Mr. Chairman, the atmosphere here is quite different to that in which I normally conduct proceedings in the Other Place, and I have no intention of disrupting the peaceful atmosphere in this Committee either.

In the first place I want to say thank you very much to the hon. member for Jeppe and other hon. members for their kind words to me. Because of the fact that since last year’s session we have had a new Chief Registrar of Deeds, Mr. Dick du Toit, let me welcome him very sincerely as our new Chief Registrar of Deeds. I should like to deal with matters in a specific sequence, and for that reason it will be a short while yet before I say a Jew words about the Deeds Office.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North referred to the fact that this department was being used to clean up the borders to the north of Venda. The task is not quite finished yet. The department is still busy clearing a 47-kilometre border area there. A fence is being erected as a border between Venda and the buffer zone between Venda and the Limpopo. The clearing of the area also entails the construction of a road on both sides of the border. The bush must, of course, be cleared. We are chiefly engaged in the clearing of the bush. At a distance of four metres on either side of the border we are busy with the construction of a road that will be used for the maintenance of the border fence. The work on this border, agreed to by both South Africa and Venda, will not be done solely by this department. A portion of the border is to be established by the planting of sisal plantations. We are therefore not solely involved with the project as a whole. At this stage we are merely working for another department on an agency basis.

Both the hon. member and the hon. member for Newton Park referred to the survey office and the Deeds Office. The hon. member for Newton Park referred to the amount of work done at the various deeds offices and expressed his concern at the fact that we would perhaps not have sufficient staff available. When all is said and done we have the same problem as other departments, particularly as far as professional and semi-professional posts are concerned. It is not always an easy matter to have those posts filled. I can assure hon. members, however, that the Chief Registrar of Deeds and the department are mindful of the fact that the new selling campaign which the hon. the Minister announced is going to burden the Deeds Office with a heavier load. We shall also be doing everything in our power to restrict the backlog or possible delays that could occur to an absolute minimum. If we compare the increase in the workload over the past few years with the backlog, as indicated in the reports at present, it appears that there has been a very great improvement. Our largest backlog at the moment is in the Cape, where it is a matter of eight days. I am reminded of the days when I was still practising fairly actively and when, in Pretoria, Johannesburg and elsewhere, we had a backlog of up to 21 days. The department is continually giving consideration to the streamlining of activities. I can assure hon. members that if there were to be a large increase in deed and bond registrations, we would be ready for action. I appreciate the friendly words extended to the Land Survey Office and the Deeds Office. Those people work very hard. A great deal is expected of them. On the strength of another post I occupied, I know that we must constantly rely on the Deeds Office and the Survey Office to furnish us with certain particulars in a very short time.

The hon. member for Witbank referred to the total State land selling campaign. Let me firstly say that it is not this department’s idea that there should be speculation when it comes to the land being sold by the State. The idea is specifically to have the land made available at the most reasonable prices possible. This does not actually fall within my sphere of activities, but I do want to say that in my opinion it is undesirable to have an area, in which land is made available and for which certain services are provided, lying unsold for years on end. I think we must see the question of the sale of State land against the background of the fact that we would like to have that land developed as quickly as possible and used for the right purposes. The State’s selling campaign does not solely include urban property, but also property in rural areas. As the hon. the Minister said yesterday, up to now the idea has been for the State not to hang on, as long as possible, to land it does not necessarily need. I can assure hon. members, however, that we have now decided that in rural areas the State must get rid of its land by allowing it to transfer to private ownership so that agriculture also has a chance to participate. We are of the opinion that the State owns altogether too much land. During the past three years we have begun to sell small pieces of land. During the first year, i.e. in 1980, we sold land to the value of about R900 000; in 1982 we sold land to the value of about R900 000 and last year we sold land valued at almost R2 million. In the House of Assembly at present there is draft legislation in connection with the disposal of grazing land, with specific designated areas that we intend to convert to private ownership. The total surface area of the relevant land is 108 000 hectares. Hon. members can therefore see that the department is making a definite effort to get rid of State land. In passing I also just want to point out that it is not only the department as such that has property at its disposal, but also the Community Development Board. This board also has quite a number of properties. Here it is also the intention to get rid of the properties. The board has 47 business centres, and the intention is also to sell these business centres or plaza’s as they are generally known. The best thing would probably be to sell those properties by way of sectional title. The department has appointed consultants, for example, to advise the department on the Eastern Plaza in Johannesburg. We should like to do this in the best and fairest way possible.

I can, for example, mention examples of properties that have already been sold. Examples are Wenen, Carolina, Ermelo, Louis Trichardt, Nylstroom, Standerton, Swartruggens, Ventersdorp, an Indian commercial complex in Pretoria, Gatesville, Mitchell’s Plain, Smallcross, etc. There are a number of further examples I could mention. Our whole idea is to have those properties transferred to private initiative as well.

Mr. Chairman, could I just put two questions to the hon. the Deputy Minister? Firstly, are there shops that have already been sold under the sectional title scheme? The second question relates to the training of staff working with the registration of deeds. The department’s report states that 61 students were enrolled for the National Diploma for the Registration of Deeds, that only 28 of the 61 wrote the examination and that only 11 of the 28 passed the examination. I wonder whether the Deputy Minister would not just make a few comments on this.

Mr. Chairman, let me answer the last question first. We cannot, of course, be held responsible for people not passing their examinations. The students enrolled for that diploma course are not necessarily the only source from which the department draws staff trained to work with deeds. There are also other sources the department can make use of. We continually try to keep abreast. One of the sources lies with attorneys who were conveyancers but who are perhaps not in active practice any longer and who can then be used, on a part-time basis, to help in the Deeds Office. This is chiefly a question of technical work for which knowledgeable people are needed. An examining officer who examines deeds is a very important link in this whole chain of deeds registration, and we do everything in our power to obtain knowledgeable people. At this stage we are indeed getting by. A backlog of about three days in the overall programme in a city like Pretoria is not a significant backlog. It is virtually as normal a situation as can be achieved.

As yet no properties have been sold under the sectional title scheme. The Eastern Plaza in Johannesburg is the first property we are looking at with a view to a sectional title sale. I think it would be wrong of us to say that we should adopt the customary process in this case. It would perhaps, in certain cases, be better to sell the whole property to a single person. As far as the Eastern Plaza itself is concerned, we want to see what we can do, in regard to sectional title sale, with a view to giving the variety of people occupying the premises as much of a chance as possible when it comes to dealing with those premises.

The hon. member for Witbank also referred to the overall sale of land, and I think I have replied to the hon. member’s questions in that connection.

I also want to make a few general remarks about the Land Survey Office and the Deeds Office. For years now we have found that it is frequently more fruitful to overcome the staff shortage by allowing officials to work overtime. That is, in fact, one of the methods we make use of. During normal working hours officials are disturbed a great deal. Many people come along wanting this or that, and that takes up a great deal of time. According to present arrangements, there is certain work that is done, not in normal office hours, but after-hours. The available staff is then used for overtime work, and I think the work that is done during this overtime period is amongst the most profitable work that is done, because those people can then really sit down and do some work without being interrupted by enquiries, etc.

I just want to mention in passing that the hon. member for Newton Park cannot be here today.

The hon. member for Bezuidenhout asked why we were making such slow progress with the 99-year leasehold scheme. That is not, of course, a matter that we in this department have any control over. It is actually a matter that falls under the Department of Co-operation and Development. As far as the question of surveying is concerned, however, let me just mention that within a month or two we shall have finished surveying 60 000 plots in Soweto and that we have already appointed people to survey the following plots: 53 500 plots on the East Rand; 6 000 on the West Rand, excluding Soweto; 11 000 in the Highveld area; 11 500 plots in the Orange Vaal area; 15 000 plots in the Free State; 7 000 plots in the Western Transvaal; 6 500 plots in the Eastern Transvaal; 2 000 plots in Drakensberg; 3 000 plots in Port Natal and 34 700 plots in the Eastern Cape. Where it is at all possible, we want to make use of the familiar system of doing a meticulous job of surveying the site, but we also make use of aerial photographs, aerial cartography, etc., to help us in the process. As far as the surveying is concerned, I think that we are, in any case, far ahead of the demand for 99-year leasehold properties.

Mr. Chairman, in the light of the fact that this is such a controversial matter, could the hon. the Deputy Minister tell us what accuracy coefficient is used for these surveys? Does the Surveyor General insist on the same standard, i.e. a discrepancy factor of 01, being applied in all the surveys?

Mr. Chairman, it is obviously not possible to maintain the same standard. If one wanted to maintain that same standard, one would have to remove certain structures. That would only entail unnecessary costs. We do try, however, to stick as closely as possible to the permissible error factor. According to my information, the error factor lies between 1% and 1½%. I think that under the circumstances it is very reasonable to deal with the matter in this way, because 1½% is really not all that big a difference. The fact of the matter is that we ensure, in any case, that there are no disputes between neighbours.

That is very important. That is the purpose of the surveys.

Yes, that is the purpose of the surveys. Where we cannot ensure 100% accuracy when doing the surveys, the Department of Co-operation and Development nevertheless tries to reach an agreement with the relevant parties. I think we can be satisfied—particularly with the extensive housing activity, etc., that is on the way—that new townships will be planned on an orderly basis and that we will have far fewer problems. Our great problem lies with the reasonably old townships. Here one is not always sure how to handle the matter.

Mr. Chairman, could the hon. the Deputy Minister tell us whether a decision has been reached about where the process of registration as such is going to take place, whether in the Commissioners’ Courts, or in the Deeds Office?

Mr. Chairman, it is an important question that the hon. member for Bellville has just put to me. I do not think the matter has been settled yet. I do not think there is, as yet, complete clarity about where the registration is to take place. It was thought that it should be done at the Deeds Office, but it was also thought that the office of the Chief Commissioner should handle the matter. It is a little difficult for me to fully clarify this matter. Let me tell hon. members why I say this, and I say it quite frankly. It is proposed that the work done by the old Bantu Commissioners Courts, as we knew them, should be transferred to another department, for example the Department of Justice, and that this kind of work should then be given its rightful place in the process of rationalisation that will then take place. I personally cannot see why, in this process of rationalisation, we cannot think about having this work done in the normal way that other work is usually done in the Deeds Office. I do not think this would result in insurmountable problems. Since one would have to appoint additional staff to the Commissioners Courts, one could just as well appoint additional staff to the Deeds Office in order to have this work done. As far as I am concerned, the Deeds Office is better equipped to do this kind of work than the Commissioners Courts. That is my personal opinion, and as far as I am concerned there is no political or policy aspect involved in this. It is merely a practical situation that is involved.

I think I have now replied to the questions put to me. In conclusion I just want to say that as a newcomer in this department, I greatly appreciate the approach of the hon. the Minister to the functions of this department. Other hon. members have mentioned this, but I also just want to say that apart form the hon. the Minister’s new approach, there are also officials—in particular senior officials—in this department with a fresh approach to the handling of the affairs of this department. I am really impressed by the standard of work I encountered when I had to take over this job in this department. I think it would be completely unfair not to mention specifically the excellent work done by senior officials in this connection. The kind of work we must handle, i.e. the purchase of land, should be discussed at length. When the Department of Co-operation and Development’s Vote is discussed, we could perhaps also talk about the whole question of valuations. Although in the past one has sometimes had to wait from 9 months to a year owing to certain circumstances, the valuation process has now been streamlined to such an extent that we are working on a four-month basis form the time the process is initiated to the time we are in a position to make a person an offer, particularly in the case of the purchase of trust land. One must also bear in mind that the department deals with sensitive matters such as expropriation. In the process of expropriation, it is not always easy to be fair and just to everyone. I think we are fair and just in the sense of being satisfied, in our own minds, that other people have not been detrimentally affected, because from that person’s point of view, each piece of land one buys from him is the best land in the country and he therefore wants nothing but top prices for that land.

Mr. Chairman, I request the privilege of the half hour.

Although my contribution to this debate is not going to be a monotonous paean of praise, I shall do my best not to disturb too much the calm and peaceful atmosphere which has been created here.

†As far as the hon. the Minister is concerned, may I say that he has shown a degree of pragmatism and approachability which is very welcome indeed. He has shown that all parties have a constructive role to play in trying to assist in solving the housing problems of South Africa. I for one and I know others on this side of the House welcome the fact that we have been able to participate in the Select Committee on Rent Control, prickly pear though it is. Perhaps we can help solve the Government’s problem in regard to this matter. Some of us are also taking part in the Commission of Inquiry into Township Establishment. We welcome this opportunity. Three members of the Opposition, two Deputy Ministers and another member on the Government side went on a study tour abroad last year as a result of being members of that commission. While I must tell the hon. the Minister that we have not yet found the answer to the problems of rent control and nobody over there could teach us much in this regard, I think we all learned certain facts about housing. The first one that I learnt was that if the Government wants the private sector to contribute to the housing problem solution in South Africa, it must get off the private sector’s back. It must get out of the way, and let them get on with the job. The more administrative, ideological and technical problems there are in the way of the private sector, the more impossible it is for the private sector to perform. Secondly, if the Government wants the free market system to operate in the housing field it has to find some way of assisting those people who for economic reasons cannot enter into the housing market at the level of economic rentals and economic housing costs. If they do not do that there is no way in which the free market system will operate in the housing field. The third point is that whatever is done by the housing sector, by utility companies and individuals, the State has an overall responsibility to see that the people of the country are properly housed. Housing is not just an individual matter, it is a collective social problem. It has social implications; it has economic implications; it has vast political implications. Nothing that the Government does to bring other people into the housing field can absolve the Government from its responsibility to see that a combination of forces ensures that all of the people of South Africa, our very country, are properly housed.

It is in this regard that I must say that I am disturbed about the approach which the Government and the hon. the Minister is taking. I can understand that he is excited about the prospects of selling off half a million houses. That is an exciting sales promotion campaign. However, I have heard precious little about building houses. While I do not want to knock the concept of selling houses, because there is some merit in it, I must say that to sell houses and to make that the accent of activity without also seeing to it that the other accent of activity is building new houses, will prove to be a disaster. I listened to the hon. the Minister’s contribution to this debate and found that it was more about selling than about building whereas in the past it was more about building than selling. I want to say to the hon. the Minister selling houses, desirable though it may be in itself, does not provide a single unit of new accommodation. It is the process of building new houses that it still the major problem facing the Government. We want an assurance that the government in thinking of selling houses is in no way losing its enthusiasm or its determination to build more houses in South Africa because that is in fact the crux of the problem.

The next point I want to raise is about the hon. the Minister and his department. He has brought a welcome degree of pragmatism and even a touch of humanity to a department which very often in the past was administered coldly, clinically and with a degree of rigidity which really was not appropriate to a department that handles such sensitive issues as this department does handle. In that sense we are pleased that the hon. the Minister has imparted this new thrust of the common touch, the human touch, to the department. I think this has gone right through the officials of the department. We think it is appropriate that this department should have a pragmatic approach, an approach which considers the human factor in the community development field.

There are still three critically important problems which affect the performance of the hon. the Minister and his department. The first is that there is still a hopelessly inadequate allocation of funds for housing. I do not know why this hon. Minister is not more effective with the hon. the Minister of Finance, he comes here year after year and says we do not have enough money. I think he must go back with his frontrow forwards next to him and somehow or other see that next year there is a better and bigger allocation of funds.

But the allocation increases year by year.

If you compare the increase in the allocation of funds with the increase in the cost factor there is no increase in real terms in the money provided for housing. All that is catered for is the inflation factor. There is no real increase and if it was inadequate by 60% as it was in the previous year and in the year before that, it is inadequate by 60% once again this year.

What about borrowing by the State?

We are talking about what the State should provide as opposed to what the private sector we hope could provide.

The State can borrow money.

There is no definition of what is going to be raised by way of loans. What plans does the Minister have for raising private loans this year? Will he tell us in the course of this debate how much money he intends adding by way of loans from the private sector to the funds that have been appropriated in order to see that housing really gets off the ground this year? 50% of the profit on the sale of houses goes to the local authorities and 50% to the National Housing Commission. How much does he anticipate receiving this year? How much money in cash is going to come in this year? We want to do some budgeting for this year, not hear an airy-fairy statement of some half a million houses being sold. How much money coming in this year is the hon. the Minister budgeting for in order to build more houses and how will the change of the book value into a cash value effect the value of National Housing Commission funds? What is going to happen and how will the sale of houses affect the cash flow which comes to the National Housing Commission by way of rentals? Once one has sold those houses at reduced prices, it means that no rentals are coming through to one. What will be the effect, in money terms, of the sale of houses as regards the cash which comes in during this year, the book value of the National Housing Fund and the cash flow which would normally accrue by way of rentals? We would like to know what is in fact the impact of the sale of houses.

The second problem facing the Department remains the divided control over and the divided responsibility for housing in South Africa. The hon. the Deputy Minister indicated this. He did not quite know under which department, for instance, the registration of deeds would resort. He must have received some inspired message as it now appears that the responsibility therefore is going to shift away from the Department of Co-operation and Development to the Deeds Office. Be that as it may; I am just indicating that this is one of the problems. It is impossible for us to carry on in South Africa with there being a totally divided control over the question of housing for Coloureds, Indians and Whites on the one hand under one department and for Blacks on the other hand. There is divided control over the use and over the provision of services and infrastructure. This Department has to pay for it and the other department decides what the priorities are. What kind of a business is this? There is the argument about where one establishes townships. This Department pays for the establishment of townships and the other department decides where they are going to be. There is the question of the building of houses. This Department has to pay for it and the other department decides where the priorities lie. This is a hopeless situation. There is the question of registration of ownership. This is an absolutely hopeless situation. It makes for bad planning and a wasteful use of resources, it is a waste of money and it is an evasion of overall responsibility. I have never seen more than the hon. the Minister’s attempt to escape his responsibility for the possible removal of Blacks from the three existing Black townships to a new township.

I contend that there has to be an overall planning and housing authority at least on a regional or metropolitan basis. It is crazy to have divided control within one region or metropolitan area. I believe the sooner the hon. the Minister or a department accepts overall responsibility, the sooner one will get some sense into the housing policy and programmes of the Government.

The hon. the Minister is pragmatic and has brought this human touch to his Department. The third obstacle is the stubborn and destructive race policy of the Government when it comes to housing and community development. When the National Party’s policy whip cracks this benign Minister of Community Development changes from a benign, pragmatic Minister with a human touch into a tough, insensitive racial hardliner. He is then two people, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. There sits the Dr. Jekyll.

Just look at the kind of things this man is compelled or feels compelled to do. Look at the debácle over the opening of the cinemas for the Gandhi performance. The hon. the Minister tells us, through the hon. the Prime Minister, that chaos would reign in South Africa if we had to open cinemas in South Africa. Go to the Golden Acre and see the restaurants open, the shops open and the areas open, but the three grade cinemas, where one has to pay something like R4 to go in, cannot be opened because the hon. the Minister believes, in terms of policy, that it would lead to chaos. This is a nonsense situation. Think of the tough line that he has taken with the Cape Town City Council about the opening of amenities. It is their responsibility.

There are only two city halls left that I am not throwing open. You do not want Sea Point’s to be open.

It is the Council’s responsibility. Let it accept the responsibility for seeing that there is law and order and good behaviour there. Why does he have to take a tough line? Think of his tough line with the City Council again yesterday on District Six. He should know that it is absolute nonsense for District Six to be kept as primarily a White area. He should know that it is wrong for the technikon to be there. He should know all these things. He should know that every planning law says that that should be an open area or a Coloured area, but not a White area. He knows that there is no basic shortage of housing for Whites in the fairly affluent economic group in the Peninsula. It is the older people who are affected here. And yet he actually allows Whites in District Six whereas in fact that place could be made available to coloureds. However, it is the party line that has to be followed. Think of the constant harassment which he metes out to Coloureds and Indians in the central districts of Johannesburg while he knows that there is no other accommodation for them. Hear the excited way in which he says that they are going to get rid of squatting. I do not mind getting rid of squatting, but one cannot get rid of squatting unless one provides the housing. In Hout Bay, in my own constituency, his departmental inspectors go early out in the morning and pull down shacks, but they do not offer to put people on a lorry and take them to alternative accommodation. They know there is no accommodation. They go and pull down the shacks but they do not provide the alternative accommodation.

