The latest issue of the Board of Trade Journal has as i lead article a report from the commercial section of the British Embassy at Pretoria, The aim of the article is to inform British businessmen of the possibilities in the African market in South Africa. The figures it gives are designed to prove to the British exporter that he should not ignore the possibilities of selling goods to Africans in South Africa. We will leave aside the question of what the Wilson Government is doing in the field of fevene to apply economic pressure on South Africa to consider what the a gures revea: about the standard of living of Africans in South Africa, In other words, what Apartheid means in living standards.
The article begins: "All statistics relating to Africans in South Africa are of uncertain validity. The last figures which are anything like firm are for 1961. These show the national income as £2,165 million and the share of the Africans as £492 million or about 23%,."" Seeing that just over two-thirds of the population of South Africa are Africans this means that the aon-African population was on average 133 times more prosperous than the African section, But this ratio of 13% to 1 isn't the whole picture,for the non-African population includes coloureds, Asians, etc., many of whom are worse off than some Africans. And this does not take account of the class differences within the whites.
If this ratio of 134 to 1 is staggering, the picture becomes all the more bizarre when one considers the differences within the African community. To quote from the article again: "The estimated £450 million which the . Africans spent in 1963/4 was not spread evenly over the whole population. There are three main groupings: the urban Africans who live in townships near the European towns and cities "(a euphemistic way to describe enforced Apartheid)"the Africans who work on farms in the European rural areas; and the Africans who live in the rural areas in 'Reserves', ‘tribal areas’, thomelands' or 'Bantustans! to use but a few of the names given to that part of the Republic's land-space reserved exclusively for the Africans Numerically the first group is the smallest, comprising only some 3 million or 25% of the African population against 34% on the European farms and the 41% in the ReserveSeeceee
"Financially, however, the picture is very different. The urban Afsican eeehas gained most from the economic upsurge which South Africa has enjoyed over the last 20 years, The best guess is that nearly 50%..of the spending power of the Africans is concentrated in this sector giving an average annual income of about £100 a head" (and these are the ‘prosperous! ones living on less than £2 per week!) "For the European rural areas the comparable figure would be £32" (somewhat under 15/- per week) and for the African in Reserves only £24..." (less than 10/- per week).
South African apologists often claim that the African is better off in South Africa than in other African countries, What have they to say about these figures? And what about - British big business which does so much to bolster up the Apartheid regime in South Africa? Their reluctance to take any steps to boycott South Africa cannot be unconnected with their desire to share the loot which comes from 4,000,000 Africans earning less than 15/a week, Lastly, what about our Government? Is seems only to be concerned with how to increase trade, i.e., support economically, with a monstrous regime which rests upon millions of Africans working a whole year for less than MPs get in two dayse Is it "rocking the boat" to say SHAME?