Mr Chairman, I move without notice:

Their daughter, Lesley Lucinda Lategan died in an accident at the tender age of 14 years. She celebrated her birthday on Thursday and passed away on Sunday.

The funeral arrangements are as follows: At home tomorrow, Wednesday, at 12h00 at 78 Bongo Crescent, Silvertown; at the church at 13h30 at St George Church, Calendula Road, Silvertown, Athlone.

One can say this little girl was a child of the LP. Her father and mother grew up within the LP; she was born into the LP and her young life was filled with enthusiasm for the things that we stand for, believe in and strive for. Her beautiful approach and her loving tenderness will certainly be remembered by many of us.

Mr Chairman, I wish on behalf of the Official Opposition to identify myself fully with the motion of the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council.

Mr Chairman, we learned with shock about the tragic death of the daughter of the hon member for Hanover Park. We would like to associate ourselves with the words of condolence expressed by the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council.

Agreed to unanimously.

Mr Chairman, I move without notice:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, I move without notice:

Agreed to unanimously.

Mr Chairman, I read that the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs had a birthday last week. I should like to congratulate him and wish him all the best for the coming year. South West Africa is still on his agenda, and we shall place several other minor matters on the agenda later.

Both during and after the interpellation debate on 11 April the hon the Minister and his fellow party members sorely resented the fact that we did not share in their euphoria with regard to the course of events in South West Africa. We were accused of having a warmongering attitude and it was said that only Swapo and ourselves were dissatisfied with the course of events.

We do not even reply to such absurd statements. In contrast to their euphoria, the CP adopted a wait-and-see attitude and we questioned the entire exercise in very unambiguous language. For us the proof of the pudding would lie in the eating. They were ecstatic because they had discovered the recipe.

We are reliant for our information on what we hear from the public media. What we receive from that quarter, such as the interviews with the Director-General of Foreign Affairs and the Chief of the SADF on Network, lead us to just one conclusion, and that is that Resolution 435 in its entirety is a hopeless mess, that no one can say what is going on and that the situation is in a state of extreme flux.

I want to make a few observations and I should like to hear what the hon the Minister has to say about them. Firstly, there is still an unknown number of Swapo insurgents in the north of South West Africa and they have made good use of the 60 hours in which the South West African and South African security forces were confined to bases, to conceal their weapons and uniforms and to disappear without a trace among the local population, from where they may appear at any opportune time to sow terror or to become involved politically.

Secondly, there is no certainty whatsoever regarding the number of insurgents who have gone back over the border, to say nothing of whether all Swapos in Angola are north of the 16th parallel and are remaining there. Rapport says no, there is a large concentration of terrorists 60 km north of the border, and 200 members of Plan, Swapo’s military wing, have been deployed at Mahenene, just north of the border.

Thirdly, the Untag forces are visibly pro-Swapo and nothing has come of their so-called impartiality. The reason for this lies in the fact that the whole of Resolution 435 is loaded against South Africa, that the UN, despite resolutions to the contrary, is pro-Swapo and anti-South Africa, and that Untag has been sent here to monitor not so much Swapo, as South Africa and South West Africa. Now Untag finds itself in precisely the opposite situation and it cannot handle it. There is one thing it cannot conceal, however, and that is its partiality towards Swapo. Sunday’s edition of Rapport had a whole story on this, under the heading “Untag se optrede skep krisis”. Worst of all, no remedy whatsoever has been negotiated by South Africa for such a situation.

My fourth observation is this: The timetable for the implementation of Resolution 435 has gone totally by the board and this means that Resolution 435 itself is as dead as a dodo. Absolutely nothing has come in practice of the assembly points in terms of the Mount Etjo agreement.

The chief of the SADF believes that lost time can be made up. That is true, but at what cost to South Africa as a result of the total helplessness of the UN and the treachery of Swapo; on the contrary, even the censored news from South West Africa contains reports of the tracks of at least two apparently new groups of insurgents which are still leading southwards, of skirmishes which are still taking place and of people who are still dying.

My sixth observation is that confidence in the entire exercise is in tatters. That is the only picture of South West Africa that we can sketch at the moment, and in retrospect I do not regret the absence of any premature euphoria among my party with regard to what is going on in South West Africa at present.

Where do we go from here? I do not believe that the South African Government can turn back, even if it should wish to do so. As I have said, the UN is firmly in the saddle, with a representative of the Secretary-General in Windhoek, and Untag on land and in the air. South Africa is caught up in a situation in which it is simply going through certain motions and uttering certain words at a given moment, sometimes even words of protest and threats. Meanwhile the days are passing by, one by one, leading towards 1 November and an election, regardless of whether or not Swapo remains north of the 16th parallel; regardless of whether or not Untag is biased.

The chief of the SADF made an admission on Sunday evening. He said:

In the light of that admission I say that we are faced with a fait accompli in South West Africa. South West Africa and its people have been handed over by this Government to the UN, and quite probably to Swapo as well.

In conclusion I want to put one last question to the hon the Minister. Last Sunday’s edition of Rapport contained a report on “Pik se paartie”, which must have been a feast, judging by the menu, the wine list and the guest list. I shall not comment on the fact that the hon the Minister does, in fact, entertain. Not only is that his prerogative, but it is sometimes a very onerous official duty. What is not clear, however, is whether anything was celebrated, and if something relating to South West Africa was celebrated, I should like to know what has happened in South West Africa to give South Africa cause to celebrate at this stage.

If there is something to celebrate, the people would probably like to join in the celebrations. Would the hon the Minister not like to recommend to his Cabinet colleagues that the South African election should take place about a week after South West Africa’s election has ended?