The Government, has two faces. There is the benign, pragmatic Minister dealing with issues and there is the tough, hardline NP man when it comes to the ideological policy of the Government. I must say that the Government’s housing policy for Blacks in the Western Cape is heartless from a human point of view, politically dangerous and economically wasteful. I understand, although I disagree with it, that the Government does not like to acknowledge the permanence of the Blacks in the Western Cape because of it being a Coloured labour preference area. However, the Government knows that there are already 110 000 Blacks who are legally here, and that in terms of their own policy their offspring are going to be legally here. They know that. I cannot understand why once that is accepted those people cannot have the same rights of occupation and ownership than Blacks elsewhere if they are legally in the area.

Do you want them in Sea Point?

I do not mind where they are. I am just saying that what one cannot say is that these people are not there by right. What I cannot fathom is why the Government stubbornly continues to harass these people in the way in which they are.

Now the Government has this new plan of establishing a new township, Khayelitsha. What is the situation? The hon. the Minister has said that we must talk about it in another debate, but judging from Press reports his Department has been busy planning this new town. He therefore cannot say it is Dr. Koornhof’s responsibility. His Department is involved in the planning of this town.

Of course we are involved, yes.

Then the hon. the Minister must accept his medicine.

But we are not taking the lead.

What is more, you are evading your responsibility.

The Chairman of the National Housing Commission is one of the members.

What I am saying is that this is a typical example of divided responsibility. What is happening is that once again the poorest people of the Peninsula are being moved farthest away from their places of work. This does not make social, economic common sense. The poorest people are moving farther away.

Furthermore, this Department is going to pay for a new town with a new infrastructure, but the services and the transportation could not be more expensive as it is so far removed from where all the other services, the infrastructure and the transportation are centred. It is the most expensive place at which to establish a new town.

One of the conditions for the establishment of this town which have been announced by the hon. the Deputy Minister is that there should be no further filling in in the other Black areas in the Peninsula through to Stellenbosch. This is nonsense.

Why do you not hold over this part of your speech just for one week? Then you will get all the answers.

But it is your land. The hon. the Minister is going to have to pay for the services, not the hon. the Minister of Co-operation and Development. This hon. Minister is going to have to build the houses. I want to give him the ammunition to go and fight with the hon. the Minister of Co-operation and Development, because obviously he has not been successful so far. Or is the hon. the Minister just lying down because the whip has cracked? I want to say to the hon. the Minister that he has his share of responsibility. While the problems I have mentioned are problems largely of economics and sociology, let me say that if the fourth condition is implemented and the Blacks in the three existing townships are going to be coerced or forced out of where they live today, he will be playing with political fire. I want so say to the Government that it is one thing to create a new township, but that it is another thing to say to people in an established township that they have to get out and that they will be forced out even if it means making the conditions of living there so unpleasant that they will have to go. Let the Government accept this as a very dire warning as to what the consequences may be.

I want to come back to other aspects concerning housing. When it comes to White housing the problem to an increasing extent is, as the hon. the Minister realizes, the question of affordability. Can people pay for housing? Even if housing is available, can they afford it? In particular, once again, it is the older people, the retired people living on fixed incomes, who are finding it increasingly difficult to do so. The hon. the Minister is aware that building costs have gone up by 74% in three years and building society loans by 38% in two years. In other words, the income of an individual has to go up by 38% to match building society loans. The hon. the Deputy Minister is aware that the cost of renting accommodation, even rent controlled accommodation, has increased by 54% over two years. This is the pattern. There are more and more people in the middle income group who in the housing field have been pushed down, down and down into what is effectively the lower income group.

I do not think the Government is doing nearly as much as it should be doing in this regard. I know it falls partly under the hon. the Deputy Minister’s other department. We believe that there should be increased housing subsidies for the welfare organizations for the aged. The amount which the Government is subsidizing per capita is hopelessly inadequate. Furthermore, the income limit of R300 should be shifted up so that the welfare organizations can play a greater role than they are at the moment.

I believe that some form of funding should be found for local authorities so that they can purchase, either out of new revenues or out of loan funds, older rent controlled blocks and retain them in their possession for use by older people in the community. The hon. the Minister knows there is a Bill before the House right now which is going to start a new wave of sectional title sales. Each one of those sectional title sales is going to provide to Mr. Horwood increased revenue by way of transfer duties. That is what is going to happen. There are going to be thousands of transfers. I believe that some of that money should be allocated to local authorities so that they can purchase older rent controlled blocks and keep them secure for use by older people.

One of the problems facing younger people—and there have been some new concessions and aids made available to them—is how to buy their first house. In terms of the present regulations the building societies are required to make them pay a deposit of 25% of whatever the total cost is going to be. I believe we should do away with that deposit. I believe that the most secure investment is a house. There is no risk to the building society. To make a young person first gather 25% by way of a deposit before he can enter that housing market means that he is prevented from entering that housing market. I believe that as far as a house, fixed property or a piece of land, is concerned, the deposit could be done away with. The security is the house and his ability to pay in terms of his income should be the test by which he enters that housing market.

And the monthly payments?

The monthly payments should be the…

How much are they then?

However, the obstacle should not be that he must first go and find the 25% down payment. This becomes a major obstacle for many young people.

But it is in his own interest.

We believe that he should be able to get a 100% loan on a house and a piece of land. The only reason for having that 25% is to see that there is sufficient security for the building society. That is a risk that they take. The hon. member has asked about the “maandelikse paaiemente”, but let that person rather pay that 25% off by way of monthly instalments than tell him that he must first find that money or obtain a second bond before he can enter the housing market. I argue that is should be made easier for the young person to enter the housing market and that the obstacles in his way should be removed.

Mr. Chairman, the hon member for Sea Point kicked up quite a fuss here about the so-called harsh and inflexible approach of the National Party, particularly in connection with housing and everything associated with it, but in the same breath he went on to speak of the wonderful “human touch” the hon. the Minister has introduced in this department. How can one reconcile these comments? The sooner we introduce the committee system the hon. member for Langlaagte is so afraid of and the sooner hon. members need no longer play to the gallery when speaking in these debates, the sooner we shall find a solution to our problems. You know, Mr. Chairman, it is not such a bad experience to serve on the Select Committee on Rent Control with the hon. members for Sea Point and Hill-brow, but, all of a sudden, when they speak here they lose their heads in a political sense. The hon. member for Sea Point referred to money which is not available and then made the arrogant remark that the hon. the Minister should approach the Treasury and negotiate for money along with his officials. Does the hon. member for Sea Point think that everything possible is not being done to obtain money from the hon. the Minister of Finance? However, I have nothing further to say about him.

I should like to exchange a few ideas on the work of the department which to a greater or lesser degree affects the life of every citizen. I want to refer to the activities of the Directorate of Surveys and Mappings of this department. We know that in terms of the system of registration of land in South Africa every deed transferring ownership has to be accompanied by a surveyor’s map and that transfer has to take place in such a way that ownership is indisputable. We also know that these maps are available from the Government Printer. I went to take a look the other day because I wanted to find out for myself where those maps come from. I went to the head office of the Directorate of Surveys and Mappings close to us here in Mowbray, where I was very cordially received by Mr. Van der Spuy, the chief director, and some of his heads of sections. I want to thank them yet again for receiving me in such a friendly manner. I also want to express my thanks to the officials of the department who arranged this for me.

When one drives through the front gates and one walks through that building complex, it becomes quite clear to one that the activities in that building must have a significant effect on many spheres in the South African community.

In the first place I want to refer to the staff. The hon. the Minister has reason to feel very happy, satisfied and at ease to have such people heading that Directorate. The members of that senior corps are not only experts, but top administrators and internationally acknowledged. They attend international congresses, not because they want to be there as observers, but to participate as speakers, because they are experts in their field. The rest of the staff are experts and technicians with an enormous workload. The amount of work flowing in is increasing all the time—here one need only consider what a tremendous additional task it is, for example, to go through the 99-year leasehold surveys in an area such as Soweto.

But what I consider to be of greater importance, is the attitude of the people with whom I came into contact. In spite of pressure of work, which means that a great deal of overtime has to be worked—the hon. the Deputy Minister referred to this—there has, according to my information, never been any question of payment for overtime being demanded. On enquiry it became quite clear that there, too, occupational differentiation had a salutary effect in the sense that the staff provision position has improved vastly.

The training of those technicians takes place in conjunction with the Cape Technikon, and one is struck by the number of men in uniform being employed there. I shall have something to say about this later on, if I have the time.

I asked those people what their requirements were and what pleas we could make on their behalf in this Committee. The reply was that they were happy to be able to work under such favourable and pleasant conditions; what a testimonial this is to the hon. the Minister, the department and the men concerned!

In recognition for the outstanding role played by Dr. Van der Ster as the former Director of Trigonometrical Survey, the head office is at present known as the Van der Ster Building. In this office the work is done in conjunction with the regional offices in the various capital cities of the other provinces.

The white sighting beacons, 27 000 of which are to be seen on hills and mountains throughout the length and breadth of our country, are visible proof of this surveying network. These sighting beacons play a very important role in the development of infrastructure because surveys of new roads, dams, power-lines, canals and many other things are linked to these fixed points. By means of an effective surveying system a basis is provided for the consultant and engineer for the further planning of projects such as the Du Toitskloof Tunnel, the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam and the Saldanha-Sishen railway line. These people were also able to cheer when the last blasting was done at the Du Toitskloof Tunnel and it was found that after tunnelling from opposite directions, the centre point was only a centimetre or two out.

Mappers use these fixed points I have been referring to, to place the country with its valleys, mountains, rivers, towns and many other things on topographical maps. These fixed points imply accurate surveys. I should like to say a few words in this regard. At the time of the allocation of land to the first free burghers here at the Cape on the northern banks of the Liesbeeck River use had to be made of untrained seamen with a very elementary knowledge of mathematics to survey the farms, it goes without saying that overlapping of farm boundaries occurred very frequently. I assume that by the time the fruit of the vine found its way into wine press and then into the bottle, there must have been even more overlapping of farm borders. However, times change and the equipment used can now be seen in museums. What struck me was the highly sophisticated apparatus without which this tremendous task cannot be done. These vary from data processors, into which commands are fed onto a magnetic tape and plans including inscriptions are completed at the touch of a button without a human being ever touching them, to satellite tracking systems, etc.

Then there is also apparatus which is used in the veld and which has been developed by the CSIR. I cannot elaborate on this any further because time does not allow me to do so.

The Mapping Section plays a very important role by interpreting and mapping aerial photographs at very great speed, almost immediately. This is of course, a valuable service which is rendered to our Defence Force. It is an exciting part of the work. It became clear to me that there was a specific reason for the presence of so many men in uniform at this Directorate, because the closest supportive co-operation with the Defence Force is to be found there. It goes without saying that the Defence Force uses maps which have to meet special requirements. They need accurate and updated maps which can form the basis of any successful operation.

In conclusion I want to say that it is good to know that the Directorate is internationally held in very high esteem. The reason for this is that such ingenious and capable people fill the posts in that department.

Mr. Chairman, it is always a pleasure to listen to the hon. member for Rustenburg. As usual he again prepared himself very well. The topic he discussed and the visit he made to the Directorate to study the activities of this Department attest to interest in this work, and we want to congratulate him on this.

During the past by-election it was my privilege to visit various old-age homes in the particular constituency where I worked. At this juncture I do not want to discuss the by-election nor the political evils which took place there in some cases, but would prefer to concentrate on the residents and the staff of those old-age homes.

An old-age home is not merely a place providing accommodation for its residents. It is far more. Here our aged have the opportunity to pass their twilight years in the company of their contemporaries. Here they receive the necessary care and treatment.

The staff caring for and exercising supervision over residents at old-age homes are the people about whom I could really wax lyrical. The compassion with which they care for the infirm aged and see to their needs is simply praiseworthy and must be appreciated. It is not simply the pursuit of yet another profession or merely a job that has to be done; it is truly a labour of love which is performed with the greatest loyalty and compassion and unquestioningly. These people constitute the core of a sound housing and care programme which must definitely be indulged. We can provide as much housing for the aged as we wish, but if we do not have the willing, serving hands to do the caring and supervising our fine intentions will come to nothing.

This brings me to the projects being planned in this connection in my constituency and with regard to which we have to rely on the goodwill and sympathy of the hon. the Minister, the hon. the Deputy Minister and the Department. It is therefore with great appreciation that I am able to say thank you on behalf of the Suid-Afrikaanse Vrouefederasie for the appropriation of funds which will enable them to carry through the so-called city centre project. This includes accommodation for the infirm aged, a service centre for approximately 1 000 aged persons and a child-care unit. This project is to be erected in the Pretoria city-centre, where the need for a service centre in particular is very great. We should like to congratulate the Vrouefederasie on this fine project and convey the thanks of the community to the hon. the Minister and his Department for the apparition of the funds which made it possible for the Vrouefederasie to make a start with this project.

In the second place I should like to know from the hon. the Minister whether the building programme for Krugerpark is going according to plan. Last year we were very grateful to take cognizance of the fact that the building programme could be proceeded with after an initial stoppage in the sense that the programme was left in abeyance for a while.

High density housing in the Pretoria city-centre remains a major need, and for that reason we are all grateful that this project is again underway and can be proceeded with.

What is also being contemplated, is the planning of approximately 40 flats for the aged in Booysens Street, Mayville, in my constituency. At present there are municipal houses for aged couples in the same street. Unfortunately the position is that when one of the residents dies, the surviving spouse has to vacate the house within three months. The Council for the Care of the Aged in Pretoria has, in conjunction with the City Council of Pretoria, shouldered the task of introducing a scheme comprising approximately 40 bachelor flat units aimed at, inter alia, providing accommodation for these people who are homeless. Once again I wish to thank the hon. the Minister for giving approval in principle for this project to be proceeded with. However, it would give us greater peace of mind to continue with the planning if the hon. the Minister would be kind enough to indicate later on whether we may proceed and whether the funds which were available last year will still be available during the current financial year.

Mr. Chairman, I have now referred to three projects in connection with housing in my constituency. This is an indication of the acute shortage of and the need that exists in Pretoria—and probably elsewhere, too—not only for ordinary housing but also for housing for the aged.

This brings me to a matter which should probably not be laid at the door of the Department and probably does not belong there, but which I believe probably concerns the Department as well. As I have indicated, housing for the aged remains a high priority. Now we can ask ourselves the question whether we, the Whites, have not become spoiled as far as housing for the aged is concerned. We have begun to accept that it is the duty of other organizations and the Department to provide this housing. This obligation is no longer that of the child. When the parents become older, an assiduous search is launched for other accommodation and care. I believe we can move away from this pattern provided we can get rid of certain obstacles. Most cities and towns have the luxury of large plots zoned for special residential purposes, i.e. a single house on a huge plot. There are probably many home-owners with parents they would like to have living near them, but who would nevertheless like them to have a little privacy and living-space of their own. However, it would seem that there are quite a number of restrictions in the form of by-laws and ordinances at the second and third tiers of government.

It is very difficult to get these flats erected quickly and without problems. I made a few inquiries: Pretoria’s urban planning scheme provides that such flats consisting of at least one bedroom, a kitchen, a small sitting-room and a bathroom may be erected on a plot which is larger than 1 000 square metres, provided the flat does not take up an area in excess of 90 square metres. However, there is one restriction which really hampers an improvement of this nature and in many cases renders it impossible, namely that the existing dwelling and the flat must have one common wall; in other words, the flat must be attached to the dwelling. I can understand that there is a danger that if the flat is not attached to the house, it could be an aesthetically inferior addition to the property. With the approval of plans and certain other measures this problem can however, be eliminated. I want to make an urgent plea for this matter to be investigated incisively in order that more additional accommodation may be made available. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that we are in complete agreement with the hon. member for Gezina in respect of his representations to the hon. the Minister concerning the promotion of the provision of housing for the aged. I also want to say that we associate ourselves fully with the praise and appreciation he expressed for the charitable work being done by the employees in the old-age homes. I must say that I also have four excellent old-age homes in my constituency and that there is an increasing demand for accommodation for people in these institutions. In fact, we cannot keep ahead in providing accommodation to the people. We fully support his representations to the hon. the Minister for an improvement in the regulations as far as this accommodation is concerned.

†Mr. Chairman, I want to address the hon. the Minister in respect of another matter and that is the powers given to him and his Department in respect of the Group Areas Act. With the advent of a new dispensation in South Africa—and I think it can be taken for granted that there will be a new political dispensation—we are going to have people in our midst whom we want to encourage to become involved in the private free enterprise system. We state in the preamble of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Bill that those people who will be involved in the new dispensation, should be involved as supporters of democracy and private free enterprise. I think it is going to be necessary for the hon. the Minister to explain to us what he anticipates will happen, specifically with regard to the Group Areas Act, in respect of central business districts and also in respect of theatres.

I told you yesterday.

I know that the hon. the Minister has made statements, but I would like to elaborate on what we visualize the difficulties are going to be which the hon. the Minister and his Department will experience. In particular, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to tell us whether he agrees that there could be a devolution of power to the second and third tiers of government, i.e. the regional, provincial and municipal levels of government, in order to allow a greater degree of flexibility in the declaration of, for instance, open central business districts. If we are to be sincere in our appeal to members of the Coloured and Indian population groups in particular that they should become full partners in the private free enterprise system, then I believe it would be extremely difficult to justify the exclusion of coloured and Indian entrepreneurs from any declared central business district. My appeal to the hon. the Minister is to give us an explanation or a statement of intent whether it would, for instance, for us in Natal—in Pietermaritzburg and Durban in particular—be possible to administer our central business districts on an open basis. I believe this is something which is unavoidable and I think the hon. the Minister should give us his thoughts on this.

Mr. Chairman, I also want to refer to the use of facilities, particularly entertainment facilities, by other groups. Let me say—and I associate myself fully with the statements made by my colleague the hon. member for Umbilo—that there has been a considerable improvement in the attitude of the hon. the Minister and his Department in respect of the use of facilities where these are justified and where they do not increase tension between different race groups. I am very encouraged by that, but here again my appeal to the hon. the Minister is: Why can we not leave the right of admission to the owners of a particular place of entertainment? For instance, the theatre which has been built in Durban by the Provincial Council of Natal will undoubtedly want to give right of admission to all people of all race groups to that particular national asset. We notice that there are many theatres, like the Nico Malan, and of course, the State Theatre in Pretoria, which have already allowed other population groups to use their facilities for their own benefit and enjoyment. However, let me say that there are also private initiative and privately-owned places of entertainment which will equally well benefit the cultural enjoyment of members of all race groups of that particular activity. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister specifically why it is not possible to leave the right of admission to places of entertainment to the owners of those places of entertainment? I think this will cause a considerable improvement in race relations, a reduction in tension, and I need not tell the hon. the Minister how it will improve our image abroad as far as our colleagues overseas are concerned.

Let me say that my prediction would be that it will not cause any problems in South Africa if it is allowed on an owner-basis, in other words, local option. If there are certain organizations or institutions in certain areas—such as Langlaagte, Germiston District, Waterberg or those areas—who do not want to open their facilities to other race groups, they will then be perfectly entitled to do so.

What if we go on holiday to Durban?

I think it will then be a wonderful experience for that hon. member. It will be an experience of a lifetime from which he will benefit for the rest of his life. I am sure that he will be a changed man after seeing the light in Durban. I would like to say to the hon. member for Langlaagte that he is very welcome to come and attend many of these institutions which we have in Natal and which operate on an open basis.

Mr. Chairman, as my time will be running out fairly shortly, I want to say in conclusion that I believe the hon. the Minister has a very severe responsibility in respect of the administration of the Group Areas Act. I would also like to ask him to consider the possibility of, once again on a local option basis, allowing us in Natal to have open residential areas declared. This is a hardy annual; it comes up every year. Many members on both sides of the House have spoken about it, some positively and some negatively. A good example is Cato Manor. What is wrong with allowing Cato Manor to be developed as an open area where members of the coloured group, the Indian group or the White group would be able to…

He gave you an answer last year.

But we are not satisfied with the answer.

