjusting. The elderly person finds himself in a position in which he no longer has a daily task to perform. In other words, he has far more leisure time. On the other hand he also finds that his income has diminished. In addition, prices rise, income falls and interest rates are adjusted downwards. The elderly person now has to make do with less. The elderly person who retired as a self-supporting individual, now has to turn to relief organizations or to his family.

To sum up I should like to say that it is clear that the number of aged persons in society throughout the world is increasing drastically. Moreover, there is the alarming phenomenon that the economically active sector of the population in proportion to the aged sector of the population is declining. As I have indicated, the number of elderly person in the 75 to 90 age group is increasing. In regard to this age there is a drastic increase in the amount of care which is required. The inference which one may draw is that the shrinking economically active sector of the population has an ever growing obligation to meet as regards the aged, while they already have to bear the additional burden of educating the youth.

A national effort in respect of the aged is becoming imperative in order to regulate and co-ordinate all disciplines dealing with the welfare of the aged of all races. Consideration must be given to providing people with information on how retirement will influence their lives. Consideration must also be given to the possibility of re-employing retired persons and the introduction of training facilities, if required, with a view to such re-employment. Retirement ages should be raised so that the gap between the aged and the economically active sector of the population can be narrowed. This is a field in which the State, the Church and the community must co-operate to satisfy the greatest possible need of this sector of the population for which it is so imperative.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to begin by congratulating the hon. member for Prinshof very sincerely on his maiden speech. I think that the contribution which he made this afternoon was only a foretaste of how well he is going to prepare himself in future. He had the advantage of being able to speak here on a subject which one can in most cases discuss peacefully. I think that the question of the increase in the number of aged which he raised and the interesting figures which he furnished are in fact an indication of the scientific progress we have made over the years in the field of medicine. If one improves matters on the one hand, one’s problems, if one wants to describe them as such, become greater on the other. When I speak of problems I mean that we are dealing with an increasing number of elderly people to whom has had certain obligations. In earlier years—and quite a lot was said about this—such services did not exist. I am pleased that the hon. member pointed this out to the House. I want to congratulate him very sincerely on the sturdy contribution he made. I am certain that he will in future make a major contribution as a member of this group.

I should also like to thank the hon. member for Meyerton for introducing this particular motion. It is a motion which all of us can discuss without making any political capital out of it. It is a motion which touches the hearts of all of us. Surely there is no one in this House who can say that there are any of us who feel nothing for the aged. One of the great statesmen of the world once said that a nation that does not care for its aged, has no future. I do not think that it can be laid at the door of this Government that it has made no efforts in this connection over the years. Some people would say that it was a feeble effort. But I shall leave it at that.

The hon. member for Umbilo said that “the State has been doing certain things over a number of years”. I thank him for that. The State has been doing something for its aged for many years. I wish to furnish a few clear facts in this connection. The governing NP party has every sympathy with the elderly and their problems. Secondly we have a sympathetic Minister of Finance, who has over the years, and particularly last year, proved that this is so. First it was R9 and later R30. Actually it amounts to a total of R14 per month if one calculates it over the entire period of 12 months. I wish I could read out to hon. members all the letters I received from people thanking us for the little sum of money they were able to save for Christmas. Then hon. members will realize what it meant to those people and that it should not be lightly dismissed by saying that the payment was simply moved forward to October.

Do they receive it every year?

It was in addition to the annual one. At present the department has a Minister who is also sympathetically disposed. The Opposition need only look at my face to see how sympathetic I really am! They will also come to realize that I am also sympathetically disposed in dealing with the speeches made by them. Many of our people outside this House do not hear how party-political issues are dragged into debates such as these. Surely this is not the time to try to prescribe to us what should be done in the budget and to say that if we do not do so, these will be the consequences. I shall deal in a moment with the speech made by the hon. member for Yeoville. To use an appropriate word, I want to say that he came forward with a dodge. That hon. member placed his own private member’s motion on the Order Paper. However, he could not get it onto the Order Paper for discussion early enough to suit him. But now that the motion of the hon. member for Meyerton is being discussed here today, the hon. member for Yeoville moved that same motion of his as an amendment to it. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central has already indicated this, but I shall pause again in a moment to consider the speech made by the hon. member for Yeoville. He tried to create the impression that his amendment will be the cause of the “bonanza” which our old people are going to receive, while the budget proposals of this side of the House have already been lodged with the hon. the Minister of Finance. I am certain the Minister of Finance has already dealt with them. But as soon as something of this kind is announced, the hon. member for Yeoville will tell the whole world that it was thanks to him that the increases were granted, that the ex-servicemen owe everything to him, and that it was he who looked after the interests of the poor people in the country. He said that he was a person who had suffered hardships and had suffered hunger pangs in his life. He said that in his speech this morning. The hon. member asked scornfully whether the Minister had ever been hungry. All of us can probably speak for hours on how much hardship we have suffered in our time, but it is not necessary to waste the time of this House with such talk. However, I have known the hon. member since the 1972 election, when he said many irresponsible things in the Caledon constituency.

I should like to discuss a few principles which are being applied by this side of the House. Our policy is that every citizen should make provision for his old age himself. That was also how I stated it to the hon. member for Yeoville in a letter, and now the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central tells me that he read that letter of mine in a newspaper. In a footnote the hon. member for Yeoville said that it seemed to him as though I, as Minister, was sympathetically disposed to this matter and that I would do something about it. I hope other hon. members do not also give all the letters I write to them to the newspapers. It astonishes me that the hon. member found it necessary to give my letter to a newspaper.

Was it a confidential letter?

Should I mark all my letters “confidential”? Is that the kind of member I am dealing with? Should all my letters to him be marked “confidential”? [Interjections.] I gave the hon. member every opportunity to make his speech even though he spoke a lot of nonsense. He must now give me an opportunity to make my own speech. Yesterday the hon. member for Finance took him to task, so much so that he grew pale and fell silent. If he is not careful I shall quote to him from the Financial Mail again in a moment! [Interjections.]

Order!

The second principle which is being applied by the department is that the social pension plays a supplementary role. Unfortunately, however, there are people who went through difficult times and were unable to put something away. We must try to help them, and I shall dwell on this in a moment. We are not encouraging a welfare state, but we have a responsibility towards people whose savings are no longer there for some reason or other because some disaster or other struck them. Perhaps they became disabled. These are the kind of people whom we have to help, but the basic premise is that each individual must attempt to put something aside for his old age. If he does not succeed in doing so, the State will try to help him. But the Government has no intention of creating a welfare state. I think this is the direction which the hon. members ought to take as well. They should encourage people to save money, instead of scaring them with stories of how that money is eventually going to disappear. There are ways and means of trying to prevent this, and I shall discuss these briefly in a moment.

The hon. member for Meyerton made a wonderful speech. He quoted from the Bible and presented various aspects, as one would expect when the aged are being discussed. He quoted the interesting line and spoke of the golden bowl which was broken. We are in fact trying to accumulate gold so that we can distribute it. However, it has to be utilized to fill many gaps. The pensions of pensioners form only a small part of that need.

The question of municipal rates is important. In the Cape, of which I have some knowledge, differentiated rates were introduced years ago, and hon. members will have noted that the municipality of Cape Town declared a few days ago that it was going to apply differentiated rates. Already there are a number of municipalities which are applying this system and ensuring that elderly persons pay reduced rates. The department responsible for radio licences charges a lower licence fee for elderly persons. The private sector is also making a contribution. I do not want to mention names, but there is a specific restaurant chain which charges elderly persons only 50c for a meal. This is how we can achieve the involvement of our communities.

I also want to thank the hon. member for the way in which he told us about the aged and their problems here. I liked the story of Mr. William Dohman who said that if he could go to the border, he would make sure that every shot he fired went straight through the head. Perhaps the hon. member could convey a message to him from me: If he were in my place today, he would need only 18 cartridges if he were able to put each one through the head. The hon. member for Meyerton said another splendid thing, i.e. that when the price of gold was low, those of our people who are old today continued to mine that gold, and now the gold price is high. I want to agree with him. If we have the money, we shall be only too glad to help, but hon. members must remember that this so-called “bonanza” which everyone is talking about is not all that large. But that is something which the hon. the Minister of Finance can discuss in his budget. I think we must make certain that it is possible to pass along what we have.

The hon. member for Oudtshoorn raised many interesting points. I want to thank him for raising the point that elderly persons cannot always live in a family context. That is more or less what I understood him to say.

The housing subsidy was also discussed here, by the hon. member for Meyerton as well. We can do what he asked for, but the day will come when a person is no longer able to occupy that house, and we must ensure that proper accommodation is then available. That is why we are spending R15% million every year on the subsidization of old-age homes. We cannot become too idealistic and say that they should all be cared for at home. Some people are disabled at the age of 70. 80 or 85 and sometimes others are already disable when they are 50. They are then forced to go and live in a home. However, I do think there is something we can do. We can consider housing subsidies, but I think one will be able to return to that at a later stage. The hon. member also discussed declining interest rates, as did every other hon. member. It is a real problem, but I think one should regard this in the light of the fact that the social pension is supplementary, that we have over the years not only ensured that pensions have been improved, but have also given constant consideration to the means test. It is not true that since 1972 it has never been improved.

[Inaudible.]

Up to now the hon. member for Bryanston has been relatively quiet. He did not even speak in the debate but is now making nonsensical interjections. I want to refer to the hon. member for Umbilo, a person to whom one can listen when he is speaking. He is authoritative on this subject, and I have often sat listening to him from the gallery. This hon. member made another contribution today and gave credit were credit was due. He said that assistance had in fact been rendered in certain areas, but that we should render even more assistance. I want to thank the hon. member for having said—

I am in complete agreement with him. We must bear this in mind at all times. The hon. member also said—

That is important. There is another quotation from the Bible, namely—

I think this is something which many of our people have forgotten. The hon. member for Oudtshoorn said that the aged are not always able to live with their children. Many children are in fact making a contribution as far as their parents are concerned. For example, they pay for their keep in old-age homes. Consequently, one should not write it off and say “Government, here are the old people; you look after them”. There is community involvement.

Another matter I wish to refer to is that there has in fact been an increase in every budget during the past 18 years. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central said that we should now establish how much it actually costs to subsist. I thank him for the suggestion, but in January already I asked the Human Sciences Research Council to furnish me with the figures and I received them on 1 February. For a male person it cost approximately R114 per month just to stay alive, and for a female person R118 per month. I do not know the reason for the difference, but these are the figures with which they furnished me. On the basis of the figures I now wish to state that the R97 which the pensioner received at that stage from the State—it could be that he received another amount—was 80% of that amount. However, there is something else that still has to be added. He may also invest an additional R5 000 at an interesting rate of 10%, and consequently he receives R500 per annum or ±R42 per month. If one adds together the R97 and the R42 we are already in the region of 120% of the amount which a person requires to subsist. Of course we do not merely want people to subsist, but we cannot give them a generous amount and neglect others. We must try to help everyone up to a certain stage. That is why we have the means test.

Typical of all his speeches, the hon. member for Yeoville also said that we should improve the means test. How should we improve the means test? During the discussion of my Vote he can reply to that question of mine if he is one of the speakers on that side of the House. How should I improve it? Should I abolish it? If I abolish it then I still need R263 million in one year to provide all the people over the age of 65 years with a pension. Is that fair to the people who are receiving pensions at present? Should I not rather try to double their pensions? During the discussion of my Vote hon. members must make suggestions to me. That is the opportunity to indicate how we should improve it. We are working on it all the time, and it could be that there will in due course be a better means test, but we cannot abolish it. If we abolish it then the person who draws R800 or R1 000 per month from his income that he has set aside is also going to enter the picture.

I should now like to deal with a few of the statements made by the hon. member for Yeoville. He suggested certain things in his amendment. He said: “We must immediately review the means test applicable to aged social pensioners.” We are trying. We are going to consider this. He also said: “We must introduce an indexed bond which protects the cash invested therein against inflation.” That is something we could consider. When the hon. member makes such a suggestion I cannot state here across the floor of this House that I think it is a good thing. The examples which the hon. member furnished of how it would work did not in my opinion sound very convincing, especially when he said that in the early years when the dollar was still strong the people linked their incomes to the dollar. The hon. member said that they should invest it in gold.

I said nothing about “linked”.

The hon. member said one should invest it in gold, but what happens if the price of gold drops tomorrow?

You do not understand.

