reported that the Standing Committee on Vote No. 13.—“Police”, had agreed to the Vote.

Mr. Chairman, at the outset I should like to state that we on this side of the House are pleased to note that the hon. the Minister has not suffered any serious injuries as a result of his recent unpleasant experience in Pretoria. We sympathize with him in what must certainly have been a most frightening experience. If the rules of the House had permitted it, Mr. Chairman, I would have been tempted this afternoon to move an amendment seeking an increase in the hon. the Minister’s salary in order to enable him to recover part of his clothing and shoes!

Hear, hear!

Unfortunately, I know that is not allowed. Nevertheless, I hope the hon. the Minister will take that remark in the spirit in which it has been intended.

Our time in this Vote is very limited, Mr. Chairman, and we will try to raise a number of issues to which we should like the hon. the Minister to respond. The one I wish to deal with specifically relates to civil aviation in South Africa, and more specifically to the report and the recommendations of the Margo Commission. This commission was appointed on 30 September 1977 with terms of reference which required it to inquire into and to make recommendations on aspects of civil aviation, inter alia the administration and control of civil aviation and the related activities, the licensing of air services, the adequacy and the efficiency of scheduled and non-scheduled international, regional and domestic services, safety requirements and accident prevention, the operation of State airports on a sound econmic basis, search and rescue, as well as other related matters. The commission, as we can see, thus had very wide terms of reference. It reported on 7 December 1981, bringing out a mammoth and comprehensive report which reflected considerable research on the part of the commission during the period over which it carried out its investigations; research done both inside and outside of South Africa, and it also contained a huge amount of evidence from experts and other interested groups and individuals. I should like the hon. the Minister to make use of this opportunity of giving us an indication of what the attitude of the Government is to the recommendations of this commission.

Since the report of the commission was tabled—I think it was a year ago—there has been no White Paper by the Government, and therefore there has been no indication at all of the Government’s reaction in regard to the commission’s recommendations. It is obviously impossible to do justice to a report of this magnitude in a 10-minute speech during the discussion of the hon. the Minister’s Vote. It will also, I think, be impossible to do justice to the report of the Margo Commission in a general discussion of the Transport Vote, which, this House knows, covers a wide range of transport activities.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will consider taking steps at the appropriate time to make sure that time is made available specifically for this House to debate the recommendations of the Margo Commission. There is ample precedent for that happening in respect of other important commissions which have received the attention of this House, and there has also been a special debate on the recommendations of those commissions. I should like the hon. the Minister, when he replies, to give us an indication whether he is prepared to consider taking the appropriate steps to reserve time for this House to consider, at the appropriate time, the full import of the recommendations of the Margo Commission. Meanwhile, however, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to give us some indication of the Government’s attitude to some of the recommendations of the commission.

The commission deals extensively for example, with the issue of administration and control of civil aviation and the contribution of private enterprise in that field. The commission also devotes a great deal of its comments to that subject. It draws attention to three inputs in this connection: Firstly, in its own words, “international participation and co-operation”; secondly, “national regulation of civil aviation”; and thirdly, “domestic promotion in collaboration with various interest in the aviation industry”.

With regard to international participation, negotiation and co-operation, dealt with by the commission, it says bluntly the following, and I quote the commission’s own words, as follows—

That is the situation relating to the international operation of aviation. The hon. the Minister has certainly read the report, Mr. Chairman. I therefore want to ask him whether he agrees with the commission’s comments in this regard. What he is doing about it if South Africa has indeed fallen behind in its negotiations and regulations internationally regarding aviation?

Then, in respect of the national regulation of civil aviation the commission makes very specific recommendations. It says that the existing Civil Aviation Advisory Committee has not fulfilled its expectations. Again I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he has given consideration to that comment, which is a very important for the regulation of civil aviation in South Africa.

The commission then goes on to call for the setting up of various bodies relating to the administration of civil aviation in South Africa. For example, it calls for what it terms a permanent body to provide for the formulation and adaptation at ministerial level of a National Civil Aviation Policy, and it also sets out its recommendations in this regard. It then also calls for what it terms an international affairs section to promote the Republic’s international aviation relations, and it also deals with very important other aspects relating to the civil aviation industry.

Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, the commission calls for the acceptance of conditions “necessary for private enterprise to make the fullest contribution to the development of civil aviation in the Republic of South Africa and the subcontinent”. The Government is on record through the hon. the Prime Minister and other hon. Ministers as being committed to the free enterprise system. That is Government policy and it is also the policy of this side of the House. I want to ask the hon. the Minister what his attitude is in the field of civil aviation in regard to the recommendations of the Margo Commission relating specifically to the part to be played by private enterprise in civil aviation in South Africa. The issues at stake dealt with by the commission involve the economic regulation or deregulation of civil aviation and the economic licensing of civil aviation. The commission spent a great deal of time dealing with the whole question of licensing and the debate as to whether there should be a greater degree of deregulation in regard to civil aviation. The commission did not come to a final decision or conclusion on the question of deregulation but it has certainly indicated that it is in favour of a relaxation of existing regulations in the interest of free enterprise and competition in the field of civil aviation. It draws attention to the fact—and I again I want to quote its own words—

The commission has gone to a great deal of trouble to receive expert opinion from overseas in this particular sphere. It examines areas where a measure of deregulation should be considered. On page 8 of its first report the commission sets out in some detail what its conclusions are on the question of deregulation. In paragraph 5 the commission states—

It then goes on to deal with its interim attitude and states—

These are particular routes—

In its concluding paragraph the commission states—

In paragraph 6 on the same page, the commission states—

These are the conclusions of the commission. I should like the hon. the Minister to reply to the points that I have raised. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry that I shall not be able to follow up on what the hon. member for Berea said. He asked the hon. the Minister to reply to his representations and there are probably other hon. members on this side of the House as well who will comment on the points raised by the hon. member.

I should like to congratulate the Department of Transport in general and the Director-General and his staff in particular on their activities during the past year and for the comprehensive annual report they made available to us. If I remember correctly it was also the first annual report on our tables when we arrived here at the beginning of the year. One need only page through that annual report to gain an idea of how divergent the activities of this department are. They include, inter alia, Antarctic research, third party insurance, water transport, the Weather Bureau, national roads, the National Transport Commission, road transportation and civil aviation, and this gives us an idea of how wide-spread the functions of this department are.

Last year in this debate I advocated the necessity for a national transport policy. When we discussed the private member’s motion on transport at the beginning of this year a national transport policy was again advocated. I do not want to repeat the arguments but I should like to ascertain from the hon. the Minister if any progress has been made in achieving this important ideal. I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister could give us some information on this score when he speaks later.

The high road accident rate again came to the public’s attention over the recent Easter holidays. I feel that every right-minded South African is worried about the carnage on our roads. I do not think that South Africa can afford such tremendous carnage on its roads. However, this is not the subject of my speech. Other hon. members will elaborate on this and suggest solutions.

I want to ascertain from the hon. the Minister what progress the National Transport Commission has made with the establishment of service and rest areas along our national roads. I feel that the need for service and rest areas for motorists and stopping and overnight facilities for drivers of heavy vehicles has become a necessity.

I should also like to bring it to the attention of the hon. the Minister that there is some concern in smaller towns along our main routes in particular because they are afraid that the private sector in their area may not be given the opportunity to make proper inputs in connection with service areas and overnight facilities. These people are afraid that large companies may outbid them when it comes to concessions for the running of these service areas. Consequently I should appreciate it very much if the hon. the Minister would explain this system and would assure the private sector that this will not be the case. Such service and rest areas and overnight facilities can in their turn make a tremendous contribution to reducing the number of accidents. I should like to hear the hon. the Minister’s reply to this.

At present the road transportation industry in South Africa consists of three large organizations, viz. the Public Carriers Association, the Bus Operators Federation, or Bofsa as it is called for short, and the Passenger Transport Association. These three organizations are recognized by the National Transport Commission as being the spokesmen of the road transportation industry in South Africa. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister whether he agrees with the idea that these three organizations should be amalgamated into one body. I know that in speeches the Director-General has already, on occasion, suggested this. I should like to ascertain from the hon. the Minister whether any progress has been made in this direction. Are there any snags preventing this and if so, what are these snags?

The department was planning to make 1983 road safety year. I want to assure them that I welcome this very idea very much indeed. I want to congratulate the department on its attempts to bring about greater awareness of and knowledge of the causes and extent of road accidents. I trust that this attempt will succeed in creating a positive attitude on the part of every member of the community. May the entire community become involved and work as a team to make a tremendous success of road safety year!

If this has not yet been considered, I think it may be a very good idea if, in collaboration with the Department of Posts and Telecommunications and its philatelic services, we could issue a special series of stamps to commemorate road safety year and to bring this matter to the attention of our people again.

I have on several occasions had to listen to complaints about the quality of the services and catering services at our airports. Hon. members in this House have also criticized those catering services in the past. The department has investigated these complaints on various occasions and has introduced productive measures to improve this service. But there are still shortcomings and the service remains unsatisfactory. The catering services at our airports have to contend with unique problems. It can easily happen that on a certain day thousands of additional people may arrive at an airport—up to 5 000 people last year in January—and refreshments and other facilities have to be provided for them. There are also times when several flights are delayed simultaneously. Then refreshments have to be served to thousands of extra people. In addition those people are saddled with tremendous staff problems. The result is that the concession holder cannot always make use of part-time or casual staff, because they are not aquainted with the work in the first place and if he were to employ them they would only cause further dissatisfaction.

In addition there are also various facilities at airports which are not adequate to meet all requirements. I am referring, for example, to things like refrigeration space and storage space. If one arrives at an hotel and one cannot be accommodated, one is simply turned away, but if members of the public arrive at an airport, they expect to be served, and one may not and cannot simply turn them away. [Interjections.]

Order!

The concession holder at Jan Smuts Airport has to pay R70 000 a month for the privilege of that concession. Add to that the high costs for the transportation of his staff, the licence fees, the cost of the uniforms and all the other things involved, and one sees that a concession holder must find it difficult to make a decent living. The question I ask myself is whether the open tender system which led to this very high rental should not be changed now. Is it not time this was done? I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether another method—or methods—of leasing these facilities at our airports should not be investigated now, because as things stand at the moment I do not think we will ever have a satisfactory situation. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the number of flying accidents in the RSA is increasing alarmingly year after year. There is concern every time one hears about an accident, in particular because it is usually wealthy people who own aircraft and the fact that professional people, farmers, businessmen and clergymen, viz. the cream of the country, make use of this mode of transport. Aircraft registered in South Africa were involved in 170 reported accidents during the 1981-’82 year under review, and 38 people lost their lives in 18 fatal accidents. Investigations into 65 of the accidents have been completed for purposes of analysis. Interesting conclusions were arrived at in this regard. Although a lack of airworthiness was an important factor in flying accidents, it would appear that in most cases the pilots had been the cause of the accidents. In many cases it was shown that poor technique and even negligence on the part of the pilot were major causes of accidents. Another very important factor which plays a role in flying accidents is fatigue. On long solo flights in particular it often happens that the pilot falls asleep, with disastrous results for himself and his aircraft. I should like the hon. the Minister to indicate whether anything is being planned, particularly in connection with better training of pilots and also a better system of control over the airworthiness of aircraft.

Another matter I should like to deal with, is the matter of service and rest areas along our national roads. The primary function of the national road is of course to accommodate long distance traffic along the most economical and shortest route. Roads are frequently built at some distance from towns and cities. This means that the motorist does not always have an opportunity to make use of the service facilities in those towns. Now the motorist is prohibited by law from stopping under bridges or on open areas immediately adjacent to national roads, for example, and is therefore forced to drive for hours on end with the result that fatigue from overexertion sets in. Fatigue is one of the major causes of road accidents on our national roads. It has been found that fatigue is also the primary cause of approximately 40 000 heavy-duty vehicle accidents in South Africa annually. These accidents cost R1 000 million per annum and it is simply unthinkable that this state of affairs can continue.

That is why I am glad that the National Transport Commission has decided to make provision on a selective basis for service and rest areas with direct access to the national road. The NTC is apparently envisaging a variety of facilities for the travelling public. There are heavy duty vehicle lay-bys and overnight facilities for carriers. There will also be rest and service areas for carriers and motorists. The overnight facilities will include rest-rooms, take-away meals and refuelling facilities, while the service and rest areas along national freeways will only be provided between interchanges. At service areas, in addition to the facilities available at the rest areas, provision will also be made for petrol pumps and restaurants.

We welcome this provision of essential services to the carrier and the motorist, but I should like to voice my concern about the threat which service and rest areas will present to existing garages and restaurants along our national roads. In some of the smaller towns along the national roads the motorist is a major source of revenue. Some of them depend primarily on the travelling public for their fuel sales and restaurant services. I am worried that the continued existence of these small towns will be threatened. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to take the existing undertakings into consideration when determining the envisaged areas.

I also want to ask the hon. the Minister to ensure that in view of the fact that we live in a multiracial country, the planned facilities will be equal but also separate. I am asking this for the sake of good relations, in future as well.

Mr. Chairman, the contents of the speech of the hon. member for De Aar were very familiar to me because I had just heard them from the hon. member for Kempton Park. I want to remind the hon. member for De Aar that there is an old accepted convention in this House, namely that when an hon. member rises to make a speech, he should at least have the decency to refer to the previous speaker. However, I shall not pursue the matter.

I want to agree with the hon. member for Kempton Park that the Department of Transport has such a large number of components that it has to control and co-ordinate that it is not possible for one speaker to refer to all these facets in 10 minutes. For that reason I shall concentrate on one aspect, namely motor-vehicle theft. Motor-vehicle theft is on the increase in South Africa. I wonder whether hon. members realize that in January of this year at least 100 vehicles were stolen every day in South Africa. A land with an economy the size of South Africa’s cannot afford to have vehicles to the value of R2 million stolen every year, but that is what is happening in this country at present. We find ourselves in a unique situation. Here I am thinking in particular of our geographic position with many difficult to control borders. For that reason we have to accept that motor vehicles will disappear.

I ascertained from the S.A. Police what became of these stolen vehicles. Basically three things can happen to stolen vehicles. Some vehicles are dismantled and end up as second-hand parts on the shelves of dealers in second-hand parts. Other vehicles are resprayed and find their way back into the stream of vehicles on South African roads. A third group of vehicles simply disappear into the neighbouring States. The police do commendable work in erecting roadblocks and they should be congratulated on this. What are the facts, however? In 1980, 39 000 vehicles were stolen. Of this number only 18 000 were recovered, most of them much the worse for wear. In 1982, 50 000 vehicles were stolen but at this stage we do not yet know how many have been recovered. The point is however that we cannot afford this. We shall have to do something about the situation.