You were not here for the answer.

We are not satisfied with the answer. I have been in touch with my colleague the hon. member for Umbilo. We are not satisfied with the answer because the principle of only having exclusive areas is, I believe, a retrogressive step and not a positive step. There is a definite need in South Africa for open areas, where the only criteria will be the willingness of the individual, fully knowing what the consequences will be, to want to buy property in an open area and also the economic viability of purchasing land in what will be a very high-class suburb.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member this: If open areas were to be allowed, should I allow Whites to buy and to develop property in that area?

The reply is “yes”, but the Coloureds and the Indians must also be allowed to do so. That is what an open area is about; it is private initiative.

But surely the Indians are there now.

Yes, they are there now, but the only thing we still have to do now is to allow also the Cloureds and the Whites to invest money where and to stay there.

†I say this because this is the essence of an open area. People do it on their own initiative. I am not suggesting that we must now have a policy which applies right throughout South Africa and which will state that you must have open areas all over the place. We must leave it to the local authorities to declare open areas and then leave the development to private enterprise. We are not asking for a single cent of State money.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Sea Point indicated what could happen to what was the old District Six. Why is it not possible? It would satisfy many people without jeopardizing the Nationalist Party’s basic manifesto. The only thing the hon. the Minister has to recognize, is that there is a fifth group of people in South Africa and that is a group which wants to live in an open area. He can do that without affecting my rights as a White that enable me to keep Durban North as a White area, which I want to do, because that is the local option of the people who live there. He can do that, without affecting the rights of the Indians, in Isipingo, to have exclusivity of residential area there. But why should we become the whipping boys for overseas countries, simply because we do not want to allow open areas? I look forward to getting further answers from the hon. the Minister in this regard, because we are making further representations to him to reconsider his attitude regarding open areas.

Allow us in Natal, if nowhere else, to do it and to show the world and South Africa that it can be done successfully without causing friction. This will in fact enhance the status of all South Africans in the eyes of our overseas partners. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the temptation to address myself to the hon. member for Durban North is very great. The hon. the Minister, however, has much more time available to him than I do. He will therefore do so.

I want to agree with the hon. member for Sea Point when he says that the whole matter of housing must be rationalized. That is not the NP’s standpoint; it is my personal standpoint. I think it would be of benefit to South Africa if we placed all housing under this department.

I want to say a few words about the Government Printer. I notice in the annual report that the equipment in the factory is being modernized. It was disconcerting to note that use was still being made of the hot-lead machines or hot-lead system. That has been out of date for a long time now. This modernization of the equipment will only improve the services furnished by the Government Printer.

Speaking about the modernization of the equipment, I note that the old Publications Building has been declared a national monument which is to be restored at tremendous cost. I am a little concerned about the fact that we may have been overtaken by a preservation mania and may want to preserve everything that is at all old. I want to tell hon. members that I know the building concerned, and firstly I do not know whether there is any justification in having declared it a national monument. Nor am I sure whether the cost of restoration is justified. On that site, directly beside the factory, we can erect a much more practical building than the small monument we are now going to restore there.

Mr. Chairman, Pretoria is a city of young people. Annually thousands of school-leavers converge on Pretoria, not only from the other parts of the Transvaal, but also from the rest of the Republic. They come to the educational institutions situated there, the University, the Teachers’ College and the Technikon. They come to serve in the Forces, in the Police Force, the Defence Force and the Prison Service. Then we also have a mass of young people who come to work in Pretoria. This results in the average age of the voters in Pretoria, particularly in the city centre, Arcadia and Sunnyside, being less than 25 years. There is a huge mass of young people living in Pretoria.

What do these young people earn? What are their incomes? A person who has passed standard VIII and starts working in Pretoria, earns a gross salary of approximately R250 per month, with a nett salary of approximately R200 per month. A person with matric earns a gross salary of approximately R350 per month and a nett salary of approximately R300. Professional people—i.e. those from university who, having obtained their degrees, have subsequently obtained diploma qualifications—earn a gross salary of approximately R550 per month and a nett salary of approximately R500. That is what they earn.

Mr. Chairman, where do these young people live? At present there are a few boarding houses which are, in point of fact, situated in less auspicious areas around the city centre. Then, as one moves towards Arcadia, there are excellent private hotels and boarding houses providing accommodation for these young people. The church has also established the A.J.O. Building, the Jeugtuiste and the Jeugsentrum. As far as the State is concerned there is Stalshoogte and the Public Servants’ Association building. The young people also share flats. Two, three or four young people get together and rent a flat which they then share. Thus we increasingly encounter the phenomenon of communes. Between five and ten young people rent a house. That is how the young people house themselves these days.

At church institutions accommodation costs between R125 and R150 per month. Accommodation in private hotels cost between R300 and R450 per month. In Pretoria one finds very few flats costing less than R300 per month. The rental is closer to R500 or R600 per month. Inevitably houses in Pretoria are very scarce and very expensive.

What is the result? Both the young people from other parts of the country, and those who have completed their period of service in the Forces, or have completed their university training, settle in Pretoria. The truth of the matter is that Pretoria is a city with a special enchantment for young people. As a result of the shortage of proper housing there is a tremendous labour turnover. That is one of the problems experienced by the government departments. Young officials only stay for a few months. They resign from the Public Service for other jobs with better salaries. They do not want better salaries to improve their standard of living; they want better salaries so as to be able to pay for the accommodation. They must get salaries that will enable them to pay for the accommodation they would like to have.

These young people living together in flats and houses also elbow out the married couples. I think that people who specifically find themselves faced with a problem are the Parliamentary staff, the young unmarried men and women who live in Acacia Park here in Cape Town for six months of the year. When they arrive back in Pretoria, they must start looking for accommodation from scratch, and only the most expensive accommodation, if any, is available.

I want to ask the department please to have a look at this serious and very important issue. It is true that this is the year of the aged, and we speak at such great length about the aged, but we forget about these young unmarried people. These are people who are in the most productive phase of their lives, people whose services we urgently need. They must also be looked after. I think they deserve it.

What I am asking is whether the department will not investigate the possibility of building one-room units. These could be housed in a gigantic building, because the demand is very great. The housing unit could consist of one room, a small kitchen, a shower and a toilet. It could be built on the Good Hope terrain. This is close to the university’s extramural buildings, within reach of the new Technikon and in the Pretoria city centre where the job opportunities are.

What is even more important is the fact that we will have them near the old-age home which is to be erected by the Suid-Afrikaanse Vrouefederasie. Thus we would be bringing the young people, the old people and the inhabitants of Schubart Park together. A fine community could be established there in the Pretoria city centre.

That should be a new constituency!

It is in that hon. member’s constituency.

No, it should be a new constituency!

Yes, it would be a new constituency, but at the moment it is in that hon. member’s constituency. I think it would create a balanced community there in the city centre of Pretoria, revitalizing a city centre that has died.

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to speak after the hon. member for Hercules has spoken. As always, he has again presented a new approach, and since it is clear that a new constituency will come into being as a result of his plea, I cannot think of anyone better able to represent that constituency than specifically that hon. member! I want to say, however, that in 20 or 30 years’ time that hon. member would perhaps be offering less resistance to the preservation of antiquities!

The concern expressed about the high cost of housing by, amongst others, the hon. the Prime Minister, several hon. Cabinet Ministers and others responsible for the provision of housing, including the Stellenbosch-based Bureau for Economic Research, actually preceded the appointment of the Fouché Commission. In May 1975 the then hon. Minister of Public Works and of Community Development, in announcing the appointment of the commission, said that the department and local authorities, which were responsible for the provision of housing to the lower income groups, could make reasonably-priced houses available to those people at that stage. A figure of R7 000 was mentioned, and the most expensive houses cost R9 700. This figure of R9 700 per housing unit worked out to a cost of approximately R114 per square metre in 1975. The same figures were applicable at the time of the commission’s report which was submitted in 1977. In the estimation of the hon. Minister concerned, the cost of those houses, at that stage, presented no problem, being within the reach of the community which was the responsibility of the department and the local authorities. The problem involved the provision of housing to the higher income group, as the hon. the Minister defined it. I think that was actually what we would normally call the middle-income group.

Mr. Chairman, my information is that at the time of the report, from 1975 to 1977, it cost approximately R160 per sq. metre to provide a house for someone in the middle-income group. Today the cost for the same house is approximately R375 per sq. metre. That is approximately a doubling of the cost since 1976. If one looks at the increase in the cost of housing in the lower income group, one finds that it is actually very much the same. For that group, too, costs have approximately doubled. I said that the cost of the most expensive house was approximately R114 per sq. metre. I understand that these days the same kind of house can be erected for approximately R200 to R220 per sq. metre. Proportionately the cost increase was therefore the same. This compels me to ask: Why the concern? The concern, it would appear, is generally about the high cost of housing. For the middle-income groups it is not actually a matter of high building costs, but of costs for the houses in the upper brackets. What I am hereby trying to say is that the desired standard that is set is too high. One is simply looking at the matter superficially. In South Africa five-roomed houses are normally built: a diningroom, a lounge and three bedrooms. I now ask myself: What justification is there for providing a family of three, father, mother and perhaps one child, with such accommodation? Surely that is unnecessarily expensive. Unfortunately I do not have enough time to go into this aspect in greater detail, but it seems to me that I should tell the hon. the Minister to perhaps have a look at the Sumptuary Laws of Ryk Tulbagh’s time.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to focus my attention, for a moment, on the land aspect. The cost of the land, of the erf, is naturally part of the cost of the house, and the services also go hand-in-hand with this. In this connection I want to make serious representations to the hon. the Minister. The present-day requirement is that before an erf can be sold, all the services must be provided, in other words tarred streets, stormwater drainage and electricity. One thus sees numerous township areas having all those services, but with not a single house standing. I cannot imagine having anything more expensive than a fully developed township area which is completely unutilized, because there is not a single house that has yet been built. The erven have perhaps already been sold, or are in the process of being sold, but the fact remains that no development has as yet taken place. My plea is that we look at one of the big cost factors—that involving the services—as far as these erven are concerned. Probably the largest portion of the present-day costs of erven relate to the provision of services to such erven. The hon. member for Langlaagte will have first-hand knowledge of this. It seems to me that we could, in the first place, delay the provision of some of the services, for example tarred streets. Why must the streets between erven immediately be tarred? The tarring of the streets depends on how many people use them. Is it therefore necessary for all streets to be tarred immediately, even prior to any development taking place? To me the obvious answer seems to be no. Another aspect is stormwater drainage. I know of township areas in Port Elizabeth that do not have any stormwater drainage yet, and if I am not mistaken McKenzie Street in Pretoria has not, as yet, any stormwater drainage either. It does not seem to me as if stormwater drainage is an essential adjunct to the opening up of new township areas.

Another aspect on which I should like to focus attention involves a report which appeared in yesterday’s edition of Die Burger. In this article Prof. Hans Gildenhuys spoke in the following sharply critical terms—

I cannot agree with the professor’s conclusion. I think it is a duty, on the part of the authorities, to put the interests of the community first. He says we are thereby promoting communism. If the authorities do not put the community’s interests first, whose interests must the authorities put first. It is specifically the duty of the authorities to put the interests of the community first. If we were to look at what was happening in this connection, I think we could say that at this stage the authorities were not yet exercising unnecessary control over township development. The professor was also critical about the drawing up of guideplans. I think the drawing up of guideplans is beneficial to the developer because it facilitates matters for him. The developer himself is not, of course, without blame. Surely one cannot allow a developer to adopt any kind of development pattern he wants to, because it stands to reason that the development must fit in with with the environmental pattern, or at least the pattern of the adjacent areas. In that regard I therefore think that the drawing up of guideplans is also of particular benefit to the developer. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, before the adjournment I should like to reply to one or two matters which were raised by various hon. members. The hon. members for Sea Point and Hercules, and others, expressed quite a general desire here for greater co-ordination in the sphere of housing. Apart from the role of the Department of Co-operation and Development in the provision of housing for Blacks—I shall reply to the hon. member for Sea Point on this subject this afternoon—I think that, as far as the sphere of housing is concerned, there are many loose ends which can be tied up to the benefit of everyone concerned. For that reason I wish to make a few announcements in this connection.

Recently there have been clear calls to the Government to take more positive steps to ensure that the sphere of housing in its totality should be co-ordinated to a greater extent and that the activities of the private and public sectors in this sphere should be co-ordinated. Earnest appeals have been made for a central Government organization to lay down the rules of the game, without participating in the game itself or acting as referee.

†Although the Housing Matters Advisory Committee has specific instructions regarding the national housing policy, I am satisfied that because the activities of this committee are mainly advisory, it cannot meet all the requirements. It is now, more than ever, necessary that the housing problems of South Africa be tackled and sorted out through a team effort. I have, accordingly, made an urgent request to the Housing Matters Advisory Committee to give immediate attention to a plan of action in terms of which the housing field in the Republic of South Africa will be co-ordinated, planned and controlled, and to submit suggestions on the machinery to achieve these goals—if necessary, through drastic steps.

*Together with this there is another announcement I want to make. It is a pleasure for me to be able to announce that with effect from 1 August 1983 the Department of Community Development is going to establish a comprehensive housing data bank. The need for a central source of information on the overall housing sphere has emerged very prominently during the past few years. As a result of our rapid population growth and high urbanization rate, the provision of housing is constantly in the limelight. Widely divergent, contradictory and confusing figures and statistics on housing needs and backlogs, figures and statistics which are imcomplete or scientifically unfounded, are quoted fairly frequently by all kinds of organizations. This situation leads to confusion, uncertainty, despair and frustration among house-hunters, particularly those who are in serious need of housing. In addition, this can create negative attitudes and in that way undermine efforts to motivate people to help themselves. Without self-help it will be difficult to avert the housing crisis.

†The present-day situation demands that we be able to obtain an overall picture of the housing position not only country-wide, but also for each region or local authority area. In the interests of efficient planning it must for instance be possible to determine the existing housing stock, the availability of building sites or sites in the pipeline, the backlog in housing and expected requirements for the next five years. With the aid of the data bank it will be possible to collect and process comprehensive and reliable data, which will be as complete as possible. It is also intended to cover the full spectrum of housing within the borders of the Republic, excluding the national States. An information source such as this will be of invaluable assistance in the implementation of the Government’s latest initiatives in the fields of the provision of housing and the development of growth points. To be able to monitor these initiatives the availability of comprehensive and reliable data is essential. The establishment of the data bank will also be a public service, because the data will be at the disposal of both the public and private sectors.

*I mean that we get all kinds of surveys and everyone gets up on a soapbox and talks about housing. This is the one subject in South Africa about which people talk the most nonsense and rubbish. Everyone who has nothing better to say, gets up onto a platform and talks about housing.

†According to reports by the National Building Research Institute to the Housing Matters Advisory Committee, it appeared that during the period 1970 to 1979 as many as 246 research projects, related to low-cost housing, had been undertaken by South African universities. An evaluation showed that only 66, or 27%, of the projects could be of any practical significance. In order to ensure co-ordination and the most economic utilization of manpower and funds I have appointed a committee to supervise and guide the implementation of a housing research information service.

*This Committee is under the chairmanship of the Director of the National Building Research Institute and for the rest is constituted as follows: The Deputy Director (Housing) of the Department of Co-operation and Development, the Director of the Institute for Sociological and Demographic Research of the HSRC, a representative of the Committee of University Principals, the Head: Architecture Division of the National Building Research Institute and a Deputy Director: Architectural Services in the Department of Community Development. In the few minutes at my disposal I should like to mention the following in respect of what I have just said. For years people pestered the department and me because we were allegedly clinging to the conventional way of building houses and because we did not introduce a self-help service. Apparently that would be the answer. The hon. member for Sea Point and other Opposition members were disciples of this method. If I had not prevented it, they would have brought squatters right up to the front-door of Parliament. Certainly the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens still wants to do it. Quasi-investigations by the hundreds were carried out at universities. Most of these were fruitless and useless as evidence. I have now read to my dismay that a certain Mr. Groom, the chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, has attacked the housing policy of the Government, particularly in respect of the R150 limit. He alleged that all we were doing now was to establish slums again. Where did this poor man, who obviously knows nothing about what is happening in the field of housing, obtain his information? He obtained it from research done at the University of Cape Town. That is where most of the iniquities in respect of this research have their origin. The research at the University of Cape Town states that the self-help scheme is a farce and that it is worthless and should be written off in order to make a contribution in the sphere of housing. To get away from this kind of thing, we are taking the steps I have announced.

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, obviously we shall have to make up a little time now. There was a little time left, but now I understand that more time has apparently been made available than we actually had. I shall try to make my replies as brief as possible, and hon. members must please accept this.

Yesterday the hon. member for Newton Park referred to the development at Fair-view. It is a fact that we have reached an agreement with the city council that they will now provide services for 200 stands in that residential area and we hope that they will have been completed by the middle of next year. The hon. member said that city councils sometimes own pieces of open land and that they do not have the funds to develop them. This is not only the problem in Port Elizabeth, it is a general problem. Precisely because there is such a shortage of inexpensive building sites it is a pleasure for me to announce that the Cabinet recently approved of selected local authorities being allowed a greater measure of freedom in acquiring loan capital on the open market for the purchase of land and the creation of infrastructure for housing purposes. The Department of Finance will therefore give sympathetic consideration to additional loan powers for these bodies in cases where the Department of Community Development certifies the requirements and recommends the application.

Yesterday the hon. member for Jeppe mentioned a few matters and referred inter alia to the infiltration into the White residential areas of Johannesburg of people of colour. He said that the problem could be alleviated by creating proper alternatives, particularly for Black people. I agree with the hon. member. It is also our policy that proper alternatives should be created. For the Black people, however, the alternatives are being created by the Department of Co-operation and development. The hon. member also referred to illegal occupation in that area. This is an extremely difficult task. Great progress has been made in this connection by the South African Police. It is not our task. The South African Police have to deal with the law-breakers. For various reasons, however, considerable progress has been made. In the first place the Police have begun to clamp down on the owners who act illegally. Heavy fines have been imposed on these owners. The owners themselves are now taking steps to get rid of their illegal tenants. For example, one of the major inciters behind ACSTOP, which had in reality also been exploiting people all the time, has now done an aboutface and given all its illegal tenants notice. When it suited that organization it was a fellow-traveller and an inciter along with ACSTOP, but when they began to put pressure on this organization, it threw its tenants out into the street. There were reports about this in the newspapers and hon. members probably saw them. I cannot associate myself with this kind of underhand conduct, where people exploit other people when it suits them. This is a long, drawn-out process and must frequently take place through the courts. It is also a fact that our housing position on the Rand is now far better than it was. I am not saying that it is all that it should be, but in regard to Coloureds and Indians the position, in comparison with three years ago, has changed dramatically. Matters have now been facilitated, in the first place, because there is now an Indian residential area in the central city area of Johannesburg. However, we have also made provision for housing and have made many stands available. Today for example there are 1 081 stands available in Lenasia South, ready to be sold. There are also 1 490 stands available for special dwelling units and 90 stands for group housing for which services are also available. We are simply waiting for the proclamation to come into operation and then these stands can be made available to Indians. In the new Indian residential area of Marlboro there are 862 special residential stands and 40 stands for group housing available.

The hon. member also said that in 1981 I had made a promise which I had not kept, namely to introduce drastic legislation early last year in terms of the Group Areas Act for the purpose of removing people. I did in fact give that undertaking. The Cabinet decided to do this at the time. At the beginning of last year, when the members of the CP were still members of the National Party and when the hon. members for Waterberg and Lichtenburg were still members of the Cabinet, the Cabinet adopted a different resolution. These two hon. members could have informed the hon. member for Jeppe about this. Last year the Cabinet resolved to make no further contentious changes to the Group Areas Act. There would only be changes in respect of the uncontentious clauses relating to sport. At that juncture we were all ad idem that these were uncontentious. When those members left the party they opposed the amendments to those clauses, but at that stage we thought that these were uncontentious aspects which we could take a look at. That was why the Cabinet resolved to do what it did, in other words, the present leader and the deputy leader of the CP took the same decision, namely that these aspects of the Act should be referred to the Strydom Committee. Consequently we shall be dealing with the Group Areas Act in its entirety at a later stage.