But this is something we can discuss, I cannot argue about it with the hon. member here. The hon. member also said: “We must increase social pensions.” The hon. member is taking a chance. He knows that for 18 years there has been an increase every year. Now he is asking for another increase, and then he will say that it was the hon. member for Yeoville of the PFP who was able to get it. All assistance which the pensioners receive will come from this side of the House.

That is what you are afraid of. The point is that you are afraid that some one else will get the credit.

Then the hon. member came forward with this story of the Legion which I had allegedly not replied to. I had an interview with them for over an hour and a half.

When?

It was in November. Ask them. They left me completely satisfied with what I had told them, viz. that certain concessions had been made and that I was going to recommend that the concessions could perhaps be implemented within a shorter period. I cannot at this early stage say that it will happen. The hon. the Minister of Finance has to decide. However, the hon. member implied here that “they had not heard from the department”. And he referred to 2 February. They heard everything from me. I also said that I could tell them nothing further prior to the budget Surely I cannot write to them and say that certain amendments have been made; the hon. the Minister of Finance must first announce it in his budget. Surely I cannot tell hon. members today what proposals I put forward to the hon. the Minister on pensions. It does not work that way in practice. The department does the necessary research and I put forward the proposals, and subsequently the hon. the Minister of Finance announces them in the budget I shall leave the matter at that because I do not want to spend too much time on the hon. member.

I also want to thank the other hon. members who spoke.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 34 and motion and amendments lapsed.

Order! I have to announce that in terms of a resolution of the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders and after consultation with the South African Broadcasting Corporation the budget speeches in respect of the Railways and Harbours Appropriation Bill and the Post Office Appropriation Bill will in future be broadcast as in the case of the budget of the Central Government.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

I should like the House to apply its mind to the wording of my motion, because it is within these parameters alone that I wish to discuss this matter which I believe is of the utmost national urgency. At the outset, let me say that I sincerely hope and trust that this is not going to be turned into a political debate. I would not like this to be a debate of a political nature, nor would I like this to be a debate of an emotional nature. I know we shall have facts and figures laid before us today, and my colleagues will be assisting me in this. So I make this appeal to all parties to join me in avoiding the tèmptation of scoring petty political points.

It is my earnest desire today to bring the spotlight to bear on an issue that must receive, not only the attention, of this House, but I believe also the attention of the whole country. I think it is fair to say that it was probably Sir Robert Peel who can claim to be the father of the modern-day police force, because it is well known that his name gave the first two nicknames that we know of to the police, namely the “Peelers” and “Bobbies”—the “Bobbies” deriving from the abbreviation of the name “Robert”. Since then the police of all nations have had to endure all sorts of nicknames, both flattering and insulting. They have been known as “cops”, “the law”, the “fuzz”, all manner of things. Irrespective of their name, the police are the law-enforcement officers in whichever country they serve.

With the possible exception of the hon. member for Houghton—although she maybe joined in as a small girl—most of us played the game of “cops and robbers”.

Was she a cop or a robber?

I do not know. I would not like to say. The hon. member for Germiston District is also a possible exception. We all played it, and I submit that you, Mr. Speaker, possibly played “cops and robbers” or “cowboys and crooks” too. We all learnt at an early age to like seeing the “goodies” come out on top. We like to see the “goodies” beat the “baddies”. We like to see the law enforcer come out as the ultimate winner.

What have we done, and what are we doing, about seeing to it that our present S.A. Police Force are winners? Do we give them what they deserve? I do not believe we do at all. I should like to examine the lot of a policeman and our attitudes towards him. What do we expect of him? Firstly, we expect him to be at our beck and call 24 hours of the day. Right around the clock we expect him to be there. Secondly, we expect him to be upright, honest and completely incorruptible at all times. Thirdly, we expect him never to break any law because, after all, he is the law enforcement officer. Fourthly, we entrust to him our security, our lives, limbs and properties. Fifthly, we demand from him a completely neutral political stance and, sixthly, we expect him to crawl through sewers one minute to deal with the scum of the earth, because every country has its scum and they can be of any colour, and to be able to deal with the cream of society the next minute in investigating crime. What do we give him in return? We give him what I earnestly consider to be a paltry pay-packet and, more often than not, insults to boot.

I merely want to talk about the material return. I do not want to talk about the insults which are very often heaped on the heads of members of our Police Force. We pay the White constable a minimum salary of R2 100 per annum and a maximum of R5 160 per annum. That means that we pay him R175 per month to start off with, and after a period of 10 years, if he remains a constable, he is then earning R430 per month. One of my hon. colleagues will elaborate on these figures. The Coloured and Indian constables receive a minimum wage of R1 842 per annum and a maximum of R4 320 per annum, while a Black constable starts at R1 272 per annum and rises to a maximum of R3 540 per annum. That is what my motion is about here today. I think it is common cause to say that the security and peaceful existence of any orderly, well-governed country is to a very large degree dependent on the loyalty and integrity of its Police Force. I think too that we must note carefully that history has no record of a Police Force falling apart as a result of a change in Government in any country in the world. There is no known cause of this ever happening.

Having said that, let me look at the S.A. Police Force. It was formed in 1913 out of various units that were responsible for police functions in various parts of what was then the Union of South Africa. I believe sincerely that since then it has developed and become one of the best in the world. In this period of time it has achieved the status of being comparable, certainly, with the best in the world, through a period in our history that has seen the balance of power swing between various political parties and party combinations, as well as our emergence into what we are today, viz. the Republic of South Africa with its completely independent status. I sincerely believe that this Government, previous Governments and, in fact, all the people of South Africa have a lot to thank the S.A. Police for. They have a lot to thank them for, in spite of the just and very often unjust criticism that is heaped on their heads. In talking about just criticism and unjust criticism, let me say that in all walks of life one will find the bad egg. One will always find the man or woman who does not measure up to the standards required of him or her. One will also find that we in South Africa are very prone to criticize the whole because of the misdemeanours of the individual. This appears to be part of our national sport. We do this on the rugby field. We criticize the whole team and say they are dirty players when there is only one fellow who sticks out head and shoulders above the rest in this respect. So, we must not criticize the entire Police Force because of the few who may be the rotten apples in the barrel.

Or Cabinet Ministers.

In the difficult times in which we live I do not think the Government or the people would be able to face the future with its unpredictable difficulties without a sound, loyal and well-equipped police force. When I say “well-equipped”, I do not necessarily mean well-equipped purely in the logistical sense, but I mean mentally and physically well-equipped. Sir, if one wants to equip a man well mentally, one must reward him properly for his efforts. What is it that militates against our drawing men into the Police Force as well as retaining the services of our older and more experienced men? The answer is simply this: Poor pay. We know that there is unhappiness about the fact that salary scales are linked through the Public Service Commission to those laid down for people whose duties and functions in no way compare with those of a policeman. We have repeatedly asked that the Police be taken out of the ambit of the Public Service Commission. We stand by that viewpoint and say this would be the ideal situation. But if we cannot achieve that goal, we respectfully request that the Public Service Commission be made to appreciate that the Police Force should have a special standing and a special status within the structure of the Commission. We say, furthermore, that the police should have its own pay structure and must in no way be linked to any other branch of the Public Service. One cannot mix oil and water. It is as easy as that.

Sir, how can we expect promising young people to make a career for themselves in the S.A. Police Force when the private sector offers them salaries that are sometimes double and even treble that being offered by the S.A. Police? How can we expect to retain young policemen, young officers, when the current financial pressures, the cost of living and the ever increasing responsibilities towards their families force these young men to look for pastures new in the private sector? They are compelled to do so because of their family responsibilities. More often than not, let me add, they have very little difficulty in getting positions in the private sector.

Of course. They are well paid.

Precisely. We must remember, too, that the exodus from the Police Force means that greater pressures are then brought to bear and greater demands are then made on a smaller number of people. This means longer working hours, often in dangerous circumstances, under more difficult conditions for those who are left.

Sir, speaking of the exodus, what do we find? In reply to a question recently we learnt that, as regards the White sector of the Police Force, we lost during last year 2 404 policemen while we trained 1 529. Therefore we had a loss of 875. The hon. the Minister told us this morning that it cost R4 566 to train one policeman.

What then is the total cost of that.

Yes, what is the cost of it? Let me add that 875 represents 57% of those trained last year. That is the percentage lost to the Police Force in the White sector alone. Amongst the Blacks the position was not as bad. There were 1 636 lost as against 1 291 trained, which is a loss of 345, or 26,7% of those trained.

Let us also remember that the policeman lays his life on the line every time he goes on duty. We are living in a world of increasing crime and in a world where terrorism is almost reaching epidemic proportions. It is quite understandable, therefore, that some of the police feel that the State does not appreciate this, purely because of the poor pay packet they receive. I am also sad to have to say—somebody referred yesterday to “die grys koppe in die Raad” and I am one of them—that the policeman no longer commands the respect he did when I was a youngster. Sir, that is not all that long ago. I am not all that old.

It must be years ago.

But today, Sir, the policemen of all races have to face open antagonism from some sectors of the population. It is hard to believe that there was once a time when it was both a pleasure and a privilege to be a policeman. I sincerely believe we can re-introduce the pleasure, privilege and pride if we upgrade salary scales to a deserving level. If we were to do that, we would not have the situation reported in The Cape Times on Tuesday, 19 February—

I quote—

But that was the previous year.

Whenever it was, it nevertheless happened, but it should not happen. It does not matter what year it was. We are never going to know what we are missing in the way of good policeman, very fine young men, if we do not make this attractive enough as a career. We shall never know what we are not getting, and this applies to policemen of all races. If we do something concrete and positive about their pay, we can justifiably ask and expect a properly compensated, proud and respected Police Force to be able, amongst many other things, to do a tremendous amount towards eliminating racial friction in South Africa because of the goodwill they would be able to engender.

I think we can also safely say that such a Force would be above corruption because, to a very large degree, temptation would be removed. By being in a position to bring this Force up to the level of strength it should be maintained at, we would once again be able to see what we all want, i.e. the Bobby back on the beat. I do not, in any way, want to criticize our present Police Force, but I do believe that higher salaries and more attractive conditions of service would encourage young men and women of the highest intelligence and integrity to seriously consider a career in the S.A. Police Force.

Permit me to digress for one minute to touch upon the Police Reservists, those people who offer their services, free, gratis and for nothing and sometimes serve up to 35 hours a month. More often than not one finds that without their efforts the S.A. Police Force would not be able to function as efficiently and effectively as it would like to. These people, however, have no insurance cover whatsoever. This is a bad situation.

Mr. Speaker, we welcome the opportunity given to this House by the hon. member for Umhlanga to put the spotlight on the police. I thank him for moving this motion here this afternoon. We welcome the opportunity to pay tribute to a gallant army of men and women who face danger constantly and risks their lives daily, and who take upon themselves the responsibility of enforcing law and order, exercising authority and ensuring peace and stability in South Africa We salute them for their loyalty and dedication to duty and to the country.

Apart from their police duties as such they are also, as we know, maintaining peace in the operational area, taking the same kinds of risks that members of our armed forces take. Figures at my disposal show that at one stage 17 had already lost their lives. At this moment I am thinking of one of the bravest of acts by the police in South Africa. I am referring to the Silverton bank episode where the police, without fear, went in to carry out an operation equal to any military operation. But for a slightly unlucky episode, I think the police would have carried out that operation without a hitch. Nevertheless, what we are doing today is focusing attention on the salaries of members of the Police Force. The hon. member for Umhlanga said that the Government was perhaps not doing enough in respect of the salary structure in the Police Force. I was happy to hear the hon. member for Umhlanga mention that he believed the whole problem could well centre in the fact that the Police Force was administered by the Public Service Commission. Now, I want to move an amendment to the motion as it stands, even though I basically agree with the motion of the hon. member for Umhlanga. All I want to do is to add something to his motion. I therefore move as an amendment—

Of course, there is a precedent for this in the South African Administration in that the Post Office is not subject to the Public Service Commission, the S.A. Railways is not subject to the Public Service Commission, and I believe that the parliamentary staff is also not subject to the Public Service Commission.

I want to refer now to a reply given by the previous Minister of Police to a question put by me during last year’s session of Parliament. That was on 11 May 1979. The then Minister of Police replied as follows—

So, it is for this reason too that I moved my amendment. I trust it will be met with favourable consideration.

I do not believe it would be fair to say that the Government has done nothing for the police. I do not believe it would be fair to say that the Government has been unmindful…

Would the hon. member care to repeat what he has just read?