How can the situation be improved? I consulted the former head of the S.A. Detective Branch, Gen. Visser. I wanted to know from him what the major problem of the South African Police was in recovering stolen vehicles. He summed it up in one word: Identification. What does that mean? At present there are three identification marks on a motor vehicle. There is the registration number on the number plate, an engine number and a chassis number. But what is easier than to switch number plates? Even a woman can do it. Even a member of the CP would be able to do it. He may put the new plates on upside down but he will be able to do it. In addition, people who deal in stolen vehicles are experts at erasing engine and chassis numbers and replacing them with other numbers. One almost needs a microscope to be able to see whether that number has been tampered with. What do we find now? There is a roadblock, and it is night time because these people do not operate during the day. These people wander about at night, like some other people I could mention. The constable on duty walks to the vehicle with his torch and he has a list of stolen vehicles. A Valiant, for example, stops at the roadblock. The registration number of the Valiant does not correspond with any of the numbers of the stolen vehicles. However, the policeman does not know whether the number plate has been changed. Now he has to look for the engine number under the grease, oil and mud adhering to the engine. If the engine number does not appear on his list he has to look for the chassis number. Now he has to crawl under the car and look for the chassis number. Most of us do not even know where the chassis number is. Is there no other way? There is. It is a far better way, a way which can work. As a matter of fact, there is a way which does indeed work. It is described as window coding. Windscreen coding or glass coding simply means that the same code appears on all the windscreens of a vehicle. The code number consists of 5 figures and a letter or 6 figures and a letter. That is not important now. What could be easier for the constable than to walk around a motor vehicle with his torch and see whether the same number appears on all the windows? He can then ask the driver of the vehicle to produce his disc which proves that he is the owner of the motor vehicle. But does this system work? The system works in England, in the USA, and in Australia. It even works in an African country, namely Kenya. If a windscreen is smashed, all of them have to be smashed to make identification difficult. All the windows will have to be smashed if someone wants to steal a vehicle. Then the thief goes to a windscreen dealer, but that dealer has an agreement with the police. If a person comes to him and ask for a full set of windscreens for a Valiant he knows that something must be wrong and he immediately informs the police. In 1980 there were 65 000 coded motor vehicles in Queensland, Australia. During that year some of them were stolen, but the police recovered them all.

In South Africa the system is already being used. A firm called Identicar has already coded 15 000 motor cars in South Africa. Fourteen of them have been stolen over a period of three years and 11 of them have already been recovered. Surely this proves that the system works. Why does the system work? In the first place, it is a deterrent. In the second place, the code numbers can be fed into a central computer together with information on the owner and the motor vehicle. When the police find a vehicle they can find out, at the touch of a button, who the owner is. I should like to see the CSIR acquire such a computer because they have the experts, but in particular a man by the name of Adv. Theuns Botha, who has done pioneering work in this field as also in the field of licensing. Hon. members need not think that the motor manufacturers will be interested in this. What does it matter to them if a motor vehicle is stolen and disappears? After all, they can then sell another one. What could be easier? That is why I am appealing to the hon. the Minister to lay down in legislation that all new motor vehicles have to be coded and that when that motor vehicle is sold or delivered to the retailer those codes and the information are fed into a central computer. The S.A. Police should have access to the data in the computer. It is so easy to do this. The policeman at the roadblock need only contact his head office by radio. Then the head office can get the information by telephone within 90 seconds and can relay that information back to the road block. Consequently there need not be unnecessary delays when a policeman, a traffic officer or a member of the Defence Force manning the roadblock has doubts about the ownership of a specific motor vehicle. I think this is a serious matter, and it is in the interest of the economy of South Africa, of the S.A. Police and of law enforcement for us to have this type of measure on the Statute Book. If we continue as we are doing, it will be of no avail increasing the police force by 25 000 men. They will still not be able to cope with this matter. There are already encouraging signs that in the case of coded motor vehicles the insurance companies are prepared to remit the additional payment when it comes to a stolen motor vehicle. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I ask for the privilege of the second half-hour.

The hon. member for Roodeplaat has raised an interesting subject, i.e. the theft of motor vehicles, and has suggested that the identification of a motor vehicle by engraving or etching the windows would assist the law enforcement authorities to solve this problem. I am inclined to agree with him. But let me tell him that members of the NRP are already way ahead of his suggestion because the hon. member for Umhlanga has already had his windows etched with the number of his car. So the NRP is showing the way once more.

However, I think the hon. member for Roodeplaat wandered away from the main budget of the Department of Transport. The hon. member for Berea opened this debate by speaking about civil aviation, which represents something like R47 million of the department’s total budget of R283 million. However, to that has to be added another R185 million which is to be spent on national roads. This also falls under this hon. the Minister. I want to restrict myself to the amount to be voted for the programme “Overland Transport” and then also the National Road Fund.

Mr. Chairman, a lot has been said during this session about the need to fight inflation and the need to cut down Government expenditure. It is for this reason that I would suggest to the hon. the Minister that we have a second look at exactly where we are going in regard to overland transport. It has been said that one way to cut down inflation is to reduce Government spending. If we look at this Vote we find that the Minister is being forced into an expenditure of something like R198 million in subsidies to various transport organizations, and we cannot really blame his department for incurring this expenditure. On the other hand inflation is also due to State bureaucracy holding things up which contributes to reduced productivity of the wealth generating sectors of our economy.

I should now like to refer to the Road Transportation Act. Hon. members will remember that earlier this session the hon. the Minister saw fit to come to this House to amend that Act, amendments which we opposed very strongly, as did the Public Carriers’ Association. The amendments were we believe brought in in order to protect the vested interest of the S.A. Transport Services, particularly the S.A. Railways. I said during that debate that the amendments the hon. the Minister were introducing were going to incur additional expenditure to the private operator and that that was going to make their operation less efficient. Furthermore, because it was increasing the cost of transport it was leading to inflation. Certainly it was not assisting the campaign against inflation. I received a letter the other day from a gentleman who is employed by a very large transport organization. Mr. Chairman, it is one thing to pass legislation to give a degree of protection to the S.A. Railways; it is another thing to use the powers of the law to frustrate the private sector through making them less efficient and less economic in the hope that this may assist the S.A. Railways in its competition with the private sector. I want to quote from this letter. It says—

Allow me to add, Mr. Chairman, that I am prepared to give the hon. the Minister the name of this company. I quote again—

Then, Sir, he goes further to say—

Another important feature is the delay which is experienced by the client. In these instances the clients had been promised delivery by 09h00 on 16 March 1983, and owing to the road-block the cargo was only delivered late that afternoon. I quote again from the same letter, as follows—

I want to point out, Mr. Chairman, that the planning of this road-block included in the equipment a mobile gantry for removing the containers, fork-lift truck vehicles for stripping the containers, etc. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister, who is also a businessman, that the question has to be answered of how our private operators can operate under these conditions. They do have a permit. They operate within the law. To be harassed—and that is why I put it to the hon. the Minister—by officials of his department—and I believe that the S.A. Railway Police are also now manning these roadblocks—I believe, is scandalous. That is what I quite frankly believe. The reason for this, the motivation behind a lot of this, is merely to protect the S.A. Railways’ vested interests. [Interjections.] We know that the Railways are increasing their share of road transport. I have a newspaper cutting here, Mr. Chairman, under the heading “Act will cause more hauliers off the market”—a Press cutting from the Business Times of 1 May 1983. It says—

I must say that the S.A. Transport Services have been quoting tariffs of up to 50% lower than the private sector, and so introduced a substantial loss to this industry.

Who said that?

It is said in this Press statement. The spokesman was a Mr. Erasmus, vice-chairman of the Private Carriers’ Association.

He is talking a lot of nonsense. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, then I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether his road transport services are making a profit.

Yes, in certain sectors.

It is certainly not making a profit, Mr. Chairman. [Interjections.] They are prepared to cut the price in order to keep the Railways going, and in this way they have been creating inefficiencies in the industry, which, I believe, the economy of South Africa can ill afford. Furthermore, it goes against everything the Government has been saying about free enterprise, private enterprise, the private businessman, and everything else. [Interjections.] I want to ask the hon. the Minister to take a good look into this matter. [Interjections.]

Secondly, Mr. Chairman, the other aspect I want to raise this afternoon is the appropriation for overland transport. Of the hon. the Minister’s total budget of R287 million, as I have said, R198 million is for overland transport. This means that the hon. the Minister is giving the S.A. Transport Services—the Railways, Harbours and Airways—R100 million in subsidy towards its rail transport. In addition, there is an amount of R98 million which I am pleased to see is a reduction from the R108 million that was expended on bus passenger subsidies during the financial year 1981-’82. This amount has been reduced because of the recent amendments which now force employers to contribute more to this subsidy fund. However, the question that I want to ask the hon. the Minister is: Where are we going with passenger subsidies? I was shocked to hear that on some routes the passenger pays, for instance R7,30 for his ticket, the subsidy is R27,70 and the total fare is R35. This means that the taxpayers are paying more than three quarters of that passenger’s transport expenses. I wonder just exactly how far we can continue along these lines. My time is limited but I want to tell the hon. the Minister that I know of a bus service in an industrial area, not a major industrial area, which is heavily subsidized by this fund. Of late, however, the local road transportation board has issued certificates to Black taxi operators operating combi taxis. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that if one goes into that industrial area at the end of the working day when the factories close one finds the Black workers clamouring to use the taxi service rather than the bus service. I am led to believe that the average taxi fare is only 5 cents higher than the bus fare, yet the bus fare is heavily subsidized by this hon. Minister’s department. The passengers prefer to use the combi taxi because they are taken closer to their homes and the travelling conditions are better. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that perhaps we should allow the free enterprise system to operate for a while in certain areas. Let us shake out this whole matter of passenger transport because I do believe that as with the price control system that is to be found in other industries, we run the risk of profiteering and we run the risk of being forced into highly uneconomic operations. We also run the risk of overcapitalization. We have experienced this in industries which have already been deregulated; for instance, the hon. the Minister of Industries, Commerce and Tourism deregulated in the building industry and others. My suggestion to the hon. the Minister is this: Perhaps we should select a few areas and just allow the free market system to operate, i.e., let the private entrepreneur offer a Transportation Service, and then see what we shake out. We may shake out a great deal of inefficiency and uneconomic operations as well as a certain amount of profiteering.

Finally, in the few minutes left to me, I want to say a few words about national roads. It is very regrettable that the National Road Fund was depleted over the past year or so and I am pleased that the hon. the Minister now has access to other funds. I do not believe that we can allow certain sections of our national roads where we have severe traffic problems to remain unattended to. We saw what happened over the Easter weekend on the N3 from Durban to Johannesburg and I do believe that the hon. the Minister should use the facilities now available to him to spend more money on our national roads.

I should like to ask the hon. the Minister when he replies please to tell me when the Umkomaas River bridge is expected to be completed and when he expects the stretch of the N2 between Umgababa in the North and Scottburgh South, in the South to be completed. There are three major bridges to be built here namely the Mpambinyoni River bridge, the Amahlongwu River bridge and the Amahlongwana River bridge. Those three rivers have major bridges to be built across them. I believe that this section of the national road should receive the highest priority especially now that a casino in Transkei has been opened and the N2 on the South Coast is carrying very heavy traffic at the present time.

I would like to make one further appeal to the hon. the Minister and that is in regard to the N3 from Durban to Johannesburg and particularly the stretch between Marionnhill and Key Ridge. I believe that construction on that road has been delayed somewhat. I know that the hon. the Minister has received letters from various local authorities in regard to the stretches of national road that I have mentioned, and I sincerely hope that he will use all the horsepower, if I may use that term, at his disposal to ensure that these are built as soon as possible. The existing bottlenecks present severe traffic hazards and are, as records show, areas where a considerable number of accidents have occurred, and as such are a danger to human life.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Amanzimtoti raised a number of matters, and I am sure that the hon. the Minister will reply to him on that score in due course.

I am not coming to this Committee this afternoon with a prepared solution which will ensure the infallible safety of the traffic on our roads. In fact, I am of the opinion that we should first be very clear on what our traffic problems on land are before we can try to find a recipe or formula for the safety of traffic on our roads.

Therefore it is necessary to ask ourselves what elements constitute traffic on land. We should bear in mind that in our country traffic is restricted to the breadth of a road. It is limited to the width of a road. To be more precise, our country’s traffic is restricted to half the width of a road. We should also bear in mind that in our country not all roads are the same width. Just think of the double tracks across the dunes and through the veld. Think of the beautiful freeways. Moreover, not all roads (“paaie”) have the same surface. We have tarred roads, we have concrete roads, we have gravel roads, sand roads, dirt roads, clay roads—you name it, we have it.

“Skilpaaie!”

This is one of the elements of our traffic. Thus we do not travel on roads of standard width or standard quality, and it is extremely important to bear this in mind when we have to contend with the set of rules or the determining of measures to safeguard our traffic.

Vehicles constitute the second element. Consider moving verhicles: The large, heavy, slow-moving vehicles, the light rattletraps, the fast ones—a large variety. There is even the oxwagon and the donkey cart, the horse-drawn carts—all form part of the second element, that of vehicles.

There is another element. We also have the pedestrian on our roads, in our traffic—goats, sheep and cattle that may find their way onto the road by accident. We also have on our roads children darting and playing and old people who move with difficulty. We also have on our roads people who have never seen a motor vehicle, who have never learnt how to judge the speed of a vehicle. They are accustomed to seeing a vehicle coming along at a distance and having all the time in the world to move out of the way of that vehicle—an oxwagon or a donkey cart. On the other hand, they do not know how to move or what to do when a motor vehicle comes speeding down the road.

Another element of traffic on our roads consists of the drivers of these vehicles. It is true that every driver has to be tested by law, and every driver is supposed to have a licence in order to be allowed to drive a vehicle. However, we should bear in mind—with regard to this element of our traffic—that a driver is only tested once in his lifetime. He is never tested again. However, there is something else which is very important. When drivers are tested there are many things which are not taken into account. For example, the state of health of the person who has to be tested for a motor vehicle licence is not taken into account. He only has to be able to do certain things according to the recipe of the man testing him. He health is not taken into consideration. He may be someone who suffers from epilepsy. He may perhaps be a person who suffers from a heart disease or he may have defective vision. In fact, there is evidence that about 40% of our drivers cannot see properly. However, the person who issues the licence is not at all concerned about that. Nor are the people who wish to become drivers subjected to any form of psychological testing. We take no account at all of people who, for example, are aggressive by nature. After all, we are familiar with them. Indeed, it is a widespread psychological phenomenon. This is the kind of person who always has to be in the forefront, no matter what kind of dangerous situation he creates. All these things are not taken into account at all when we test drivers.

Apart from these elements that are built into the system of traffic on our roads, of course, traffic regulations have to be drawn up, but who draws up the traffic regulations? Where are those traffic regulations drawn up? One would expect that one would at least have one co-ordinated set of regulations which are applicable under all circumstances in all cases, but here, too, things are completely unco-ordinated. Everyone draws up his own rules to suit himself, as he sees it, while at the same time at least ensuring a measure of safety in respect of our traffic.