It must be abolished.

That hon. member must go and make a noise on the other side. The hon. member for Vasco made an interesting speech and he referred to a certain professor who visited South Africa recently, namely Prof. Slate. He is connected with the University of Cornell, and has investigated low-cost housing in 70 countries. He was here as the guest of the Universities of the Witwatersrand, Natal and Cape Town. In reply to a question he said that he was very impressed and that South Africa was not merely talking about the problem, as was the case in many other countries, but was in actual fact doing a great deal. He also said that he suspected that even with the present large-scale effort to expand accommodation, South Africa had probably fallen behind, but that the backlog in most other countries was even greater. Consequently we do not have this problem in South Africa only. Earlier this year I read the following in The Cape Times: “Two million United States citizens are homeless. Oklahoma. Officials said that as many as 200 to 300 people live under the city bridges”. If that had to happen here, the world would erupt. [Interjections.] Yet this is what is happening in wealthy America. [Interjections.] No, I do not have any problems. I just want to tell hon. members that when we discuss these matters everyone should sweep before his own door. The report also stated that in New York there were 36 000 adults who did not have a roof over their heads. [Interjections.] I was not attacking the hon. member, I was merely stating a fact. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Gezina referred to welfare housing. The hon. the Deputy Minister will reply to him on that subject. He also asked what progress had been made with the development of the first phase of Kruger Park. Very good progress is being made and we hope to have completed the first phase by 1 October 1985. In the first phase there are 75 dwelling units, but when all the phases have been completed, 319 dwelling units will have been added in Kruger Park. The average cost will be approximately R50 000 per flat and the entire project will, after completion, have cost between R15 and R16 million. The position in Pretoria is very difficult. In Sunnyside, with a view to the problems of Public Servants, we are constructing a block of 99 units. We hope that it will have been completed by June of next year. We will then have a beautiful block of flats, costing R4,4 million. The average cost per flat will be R44 533. The hon. member also asked a question about the project at Booysens Park. The hon. the Deputy Minister will give him a reply. We realize that Pretoria’s position, particularly with its public servants, is a very difficult one. That is why we are doing all these things in Pretoria which we are not doing elsewhere. I referred yesterday to what we were doing in regard to the making available of stands at Suiderberg, Newlands and Garsfontein.

The hon. member for Hercules also referred to this and in particular to the plight of single persons. Their position in Pretoria is a desperate one. The private boarding houses which used to meet these needs in earlier years are disappearing in Pretoria. For that reason we shall have to give serious consideration to what the hon. member said. Rooms are a cheap way of creating accommodation and we shall look into the matter. At present we are letting 199 single flats at Schubart Park, 27 single flats and 30 rooms at the old Stalshoogte and 14 single flats and 80 rooms at the new Stalshoogte. We shall shortly have 19 single flats available in the new Sunnyside block. In the new project at Kruger Park 75 single flats are also being built.

The hon. member for Durban North referred primarily to the Group Areas Act. He is an interesting member and he made an interesting speech. I just think he ought to have listened to what I had already said in this debate. We referred all the aspects of the Group Areas Act to the Strydom Committee and that committee is on the point of submitting its report to me. We shall then take a look at the Group Areas Act, particularly at aspects such as central business areas, the question of how permits should be dealt with, etc. In this connection we have a policy which works well. We make concessions in the principal urban areas, as happened recently in Kimberley—although Kimberley received this concession as long ago as 1981 when hon. members asked me for it, but now an error has crept in again…

It is the CPs who have crept in there.

Yes, but in any case, in Johannesburg, Pretoria and other important places we have opened theatres to all races. At the moment the situation in respect of concessions is that we have already opened 159 restaurants to all races. I have a list of these restaurants and if hon. members wish to have the particulars, they can obtain them from the Department. A total of 35 private hospitals, 16 drive-in theatres and 25 halls have already been thrown open. It is only the halls in Muizenberg and Wittebome in the Cape Peninsula which I have not yet declared to be open amenities. Why is the hon. member for Sea Point complaining? There are no Coloureds, Indians or Blacks nearby. It would only cause trouble to take people to these centres. The hon. member for Houghton will never allow me to admit people of colour to the Muizenberg hall.

Oh rubbish!

With regard to live threatre 33 concessions have already been made. In respect of other things which I do not wish to specify now, a further 11 concessions have been made.

What about the permit system?

Yes, we shall take a look at the entire permit system. He says that we should leave the throwing open of Cato Manor and other places to the Natal authorities. The local option does not work out everywhere. There is a mayor’s wife in Kingsborough who voted for the Progressives during the last election, and now she is a member of the CP. What has she done now? She has used her town council to close the entire beach area within the jurisdiction of that municipality to all persons except Whites. That is local option. His own Provincial Council, his own Executive Committee, do not see their way clear to accepting that kind of local option. Now the hon. member is shaking his head. The brakes have to be applied. One cannot merely say it is local option, and then allow everyone to go their own way. I want to tell the hon. member, as well as the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North who spoke yesterday about Whites being allowed to buy land in Cato Manor and develop it, that they need not even talk about other races, about Blacks and Coloureds. If that hon. member can get the go-ahead from the Executive Committee of the Indians for me to allow Whites to purchase land in Cato Manor, then I shall do so.

Is the hon. the Minister aware of the fact that Indians alone owned 40% of the properties in Cato Manor before it was expropriated?

Yes. That was my argument yesterday. We can talk again when the hon. member has persuaded the Indians to allow other people to purchase land there.

Are we agreed on that?

Bring me that assurance, then we can talk again. I am not afraid to take a decision.

The hon. member for Rustenburg made a fine speech. Not only was it pleasant to listen to, but it was also meaningful. He spoke about surveys and mapping. The hon. member taught us a great deal. I wish all hon. members would pay a short visit to that section at some time or another, but not every day, because these people work hard. In addition they work without overtime. I shall have his speech sent to Mr. Van der Spuy, the Chief Director of Survey and Mapping. Mr. Van der Spuy will be very pleased that such a fine speech was made here about his department and his staff.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth North spoke about escalating building costs. During the past two decades building costs have gone up more than 800%. He spoke about the standards and about the provision of land and services which young people can afford. I cannot find fault with anything which the hon. member for Port Elizabeth North said, but I do wish to tell him that the Venter Commission is looking into this matter. I said yesterday that this was the Achilles heel of housing matters, particularly when it came to township establishment and the costs which that entailed. I hope the Venter Commission, on which I think the hon. member is serving, will do something about this. The hon. member should also put forward plans, and not merely state the problem. He will simply have to help to find solutions. If he comes forward with the solution, I shall make sure that it is converted into legislation.

The hon. member for Sea Point said that in order to save time I need not reply to him. I gladly avail myself of this opportunity. The hon. member really said that, yet I shall touch upon a few matters here and there. He and I can have a discussion later over a cup of tea. He had a great deal to say about Co-operation and Development. I shall simply give my replies to my hon. colleague to pass on to him. He said it was wrong that Co-operation and Development should provide Blacks with housing and that Community Development should provide the other race groups with housing. Co-operation and Development is also spending millions of rands on housing for Blacks in the national States with money from the development trust and other funds. There are many Black people of the national States in this country who are still under the control of South Africa even now, and for whom that department has to make provision. Therefore it is no more than right that the Department of Co-operation and Development should provide housing for all Black people. Earlier this year there was a debate in which the hon. member stated this case. From his point of view, he did not receive a satisfactory reply, and he will not receive one today either. This is a matter which has already been discussed by way of a special debate and I cannot elaborate on it. The hon. member said: What do we expect the selling campaign to produce. My reply is as follows—

The hon. member also asked me how much money we still wished to borrow this year. This year we still wish to borrow R200 million, apart from what I spoke about yesterday. In addition I am still talking to the Minister of Finance about borrowing a little more. The fact of the matter is that during the past financial year we did at least receive R15 million from Sanlam for Coloured housing in the Western Cape, R16 million from the Old Mutual for Black housing in the Eastern Cape and R12,5 from Anglo American for Black housing in Soweto. This R43 million—and this is approximately 13 per cent of our budget—is not being processed through the main estimates. In other words, the hon. Minister Horwood does not know about it. [Interjections.] If one is able to expand one’s own budget by R43 million, by 13%, of one’s own accord, that is not bad. The hon. member will agree with me. One of the tasks of Mr. Kruger, who has now been appointed, will be to obtain more of this kind of money for us. This is over and above the money which we receive from Treasury, and that which we borrow. To refute this nonsense which people are talking about how we do not wish to provide any more money for housing and about the R150 limit, I just wish to indicate to the hon. member how we are going to spend this R363 million this year. This will enable hon. members to see in its correct perspective where we wish to place the emphasis. In respect of land and infrastructure creation—R150 million, and of this amount the largest proportion is for Black infrastructure; welfare housing—R40 million; 90% building loans—R10 million; building material loans—R30 million; and conventional housing R105 million. Altogether one-third of what we are going to spend is still being spent on conventional housing. Now hon. members are saying: Why a R150 limit? This is not a rigid limit, yet I have to spend the money on those people who need it the most. Moreover, we do not even have enough money to help everyone falling under the R150 limit. Of what avail would it be if I had a R300 limit? We have to provide the municipalities with guidelines as to how much they can provide out of what we make available to them. For community facilities we are budgeting R18 million and for housing for industries in industrial growth-points, R10 million. That is as far as I wish to take the matter with the hon. member for Sea Point. If there are further questions which I still have to reply to, I shall do so by writing to him.

Mr. Chairman, I take pleasure in making my speech after that of the hon. the Minister. I should like to ask him whether he could not also cheat the hon. the Minister of Finance a little if perhaps I were to ask for something! The Department of Community Development has an enormous and comprehensive task to perform. The department has to provide an infrastructure for communities so that it can be utilized by those communities. These facilities are usually there to provide for the needs of communities, as well as to make life better and easier for them. We are pleased that so much is being done in this department.

I should like to come to an area in the provision of facilities which has not really been mentioned yet today—viz. Welfare Services. Community development services are services to the community itself. I should like to ask that we express a very big word of thanks to these people today. The registered welfare organizations are able to obtain aid in the form of capital from the Department of Community Development at a very low interest rate for a period of 40 years. This is a great help and it is also much appreciated. The members of registered welfare organizations are probably mostly women. There are the various women’s church associations, welfare organizations, the Vrouefederasie and other organizations that have been mentioned here this afternoon, that offer voluntary service. Their members are people who voluntarily give of themselves, which is something one cannot buy. They also perform services which are not always so pleasant. I do not think it is very pleasant to stand and collect money on street corners, or to work hard for cake sales and other fund-raising activities. However, these people tirelessly collect funds, so that they can build facilities for the many different needs in our society with this aid in the form of capital. Homes for the aged and the infirm, children’s homes, crèches and rehabilitation contres are built with this money. It is used for many purposes. As a result of modern trends, this kind of institution plays a prominent role nowadays. The heavy demands which the rapidly developing technological world with its tremendous pace places on people, are responsible for this. Today some people are unable to deal with these demands and come to terms with them. They then become prey to the demands they are unable to meet. They become frustrated and some of them lose their heads completely. That is why it is so essential to provide these people with the necessary facilities, not only to care for them physically, but mentally too. Often mental care is worth much more. Consequently, the two pillars on which this service rests, are indispensable in our present-day society: Community Development, which provides the funds, on the one hand, and the welfare organizations on the other.

The disintegration of family ties is probably one of the major causes for there being a need for institutions. Children and the aged are affected by the disintegration of families. The child is the first to suffer when a family breaks up. The child may be orphaned, or no longer has the security afforded by a parental home. The aged, who often have to go and live with their children, are also affected if their children’s families disintegrate. The elderly person then finds himself on the street and there is no longer accommodation for him with his own children. It is therefore imperative that time be spent on, and attention given to these people. An ever-increasing percentage of our population is being affected by these trends. After all, these people are still part of our society, and we must assist them in taking their rightful place as useful members of society once again. What is of major importance in this respect, is that there are, in fact, people in society who are prepared to give of themselves, their time, their love, and even part of their income to these unfortunate people who are victims of circumstances to which they are unable to adapt or fit in. Those who are prepared to do charitable work, utilize these facilities provided with the assistance of the Department of Community Development. As I have already said, we owe them, as well as the welfare organizations and every individual member of those organizations a great deal of gratitude. We urgently need voluntary involvement in this kind of service, which is something one cannot buy.

In contrast, I also just want to say that the never-ending frustration and shortage of funds, as well as the long period of waiting for the approval of funds to begin and continue with projects, makes voluntary workers despondent. This frustrates them. The indispensable framework on which welfare is built, rests on the shoulders of the welfare organizations. We must think of them. I want to pay tribute to them. I should like to ask that we do everything in our power to utilize this involvement by the voluntary worker productively and not to allow these people to become despondent. They care for the disabled, not only mentally, but physically too. I should like to ask that we see to it that we meet the needs of these people more promptly when they urgently request funds to begin or continue with a project. I ask that we define their needs much more promptly. I myself am aware that people often have to wait very long after having taken years to collect funds. They then have to wait to obtain permission for loans. I know that the money is not always available, but I want to tell the hon. the Minister that I definitely think that this is one of the things we must give urgent attention to, since this is a pressing need at present. Some of these societies really need capital urgently, and they would like to borrow it in this was so as to plough it back again and provide a service to every population group in this country. I would very much like to see each population group providing for its own people in the field of welfare. In doing these things for one’s own people, one is already doing a great deal. It is only when one gives of oneself that one can do a great deal for others. I hope that the hon. the Minister will not regard this as criticism, but, as I said at the outset, perhaps he could obtain those funds without the knowledge of the Minister of Finance.

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to speak after the hon. member for Germiston District, particularly since I have no swords to cross with her. We started out together in the Provincial Council in 1974 and we came to appreciate her as a lady, and we still do. I just cannot understand where Aunt Bessie and I went wrong as far as politics are concerned—that she is in the CP and I am in the National Party.

I want to devote the time at my disposal to welfare housing, but firstly there is an aspect I am most concerned about and about which I feel I must say a few words during the discussion of this Vote. Over the years, a play group for small children developed in Acacia Park and it had its own management which arranged for the children in Acacia Park to meet twice a week in a semi-detached house made available to this committee by the department. Over the past three years this group has grown to include more than 50 children. This year there are 64. What is more, a number of them have to be turned away each year. The facilities that existed were completely inadequate when one considers that there was only bathroom and one toilet for all these children and two members of staff. In 1982 the management made representations to the department and liaised directly with Mr. Karsen and Mr. Tocknell concerning the urgent need for a nursery school for the children in Acacia Park. The friendliness and helpfulness of Messrs. Karsen and Tocknell is highly commendable. I just want to tell the hon. the Minister that with officials like them, a department can only prosper. I therefore want to address a word of thanks to the Minister and his officials for the facilities that have now been established for the children in Acacia Park. As I said, the building in which these children were housed was totally inadequate, but with the assistance of Messrs. Karsen and Tocknell, as well as other officials, the real need that existed has now been met. The facilities that have been established by the department fulfil all the requirements laid down by the Transvaal Education Department. Mini toilets and washbasins have been installed for the children, there is a sick-bay, and office for the head of the school and three classrooms so that the children can be divided into various age groups. There are even build-in shelves, and so on, to make it as convenient as possible for the staff and the children. I want to thank the hon. the Minister, the Deputy Minister and all the officials that were involved in this most sincerely for their prompt action and for their understanding of the problem and the involvement of the officials of the department. The teaching of small children is certainly of the utmost importance today. One only hopes that the Transvaal Education Department will fulfil its promise of seconding nursery school teachers to Acacia Park.

Order! Would hon. members please not whisper so loudly.

Aunt Bessie is the one who is interrupting me. At this stage there is indeed an urgent need for small tables and chairs for these children, since the Transvaal Education Department did not provide these. I do not know whether perhaps the hon. the Minister also has a few extra rand which the hon. Minister Horwood does not know about, so that these facilities may be provided.

The provision of welfare housing is a task dealt with by the Department of Community Development, in close co-operation with the Department of Health and Welfare. I want to assure hon. members that welfare housing is one of the highest priorities in allocating funds and in the approval of projects. Welfare housing means housing for the disabled, the aged, under-privileged children and, to a lesser extent, the youth. This takes high priority, particularly when it comes to housing for the aged. The allocation of funds proves this. In 1978, when the department’s position as regards funds reached its lowest point and only an additional R250 million was obtained for non-White housing, the department immediately channelled its normal funds into welfare housing, to such an extent that at one time no less than R22 million was allocated simultaneously to provide all welfare projects that were on the books with funds, so that at that stage there was no backlog whatsoever. In welfare housing, the emphasis falls, of course, mainly on housing for the aged, particularly in the rural areas. Consequently, today there are almost no rural towns that cannot boast of having accommodation for the aged. I just want to make one appeal. When the aged in the cities and towns find themselves in difficult circumstances, they should really consider making use of offers for cheaper accommodation elsewhere, often in the rural areas. Those who are still able, can find accommodation there, they can live much cheaper than in the cities, while still enjoying the benefits of a peaceful retirement. In this way they can also make a positive contribution by effectively utilizing unused dwelling units in the rural towns.

As regards other assistance to the aged, the department is even going so far as to ask the institutions that house the aged whether they do not have people who are able enough to come and work at the department in a clerical or other capacity, if they are able to cope, even if it is for a few hours a day. In this way the staff shortage in the department can be overcome and the pensioner can earn an additional small income. Thus the department is trying to do everything possible, apart from providing accommodation, which is really its duty, to make use of the services of the aged living in such accommodation as well.

During the past five years, 19 449 dwelling units for Whites have been provided for Whites by the department and local authorities at a cost of R318,8 million. Between 1978 and 1982 the following amounts have been spent in total by the National Housing Fund on building old age homes: For Whites—R104 570 245, Coloureds—R7 322 822, and Asians—R2 142 547. This amounts to a total of R114 035 614. Since 1921 the number of old age homes, as well as the number of residents financed by the National Housing Fund have increased as follows: For example, in 1921 there were 21 old age homes with 388 residents, in 1972 there were 212 old age homes with 13 359 residents and in 1981 there were 365 old age homes with 24 696 residents. The responsibility rests with the public themselves to make provision for their own accommodation in their old age. One must not simply sit back and wait for the State to make provision for accommodation for the aged. The private sector will also have to start making a drastic contribution to facilitate the State’s task in this respect. Our provinces and local authorities will have to take an urgent look at lower standards when it comes to building houses so that our people can afford them. As a point of departure, smaller plots in particular could be permitted. This would mean higher density housing and this would hold out many advantages for everyone. The prospective buyer would be able to purchase a smaller plot for considerably less, and more people would be able to afford plots. The local authority would be able to collect more tax, even if it were to lower taxes, since there would then be more home owners paying tax. Another advantage is that in this process, we could even save water. We could still be able to accommodate the garden lover in that he would have a small garden he would be able to take care of and, at the same time, he would not have a massive garden, lawns, etc., which would have to be watered. For example, local authorities should also be more lenient about allowing home owners to build flats on their plots. The elderly parents of the home owner could live in the flat, which would have many advantages for both parties, but which I do not want to go into now. When the parents are no longer there, such a flat could be let to a young married couple. In this way, we could make more accommodation available to people. Accommodation is becoming a major problem in South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is always a pleasure to listen to the hon. member for Losberg, and the same applies to the hon. member who spoke before him, the hon. member for Germiston District. They both spoke about welfare housing, to which I shall also refer during the course of my speech.

I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to congratulate both the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Deputy Minister on the energetic and competent way in which they are tackling the whole housing strategy in South Africa. I am also pleased that during this session they have emphasized very strongly the question of Whites, since the Whites are needed to usher in this new era of success and prosperity in South Africa, and this also applies to the Coloureds, the Asians and the Black people.

This is also a memorable occasion when one considers that 35 years ago yesterday the NP brought about a revolution in the extremely difficult housing conditions. Not only were new projects tackled with vigour, but the development of communities reached unprecedented heights. However, I want to refer hon. members to certain problem areas, inter alia, that of rent control, which is giving rent boards, estate agents, developers, as well as tenants in my constituency, Rosettenville, tremendous problems. Last evening I made so many telephone calls, that my colleague next to me asked me what was going on. I was making these calls at a rate of 20 per hour to people who had addressed their complaints to me, and most of them were cases in which properties were being rented.