I shall read it again—

I am not blaming the Government for not doing anything and I am not saying they are unmindful of the need to revise the salaries of members of the Police Force from time to time. There was quite a crisis only last year when it came to light that members of the Police Force had for three years had only a very small improvement in their overall remuneration structure. On 17 April 1979 a positive move for the better in the form of a new salary structure in respect of members of the Police Force was announced by the then Minister of Police. That announcement was welcomed because it provided for substantial increases in the salaries of members of the S.A. Police Force.

The maximum salary paid to a police constable then increased from R4 830 per annum to R5 160 per annum. That of a warrant officer was increased from R6 630 a year to R7 200 a year. That means that the salary of a police constable was increased by R27,50 a month, which was an increase of 6,8%. Police sergeants received an increase of 8,4% and warrant officers an increase of 8,6%. Police lieutenants received an increase of as much as 31,3% and a Commissioner of Police an increase of 21,25%. The only criticism I have to level at this is that the Public Service received a general increase of 10% whereas, if one compares that with the increases in respect of the first three categories in the S.A. Police Force, it appears that police constables only received an increase of 6,8%, police sergeants only 8,4% and warrant officers only 8,6%. All those members who form the bulk of the Police Force, as it were, received an increase of less than 10%.

With reference to the S.A. Railway Police, I should like the hon. the Minister to take note of the fact that even at that stage a Railway Police constable received a maximum salary of R5 544 a year, which is in excess even of the increased maximum salary of R5 160 paid to a S.A. Police constable since 17 April 1979. I shall deal with that a little later.

Still dealing with the salaries of members of the S.A. Police Force, I should like to point out that certain deductions are also made from those salaries. In the case of a constable on his starting salary, for instance, R28,50 of his monthly salary is deducted in the form of tax. He pays R15,40 towards his pension fund and R2 towards medical aid. Then there is even a subscription of 35c a month for the police magazine. The take-home pay of a constable earning R3 000 per annum was R200 per month. Perhaps that is the reason why there is such a large number of resignations or so many individuals buying themselves out of the Police Force. This salary of R200 obviously cannot match the salary structure in the general economic sectors in the country, so it is far more attractive for them to go ahead and leave the Police Force.

Another aspect which I think should be brought to the attention of the hon. the Minister is that the question of overtime is a sore point. I want to draw his attention to several aspects. Firstly, overtime can only be paid on off days. When a policeman works overtime on a normal day, he receives nothing extra. If he is to come off duty at 16h30, but is given an assignment at 16h00, he may have to work right through the night with no extra pay. This is called continuous duty. To earn additional remuneration a policeman would have to work on his two off days per week. This is unhealthy, as he has no time for recreation. On his off days a policeman can be ordered to go on duty at, for example, a soccer match or a rugby match, or to look after Cliff Richard, but he does not qualify for extra pay. The additional remuneration is paid for either a four-hour or an eight-hour shift. That means that if he works for six hours, he is only paid for a four-hour shift, and that if he works for 10 hours, he is only paid for an eight-hour shift. Except in the case of the murder, robbery, security and narcotic squads, prior application for extra work must be made. Overtime rates paid are equivalent to the daily rate and not time-and-a-half or double time. When a policeman goes to court to give evidence, he very often does so on his off days while nothing extra is paid to him for doing it. In addition I want to say that there is no excuse for any discrimination in respect of the salary scales paid to Coloureds, Indians and Blacks. The work they do is exactly the same. The hon. member mentioned some examples. In terms of the new salary structure a White constable’s top salary is R5 160; that of a Coloured, R4 320; and that of a Black, R3 540. The figures are, of course, available to everyone. They share common duties and dangers, they go out together on patrol, the risks they take are the same and what they buy costs the same, and so there is really no excuse whatsoever for continuing with this disparity in salaries. I think this is the reason why there are so many resignations. By way of documents which have been tabled and questions which have been put in the House, this matter has been brought to the attention of the House. The hon. member for Umhlanga has referred to a figure of 875. I accept this figure. I have a slightly different figure, but it does not matter. It also shows that we have had a net loss, which has increased since last year. Between the authorized figure and the actual figure there is a difference of 2 173 as far as the Whites are concerned. This is a serious difference of which we have to take notice.

Let us do a “Thatcher” on the S.A. Police. When Margaret Thatcher came into power in Great Britain, the first thing she did was to give £4 300 a year to a constable after two years’ service. I shall show the hon. the Minister the advert from Britain that I have here. This is the new salary rate paid to policemen in Great Britain. [Interjections.] I think we should try to follow this example. I think it is common cause that we have these problems. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and despite the increases which have been granted, the figures still show that something is wrong, and that something is basically that the remuneration paid to them, particularly in the lower echelons, is not sufficient to keep them in the Police Force. I do not think there is room for much complaint as far as the very senior members of the Force are concerned. I also know that there has been a slight change since the announcement in April, viz. that an amount of R70 per month is paid to all members of the Force, irrespective of rank, which represents a distinct improvement. However, I do wish to ask the hon. the Minister what the position is in regard to members of the CID in respect of an allowance for uniforms. Constables in uniform get a uniform allowance, but do members of the CID, who do not wear uniforms, get an allowance? I think the hon. the Minister should clarify the position in this regard.

The South African Railway Police have direct representation, as police forces in Germany, France and Britain have their unions although our police do not have the power to strike. Through their staff associations the Railway Police have direct contact with the General Manager and with the Minister. In other words, they can speak directly to the Minister and to the General Manager, but as far as the S.A. Police are concerned—I raised this under the Police Vote last year—no member has direct representation, as far as I am aware, on the Public Service Commission to put their views and to explain the difficulties that policemen are faced with today. I raise all this for a very simple reason. I have filed a petition in Parliament and have made a plea, on behalf of the voters of Hillbrow and Yeoville, for the return of the Bobby on the beat, the policeman who can go on the beat in order to try to arrest the increase in crime which is taking place, particularly in that built-up area, one of the most densely populated areas in the Southern Hemisphere. Problems have arisen there which can only be solved by having policemen on the beat. One of the main problems, and one which has to be constantly watched, is the problem of prostitution in Hillbrow and similar areas. Where a group of women abandon a moral way of life to live parasitically in a decent society where the values of family, home and work are paramount, their fellow travellers pursuing the same easy path to ill-gotten gains will congregate. A variety of criminal bees will buzz around the honey pot: The pimps who live off the earnings of prostitution and do not work and the gangs of unemployed males who need money for liquor, for drugs, for the purchase of prohibited substances such as gold and diamonds and for gambling. Internecine wars between rivals for “favours” are a feature of the lives of prostitutes, with an attendant rise in other criminal activities such as thefts, break-ins into flats and stores, etc. Policemen should be assisted in the task of combating this evil, and I suggest that an investigation be launched by the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions to go into the whole question of prostitution. There are difficulties with regard to the conviction in court of these prostitutes. Prostitutes find that they are spotlighted and that their names are revealed, but that the men who take part are protected and their names withheld. Yet if the names of those men were not hidden and they were not protected, the police would never be able to get a conviction because nobody would come forward and no evidence would be available. We have an impasse, and perhaps something should be done to remove the social evils which adhere to this society. Even if there is some form of legalization and control—I am not saying that I am in favour of it—I still maintain that the situation should be investigated.

Due to the limited time at my disposal, I wish to say in conclusion that there should be a new deal for the police. Let us do a “Thatcher”, as I have suggested. Let us pay them overtime at 1½ and double pay rates, let us create a union for policemen to constantly review and negotiate their salary, pay them danger money when they are at risk and also divorce them from the control of the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I was surprised that the official Opposition’s main speaker to this motion was the hon. member for Hillbrow. One would have expected it to have been the hon. member for Johannesburg North—that hon. member is probably still formulating arrear decisions—or the hon. member for Houghton.

The motion moved here today by the hon. member for Umhlanga is one that should be approached and discussed with great sensitivity. The hon. member for Umhlanga is a Whip of that Opposition party and we are used to his getting excited at times. However, I want to congratulate him on the restraint he exercised today.

We on this side of the House have always thought it unnecessary to discuss the conditions of service and, in particular, the salaries of policemen across the floor of this hon. House. Our approach has been that a policeman, like any other individual, also has a right to privacy and that it would be wrong to discuss his position here in public. However, we have no option now because this motion is before the House but I do not believe that there is only a dark side to the picture. In order to illustrate the positive steps taken by the Government in the past I should like to move the following further amendment to the motion of the hon. member for Umhlanga—

Right at the outset I want to say that I do not believe anybody is more proud of the S.A. Police than I and my hon. colleagues on this side of the House. I want to avail myself of this opportunity of saying to the Commissioner of Police and his 35 000 colleagues that this side of the House is proud of them and of the way in which they are performing their very arduous and sometimes thankless task.

So is this side of the House.

I accept that. I accept that that side of the House feels the same way with one exception, namely, the hon. member for Houghton. I can never regard her as being a friend of the police.

I want to address a special word of thanks and appreciation to the families of policemen, especially to their wives. I think the wife of a policeman is the epitome of unselfishness and selflessness. The public at large is not sufficiently aware of the sacrifices the wife of a policeman has to make in the interests of South Africa.

Having said that I know the hon. member for Umhlanga will tell me that appreciation for and pride in the Police Force do not pay the accounts. That is true and I have no quarrel with that. After all, it would be stupid of me to do so. On the other hand, it is equally true that salaries alone cannot be conducive to a stable and satisfied Police Force. Surely that is also true. Surely there is a multitude of other factors that one has to consider. I do not want to denigrate the motion of the hon. member for Umhlanga. I merely want to say that we should colour the whole kaleidoscope of this picture. After all, there are other factors such as the opportunity to study, bursaries, sporting facilities and the opportunity to play sport from club level up to national and international level.

That does not feed the children.

Let us take a look at service allowances. These amount to R552 per annum. There are camp allowances, over-time, operational area allowances, pension funds, medical funds, etc. These are only a few of the examples I can mention. They constitute some of the perks that I should like to call “the invisible components of the service contract”. Because they constitute the invisible components of the service contract, they are unfortunately often overlooked. I can mention others; for example, housing benefits and uniform allowances, but this is not the point I want to make.

The point I do want to make is the fact that a finger is always being pointed at the Government as though nothing was being done for the Police Force. That is not true when one applies the test of time to the situation. On the contrary. I want to go so far as to say that the benefits I have just mentioned are some of the best in South Africa In point of fact—the hon. member for Umhlanga will agree with me—the additional benefits I have mentioned are generally speaking better than those that the private sector offers its employees. They are far better.

The hon. member for Umhlanga said: “Let us discuss the entire motion peacefully and calmly.” I should like to do that but I also want the policeman in South Africa to know that the NP as such is extremely sensitive when it comes to the working conditions, the work situation and the conditions of service of the Police Force. This aspect was discussed in detail last year at the congress of the party in the Transvaal. I know too that the hon. member for Umhlatuzana who is unfortunately in hospital today, raised this subject at the Natal Congress. On both occasions the hon. the Minister who had only recently assumed responsibility for this portfolio undertook to regard as a very high priority the introduction of a conditions of service package deal that would cater for the special circumstances and needs of the Police Force. I think that is what the hon. member for Umhlanga has also asked for, namely, that special attention be given to the special needs of the Police Force. That is the undertaking which the hon. the Minister has given. I want to assure the hon. member for Umhlanga that the hon. the Minister is attending to the matter. In fact, he is attending to it very actively. He is extremely active in regard to it.

He must hurry up.

The hon. member will agree, however, that that cannot be done overnight. After all, there are other sectors as well. What will the hon. member for Umhlanga do if a voter asks him: What about the teachers?

Yes, what about them?

What about the nurses?

Yes, what about them?

What about the army?

Good question!

In other words, one has to consider the problem in toto. A responsible Government has to look at the entire spectrum of the problem. For that reason this cannot be done overnight.

I make bold to say that it is still worth one’s while to be a policeman and I shall tell hon. members why I say this. The unfortunate incident at Silverton happened in the very centre of my constituency. I have visited those people in hospital. There I found a little fellow whose name I shall mention, young Knutz. He had tubes protruding from his intestines and veins. The matron did not want me to speak to him but he is one of my electorate, one of my lads. I walked up to him and he said: “Sir, you people must not worry about us; we are all right. Just see to it that things do not go wrong in Cape Town.” There’s a policeman for you, Sir! There’s a man for you! There is a man who is proud of his job. Do hon. members know why? He is a man who knows he is on the winning side. That is the type of policeman I want to have alongside me on the road ahead. That is the type of man who considers it an honour to be in the Police Force.