Mr Chairman, I shall, in the course of my speech, refer to what the hon member for Soutpansberg said

†As always, it is a pleasure to take part in the debate of the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs. On behalf of my party—the LP of South Africa—I wish to congratulate him on the work that he and his department did in the past year, particularly in bringing peace to the African sub-continent. Let me hasten to add that we do not necessarily agree with all they did or all they said. However, regardless of whatever the prophets of doom might say—this afternoon we once again heard the hon member for Soutpansberg—regardless of what the bitter right-wing in this country might say, we believe that history will show that the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and his team did their damndest for South Africa. [Interjections.]

*We believe that if we have South Africa’s interests at heart, we will seek peace. We in South Africa are seeking peace at almost all costs. We are seeking peace so desperately that we have been fighting for it. We are seeking peace so desperately that over the past year we have sat around the negotiating table with some of our greatest enemies.

†Let me remind this Committee of the words of the American Wendel Phillips when he said:

Therefore the LP dismisses with contempt the repeated calls by the CP for the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs to resign because of the peace agreement his team reached on the Namibian issue. Unlike the CP we were not so naive as to believe that this agreement would lead to a situation where the frustrations and the mistrust built up over the years would disappear overnight. We also believe that South Africans in general share this view.

We also believe that peace is a painstaking process, that it is a pricey process and, like parliamentary democracy, a slow process. In Africa the attainment of peace is not a luxury; it is a must if the continent wishes to bring justice and prosperity to all its inhabitants. There can be no peace without justice, and justice will only be accepted as having been done when there is lasting peace. And so, for his peace initiatives and for bringing Namibia along the road to independence we applaud the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs. [Interjections.]

*I should like to read to the hon the Minister a few lines from Totius’s “Besembos”, because I believe it also portrays the life of the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs over the past ten years, especially where Totius says:

[Interjections.] For the information of the right wing both in Namibia and in South Africa, let me emphasise that the quest for independence on the part of the people of Namibia will not be checked. It does not matter whether a procession of 10 or hundreds of cars to Pretoria is organised; the burning desire for independence and the burning nationalist feeling on the part of the Namibians cannot be suppressed. Remember, Namibia has never belonged to South Africa. Namibia will only belong to South Africa at the cost of the blood of thousands upon thousands of South Africans.

I am ashamed of the fact that there are members sitting in this Parliament who have no qualms about pursuing the short-sighted and pitiful objective of securing Namibia for South Africa, no matter how acceptable they try to make it sound.

†While we congratulate the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs we cannot help reminding ourselves that his very own party in the past possibly helped to create the spirit of White self-expectation which the extremely rightist White people of Namibia and South Africa are so earnestly yearning for—a self-expectancy which communes with the raw gut emotions of those Whites whose innermost beings it has inhabited over decades. Therefore we can understand their almost hysterical call for the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs to resign.

It can, on the other hand, be said that by its recent actions on the diplomatic front the Government of the day has bought valuable time for South and Southern Africa.

We meet here today as part of the world in a sense remains hostile, while in other parts there is renewed hope. In the recent past there have been encouraging views from within South Africa which will lessen, we hope, the hon the Minister’s burden.

*The progress that will be made at diplomatic level will depend, firstly, on the extent to which we ourselves are prepared to strive for a new South Africa.

†The way in which the world reacts to South Africa depends on the way in which we act towards ourselves. To be fully accepted in the community of nations we must move from the apartheid situation which has bred its own legacy of mistrust, bitterness and prejudice. To be accepted back into the world community we cannot merely adapt South African society; we must transform South African society.

The policies of the past 40 years have led South Africa into an international political wilderness. We believe that if one concentrates one’s energies on promoting narrow self-interests, one undermines the spirit of a broader South Africanism in the process. It would not be realistic or fair to put all the blame for our world acceptance situation, however, on the NP’s shoulders.

It is also true, however, that their policies and the local situations they created gave support to that roaming band of clerics who sing the disinvestment song while their fellow Blacks face the economic consequences.

During the past week we have seen the situation with Mobil. It can and must be said of the doctrinaire of strict separation that it brings to communities and individuals alike untold misery and creates great bitterness. In the outside world it generates a universal loathing which will influence events for decades to come. Therefore we cannot understand that in today’s day and age a party such as the CP can still long for that past.

We must never forget that our major trading partners are extremely sensitive to developments within our own country. In the past internal events and State action have given impetus to the pro-sanctions movements, particularly in the United States.

*I appeal to the hon the Minister to obtain the co-operation of his colleagues so that he will be able to say with justification that what happened during the past era was not in vain.

†We must call on all South Africans to be painfully honest with each other. The hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs must impress on his Cabinet and party colleagues that they should inform all South Africans, including White South Africans, about the realities and aspirations of all South Africans.

There are fundamental differences, inequalities and injustices in our society. I am realistic enough to realize that in a complex society such as ours conflict will be removed with great difficulty. Instead, we should be actively working towards the constructive accommodation of conflict. We should work towards a point at which we can live together with the least amount of conflict and violence.

Privileged South Africans have greatly resented the world focus of the past decade. The privileged section has quite rightly pointed out that although this world attention, came at a time when there were changes to the South African way of life, these changes were generally ignored by the outside world.

In the most recent past there has, however, been a more sophisticated understanding of the dynamics of South African society by some of the world’s leading Western nations. We must always remember, while the pressure for sanctions is likely to lessen with time, the pressure for fundamental change against what is perceived as apartheid will continue. That is the environment in which the hon the Minister will work in the ensuing year.

Let me briefly allude to the Storm affair. While we fully understand the need to acquire arms technology and while we accept the assurances of the hon the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defence that the South African Government was not involved in selling arms by whatever means to a terrorist organisation, we nevertheless call on the Government as a matter of urgency to clear up this matter and take the necessary action if need be. South Africa does not need this type of embarrassing situation, especially with a nation such as Britain.

Let us turn to another area in which South Africa has recently stood in the dock. In the past week, South Africa has denied any involvement in the continuing destructive Mozambique civil strife. The Government has explicitly denied any involvement. Let us accept the South African Government’s word, but let us then in the same breath ask: Who are the people who are financially and otherwise helping the Renamo bandits? If any such people or groupings are living in South Africa then action must be taken against them. Without South African help there is no way in which Mozambique can survive. The time has come for South Africa to do more than just sign accords. Now is the time when action is needed.