We must be very honest with one another when we ask: How does one explain that a person with a meagre income of R100 per month is living in a rent controlled flat, whereas someone who earns R2 000 per month rents a flat in the same block and is also protected by the Rents Act? [Interjections.] I also asked myself how many wealthy people and their families are not living in such flats, when thousands of others are suffering extreme hardship? Do these people not have a conscience?

Developers are being hampered by a lack of plots, increased building costs and the necessary capital to meet these urgent needs. However, not all tenants take care to pay the rent that has to be paid and then there is also the risk that they will not look after the flat very well.

There are, however, also unscrupulous estate agents—and I am going to confine my attention to these people during the recess—who only look after their own pockets and who constantly go to the developers and tell them that they could get more for their flats, provided that they receive a commission from the transaction.

That is the free market system.

Yes, but it is wrong. We simply cannot afford this kind of unscrupulous exploitation. Some of these attorneys and estate agents were present at a sitting of the Rent Board and they told that board that they were not going to do anything to those buildings, but the rent must be increased. I shall refer at a later stage to a few cases to indicate that it is, in fact, the pensioners, people who receive social pensions, who eventually land up in old buildings without electricity and who then have to pay high rentals while living in dreadful conditions.

I therefore ask: Could the State not acquire old buildings and make them available to the aged? There are many of these old buildings that could perhaps be converted into flats and premises that could be developed in this way by the State. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister or the hon. the Deputy Minister whether something cannot be done for those people who do not receive social pensions? These are people in the middle income group who simply cannot afford these high rentals.

I also want to refer to certain malpractices that occur in my constituency. In one area, the rent was increased from R77 per month to R190 per month within the space of one year, and from 15 April a further increase is being effected. The minimum is done as far as repairing those buildings is concerned. The roof leaks to such an extent that furniture is damaged. The Rent Board has given instructions for certain matters to be altered, but nothing has been done about it.

There is one building where the rental was increased from R100 to R120, R140 and then to R220 per month within the space of 10 months. There is no electric plugs either in the bedroom or the sitting-room. The kitchen is in a dreadful condition and the front door is blown down by even the slightest breeze—one need not even kick it open. Even the window panes are no longer firmly fixed in the window frames. The hot water system has been out of order for two weeks. It is alleged that the Rent Board ignores all complaints and even refuses to carry out inspections. This is what people tell me.

In one building the rent for a flat was R135 per month in September 1982, and in March 1983 it was R250 per month, and there is even a building where the rental was R95 per month three years ago and at present it is R250 per month, and by the end of the year it will be R350 per month. [Interjections.]

These are irregularities which simply cannot be permitted. I could mention many of these cases and I therefore ask, in the public interest, that housing be approached from a new angle. The question is whether the private sector can meet the demand quickly enough? How soon can old buildings be renovated and be made habitable again? Are premises available? This is a matter we shall ultimately have to give a great deal of attention. Another question is whether large companies cannot make provision for dwelling units in huge business complexes? I live in Gardens Centre, a building consisting of 21 storeys, and which is surrounded by large business undertakings. There one has a company, Anglo American Properties, that has developed 21 storeys consisting of flats in conjunction with these business undertakings. The question is whether this idea could not be developed further by other business undertakings.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to refer you to an area in my constituency, Rosettenville, where many industries are concentrated. I wonder whether these industries should not move to the outskirts of the cities so that one is not overwhelmed by them. I am referring here to the Physical Planning Act, No. 88 of 1967. Are the town councils and departments doing enough to bring these regulations to the attention of these people so that industries do not ultimately overwhelm our residential areas?

I also have before me a report written by 10 social workers and I shall give it to the hon. the Minister and his Deputy. These 10 social workers are from the Christelike-Maatskaplike Raad and they have published a very interesting report about the people living in my constituency, who really need assistance and support urgently.

Mr. Chairman, it is always an inspiration for me to listen to the hon. member for Rosettenville, because there are few hon. members who work as hard in their constituency, and have the interests of their voters as much at heart, as specifically that hon. member. I must shamefully confess that in the course of the session I probably do not make more than 20 telephone calls to my constituency, but that hon. member makes that many calls in the space of one hour. I have here a newspaper cutting that comes from a small newspaper circulated in the vicinity of that hon. member’s constituency, and in that newspaper, too, there is an indication of what the hon. member does in his constituency in the interests of his voters.

The hon. member spoke about rentals, and it is true that rentals have increased tremendously, both in regard to controlled and uncontrolled premises. This can simply be ascribed to the fact that there is an imbalance between supply and demand. I do not want to draw comparisons between potatoes and houses, but I think that the market forces operating in both cases are more or less the same. There has been a tremendous increase in the price of potatoes as a result of the scarcity this year, but at one and the same time I want to venture the prediction that if we have a season of good rain next year, we will have an abundance of potatoes because, as a result of the good prices being obtained, many more farmers are going to plant potatoes and there will constantly be a dramatic drop in prices. The same applies to houses, and although the increases were not as high as the hundred per cent to which the hon. member referred, they were in the vicinity of 50% to 60% over the past year. As a result of those increases—as is the case with any commodity—more provision will be made to cater for the demand. In fact, there are already indications that the private sector is busy building on a much larger scale and that there is a movement away from commercial property and back to residential property.

I am optimistic about the future of housing. The hon. member for Sea Point spoilt a good speech by saying that in this Committee this morning we have spoken about nothing but the selling campaign and said “precious little about building houses”.

The emphasis was on selling.

No, the emphasis throughout was on the creation of new units to supplement the supply.

I want to prod you in that direction.

We spoke about the greater involvement of the private sector, because surely this leads to the creation of more houses. That is even the case with the selling campaign, about which the hon. member spoke, because surely that leads indirectly to the availability of more houses. I do not only have to point to the improving cash-flow, because the hon. the Minister has already spoken about the fact that these funds are being ploughed back into housing. We are also busy creating a category of people who, until only yesterday, were mere consumers, but who are now becoming owners. In spite of the selling clause, these are houses that will come onto market again, and so off their own bat those people will be bringing new property onto the market. To this one could add the hon. the Minister’s announcement about the Government’s incentives, because surely this is all related to the new housing that is being created. Mention was also made of the flow of new funds to the building societies and the involvement of both the banks and the insurance companies, about which the hon. the Minister has just spoken. More money is therefore being generated and this is all related to the provision of new housing which is aimed at solving the problem—including the problem in Rosettenville—because this will happen once there is a balance between supply and demand. The hon. member for Sea Point knows too, does he not, that in spite of the economic recession, the private sector built more houses last year than in 1981. Surely the hon. member knows, too, that except for one single year, this department built more houses last year than in any other year since its inception. He must not try to present a crooked picture, and his criticism is therefore uncalled for and unfair.

The hon. member for Rosettenville referred to the fact that in the same rent-controlled block of flats there is someone living who has a monthly income of R100, whilst there is someone else living there who has an income of R2 000. Both of these tenants, however, enjoy the same protection under the law. That is one of the many anomalies in the Rent Control Act. It was, in fact, one of the chief findings of the Fouché Commission that rent control discriminated between one lessee and another and between one lessor and another, but we are busy looking at these aspects. The hon. member also spoke about sales under sectional title schemes, and in Rosettenville there are many of these blocks of flats that are going to be converted to sectional title as a result of legislation that will probably be brought before Parliament shortly. I trust that the lessees of Rosettenville and elsewhere will solve their rental problems by becoming home-owners. This department is making it possible for those people to do so. A person with an income of up to R800 per month can obtain a 90% loan from the department. A person who has an income of up to R900 per month can take part in a 10-30-60 scheme. He puts down a deposit of 10%, the department contributes 30% and the building society contributes 60%. I trust that an increasing number of our people will become proud flat and home owners.

The hon. member for Germiston District, the hon. member for Gezina and the hon. member for Losberg spoke of welfare housing. The hon. member for Losberg referred to children’s homes—or was that the hon. member for Germiston District? I am nevertheless glad to be able to say that there is a decreasing trend in the number of children’s homes. In 1963 there were 115 children’s homes for Whites, whilst at present there are 89. The number of children has remained reasonably constant in recent years, with a slightly decreasing tendency, which we welcome, because of the increasing emphasis being placed on foster care. There are 43 institutions for the handicapped, and the situation remains more or less static. Unfortunately I cannot say the same as far as the number of aged are concerned, because there has been a virtual explosion, and it seems as if the end is not yet in sight. The situation is anything but constant in their case. At present we have 365 homes for the aged erected with funds from the National Housing Commission, homes catering for approximately 25 000 inhabitants. In addition there are nearly 80 private homes for the aged. So there are approximately 30 000 aged being cared for in homes for the aged. This represents 8,1% of the aged population of our country, a figure which is, to the best of my knowledge, the highest in the world. In the rest of the world the figure is 4% to 6%. In the Netherlands a few years ago it was 11%, but for sociological and other reasons they made drastic efforts to decrease the number of inhabitants of their homes for the aged, and today the figure is 7% of their aged population. Apart from the 8,1% of the aged living in homes for the aged, there are an additional 22 000 living in flatlets erected by funds provided by the National Housing Commission. Since 1971 we have intensified this effort because we want to divert the stream of people to our homes for the aged. Since 1971 we have, in 281 projects, made provision for an additional 14 000 aged in these flatlets. These are the so-called category A aged. In spite of that, however, the stream to the homes for the aged has still been increasing. In 1959 there were 57 homes for the aged and 13 years later, in 1972, there were 204. The number of inhabitants increases, on average, by 755 per year, but since we began erecting these flatlets, the stream has flowed even more strongly. During this period the number of homes for the aged increased by 161, i.e. we built an average of 16 homes for the aged per year, whilst the number of inhabitants increased by more than 1 100 per year, as against 755 during the previous year. It would therefore appear as if the end is not yet in sight. What is disturbing, however, is the fact that 43% of the people in the homes for the aged are people in the A category, people who are still healthy, could take their place in the full bustle of life and could therefore readily be housed in these flatlets. Our policy will therefore be the gradual phasing-out of those people and the establishment of homes for the aged for the really debilitated aged who cannot look after themselves. I wonder whether we have not overdone institutionalized care in our country? I believe that the best ever children’s home can never prove to be a surrogate for the warmth, love and care that a child receives in a natural home. If that is not available, the substitute must preferably be foster-care. I believe that the most attractive of homes for the aged—although I cannot wax lyrical about homes for the aged—can never compensate for that great need, on the part of the aged, to remain part of the pulsing, bustling community, to be involved in community life and to continue to make a significant contribution to society.

†I was impressed with what the hon. member for Umbilo said the other day. He is in a constituency in which there are several of these old-age homes and he says he knows of no one of those inhabitants who would not willingly change that very cosy and comfortable place in that old-age home for a modest flat or cottage in the community where he can still be involved. I was speaking to an American the other day and he told me that many of the soldiers who came back from Vietnam who were wounded, maimed and severely disabled said very bluntly: “We are not freaks. We do not want to be isolated in institutions. We want to be part of the community and play our role in the community.”

*I therefore believe it to be sociologically wrong to accentuate institutional care to such an extent. In its most natural form the community is heterogeneous, and in every community there must be room for the aged, the child in need of care and the nadicapped, yes even for the retarded person, because our communities are that much poorer for the absence of those people. As far as this aspect is concerned, I believe that we need a new approach. Unfortunately many well-intentioned people adopt the approach of pitying the aged in the belief that those aged no longer have any useful contribution to make. Now, in the twilight of their years, the aged must live on charity and must be buried somewhere in some old-age home that is given some or other suitable name bearing echoes of eventide or autumn. There they must remain in a sort of entrance hall to heaven, waiting for that day when the angel of death comes to claim him. I think that the people who have made the greatest contribution throughout history have specifically been the aged. In Britain’s darkest hour they called upon the services of Winston Churchill, who was in his seventies, to help that nation. He said—

When there was great confusion and instability in France, they called upon the aged Charles de Gaulle.

What about Gen. Smuts?

Yes, Gen. Smuts belonged to the ranks of the aged, as did Konrad Adenauer who helped lift Germany up out of its ruins. Yesterday the hon. member for Rosettenville reminded us of the fact that 35 years ago this country obtained a new Government, headed by the 74-year-old greybeard, Dr. D. F. Malan. I think a new approach is necessary in our allocation for homes for the aged, which I am afraid will always be with us. Thus far our approach has been that the Department of Community Development should give a 100% subsidy at an interest rate of 1% or even one twentieth of 1%. In addition, the Department of Health and Welfare gives subsidies of almost R300 per month, and yet the hon. member for Sea Point says this is inadequate. Do hon. members know what subsidies we give for the flats we build? The humblest flatlet costs R12 000, and to build those flats the hon. the Minister borrowed money last year at an interest rate of 15%. An interest rate of 15% means that the repayable interest on just a single flat costing R12 000 is R150 per month. We rent those flats to those with an income of up to R300 per month, however, at a maximum rent of R15 per month, and this means that our subsidy is R135 per month. The hon. member must please not come along and say that is inadequate.

I think that the reason for the explosion we are experiencing is perhaps the fact that we have made conditions too attractive. I do not want to propose, however, that we make conditions less attractive to the welfare organizations, but what I do want to say is: The Government stands for partnership between the welfare organizations, private organizations and the State, and in this partnership there cannot, as far as finance is concerned, be a one-sided emphasis on the State having to make a 100% contribution. I am not thereby asking the hon. member for Germiston District to hold pancake sales in order to collect funds, because there is an easier way. My request to those welfare organizations which may approach us in the future, is that they first tell us what they themselves have done to mobilize funds. Then they can come along and ask us for supplementary funds for the social pensioners and for a home for debilitated aged. In Pretoria, some time ago, there was an organization that told us that it had mobilized the capital of various individuals and provided housing to the tune of R4 million. They asked whether we could not see our way clear to providing an additional R1 million for the erection of a home for debilitated aged. In the sphere of social care one speaks of a quid pro quo, i.e. helping those who want to help themselves. I believe that that is increasingly going to be our approach in this department.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the privilege of the second half hour? Firstly, in reply to the speech of the hon. the Deputy Minister, may I say to him that he made a statement to the effect that we have built more houses this year than in any other year.

I referred to last year.

Last year? If the hon. the Deputy Minister would care to look at the Schedule on page 1 of his department’s report he will find that in previous years on each occasion they have erected more houses than in September 1982. I do not have time to go into it, but please look at Schedule 1. The other matter which the hon. the Deputy Minister—and the hon. the Minister—should be concerned with is that there should be one motto in the department, and that is: Build, build, build and build more houses. Build more units and build more accommodation for all the people. That is the only motto which the department should have at the moment. We know that this hon. Deputy Minister is concerned and we appreciate the manner in which he has handled and is handling the Select Committee on Rent Control. We appreciate his attitude and we will give him all the support we can for the concern that he has shown and is still showing. Mr. Chairman, may I refer to the statement made yesterday by the hon. the Minister in regard to the buildings that will house the President’s Council which is an important item. He told me in reply to a question that it will cost R2 million. I do not mind the R2 million really as I am no judge on what is to be built. The hon. the Minister was then asked about the other two houses, the House of Deputies and the House of Representatives. The hon. the Minister then said: “Dit sal ’n bietjie voorbarig wees.” But with the greatest respect in the world, is it not “voorbarig” to build a building for the President’s Council at this stage? If one states that one is going to move the existing President’s Council over here, why do you move the existing President’s Council to Stal Plein and spend R2 million when it could be spent on housing if the President’s Council is going to stay where they are?

Do not be so stupid, this is for restoration purposes. I am going to use a restored building.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander. The hon. the Minister must then be able to tell us what the position is in regard to the other two houses. The hon. the Minister has also displayed a very nice attitude in regard to co-operation. He is prepared to listen to us and take advice. However, when the universities give advice, he says that they are talking a lot of nonsense. He then says that people everywhere are making statements about housing and that they are talking nonsense. I think we must give consideration to such statements with due respect to the university personnel concerned.

As the hon. member for Sea Point pointed out, this hon. Minister and his department have a very unenviable job. Although he gave a very good description of Dr. Jeykll and Mr. Hyde I think, in this instance, the Hyde is spelt h-i-d-e because the hon. the Minister must have a very tough hide in order to be able to do some of the things that he is obliged to do in terms of his party’s policy. I am thinking of the implementation of the Groups Areas Act, the removal of communities from place to place and the uprooting of families which he is obliged to carry out. These people are being shunted around as though they are playing a game of chess. People are being removed from their homes and communities are being destabilized and I think that must be a pretty awful job for him to do. I do not know whether the time has not come for him to revise his policy in that regard because he cannot go on like this. A few examples come to mind: What is the position at the moment in regard to Mayfair East? One minute this project is on and the next minute it is off. As far as May-fair East is concerned, is that to be declared an Indian area or not?

The proclamation is already out.

Right, it is an Indian area. Then he will have to move a number of people and that means he will have to uproot the White people. He will have to move the White people who are living there.

You are just like Barnard.

Yes, but he does it for a different reason. Pageview is another example. Those people were there since the days of President Kruger. You have moved them all but according to your report there are still 53 families living there. In terms of the judgment given by Justice Goldstone in the Govender case, you cannot get them out merely for having contravened the Group Areas Act.

These people should not be moved.

I am with you there because I do not agree with the views of the members of the CP. I do not think these people should be moved out. [Interjections.]

As far as the Group Areas Act is concerned, our attitude is a very simple one. Declare more open areas. Let people live where they have lived through the years. Do not uproot them. These people in Mayfair, for example, have lived cheek by jowl for 40 years. They know each other and their children play with each other. They are quite happy and do not want to move. No one is forcing them to stay and if they want to move they can move, but now you are forcing them to move and that is entirely wrong.

When one comes to the question of Coloured and Indian housing it is clear that there is a tremendous backlog. The hon. the Minister issued a statement on 12 August 1981 in which he said that he will wipe out the backlog for Whites, Coloureds and Indians in five years and in the case of the Blacks, in 10 years. He referred to a backlog of 73 670 houses in the public sector and 46 000 in the private sector. Then the hon. the Minister said he would require something like R882 million a year to start working on this backlog. But what did he actually provide in the budget? He only provided R330 million this year. He only provided R30 million more than last year. How on earth is he going to tackle the wiping out of this backlog if he does not have the money to do so? He does not even scratch the surface of the problem. Apart from this, there is an annual increase in the number of people who require accommodation. With great respect, the hon. the Minister is not being realistic.

Mr. Chairman, ground must be made available. For example, I know of the struggle that Johannesburg had to have the group area for Coloureds. For years and years they were asking and begging for an area. They could not get it. Then there is also the question of the Blacks. For years, the policy of the National Government was: “Do not build Soweto nicely. Those people must go. They are so-journers there. They must go back to their areas.”

As far as the Indians are concerned, we have struggled for years. Those two hon. members will know. For years we have struggled to get Pageview for them. We have struggled so that they do not have to be sent 32 kilometres outside Johannesburg to Lenasia.

Indian waiters had to work until midnight, catch the train, get home at 2 o’clock in the morning, get up again at five o’clock in the morning, after three hours sleep, and get on the train to come into town to work. Their home life was messed up and the divorce rate was high. How can you treat people on that basis? Obviously they have places where to live.

To take this a step further, we come to the question of central business districts and of places where people must trade. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to declare the central business district of Johannesburg an open area in which everybody can trade openly. Give them all a chance. When we had talks with Sam Motsuenyane of Nafcoc, the Chamber of Commerce for Blacks, it came out that they did not want White people to go into the Black areas, because they did not have the right to come into the White areas. I therefore think that the time has come that we must allow not only the central business district of Johannesburg, but other areas as well, particularly where Johannesburg wants it, to permit people to come in and trade on this basis.