We have a problem. What is our problem? Our problem is that there are only so many people. We are all worried. The hon. member for Umhlanga is not the only person who is concerned about the large number of resignations. If it costs R4 500 to train one policeman and the service loses 2 500 per year, the cost to the State is R11 million. I must add, however, that some of them come back, they rejoin the service. We simply have to accept that the Public Service as a whole is being used by the private sector as a training facility. We can try as hard as we like but when it comes to salaries alone we shall never be able to compete with the private sector. We must try to make the service attractive in other directions as well.

I am extremely pleased that it was an English-speaking member who moved this motion. I think it is safe to say that approximately 40% to 45% of White South Africans are English speaking.

35%.

Sir, it is shocking when one realizes that the number of English-speaking policemen comprise a mere 12¼% of the Force. I am not making a political issue of this; I am simply asking the hon. member for Umhlanga what he and his colleagues are doing to encourage the English-speaking young men to play their part in protecting South Africa.

All the training is done in Afrikaans.

Let us go further. I am very glad that a Jew has also taken part in the discussion of this motion. Let us consider the Jewish community for a moment because that is a fairly large community in South Africa I am told that there was a time when there were two Jews in the Police Force.

Do not bring that up, please.

One Jew retired on pension and the other one resigned. Sir, I am not trying to make a political issue of this. I am only pointing out what the various groups are doing. [Interjections.]

Order! Is the hon. member prepared to answer a question?

No, Sir, he must sit down. I am told that every seventh White person in South Africa is a Portuguese.

Why are you so rude?

They own vegetable stores, cafés and other shops but how many of them offer their services to the S.A. Police? Must the Afrikaner alone always be responsible for the maintenance of law and order in South Africa? I think the time has arrived in South Africa—let us make no bones about this—for the S.A. Police Force to become the joint responsibility of all population and language groups in South Africa because unless that happens, there will always be an outcry about benefits. There must be a joint effort to build up the Force. In this respect my hon. friend from Umhlanga has the same responsibility as the hon. member for Hillbrow and myself. We must make a joint effort to build up the Police Force to ensure the safety of South Africa as a whole.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Pretoria East has seen fit to introduce an amendment which starts off by saying that they want to delete all the words after “that”. I wonder if he knows what he is doing. What does the motion say? It says—

Does the NP not want that done? Do the hon. members not believe that that would be a good thing to do? In fact, the hon. member has already told us that the hon. Minister of Police is making this a priority. So how can they possibly say that they want to delete it?

Why do you not read the amendment?

Secondly, our motion goes on to say—

Does the hon. member not agree with that? Why does he want to delete those words?

Why do you not read the amendment?

I cannot read the amendment because the hon. member has not sent anyone in these benches a copy of it. [Interjections.] The fact remains that the NP has turned this into a paean of praise: Thank the hon. the Minister and thank everyone else.

Then the hon. member for Pretoria East chose to introduce a most unfortunate note into this debate. He took the English-speaking population to task, because they were only providing 12½% of the Police Force when they form about 40% of the White population. Does the hon. member know what the figures for the Police Reserve are?

Unpaid.

They, the voluntary people, do it without being paid at all, and the S.A. Police could barely exist without them today. I understand that in the Police Reserve the ratio is approximately 50:50 between English and Afrikaans speakers.

Is that the figure for East London?

I am talking about countrywide figures. It is in proportion to the population. Let me, however, ask what the Government expects when they take our young children, at a very early age, put them into schools and insist that those children must be separated into English-and Afrikaans-speaking schools. They encourage a situation where our population is not able to get together. [Interjections.] I am, however, digressing from the main argument…

And digressing from the truth. [Interjections.]

… because the hon. member for Pretoria East introduced a new thought into this debate.

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order: May the hon. member for Klip River say that the hon. member for East London North is digressing from the truth?

Order! The hon. member for East London North may proceed.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the salaries of the Police. I want to point out that two years ago during the debate on the Police Vote in the House I quoted various salary scales for White constables, for Black constables and for sergeants in the S.A. Police Force. We were assured by the hon. the Minister at that stage—and we had the same sort of assurances today from the hon. member for Pretoria East—that he would go into the situation and that he would do his best. Two years have elapsed and what has happened in the interim? In the interim, and I will grant the Government this, the minimum pay for a White constable has gone up by R546, which is a percentage increase of 35%. That is not bad, but at the same time, when one looks at the maximum salary of a White police constable, it has gone up from R4 830 only to R5 160. So, that most senior White police constable can only earn R330 more now than he earned two years ago. This is an increase of only 6,39%, and the hon. the Minister will know that the cost of living has increased in excess of 25% in those two years. Yet, the maximum salary for a White police constable has gone up by 6,39%. I think it is shocking. When one compares this with the position of the Railway Police, one finds that the maximum salary of a Railway police constable has gone up by R939 over the past two years, so that the top constable in the SAP earns R5 160 per annum and the top Railway police constable earns R6 483 per annum. This is a considerable difference, and I suggest a scandalous difference.

Calm down.

The next point I want to make is that while the starting salaries between these two groups, i.e. the S.A. Police and the Railway Police, have, in fact, got closer, the first increase of a SAP constable is R180 per annum, whereas the first increase of the Railway police constable is R509 per annum. In my view, this is the sort of increment that will encourage people to stay and which needs to be introduced in the S.A. Police. The tragedy is that the wage gap has widened between the Railway Police and the ordinary police. It was R714 and it is now R1 323, and then the hon. the Minister perhaps wonders why the police are leaving the Force and why he is not attracting the sort of intake that he should be attracting.

Why do you only take the rank of constable? For the rest there is very little difference.

I have not yet finished my speech. If the hon. the Minister will be patient and listen, he will find that I am going to look at other situations as well, which I have made a study of. I now want to discuss the position of the White sergeant in the S.A. Police Force. While his minimum salary has also shown a reasonable increase of R510, or 16,83%, over the last two years, we again find that the maximum salary is the problem. The problem is that the maximum pay of the White sergeant between 1978 and 1980 has gone up by only R510 or 8,37%, which is well below the amount by which his cost of living has increased. He is now in a worse position than he was two years ago. Two years ago the situation was already desperate. What can we then call it today? At the same time, the Railway Police—and I am glad to see that the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs is present—have done a better job. They have increased the maximum pay for a Railway Police sergeant from R6 237 to R7 320, or by 17,36% compared with only 8% in the Police Force. Sir, this is constantly presenting an appalling picture. The hon. the Minister is shaking his head: Does he not believe this? Does he not know that this is the truth? Or does he not agree that it is an appalling situation?

I have got figures in front of me that differ a little from yours. That is why I am shaking my head. But carry on with your speech.

Well, Sir, he may have, but I must tell you that I in fact have the salary scales of the S.A. Police for 1980. I have taken them from a photostat given to me by my colleague, who I understand got it from the S.A. Police a short while ago. I have taken my other figures from the answer supplied by the hon. the Minister of Police to a question I put on 16 February 1978. I am therefore prepared to say that my figures are correct and, if the hon. the Minister has different figures, they are not correct.

I also want to talk about discrimination in terms of pay in the Police Force. Once again this brings up a situation which I believe needs attention. We are constantly told by the Government that they are trying to equalize the pay position between Black and White in South Africa, that they are trying to narrow the gap, and that the Blacks percentage increases have always been greater. Let us however look at this in terms of money, which is what I have done, as far as the Police are concerned. The gap between a Black constable and a White constable in starting pay in 1978 was R636. The Black constable was starting on R918 and the White constable on R1 554. What is the position in 1980? The difference has gone up to R828. So in terms of money received the difference is actually increasing. It was R636 and it is now R828. Therefore I ask the hon. the Minister in his reply not to “percent” me any percentages: Let us talk in terms of money, in terms of how much the man is putting into his pocket.

I am doing my calculations. I shall reply to you.

Let me concede here and now that as far as the Coloureds and Indians are concerned the gap is closing. It is not closing materially, but it has decreased from R276 to R258. At least that is happening, but the gap in starting salaries for a White constable and a Black constable is not improving. Let me also concede here and now that, looking at the position of the sergeant in terms of both minimum and maximum salaries, I find that the gap has closed slightly. There is a slight improvement in respect of Black and White sergeants in 1980 as compared with 1978. Again, it is not a tremendous improvement, but it is at least an improvement. Between 1978 and 1980 there has been a slight improvement.

Sir, what is the result of this pay situation? I want to turn now to some quotes I have from an excellent series of articles published in The Cape Times between 14 and 16 February 1979 and written by their crime reporter, one Malane Bosman. One sees the result of what has happened. I have quotes from this article, e.g.—

Now another quote—

Then one must also look at what the Black man gets. Let me remind the hon. the Minister of what I said to his predecessor, in a police debate. The Black man is just as dead when he finds himself on the wrong end of a riot as is the White policeman. The Black policeman’s life is very often rather more at risk because Black policemen have to deal with situations which are perhaps more difficult to handle. Those policemen are working amongst people of their own colour, whose feelings perhaps boil up more easily, so they are definitely placed in positions of greater risk. I quote further from the articles—

So it goes on. I quote further—

Now the comment of a Johannesburg policeman—

There are many more examples I could quote, but my time is running short, so I shall not quote any further from those articles. I commend them to the hon. the Minister’s attention, however. If he has not already read them, I believe he should.

The Cape Times articles?

The Cape Times articles, yes. The problems are manifold. There is an increasing lack of respect for policemen from members of the community. Because of the low pay-scales, too, the wrong people are being attracted. When one builds a pyramid the base has to be sound if one wants the whole pyramid to be sound.

We have good boys in the police.

I am not saying that there are not good boys in the police. I am not saying that in any shape or form.

You said the Police Force is attracting the wrong people.

I am saying the Police Force also attracts the wrong people. I would not be as foolish as to say that it only attracts the wrong people. I would not for one moment be as foolish as to suggest that. I can, however, give the hon. the Minister figures, taken from 1978, of the number of policemen who have, in fact, been charged with criminal offences. I do not have to quote them, however, because the hon. the Minister knows them himself. They do not make attractive reading.

There is another problem, and this is quite a serious problem. I am referring to the discouragement of the policeman who arrests a criminal for a relatively minor offence, gets him to court and gets him convicted, only to come up against the fact that we have this tremendous overcrowding in the prisons because of people serving minor sentences.

That has nothing to do with salaries.

If the hon. the Minister would just listen for a moment. I am saying how discouraged policemen become. They are discouraged because, having arrested a man and got him to prison, they find that…

Where do you find that in the motion?

The hon. the Minister will have his turn. They find that the prisons are so full that the prisoner is let out on bail almost immediately, or he is let out on parole virtually at once. Then, within 24 hours of having charged that person the policeman sees the same individual committing the same crime. This is terribly discouraging. [Interjections.] I am not saying that that is the fault of the hon. the Minister of Police, but it is one of the things in this country that the police have to contend with.

So in closing let me say that there can be no doubt in the mind of every man who uses his head that there is a situation here that needs urgent attention, a situation that has been allowed to become more serious as the years have gone by. I would therefore suggest that if the hon. the Minister himself is not prepared to act, at least he should appoint some sort of a commission of inquiry.

Who said that?

I did not say that the hon. the Minister was not prepared to act. I said “if" the hon. the Minister was not prepared to act…

Are you saying that for the Daily Dispatch ?

… he should appoint a commission of inquiry to investigate the whole situation in regard to the police.

Are you saying that for the Daily Dispatch ?

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid matters have been raised in this debate which were most certainly never intended to be raised under this motion. [Interjections.] I cannot see any connection between them and this motion. I am sorry that this has happened because I think the hon. member for Umhlanga has tried today to put in a good word for the police and has tried to see if anything could be done to ease their lot.

I want to put it to the hon. member for Pretoria East—I think he is the one who started this—that he as a former Bolander will agree with me that we Bolanders are moderate people. We are composed, calm people. However, since the hon. member has moved to the Transvaal, it looks as if something has gone wrong. [Interjections.] He has come here today …

Surely you are now preaching provincialism.

Rather provincialism than politics. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon. member must now confine himself to the motion under discussion.

Mr. Speaker, that is in order. I shall abide by your ruling.

The hon. member for Pretoria East drew comparisons in regard to the number of persons from the respective population groups in South Africa represented in the S.A. Police. I want to ask him whether he has also tried to find out how many Portuguese teachers and how many Portuguese doctors and advocates there are in the country? Is he drawing a comparison when it comes to the S.A. Police? I am sorry that that has happened.