Let me also briefly touch on the subject of Russian, American and Cuban involvement in Africa. While I will be amongst the first to call on them to leave the Southern cone of Africa, I am fully aware of both the constructive and destructive roles these groupings play. I believe that the new Russian policy of forcing client countries and groupings to pay cash for arms will lessen tensions in the sub-continent. However, an exception is likely to be Angola, where the Cabinda oilfields are providing a cash boom. The tragedy, however, is that this money is being wasted to secure a government and not to develop Angola.

If we are going to see less Russian involvement, we are also going to see less American involvement. The joker in the pack is, however, Cuba, which has been involved in Africa, not Angola, since 1963. Let us not forget that Cuba has flexibility in foreign policy. It is at the same time a Third World country, a Soviet Bloc country and an underdeveloped country. To disregard Cuba as just another backward country would be making an extreme mistake.

The hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs of South Africa has an extremely difficult task. He must deal with a hostile world. He must deal with countries each of which has its own agenda for relations with South Africa. Above all he must do all his dealings while at the same time trying to convince his colleagues within South Africa that the ways of the past cannot suffice in the world of tomorrow.

*As Totius would have said:

Mr Chairman, what a contrast it was to listen to the hon member for Diamant with his positive approach compared to the very negative attitude taken by the hon member for Soutpansberg this afternoon! Notwithstanding the negative remarks of the hon member for Soutpansberg. I would like to say that it was a tremendous experience to be present as one of the guests at the reception given by the hon the Minister in honour of the Third Meeting of the Joint Commission on South West Africa/Namibia. I would like to say that the divergent complement of guests including Angola, Cuba, South Africa, Russia, the United States of America, diplomats accredited to the RSA from all over the world and representatives of the United Nations Organisation was a remarkable achievement on its own. Without stealing the thunder of the hon the Minister I would like to say that what made a. lasting impression on me and all the guests present at that evening was the meaning contained in the special label on the wine presented—a sketch of a sundial with the Latin words Peruent Et Imputandor. Without going into the details as ably presented by the hon the Minister the meaning appropriately gives credit to the decades, years, months and hours of dedication: “Hours gone by were not wasted”.

How appropriate to describe the relentless efforts of the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Pik Botha, his Deputy Mr Kobus Meiring, the Director-General, Mr Neil van Heerden, their staff, every diplomat abroad and all the people working at the desks in the Department of Foreign Affairs, working under extreme difficult circumstances and, at times, the worst possible provocation, to put South Africa’s case to the international community!

What a triumphant success—notwithstanding what the hon member for Soutpansberg says— do we not presently experience in regard to South West Africa/Namibia? For how many decades now have we not experienced an artificial divide in Africa?

But— the remarkable change in the political climate did not pop up like a mushroom overnight. Oh, no! The most difficult circumstances prevailed—short notice at times, preparation overnight, teams that had to be sent off in advance into Africa to arrange accommodation, to arrange security, communication lines, direct satellite communication at times—only due to the South African technological development— international travel ranging up to 800 kilometres per week, not always in the most comfortable circumstances, away from families for days and suffering illness in foreign countries—all this, whilst normal busy programmes inside South Africa still remained their priority.

I would like to give an example of the schedule of the Director-General from March 1988 up to date. It is breathtaking if one looks at the dates—in a period of 12 months to Geneva, Washington, London, Brazzaville, Cairo, New York, Geneva, Brazzaville, Brazzaville again, again to Brazzaville, New York, Zurich, Geneva, Brazzaville, Brazzaville, New York, New York, Luanda, Havana, Mount Etjo, Rua-cana; all this in a period of 12 months! I would like say this is an achievement on its own. When we look at the same situation comparing the schedule of the hon the Minister we see that basically the same thing is happening to him and in many cases also to our hon Deputy Minister.

Whilst we are riding the crest of the wave, whilst we are experiencing South Africa on high ground we must not let slip this particular opportunity to the best advantage of South Africa. Of course South Africa embarked on the road of reform politically and socio-economically.

The SA Defence Force played a major role to ensure a calm atmosphere within which negotiations could take place. Our SA Police Force secured law and order but it was our Foreign Affairs Department under the leadership of the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and his advisers which, when the opportunity reared its head, seized the moment—though with the necessary caution but with the required sense of urgency—to bring finality to the long awaited peace initiatives that we were waiting for in South West Africa.

I have no doubt that this tremendous development will have a spillover for South Africa. South Africa is tired of war. Southern Africa is desperately seeking economic improvement. Southern Africa is eager for peace. Fortunately for us those who orchestrated violence from outside and those who unnecessarily interfered from abroad in developments in Southern Africa have made way for something better. Both the Nkomati Accord and the implementation of Resolution 435 made it more difficult for the ANC to pursue its acts of terrorism.

South Africa has given a clear lead to Africa, confrontation has made way for negotiation and Africa seems to be interested in following this guide. The world recognises South Africa’s initiatives. We must continue to play this leading role.

We have experienced the steadfastness of Swaziland, the changes that have taken place in Lesotho, the caution in Botswana, the turning point in Mozambique since the Nkomati Accord, the understanding of a country like Zaire, the decrease in aggression from Zambia and a friendlier face from Africa. The only odd man out appears to be Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe and perhaps somebody can talk some sense into him. Any objective evaluation by reasonable, responsible people will admit the efforts and the role played by the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and this department. I want to plead that we should not let this opportunity slip through our fingers.

Now I want to say three things which must not be misinterpreted. We all appreciate the difficulties in relation to releasing Mr Nelson Mandela. We all understand the importance of the present state of emergency. We all acknowledge the reasons and the problems related to detention without trial. If there is, however, the slightest possibility of resolving these obstacles standing in the way of political negotiation and international recognition, my plea is that we should re-examine our strategy. I have the necessary faith in the NP Government with its responsible and balanced approach, as has been proved in South West Africa.