Mr. Chairman, before I come to the question of White housing, I want to ask the hon. the Minister: What is the position with regard to the Chinese community today? Can the Chinese live anywhere they want to live, or do they still have to get a permit to live in a White area? Can the neighbours who live in the street, object? I know it happened a little while ago that they were allowed to stay if there were no objections. Has the time not come now to recognize the Chinese people and allow them to stay wherever they want to stay and to trade where they want to?

When it comes to the question of White housing, I want to submit the following: The whole concept of letting accommodation has changed with the advent of sectional title, the advent of the share block control system and the advent of the phasing out of rent control. Every time a unit is disposed of on a permanent basis, it is one less for letting purposes. I want to tell the hon. member for Rosettenville, who made a plea with regard to the complaints, that we have had lots of complaints like that. I hope he will give evidence before the Select Committee on Rent Control, but is he pleading for those people who should not be in rent controlled accommodation and who are getting it, or is he pleading that those people who should be in rent controlled accommodation, should be put into rent controlled accommodation? We would like to know that as well. The position has changed considerably because of the change in respect of letting accommodation. A flat is no longer a place of temporary abode, it is a place of permanent abode. People who have sold their houses and think that they can retire to a flat, or young people who want a flat and want to move into a house later, are now in a difficult position. The whole concept has changed. A flat or a unit under a sectional title register or in a share block scheme is now a place of permanent abode. As far as the people who are under rent control are concerned, I want to say that there will always be a number of people who will require protection. That is a matter which will have to be discussed by the Select Committee on Rent Control. However, I want to say this: If rent control is ever to be abolished at all, then there is nothing to stop this Government and there is nothing to stop any future Government from bringing back rent control at any time, because a Government must keep its finger on the question of what is happening in its country. Where control is needed, it has to be exercised. It is therefore no good telling people that if rent control is to be abolished at all, that will be the end of the story.

Are you for rent control?

Yes, I am for rent control. Yes, most positively! I should think so! Yes, because the people face ejectment, they face harassment, they have no redress and they have nowhere to go in these particular times. The situation will change from time to time. That is why you will find a reference to it on page 12 of the report. Even the Rent Board are making determinations that are far beyond what the average person can afford. There is also the abuse of section 28 of the Act and I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to accept a recommendation. It is in the report before us, and I am entitled to talk about it at the moment. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to amend section 28 of the Act in terms of the recommendations made by the Select Committee at this stage, so that when six months’ notice is to be given for a reconstruction scheme, one first has to apply to court before the notice can be given. If the hon. the Minister makes it retrospective, we shall support him on that as well. One can even look at the question of boarding houses, which have become places of permanent abode for people. The fees charged in boarding houses are so high that people are now no longer able to afford living in boarding houses. I think one day the hon. the Minister may have to take a look at what is happening to people there.

Lastly, with regard to utility companies, we think that they should also assist, and be amalgamated with building societies, and that building societies should play a more positive role in bringing about utility companies. We should appeal to them on that basis as well. With regard to Proclamation 91 of 1980, which has been amended by Proclamation 32 of 1983, I want to say that the amounts that the hon. the Minister has now raised to R360 and R650, are too low. We ask him to raise them to R500 and R900, respectively.

As far as the housing position is concerned, I want to suggest that, despite his data bank, he should give information to all those people who are concerned with the provision of housing. I also want to ask the hon. the Minister if he would consider appointing a general ombudsman for the whole country who can give information to everybody who is concerned with utility companies and otherwise, so that information can be given to people who do not have access to data banks. I think if we tackle this in a comprehensive way and if we get into a system whereby we shall have houses which will either be made of timber or by means of preconstruction methods, and whereby regional authorities will amalgamate and go in for joint regional schemes, we shall find that this will be much cheaper in the long run and much more efficacious. Then we shall be able to meet the crisis regarding the shortage of accommodation which is facing the country today.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow made a very amusing speech. I must say that at the end of his speech he spoke a little more positively. He mentioned what he thought could be done to make cheaper housing in South Africa possible. However, he again adopted the old standpoint of the hon. members on that side of the Committee.

†He said that the hon. the Minister must have a pretty awful job. He referred to the uprooting and the moving about of people, when applying the Group Areas Act.

*Now I must remind the hon. member that this Act has been on the Statute Book for 30 years and longer and in spite of he so-called “uprooting and moving about of people”, it has also brought due order to the various communities in South Africa. I want to say something more about this subject at a later stage. The benefits that have accrued to the various communities in South Africa due to the implementation of the Act are ten times greater than the problems and so-called hardships caused by the implementation of this Act. It is one of the successes of this department that it has been able to regulate communities in the way they have been, and the basis on which it has done so is the Group Areas Act. I do not want to say that everything is perfect under this Act. It was for that reason, too, that the hon. the Minister said to us that a judicial commission was investigating the matter. However, let me also say to the hon. members that without the Group Areas Act we could not have had this neat situation that we have in South Africa. It is also due to the implementation of this Act that to a large degree our country is today the show-case of how well a country ought to be planned. It has resulted in proud, contended and prosperous communities. After all, that is the aim of community development. It is also our aim that the various communities in South Africa should live peacefully side by side. The attacks made on this Act, such as those that that hon. member made once again, are made by emphasizing only the negative side. The purposeful development and the promotion of the interests of the communities has always been the principal aim of this Act. Homeownership has come into its own due to the improved ordering of adjacent communities. The owner class among the Coloureds and the Indians has grown tremendously due to the implementation of this Act. It has also brought community leaders to the fore. The principle of self-help has got many communities off the ground. Years ago the Secretariat of the UN published a certain report entitled “The Report of the Mission to Survey Community Development”. I want to quote the following paragraph from it—

That is exactly what the Department of Community Development has achieved in South Africa.

†By clearing slums and by rehousing squatters, problems have not escalated, but have been solved. Also by demarcating areas for the various groups people have been given a new lease of life. Whenever we have had re-establishment of communities in South Africa or new townships have been established, things have been improved for the people themselves. Things did not worsen for the people of South Africa. I should like to mention the example of Mitchell’s Plain. Many inhabitants of Mitchell’s Plain who were initially reluctant to move out to Mitchell’s Plain are today proud of their new homes and in a creative spirit they have moulded and developed an entirely new and happy environment.

*If one looks at this report one finds that at that stage community development there meant a tremendous escalation in business and professional talent.

†To serve one’s own community, I believe, brings compensation and has more advantages than disadvantages.

*Therefore one can congratulate the hon. the Minister and his department on the progress they have made during the past year.

Mr. Chairman, at the outset, may I just take up one or two little points that have been made particularly in respect of Kingsborough. I still do not think the concept of local option is understood. It means basically that people elect either to retain their facilities to themselves or share them. It does not mean that they can grab the lot for themselves, which is in fact what Kingsborough tried to do. Therefore I say it is most unlikely that the Natal Provincial Executive will allow their request.

Where does the local option lie, in Kingsborough or in Pietermaritzburg?

The local option is for Kingsborough. We assume that they are reasonable people. They will not be allowed to say that their local option is that they will not allow Indians to walk on the pavements, for example. We cannot be stupid about this.

The other point I want to touch on is the question of Cato Manor. I believe the hon. the Minister indicated that if we could persuade the Indian community to make it an open area he would have another look at the issue.

Yes.

Right. I think I will call on my friends in the Progressive Federal Party who say they are the official representatives of the Indian community to try and do just that. However, I will not leave it all to them but will try myself as well. I just want to make that point.

There is one point that I have been asked to bring forward by the hon. member for King William’s Town. I serve on a group that deals with the Department of Community Development and I am very proud and pleased to be with this group because they are a group with a good reputation. I feel very sensitive about it when they are placed in a position of what I would consider embarrassment. I am referring to the probe that was called for by the Department of Community Development into firms that employ Coloured and non-White managers in European areas. There was a report on this in the Eastern Province Herald of 6 April. These people were apparently hauled in by the Police, the matter was investigated by the public prosecutor and he then declined to prosecute. It was the Department of Community Development that put the matter forward, as I understand it. I have all the documents here.

The complaints came from the city council.

I believe they did, but nonetheless this is the situation. This department has been placed in an embarrassing situation in so far as the Act has gone against what can in fact obviously be prosecuted. I know the attitude of the hon. the Minister. He does not support this concept. In fact, in answer to questions that were put to him and of which I have copies here he indicated that that was the case. However, I would hope that in the very near future appropriate legislation will be put forward so that this department, which, as I say, I am proud to work with, will not be embarrassed in the future.

I again come to the primary function of this department which is housing. As I and other members have indicated previously one of the most important aspects of this is the provision of serviced land. Having possibly achieved the serviced land in the appropriate areas, I believe one has to look at how one is going to use it and how one is going to get housing built on it quickly. I have indicated that one of the better ways of doing so, is to find a system whereby you can bring the small builders in so that they can build individual units. I can remember a time in Durban, for example, when there were literally hundreds of small builders building houses, not only White builders but Indian builders. In my own particular building interest I had a great deal to do with Indian builders. There were in the region of 40 to 50 Indian builders who were very good and very competent. There were Coloured builders as well. There are builders in all three of these race groups particularly who are competent to build housing and smaller home units. I believe it is going to be necessary to look at this aspect in order to help these people. I should like to suggest a way in which these people can be helped. These smaller builders normally do not have a great deal of capital. If they have to tie their capital up in buying the land before they build they just do not have the capital left to build. Is it not possible that the land can be allocated to the builders? The department can lose nothing. If the land is allocated to the builder he can build on that land. When he wants to sell that house he is not paid for the land. The cost of the land is established and set and he then sells that house for what it cost him to build it plus his profit on the house. He does not get paid for the land because he has invested nothing in the land.

It is being done.

Well, it certainly is not something which is being done in the part of the world in which I operate. I believe it is worth having a look at this.

When we think in terms of building for the masses we somehow or other seem to think only in terms of individual free-standing units or massive great blocks of flats. If some of the hon. members can cast their minds back about 30, 35 years, they will recall that much of the housing need at that time was in fact provided for with small blocks of flats, blocks of four and six and up to 12 flats, only three storeys high. It was done deliberately on that basis because in a three-storey block you do not have to provide lifts and you do not have to have steel structures or reinforced concrete structures, but can use load-bearing block and load-bearing brick. These smaller blocks of flats can be built very, very cheaply indeed. I know of such blocks that have been built relatively recently at a ridiculously low cost per unit as compared to these multi-storey blocks that entail huge expenses in respect of lifts and so forth. There are some of these blocks that have been built many years ago. I am referring to the type of flat that was built in Kenneth Gardens. The hon. the Deputy Minister knows them well. They were constructed very cheaply at the time and they are still as sound as a bell. They are really first class flats, but were cheap to construct. I believe if one goes in for that type of development one can use land very economically. One does not need huge pieces of land for this type of development. Going one step further, I might tell hon. members that people who live in these huge blocks of flats it has been found in the UK, America, in fact all over the world, do not like it. They feel like hens in a coop. However, you can get a good standard of living, a good quality of life, in the smaller blocks of flats and still use the land very economically. You can use the services economically and they can be produced relatively cheaply. I believe this is a form of construction that we should have a look at, particularly in respect of the White community, the Coloured community and the Indian community.

The question of standards has been taken up by a number of members. I have been out to Acacia Park and have seen some of the standards in which hon. members of Parliament and some of our senior officials have to live there. The public generally do not seem to accept that those are satisfactorily high standards for them and I cannot help but feel that if these standards are good enough for members of Parliament and senior officials, perhaps the less affluent segment of the community should be able to cope with them.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say to the hon. member for Um-bilo that that which he has suggested is being done. Land is being made available without having to be paid for until it is used.

I am talking about individual sites.

Individual sites. The department has given an option on land in Bothasig to a utility company and that utility company has to pay for the land only when…

Yes, only to utility companies. I am talking about private people as well.

Also to small developers.

Without question, we are experiencing a very dynamic time in the history of housing in our country. What we have seen in this Committee over the last few days and what we have heard from the hon. the Minister unquestionably illustrates that we now have a new and dynamic approach to the emergent problems in our country. I think members of all parties will agree with that. It is fundamentally true that housing in South Africa is undergoing a major structural change. Some of the reasons are obvious and some of the reasons are less obvious; some of the causes are known and some of the causes are less well-known, but the price structure has changed and the rental structures are changing very quickly. The whole profile and method of ownership is changing. The housing needs of people are changing, sometimes born of new patterns of living and sometimes in adjustment to the new cost structure and financial strictures that confront the potential home owner.

I have very little time at my disposal and I would therefore like to make only a few observations. Firstly, the 500 000 new houses that have been announced is one of the most far-reaching and profound socio-economic steps taken in the history of this country. It will directly affect something like between 3 million and 3,5 million people in our country. In this regard I should, however, like to make one suggestion. Where the State is going to give loans to certain categories of purchasers, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to look again at the whole question of second bonds. Currently a second bond cannot be passed over a property over which the State has a first bond. I do not think it will be possible for employers to help their employees by way of bridging finance and second bonds if second bonds cannot be registered over those properties, because that will mean that those companies will have no surety.

Sectional title is an efficient and cheap way of making housing available, especially in those areas where we have the lower income groups. However, I think we will have great problems with the body corporate in those circumstances where we are dealing with poor people who do not have a history of home ownership and who sometimes are unsophisticated. We have enough problems in running bodies corporate amongst the more sophisticated elements of our community. I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he investigates the possibility of establishing in a particular region where a great many of those particulary properties are going to be sectionalized a utility company sui generis whose sole function it will be to act as the manager of the body corporates for all the sectional title schemes within its region, to collect the levies and to arrange the maintenance. To have private companies do this will be beyond the means of the kind of people that we are going to be selling sectional title properties to.

Seven members is the minimum for a body corporate.

Yes, but I think that if you have a utility company in the region running all those schemes for the body corporates it will bring a certain sophistication to the running of that scheme and will help to maintain it at a cost which those people will be able to afford. I leave this suggestion with the hon. the Minister because I think it is an important one.

We are delighted that the department has sold 526 erven to 12 developers in the Viben area of Bothasig which is in my constituency. This step is important. It will keep these 12 small home builders to whom the land has been given in business. That is a very good thing. They are in fact passing on the benefits of the low cost of the land to the home owner. Houses are becoming available there at between R40 000 and R45 000. Some of these houses are very nice houses indeed. I think that is wonderful. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to monitor the situation to see to it that where such land is made available on this basis those builders continue to pass the benefit of that low cost land to the purchaser and to do not profit by it unduly.

I should also like to appeal to the hon. the Minister about two parochial matters but matters that are extremely important to me and to the community at Ysterplaat. I am referring to the proposed 112 single person flats for the aged in Good Hope Model Village. The need there has become very urgent. When the application was first made there were 188 persons on the waiting list of the Housing League. This has not grown to approximately 800 applicants of whom 130 show a preference for Ysterplaat itself.

The hon. the Minister will know that since 1977 I have been working oh the question of a creche for Ysterplaat. He will know that my community there is a poor community, a vulnerable community. The women of the house also have to work but there is no creche in the area. There is a great need for it. That need has also been established by the Department of Health and Welfare. In 1979 a survey of only the subeconomic area of Ysterplaat showed that there were 125 children who needed care during and after school hours. In the whole area from Cape Town to Blaauwberg there are only three centres with crèches run by welfare organizations and where the parents can pay according to their income.

*In the few minutes at my disposal, I want to compliment the hon. the Minister’s department. The hon. the Minister’s department is very thrifty. Yesterday I received a letter from the hon. the Minister’s department in which I was notified of a meeting of the commission for township development. On the envelope was printed “On Her Majesty’s Service” and this nearly on Republic Day. I consider this a very effort at saving money. On the envelope is also printed “Use paper sparingly”.

†I must say this department obviously does, but the previous administration obviously did not. They must have believed like Winston Churchill that the empire would last for a thousand years and they printed envelopes for a thousand years.

Mr. Chairman, we have almost reached the end of a very important debate. There are things that have become very clear to me in the course of this debate. Firstly, it has become clear to me that the department and every one in this Committee adopts the standpoint that only the best must be done for South Africa as far as housing is concerned. However, our greatest problem, as the hon. member for Port Elizabeth North said, lies in the standards set and the laws controlling the establishment of towns. There are so many bodies that have a say in such an undertaking—and that have more to say than is strictly necessary—that matters are only delayed. To establish a town one needs only one thing. One needs to maintain a farm register. One need only subdivide, and one does not need to establish a town. If in a large city like Chicago, one of the biggest cities in the world, there is only farm division instead of township development, I do not see why we in South Africa have to have township development. In Pietermaritzburg there is an example of farm subdivision.

A related matter is financing. The State must provide financing at a cosmopolitan level. All costs apart from the cost of the land must be covered by a loan of 20 to 30 years. I would not even mind if this were done by way of a levy. This cost must not be included in the initial cost of a plot, because if all these costs are included in the calculation, then the cost of the plot can sometimes be as much as 40% of that of the house. We have a great deal to say about how township development should take place, but I think that the way township development should really be done could be summarized in not more than 10 pages. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth North referred to the cost of tarring streets. Where in the world is it necessary to have a tarred road two inches thick if that street is not going to carry at least 7 000 cars? If the traffic is too heavy and the tar is too thin, it cracks and then the water runs into those cracks and fragments the basis of the street.

†The old method of chip and spray should be employed to a greater extent especially in areas where there is a lot of water. This is still the most economical method, especially where you have a solid base. For instance, the ordinary gravel of the Western Cape is good enough for any road. A chip and spray, or even only a blow-blast of tar, stops dust and provides a surface that is good enough for 20 to 25 years. We do not have to spend vast amounts on things that are not necessary.

I want to talk to the hon. the Minister today about something which is very near to my heart. I am referring to the Group Areas Act. We have learnt a lot over a long time in South Africa. We have learnt that once you have started with something you cannot readily stop it. I want to tell the hon. the Minister today that once you have started opening parks and other facilities to all groups you will eventually be unable to stop it. I think the Government must make a decision in this regard and tell us what its decision is. We cannot go on with the present system and do what the hon. member for Hillbrow wants us to do, namely open all these facilities, also the central city. Once you have started, you will not be able to stop. Once you have started opening facilities you cannot say that the parks in Pretoria will be open to Whites only because then you will have the nasty situation that you will have to patrol the parks with dogs like they do now in Pretoria. This will only create a further unhealthy aspect of a situation which to most people is undesirable.

What about our factories?

You cannot compare the social life of people with the situation in factories. It is something completely different. The upbringing of your children and caring for your old people, the day-to-day running of your ordinary life and your home affairs are things that you cannot share. People should not be compelled by law to share these things. Let me sound this warning today. We are all trying to create good relations with the rest of the world. By all means, let us have good relations with one another, but do not let this country of mine become a place where I cannot live happily and where my children will have no future. Give me a chance, give everyone a chance to live his own life. Put us in a position to say to the Government that it must protect us against the ills of ordinary life, allow us to carry on with the day-to-day life we have practised for 300 years. Do not take that away from us. If you want to open facilities you have to do it the full hog or you have to stop right now.

Let us do it the full hog.

This hon. member says let us do it the full hog. I want to tell him that he is not dealing with the old NP now. There was the time when members of the old United Party said: Vote for the United Party, but thank heaven’s the NP is governing the country. Today, however, the Progs are making a mistake by saying that people should vote for them, because the NP is listening to some of the Progs and to a world call, the Progs are therefore going to get what they do not want. In the very near future they will get what they will then complain about. Just look at the situation in places like The Wilds. Just look at the many complaints we receive from people who have never complained before. In this country we either have to have complete separation or we have to open every facility. It will not help us to do things in half measures. That way we will not appease anybody. We dare not take that chance, in fact, we have no right to take that chance. I know this is very difficult. To work with human beings and to make laws ruling the lives of human beings is one of the most difficult tasks one can imagine. I do believe in the survival of my own people, but I see them threatened today. They are not threatened by other people, but by the very laws that are being brought into existence at the moment. Let us be fair with each other. We are fighting a political battle with each other. This is not necessary. We will have destruction of people when at the end of the day the different groups meet eye to eye and the one group says to the other: You have led us up the garden path. 80% of the people that I am representing can never leave this country. They have to die here. I want that the laws of this country will be such that these people will have the right to live here and will be able to give their children a future, the same as all our fathers have given to us. An Indian child today gets from the Government approximately R20 000 the day he is born if one takes into consideration all the money that is spent on various projects for the Indian community.