Hon. members ought to remember that it was the hon. member for Simonstown who over the past two years has very strongly and unequivocally spoken out in favour of the S.A. Police. As he is not well and is unable to be present here today he has asked me at short notice to take part in the debate, and I am pleased to do so. On behalf of my hon. colleagues I support this motion.

We are talking about people today who are held in high esteem in this country. Not only do they deserve that esteem but they also have it. The policeman is the friend of old and young. All of us can testify as to how policemen act and how they co-operate with the people in this country. One can hardly imagine a situation in which society will be able to cope without the services of a policeman. They are the people who ensure that we are able to sleep peacefully at night. When we go to bed at night how many of us give a thought to the fact that somewhere there is a policeman on duty, especially when the south-easter is blowing at gale force here in Cape Town or when it is raining continuously? There are always people who are only too willing to criticize the police.

I can assure you that the wind does not blow any less here than in Port Elizabeth.

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry but once again the hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs is trying to distract me. However, the two of us can argue that question at a later date. I am convinced the wind is stronger in Cape Town than in Port Elizabeth. [Interjections.]

There are those who criticize the police but in any emergency they are usually the first to run to the police for help. I want to avail myself of this opportunity today to pay tribute to the police. We must always remember the fact that the S.A. Police were the first to go to the border. They were the first people in the country to do border duty, long before members of the Defence Force went there. They did so in the days when conditions there were appalling, at a time when there were no facilities. They had a very hard time there and we must remember that.

The police work long hours. I think all the arguments I am advancing at the moment have already been advanced. The police work under difficult circumstances. Their lives are endangered in the performance of their work. In one respect I agree with the hon. member for Pretoria East and that is his reference to the domestic life of members of the Police Force. We realize that most of them see very little of their families. That is definitely a drawback for both themselves and their families.

When we consider the circumstances under which they live, the responsibilities that rest upon them, they are most certainly among the lowest-paid officials in South Africa. Therefore, we must see to it that they too are placed on the same level as other officials. Reference has already been made to the S.A. Railway Police. Even those employed in the Prison Department are better paid and so are the Railway Police. I do believe, therefore, that the time has arrived for attention to be given to this matter and that members of the S.A. Police Force should not only be entitled to overtime pay in certain circumstances but that they should be paid overtime every time they work overtime.

It is true that the allowances they are paid makes a big difference to their income. It is true that they are paid allowances. We cannot deny that. But those allowances are not pensionable and when a policeman retires on pension he, like anybody else, likes to maintain the standard of living to which he has become accustomed. Therefore, if he can only make ends meet on allowances which are not pensionable it is obvious that he will be unable to maintain his standard of living when he retires and that he will be faced with bigger problems. The hon. member for Simonstown has spoken frequently about the uniform allowances paid to the members of the Police Force. We expect our policemen to be neatly dressed at all times. I am not quite sure at the moment what that allowance is.

It is R214.

I take it that that is R214 per annum.

Every five years.

One need only look at the price of clothes today. I take it that police uniforms are not cheap. A policeman has to have a raincoat as well as a warm overcoat and shoes. Neither can he make do with only one uniform. I wonder whether the amount mentioned by the hon. the Minister is adequate. A policeman is obliged to do duty in his uniform. He cannot go on duty in a worn-out suit like some of us sometimes wear in this House. His uniform must always be neat.

I think the question of removing their service from under the aegis of the Public Service Commission has already been mooted in this House. I think that was the theme of an amendment moved in this House. If I am not mistaken, I think it was the hon. member for Simonstown who first raised this matter. He feels that not only the Police but all the uniformed branches of our forces as well, i.e. the army etc. should be removed from under the aegis of the Public Service Commission so that they can be paid in relation to the responsibility they carry, the duties they perform and the danger to which they are exposed when they do that duty so that we can have contented officials in the service.

I want to deal with the Silverton incident for a moment. I can tell hon. members that there is definitely not one person in South Africa who is not proud of the way in which the S.A. Police Force acts at all times and especially of the way in which they acted at Silverton.

I am tempted to say that my blood nearly boiled when I read an editorial in one of Cape Town’s English-language newspapers recently in which doubt was cast upon the use of a firearm to shoot a suspect who ran away when a crime was being investigated. The impression is even created that there is justification for criminal action that does not result in death. It amounts to the fact that when a policeman is investigating a case the suspect can run away but according to this newspaper he may not be shot at. I wonder what attitude that newspaper would adopt if that man were to hide behind the first tree he could find, pulled out a weapon and killed the policeman. Would any sympathy be expressed for that policeman?

A great deal has been said in the past and again today in this House about the S.A. Police. I am afraid that today will not be the last occasion. The subject will be raised again. I want to conclude by saying that if we do not have a happy Police Force, a Force consisting of people who do responsible work, people who work hard, young men will never be encouraged to join the Force. In order to keep the Force at its full strength at all times, we need people in the Force who can at all times recommend a career in the Police Force. My appeal today is that something be done so that we will have a contented Police Force in South Africa.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central will not take it amiss of me if I do not take his arguments any further, because as the hon. member for Umhlanga recommended, I prefer to keep this very important matter above politics. If one has the intention of doing so, then it is a great pity if one provides figures about which one is not very certain. I do not want to try and recruit a few votes among the S.A. Police. These people do not like it if you underestimate their intelligence.

I should prefer to deal with a few of the reasons why so many policemen purchase their discharge. Many of the reasons for this have already been pointed out. 80% of our people in South Africa simply cannot be bosses and must do a job or perform a task to earn a wage or salary. It is my conviction that if one has to be employed, the most interesting vocation one could follow is to join the S.A. Police. I am reasonably well-informed in this regard.

One of the reasons why many young policemen resign is that the methods of recruitment make careers in the S.A. Police sound too rosy. That is wrong. I think it is imperative that the dull facets of this polished jewel should be brought forcefully to the attention of the potential recruit to the S.A. Police. I should like to see the following five points being put clearly to these people before they join the S.A. Police. Firstly, one must be a person of backbone, because if one is weak one is not going to keep up. Secondly, the day one joins the SAP one has to declare war on crime, and one has to realize that in the time that lies ahead one will encounter adversity at the most unexpected times. Thirdly, one will be humiliated and sometimes insulted in public at the most unfortunate times and one will not be allowed to retaliate. Fourthly, it has become the practice among certain transgressors to try to place the policeman in the accused’s bench by maintaining that they have been assaulted or that the policeman has performed an unethical act. Fifthly, by the end of the month one has to salute when one receives one’s salary cheque, which, during the first eight years of one’s period of service, will be relatively meagre. However, such a prospective policeman can be told that there will always be someone who will take his part, and that goes for this House as well. If he only has sufficient faith, this matter will eventually be rectified.

Only then ought all the fine things in the S.A. Police be put to him and pointed out to him. For example, there is the large number of technical fields in which he can qualify himself and the wonderful promotion opportunities and the fine loyal comradeship which only exist in the SAP.

If an applicant for the S.A. Police is not informed at an early stage of all the implications of his profession, cases of policemen purchasing their discharge will be inevitable.

Is it not time for prospective policemen to perform proper aptitude tests? It is not necessary to concentrate solely on numbers. Would it not be far better to train fewer policemen and then to retain them? The recruitment of “moaners” must be guarded against at all times, because this is an infectious disease which can be contracted by policemen who are contented and happy in the Police Force.

Another factor responsible for the purchasing of discharges is the lack of discretion shown by the employment programmes of some sections of the private sector. A disciplined person will always find employment. A fine, healthy, upright, neat and disciplined policeman will always be an asset to any business enterprise or any industrial establishment. This practice is too often abused by certain private bodies. These people are employed in disregard of the fact that the security of the community is jeopardized as a result. The fact that it cost the State R3 566 to put one policemen through his basic training is not taken into account either. This is not the most ethical way of supplementing one’s staff. The private sector ought to be made aware of these facts in a very civil way.

This factor is closely linked to the fact that the lower ranks of the S.A. Police still do not receive the salary they are entitled to. We cannot get away from this fact. I hesitate to say it, but it is so. I think I have the right to speak openly about this matter. I have been in the S.A. Police for 21 years and I have now been in the private sector for 21 years. I think that in these circumstances I have the right to express an opinion in this regard. The percentage-basis of salary increases has not worked, nor will it work in the future. It leaves too large a gap between the salary scales for the higher ranks and those for the lower ranks. However impossible or strange it may sound, I want to ask whether the possibility could not be investigated of having, just once more, a decent salary adjustment from below upwards instead of doing it from above downwards as has always been the case in the past. It sounds strange and perhaps even ridiculous, but I want to tell you that the people in the higher ranks in the S.A. Police are very contented with what they are earning at present, but it is those fathers who feel unhappy about their sons who are in the lower ranks of the S.A. Police.

It is disturbing that such a large number of policemen purchased their discharge during the period between their third and eighth years of service. They are men who have already completed a substantial portion of their apprenticeship. In passing, a policeman’s apprenticeship never ends, for the very simple reason that the apprenticeship of the underworld never ends either. They are constantly circumventing the proven methods of the police. That is why I say that it is dangerous and very undesirable that we should lose these people, who have a reasonable period of service behind them, from the Force.

Has the time not come to institute proficiency and merit allowances, for example after periods of service of three, five or seven years? Proficiency and reliability should also be taken into account. Mere numbers will not help. Nor would it be a mistake if an adjutant officer were to receive an additional allowance after three years’ service in that rank because it is such a person who is in a position to take the junior men, the constables and junior sergeants, in hand and instruct them in the finer arts of the police service.

The service a policeman can render the community is very difficult to evaluate. No one who has not himself performed night service realizes what this extraordinary way of life involves. No one who has not performed night service himself really know what the word “cold” really means. People who have never assisted in looking after important places such as railway lines, railway stations, post offices, electrical installations and water installations in times of emergency and have stood watch there, can speak with these people. People who have not assisted in suppressing strikes, riots and acts of violence, do not know what these people go through. These people realize that our security and that of our property rests on their shoulders. These people live in tension from day to day and it is our duty to make these people happy at all times.

Mr. Speaker, in the first place I just want to tell the hon. member for Springs that I shall come back to his argument on the percentage increases in a moment. I should like to have a few words with him on that matter.

But first of all I just want to come back to the speech by the hon. member for Pretoria East. I want to tell him that we in this party are just as worried about the fact that there seems to be a percentage difference in the contributions by English-speaking South Africans and by Afrikaans-speaking South Africans. We are most concerned about the fact that such a contradiction exists and that there is this difference in South Africa. I should very much like to put a question to the hon. member, because I understand that he is the chairman of the Police group of the NP. Since he is so concerned, could he perhaps promise us that he would motivate the hon. the Minister to do some research so as to find out why we have this situation? I think this matter calls for research in order to determine scientifically why we have these differences. It is as tragic to us, really something which worries us as much as it does the members of the NP. Therefore, I should like the hon. member to ask the hon. the Minister to do a little research with regard to the Permanent Force. I am not talking about the reservists, but the Permanent Force in particular. I should also like to ask him to concentrate his research particularly on those men who may be English-speaking at home but are also true South Africans—people who have left the force—and to get their views on the matter too.

I want to come now to what the hon. member for Springs said. I think I understood him correctly to say that he did not want a percentage increase scale for the police. I wonder whether I understood him correctly.

That is correct.

I do not believe the fault lies with the percentage system as such, but with the size of the percentage. It is so, of course, that if one grants a 10% increase right across the board the wage gap becomes bigger and bigger. That is quite correct. So perhaps one could effect a few changes to the system if there is to be a change to a percentage system.

†Mr. Speaker, what I should like to speak about specifically is what to me, on closer analysis, appears to be—and I am sure I am correct here—that the pay of the policeman is decreasing every year. Despite the actual base-line increases which the hon. the Minister gave—not this hon. Minister; I think it was the previous hon. Minister of Police—the actual real value of the pay of the policeman is going down. I should like to demonstrate that. I do not think that this is anything that the policemen themselves should be ashamed of. Quite the contrary, in fact. It is something the Government should be ashamed of.

Let us take the young White constable which the hon. member for East London North mentioned. In his first year he starts on R175 per month and then he gets himself an increase of 8,5%. By his fifth year his increase is only 6,7% of his salary, and should he remain a White constable in the SAP, by his 10th year his increase is only 4,8%, and that at a time when the cost-of-living index is going up by 14% per year. The cost-of-living index is going up by 14% per year, and at the very best, in his first year, a young constable only gets an increase of 8,5%.

Surely salaries are increased from time to time.