South Africa has come a long way to prove its bona fides to the international community, and especially to Africa. We have proved that we are not the aggressor we have always been made out to be. We are positively seeking peaceful and lasting solutions. We want to play a meaningful role in South and Southern Africa, and we want to remain part of the international community. Our actions in South West Africa are proof of just that. Negotiation is the answer, also for the Republic of South Africa.

To my mind, however, a tragic situation is the pathetic exploitation of a most delicate, a most sensitive, a most urgent situation for short-term party-political gain by a bankrupt Official Opposition in the House of Assembly. [Interjections.]

*Mr Chairman, the hon member for Soutpansberg attempted to score a few political points here again this afternoon with regard to the detail of the events surrounding the implementation of Resolution 435. No one—most certainly no one in the Government—is standing back with folded arms and saying that things must simply take their course in so far as the implementation of Resolution 435 is concerned. We are aware of the dangers. We are aware of the difficulties we have to contend with in keeping this train on the tracks. However, surely a little credit should also be forthcoming from the CP.

In my humble opinion the greatest triumph of the past few decades lies precisely in what has happened in South West Africa. It is a turning point. The reaction of the CP, through its hon leader, simply amazes one all the more. I am tempted to say: “We look upon them more in sorrow than in anger”. The further outburst over the past weekend by the hon the leader of the CP in connection with his allegation that we were now ostensibly trusting Russia, is really and truly so irrelevant with regard to what is happening in South West Africa that one really ought to ignore it.

Of course, they are doing this for one reason only, and that is to stir up people’s emotions once again and to attempt to exploit a situation. [Interjections.]

What, then, has become of the total onslaught? Where is it now? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I ask the hon members of the CP when this Government and this hon Minister have placed reliance, in any discussion, either in South West Africa or outside it, upon this so-called trust in Russia. I want to ask those hon members the following question. When there was an indication that Russia wanted to pull out of Angola, when a willingness emerged on the part of Cuba to withdraw from Angola, should we have seized that opportunity for peace or should we have prolonged the state of hostilities there?

With reference to the first reaction of the hon leader of the CP—that declaration of war of his on television—and in view of what has happened subsequently, up until today, we want to ask them what has become of those arguments. Should we still suspend Resolution 435 in South West Africa? Should we still chase Untag out of South West Africa?

We said that there had already been a de facto suspension of Resolution 435! [Interjections.]

Should we once again make a full-scale return to South West Africa with our Defence Force? [Interjections.]

Come on, answer these questions! [Interjections.]

This small right-wing group is so bankrupt that they seize upon anything that could possibly serve as an embarrassment to the Government. They are so obsessed with this that they do not for one moment take South Africa’s interests into account. [Interjections.] Just imagine, Sir, a CP in power in South Africa. Resolution 435 out of the window. Confrontation with the UN once again in our midst. The entire Western World placing sanctions on us. Africa and the frontline states once again up in arms. Peace in South West Africa taboo. Our Defence Force back in a conventional war situation. The Cubans once again moving southwards instead of returning to Cuba. The Russians once again forced back into Southern Africa. Can you imagine, Sir, what would happen to South Africa then?

Then they come along with this story that we ostensibly trust the Russians. It is so absurd that it is not even worth the trouble of responding to. [Interjections.] We say to the Government—we on this side of the House—there is the agreement, the result of 12 months of negotiation since the first discussion in London. There have been, and will yet be many problems, but we appeal to the hon the Minister to adhere to this agreement and to make every effort to hold the other parties to the agreement. Our people want to withdraw from South West Africa. They want to see South West Africa independent. During this period leading up to independence South West Africa is in very good hands and hon members on that side of the House would do well to go and take another look at the agreement.

South Africa remains in full control until the day of independence, and after the election a constitution will have to be negotiated by a two-thirds majority. Swapol remains in full control of the security situation. The most important point is that Swapo is no longer “the sole and authentic representative of the people of Namibia” in terms of the pronouncements of the UN. The agreement is being confirmed by the world and by Africa.

The short-sightedness, irresponsibility and rashness of that side of the House is rejected by this side of the House!

We on this side of the House would like to take this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister and his department, and to wish them the strength and good fortune they will need for the great and comprehensive task which they have to perform on behalf of South Africa.

Mr Chairman, on this occasion one cannot neglect referring to the office of the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, to the hon the Minister and to his officials right down from the Director-General Mr Van Heer-den, I want to take this opportunity on behalf of my party to extend to the hon the Minister and his departmental officials our congratulations on the fact that over the past few months, in difficult negotiations, they have been able to keep the South West Africa/Namibian negotiations on course despite enormous challenges which have been presented from time to time.

I also want to say that it has taken South Africa a long time but at last we have proved to the world that there are many groups and peoples in South West Africa, all of whom have a rightful claim to be recognised as part of the people of that territory, and that the climate and conditions will be created whereby all of those who commit themselves to Namibia will be given the opportunity of participating in elections and contributing to the progress and prosperity of that land.

Mr Chairman, I was also present, along with some parliamentary colleagues, at Friday night’s function and, being an optimist—I have always been an optimist—my optimism was reinforced by the short discussions that I held with the leaders and members of the various delegations that were present there. There was not very much time to enter into long discussions but it became abundantly clear that a new understanding of South Africa and its problems is emerging. Provided that we keep on track and work towards realising the goals that we have committed ourselves to in this Parliament, I believe that we will have the opportunity of finding a solution not only to the question of Namibia but also to the main problem of South Africa and that is the constitutional impasse.