There is another very important aspect with regard to the rules which are made to safeguard our traffic. There should be a group of people who should see to it that the rules in question are implemented. I have a great deal of appreciation for the work these traffic officers do, but the question arises: Are these people sufficiently trained to be able to do this work? We should bear in mind that those people are expected to prevent deaths on our roads, and three people die on our roads daily. However, there is no training whatsoever, no introduction to this responsible task they have to perform. I venture to say that these people are not properly rewarded for the work they have to do.

This brings me to a final aspect we should take into account. We have just spoken about people who have to see to it that the rules are implemented, but there are also people who have to impose punishment if people do not abide by the rules. The question which arises is this: What measure of uniformity is there in respect of the punitive measures implemented when people violate traffic rules? I have had the experience of a magistrate who penalized the violation of road safety rules so heavily that a man in my town did not even want to risk drinking a single glass of beer, since he was too afraid of being caught. He prefers to go and drink in the neighbouring town. [Interjections.] This is something that really happened. In other words, there is absolutely no control over the degree of punishment which is implemented when traffic regulations are violated. If we consider all these things, we realize that in reality, what it amounts to is this: The deeper I attempt to delve, the more difficult the problem seems to be, the more difficult it seems to be to establish rules that are really capable of ensuring safety on our country’s roads.

Mr. Chairman, I take pleasure in speaking after the hon. member for Kimberley North. He spoke very seriously about road safety and I think we all agree with him that it is one of the extremely complex questions which has to be dealt with. I just wish to make one remark in the light of his speech—I hope the hon. member will pardon me for doing so—since one point he made was perhaps not quite correct. He must pardon me if I did not understand him correctly, but I understood him to say that there was no training whatsoever for traffic officers. If the hon. member said that, I simply wish to say that that is not quite correct, since there is, in fact, training for traffic officers. In fact, certain organizations offer relatively thorough training in traffic legislation and many other facets connected with the task these people have to carry out. I would agree with the hon. member if he said that this could perhaps be improved. However, I just wanted to react to that aspect of his speech.

I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the hon. the Minister for visiting Welkom. Last year we spoke about the airport there and its possible incorporation into the scheduled flights of the SAA. I do not wish to discuss that again at this point. I merely wish to express my gratitude and appreciation to the hon. the Minister and his senior officials for their visit. When this hon. Minister visits a place, it is always a pleasant experience, even if he does not make a specific promise, because he is a friendly and approachable person. In any case, I want to thank him and I hope that ultimately, when circumstances are more favourable, this matter can be attended to. I am always reminded of the time when, if I remember correctly, it was necessary to march around the walls of Jericho seven times before there were results. One should not, therefore, abandon hope too soon.

I just wish to refer briefly to certain matters with regard to road traffic in conjunction with what the hon. member for Kimberley North had to say. When I commented last year on the criticism levelled by the secretary of Fedhasa, at the campaign of the National Road Safety Council against drinking and driving, I received a letter from him in which he rebuked me and said that I should rectify the matter in public. I still stand by my view that it is not for that interest group to interfere in the work of the National Road Safety Council. However, I do not wish to elaborate on that. I merely wish to say that it seems to me as though it has had the desired effect, since I have noticed that that person has recently been very quiet in respect of these matters. I think that that has been to the benefit of the image of the association whose cause he serves.

Then, in the limited time at my disposal, I also wish to refer briefly to the Road Safety Council. The task of that council, which the hon. member for Kimberley North discussed in detail, has a bearing on a situation one can only describe as alarming. Therefore it would probably be justified to introduce measures which could be described as drastic.

A great deal has already been said about the incidence and possible causes of accidents, particularly those that occurred during the period 30 March to 6 April this year when 187 people were killed and 560 injured. In 1982 there were 25 deaths on our roads every day. It was encouraging to read in our daily newspapers that the hon. the Minister is not merely concerned about the situation, but he is also prepared to take positive steps.

The increase in the levy for the purposes of the National Road Safety Council is a positive step and proves that the hon. the Minister is in earnest. I hope that this will enable the NRSC to achieve more. I should not like to go into the details concerning the task of the NRSC, since it is too comprehensive a subject. However, I am convinced, and I should like to emphasize this strongly, that a greater degree of co-ordination among the parties concerned to bring about a greater measure of streamlining would be a step forward. I do not wish to underestimate the complexity of the question. I do understand this. However, delays in implementing essential measures are a source of concern.

I wish to mention a few examples in order to support this statement. We have been dealing with the question of drivers’ licences for a long time. I do not say this in order to be critical; I am merely using it as an example. I think there has long been consensus concerning the compulsory carrying of drivers’ licences, a step that would combat a number of malpractices. However, the question arises: When is this going to take place?

There is also the question of minimum safety specifications for new caravans. The SABS has been entrusted with this task and I understand that they have already made progress. As a matter of interest, I wish to mention that this matter has already been receiving attention for more than four years. I really think we ought to have a great deal more co-ordination so that more positive and streamlined action can be taken with regard to these matters.

I wish to refer briefly to the hon. member for Amanzimtoti who spoke about taxis. He also referred to free enterprise, etc., but I do not wish to elaborate on that. I merely suspect that malpractices are being committed as far as taxis are concerned. The various road transportation boards deal with the question of taxi licences. All applications are considered and granted in accordance with certain norms. I suspect that as far as the renting of vehicles is concerned, there could be a degree of malpractice. I wish to say at the outset that I have not investigated the matter in depth. However, I suspect that there are companies that have 10, 12 or more mini-buses which are available for hire on the same basis as, for example, Avis and other groups, but that these vehicles are not used for hire, but are used as quasi-taxis. In other words, they supply a driver for the mini-bus and charge taxi fares. I should like to request that attention to be given to this matter. I do not think this is a healthy state of affairs, since these grants or concessions are not made in accordance with specific norms, as is the case with taxis. If malpractices do occur, they ought to be combated. I do not wish to elaborate further on these matters. In conclusion, I simply wish to say that I hope that as far as this very important matter of road safety is concerned, we shall reach a stage when we shall speak less but do more about the matter. I really think the events of the past long weekend have once again emphasized that we should take positive steps to eliminate certain evils and malpractices. We can only do this if there is better co-ordination among the parties concerned whose task it is to attend to this matter. We should not only take the interests of certain organizations into account, but also give priority to the interests of the road user. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am sure that it is common knowledge among all hon. members of this House that we have an appallingly high accident rate in this country. Last year, 1982, there were 392 000 motor accidents and more than 9 000 fatalities arose from those accidents. We are in fact towards a situation where we have a motor accident every minute of everyday, 24 hours a day, throughout the year. It is sobering to think that during the course of the debate on this Transport Vote this afternoon there will be 200 reported motor accidents in various parts of South Africa.

The Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act, 1973, commonly referred to as the Act providing for third party insurance, provides for compensation to be paid to persons in the event of bodily injury or death. However, no provision is made for payment for damage to the motor vehicle or other property of an innocent person.

Let us look at some basic known facts in relation to some aspects of road safety and usage. I have already mentioned the first one, namely that there were 392 000 reported motor accidents last year. Secondly, we know that there are thousands of drivers without a valid, legal driver’s licence. Thirdly, we know that there are a large number of licensed drivers who are no longer physically capable of driving properly. Fourthly, there are tens of thousands of unroadworthy vehicles on our roads. I fully support the efforts that are made by various bodies in the interests of road safety and their campaigns to improve this situation, but I believe that more is required.

Law-abiding people are entitled to be protected against reckless and dangerous drivers. They are entitled to compensation for damage caused to their vehicles or to their property. I believe that the time has come for all motor vehicles to be required to have compulsory insurance to cover damage to other people’s motor vehicles and property in the event, of course, that the driver of the vehicle is liable for that damage. Relatively minor accidents today can result in hundreds of rands damage and it is unjust that the innocent party can often in practice not recover his costs. He may have the legal right to do so, but if the driver of the other vehicle does not have the means to pay, he does not get paid.

Compulsory insurance will increase costs for some motorists, but I believe that we need to recognize that a motor car is a potentially dangerous piece of equipment, and the public is entitled to protection. It would also help to calm people’s tempers when accidents did occur if they knew that if the other driver was at fault, they would be compensated for the damage to their vehicle. I ask, therefore, that the hon. the Minister comment upon this and possibly consider some form of investigation.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to associate myself with what the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens had to say about compulsory third party insurance. The question I wish to put to the Minister is whether he is satisfied with the situation which is going to arise between the RSA and the TBVC countries from the moment they take responsibility for their own third party and other motor vehicle insurance. Is there going to be reciprocity? Are there going to be agreements with regard to citizens of those countries who are involved in accidents in the RSA and vice versa? What arrangements are there to regulate summonses and the entering of claims? This is an extremely important matter for the future.

The hon. member for Amanzimtoti spoke about private initiative as against the S.A. Transport Services. This suggests that private initiative is being victimized. In fact, it is true that these two poles can never meet and clashes will, therefore, occur. However, I must just break this lance for the S.A. Transport Services, viz. that whereas profit is the incentive in private enterprise, the S.A. Transport Services have to render all those services which private enterprise is not interested in rendering.

Mr. Chairman, I notice that only the CP Whip is present in the House at the moment.

There are two of us. Where are your Ministers?

The hon. the Minister whose Vote this is is sitting over there. He is man enough to deal with both those hon. members of the C.P.

Today I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the Department of Transport for their contribution to the expansion of decentralized regional development, as was announced last year by the hon. the Prime Minister. In April 1977 the then Minister of Transport said in his Second Reading speech, after introducing the Road Transportation Bill on Friday, 29 April 1977 (Hansard, col. 6520)—

Then the hon. the Minister referred to the freedom granted to private businesses to convey their own goods and people. Since then this legislation has been amended on a number of occasions, each time with the aim of bringing about freer competition in general, and more specifically as far as decentralized industries and industrial areas are concerned. For example, section 125 of Act No. 74 of 1977 was amended by Act No. 78 of 1982 in that the load capacity of a vehicle which private businesses are allowed to use for conveying their own goods, was increased from 8 000 kg to 14 000 kg. There were 31 decentralized areas in 1979. East London was the first to be announced. Today there are 49. On 29 April the number was further increased by six, i.e. in the Cape Province, De Aar, Vredenburg, Saldanha, Walvis Bay, Berlin and Kuruman. In addition, there were two in the Free State, i.e. Bloemfontein and Onverwacht, and five in Natal, i.e. Empangeni, Ulindi, Esekele, etc. Messina was included in the Transvaal. Altogether there are more than 50 of these areas and in this way this department is also contributing its share to the success of the vitally important development of our decentralization programme in South Africa. We wish to express our gratitude to the department for this.

In addition, the faulty definition of centralized industries was amended in 1982, and since then new businesses established before the area was declared a decentralized area, may also avail themselves of these benefits.

The Black homelands, as well as the independent Black states can now share in these decentralization benefits. One asks oneself how far should one go with these concessions. Unfortunately, it appears that at present the Black states are not yet inclined to introduce a similar measure so that these benefits can also apply in their areas. Are there initiatives which the hon. the Minister can take to urge these states to make these benefits operative in their areas as well, so that industrialists may be encouraged to make use of them? I know that the hon. the Minister will do his best to do this through the accepted channels, but I wonder whether it will not be necessary for us to make use of channels other than the formal ones in order to propagate this matter.

My final question to the Minister is: If we consider the various decentralization areas, inter alia Atlantis and, say, Kimberley, the one with a rail link and the other without, is the hon. the Minister satisfied that these benefits should be the same for all areas? Should there not be a difference depending on the nature and scope of the decentralized industry we are dealing with? This is something we could bear in mind.

Mr. Chairman it is always interesting to listen to the hon. member for Vasco. I am sure the points he has raised here this afternoon will be more than adequately replied to by the hon. the Minister.

I want to tell you a story this afternoon, Mr. Chairman, because as a representative of a Natal constituency you will understand the problems we have. I want to tell the story of the airport that isn’t. Actually, to put it correctly, it is not just one airport that isn’t. There is a second airport that isn’t as well. So there are two airports that aren’t! Both these airports serve Durban, South Africa’s premier port and holiday Mecca. Airport number one that isn’t is La Mercy and airport number two that isn’t is Louis Botha. Neither of these is an airport.

In 1972 the now hon. Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs and Fisheries asked a question here in the House about the La Mercy Airport, and the then Minister of Transport said that he could not say when it would be finished. In 1976 … I am so delighted to see the hon. the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning back in the House.

I came back specifically for that. [Interjections.]

In 1976 I asked a question about the proposed international airport at La Mercy. I asked whether there had been any delay in the construction of that airport, and if so, what the reasons therefor had been. Mr. Louwrens Muller, who was then in charge of the Transport portfolio, said there was no reason for concern because the Department of Transport was planning to have the international airport at La Mercy operational by 1982. 1982 was last year. He then gave a few reasons why they thought they might have to do a few things at Jan Smuts Airport first. [Interjections.] Then, in 1977, I asked again. We received a different answer in 1977. In 1978, I think, the hon. the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning was in charge of this portfolio. He gave us some interesting answers as well. He said, however, the airport would be completed by 1983-’84. I think we have now reached 1983-’84, and we still have nothing. We have R33 million worth of absolutely barren veld. That is all we have.

In 1979 I asked again, but received a completely different answer. The answer was that the date of completion depended entirely on the availability of funds.

That was my answer.

Yes, that was your answer. That was a good one. In 1980 I asked when the construction would be recommenced. The reply was that that would happen in the course of 1981. The reply was that the work would be recommenced in 1981 if funds were available. [Interjections.] But we have now reached 1983. In 1983 we asked the brand new hon. Minister …

I was a new Minister last year.

Yes, the hon. the Minister was a new hon. Minister last year. I asked him this year whether it was the intention to recommence work on the proposed international airport at La Mercy; if not, why not; if so, when? The hon. the Minister then gave a brand new answer. He said that final plans were still being drafted. [Interjections.] However, it was supposed to be finished, Mr. Chairman. It was supposed to be finished last year—meanwhile final plans are still being drafted! [Interjections.]

Consequently we tried to find out a little more about this. We asked again. On 23 February this year I asked what the total amount was that was spent on all aspects relating to the proposed international airport at La Mercy to date. So, airport No. 1, which is not an airport, had R33,7 million spent on it, according to the hon. the Minister in his reply to my question. I invite every hon. member to my constituency, to come and have a look at that R33,7 million. One cannot find it anywhere. It is all in the earth. This hon. Minister said he was going to invite me to the opening of that airport. I want to say this. When that opening comes, I challenge him to a race down the runway on our wheelchairs, because he and I will not be able to do anything else. [Interjections.] That is about all we will still be fit to do! [Interjections.]