I should like to point out to the hon. the Minister that the hon. member for East London North has already demonstrated that the base-line salary is too low, and even if the base-line salary of R2 100 is increased in order to compete with the outside market, the policemen are still going to be paid less and less each year with this kind of increase scale. That is not something which is confined to the White constable. It goes right through the ranks, right up to that of major. Let me give the hon. the Minister an example. In the first year in which a policeman is a major, under the present salary scale—and on average it would probably take a policeman 20 years to reach that rank—his first-year increase is only 4,8% of his previous year’s salary. To reach his first maximum, which takes seven years, the poor major, in the last year of the first of the seven-year cycles, is only going to get a 3,7% increase on the present scales. That is already on a base-line salary which is uncompetitive with private enterprise.

The position runs right through all colour groups as well. Let me illustrate this by quoting the position of a Black constable. He is marginally better off than his White counterpart because his increase is 7,5% compared with that of his White compatriot. What is even more important is that we must look at where the policeman stands in relation to the cost of living, and where his salary increases stand in relation to other categories of occupation in South Africa. What do we find the position to be over the two-year cycle from the beginning of 1978 to the beginning of 1980? The average increase of Whites’ wages, and that includes the Civil Service, was 10%; but if one looks at the average increase for policemen, particularly that of the constable, one sees he is already at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the population because his increase was only 8,5% in the year of best increases for him, which is his first year. If we consider the Black constable, we find exactly the same problem. Black wages in South Africa, on average, during the same period increased by 13%. But his salary has only gone up by 7,5%. If one bears in mind that the young constable, the young married man, probably faces a greater outlay of capital necessary for the establishment of a home, that he is going to be hit harder by price increases, and that he is going to be hit harder by inflation which averages 13% per year, then I think the hon. the Minister will have to agree with us that the take-home pay of the Police in South Africa today is decreasing in purchasing power every year. That must be one of the most important reasons why they are losing so many people out of the Force.

I would like to come back to the plight of the Black constable and point out to the hon. the Minister that, if he does not have the Police Force taken out of the Public Service Commission, he should at least give special consideration to their circumstances, as the mover of the motion, the hon. member for Umhlanga, suggested. Let us consider the Black constable. He starts at R106 per month at a time when the poverty-datum line for South Africa is R145 per month—the poverty-datum line! The hon. the Minister will say that the Black constable is probably a single man. He may be a single man, but there will also be married men who will join the force as constable. Then we will find that inflation over a five-year period will probably push the poverty-datum line to R200 per month. On current salary scales for that Black constable—and these are the official figures I am quoting; the hon. the Minister can quote us his own figures—he would only have gone to R154. That then would be at a time when the Black constable was most likely to have got married. Again, we have a poverty-datum line of R200 per month and the constable getting R154 per month.

I have chosen only three categories, three ranks, in the Police Force at random to illustrate that the purchasing power of the wages of the S.A. Police is decreasing every year. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that, unless a remedy is found soon, he is going to find that he will not only lose the intake of young people but also the experienced people and those people who put their life’s work into the S.A. Police. The time has come for us to stop saying this is a sensitive issue. It is a sensitive issue, but we cannot hide behind that. Comparisons are odious, but we must realize that a major in the Police Force, on the day he is made a major—and I shall not quote the figures here because it may embarrass people and I do not want to do that—earns less than the average sales representative in South Africa, and that after five years a constable in the S.A. Police Force earns less than a junior shorthand typist with three years’ experience. Those are the facts. I am ashamed to have to state them, and I think they must be a terrible embarrassment to the police as well. However, they need not feel embarrassed because the people who must feel embarrassed are the hon. members on that side of the House. I believe—and I am not dragging politics into this—the time has come for all of us to stop depending and riding on the loyalty of the Police Force and to stop underpaying them. I sincerely hope that the hon. the Minister will see his way clear this year to study the problem realistically and give the police what is really due to them.

Mr. Speaker, having listened to hon. members speaking this afternoon, there is no doubt that there is broad agreement on a number of issues relating to this motion. Firstly, there is the very importance of the work of the police in South Africa as custodians of the law, protectors of the individual citizen against crime and the shield of society against anti-social behaviour. Secondly, there is no doubt that there is an appreciation of the difficulty of the task of the police. Crime prevention and crime detection are never easy, and certainly in South Africa with its plural, heterogeneous, multiracial or multinational society the task of the police is even more difficult. It is made more difficult because of the nature of our society. We, who know the situation, know that, if one wants to face it quite frankly, one of the problems that the police have in the exercise of their duty is that they are from time to time required to enforce laws which are discriminatory and bear more heavily against one section of the population than the other. They have to apply these laws, which certain people do not consider moral and which are resented. This is a fact, a reality, which we in this House should face from time to time. The policeman is very often at the interface between a determined Government on the one hand and a resentful group of people who are governed. This is a problem in which the police find themselves and which must be given special consideration. All too often the policeman is, perhaps as an individual, unfairly identified with either a system or a set of laws which certain people consider offensive or repugnant. This makes it especially difficult for the police, in the normal course of their activities, to obtain the co-operation of certain sections of our society. The unique situation in which the police find themselves in South Africa requires of the policeman, whether he be the man on the beat or the major or general at the top, very special qualities—qualities of toughness, resourcefulness, tact, competence and integrity. We are happy to know that many of our police have these qualities. They have these qualities in spite of the conditions of service under which they have to work and in spite of the rates of pay which are available: to them. Policemen, young and old, as I have found them, see the police and police work as a calling. They see it as a calling and as an opportunity to serve. I believe that the Government should stop exploiting the loyalty and dedication of the police when it comes to their salaries. The hon. member for Durban North has made this point. More and more, as I chat to the ordinary policeman about his problems, I find him to be a young man with a great feeling for the police. He seems emotionally attached to this arm of our service. I think that emotional attachment and loyalty have been exploited by the Government, who have not given the policeman a square deal. He deserves better because of the nature of his work and because of his loyalty. My discussions with young policemen around the country indicate that they have been bitterly disappointed with the improvements which were made last year, or promised to them last year. I consider that they were totally inadequate to meet the backlog, or “agterstand”, which there was in police pay and in their conditions of service. Unless the Government announces a substantial improvement in the rates of pay and improvements in the conditions of service, I fear that these young men are going to be tom all the more between their loyalty and commitment to the Force on the one hand and the need of meeting the ordinary financial requirements for their and their families’ daily living on the other hand. Many of them may reluctantly feel that they also have to leave the service.

There is no doubt that the pay is inadequate at two levels. It is inadequate for the ordinary young constable in the Police Force who is getting married, buying a house and starting a family. We all know that he has unique working hours. He, in fact, very often cannot live in the barracks because they are unsuited to his domestic situation. Very often he requires, as he does in the Peninsula, to have a motor-car and to spend R2 or R3 each day in getting from his home, where his wife and his family are, to his place of work.

I believe that, if one takes all these factors into account, it is virtually impossible for the young policeman in the urban areas of today to offer his wife and family a comfortable living. Secondly, the pay is inadequate to retain those who through their very ability should rise to the top, because the police have to compete at the top with top people in commerce and industry. There is no doubt that a man who can rise to the top in the complex and difficult task of organizing the Police Force is a man who is sought after by the private sector. So it becomes equally important to see that the top salaries and the top conditions of employment are sufficient not only to retain the best men in the Police Force, men who will rise to the top, but also to ensure that the Police Force can attract people of calibre, real potential and real managerial and executive skills.

The fact is that the police are underpaid, that the Police Force is understaffed and that South Africa as a consequence is losing the battle against crime. Whether one takes our city centres, our flat-lands, our suburbs or our townships, there is no doubt that the consequence of the underpayment and the under-staffing of our Police Force is that there is a serious and constant rise in both petty crime and serious crime to the point where ordinary South Africans do not feel safe. Part of this is the result of socio-economic factors. Perhaps those socio-economic factors can only be redressed in the long term.

That is not just part of it. It is the most important aspect.

Sir, I am saying that in the long term they can be put right when the Government changes its policy. In the short term, however, there is no reason whatsoever why the police should not be properly paid, why the police stations should not be properly manned and why the police should not be properly trained and have all the modern equipment necessary to fight crime to the best of their ability. Mr. Speaker, the socio-economic side we will debate in due course. This motion deals with the pay and the conditions of service and there is no excuse whatsoever for the void or gap in the Government’s thinking on this particular issue.

Mr. Speaker, I must at this stage pay tribute to a remarkable group of public-spirited young men. These are the young men who volunteer to serve in the police reserves. They volunteer to augment the activities of the normal full-time policeman. I believe that without them, without their public-spiritedness, in the built-up city areas of South Africa the police would not be able to cop>e in the least with their responsibilities. Without the dedicated and, I stress, voluntary work of these men, the cities would be even less safe and our citizens would feel less secure. I want to draw to the hon. the Minister’s attention the fact that in an area like the Sea Point-Green Point area there are some 40 young men who, without pay, give up two to three nights a week to assist with this task. Although they are employed during the day, they give their services free. They are all working men and they help to provide for the safety of people by day and by night. Not only do they give their services free, but they have actually in the past raised money to augment the equipment the Government provides them out of State funds. They actually raised R2 000 on a voluntary basis to buy the intercom radio equipment which is not available from Government sources. I believe that the efforts of these remarkable young men, the voluntary contribution they are making, should be taken note of by the Government and the public at large.

Sir, if there is a need to up-grade the policing in the city centres and the so-called White suburbs of South Africa, the need for up-grading there does not compare with the need for more effective policing in the Coloured and Black townships around our cities in South Africa. One can look at the crime statistics as they come through: Crime is almost out of hand in the Black and Brown townships of South Africa. Very few people who live there have any real sense of personal security against the criminal element. House-breaking, theft, mugging and assault are daily occurrences and somehow the police so far have been unable to cope with this.

Once again I believe it needs, inter alia, a drastic up-grading of the service conditions and rates of pay of the police who serve in those areas. I think that in the first instance we should get rid of any discrimination in the rates of pay of people who have to face exactly the same dangers, who have exactly the same responsibilities and who give exactly the same service to society, irrespective of where they work. I believe that, if we were to up-grade the rates of pay of the Coloured constables and others, we would have a force which would attract attention, have the necessary status, enjoy respect and to a greater extent enjoy the co-operation of the local people. While there are many long-term things that should be done, I believe that in the fight against crime in South Africa there can be no more immediate step than to pay the policeman properly and to improve his conditions of service.

Mr. Speaker, I think it would have been better for us if the hon. member for Sea Point had rather not delivered the first part of his speech this afternoon, because he blatantly dragged politics into the debate—it was certainly a discordant note. For example, he referred, inter alia, to discriminatory laws that the police supposedly have to implement.

Is that so?

Yes, it is so. The hon. member discussed that. [Interjections.] However, the hon. member for Sea Point went further. He said—

the loyalty of the police in South Africa.

Yes.

I think that is a scandalous thing to say. [Interjections.] It is scandalous to say that this Government is exploiting and abusing the police. [Interjections.] Surely this is untrue. I reject it with the contempt it deserves.

They have to do the political dirty work.

The police of South Africa are not engaged in political dirty work, as that hon. member maintains. The police of South Africa work for their fatherland. They are doing this work for their people. [Interjections.] They need not be abused to do so. They do so because in their hearts they want to do it. [Interjections.] Consequently I reject with contempt that accusation made by the hon. member for Sea Point. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Durban North also alleged this afternoon that percentage-wise, the police actually earned less as they progressed along their salary scales. This may be true if they only continue to advance on the same scales in accordance with the salary notches which may be applicable at a given moment. However, what the hon. member fails to bear in mind, is that the key scales, as well as the notches, are adjusted and improved from time to time. This is an aspect he has overlooked. Surely from time to time the scales are adjusted and improved so that they will not be in a weaker position.

We had another discordant note in this House this afternoon as well. I am referring to certain things said by the hon. member for East London North. It is a pity he is not present now. I do not know why the hon. member tried to do a thing like that. In my opinion the hon. member for Umhlanga opened the debate well and that initially it was conducted at a very high level, until the hon. member for East London North entered the debate. I am really sorry about certain things he mentioned here this afternoon. [Interjections.] It is a good thing the hon. member is now back in the House. In the first place the hon. member for East London North did not understand the amendment of the hon. member for Pretoria East. I am not going to try to explain it to him now. I think he should go and read it this evening. Then he will see what the hon. member for Pretoria East meant by a positive amendment.