I believe that the manner in which our hon Foreign Affairs Minister and his officials, acting on behalf of the Government of South Africa, have been able to adhere statesmanlike to negotiations, and to show understanding for some of the problems that have been brought to the fore over which we have no control, has enhanced the image of this nation in the eyes of the statesmen of the world. We can only earn great respect by our tolerance and understanding.

No sooner were we receiving plaudits in the newspapers when somebody was already starting to write a different kind of a story. I am glad that story has been cast in the wastepaper basket. The truth has again been reaffirmed by the representatives of the Joint Commission after their visit to South Africa and the discussions they had here. It is a constant challenge that we face and each challenge presents a wonderful opportunity. As we overcome these challenges we enhance the image of our country and our people. Our desire is to seek peace and to work for what is true and correct in Namibia.

I want to say that we have dreamt about Southern Africa and we talk about it. We talk about the opportunities and the challenges of finding oneness in Southern Africa. I believe that it is not a dream. It is the truth that we have to address and overcome to make it reality. My brief discussions with the representatives who were present here in Cape Town made it absolutely clear that Southern Africa is a region which has to work together and think alike, not politically but for economic survival. That reality is dawning and this country must assume the role of leader in making that a reality.

When these issues are resolved, I would like to see a Southern African economic community so that the people of Southern Africa, who have an abundance of natural resources, do not suffer a second form of colonialism—an economic colonialism where they are exploited by the richer nations of the world. We need to market the resources of this land collectively so that everybody gets a fair price for the commodities on which they depend for their economic and social upliftment. I think that this is a God-given duty and this country can make a contribution in that direction. Things like these will bring about a unity of purpose and harmony among the peoples of this region. It is a real challenge and opportunity.

We tend to export all our raw materials, whether produced in Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Zaire, Zambia, South Africa or Namibia. Surely there will be wisdom, statemenship and leadership forthcoming from all these countries in saying that we should process these raw materials further by situating the processing plants in the most ideal locations so that all of us can get more money from the goods that leave our land. This is not beyond realisation but it is a challenge.

Like any other challenge it will require us to bring out our best in every sphere of activity. I see this as a reality because no country can afford to help Southern Africa as much as South Africa because we are the workshop of this region. We can fly an engineer to Zaire or Angola in one and a half hours as opposed to them coming from Czechoslovakia or Hungary or somewhere else in the world. We have the means of communicating with these people and we must be able to address this problem seriously.

I also want to refer to Mozambique. I was heartened by the reports that appeared in the Press that there is a possibility that much of the property that was lost to South Africans of all race groups may be discussed. I sincerely trust that the hon our Minister of Foreign Affairs will take up this matter and that an equitable solution will be found which will encourage South Africans to make a greater contribution towards the rehabilitation of that country to get its commerce and industry moving again. That in turn will create a chain reaction onto which the people of Mozambique can link and they can progress on a broad base, whether it is industrially or agriculturally. That potential is there.

There is understanding because of the fact that we are talking. Suspicion and doubt will certainly give way to more understanding, despite the fact that the name of Renamo always drops in like a bottle of blue ink on a white shirt. We also have to address that challenge and once and for all we have to remove any doubts that may exist about our bona fides in our dealings with Mozambique. I sincerely trust that the opportunity will soon arise for the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs to address this nation, the peoples of this region and the world so that these doubts can be removed once and for all.

I noticed that back in the United States the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also known as the Africa Committee, is soon to have hearings on the nomination of a gentleman who will represent Africa and the work that is done in this area. This also means that the question of further sanctions against South Africa will come up for discussion in the United States. All I want to say is that when the Americans listen to people, whether they be clerics or others, who influence the thinking in the United States, and who cause that nation to impose sanctions on our country, they must honestly ask themselves whether they are listening to people who have the credentials to speak about the needs of the people of colour in South Africa, and whether the suggestions and recommendations that were made and implemented have brought forth any positive results which have enhanced the wellbeing of the people of colour in South Africa.

Let them ask themselves whether the moving away of Mobil from South Africa helped any man of colour in this country. If their answers are in the negative, then they must deter for all time those advisors who have had the freedom to move on Capitol Hill and influence people to take decisions against South Africa not based on facts but based on dreams. A man who calls for sanctions but who does not do an honest day’s work in a factory or a shop and earn his keep, has no right to speak about those who will suffer as a result of sanctions and those who have to work and sweat to earn their keep. Only a man who starts work at seven o’clock in a factory, who perspires, who looks forward to going home at five o’clock and takes home his pay-packet on a Friday can give the answer as to whether or not sanctions should be imposed against this country, and whether he wants to stay home without a pay-packet to feed his family. No cleric can claim the right to speak about that because he does not have to work for a living. Other people pay for his keep and it is important that he should be reminded about it.

I sincerely trust that the new American administration will ask those people who advise against sanctions, how positive action can be taken by the United States if they are really interested in peace in this part of Southern Africa and if they are really interested in the well-being of the people of colour. Ask the man of colour who has pulled himself up by his own bootstraps. They must tell us what to do so that we can help our people. Within the ranks of the Indian, Coloured and Black communities there are men who despite the conditions prevailing in this country have been able to pull themselves up and be leaders within their communities. They are the kind of advisors who should be able to offer advice based on experience and not university trash or books written by economists. Ask the man who in South Africa in the face of a colour bar and all kinds of restrictions has made progress. His book is the book that the Americans should use to find answers to our problems in this country. Nobody else has the right to speak for us. Let them speak to the people of colour because they alone know their pains and the cures that they will require. If one wants to do something, do it on the basis of the recommendations of the people who are involved and who, despite the problems and challenges in this country, are making progress slowly but surely. If the United States wants to increase the pace of that progress, then let them introduce the inputs the people want and not what they think is right.

I also support, like everybody else in this Committee, what was said here earlier by a speaker for the NP, and that is that we cannot have any fixations about anything. Nothing is just fixed and will not change. Only a nation and people who are big enough to adapt and to change on an on-going basis will survive.