Then I also asked the hon. the Minister when it was expected that final arrangements would be completed and tenders would be called for for the construction of the airport. His reply was that it would be in approximately two years’ time. We are now in 1983. In two years’ time it will be 1985. Meanwhile I thought it was finished! Mr. Chairman, I appeal to the hon. the Minister to let us have some straight talking about the La Mercy Airport; and while we are at it, let us also have a little straight talking about Louis Botha Airport as well because I think the time has come for us to talk frankly about these two situations.

Louis Botha Airport is “sommer ’n gemors”. That is the only way in which one can describe it. [Interjections.] Again I wish to point out that I put a question to the hon. the Minister some time ago in connection with what was going to be done about Louis Botha Airport. I was told that it was going to be improved, that certain things were going to be done there, and that it was going to be a wonderful place. It was said, however, that all this would be only temporary. Now what is the situation at the moment? In 1979 we had something like 6 345 people per day going through Jan Smuts. By 1982 that figure had risen to 7 186 people per day. D. F. Malan and Louis Botha Airports also experienced an increase. I have the detailed figures here. If one takes the passenger traffic through these three major airports over the three year period from 1979 to 1982 one finds that the traffic at Jan Smuts increased by 9,59% per day, D. F. Malan by 7,73% and Louis Botha, which showed the largest increase, by 10,03% per day. Going through the portals of Louis Botha Airport daily there are something like 3 684 people and these people have to be accommodated at some time during each day in a holding area of 787 square metres. The statistics I am mentioning here are those of the hon. the Minister. In 1979 the area at Jan Smuts was slightly smaller and Jan Smuts has increased marginally. However, if one wishes to find a comparison in regard to the effect on a daily basis, one has to take the amount of passenger space per person per day on a square metre basis. On this basis, at Jan Smuts each person would have 0,36 square metres. D. F. Malan had an increase because of the new buildings that have been built. It has had an increase of something like 1 183 square metres over this three-year period. The area there has increased from 580 square metres to 1 763 square metres. Therefore, the figure per passenger at the moment is 0,44 square metres. However, Louis Botha Airport in Durban has only 0,22 square metres—half the space as that available at either of the other two major South African airports. Nothing is happening at Louis Botha. We hear that things are going to happen. We hear that things may happen. Year after year after year we are given promises. On 20 April of this year, the most recent occasion on which I asked a question of this nature, I asked the hon. the Minister—

To this the hon. the Minister replied to me that as far as Louis Botha Airport was concerned, the answer to (a) and (b) was nil. Nothing was going to be done. He went on to say as far as (c) was concerned that—

He then went on to tell me what was going to happen to the existing domestic arrivals building. However, Mr. Chairman, I submit—and you know it, Sir—that we have in Durban an airport that is not an airport. It just cannot cater for the travelling public and something drastic has to be done about it. We were told years ago that something was going to be done about it. We were told years ago that we were going to have a new airport. We have spent R33,7 million on an airport that, as I say, is not an airport. We have nothing to show for it and I say to the hon. the Minister: In heaven’s name, apply your mind to this so that we can have finality on this issue. Let Durban know, let organized commerce and industry in Durban know and let the tourist and city fathers of Durban know and let the people of Durban know exactly what their future is.

What about Pietermaritzburg?

I can talk about Pietermaritzburg as well. Actually, the hon. member is quite right.

We have a nice new airport there.

There is a lovely airport there. What do you drop on it—parachutes or something? [Interjections.] Really, Sir, we have to have an answer to this problem. As I said a little earlier, the hon. the Minister must apply his mind to this matter and give us the answers here today. He must let us know exactly what he intends to do for Durban because we cannot continue in the way that we are. Extensive alterations have been made to D.F. Malan Airport but not a brick has been laid or a stone turned at Louis Botha Airport. I submit that that is a shocking state of affairs and it is worthy of the urgent attention of this House.

Mr. Chairman, it gives me pleasure to follow the hon. member for Umhlanga, but he will forgive me if I do not move further in that direction, because I am sure the hon. the Minister will be able to reply properly to his questions.

Transport and motor transport in particular play a very important role in the Government set-up and the motor vehicles belonging to the Government represent a very large and valuable investment. It is not always realized what it costs the Government annually to provide suitable transport for its employees to carry out State administration. It is not always realized what contribution mismanagement of this enormous transport section could have on the rate of inflation. The effect of unsuitable transport on the productivity of the employees dependent on that motor transport is considerable. In every industry dependent on motor transport, the capital invested in vehicles and the running costs involved represents an ever-increasing part of the total expenditure.

For the present financial year the Treasury has allocated approximately R4,5 million to the Government motor vehicles programme and if one takes into account the 13 Government Garages, the equipment in those garages and the value of the 17 031 vehicles under the control of the Government Garages on 31 March 1982, one realizes the magnitude of the investment. In the 1981-’82 financial year the Government Garage vehicles covered almost 181 million kilometres and the amount of fuel consumed represented a large part of the Government Garage’s operating expenditure. On 31 March 1982 there were 1 321 subsidized motor vehicles in use and annually there is an increase of approximately 100 subsidized vehicles.

What control is there over this State asset by the Government Motor Transport Branch? Is the management of this branch satisfactory? There is not the least doubt in my mind that everything possible is done to manage this largest fleet of motor vehicles in the country properly, and as economically as possible. When one considers all the important aspects of transport management in this branch, one finds that careful attention is given to aspects such as workshop administration, staff administration and training, purchase of new vehicles, sale of unserviceable vehicles, statistics in connection with accidents, distances, maintenance costs, fuel costs and of course subsidized vehicles. From the report it is clear that this branch is in good hands.

There are a few ideas I should like to mention to the hon. the Minister for consideration. I am of the opinion that the scope of this branch’s activities justifies the computerization of information and that the programming of certain running costs, inter alia fuel, tyre and accident repair costs could lead to even better control. It is extremely difficult to determine when repair costs to a specific vehicle are no longer economically justified. It may happen that a vehicle is repaired at great cost and is sold shortly afterwards because it has reached the prescribed kilometre life, or that a vehicle damaged in a collision is repaired although the mechanical condition of the vehicle does not justify the repair work. Fuel consumption and the life of the tyres are equally difficult to check without the aid of a computer programme. The Government Motor Transport Branch should be placed in a position where it can have even more effective control over the assets it has been entrusted with.

During the past financial year 1 310 more vehicles were purchased than were withdrawn from service, and the kilometre distance covered was about three million kilometres more than last year. There is therefore no doubt about the increase in activities. With the aid of a computer programme the running costs and other information on such a large number of vehicles could become a very important and enlightening source of information for the other Government departments and corporations operating their own transport.

I also want to ask that the annual report of the Government Motor Transport Branch be adjusted in the future to reflect information of this nature, inter alia the cost per kilometre. I also want to ask whether it would not be advisable to make the Government Motor Transport Branch responsible for the purchase of all new motor vehicles. At present this Branch is responsible for the purchase of all vehicles for the civilian departments of the Public Service. In my opinion the Government Motor Transport Branch should purchase all vehicles, except of course specific specialized types of vehicles, for all Government Departments, in order to be able to negotiate lower prices and to move in the direction of standard types of motor vehicles. When the purchase of vehicles is undertaken by one central purchasing organization, it is also possible to evaluate the serviceability of makes and models better, and quality control could also be applied more effectively. A further advantage is that specifications could be more uniform and that this could lead to standardization, which would result in more effective vehicles. The standardization of motor vehicles in particular has been an ideal for many years now, and this may be a point of departure towards realizing this ideal.

With few exceptions the maintenance of vehicles is undertaken by the 13 Government Garages, and in this regard standardization could only be beneficial. The Government Garages have posts for 105 mechanics and 41 apprentices, and measured by the norm usually laid down for maintenance, namely about 10 mechanics per 100 vehicles, this Branch does wonders. There are 1 000 posts on the establishment of this Branch, and considering what is done by it one cannot but congratulate the management on the high level of productivity that has been achieved, for in general the level of productivity in the motor industry is very low.

I note in the most recent report, in connection with the Government Motor Transport Branch, that there is a percepible drop in the number of kilometres covered by vehicles before they are involved in a collision for the first time. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to warn the departments making use of Government motor transport to ensure, in terms of the existing directions, that employees entering the Public Service and making use of Government motor transport, are competent drivers and that the existing road safety programme is carefully implemented.

This brings me to my final request. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to please give orders for the seats of the buses which the Government has so kindly made available to convey commuters between Acacia Park and Cape Town for a fee, to be readjusted so that large people do not have to sit sideways in them.

Hear, hear!

I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister, the Director-General, the Director and the staff of the Government Motor Transport Branch on an excellent achievement. I also want to congratulate them on the way in which they control and manage this major State asset.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Maraisburg would seem to have made a thorough study of the Government Motor Transport Branch. He also made a very good speech in which he addressed a number of requests to the hon. the Minister. I should like to return later to the subject which was discussed.

This brings me to the ideas expressed by the hon. member for Welkom and the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens. I am referring to the matter of road safety. We on this side of the House would like to tell the hon. the Minister that we also want to offer him our support and want to help him when it comes to research, planning and auxiliary services to make our road safer.

When my son had to go for his military training at the beginning of the year, his mother was very worried about the fact that her son was now a soldier and that he might be sent to the border. I think she found it very reassuring when I told her that it was far more dangerous to give one’s son a motor car and let him loose on South Africa’s roads than to allow him to be sent to the border. We want to wish the hon. the Minister every success with this very important task in which his department is engaged.

This brings me to the matter of motor transport which the hon. member for Maraisburg dealt with so thoroughly here. I want to congratulate the Director-General and his department on a very neat and comprehensive report. The hon. member for Maraisburg referred to this Branch and I want to say that I think it is really working overtime at this stage. I am now referring to the Government Motor Transport Branch. On page 9 of the report of the department one reads—

In my opinion this is cost saving and we therefore want to congratulate the department. It goes on to say—

I just wonder how many kilometres will be added to this figure in next year’s report. One need only look at the Government vehicles travelling about in the Soutpansberg and Waterberg areas. [Interjections.] One sees clouds of dust everywhere as Ministers are conveyed two or three at a time from one NP meeting to the next. The hon. the Minister of Transport Affairs seems to have turned into a very able chairman. It seems to me they do not have chairmen in Waterberg, because the hon. the Minister had to be taken there to act as chairman. The other day the hon. the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning arrived in Nylstroom and I thought he was going to address a large public gathering. I heard afterwards that he went to a tea party attended by approximately 30 women. [Interjections.] The CP members do not travel at Government expense, but at their own expense, and they will wipe the floor with the NP in Soutpansberg and Waterberg. [Interjections.]

How do you get there? You also fly free of charge on S.A.A.

Order!

When one steps on a dog’s tail, he yelps. [Interjections.]

Apparently every department is given an allocation of a certain number of kilometres which it may travel annually, which includes the number of kilometres travelled by Ministers. Because the remainder has to be devided among the officials who have to do the work, I want to make the following appeal to the Ministers: Particularly in the vast areas in my part of the world, up there in the Northern Cape, the distances veterinarians and extension officers have to travel should not be curtailed, for they are doing very important work; the hon. the Minister should rather curtail the number of kilometres travelled by the Ministers.

The hon. member for Vasco said that only two members of the CP were present here and that we were therefore not interested in this Vote. When one lives in a glass house one should never throw stones. At that juncture, when there were only two members of the CP present, there were only 28 members of the Government party here.

You cannot count.

There were 28. I counted them.

Yes, but you cannot count.

I took a look at the national route system in the report and I found that as far as planning is concerned, the National Transport Commission is not active in the Northern Cape. We understand the hon. the Minister’s dilemma that the levy of 2,345c per litre, which is the most important source of income for road building, is completely inadequate. Yet I still want to ask the hon. the Minister to get the National Transport Commission to consider the importance of extending the Kuruman-Hotazel tarred road through Vanzylsrus and Askham, through the Kalahari-Gemsbok Park to link up with the road network of South West Africa. This is a very important strategic road. As a result of the war on the northern border of South West Africa there is a great deal of transport between the PWV area and the operational area. This road shortens the distance between the PWV area and South West Africa by several hundred kilometres. Also from the point of view of tourism between South West Africa and the Republic—quite a number of people make use of this—it is an important road. It is not only used by people who want to admire the scenic beauty of South West Africa, but also by people who want to visit the fishing waters in the hon. member for Walvis Bay’s part of the world. Livestock being transported by lorry between South West Africa and the markets in Johannesburg can also be transported over this shorter route. By means of this road, tourists from the PWV area, where the largest part of our population is concentrated, will be brought nearer to the Kalahari-Gemsbok Park, one of the most beautiful national parks in the Republic. For that reason I want to ask the hon. the Minister to get his department and the National Transport Commission to consider extending the Kuruman-Hotazel tarred road through Vanzylsrus and Askham to the Kalahari-Gemsbok Park to link up with the existing road network of South West Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I do not know why the devil it is that I always have to speak after the hon. member for Kuruman. I want to tell the hon. member that he has now completely upset what had been a calm debate, after the experience the hon. the Minister had with thieves who wanted to attack him. He has now introduced politics into the debate and that will probably be the way things will go for the rest of the afternoon. I want to tell him that it is not true that the NP is moving so fast—it only seems that way because the hon. member is riding on a tortoise.

A tortoise moves forward.

Yes, but with its head pulled in. That is why it cannot see what is going on around it.

I wish to convey my thanks to my fellowcommissioners who assisted with the proceedings of the Bus Transport Commission. We shall sign the final report of the commission on 17 May 1983. It will be a comprehensive package. I want to thank the members of the commission, who are drawn from all four population groups, for the exceptional understanding and objectivity they displayed, and for not having put the interests of their own population or race group first in our consultations. At this point I wish to convey my thanks to them publicly for having co-operated so that thus far a consensus decision has always been reached.