The hon. member for East London North also reproached the Government, and used terms such as “shocking” and “shameful”, for having ostensibly failed to keep certain promises. It is very easy for that hon. member to be so bold and to make promises, because fortunately for him and for us he knows that he need never implement those promises. Therefore it is very easy for him to make such a fuss. However, the hon. member also played politics here this afternoon, despite our having more or less agreed that in discussing this highly important matter, we were not going to bring in politics. He dragged in the question of the disparity between the salaries of Whites and people of colour in the Police Force.

That is a political issue, is it?

We admit that there is a disparity, and this disturbs us, too. However, the hon. member knows that there are reasons, and good reasons, for that. [Interjections.] Why then does that hon. member say, in a way which surely does not contribute to the creation of a good team spirit and of harmony in the Police Force, that a Black policeman is just as dead when he is shot as a White policeman would be?

It is true.

Why does that hon. member drag that in here? Does he perhaps think that this creates better relations among policemen? [Interjections.] It has nothing on earth to do with this matter. We hold that against that hon. member. We hold it against him that in his speech this afternoon he did not try to improve the lot of the policeman in the interests of South Africa, but instead played cheap politics.

Did I say anything that is not true?

The matter we debated here this afternoon is an important one and it is a good thing that we had, and also used, the opportunity of discussing a group of people who are of very great importance to the continued existence of South Africa and all its people. We cannot do without our Police Force. They are indispensable to us. However, let us say at once to those hon. members that they do not have a monopoly on sympathy with our policemen. We on this side of this House have the greatest sympathy with and understanding for the position of this group of people. [Interjections.] We are neither cold nor unsympathetic to their needs. We know that the hon. the Minister and his officials have worked very hard over the past few months in an effort to improve the position of these people. They have worked very hard at this.

Let us at least be reasonable. I believe that we can accept—the indications are there—that there are prospects of a marked improvement for these people. Although we cannot give tangible proof of this, we can assure policemen and policewomen that we are in the same team as they are, that we are part of that team, that we are not standing on the sidelines and that we are seeking to improve their position in the Police Force as far as possible. We are trying to further their position to the maximum possible extent with the means at our disposal. In this regard, we can never, of course, lose sight of the fact that we must never overextend the financial resources of our country. The members of the Police Force need never doubt our understanding and sympathy for them.

I want to come back for a moment to the motion under discussion. I am of the opinion that this motion lacks a very important element The hon. member for Umhlanga referred only to the salaries of the police. The hon. member for Pretoria East also pointed out that it was not merely a matter of salaries. We are concerned with the total situation as regards the remuneration of our Police Force. This embraces far more than the salaries alone. Time does not permit me to refer to this in detail. However, what I have in mind, is the total remuneration and promotion prospects of the police. I believe that this aspect must be examined, and not only the salaries of the police. One does not buy people with salaries alone. We shall be unable to obtain and retain police of the calibre we need in South Africa, and which indeed we have, with a salary alone. One buys a fortune-seeker or mercenary with a salary. However, our police are better than that. What our police are prepared to do and sacrifice in the interests of South Africa, cannot be bought with money. They are people who do their duty 24 hours a day. While we sleep, they defy wind and weather. Their loyalty cannot be bought with money.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. member a question?

No, Mr. Speaker, I have only a few minutes at my disposal. The hon. member cannot use more of my time now.

The police are people who are prepared to render service of the highest order to the community and are also prepared to lay down their lives for our fatherland. These and many more are the requirements we set our policemen.

Together with these requirements, however, there are also exceptional opportunities for our policemen in the Police Force. Today the Police Force offers a challenging career to every promising young man or woman. Think of the opportunities that exist, the wonderful possibilities to do detective work, the opportunities for a man to measure up against the ingenuity of intelligent and wily criminals. These are the opportunities that exist for our men in the Police Force. These are the challenges to our people. Then, too, there is the work in the forensic laboratory, where highly qualified people work. I believe this is a challenging career for young men and women who want to join the Police Force today. It is the kind of challenge which brings out the best in any man. These are opportunities which are definitely worthwhile working for, to make oneself a proud member of an equally proud Police Force. This is something we never dare overlook. Having said all this, however, it is also true that we shall not get people of integrity, of good calibre and of high quality if we do not also look after their salaries. This is a fact, and we cannot ignore it.

However, no Government, nor hon. members of the Opposition who have expressed themselves strongly on this matter today, if they were to come into power, could ever really pay for what the policeman is worth to us. Taking everything into account, the fact is that the situation today as regards the remuneration of our police is not what it should be. I therefore believe that we shall really have to examine the situation as regards the remuneration of the police. It seems to me—and we are not trying to emulate hon. members of the Opposition in seeking popularity—that we must definitely take a look at things that cause problems, particularly with regard to the salaries of the junior ranks, the ranks from constable to major. It seems to me that there really is room for improvement and therefore we should like to see the rationalization of the Public Service in respect of remuneration benefits also being applied at that level, so that all the men, right down to the very lowest ranks, will be able to reap the fruits. At the same time it is my conviction, not only that the maximum notches of the salaries scales are too low, but also that the advancement on those key scales is not rapid enough.

We agree.

The policeman and the Police Force have distinctive needs and distinctive requirements. For example, we have seen that to render service is a very important factor in the Police Force. Now one can ask oneself the question why, in that case, we cannot remunerate according to merit the men with years of unremitting and outstanding service. In other words, apart from the remuneration in respect of examinations they write, we must also compensate them for their good and unremitting service to the force and South Africa In view of these considerations I gladly support the positive amendment moved by the hon. member for Pretoria East.

Mr. Speaker, it is very clear from the debate so far that the Government is on the defensive.

They are embarrassed.

It is also embarrassed, as the hon. member for Pine-lands has said.

The hon. member for Verwoerdburg, who has just sat down, started off by attacking first the hon. member for Sea Point and then the hon. member for Durban North. However, I should like to say to him that in the final moments of his speech he started to take a positive approach to this issue, and in so doing he justified the motion of the hon. member for Umhlanga which indicates that something is wrong in the S.A. Police Force. He has admitted that there is scope for improvement.

I want to refer to his attack on the hon. member for East London North who said that all policemen should receive equal pay. He may say it is political, and I know that my hon. colleague who introduced this motion did say that he did not want to make a political debate of this. However, I think it should be an objective of the Police Force to ensure that every man of the same rank is earning the same pay for the same work he is doing. It is a basic principle in which this party, anyway, believes. I therefore cannot see why he is really angry with us for raising the issue at this moment in time.

He is just making a noise for practice.

Yes, he is making a noise, because I believe they are finding it very difficult indeed to refute this motion before the House.

The hon. member also said that it was scandalous of the hon. member for Sea Point to have suggested that the Government was exploiting the loyalty of the police, but that very hon. member did exactly that. He has said that it is an honour to work for the Police Force and that these men will work 24 hours a day because they have a great loyalty towards the Police Force. I made some notes of what was said. He said that they were prepared to do it for their “vaderland”. We in these benches say that while we accept that the man who joins the S.A. Police Force, or the Defence Force, is the sort of man who is prepared to defend the people if he is in the Police Force or to defend South Africa if he is in the Defence Force. [Interjections.] We also believe, though, that he should have a decent standard of living. [Interjections.] I should like to say that this very amendment moved by the hon. member for Pretoria East is exploiting the loyalty of the Police Force. I should like to show why. It says—

What evidence has been put before the House today? So far it is evident to my hon. colleagues and others that members of the Police Force are dissatisfied with the conditions. We hear stories that they cannot make ends meet and that they are leaving the Force because the conditions of service are just not good enough. I have a Press cutting here of the same article from which my hon. colleague quoted which appeared in The Cape Times and in which a policeman’s wife said the following—

I think we owe a debt of gratitude to The Cape Times for exposing this to the people. This article shows that something is wrong in the Police Force. I would suggest that hon. members opposite adopt a more positive approach to this debate. They have to admit—and I hope the hon. the Minister is going to admit—that all is not right in the Police Force.

I think we can learn from history. I did some preparatory reading for this debate, and in a book Political Police in Britain there is a chapter on the history of the uniformed police. It is interesting to note that for some 600 years prior to the formation of the Metropolitan Police Force in Britain in 1829 a system called the “old method of policing” was followed in Britain. In Anglo-Saxon times the enforcement of peace was the collective responsibility of towns and villages. As time went on they appointed one gentleman in the local community to act as a constable. When he saw somebody doing wrong he would, as is said in this book, raise the “hue and cry” and get all the villagers together to go and collectively arrest the wrongdoer and bring him to justice. This is just to show how far we have come since then. In the forward to this book the Royal Commission on Police in Britain in 1962 says the following—

It is for this reason that we have brought this matter to the attention of the House. Members of our Police Force are not getting a square deal. I want to go back in history again and mention that the British police, after the First World War, actually went so far as to strike. It was as a result of that strike that a Police Federation was formed in Britain which now negotiates on behalf of the Police Force throughout the country, but it seems as if Governments do not learn from history because again, after the Second World War, there was trouble in the British police because their pay was too low. Another commission was set up to investigate this issue and I should just like to quote the causes of the dissatisfaction amongst the British policemen at that time. I quote from this book again—

Let me just digress to say that this recommendation was to increase the pay of policemen in Britain from 33% and 54%. I quote further—

This was stated in a commission’s report in Britain way back in 1949. I honestly believe that in the debate so far these same complaints have been forthcoming from hon. members here today. I sincerely hope that the hon. the Minister has a copy of this newspaper article. If he does not, I shall give him a copy of it. The complaints which the Press found, when speaking to policemen and their wives, were almost identical to those reported by this commission in Britain in 1949.

In conclusion I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that I believe that the statistics we have put forward show that something is wrong. I also believe, and so do my hon. colleagues, that the matter is serious, especially at these times in South Africa, when, as has been said, so many demands have been placed upon our men in the Police Force. As the hon. member for Sea Point said, we are living in a country with a plural society and there is a potential here for disorder, something which one would not find in a homogeneous population. I do not believe that this hon. Minister and the Government can afford to ignore the implications of this particular problem and therefore I believe that this Government has to act as we have suggested, and I should just like to say in conclusion, that if the hon. the Minister does so, he will be assured of the support of all the Opposition parties in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I have sincere appreciation for the hon. member for Umhlanga who moved this motion today, and for his good intentions, and the way in which he presented his motion. It attests to a healthy interest in the weal and woe of the S.A. Police and I can assure him that there is little that he said today about which I cannot fundamentally or partially agree with him. If I have time, I shall refer at a later stage to a few of the matters raised. At this stage I just want to give him the assurance that I appreciate them.

However, it is unfortunately true that a debate which began at a very high level and which was conducted at a high level was made unpleasant by political utterances of hon. members on the other side of the House. Who is the hon. member for East London North to come and tell me: “If the hon. the Minister is not prepared to act, I demand a commission of inquiry?”

†He just said that so that it could be published in the Daily Despatch. That was his only reason for doing so. Let me tell the hon. member that the policemen of East London are laughing at him. I shall go to East London and tell them that this representative of theirs is nothing but a windbag. [Interjections.] I shall personally go and say that in East London, I can promise him that.

Was there any reason for the hon. member for Durban North to accuse us of riding on the backs of the policemen and saying that we must get off their backs and stop underpaying them? Since when has this Government been doing that? There was no necessity for saying that.

*The hon. member for Green Point then made an interjection which takes the cake. He said: “The police must do your dirty political work for you.” Those are the remarks one hears from the other side of the House. I should like to ask the hon. member for Sea Point: What does this lot of scoundrels and hooligans in the lower section of the urban area of Cape Town who are muggers and lay-abouts and stab people with knives, know about the policy of separate development?

What has that to do with it?

Yes, precisely. The hon. member said that if this Government changed its policy, certain socio-economic conditions would disappear and then we should have no crime. What has crime down here to do with the policy of separate development? I say this merely so that hon. members can understand that this is a matter which we should like to discuss with one another in all earnest, and there was no need to drag those elements into this debate. They can display their cattiness somewhere else, but not when we are discussing the police.

I should like to say to the hon. member for Umhlanga that what he is advocating in his motion today is a matter to which we are giving our constant and earnest attention. I should like to say to him and to other speakers opposite that the position in the S.A. Police is not as critical as hon. members imagine. The shortages in the S.A. Police are not all that critical. The shortage is a figure of approximately 2 700 for all races in the police this year. These are more or less the same figures as those of last year. We have had a fair measure of success in stemming that tide. I have the figures before me, but I do not have the time to go into that. What is more, that physical shortage of approximately 2 700 has been supplemented to a reasonable extent by retired members who have been re-employed. However, I want to mention another figure to hon. members and that is that more than 400 former members of the Force have returned over the past year. We have also had a relatively larger number who would like to come back. Of those who want to come back we have already reappointed more than 400 in the Force. I mention this merely to give hon. members the assurance that things are not so bad in the Force and also that there is a gratifying return of former members to the Police Force. They have found out that one is not so much better off in the private sector than in the police, and accordingly they are returning to the police.