I believe that I can pay a compliment to the Government today because many of the things that were never to be changed are now dead and buried. This is a good thing and they must be complimented for that. It is only on the basis of accepting realities and changing and changing again because the previous change needs to be processed further, that they will win the support of the people.

The compliments that the hon LP member paid the hon the Minister this afternoon were sincere compliments, because the hon the Minister has been doing a job of work that makes us all feel proud. It also gives hope to those of us who have come here in the face of criticism, in the knowledge that working together we will, at some time or other, find one another and work towards the realisation of that final goal, the day when the South Africans in this House will be representative of every sector of South African society and when Black, White, Indian and Coloured will be able to stand up here with one voice and state the feelings of South Africans, whether we are in opposition or in Government.

There comes a time in the history of a nation when politics must be cast out of Parliament and the future of one’s country becomes the one thing which must be talked about. That day will come in this country, but I hope that by then we in this Parliament will have achieved oneness and all South Africans will be represented. I also hope that, despite what has been said by the hon the State President, we will see the release of Nelson Mandela, so that he can make the kind of contribution that we expect him to make.

We will see too that those people abroad—here I refer again to the Prime Minister of Great Britain—will use their influence at the right times and in the right places, so that when talks about a new constitutional framework take place in South Africa, they will have the blessing of all peace-loving people in South Africa, because that is necessary. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, my comments on Namibia are going to be brief, not because Namibia is not of critical importance to all of us in South Africa and in the Southern African region, but because this matter has been dealt with by myself and other speakers on behalf of our party. We are pleased that Resolution 435 is in the process of being implemented; we want to see South West Africa/Namibia independent; and we realise that there will be problems and dangers and that there may have to be adaptations in the process of implementing Resolution 435.

However, based on the performance of those people who have been handling the implementation on behalf of South Africa over the past few weeks, we have no reason to believe that those problems are not going to be overcome with skill and determination. We will leave the matter at that for the moment.

I suppose that if we are looking at the global scene, last year was perhaps the most important and constructive year in the field of international relationships since the end of World War II. Gorbachev’s policy of perestroika and his meeting with Western leaders such as President Reagan and Prime Minister Thatcher have effectively brought to an end a 40-year-old cold war syndrome and have foreshadowed a new era in East-West relationships.

In the wake of this East-West detente there has without doubt been a marked scaling down of regional tension and conflict. The nuclear missile reduction treaty in Europe, the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, the end of the Iran-Iraq war and the Vietnamese commitment to withdrawal from Campuchia are all important regional settlements far away from this subcontinent.

Nearer home, however, we have had the reaffirmation of the Nkomati Accord and the Geneva Agreement between Cuba, Angola and South Africa, which not only set the scene for the implementation of the Namibian independence process through Resolution 435, but also involves the withdrawal of all foreign forces, including 50 000 Cubans from Angola. Perhaps more important for the future, it involves an agreement on the basis for regional co-existence and co-operation in future. We believe that this third leg of the agreement is of tremendous importance.

An important by-product of all of this has been that the Government appears at last to have abandoned what I call the total onslaught theory and its concomitant propaganda in that regard. In fairness I must say that the Department of Foreign Affairs appeared to drop this total onslaught syndrome a couple of years ago, but now the hon the Minister of Defence has followed suit.

I hope that this total onslaught theory is well and truly buried and that South Africans will be able to deal with their internal problems in a more rational, more analytical and more objective way.

We will have to come to realise that while our internal problems have been aggravated by some people and some countries outside of South Africa—yes, there have been people who have aggravated our problems—our problems in South Africa do not originate in Moscow, but in Pretoria and in Cape Town. They have their origins in our own failure to abolish apartheid and to evolve a political system through which the majority of our citizens can participate as citizens in the central Government of their country.

The hon Minister of Foreign Affairs and his officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs have achieved much for South Africa in the field of international affairs over the past year. There is no doubt that the international climate has improved. There is no doubt that the role which South Africa could play in this region has been recognized. There can also be no doubt that important new lines of communication have been opened up and that the prospects for peace and co-operation in this region have grown enormously over the course of the past year.

It is against this background of renewed opportunities for South Africa as the result of the improvement of the environment around South Africa and in the international world that it would be a tragedy if these opportunities where frittered away by the failure of the Government to carry out fundamental political reform inside South Africa. I thought that was what the hon member for Turffontein was suggesting, although not quite saying.

For close on four years the reality is that we have been stranded on the wrong side of the Government’s Rubicon. The hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs has sensed this. Even when making allowances for his natural exuberance on occasions this shows in the Press report of his Church at Piketberg. “Gevleuelde woorde” were spoken there. It was under the heading “A new era is heralded in South Africa.” I quote:

He then went on:

*He said further:

†I think this is superb stuff but then he went on and said:

And then he says this:

*And that after 41 years of an NP winter! And then the hon the Minister says that only the NP can bring those spring buds to the trees of South Africa. Winged words!

†However, I want to say that he should put his money where his mouth is. What is he doing inside his Government to see that this becomes a reality?

The other point is this. It would appear that the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs has come to appreciate the importance of the release of Mr Mandela within the context of getting the process of negotiation going. Here again there are reports in the Press, and he has not denied them, that he has had discussions with Mrs Thatcher on this very subject. On answering in the House of Commons after a meeting with Mr Botha, Die Burger said:

I think the hon the Minister must tell us what he did in fact say to Mrs Thatcher that could cause her to stand up in the British House of Commons and say “as a result of our meeting I believe he is going to be freed soon.” I want to know what he said, but what is more important, what is he doing in his own Government to make this a reality? That is what I want to know from him.

One has spoken about encouraging signs. I must just say this. Against the background of progress in the field of international relationships and just when South Africa’s diplomatic credibility is beginning to recover from the Government’s going back on its undertakings in respect of the Coventry Four, it is utterly distressing that we should now suffer another devastating blow in an affair which allegedly involves an Irish terrorist organisation, illegal arms trafficking and a South African diplomat.