However, I wish to devote my speech to a sensitive matter, the problem of the politicization of public bus transport in South Africa. This is a matter which is slowly but surely getting out of hand. I do not wish to throw stones, but I do wish to request that all political parties and denominations that play a part in this, refrain from doing so, please. To come and tell us that this is not so, will not do. Thus far the Commission on Bus Transport has heard several witnesses and received several memoranda. They amount to a few hundred. When one sees what is going on at the moment in the Ilanga area in Durban, I can only say that the violence that has broken out there in connection with public bus transport is being politically incited. Every spark that is ignited in the community, flames up where public bus transport is concerned. An eloquent example of this occurred in Lamontville last week when a certain Mr. Gasa was shot dead as the result of a riot which took place after an increase in fares in that area. The result is that buses were burnt. These disturbances continue to occur and are always concerned with bus transport, and if the situation is not defused in some way, it will become progressively worse. It is already happening that when people no longer get beer, as happened a short while ago, they burn buses. The worst thing about this is that tariff increases are not at issue here. The matter goes deeper than tariff increases. These are people who use bus transport for political purposes. At this stage I wish to request the hon. the Minister to give thorough consideration to the proposals which the commission has put forward in its second interim report. A great deal has already been said about them since the report was tabled. That report contains certain proposals relating to applications for tariff increases in the future. We are trying to move away from public hearings as such, to co-ordinated hearings where people—the people who are concerned—say their say in an orderly manner. I cannot see—and I want to say this very bluntly—what certain White political parties have to do with tariff increases. Nor can I see any justification whatever at this stage for certain White churches to incite people to such a pitch that they do not accept increases in tariffs. In this regard I want to correct the hon. member for Amanzimtoti. Last year, viz. in the past financial year, R920 million was paid out in direct and indirect subsidies to public transport, viz. train and bus transport, in South Africa. Having said that to the hon. member, I want to tell him that I must agree with him, and this is also the conclusion reached by the commission, that we cannot continue with subsidization at the present rate. Subsidies will have to be phased out in some way. The commission has put forward certain proposals and I trust that the hon. the Minister will give the report his favourable consideration and will implement it, because this will achieve two things. In the first place, it will take politics out of public transport. In the second place, it will phase out the subsidy. At present, approximately 25% of the total income of the bus transport companies is obtained from subsidies. The hon. member for Amanzimtoti must not single out just one route. He must look at the total network of routes in South Africa. The commission has found, and I want to refer the hon. member to paragraph 2.26 of the second interim report, page 14, where it is very clearly spelt out, that it is in the region of 25%.

I now want to come back to politics. I should like to tackle the people of the Black Sash. It is not only Di Bishop who is saying irrelevant things.

The views of the Black Sash’s Mrs. Di Bishop and Mrs. Burton as regards community service are as distorted as those of Mrs. Van Zyl of the Kappiekommando on religion. That is why it is possible for them to propose that the Government should now all of a sudden—and I quote what she says—

We never said any such thing. We said that we wanted an orderly say, and we motivated it very clearly, too. The biggest trade union in South Africa, the trade union Tucsa, asked that these public hearings, which are so abused by people who do not have a role to play there except to be political hyenas, should please not admit such people to have a say in the future determining of norms when tariff increases occur in bus transport.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I have a few things to say about the problem of taxis. A great deal has already been said here about private taxis. The Financial Mail has made a big fuss and asked what is wrong with private taxis. I now refer to a report in the edition of that newspaper that appeared on 22 April this year. I shall tell hon. members what is wrong. The Act provides that a taxi, in accordance with the spirit of a taxi, may convey eight passengers and a driver. Do you know, Mr. Chairman, what the commission in New Brighton, Port Elizabeth, found? It had a few taxis stopped. They found that 19 or 20, or as many as 21 people, alighted from a microbus. Now people speak about road safety and put forward arguments in connection with road safety. This is where the problem begins.

Then, too, the taxi enterprise is praised by people as being part and parcel of private initiative. I am not concerned about the taxi that is correctly run, but then it must be run in the spirit of a taxi. A taxi service must not be operated as if it is a minibus service. I believe that taxi services, as they are operated at the moment—as a minibus service …

What does the spirit of a taxi look like?

It looks like what a CP does not look like. That is to say, it does not look like a tortoise. Nor does it move like a tortoise, but like a Nationalist; with purpose and willpower.

Left and right and up and down, not so? [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, the party which makes the loudest noises about the problem of taxis is, of course, the PFP. In fact, tomorrow their people are going to Langa to provide assistance. They are going to provide assistance at Langa tomorrow and the next day with regard to the stone-throwing sessions that are in progress there. [Interjections.] I make this allegation because in 1975 their member Mr. Ross …

Order!

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon. member allowed to suggest that this party participates in throwing stones at buses in Langa and Lamontville?

Order! The hon. member Dr. Welgemoed must withdraw that remark.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the remark, but I am going to define it differently.

I regret that that will not be possible because the hon. member’s time has expired. [Interjections.]

You have missed the bus again, Piet. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member Dr. Welgemoed is politically naive to describe people as political hyenas. [Interjections.] As is the case with all other aspects in South Africa, the conditions under which people live are also a direct reflection of their political power. The less power people have, the smaller their share will be in the total prosperity of South Africa.

I shall do a deal with the hon. member Dr. Welgemoed. As hard as he pleads with his party for political rights for those people, I shall plead that they do not attack the symbols of the State because of not having any political rights. [Interjections.]

†We are talking today about the allocation of some of the resources of this country to the transportation sector, which is one of the largest sectors of our entire economy. Yet we have the ridiculous situation that one risks being ruled out of order if one talks about certain aspects of transport, such as, for instance, South African Transport Services, provincial roads, etc. The reason for this is of course that the various provincial authorities, the Transport Services, the homelands, and the Department of Transport, each has its own budget, its own objectives and its own officials, each one with his own pet projects. Yet all of them have finally to compete for a share of the total resources that we allocate today. I believe that this is a state of affairs that does not serve the best interests of South Africa as a whole and I think it is high time that priorities were determined on an integrated basis so that we do not experience these absurd situations in which massive, unutilized freeways lead from the village of Bloemfontein into the Karoo and to nowhere just because it was the Free State’s turn for another project, while the Johannesburg-Durban freeway is totally inadequate to cope with its traffic on almost any day of the year. There is also the fact that kwaZulu with an absolutely minimal transport budget is expected to be solely responsible for the roads in the informal urban sprawl surrounding Durban and Pietermaritzburg.

I should therefore like to know from the hon. the Minister firstly, what he as the responsible Minister is doing to obtain a new integrated dispensation in terms of transportation matters to coincide with the new semiintegrated constitutional dispensation. Secondly, in terms of metropolitan transport planning in the declaration of metropolitan areas in which the metropolitan transport advisory boards were supposed to plan, the boards in Pietermaritzburg and Durban could not take the bordering areas of kwaZulu into consideration. This, of course, will make a total mockery of transport or metropolitan planning in those areas of Natal. In this regard I should like to know from the hon. the Minister firstly, whether he is in favour of an integrated transport plan across the borders of kwaZulu; and secondly, whether he will make it his special duty to remove those legal impediments so that kwaZulu can be included in the jurisdiction of the metropolitan advisory boards of Durban and Pietermaritzburg so that planning can start as a matter of urgency. In the third instance, these totally unplanned urban areas of kwaZulu border directly on the suburbs of Durban and Pietermaritzburg, which puts them in a unique situation as far as cities in South Africa are concerned. Flowing from this, I should also like to ask in the fourth instance what special financial arrangement the hon. the Minister is going to make so that the urgent implementation of these transport plans can go ahead in Durban. I ask this because it will create an ever more irreversible position for future generations if we do not tackle this matter very urgently. It means that the people of Natal will have to pay for all the silly things stemming from apartheid that they did not want in the first place.

When one talks about apartheid, of course, the Pretoria City Council must be the only authority in South Africa that still in this day and age wishes to turn back the clock of apartheid. I think hon. members all know about the parks now being reserved for Whites only, but I wonder how many hon. members realize that Pretoria runs a municipal bus service that is also reserved for Whites only. What is more, even the drivers are still required to be White. This bus service will wind up in the current year with a projected loss of about R6 million. That is fair enough because the public of Pretoria will have to pay for it in view of the fact that they vote for the type of public representatives that they do. At the same time, however, taxpayers and employers throughout the length and breadth of South Africa have also to subsidize Putco to run a parallel service for Blacks in Pretoria. Therefore, it is in fact not simply a matter for the people of Pretoria. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister, therefore, what his attitude is to this waste of resources by running two parallel bus services in the city of Pretoria where an integrated service would obviously be far more efficient. The same thing holds good for Durban. At least they asked the hon. the Minister for an integrated service. What is his reply in these respects?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Greytown did not make contribution to the debate that was anything out of the ordinary because, like his colleague in the CP next to him, he just tried to impose their own political stamp on this debate. I shall not react further to his speech—the hon. member will forgive me—because in the course of my speech I should like to comment on what the hon. member for Berea had to say. I think that this afternoon the hon. member for Berea made a very good contribtution when he referred to the Margo report.

Allow me to thank the Director-General of Transport and the Chairman of the National Transport Commission and to congratulate him on the excellent and detailed annual report which has been presented to us. On studying the report, one is deeply impressed by the wide spectrum of activities of the Department of Transport.

When one looks at chapter 11 of the annual report dealing with the activities of the Directorate of Civil Aviation, one is also deeply impressed by the wide-ranging task entrusted to this Directorate, and the Commissioner of Civil Aviation, Mr. Germishuizen, and his staff deserve high praise for the enormous task they perform with such distinction.

However, I want to come to the Margo report. Nowadays conversation in civil aviation circles centres mainly around the report of the Margo Commission of Enquiry into Civil Aviation in South Africa. Then I should also like to thank the hon. Mr. Justice Margo and the members of the commission for the good work done by them and for the very good report they submitted to us, a report which, I think, is going to make a considerable impression on and a considerable contribution to the promotion of civil aviation in South Africa.

Solomon, in his wisdom, said that there is nothing new under the sun. This is also apparent from the report. It is a fact that in the report reference is made to other recommenddations which have already been confirmed by the Directorate of Civil Aviation, some of which have already been implemented. The report also refers to recommendations of previous commissions but which—and this is important—have not yet been implemented. The Margo report contains a wealth of knowledge, information and recommendations which, to my mind, should be scrutinized very thoroughly and which, if they were to be implemented, would place civil aviation on a much sounder basis.

The hon. member for Berea asked whether the hon. the Minister should not create an opportunity for the report to be discussed in the House by way of a debate. I believe that the hon. member made a very thorough study of the report. It is an all-embracing report which certainly covers all facets of civil aviation in South Africa very thoroughly. That is why I believe that it will not be possible for such a debate to really take place. A proposal which I should like to make to the hon. the Minister, is that a White Paper on the Margo report be compiled. Such a White Paper should then be discussed in this House in due course. I believe that in this way we shall be able to conduct a much more meaningful discussion.

As was quite rightly said by the hon. member for Berea, one lacks the time to conduct any kind of meaningful discussion of the contents of the report. At the moment the Directorate is studying the report. We look forward with great expectations to the standpoints that will be adopted on some of the recommendations. The hon. member asked what the attitude of the Government was going to be to the report. I think it is self-evident that we are going to adopt a very positive attitude to the report, because we seek only the best for civil aviation in the country. I believe that we shall take a very thorough look at all the recommendations of the report. Taken as a whole, we can summarize it by saying that there are three recommendations which one would be entitled to regard as three very important outstanding recommendations, and I wish to discuss them very briefly.

In the first instance, it is very clear from all the recommendations of the commission that they call for a strengthened Directorate of Civil Aviation, and that this is to be done by elevating the status of the directorate as such, with an accompanying expansion of staff and an increased budget for the directorate. By that I imply that it must be a meaningful strengthening which will enable the directorate to perform its functions properly, so that the basic issues, such as safety in the air and flying skill, may at all times enjoy absolute priority. This can only happen if the directorate has at its disposal adequate and highly specialized manpower. We must always keep in mind that we are dealing here with a highly sophisticated industry, an industry which is also developing very rapidly, an industry in which the factor of loss of life is an ever-present factor.

The second recommendation of the commission to which I should like to refer, a matter to which I believe very serious attention will have to be given, deals with the fact that the existing Civil Aviation Advisory Committee has to be placed on a much more efficient and firmer basis than is the case at the moment. The hon. member for Berea also referred to this. I believe that this committee should play a dynamic role in future. It should be the instrument to give effect to many of the recommendations of the Margo report. To be able to do just this, the directorate must have additional staff to enable it to provide an effective secretariat and a staff service for this committee. It is, therefore, very important that the members of the committee must be representative of all agencies in the aviation sector. The hon. member for Berea also asked for this when he talked about free enterprise and the participation of the private sector in this regard.

The third and final important recommendation which I should like to single out concerns the activation of all the sectors in the aviation industry, to get them so far as to play a promotional role in it themselves. By that I mean that the various associations in the aviation industry will also have to be encouraged to contribute towards encouraging professionalism in the industry. I think this is very important. These people should not just sit and wait to see what the Directorate of Civil Aviation can do for them. They must also make a contribution. They must make inputs in order to see how we can improve aviation as a whole in this country. Of course, this requires liaison work, and in this respect I believe that the directorate has a tremendous educational task, and this in turn requires staff and finances.

In conclusion I just want to say that today South Africa has a proud record in the world today in the field of military as well as civil aviation. In view of the fact that aviation is a rapidly developing industry, we cannot risk falling behind in the process. In the report the fear is expressed—and the hon. member for Berea also referred to this—that we shall fall behind, but although South Africa is one of the contracting States of the International Civil Aviation Organization, we were deprived of full membership of this association as a result of a politically inspired decision in 1971. However, in spite of that it is very good for us to know that the directorate is not falling behind at all. On the contrary, the directorate is keeping fully abreast of all developments and techniques existing in the world today. However, these things do not happen of their own accord. They do not simply fall in one’s lap. However, it attests to great dedication and a spirit of enterprise on the part of the directorate, and in this regard these people deserve only the highest praise from everybody involved in aviation.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank the hon. member for Berea for his contribution. He made a good study of the Margo Commission’s report and I can give him the assurance that we will table a White Paper and have discussions on the recommendations in the House, because that is a most important report concerning civil aviation. The hon. member also referred to the contribution made by private enterprise. It is essential that private companies must operate as feeders for the S.A. Airways. I want to thank the hon. member for his contribution. We will go into all the matters he raised here. We have practically completed our study of the report. It has been completed for 90%. It will therefore not take too long before we table the White Paper and come with our recommendations.

Will it be this session?

It all depends on what is going to happen this session with the new constitutional plan, but I will pay attention to this matter and I can tell the hon. member it will not take very long.

If we have to wait for the next session, you may have to serve the White Paper to three chambers.

Well, it all depends.

I also want to thank the hon. member for proposing to increase my salary. I really appreciated that.

*I regard it as a kind gesture, and I want to tell him that I shall do the same for him if someone goes off with his jacket one day. I thank him for saying that.

The hon. member for Kempton Park discussed divergent functions of this department, which include the following: Antarctic research, weather forecasting, civil aviation, clean-going traffic, and the combating of oil pollution. I thank the hon. member for doing so. I also want to convey my thanks on this occasion to the Director-General, Mr. Eksteen, and his top officials. It is a pleasure for a Minister to work with such able people. It serves as an incentive to me to see the pace at which Mr. Eksteen and the various Directors do their work. For this I thank them sincerely.

The hon. member for Kempton Park, as well as the hon. member for De Aar, referred to the question of service and rest areas. The National Transport Commission has approved certain service and rest areas. Overnight facilities for heavy vehicles will be provided at Hammarsdale, Mariannhill and Cato Manor in Natal, at Kraaifontein in the Western Cape and at Markman in the Eastern Cape. There will be rest areas at Harrison East in Natal and at Bloukrans and Bay View in the Eastern Cape. There will be service areas at Heavitree, at Rheebok in the Eastern Cape, and at Lonetree, Golden and Natalspruit.