What does the White child get?

This hon. member wants to distract me. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it seems as if it has fallen to my lot to speak after the hon. member for Langlaagte. The hon. member commenced with a few positive ideas as regards services and standards. As he is aware, a commission is in the process of looking at this, and we hope that this commission will come forward with the answers. As is customary, however, in the second half of his speech he once again lapsed into a dramatic casting of suspicion on a policy which is very clear to everyone, but which he and his henchmen apparently are unable, or refuse to understand. The time I have at my disposal is limited and I therefore do not want to waste any more time on that hon. member, but I should like to raise a few other matters.

I want to commence by referring to a matter in my own constituency which is causing extreme concern, viz. the cleaning up of Duncan Village and the rehousing of its residents in suitable accommodation. Conditions in large parts of Duncan Village are dreadful, to say the least, and a source of growing unrest. This is giving rise to tremendous social problems for the people trapped in these conditions and is also leading to disruption within the community of Duncan Village as a whole. Furthermore, this is bedevilling relations with the Republic of Ciskei and is the cause of unnecessary friction. It is imperative that funds be obtained to assist the people of Duncan Village. I therefore want to make a plea that this matter be given the highest priority. If funds cannot be obtained within the foreseeable future, we shall have to reconsider this whole position and another solution will have to be found. We cannot permit these conditions to continue.

In general, I want to associate myself with previous speakers who pointed to the importance of housing as the central factor, besides food and clothing, for a stable and happy community life. I also want to say that the provision of suitable housing for all its inhabitants is one of the main challenges facing South Africa this century. Other hon. members mentioned the present shortage of 258 000 units and the estimated 3,5 million houses that will have to be built to meet this need by the year 2000. It was also mentioned that this would cost almost R90 billion. In view of the increase in costs we can expect in the building industry in the future, it is clear that the housing problem is essentially a financial one. It is a financial problem both in the sense of finding the necessary capital to build houses, and in the sense of finding methods whereby people can afford the houses that have been built. I think that we should distinguish between two categories of people in this regard, viz. those who are financially capable of acquiring a home and those who are uable to do so without assistance, mostly from the Government. As regards the first category of people, I believe that to a large extent the existing instutions and methods of financing make provision for them. However, it is necessary that the base of this category of people be broadened as far as possible. For example, this could be done by way of salary-related adjusted financing methods, further tax concessions, such as the extremely important one the hon. the Minister announced yesterday, the possible adjustment of the statutory requirements in respect of maximum loan limits and income. However, I believe that the most urgent need exists in respect of people who cannot look after themselves. In the interests of the community as a whole it is necessary that these people obtain housing and the community as a whole will have to see to it that this is done. It is clear that the State, with its limited means, will not be able to do this alone, nor can the private sector, which justifiably demands profits on its activities, be expected to do this. Consequently, the only solution is a partnership between the State and the private sector, in which each contributes according to its capacity and responsibility. The necessity for this and involvement in this, particularly by existing home financing and financial institutions is generally recognized. However, I believe that this partnership should not remain loosely based, but that if this is to be exploited to its full advantage, it should be moulded into a suitable formal structure in which the exact division and complementing of functions of the participating partners are spelt out. The establishment of a co-operative structure similar to the existing industrial development corporations, but with the necessary adaptations, particularly to involve private initiative in the management and control set-up as well, seems to be the answer. I have no doubt that if an answer to bridging the financial problem at the heart of the housing question can be found by these and other means and the financial problem can be overcome, the problem of providing housing can be turned into a valuable opportunity for the development of Southern Africa along the path of prosperity and peace, particularly in view of the labour-intensive nature of the building industry.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to deal with a matter which has only been referred to briefly by the hon. member for Umbilo and other hon. members in the course of the debate. I refer to the position of Coloured, Indian and Black businessmen in so far as it is affected by the activities of this department, and specifically the Group Areas Act. There are two aspects of this that I want to deal with briefly. The first is the restriction imposed on Coloured, Indian and Black businessmen, in terms of group areas, from doing business in an area which is normally a White group area, and the second is the restriction, also in terms of the Group Areas Act, from employing workers in the managerial classes, if I may call it that, by business enterprises operating in White area.

As far as the first point is concerned, of course, the hon. the Minister’s predecessor, Mr. Marais Steyn, announced as long ago as 1977 that the Government had decided in principle that such central city areas should be thrown open to Indian businessmen to enable them to do business there. At the same time he said that before long this would apply to Coloureds as well. In that same year, in its reaction in the White Paper to the report of the Riekert Commission, the Government also gave the undertaking that the Group Areas Act would in fact be amended to provide for open business areas. These were to be declared by the Group Areas Act, rather than by the State President, as is the case at present in terms of section 19 of the Group Areas Act. Today I want to ask the hon. the Minister and this Committee what has become of that envisaged amendment. It is now four years since that announcement, and as yet no such amendment has been effected to the Group Areas Act. Let me say here and now that I am not quite sure that such an amendment is in fact necessary in order to achieve this aim. However, the Government saw fit to state in its reaction to the Riekert report that this would occur, and it has not occurred. What I am more concerned about, however, is what has in fact happened in practice with regard to open business areas in terms of the Group Areas Act. I want to say with the utmost conviction that the progress in this regard is pathetic. There are today 26 such open business areas in the whole of South Africa. Surely that is a hopeless state of affairs. There are only 26 areas, some of which are so small that one could barely describe them as business areas. They are only very small parts of central business areas. And this is so in spite of representations made over the years by organizations representing commerce and industry and also the professions. Particularly bearing in mind the fanfare that accompanied this announcement at the time, and the enthusiasm with which it was received in the private sector and in the Coloured and Indian communities, the progress made has been hopeless. I find it interesting that the hon. member for Kimberley South, an NP member, has now complained to the Government for the second successive year—I cannot remember what debate it was last year, but this year it was the internal affairs debate—about the fact that Whites were grossly exploiting the Indian business partners by acting as land representatives in order to evade group areas restrictions. These people form a kind of partnership or company so that business can be carried on in the name of the White person, who is in fact a sleeping partner but makes excessive amounts out of this business. I respect the hon. member for having made this point. It has also been made in the past by my colleague, the hon. member for Greytown, and many other hon. members. It is a gross abuse.

†I cannot agree more that this is in fact a disgraceful practice. However, it is in the hands of the Government to rectify the situation and to put an end to this practice. The obvious way in which to put an end to this practice is by opening business areas to all races. I ask again, why does the Government not act in this regard, unless one must assume that in some way the Government is manipulated by people who are not only racist in their approach to these matters but who actually have the gall to try and make money out of it.

I obviously do not know the nature of all these 26 areas, how big they are and what they are like, but judging by the one in the Western Cape, I once again have to make the point that progress in this area has been quite pathetic. In the Western Cape where almost three-quarters of the Coloured population of South Africa reside, business prospects in central business areas are limited to three or four street fronts in the Woodstock and Salt River area. There are some business prospects in this area, but they are nowhere near as lucrative as the business prospects that would exist for people in central Cape Town.

Must we open the Coloured areas in Wynberg also?

You can open wherever you like. Let me say to that hon. member that if one has to start one obviously has to start in Cape Town. To that extent I actually agree with the principle the Government has accepted, namely that this is the area where Whites and Coloureds do their buying in very large numbers. It is therefore only fair that people of other races should also have the opportunity to benefit from the buying power of their own people.

I cannot even set them up in Mitchell’s Plain, how am I to set them up in Adderley Street?

I am very surprised that the hon. the Minister should say that, because if that is the position, what is his problem? Why does he not open these areas? May I then ask him where the complaints come from which made it necessary for one of the officials of his department to actually officially lay a complaint in the Grahamstown case about which he knows?

The second matter I should like to refer to is the question of employment of non-Whites in managerial positions in White businesses. In this regard I want to disagree only slightly with the hon. member for Umbilo. I cannot accept that this is merely a question of embarrassment that came the department’s way as a result of a mistake. This is a situation for which the hon. the Minister and his department must take the blame. It is their fault that they land themselves in this sort of situation.

This question has also been the subject of study and recommendation by the Riekert Commission. The Government, once again in a White Paper, piously stated that they accepted the recommendation that non-White employees be allowed to hold any position in business areas for Whites. They said they accepted the recommendation of the Riekert Commission in this regard. I again ask what has been done in this regard? Have the regulations regulating those issues been amended? They have not.

Industrial areas have all been opened.

We are not talking about industrial areas. I am talking about business areas. The Riekert Commission dealt separately with industrial areas. I believe this is a disgraceful state of affairs. I have referred to the Grahamstown case where a departmental official laid a complaint…

No, it was an official of the city council.

The hon. the Minister in replying to a question in the House of Assembly said that a complaint was brought to the police by the Department of Community Development.

Yes, but the complaint originated with the city council.

That may be so.

Get your facts straight.

I am not saying that the complaint did not originate somewhere else. What I am saying is that the department’s laying that complaint with the police is in conflict with the undertaking given by the department. If the department believes that such a complaint has no basis, it should not pursue such a complaint. I do not know of any measure that is more in conflict with the principle of free enterprise than and at the same time is so incredibly immoral and indefensible as this particular limitation. Let me just briefly quote what the Riekert Commission had to say about it. The commission said that this prohibition, firstly, restricted… [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to discuss this matter with the hon. member for Green Point, but there is no time for that. I think that if we quote these sensitive things, we must at least get our facts straight. We are all aware of the fact that the Department of Community Development has over the years been the greatest provider of housing in South Africa, to such an extent in fact that we took it for granted that if we wanted a roof over our head, it was the responsibility of this department, while it is in fact the responsibility of every individual to see to his own needs. The contribution made by this department cannot be measured only in terms of the millions of rands spent on housing. No, it goes much further than that. The upliftment of people can never be measured in rands and cents. It was this department which removed people from slums and shanty-town conditions to afford them an opportunity to bring up their children in decent circumstances. As a result of the assistance of this department, hundreds of these people are leaders in their own communities today and are themselves engaged in doing uplifting work among their own people.

Today we can join in paying tribute to this department, not only for the provision of housing to persons in the lower income group in particular, but above all for the work of uplift which it has done over the years and is still doing. Every person, whoever he may be, possesses human dignity and this department has recognized this and helped to develop it over the years. The work which this department has been doing over the years has inspired other departments, State corporations and semi-State institutions to such an extent that the contributions which these institutions have made in recent years have contributed a great deal to alleviating the housing shortage in South Africa.

Let us consider what the contribution of other departments and State corporations has been during the past financial year, in just one financial year. During the 1982-’83 financial year almost R23 million was spent on housing for public servants. This enabled 980 families to acquire their own homes. During the past financial year the Department of Posts and Telecommunications erected 258 dwelling units at a cost of R7,8 million. The previous year 124 dwelling units were erected at a cost of R3,8 million. In addition this department budgeted R30 million for the present financial year for the allocation of housing loans to officials, while the expenditure of official housing will amount to approximately R10 million. In future the department will, in certain circumstances, lend officials their deposits for the purchase of a dwelling with a loan from a financial institution. The department also envisages—and this is important—selling official dwellings to officials on reasonable terms in future.

During the past financial year the Department of Environment Affairs spent R462 000 on housing out of its own funds. This was used for the construction of 68 houses, of which 6 were for Whites, 15 for Coloureds and 47 for Blacks.

The South African Transport Services only build houses when the need is imperative, yet in spite of this Transport Services has during the past year erected 482 houses at a cost of almost R29 million. Furthermore, this organization provides employees with loans to purchase their own homes on the open market. Reverting capital and funds from pension funds to the amount of R240 million will be available to officials to buy or build their own houses.

The Department of Co-operation and Development and the Administration Board spent approximately R80 million on the construction of approximately 8 000 houses during the past financial year.

As far as State corporations and semi-State institutions are concerned: Iscor built 300 houses for Whites in terms of its home ownership scheme. It also built 73 hired houses for Whites, 40 hired houses for Indians and 100 flats for Whites. This is a total of 513 units. A total of 490 houses were also enlarged and improved. They spent R49 million on these projects. During the past year Escom spent approximately R100 million on housing for its White, Coloured and Black employees. A grand total of 15 121 dwelling units were involved. This included temporary single quarters. Provincial Administrations are also making a considerable contribution to the provision of housing for their employees.

With this data I am trying to bring home that the State and semi-State institutions are concerned about the housing shortage in South Africa.

However, these efforts on the part of the State are not enough. The message which these figures seek to convey, to the private sector in particular, is that the pay-packet which is handed over to the employee does not contain enough to make of that person a happy, satisfied and productive individual. The roof over his head, where he is able to rear and educate his children under normal circumstances, comprises 60% of his productivity. In this respect it is not only the private sector which has over the years not kept up its end, but in my opinion the more than 500 local authorities in South Africa could over the years have made a greater contribution to the physical establishment of housing. Most of them were for years satisfied merely to act as agents for the Department of Community Development. Town councils are sitting with large tracts of donated land which in actual fact cost them nothing. This land was acquired as a result of township establishment, etc. This land which, in the most cases, is at present lying idle, is merely an expense to these councils. They have to keep the land clear and prevent the outbreak of fires. It is my opinion that this land should be made available for development. If town councils are not prepared to provide services themselves, this land could be transferred to utility companies and developers at a nominal cost to enable young people in that way to at least acquire inexpensive stands. The condition, however, is that we dispense with the tremendously high standards which town councils lay down for essential services. In this way, for example, 60% of the development costs are spent on stormwater pipes and tarred roads. I should not like to see a return to gravel roads, but I want to agree with the hon. member for Langlaagte that we can use the chip and spray method. I know of chip and spray roads which have been in use for the past 25 to 30 years. Town councils must realize that the provision of housing is a national strategy and that they should co-operate. Here they have an opportunity to render national service and they should not allow this opportunity to pass them by.

Mr. Chairman, it is late in the afternoon and I shall try to be as brief as possible. Yesterday the hon. the Minister reproached me for raising certain matters in a different debate. I only did so because I was discussing Indian affairs in general. I do not think one need be so schizophrenic as to reproach someone for that.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: May the hon. member insinuate that the hon. the Minister is schizophrenic?

The hon. member has just insinuated that the hon. the Minister is schizophrenic. The hon. member must withdraw those words.

Mr. Chairman, no, I beg your pardon, I said that it was so schizophrenic that one may not discuss certain things.

Just before that the hon. member referred to the fact that the hon. the Minister had said that. The hon. member must withdraw that.

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry. I expressed myself wrongly. I withdraw it.

Yesterday the hon. the Minister said two things that upset me a great deal. One does not expect this of an hon. Minister who is seeking people to fill two other Chambers of a Parliament. The hon. the Minister said: “Ek wil nie Wit geld gebruik om…”

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry but that was a slip of the tongue. I meant State money.

Mr. Chairman, a slip of the tongue of that nature is very dangerous, and I just wanted to point that out to the hon. the Minister. The second statement the hon. the Minister made was that the Indians in Natal would wait until the cows came home, or words to that affect, before State money was used for housing. It is easy to say that while we stand here talking and in the course of White politics, putting forward housing policies. I now know what the new housing policy of the Government is. What it amounts to is that a minimum requirement of R150 per month is set and that the Government will not provide a house for people with an income above that limit.

In the early years of Afrikanerdom, when we were still doing upliftment work, the situation was that people did look to the State to perform that original work of upliftment. I am sure that when, in the very near future, we also have Coloured and Indian Chambers of Parliament, and when our housing policy has to be a general policy, the other two Houses will not be satisfied with a policy in terms of which we shall only help those people who receive less than R150 per month.

The provision only applies to that specific area, to Cato Manor.

I am talking about even the broader policy, because a restriction of R150 per month is too low.

You do not understand anything.

That hon. member does not understand anything. With a limitation on salaries of R150 per month, this policy means that no person who has any job will obtain a house through the State, because the lowest paid employee in South Africa is the Black construction worker and even his minimum wage is R250 per month. Therefore hon. members can see what we ought to be speaking about when we speak about minimum wages before the State becomes involved. I know t there are going to be problems and I just want to point this out. Yesterday’s announcement that a person will be subsidized by an amount of R88,79 on a loan of R40 000 is also an example of the problem with this policy. The man who can afford to negotiate a loan of R40 000 to buy a house will be subsidized to the tune of R88,79, whereas a person who is unable to afford a house at all on the same scale will receive far less. In fact I think the scale should be inverted. It ought to be the case that a person who can easily afford a house should receive a smaller subsidy, and a person who has greater difficulty affording a house should receive a bigger subsidy. I propose that the subsidy be a constant amount so that everyone who buys a house for less than R40 000 should receive a subsidy of R88,79. I think that would make the system far more equitable, because the people who have a loan smaller than R40 000 and who are still less able to afford being in a house will then have a greater incentive.

I want to mention a few facts about Durban. Many of the hon. members spoke about the housing of Indians in Durban, Cato Manor etc. There are 16 000 Indian families in Durban who were on the old waiting list, viz. about 80 000 people. According to studies carried out by the Durban City Council in 1981—the hon. the Minister must please not repeat that this is meaningless—87% of the people on the waiting list earn less than R250 per month. Studies carried out in October 1981 in Phoenix showed that 70% of the people earned less than R250 per month, whereas the household subsistence level in Durban is R282. In other words, more than 70% of those people are unable to afford a house a all, because on their income they can only live. That is why I say that to tell these people now that the State is not going to be involved at all in the provision of housing for them…

They must help themselves. After all, we help them with building material.

Yes, that is so. If we want to do something for Cato Manor I do not think we must throw it open entirely to private entrepreneurs, because it is certainly not expected of White entrepreneurs, for example, to do something in that market for the type of person with an income of about R300 to R400 per month. No speculation builder could supply that kind of market. If, then, we want to create an outlet for Indian business people who have money and want to utilize it, we must specify the formula, so that it will in fact be a business transaction for the Indian businessman, and so that the people who need the houses can also afford them.

I propose that we consider higher density for the Indian community, particularly with regard to families living together. This is one way of reducing the cost per bedroom. A second proposal is to impose a maximum on the cost of the initial house built so that the people will not only aim for the higher market. There are many plots in the vicinity of Durban that would be suitable for Indian people who can afford their own homes. Therefore, when we discuss the people of Cato Manor we are speaking about people who have a really urgent need for housing but who cannot afford it.

Mr. Chairman, with the little time at my disposal, the hon. member must please excuse me if I do not react to what he said.

It was a wonderful privilege to have been able to sit and listen, in this debate during the past two days, to the contributions of all the hon. members in this House. I think it is a good reflection of hon. members’ feelings. If we look back on the activities of the hon. the Minister, the hon. the Deputy Minister and the department during the past year, with a view to pinpointing a theme, we would perhaps be able to characterize it as a year of home-ownership for South Africa. It does not matter what means are adopted to make it possible for a person to own a house. Ways and means were created, and certain campaigns were launched, which set South Africa on a course towards giving as many people as possible the privilege of personal home-ownership, by some or other means, provided they were willing to work and do their share. The State cannot do everything, but it does create the opportunity for personal home-ownership. Therefore the overall congratulations of the House to the hon. the Minister and all the officials involved.

If the hon. the Minister and his department were to succeed in bringing the private sector and the individual together in a kind of partnership on this road we are travelling, the venture would simply have to succeed. It is true that from time to time the emphasis will have to be shifted. At times the major responsibility will rest with the private sector and at times with the individual. What the State’s role in this connection would be, would also have to be determined from time to time. The point, however, is that here we have a partnership that could have very positive results.

I want to touch upon an aspect which was mentioned in passing today and which is perhaps still being looked at the moment, particularly by the Venter Commission. This commission is investigating the possibility of the establishment of townships in South Africa. I gave evidence before this commission and advocated a matter that I should like to put to this House for consideration again this afternoon. I am referring to the question of the important role that can be played by private individuals in the provision of housing, without this costing the State one single cent.