Those are the allegations and would appear to be the facts which are before us. The incident has already caused three South African diplomats to be expelled from France. It certainly evoked the wrath of Mrs Thatcher and the British Government and I do not think any number of red roses are going to brush that anger away over this particular incident.

I must warn the Government that unless it acts swiftly, decisively and credibly in this matter, I believe untold damage is going to be done to South Africa’s status and effectiveness in the field of international diplomacy. Already the Government appears to be dragging its heels. The hon the Minister of Defence said that he hoped that the inquiry would have been finished by last weekend. I would have expected an official statement by then. I want to say this: They must act quickly and unequivocally and if heads must roll, then heads must roll. It cannot afford to be left where it is.

Let me say this against this background. It is generally accepted that arms dealing is a murky business and that arms procurement may often involve the use of clandestine methods. That is an accepted thing. The issue in this case is whether the trafficking was conducted in such a way that it promoted South Africa’s interests, or whether it was conducted in such a way that it damaged South Africa’s interests. I must put it to the hon the Minister: Would it be in South Africa’s interest for a South African agent acting under diplomatic immunity at a time when good relations exist with Mrs Thatcher’s government to acquire weaponry which was stolen from her government? Would that be in the interest of South Africa?

Secondly, would it be in the interests of South Africa for a diplomat to enter into a relationship with a terrorist organization operating in the UK, either for the supply or the acquisition of arms? Would that be good or not? Finally, would it be in South Africa’s interests to supply such an organisation directly or indirectly with either money or weapons that can be used to promote its terrorist activities in other countries? I would hope that in all of these the hon the Minister is going to be able to say that if any of these things were to happen it would be damaging for South Africa and we will accept responsibility and put it right. I do not think the matter can stand where it is and I hope the hon the Minister is going to deal with this in a definitive way.

There are specific issues which I believe the hon the Minister should deal with. This is a debate in which I would hope that we can find one another and that he can give us answers which can resolve the issue. It has been suggested that this gentleman might have exceeded his authority, in the words of the hon the Minister of Defence. This is one of this hon Minister’s servants—a diplomat. What was his authority? Who gave him that authority? Was the authority appropriate to someone who had the privilege of diplomatic immunity? Was his ambassador aware of that authority? Was the head of the department aware of that authority? Was the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs aware of that authority? I think it has to be cleared up in the interest of our diplomatic service.

It was then said that he might have exceeded his authority but who else was aware that he has exceeded his authority? Was this gentleman in collusion with anybody else in exceeding his authority? Was it the first time he had exceeded his authority and what checks have been instituted or were instituted to see that in fact authority in sensitive matters like this never could be exceeded? What one cannot have is a situation where individuals can exceed authority under the aegis of diplomatic representation.

If arms are supplied—and I want to end on a very serious note in this matter—clandestinely to arms dealers, what meaningful steps are taken to ensure that they do not find their way into the hands of organisations that engage in acts of, terror in other countries? There is always the risk but what is being done? Trading in arms we accept is a dangerous, murky business but bear in mind that once arms have been traded, once it has happened, it is not always possible to know against whom and by whom those very weapons are going to be used.

However embarrassing the situation may be, let me warn this Government that nothing will save it from the anger of the South African people if one day, through some carelessness or exceeding authority or through the activities of somebody on behalf of the South African Government, a South African serviceman is killed by a weapon which was manufactured or supplied by the Government of South Africa. I say this because it is an extraordinarily dangerous game and I believe the hon the Minister must state categorically what the Government’s attitude is on this matter.

Through all of this I believe that the members of the Department of Foreign Affairs have played an important role, not in this case, but in all of the events surrounding the past few months in foreign affairs. I want to come back and pay tribute to the work which has been done by the members and officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs. I believe that they are a credit to any country in the way in which they have dealt with our affairs over the past few months.

I would hope that attention is being given to see that in terms of the conditions of employment and the decline in the value of the rand, the conditions of service for foreign service officers are such that they will attract more and better people to that service. They are in a sense playing a critically important political role for South Africa and I believe that it is desperately important that the officials of our department should not be looked after in the sense that they are mollycoddled, but that the conditions of service are such that only the very best are attracted to our service and will continue to give the very best service to South Africa.

Mr Chairman, I shall only take a minute or two to make an announcement, in view of the gravity of the matter, in response to the questions which the hon member for Sea Point put to me regarding the incident in Paris. I think the hon member for Diamant and other hon members also referred to it.

I wish to say at this stage that the South African Government was not aware of any irregularities that might have been committed. Neither was the hon the Minister of Defence aware of them. The hon the Minister of Defence and I immediately issued statements when this incident came to light. My statement was submitted to Mrs Thatcher shortly before my colleague the hon the Minister of Finance visited her on 23 April.

The Government views this matter in a very serious light. I do not resent the hon member for Sea Point also viewing it in a very serious light. In fact, I would not resent any hon member viewing it in that light. However, I wish to give hon members the assurance today that the hon the Minister of Defence has ordered an urgent investigation into this entire matter. I think hon members will appreciate that he had to acquaint himself with the facts, owing to the gravity of this matter.

Just before we met here this afternoon, my colleague informed me that his investigation had now been finalised and that he would issue a statement as soon as possible. I should like to ask hon members, without putting a damper on the discussion, to give the hon the Minister of Defence a chance, if possible. His statement will be issued within the next 24 hours and, according to what I know about the matter, this will hopefully place the position in perspective. I also hope that it will answer most of the hon member for Sea Point’s questions.

Mr Chairman, while listening to some of the negative criticism directed at the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs I compared it to the hon the Minister’s track record and I was reminded of the remarks of the frustrated airline pilot who said he would love to soar like an eagle, but what could he do when he had to work with turkeys!

Are you talking about your party?

No, I’m talking about you and your father.