Quite a study will have to be undertaken in order to provide lay-byes for heavy vehicles, overnight facilities for heavy vehicles, rest areas and service areas. According to the budget of the National Transport Commission, the cost involved in providing these facilities will be as follows: Lay-byes for heavy vehicles, R15 000; overnight facilities for heavy vehicles, R950 000; service areas, R1,8 million; and rest areas, R1,2 million. This is at today’s prices.

However, we do not want any disruption. All the relevant cases are being investigated. The hon. member for De Aar asked what was going to become of a small town with only one or two cafés and similar facilities. He said that such a town would bleed to death. We shall implement this system in such a way in practice that this will not happen.

The hon. member for Kempton Park also referred to the 1984 road safety year. I shall refer to this later. The hon. member also said, quite rightly, that we should ensure that the big operators to not outbid the small ones, thereby creating monopolies. The NTC will give attention to this.

Then there is the question of the catering at airports. The caterer who tendered for the catering at Jan Smuts Airport tendered R70 000 a month to be able to serve tea, coffee, etc. Now he is adjusting his prices in order to recover this money. The Tender Board is investigating this whole situation together with the department. Because the caterer is anxious to get the business, he submits a high tender, and the result is that one has to pay 45 cents today for a cup of coffee without milk or sugar.

And it is not even very good coffee.

That is correct.

The hon. member for De Aar spoke about an enormous increase in flying accidents. Mr. Germishuys, the Director of Civil Aviation, gave me the figures a short while ago. In 1970, there were 165 accidents involving private aircaft. Ten years later, there were 170 accidents. Whereas we had 2 127 private aircraft in 1970, there were 3 748 in 1980. So there has been a considerable drop in the percentage of accidents involving private aircraft.

I have already replied to the hon. member’s question concerning small towns.

Mr. Chairman, I have been asked so many questions that I intend to reply to some of them in writing. I should like to get the toll road legislation, which is next on the Order Paper, passed before we adjourn tonight.

The hon. member for Roodeplaat referred to the incidence of motor vehicle theft and suggested a computerized code system. There is a great deal of merit in the hon. member’s suggestion. We shall consider his suggestion in consultation with the Road Safety Council, the department and the police. If it could serve to reduce motor vehicle theft, it would be a practical idea.

Everyone is talking about Adolf Hitler these days. It is told that he once said in Germany that the next person who stole a car would be summarily shot. Two people were shot, and from then on one could leave one’s keys in the car in Germany. It would not be stolen. Of course, we cannot take such drastic action here. [Interjections.] However, it is terrible the way cars are being stolen in our country.

But they even steal a man’s shoes off his feet. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Roodeplaat also referred to the number of accidents. During the past Easter weekend, 187 people died on our roads. However, he must remember that 74 of these were pedestrians. We concentrate all our attention on the motorist, but many motorists are innocent. One often finds pedestrians walking on freeways at night without any lights, possibly under the influence of alcohol. One sometimes sees a Black, a Coloured or a White walking along a freeway, such as the one between Cape Town and D. F. Malan Airport. One is not supposed to walk on a freeway. I have seen such people walking without any light, and on top of that they were under the influence of alcohol. This is the kind of thing which caused 74 pedestrians to die over the Easter weekend. Of the number of pedestrians killed during the past Easter weekend, 74,8% were Blacks, 33,9% Whites, 12,3% Coloureds and 5,9% Asians. These are interesting figures.

†I now come to the hon. member for Amanzimtoti. He referred to certain powers in the Act to protect the SATS. We had long discussions on that and I told the hon. member that he should remember that the SATS is currently undertaking only 35% of all South Africa’s transport. The figure 10 years ago was 55%. Why is that so? People want to make a living. We talk of free enterprise. Some people think that by buying a truck one becomes a private entrepreneur. All these people want to do business. We have to stop these people if they undertake unauthorized transport. We are not using the Railway Police to investigate and to stop any trucks on the roads. This is done by special inspectors of the department and by the S.A. Police. It is not done by the Railway Police. The Railway Police do not use roadblocks.

The hon. member must now listen to me. I also have a book at home. Sir, do you know what happened? During the time referred to by the hon. member we found a truck carrying a 12 meter container with coffins inside. Hon. members should have seen what was in the coffins. Sometimes we even find people transporting coffins containing dagga—it is unbelievable—carting it under the name of a very well-known cartage contractor.

In the prohibition days there was whisky in the coffins.

Yes, the bootlegging type. Whisky in the coffins is even better.

There were possibly 12 postal votes for Waterkloof in the coffins.

I want to ask the hon. member: If this company was maltreated as he alleges, why did they not write me? I would immediately have given attention to it. I would have drawn it to the attention of the National Transport Commission. The hon. member also asked me when the three bridges would be completed. The department now has R71 million to spend on certain road projects in Natal that are to be completed by 1988. I do not want to have a misunderstanding about this like we had over La Mercy Airport. Do hon. members know the story about what was was? It is a good story. Mr. Chairman, do you know it? Do you want to hear it, Mr. Chairman?

The hon. the Minister may proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

*As the hon. member knows, the completion of the bridge is closely bound up with the road construction on either side of it. I am talking now of the Umkomaas River bridge. The bridge itself is nearing completion, but any advantage it may hold for the town of Umkomaas will only be realized when the road connections to the north and south of the bridge have also been completed. Arrangements have been made for one lane of the road to be completed first so that heavy vehicles will be able to use it by February 1984 to by-pass Umkomaas. It should be possible to open the first lane from Umgababa to Scottburgh for through traffic by June 1986, and the second lane about six months later. However, this date is subject to the amount of funds made available for the projects every year. If the hon. member can help me to get another 1,5 cents per litre on fuel I will be able to give him the assurance that it will be completed in time.

The hon. member for Kimberley North raised a very important matter, namely the testing of drivers. Whenever I meet someone who gets worked up and says to me: “Look, I have been driving for 40 years. Do you want to test me again?” my reply to him is: “My friend, it does not apply only to you; it also applies to the other man who is going to kill your child or your grandchild.” Then he immediately understands the position. The CSIR and the National Road Safety Council have made a study of these things and the department is investigating these matters with them. We must find a solution.

The hon. member for Welkom quite rightly corrected the hon. member. I am thinking, for example, of a place such as Boekenhoutfontein in the Transvaal, where traffic policemen are trained. I agree with the hon. member that these people must have status; they must have status as traffic policemen. We must not try to humiliate them. We must give them status. They are there to protect our lives. I am saying this specifically in order to have it recorded in Hansard, so that I can keep it in my car, and the next time they catch me, I shall be able to tell them: “Look what I said about you.” Then they may let me off for a change, for I have been having very bad luck with regard to speed traps lately. The hon. member says that they should be properly remunerated. I agree with the hon. member as far as that is concerned.

The hon. member for Welkom requested that the S.A. Airways should touch down at Welkom. The hon. member says that one has to march around the walls of Jerusalem seven times in order to get results. The hon. member once invited me to Welkom and I had a very pleasant day. He can invite me six more times.

Jericho, not Jerusalem.

Yes, Jericho. I said Jericho.

No, you said Jerusalem.

Never mind, it comes to the same thing.

The hon. member for Welkom referred to the compulsory carrying of licences. The hon. was an MEC dealing with these matters for many years. I like to listen to him and I want to tell him that we are in the process of introducing the compulsory carrying of licences. In the USA, when one gets into a car with someone, one notices that his licence is attached to his steering column by means of a leather strap. That is the best method for discipline. In this country, however, people are outraged when we say that we want passbooks with thumb-prints inside. They immediately associate it with dishonesty. I have no fault to find with it. However, the time is approaching when we shall have to carry our licences on our person. When one has a clear conscience, one does not mind having one’s licence with one.

The hon. member also spoke about co-ordination between the parties involved. This is essential. We must get the people involved and the Provinces together and bring about co-ordination. I thank the hon. member for Welkom very sincerely for his contribution.

†The hon. member for Cape Town Gardens referred to the alarming increase in road accidents, as did other hon. members. The hon. member also referred to the question of third party insurance. I want to point out to the hon. member. Mr. Chairman, that we are expecting the recommendations of the Grosskopf Commission in the very near future; recommendations in connection with third party insurance, and also in connection with the possibility of covering the innocent person to whom the hon. member referred, in the event of any road accident. The recommendations will also deal with the question of property.

*The hon. member for Vasco referred to the TBVC countries. The hon. member raised an important matter. However, we have an agreement with the independent States in terms of which there is reciprocal recognition of third party insurance among the States involved. These States are Lesotho, Swaziland, Botswana, Transkei, Ciskei, Bophuthatswana and Venda. We have entered into that agreement. The hon. member also spoke about concessions to help the private carriers. This has already been done. At first, the concessions amounted to 8 000 kg, and afterwards 14 000 kg. I shall ask the National Transport Commission to investigate the hon. member’s suggestion. The NTC can investigate the matter to see whether in those areas where there is no railway transport, but only road transport, it would not be possible for us to be more accommodating in such areas.

†The hon. member for Umhlanga referred to the La Mercy Airport. When I was still Deputy Minister of Agriculture I had to go and investigate a piece of land at Tongaat. We purchased that piece of land at the time for a very reasonable price. We bought practically a complete farm, which, with the levelling of the land, cost us about R33 million. Then, however, we discovered that we did not have sufficient moneys to continue with the building of the airport. If one does not have sufficient funds one can of course not do anything. That is why we decided then to develop the Louis Botha Airport into an efficient and practical airport. At the moment plans are already being drafted, and we envisage the spending of R10,5 million on the completion of the new development at the Louis Botha Airport. Work is expected to be completed by 1986.

*Mr. Chairman, I should prefer not to commit myself to any dates … [Interjections.] Yes, suppose something goes wrong, what then? Suppose there is a sharp drop in the price of gold again and we do not have the money, then we shall have problems again. [Interjections.]

Is that La Mercy Airport now?

No, Forget about La Mercy Airport. Get it out of your head. [Interjections.] I maintain that the land we purchased for the development of the La Mercy Airport still remains a bargain. Compared with the prices of land today, we bought it for a give-away price. That is why I say we did the correct thing when we bought that land. In a country with a turn-over …

For speculation purposes?

Yes, even for speculation purposes. Does the hon. member for Umhlanga want to buy it? He can have it for R40 million. [Interjections.] Be it as it may, Mr. Chairman, I believe that in his heart of hearts the hon. member for Umhlanga is still delighted about the fact that we are still using Louis Botha Airport in Durban. If he wants to be honest he will admit that I am right.

Honest about what?

You are delighted that we are still using Louis Botha Airport and not La Mercy Airport.

Well, that is all we can do. We cannot touch down anywhere else but at Louis Botha Airport.

Yes, you touch down at Louis Botha Airport and you save lots of time because you are nearer home. La Mercy is to hell and gone … [Interjections.] Whatever should happen, I believe, we will still settle this whole La Mercy Airport affair. The hon. member for Umhlanga and I will both be attending the opening ceremony of the La Mercy Airport one day, even if it should be, as the hon. member said, in our wheel-chairs. We will nevertheless make a happy event of it. [Interjections.] I do appeal to hon. members, however, in future discussions of the Transport Vote, not to discuss the La Mercy Airport with me; not as long as I am still in this House. [Interjections] I can give hon. members the assurance that we are spending R10,5 million on improving Louis Botha Airport. That airport will be improved in order to handle both international and domestic flights more efficiently. I can promise hon. members Louis Botha will ultimately be a top-class airport.

Mr. Chairman, is the hon. the Minister aware of the fact that if he does not live up to this promise of his here today, he will never be able to go to Durban again because they will mug him at least six times? [Interjections.]

Thanks for the warning. If I go to Durban again I shall go without a jacket and wear tackies! [Interjections.]

*The hon. member for Maraisburg has made a fine study of Government motor vehicle transport. I shall give attention to all his suggestions. He also spoke about the cost per kilometre. For the hon. member’s information I may point out that when we call for tenders, we do so in co-operation with the Post Office, the Police and the Department of Defence. We do this in view of the variety of models of vehicles which we use. We cannot buy only one make, because there are Toyota, Datsun and Ford and all the others. We must support them all. However, we shall give attention to the question of computerization as well as to the programme which the hon. member suggested.

The hon. member also spoke about the bus from Acacia Park. The trip takes only half an hour, and we have something of a financial problem in this connection. We shall have to put up with it for a while, otherwise I shall have to suggest that the next time we call for nominations for the House of Assembly, the nominees should all be people of my own height who would then fit into that bus. [Interjections.] I am afraid there is not much we can do about the bus.

It is very strange, Sir, that the hon. member for Kuruman should have wanted to drag politics into such a pleasant debate as this one. He said that the Ministers sped along the dirt roads of Waterberg in clouds of dust. He said they drove around in twos and he asked who was footing the bill for this. At whose expense does the hon. member for Kuruman drive from here to the airport? I could tell the hon. member about the financial position in which some people find themselves after resigning as members of Parliament. I do not want to talk about myself, but I just want to tell the hon. member that when I drove to Waterberg, I did not go in my own car. I paid a certain amount per kilometre for it and I have the receipts to prove it. We must not make insinuations here. The PFP and the NRP have never adopted that kind of standpoint in a debate such as this one.

I could also try to be nasty and say that I read in the newspaper this morning that Dr. Treumicht had said that the Peninsula would become a heartland of the Coloured people. Under those circumstances, the Peninsula would then be a sovereign Coloured homeland, and if the Coloured Parliament were to decide that the seat of the White Parliament should be moved, what would the position be then? Would the hon. member for Kuruman have it moved to Delmas or to some other place? I can also play a political game in this connection. Those hon. members of the CP make the most impractical suggestions.

We were talking about group areas in the Cape Peninsula.

Yes, but now there is going to be an independent heartland here for the Coloureds.

The hon. the Minister knows that we were talking about group areas in the Peninsula.

I do not want to quarrel with the hon. member. The hon. member asked for the extension of the road from Hotazel to South West Africa. This is a provincial road which does not fall under the National Transport Commission.

I want to thank the hon. member Dr. Welgemoed for the fact that his committee submitted such an impressive report within such a short space of time. I want to thank the committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Welgemoed. I fully agree with him that it is time we depoliticized our passengers in South Africa. I also agree that the subsidies will have to be reduced. However, we cannot reduce the subsidy unless we adjust the salary of the worker. We recently adjusted the salaries, however, but there was no quid pro quo from such a person with regard to the ticket which he has to pay for. An hon. member referred to a subsidy of R5 on a ticket costing R7. This is out of all proportion and it has to be rectified.

†The hon. member for Amanzimtoti referred to the question of the use of kombi taxis. The hon. member suggested that we allow the use of such taxis in certain areas for specific periods. What is the position when one drives to Johannesburg through Uncle Charley’s at 7 o’clock in the morning? What is the position when one drives from D.F. Malan Airport to Cape Town at 7 o’clock in the morning? There is a tremendous wastage of fuel because of the traffic build-up and people having to wait. Now the hon. member wishes to increase that traffic by allowing more kombis to operate.