I am referring to the present situation in South Africa involving new road networks and infrastructure such as railways. In my constituency, for example, roads to the north of the Magaliesberg, across a distance of 200 km from east to west, from De Wildt to Rustenburg, traverse very fertile areas which are densely populated but where the farms are not very big. Where that big highway is being built, small pieces of land to either side of the road become available. The owners then find themselves in the uncomfortable position that every 10 of 15 km there is some or other form of access or flyover enabling the owner to get to that patch of land. It is an impossible situation. As far as he is concerned it is a worthless piece of land. This afternoon I want to request that such owners be allowed to subdivide and transfer those small patches of land, that they be enabled to obtain them, to sell them if they want to, build a house there if they want to or give it to their children if they want to. My plea is therefore that the hon. the Minister and his colleagues from other departments—I know that it is not solely this hon. Minister who is involved, that it is not only legislation involving this hon. Minister’s department that has to be looked at, but that other Government departments are also involved—should do everything in their power to make this possible. This is not a situation that is unique to my constituency, for it occurs throughout South Africa, including the peri-urban areas. In this way it would also be possible to make thousands of new plots available in South Africa, plots that cannot be used at the moment. I predict that if this were to happen, we would be creating a new category of housing possibilities in South Africa. This would not only bring happiness and pleasure to those owners of farms or smallholdings, but also to thousands of young people. The older people on the farms would also like to build themselves lovely little houses on those patches of land, whilst the farm itself is given to the son who then takes over. We would thus be creating a category that would prove to be of great significance to South Africa in future.

The time allocated for my speech has virtually expired. I acknowledge that there are problems that can be foreseen. I would, however, like to sum up, in a nutshell, what the benefit to the State would be. It would not cost the State anything. It would create residential areas. It would eliminate the frustrations experienced by those people because of the fact that those pieces of land mean nothing to them because they cannot sell off the land, except by way of consolidation. Consolidation is, of course, the next best solution.

I want to propose that this matter be handled in exactly the same way as matters involving smallholdings in agricultural or smallholding areas. This means that the State does not have to furnish compulsory infrastructural services such as roads or electricity. Owners must be self-sufficient. They must be allowed to create facilities such as farm cafés, home industries, etc. That is surely the way to make it possible for those people to obtain their own property. It would be the responsibility of the owners to provide water.

I want to conclude by thanking the hon. the Minister very much. I also want to thank the hon. the Deputy Minister who, in the past year or two, has done a tremendous amount for Brits by the restructuring of the Sonop settlement. It cost between R4 million and R5 million. Thank you very much for that. In the future this is going to be a show-case for the Republic of South Africa. I also want to say thank you very much for the Rusoordtehuis vir bejaardes which is going to be constructed there at a cost of approximately R1 million. Let me also say thank you for the Oord vir Volwasse Verstandelikgestremdes which is a godsend for many parents in the PWV area because there is excellent provision made there for their children. I want to say thank you very much for the additional facilities to be made available for them there.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister will reply to the matters raised by the hon. member for Brits. I want to tell the hon. member that I recently paid a visit to that haven to which he referred and that I was particularly impressed by the work being done for those retarded people. I could see how happy those people were there.

The hon. the Minister will also reply in greater detail to the hon. member for Grey-town. This hon. member is the man with the fine name and the distorted views. The hon. member provided us with a series of facts concerning the Indians in Durban and furnished statistics relating to the income groups and the long waiting lists. The hon. member also said that there was a great deal of unutilized land. The hon. member omitted to mention, however, that 8 000 ha of this unutilized land in the vicinity of Durban, land on which buildings can be erected, were owned by Indians.

†The hon. member for Hillbrow, who is not here, has raised several matters which are being discussed in the Select Committee. He mentioned the question of rent control, the creation of affordable housing and conversion to sectional title. The hon. member for Hillbrow and the hon. member for Sea Point are both making a very valuable contribution in that Select Committee.

*The hon. member for Gezina inquired about the progress being made with the application for flats for the aged in Booysens Street. I take pleasure in saying that the planning has been completed by the city council and that the plans will shortly be submitted by the department to the National Housing Commission. We hope to be able to start erecting those buildings as soon as possible. The hon. member also spoke of the possibility of having a second unit on a plot. This is a matter about which I personally feel very strongly. I want to tell the hon. member that the Venter Commission is conducting a penetrating investigation into this matter.

I want to cross swords with the hon. member for Hercules—but not seriously. The hon. member referred to the Government Printing Works building which we want to preserve, and said that the building was not worth preserving, but that it should really be demolished. The hon. member used the words “conservation mania”. What we have, is not conservation mania, but a love of conservation. We love to preserve the buildings of particular architectural beauty and cultural historic value. We do not preserve them because they are old, but because they also have a particular significance. It is quite possible to convert that building in a completely functional way so as to make provision for publications of the Government Printer, whilst retaining the facade of the building. It always grieves me deeply whenever buildings with an old-world charm are demolished and replaced by architectural monstrosities.

†The hon. member for Umbilo mentioned that smaller blocks of flats rather than these huge blocks should be erected. I could not agree more with the hon. member. Huge blocks of flats are impersonal and cold and the inhabitants are mere numbers, unknown to their neighbours. Sociologically it is quite wrong. I agree with the hon. member.

The hon. member for Maitland referred to his constituency and the application made by the Housing League for flats for the aged and for a creche. I am happy to inform the hon. member that an amount has been allocated to the Housing League for the erection of 112 flats for the aged and a creche for 125 pupils.

*I want to make it very clear to the hon. member for Langlaagte that we probably feel much stronger about the interests of the Whites than he does. We make no secret of wanting to negotiate a safe place for the Whites in this country and that that is the reason for our adopting this particular style. The hon. member, however, is adopting a style which will result only in the destruction of everything. Everything built up by the Whites in this country over many generations will collapse with a resounding crash if the style of that hon. member were to gain the support of our people.

†Earlier in the year much publicity was given to the question of the future of the Groote Schuur zoo. Questions were put on the Question paper and there was much publicity in the Press. There was quite an outcry when we eventually sold the lions. I want to mention in passing that we have discovered that the lion market in this country is as dead as a doornail. We had to sell all those lions at a nominal price. The lions and the monkeys are well-cared for and are as happy—if that is an emotion which one can ascribe to them—as can be. This department is not in the zoo business and I believe that a cobbler should stick to his last. We had a very good look at the zoo. I wish to make this statement: I should like to avail myself of the opportunity to announce that the Department of Community Development is at present investigating the future of Groote Schuur zoo in consultation with all interested parties.

The zoo as it exists today is not acceptable and the hon. the Minister has therefore requested that in the course of the investigation particular attention be paid to the modern concept of the running of a zoo, the manner in which animals are kept in captivity as well as the functional home for such an undertaking.

I hold the view that there is a definite need amongst children, in particular those growing up in cities, to learn more about farm animals such as cattle, sheep, goats and poultry and I wonder whether the existing facilities should not rather be converted so as to recreate a farmyard atmosphere.

Such an amenity against the slopes of Table Mountain would in my view be welcomed by Capetonians.

*I should also like to make the following statement on the supply of furniture: I have pleasure in announcing that the Department of Community Development, in collaboration with the S. A. Bureau of Standards, has designed new and more functional office furniture for Government departments and that the furniture will in all probability be available during 1984.

In as much as it was necessary and desirable to rationalize the functions and organization of the Civil Service, it was also necessary to revise and adapt office accommodation and furniture in the interests of efficiency and a happy workers’ corps. New norms for office accommodation resulting in smaller and more efficient office units are envisaged.

In order to utilize the smaller office in a practical way and to the best advantage, a new range of furniture to replace the existing standard of office furniture has been designed and prototypes have been manufactured. These compact and functional items will be manufactured from raw materials which are freely available in the Republic by the department’s regular suppliers, namely the South African Prisons Service and Manpower (Service Products).

I am convinced that this positive contribution by the Department of Community Development will be to the advantage of one and all.

I have seen this furniture. It is most attractive and I am sure that our civil servants will be very happy with it.

I have reached the end of my speech. I want to thank hon. members most sincerely for their contributions. I want to address a very special word of heartfelt appreciation to the officials of this department. The officials are outstanding people with whom it is a great privilege to be associated.

Mr. Chairman, at the end of this debate I should also like to express my sincere appreciation to members on both sides of the House for their contributions. I did not agree with all the contributions, but of course we will not always agree on matters. Sometimes, though, it appeared to me as if we had too much time for the debate, because many matters were discussed and discussed again, which in my opinion was not necessary. In general, however, constructive contributions were made, and I thank hon. members for them.

I should also like to convey my sincere thanks to the two Deputy Ministers who assist me in this large department. Deputy Minister Cronjé and Deputy Minister Van der Walt gave me very valuable support, and they are very loyal. As a team, together with the officials, we try at all times to do our best.

I should also like to convey my sincere appreciation to the Director-General of the department, Mr. Van Blommestein, who at the beginning of this month completed his first successful year as Director-General of the department. I wish to tell him that not only do we appreciate his co-operation with the Ministers, but also the fact that he maintains a particularly positive attitude in the department so that we, who are also experiencing a staff shortage, are able to render the services which are being rendered. I want to thank hon. members, such as the hon. member for Brits, for the pleasing remarks which they made in this connection, and the hon. member for Losberg who in particular thanked Mr. Tocknell and the people at Acacia Park for what they had done. Hon. members discussed the créche and a few other matters I thought they would also discuss the fencing, the lighting and the new gate, but they did not say thank you for all those things. Nevertheless I thank hon. members for what they had to say about the officials.

I also wish to thank the various Deputy Director-Generals who are in charge of the various Directorates, such as Mr. Van der Vyver, the Deputy Director-General of State Auxiliary Services, Mr. McEnery, the Deputy Director-General of Community Development and Mr. Van Niekerk, the Deputy Director-General of Building Services, who is ill at the moment, for what they have done. It is no wonder that he is ill, because most of us work too hard. I also wish to thank the new chairman of the Housing Commission, Mr. Willie Marais, who is an excellent chairman, for the part he has played. I also wish to extend my sincere thanks to the Chief Director of Surveys and Mapping, Mr. van der Spuy, the Chief Registrar of Deeds, Mr. Du Toit, who is with us today and the Government Printer, Mr. Van Pletzen.

I also wish to convey my thanks to the staff of my own office and the staff of the parliamentary office for their esteemed services and for all the information which they obtain for me so that I can give hon. members meaningful answers. In this way I wish to convey my thanks to all the 17 091 officials working in the department. There are 17 091 people of all colours working in this department. Together with Mr. Kruger, who is now sitting above us here, we are now 17 092 people. To all of them I say thank you very much, whatever their task and however humble their contribution may be, for that contribution. I also wish to thank the hon. Whip, the hon. member for Roodepoort, for what he ultimately succeeded in doing, so that everyone who wanted to speak, was able to do so. At one stage I was afraid that he would not succeed, but I am used to Whips succeeding where other people normally fail. He has done so again, and I want to thank him very much.

†The hon. member for Maitland posed a few questions about second bonds and about a utility company to handle the administration of sectional title projects. The first question is not without implications and will have to be considered carefully. The second question is one which appears to have merits and we will give our careful attention to this matter to see what we can do, especially with regard to the new selling campaign. We shall look into this matter.

*The hon. member received a very satisfactory reply from the hon. the Deputy Minister. He received a great deal of money. I do not know whether we have that money, but I hope that the matter has been cleared up. What we promise, however, we deliver, unless the Cabinet prevents us from doing so, as in the case of Jeppe.

The hon. member for East London City made a very constructive speech in which he put many questions to me. The thing which upset him the most and to which I wish to reply briefly, had to do with the removals at Duncan Village. I was there and it is a difficult matter. The Coloured and the Indian group areas can only expand if we move the Black people out of certain parts of Duncan Village to Mdantsane. Now it is a fact that this very day, talks were held with the Department of Co-operation and Development on the clearing of Duncan Village. I hope that those talks will have positive results. As far as we are concerned, we have already spent R3 000 this year on the building of 500 low-cost houses for Coloureds at Buffalo Flats in East London and R2 million for the infrastructure required to build a further 500 houses. Altogether 1 000 houses are now going to be built there. This year it is costing us R5 million and next year it will cost R10 million. Eventually the project will cost approximately R13 million. That was the gist of the hon. member’s request.

The hon. member for De Kuilen made a very constructive contribution. One could hear that the hon. member had taken trouble to obtain details regarding the subject he wanted to discuss and that his facts were neatly presented in their correct order. I have great appreciation for the hon. member’s contribution. I am always glad to help him wherever I can in his own constituency, where he is experiencing many problems. We took note of the suggestions he made and the department will attend to them.

The hon. member for Umbilo has already received a reply from the hon. the Deputy Minister. On behalf of the hon. member for King William’s Town he referred here to the question of non-White managers. At the same time I can also reply to the hon. member for Green Point now. It is correct that Mr. Marais Steyn said at the time that the Government had decided in principle to do away with permits for non-White managers in White businesses. It is also true that the Government decided in principle on central business areas. The hon. member knows that we had difficulties in this connection. At one stage there was legislation before Parliament which was not passed that session. Subsequent efforts were made to introduce legislation, but the whole thing hinged on how the matter was to be implemented. I have stated repeatedly that these aspects were ultimately referred to a technical committee under Mr. Justice Strydom so that we could jointly consider all these aspects and regulations dealing with amendments to the Group Areas Act. There are other laws involved as well. We can then amend the Act properly, once and for all, as far as it is necessary. However, my department does not initiate complaints to the police. If a person contravenes the law, the Group Areas Act or a regulation, the people of my department are not there to play policeman and apprehend these people. Just as in the case of a person who commits any other contravention of the law, the law-enforcing agencies must take action against him. If a complaint is made, it is referred to the police, who have to follow up such matters. The officials of my department do not walk around in shops and other business undertakings to see who the manager is. We have never done so. Previously there have never been any complaints. During the past year, unfortunately, there were two complaints. In both cases these came from municipal officials. In Paarl the complaints came from officials of the town council. The town clerk laid an official complaint with my department. The first man to take us to task about this, for having referred the matter to the police for investigation, was the Mayor of Paarl. In Grahamstown it was an official of the town council who laid a charge on a letterhead of the town council. A junior official in my department unfortunately referred it to the police. In the meanwhile, however, we are dealing with the legislation until the changes are effected in the light of the White Paper published at the time. That is my reply to both hon. members.

Do you concede that no statutory amendment whatsoever is required to throw the matter open to a greater extent at this stage?

There are regulations based on provisions in laws, and those laws still have to be amended. In respect of central business areas there are aspects which still have to be investigated by the technical committee. I do not wish to go into the details of this matter now. The principle has been accepted….

Five years ago.

I do not know when it happened; it was before my time. The fact of the matter is that the department has in the meanwhile, in view of the resolution of the Riekert Commission, proceeded to open commercial districts in White areas to non-Whites. It was usually for Indians because it was only they who made use of this concession. A total of 30 such section 19 areas have already been thrown open. This happened in all the major centres, even in Pretoria. Apart from these 30 open commercial districts, there are also 47 plazas which we have built for Indians, most of which are in White areas. In other words, approximately 70 places in this country have already been thrown open and are places where Indians are already doing business in the White areas. In terms of the White Paper we are therefore implementing this guideline until such time as the statutory position is changed.

The hon. member for Umbilo also said that we should personally give a person a site. Very recently we began to do so. I want to tell the hon. member that what he advocated has already been done by us in Botha-sig and Pinetown. We are also doing this in respect of utility companies, and in future it will also be done in respect of individuals. I concede that the hon. member is correct on this score. The hon. member has already received a reply in connection with the small block of flats.

The hon. member for Langlaagte did not receive a reply from the hon the Deputy Minister. The hon. the Deputy Minister had something to say about him, and I wish to leave it at that. The hon. member is a member of the Township Establishment Commission, and I think he can make a very good contribution to the activities of that commission. I hope that he does so and I think that he will. All the matters which the hon. member raised here, could quite possibly be thrashed out on that commission. I am looking forward to the report of that commission. I understand that the second report of that commission will be available at the end of next month. I hope to receive it in time so that I can prepare legislation for the next session of Parliament. The hon. member put forward a certain idea pertaining to services. In earlier years the situation was as the hon. member pointed out, but the Niemann Commission and the Fouché Commission found that things could not be allowed to continue in that way. Perhaps Mr. Venter’s commission should devote further attention to this matter.

The hon. member for Algoa furnished an example here of how the government sector and the semi-government sector are doing their duty in respect of the provision of housing to all employees. It is an example to the private sector. I just want to say that where such organizations are providing housing, they should not buy up existing housing in which to accommodate their people but should endeavour to provide new housing. In respect of the other ideas which the hon. member raised here, on the development of open land belonging to town and city councils, I just want to say that such councils now have the power to raise special loans on the open market to undertake this kind of development. I cannot find fault with what the hon. member had to say about the standard of services, and I agree with him.

The hon. member for Brits discussed the partnership between the department and the private sector in connection with housing, and said that we should take a look at the pieces of wasteland which were created when roads were built. The subdivision of agricultural land, which falls under the Ministry of Agriculture, is involved here. As the hon. member for Maitland said, the Venter Commission is considering this matter sympathetically. There is also a committee in the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning which is investigating this aspect of the fragmentation of land. The findings of that committee of the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning will also be channelled to the Venter Commission.

The hon. member for Greytown discussed Cato Manor again, among other things. As far as public money is concerned, I can tell the hon. member that the State will be of assistance with overall planning. As regards the spending of public money there at the moment, I do not think it is a priority. I think there is sufficient capital among the Indians to develop that area themselves. But the question of subsidies raised by the hon. member is a matter for the Treasury. I shall refer this matter to the Treasury. However, it is not true that we only help people who earn less than R150. To the people who earn between R150 and R300 we provide building material loans. Any person can construct a decent house for himself there, with those building loans. He can ask the local authorities and we shall give it to him. To people earning more than R300, we give individual loans. We make arrangements enabling them to receive a loan from a building society. There is not a person in this country whom we cannot help. As I said a moment ago, when the hon. member was not here, of what avail is it if you wish to help everyone and do not even have the money to help those who earn less than R150 per month.

The hon. member for Hillbrow referred to quite a few matters, but he told me that I could reply to him on some other occasion. Inter alia he discussed rent control and in that regard he did receive a reply. That hon. member himself serves on the Select Committee investigating rent control and he need not have been so loquacious here. He could have raised his ideas on that committee. Why does he come here to waste our time by trying to elicit an answer? If he is so clever, let him give this Committee the answers.

As far as the Chinese are concerned, this is a matter which I have to raise now. There is only one Chinese group area in the country. As the Act reads today, a Chinese person has to receive a permit if he wishes to reside in a White area. Until such time as the law has been placed on the Statute Book and until such time as it has been amended, together with these other things, I have to issue that permit. The Chinese people usually receive it on request. Of course there are difficult cases. There are Chinese who married non-Whites in earlier years and this could create problems. At the moment however, it is still necessary to issue permits. They are freely issued.

The hon. member mentioned certain figures. Those figures relate to a year running from September to September. However, as regards the period January to December 1982, we erected 34 901 houses; in 1981, 26 216 houses; in 1980 approximately 27 000 and in 1979 approximately 30 000 houses. Consequently the hon. the Deputy Minister is quite right when he says that he built more houses last year than we had built in preceding years.

Mr. Chairman, I think that I have now replied to all the question. There is still one more question which the hon. member for Sea Point put and to which I wish to refer briefly. He asked for the deposits to be abolished in certain cases where 100% building society loans were granted. This is a matter which should be dealt with by the hon. the Minister of Finance and I shall ask the department to recommend for consideration that they should be abolished in certain cases. One cannot make a general rule of this matter, because not everyone needs it. There is a development among building societies as far as this matter is concerned, and we shall transmit this suggestion to the hon. the Minister of Finance for consideration.

What about Khayelitsha? When is a start going to be made and when will it be functional?

This is something which the hon. the member has on his mind, and he cannot sleep peacefully at night. Khayelitsha is an area in which a miracle is taking place. The chairman of the Housing Commission is one of the members of the team which have to prepare the area quickly. I think that with the help of the local authorities in the neighbourhood they are performing miracles. He tells me that the first 200 sites for the purposes for which they are required, viz. to resettle certain Black people, will be ready on 6 June. I think this ought to be good news to the hon. member.

Vote agreed to.