Before going further I want to thank hon. members on my side of the House for their exceptional contribution. I shall also refer to certain details they mentioned. I, too, wholeheartedly support the amendment of the motion moved by the hon. member for Pretoria East.

What the hon. member for Umhlanga asks for in his motion is receiving the very earnest attention of the Commissioner of Police, the Government and myself. Over the past few months we have taken a great deal of trouble in this regard. The fact of the matter is, who is more aware of the bottlenecks in the police than I, who am the political head of such a department? I therefore want to give this House the assurance that I have been associated with this department for a long time and I am aware of the bottlenecks. I should like to single out three matters to which we have devoted our special attention over the past few months. They have also enjoyed our attention in the years prior to this but I wish to single out the past few months in particular.

The first to which I want to refer is that I am fully aware that the maximum notches from constable to major must be increased. I am giving very serious attention to the increase of these maximum notches.

The second aspect is that I am devoting my energies to arranging that police officers, from constables upwards, should also reach their maximum notch more rapidly. It is felt that there should be more rapid notch increments in the lower ranks so that the men can plan and work out a more comfortable way of life more rapidly.

I now wish to mention the third matter to which I have given special attention over the past nine months. It is not only I who have come forward with a new case; to some extent this matter has been given new emphasis over the past few months. To be specific, the Commissioner, the police as a whole and I have been devoting our energies to arranging that whereas too many ranks cannot be introduced—that could only bedevil the salary structure—consideration should be given to the introduction of a system whereby a constable, a sergeant and an adjutant officer who have already reached their maximum notch and have stayed there for a number of years, can be compensated for their good service in the Force in a different way. In other words, this could entail that a constable who does good work may be promoted to the rank of sergeant without writing an examination after a number of years on his maximum notch, that at the same time a sergeant can become an adjutant officer without writing an examination, also after a number of years at his maximum notch, and an adjutant officer who has been on his maximum notch for a number of years should be placed on an additional promotion scale with a further maximum.

These are three extremely important matters to which we are devoting our attention and I can say with a reasonable degree of optimism that we have conducted a serious discussion in this regard over the past few months with the Public Service Commission and with the hon. the Minister responsible for the Public Service Commission. I have reason to expect, and I shall now furnish more details in this regard, that provision could be made in the budget of the hon. the Minister of Finance for the representations we are making. I have no idea what they could be, but I have every reason to expect that the Government will join us in giving serious attention to this matter.

I do just want to mention a few other positive aspects as well. Since April 1979, when the new salary scales came into operation, an improved service allowance has also been introduced, which at present amounts to a total of R840, paid to all members of the Force.

In cherishing these expectations and making these representations it is also necessary that we should be realistic about these matters. It is true that we should consider the Government’s policy with regard to the service benefits of all the Government departments, including the police. We cannot set the police apart. It is impossible to remove the police from the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission. It is impossible to have the police continue with their own budget. I do not even wish to debate this matter, because there is no time; it can be discussed under the appropriate vote. For the present we are where we are and we accept the position.

I just wish to confirm the Government’s policy with regard to these matters today. The Government is constantly engaged in improving the total service benefits package of the police. This is a planned process and funds are made available within the financial capacity of the country on a regular basis. The matter is handled in this way because the Government has a continuing interest in the welfare of its staff and does not wish to give consideration to this issue on an opportunistic and fragmentary basis.

In this process of planned improvement of the service benefits package of the police the Government has set the following goals which I should like to reconfirm: In the first place, to ensure at all times that the work be organized in such a way that the posts structure follows an accountable pattern and provides fair promotion opportunities for career-oriented staff. This is of the utmost importance, particularly in the police. In the second place, to link a salary structure to these posts, which will on the one hand result in the police obtaining and retaining their rightful share of the available manpower and on the other, will afford fair remuneration. In the third place, to make provision in the service benefits package for the circumstances and requirements peculiar to the police.

We can take it that these are matters for which provision is being made and will be made in the future because all the circumstances peculiar to the police are very different to those pertaining to other officials; and I refer briefly to the following: Potential or real confrontation with dangerous situations; contact with undesirable elements and criminals; potential or real hardship due to service in the field in temporary camps and other inconvenient and unpleasant circumstances; secret or other missions without fore-warning; being subjected to a disciplinary system which is peculiar to the services; long and irregular hours of service for which overtime payment is not received; preparedness and/or security services; and operational service.

Provision has been made in the service benefits package for these and other circumstances by way of allowances, for example operational service allowances, climatic allowances for specific areas, for example along the Lesotho border where it is sometimes very cold, and a special camp allowance. Then, too, there is the system of additional remuneration for additional work performed over weekends, and I intentionally do not use the words “overtime” because a policeman does not work overtime. A policeman is paid in accordance with this system for additional work performed. In the present financial year there have been improvements to service allowances and climate allowances for specific regions.

I should just like to point out that since 1974, the general review of police salaries has amounted to 43%. This is apart from the improvements in promotion prospects and allowances. In other words—I listened to the percentages quoted opposite but I cannot go into them—the fact of the matter is that the situation has been looked at reasonably fairly, if not totally fairly. We shall leave it at that for the moment; I just wanted to say that.

Provision is being made for an improvement in the financial year 1980 to 1981 of the service benefits packet of, among others, the police, too, as was announced by the hon. the Prime Minister on 24 October 1979. It has already been made public that the vacation savings bonus is being replaced by a thirteenth monthly salary. It has also been announced that the Government is considering profession-differentiated salary revisions which, for the police, too, are very important. The details of these improvements will, as I have just said, be made known by the hon. the Minister of Finance in his budget speech.

It must be borne in mind that the Government has to ensure that the total service of the public sector can continue. Within that framework it can deal with bottlenecks by way of profession-differentiation. Secondly, it must see to it that the taxpayers can at all times afford the service which the public sector must render. Therefore its financial resources are limited and it has to be judicious in its continual improvement of the service benefits package. Thirdly, there is a link between the service benefits package of professional groups, which must always be taken into account. Fourthly, it is not only in respect of the police that there is pressure for the improvement of the service benefits package, but also in respect of all groups in the public sector, some of which have already enjoyed a great deal of publicity, for example teachers and nurses.

The hon. the Prime Minister has committed the Government to effecting improvements to their service benefits package from a common date. I want to ask the hon. members to await that date patiently. Let us wait patiently to see what the announcement is going to be and then see to what extent we are happy with the announcement. I should like to give this House the assurance that as far as I am concerned, when we hear the announcement and if there are perhaps aspects of the announcement which do not entirely satisfy the department and myself, I shall persist in making constant representations through the right Government channels in order to achieve the aims I referred to earlier.

Mr. Speaker, we now come to the second leg of the motion, namely that the Force must again be made attractive for members to complete their service therein. Surely the Force is attractive. The police force has never been so attractive for the policeman as it is today. Never in the existence of the Force has it been as attractive as it is now. Accordingly I support the amendment of the hon. member for Pretoria East.

Why are so many people resigning then?

We must get away—and in this regard I want to make an appeal to hon. members, particularly hon. members opposite—from linking contentment in the Force exclusively to salaries. It simply cannot be linked to that. I have already given an assurance with regard to what I am doing about salaries and conditions of service. Now, however, I want to appeal to every one to get away from the idea that satisfaction is only achieved by way of salaries and conditions of service, and that we get away from the attitude displayed on occasion by The Cape Times, among others. I do not want to reproach The Cape Times about their reports, because they did serve a good purpose. However, some aspects of those reports were cry-on-the-shoulder aspects. I should like us to get away from those cry-on-the-shoulder aspects. There are many things in the police that make it worthwhile for a policeman to be a policemen. That is why, percentage-wise, we do not have such an acute staff shortage in the Police Force. The shortage is approximately 9%, and if one works it back, the shortage is approximately 7%. That is not a disturbing shortage.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. the Minister a question?

Unfortunately my time is very limited—I have only a minute or two left.

I should just like to confirm why the Force is an attractive Force and why it is worthwhile for a policeman to complete his career in the Force. I refer to the salary and posts structure. I refer to the outstanding medical benefits enjoyed by a member of the Force. I refer to the uniform allowance and situation of a member of the Force. I have the figures concerned before me and I can say that in some years that amount is not even fully used by many members. Therefore ample provision is made for that. I also refer to the housing benefits which many other people do not have, for example official quarters, lease acquisition schemes and subsidization and mortgage bonds.

I refer to facilities such as sports facilities in the Police Force. Let us look at the college in Pretoria. It has a swimming bath and a shooting range of Olympic standard and a riding school with among the best facilities in the country. Some of the best facilities are available and in one sport after the other the Police Force produces Springboks. Why is this so? Because in the Police Force the member is in a position to participate in sport at that level and he is encouraged, in that all the facilities are open to him. Where, outside bodies like the Police Force, do young men enjoy these fine facilities?

However, there is another important reason why it is worthwhile for members of the Police Force to be policemen and complete their careers in the Police Force. The reason is that these young men are filled with idealism. These young men are glad to be South Africans, and I do not care whether they are English speaking or Afrikaans speaking. They are all glad to be South Africans. Hon. members should come with me.

Why exploit that feeling?

One need only talk to these constables, sergeants and officers, even where they are experiencing the most difficult conditions in our urban areas, in our rural areas, on our borders and in the operational area in South West Africa. One does not encounter long faces there. There are more long faces opposite me in this House today than there are in the whole Police Force. [Interjections.]

In the whole Police Force there are fewer long faces than among hon. members opposite. Our policemen are inspired with idealism for their country. I can take hon. members to desert areas, mountainous areas and also marshy areas.

You are out of touch.

The constable patrols there with his dog and he even carries the dog’s food and water as well. When he returns from a three-day patrol, I say to him: “Constable, but that is really tiring work.” He replies: “Oh, no, Sir, it is a pleasure to do it for my country.” [Interjections.] Hon. members should come with me to police stations and to their sports fields and clubs. We do not have a lot of old sourpusses. We have a pleasant group of people, cheerful people, because to them it is worthwhile to be in the Police Force. They are proud of being in the Police Force. Hon. members should have come with me recently to Hammanskraal when our Black policemen obtained their blue uniforms. They are so proud of that blue uniform. I am by no means sure whether some of them took off their uniforms that night—that is how proud they are! Just look, too, at our policemen in the street. After all, it is a pleasure to see these men in their neat uniforms and to see how they serve. No, there is a lot more to being a policeman than merely the aspect of salaries. There is a lot more that satisfies the policeman than merely the salary and conditions of service.

We are not riding on their backs. The police know who their friends are. However, I do not wish to make politics out of this, so I prefer to say nothing about that. The police know that this Government does its best every day. We are doing our best every day. We tell them that and they know what we are doing. They have confidence in us. I can give this assurance: Whatever can humanly be done, we are doing for the improvement of the benefits of the police, and at the same time we are inspired by the fine idealism of those policemen and their fine attitude towards this country and the performance of their duties. [Interjections.]

Why have you R9 million over?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. the Minister for his reply and pose one question to him, a question which came by way of an interjection from my hon. colleague who sits just behind me: Why did you have R9 million over in 1978-’79?

I shall answer that.

No, I do not want the hon. the Minister to answer that question. [Interjections.] I have been here long enough to have grown wise.

We look forward with interest to the announcement. We shall bide our time and be patient. We shall wait for what the hon. the Prime Minister has to say in due course, not only about the S.A. Police, but also about the nursing and teaching professions, because I believe that those are the three areas that require attention. We expect our children to be educated, we expect to be nursed in ill health and we want to be protected. So these are the three areas that concern us most.

We had a very interesting debate here this afternoon. I should sincerely like to thank the hon. members of my party, and also other hon. colleagues on this side of the House, for their comments, remarks and support. There is something I have to say, however. I am sorry that a note of what I felt to be petty politics was introduced into the debate.

[Inaudible.]

No, it started on that side of the House, and I am sorry that it did. It unfortunately did, however, and that is unfortunately a sad note. We have had a very good debate. It has been a far-reaching one. So let me say that if I have the consent of those hon. members who introduced amendments, I would be prepared, at this stage, to withdraw my motion.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I should also like to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I therefore withdraw my motion.

With leave, amendments and motion withdrawn.