But instead of having one person to a car you will then have 10 to a car.

That is correct. The hon. member for Hillbrow only drives himself. I am also guilty in that regard.

The hon. member for Greytown said that the people of Natal are not prepared to pay for the silly idea of apartheid. The hon. the Minister of Co-operation and Development is working on proposals in relation to the points raised by the hon. member for Greytown. I refer to the problems in relation to integration, KwaZulu and so forth. I am sure that the hon. the Minister will in due course make recommendations in this regard. However, this matter does not fall under my department.

The hon. member also referred to the waste of money by the Pretoria City Council. He said that the council had lost R6 million on a separate bus undertaking and that Putco was duplicating the bus service. What about the other city councils? The loss suffered by the Pretoria City Council is one of the smallest. The hon. member should investigate the position of some of the other city councils in regard to this type of loss.

*The hon. member for Kroonstad used to be a pilot. He used to fly himself for many years. He has studied the civil aviation legislation as well as the Margo report. I can tell him as well as the hon. member for Berea that the proposals will be implemented if it is practicable to do so and after the financial implications have been properly considered.

There is only one aspect which I want to deal with in conclusion. Hon. members will agree with me that a situation where the national route system, as indicated on any recent road map, falls partially under the control of the National Transport Commission and partially under provincial control, is extremely unsatisfactory. There is divided control and some hon. members specifically made the point that we should achieve co-ordination.

In the light of the divided control and of the decline in the growth rate of traffic in the world-wide fuel situation which we have been experiencing since the end of 1973 and which has changed the ideal of a continuous freeway system for the Republic into an unrealistic, unattainable illusion—it is not practical to plan it in the way that seemed possible when we were still riding on the crest of the wave—because it is no longer possible to build a dual carriageway from Cape Town to the Limpopo, the National Transport Commission recently recommended a deviation from its original freeway policy.

Instead of the freeway system envisaged at the time, the National Transport Commission proposes that a primary or national route system be identified in the Republic which would link up all areas of economic activity, taking into consideration the Government’s policy of decentralization, and which would also connect those areas with neighbouring States.

Such a continuous national route system under the control of the National Transport Commission would have to comply with appropriate standards in order to satisfy traffic and road safety requirements and could vary from a freeway to an ordinary single carriageway tarred road with gravel shoulders. We must start thinking in practical terms. If one cannot afford to build a luxury road in some areas, one must build a practical road—as long as one can drive along it!

I believe that such a pragmatic policy in respect of our national roads would bring about a far more meaningful utilization of the available funds. I must warn, though, that with the revenue we are receiving at the moment, it will not be possible to achieve these objectives either.

At the moment, the National Transport Commission is barely able to meet its obligations in respect of approximately 2 000 kilometres of national road, while the proposed continuous system would be approximately 10 000 kilometres long. This proposed system includes certain heavy traffic corridors such as the Southern Witwatersrand, which alone will absorb an additional levy of one cent on every litre of fuel.

The proposals which the National Transport Commission has submitted to me with regard to a newly identified continuous national road network appear to me to be meaningful and justifiable. I have committed myself to helping the National Transport Commission to achieve its honourable objective in order to promote the welfare and safety of us all on our national roads of the future.

In order to achieve these objectives, it will naturally be necessary to have proper consultations with the provisions to identify their involvenent in the new road system. The Treasury will also be consulted.

I have actually concluded my speech, but the hon. the Deputy Minister of Co-operation has just handed me a note indicating that 14 motor vehicles caught fire in an accident between Cape Town and D. F. Malan Airport today. Two people were killed in the accident. I find it regrettable that the discussion should be concluded on this note. I convey my condolences to the bereaved families. This shows us once again how important it is to drive carefully and to have a good road system to prevent such a loss of life each year, as well as a loss of millions of rands to our economy, as a result of fatal road accidents. One should think of the fact that we lose 25 people a day—every day of the year. When one aircraft crashed the other day, 20 people were killed instantaneously, but every day we lose 25 lives on our roads. When an aircraft crashes, it is an isolated event and it receives great publicity, but the slaughter on our roads does not receive so much attention because it consists of many separate incidents.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he would consider appointing a commission of inquiry with a view to uniting all those bodies concerned with road safety so that we can have a comprehensive road safety plan for the safety of all our motorists?

That is exactly what I was referring to. We are busy co-ordinating activities in the provinces. The National Road Safety Council is busy with the whole idea, and so is the department, so that we can have a co-ordinated system throughout South Africa. I think we have the co-operation of all the provinces and all the people concerned in this.

I want to conclude by thanking all hon. members once again for their contributions.

Vote agreed to.

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

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

The acute shortage of road funds which the National Transport Commission and, in fact, other road authorities as well, have had to contend with in the past two years, has been debated on various occasions in this House. Therefore, it is not necessary for me to elaborate on this matter in detail, as hon. member are well acquainted with it. Hon. members are well aware that in order to maintain a consistent as opposed to a fluctuating road construction programme, the National Roads Act, 1971, was amended during the second Parliamentary session of 1981 in order to grant the National Transport Commission borrowing powers so that funds for the continuation of essential projects could be obtained in that way. I want to add that at that stage there was no question yet of an increased levy being granted in aid of the Roads Fund, and the commission had already had to borrow R31 million to keep the Road Fund solvent. As hon. members undoubtedly know, the National Roads Act, 1971, was amended during this session to provide for the imposition of a levy of 0,7 cents per litre on the sale or supply of petrol or distillate fuel, but even with the funds which will become available in this way, the total funds for road construction purposes are still inadequate, and further alternative sources of revenue will have to be found. The National Transport Commission decided in the latter half of the seventies to investigate the possibility of tolls on our roads with a view to generating an additional source of revenue.

†The necessary investigations were then carried out and the recommendations in this regard were considered by the National Transport Commission at its meeting on 30 October 1981 when it was resolved to accept them. The matter was then submitted to me for further consideration. The Cabinet then decided that the matter should be referred to a Select Committee. This Committee was formed under the chairmanship of the hon. member for Kempton Park, Mr. G. C. du Plessis, MP for investigation and report.

*In its report as tabled on 9 June 1982, the Selct Committee recommended, inter alia—

The draft legislation was submitted to the Select Committee and accepted on the 30th March 1983 “without objection”—I emphasize that—and subsequently the report of the commission, together with a Bill entitled the Second National Roads Amendment Bill, was tabled on the 11th April 1983.

†The main advantage of introducing toll financing as a system of procuring additional revenue for financing road construction projects is the fact that it will enable the National Transport Commission to finance specific projects which otherwise would have been subject to a longer construction period or, alternatively, at the other extreme, would have had to be postponed indefinitely due to the unavailability of funds.

As will become evident later, it is not the intention to introduce toll facilities on all roads. It stands to reason that the system can only be operated viably on roads which carry large volumes of traffic and as such are normally very costly to construct.

Toll financing of the more expensive projects has the further advantage that no disruption is caused to the orderly execution of the normal roads programme, as available funds can be distributed more evenly and peak demands can be controlled.

Toll financing is related to the user-tax concept and as such only persons who will benefit directly by using the improved or shorter route will incur costs. In this regard it is a more equitable manner of generating funds than direct taxation, as taxpayers who may never make use of the facility will not be burdened. If one increases the price of petrol by 1c per litre, the man in Louis Trichardt who is going to vote for Fanie Botha will also have to pay for the new tunnel at Du Toit’s Kloof which he may never use. So I think toll financing is the right way to generate income.

The National Transport Commission will be vested with supreme authority with regard to the toll financing of the national roads under its jurisdiction. The commission will identify possible toll projects and carry out the necessary investigations to determine whether such projects are justified. If deemed necessary, the commission will procure the required funds and provide and operate the toll facility. The moneys collected in this manner will be applied to defray relevant costs such as operating costs, capital redemption, interest and other direct costs related to the toll system.

*The National Transport Commission has already identified the following projects as possible toll projects: The Du Toit’s Kloof tunnel, due to be completed in 1990; the great bridges on the Garden Route, i.e. the Bobbejaans River, Groot River and Blou-krans River bridges; the route between Frere and Keeversfontein in Natal as from 1992; and the route between Warmbaths and Nylstroom as from 1987.

The costs involved in the provision of toll facilities such as buildings, equipment, road widening, etc. are at present estimated as follows: Du Toit’s Kloof tunnel, R4 million; the Garden Route, R2 million; the Frere-Keeversfontein route, R4 million and the Warmbaths-Nylstroom route, R2,7 million.

The question now arises as to whether using toll roads will entail any benefits for the user and whether such benefits will be perceptible to them. In general it is expected that the user will only see part of the benefit and will consequently be prepared to pay for it. Directly perceptible benefits will, of course, be fuel saving and, in some cases, time saving. It is unlikely, however, that the user will begin by taking other essential factors such as lower maintenance costs and accident costs into account when determining whether he should make use of the toll road or not, but we trust that this situation will change in due course.

In its report the Select Committee also confirmed the viewpoint of the National Transport Commission that an alternative route should be available for those who do not want to make use of the toll facility. As a result, it is provided in the Bill that the National Transport Commission will not declare a portion of a national road to be a toll road unless there is an alternative to the proposed toll road available to the road user.

The roadbuilding authorities are entering a new era in the financing of roads. Those projects which are of absolute national importance and which cannot be built because of inadequate funds, can now be realized by toll financing.

For the information of hon. members I may finally mention that the National Transport Commission has already appointed public relations consultants to give effect to the request of the Select Committee that a public information programme be instituted. This company is already engaged in its task.

In conclusion I want to mention that although the proposed toll fees have not been finally determined, they will vary in respect of the vehicle mass and type and will also be related to the damage to the road surface which may be caused by each vehicle. It may be that a motor vehicle will pay R2, and a fifty-ton lorry R20, to use the same road.

Mr. Speaker, the Bill which the hon. the Minister has introduced, introduces the principle of toll financing for road development in South Africa. The hon. the Minister has indicated, and the House knows, that the matter was the subject of an inquiry by a parliamentary Select Committee that was charged with the responsibility of inquiring into the introduction of the toll financing of roads. The Select Committee received evidence from a large variety of interested parties. It also had the benefit of a good deal of prior research, as the hon. the Minister has indicated, by senior officials of the Department of Transport connected with road construction.

I should like at this stage to express my appreciation of the chairman of that Select Committee, the hon. member for Kempton Park, for the manner in which he conducted the proceedings of the Select Committee. He was a patient and conscientious chairman and he at all times displayed the courtesy and consideration which we have come to recognize as part of his personality. I thank him for the manner in which he conducted those proceedings. I also should like to thank the officials of the Department of Transport as well as others who were involved in the affairs of the Select Committee and its deliberations.

In general the Select Committee met in a pleasant and objective atmosphere. There was an objective approach to the subject and I think hon. members realized what their responsibility was. I believe we were conscious from the start of the proceedings of the Select Committee of the background against which we were conducting our investigations, namely a background reflecting a grave deficiency in the whole system of road financing in South Africa, a background of increased costs relating to road construction, a background of insufficient funds, and above all, a background which indicated that for those responsible for the road building programme in South Africa there was no certainty as to the adequacy of future funds for road building or even road maintenance; in other words, budgeting for those responsible for our road network had become something of a nightmare because they were never sure what funds were going to be available in the years which lay ahead. I think this was the problem, and we were therefore asked to look at the whole question of toll financing as one of the means of overcoming these deficiencies.

It was pointed out that the concept of toll financing was not a new one. Indeed, there were tolls operating in years gone by in Durban and in parts of the Cape. Of course, there is a long history of tolls operating in Europe and elsewhere throughout the centuries. We know of course that today toll financing of roads operates in many parts of the world, such as in the United States of America and parts of Western Europe as well as parts of the Far East.

Having said all of that—I think the members of the Select Committee considered the background and all these aspects—I think it is true to say that no one on the Select Committee was enthusiastic about introducing the principle of toll road financing in South Africa.

Who told you that? That is not true.

I think it is true. Perhaps I am misinterpreting the hon. member’s attitude, but I do not think there was enthusiasm. We as a Select Committee approached the problem realistically and objectively and we were concerned that there was a necessity, in view of current circumstances, to see, if we did not have toll financing, what alternative methods of financing there were, if any. I think this attitude was reflected also by most of the expert evidence we received. The officials dealing with our road programme were principally concerned with specific projects which they saw little hope of achieving and completing unless they could establish some certainty in respect of their budgeting for these projects. Their attitude really was that they wanted the money from somewhere and if they could not get it from the National Roads Fund—there are difficulties providing money from the fund—or other sources, then the whole question of toll financing had to be investigated. When we went into the details of the operation of toll road financing we were made conscious of the high cost of equipment needed to operate to toll road system. We were also made conscious of the time taken to recover the capital expenditure on toll projects before it became profitable. We were also made conscious of the other problems relating to the whole question of toll financing. We realized that there would be a need to ensure that there would be no discrimination against those who could not afford to use the toll roads. Hence our insistence and the insistence of the Select Committee that there should always be alternative routes available to people, routes alternative to the routes upon which toll roads operate. With all these reservations it soon became apparent that whatever preconceptions anyone may have had about toll financing of roads, the system could never be regarded as an alternative to road financing by the State in conjunction with road users. At best it was an ad hoc arrangement for a limited number of specific projects, as an emergency measure in the absence of funds being available for these projects from other sources. I think all these reservations are clear from the report of the Select Committee itself. I want to quote from the recommendations and the tone, I think, speaks for itself. The report of the Select Committee states firstly—

It then goes on to state—

This, again, indicates reservations. The report states further—

It then went on to state that—

The report then stated—

So the report goes on and, I believe, correctly reflected the reservations that members of the Select Committee had, i.e. that one was dealing with a necessity but that one was not enthusiastic … [Interjections.] … except perhaps for the hon. member for Ermelo although he did not show much of that enthusiasm on the Committee. However, I think the Committee’s reaction is accurately reflected in the report which goes on to state—

1. (a) That toll financing of specific road projects in South Africa be implemented as a partial relief for the general shortage of funds for road construction in South Africa …
2. (d) That since it appears from the evidence presented that a serious shortage of funds for road financing exists in South Africa—
   1. (i) an investigation be undertaken by the Department of Transport, the Department of Finance and the Economic Planning Branch of the Office of the Prime Minister into the methods of providing these funds; and
   2. (ii) the National Road Fund receive a fixed percentage levy on fuel sales, rather than a fixed amount which is subject to negotiation from time to time, in order that the planning and provision of road facilities be stabilized.

I think that was really the kernel of the problem because the Committee realized that toll financing by itself was certainly not a solution to the problem but that the matter had to be dealt with and inquired into far more deeply. That was the injunction that the Committee gave to the Government and to the hon. the Minister. I should like the hon. the Minister, when he replies, to indicate what his reaction is to that specific appeal or injunction from the Select Committee.

I now want to come to the Bill itself. I concede that the draft Bill, as the hon. the Minister has indicated, approved by the Select Committee. There was unanimous consent to the Bill in its draft form.

The Bill makes provision for the declaration of a portion of a national road to be regarded as a toll road. It provides for the control of toll funds in terms of the recommendations of the Select Committee. It gives the National Transport Commission authority to declare portions of a national road to be a toll road. It provides for alternative roads too. What it does not do, however, is that it does not attempt, in its terms, to specify what specific projects shall be subject to toll financing. What is ever more important is that it neither places any restriction on the commission in respect of what future projects may be made subject to toll financing. The commission, in other words, in terms of the Bill as it is drafted, has carte blanche, without the need at any stage to consult Parliament on future toll projects, to act at random, subject, of course, only to the provisions of this legislation.

The commission can decide, and the commission has the authority to decide, what roads shall become toll projects. This, I must say—after reflection and after further deliberation—presents us with a problem.

With whom did you deliberate?

It presents us with a problem with regard to this legislation in its present form. Therefore I believe that I have directly reflected the mood of the Select Committee. As I said, it was not enthusiastic about the principle of toll financing. It saw it as a necessity in respect of specific projects; as an ad hoc emergency measure. It did not, however, see it as a system which we would desire to be extended without us being satisfied about its necessity, and also without us being satisfied that there will be some control by Parliament on how far it will be extended, perhaps even to the detriment of the road user. [Interjections.]

Another factor, which, if we were to consider this objectively—and I hope hon. members opposite, who have been showing some interest will also apply their minds to the issues at stake—has concerned our attitude in this regard since the deliberations of the Select Committee, is the legislation which was passed earlier this session—the First National Roads Amendment Bill. In this instance—again because of the parlous state of funds for road financing—the hon. the Minister approached us with a Bill, the effect of which was to give him carte blanche to impose a levy, unspecified in amount, on fuel, for road-building purposes. Once again, that Bill also did not provide for parliamentary control. Although the hon. the Minister said he wanted a 0,7 cents increase per litre of fuel as a levy for road purposes, the Bill, as it appeared—and it is now an Act of Parliament—gives the hon. the Minister carte blanche to apply and impose any levy for that purpose. We know that when the levy was 2,354 cents per litre it caused R153 million to be raised for the road fund during the 1981-’82 financial year. If the hon. the Minister now intends raising it by another 0,7 cents per litre, this will presumably amount to a further R50 million being added to the road fund. The hon. the Minister, however, has not indicated where he is going to stop. He has talked about an additional levy of 0,7 cents per litre but he has the right and the power, in terms of the legislation passed earlier this session, to impose any levy whatsoever.

It is interesting to note, Mr. Speaker, that when the hon. the Minister introduced that Bill earlier this session, and when he tried to motivate it, he cited many of the same projects in respect of which he required funds as are cited when we deal now with the whole question of toll road financing. In this respect I should like to quote from the hon. the Minister’s Hansard. On 14 February this year the hon. the Minister told us about the problems of finding funds for road construction and road building, and he said (Hansard, 14 February 1983, col. 929)—

The hon. the Minister cites all these projects, Mr. Speaker, which are also cited when we consider the particular problems and the particular projects which we have in mind in connection with toll road financing. So the hon. the Minister is trying to have it both ways, and this is what gives us cause for concern. He introduced one amending Bill earlier this session giving him carte blanche in regard to the imposition of a levy and here we have a Bill—which we agree there is a necessity for—again containing the very real defect in that it provides that the National Transport Commission will in future have the total right to decide which roads in South Africa are to be declared toll roads. I do not think it is reasonable that the hon. the Minister should want to have it both ways. For that reason, while we have sympathy for the immediate problems in respect of specific road projects and while we believe that the unanimity that existed in the Select Committee should have resulted in this being an agreed measure, I am afraid that I am compelled to move the following amendment—

This is a straightfoward amendment indicating what our problem is and the hon. the Minister can meet that problem in a very simple way.

Why did the hon. member not mention that on the Select Committee?

I have dealt with that point already. I said that, on reflection, when one considers the whole situation, particularly in the light of the earlier legislation passed during this session of Parliament, I believe … [Interjections.] Surely it is the right of any party at Second Reading to deal with a matter in a specific way if circumstances have changed. As far as allaying our fears in this regard is concerned, all the hon. the Minister need do is to move a simple amendment to clause 4 of the Bill which gives the commission the power to declare toll roads. All it needs is a simple amendment to add that the commission may with the approval of Parliament declare such roads. All he has to do is add those words. Once that problem has been eliminated then we can have a unanimous decision on the merits of this Bill. However, unless the hon. the Minister can satisfy us that Parliament will have a say in determining future projects that are to be declared toll road projects, we cannot support the Bill at this stage.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I did not receive a copy of the amendment of the hon. member for Berea, but on the basis of what the hon. member has just said, I find it at this stage amazing and startling, a shock and a disappointment, that the hon. member adopted that attitude here today. The hon. member for Berea is a senior member of his party, and his hon. colleague who sat with him on the committee has now, as I see the matter, been given a very serious slap in the face by his caucus. This Bill is the result of a unanimous decision of the Select Committee. Not only was the report of the commission unanimous, but we went through this Bill from top to bottom. It was a unanimous decision of the whole committee, and each of the hon. members of that party who had a seat in that committee accepted it as such and signed to that effect. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Berea and the hon. member for Walmer, who served on the committee with us, were constantly enthusiastic about the Bill and about the findings of that committee. Only yesterday I encountered the hon. member for Berea in the Lobby and he intimated that we may be able to dispose of this Bill in a short time. I even gave him the assurance that I would be the only speaker on our side. That was the whole presumption. [Interjections.] I now ask myself what happened in the caucus of the official Opposition. There is something else, too, that I ask myself. After all, that is the party that is always insisting on our appointing a Select Committee. They are always encouraging the appointment of Select Committees. This is an example of a Select Committee being appointed on which they served and in which we took unanimous decisions, but now they come and shoot those decisions down. If that is not a motion of no confidence in the hon. members for Berea and Walmer, then I do not know what a motion of no confidence is. I should very much like to know what the real background is to this about-face. It is so outrageous as in fact to be an insult to those hon. members.

What should and could, in fact, have been a very easy and pleasant debate, has now been converted into a different kind of political debate, due to the about-face performed by that party. I ask the hon. member on that side what has happened now, what has changed now since we took that unanimous Select Committee decision and since the Bill that we are now discussing was unanimously recommended by the Select Committee. Has the financial situation in the country changed? Has a dramatic event occurred which means that we must look with new eyes at the Bill and at the work to be done? I can see no change. On the contrary, the situation today is exactly the same as it was when the Select Committee was appointed to investigate these matters. We shall settle their hash, but I am not going to devote any more of my time to that; other hon. members on this side will go into these aspects further.

As chairman of the Select Committee I wrote here in my notes that I was of course very grateful that we have today reached the point of being able to see the result of the work of the Select Committe on the Toll Financing of Roads. I am also very pleased that we have today reached the point at which we have the Bill before us so as to include it in the Statute Book. However, I must now add to that a note to the effect that I am very disappointed that it will now no longer be unanimous.

I should like to convey my sincere thanks to the members of the Select Committee who co-operated with such dedication and enthusiasm to make a unanimous report possible. The following hon. members served with me on the Select Committee: Messrs. J. H. Heyns, J. J. Lloyd, G. J. Malherbe, J. J. Niemann, P. H. Pretorius, J. Rabie, A. Savage, W. J. Schoeman, R. A. F. Swart, H. J. Tempel, A. G. Thompson, Dr. F. A. H. van Staden, Mr. A. Weeber and Dr. P. J. Welgemoed. I should also like to convey my sincere thanks to the Department of Transport and its officials. In particular I want to single out Mr. Malcolm Mitchell and Dr. J. L. Botha. Their guidance, their specialized knowledge, was of great value to us in this Select Committee. We leant heavily on their knowledge and wisdom and experience. I also wish to thank everyone who gave evidence before or submitted memoranda to the Select Committee. I should like to thank hon. members on my side for their loyal support and the contributions they made. I also want to thank hon. members on the other side—and that include es the official Opposition—for the way in which we were able to co-operate with one another. It is just a pity that they have now come along, right at the end, and bedevilled everything. [Interjections.] To everyone who has made a contribution I want to convey my sincere thanks and I also wish to address a special word of thanks to the extremely able committee clerk, who performed his task with great dedication and thoroughness.

I should now like to get a little closer to the Bill itself and draw attention to certain matters. Due to a lack of time I shall not, of course, be able to go into this in any great detail. In the first place I want to put it as my standpoint that toll financing would have been unnecessary if the Treasury had had sufficient funds and had been able to provide the necessary funds to build the roads we need. If that had been the case then toll financing would not have been necessary. However, that is just the problem; sufficient funds are not available. There has been no change whatsoever in those circumstances up to now. We should have liked to see a bigger contribution to the road fund from fuel. Hon. members will recall that I have championed that cause in previous debates, but it is precisely because sufficient funds are not available that other forms of financing have to be considered. Funds are urgently required to build new undertakings such as roads, bridges, etc., facilities that are urgently needed. However, it is not only in order to build new roads and tunnels that funds are required. Funds are also required to save the existing roads from deterioration and crumbling. Seen as a whole, toll financing is the only way to obtain money for the maintenance of roads.

When the National Road Fund was established, 17% of the cost of fuel was channelled to the Road Fund. At present, however, it is only approximately 4%. If we had been able to increase that levy on fuel—to, say, 4 cents and more—we should certainly not have needed to come up with toll financing. That is why the committee recommended that the Road Fund should receive a fixed percentage rather than a fixed amount. It was our considered opinion that the high cost of facilities which would be to the benefit of a specific section of the public, qualified for toll financing. This is a very definite proviso that we put forward. The committee is also of the opinion that a toll facility must entail certain benefits for the consumer of that toll facility. For example, if a person uses the Du Toits Kloof tunnel it will entail a saving in fuel for that person and a considerable saving in time. It will also reduce wear and tear on his vehicle considerably. There is also the fact—unfortunately it is difficult to measure this—that road accidents may to a large extent be eliminated or reduced with a new facility, whereas with the existing facility this is not the case. Taking all this into account it shows us that this will involve a saving for the user of that road. In any event, the user will save more than he will have to pay in tolls. If he does not want to pay the toll, if he does not want to make use of that facility, there is still the old road, the alternative road that he can use and for which he need pay nothing. Various roads and bridges that cost a great deal to build can then be built by using this system. Otherwise they could not be built. We should otherwise still have to wait perhaps another ten to 20 years before they could be built.

I want to state clearly that toll financing is not a method of exploiting the road user. In any event, the user will benefit every time he makes use of that facility. This legislation will enable us to complete new and essential roads more rapidly and in so doing meet the demands set by South Africa. Good roads are essential for progressive growth and development in our country.

In conclusion I should like to congratulate the firm which undertook the promotion, on the notices that have already appeared in the Press and those that are still to appear. I think this was an outstanding piece of work and to them, too, I convey my sincere thanks. With these few words I wish to express my gratitude to the Select Committee and I want to say to the hon. the Minister that we on this side support the legislation wholeheartedly.

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by also putting on record my appreciation for the exceptional way in which the chairman of the Select Committee took charge of that committee and for the understanding he showed for the opinions and ideas of the various members. I also want to express a word of appreciation to the officials involved, to the witnesses who appeared before the committee and to the people from whom the Select Committee received documents.

I think it is permissible for me to state here that before that Select Committee commenced its actual function of investigating the particulars of introducing a toll system, it first cleared up to its own satisfaction the principle of whether toll financing of roads could and should be introduced, or whether the matter should not be pursued. After ideas concerning the principle had been exchanged, we were unanimous that the principle of the introduction of toll roads in the Republic of South Africa could be implemented. I do not think there was any further dispute on the Select Committee after that concerning the question of the principle.

After we had discussed the advantages and disadvantages surrounding the entire matter of toll roads and had weighed up the advantages and disadvantages, we eventually decided unanimously that the preponderance of advantages was such that the Select Committee could recommend to this House that the implementation of the principle of the introduction of toll roads in the Republic of South Africa be proceeded with. I think that we all unanimously decided that in spite of certain disadvantages which could be pointed out, the preponderance of advantages was the decisive factor. I also want to adopt the standpoint that after months of discussion of the entire matter and after we had loaded the apples onto the cart one by one, I found it surprising in the extreme that the hon. member for Berea simply upset the applecart at this stage.

That is normal for them.

I also find it surprising that he is now hiding behind this one minor point. [Interjections.] What I just said was not said in an attempt to get the two Opposition parties to attack each other. I assume they shall have an opportunity to attack each other later. They must now give me an opportunity to finish my share of the attack.

The hon. member for Berea indicated that they were going to oppose the Second Reading of the Bill. He is doing so solely on the basis of the fact that he says that this House first has to agree every time the commission decides that a road shall be a toll road. Provision is made for this in the Bill, and there is therefore the possibility that when a road has once been declared a toll road it may be deprived of that status at a later date. This is contained in the legislation. I now ask myself whether the problem the hon. member for Berea and his party have concerning this specific matter could not be overcome in the Committee Stage by means of an amendment. Possibly that provision could be introduced into the legislation by means of an amendment. Is it really necessary, for that reason, to oppose the Second Reading of a matter on which everyone is agreed as an excuse to prevent the legislation from being introduced? I am convinced that the hon. member for Berea could have overcome the problem, which cropped up later among them, by means of an amendment during the Committee Stage. Perhaps the hon. the Minister would have been prepared to accept it. All this arguing and fighting is about a principle on which the Select Committee was unanimous in its discussion as well. Now an issue is suddenly being introduced.

I want to make it quite clear that for various reasons—and I have already said this in this House—we in the Republic of South Africa need a good road network. I mentioned this in a previous debate and I do not want to repeat everything I said then. However, funds are needed to make this road network possible. Our situation at present is that we have a funding problem. The National Transport Commission does not have sufficient funds at its disposal to build’ all the roads which need to be built. Owing to this funding problem, alternative funding methods had to be investigated. It was the task of the Select Commitee to investigate such possibilities. Eventually the Select Committee decided unanimously that the possibility of toll financing was such that it could be investigated further and that it could be implemented. That is where we now stand. This Bill now seeks to create the necessary funding by means of toll financing so that the National Transport Commission may continue with its programme of building a good road network for the Republic of South Africa.

National roads.

Yes, but it does not matter. The fact of the matter is that it is still a road. It can be a tarred road or a cement road. If the hon. member for Bellville keeps on pestering me, I may eventually become like the hon. member for Berea and also upset the applecart unnecessarily. I do not want to do that.

The conditions built into this Bill in terms of which the National Transport Commission must act are such that its hands are tied in certain respects.