The universal prayer for peace in our time is very close to becoming a reality in our Southern continent. Therefore, anyone who deliberately attempts to jeopardise the peace process that is now under way must certainly incur the anger and even the hatred of the people of South Africa, South West Africa/Namibia and Angola. For them the implementation of Security Council Resolution 435 means so much in terms of future peace in the region. The decision on the part of the warring parties to talk peace has lead to a commitment on the part of all of them to make a solid contribution towards establishing that peace.

The exception, as we have come to learn, is Swapo. It may still have to pay a heavy price in the elections in South West Africa—scheduled for later this year—for going back on its word. This was done after signing the agreements providing for a cease-fire on the South West African border and the confinement of all Swapo forces north of the sixteenth parallel. Whatever trust Swapo might have built up among the peoples of the world for having displayed a seeming willingness to end the fighting and make peace has been destroyed by the incursion of hundreds of its armed men into Northern South West Africa and re-starting the war. Sam Nujo-ma’s breach of faith has already cost Swapo the lives of approximately 300 of its best young men. Who can trust him in the future? Even his own people will be asking the same question once they learn the full truth about the peace protocols and what was required of all the parties to the agreements.

The almost superhuman efforts on the part of the Joint Commission consisting of Angola, Cuba and the Republic of South Africa with the backing of the USA and the Soviet Union have succeeded in large measure in getting the peace process going again. But it is now a process heavy with suspicion of the other parties’ motives. Relations between Untag’s monitoring forces and the South West African Police have also been strained by the partiality shown by Untag towards Swapo. Allowing a political rally to be addressed by Swapo elements who should have been escorted into Angola en route to Angolan army bases north of the sixteenth parallel has not endeared certain Untag troops to the South West African forces. Nevertheless, I have no doubt in my mind that while South Africa is fully prepared for any untoward occurrence we will do everything in our power and within reason to keep the peace process from falling apart.

The moral ascendency achieved by South Africa in this process of bringing peace to our region has been due to the fact that South Africa has kept faith and stuck to its side of the bargain. It expects no less from all the other signatories to the peace agreements. Making peace and even keeping the peace are only the first steps towards the desired end of harvesting the fruits of peace. Here the hon the Minister has once again proved his mastery and grasp of events by already looking beyond the intricacies and difficulties of the unfolding peace process. The hon the Minister’s call for a Southern African Marshall Plan must be given the full backing of the South African Government and that of all the countries of our region. We have to convince the world of the desirability and necessity of such a plan of lasting peace is to be brought not only to our region but to the world as well.

US Secretary of State, George C Marshall, in an address on 5 June 1947 at Harvard University declared that US policy was directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. Thus was launched what became known as the Marshall Plan. It was designed by the provision of money and materials to help the recovery of Europe after the ravages of World War II.

According to history the Soviet Union did not participate in the plan either as beneficiary or donor. Therein lay the great weakness of the plan which failed to usher in a stable peace in Europe.

Western Europe’s economic revival as a result of the Marshall Plan was seen by the Soviets as a renewed threat. The Iron Curtain to keep the East in now replaced the Cordon Sanitaire which the victorious allied countries had thrown around Communist Russia after the First World War. Its purpose was to keep the red threat out of the West.

But the evidence is now piling up for all to see that the Soviet Union is signalling a willingness to assist in the peace process internationally. This is most evident to us in the role the USSR has played and is still playing in keeping Resolution 435 alive and moving.

The hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs’ call for a Southern African Marshall Plan therefore—if it is to succeed—must include the Soviet Union as a donor nation on a basis of absolute equality with the United States, Europe and all other major economic powers.

We must do all we can to involve the major powers in a joint venture to combat hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos in Southern Africa. This might just be the catalyst to trigger off a commitment on their part not to call a halt to world aid until all Africa is liberated from deprivation.

The United States and the Soviet Union have in fact been brought together by South Africa in a new role. They are jointly responsible as the two major world powers to ensure that Resolution 435 succeeds.

To the extent that they share that responsibility, to that extent US-Soviet relations must improve. It does not take much imagination thereafter to project these two powers into the ongoing role of being the joint custodians of world peace. Is this too much to hope for? I do not think so.

The wisdom of the past may still hold true today: Do not be too hard on your enemies; they may be your friends tomorrow.

A little more pushing and shoving from South Africa, especially from its position of moral strength, must lead to a greater awakening among the world powers of their responsibilities to lesser nations. The miracle of world peace may yet come true in our time.

The United Nations Special Representative, Mr Martti Ahtisaari, has been reported as expressing concern about the recent clashes in which three Swapo fighters were killed.

I believe I echo the feelings of all of us here, when I identify myself and my party with Mr Ahtisaari’s urgent appeal for the greatest restraint on the part of all parties in dealing with the situation.

The security forces have a job to do and they will do it well. How they do it, however, will also have a great influence on the success of the peace initiative. I know they will not fail South Africa and the peoples of our region.

Mr Chairman, if the hon the Minister still had any doubts about the fact that the past year has probably been the most successful of his term of office, all doubts which could have existed have been eliminated after this first hour and a half of this debate. With one exception the hon the Minister and his department have received nothing but praise from all quarters in this Chamber. We want to ask him not to be too upset about those persons who only criticised his behaviour. Unfortunately there will always be people in South Africa who consider it good news when things are going badly for this country. It is merely a pity that some of them are also here in this Parliament.

The successful negotiations on the implementation of Resolution 435 in South West Africa probably had the most dramatic impact of all these events of the past 12 months. Of course this was not all that was successfully tackled during the past year. The marketing of this Government’s peace initiatives in countries like Mozambique, Malawi, Zaire and further north last year by the hon the State President, as well as by the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs earlier this year in Europe, must not be underestimated either.

The month before last I was privileged to participate in a news discussion programme on the invitation of a British television network. Later I was also questioned by British radio and press representatives. I can therefore also attest from experience that the attitude of many critical observers in Britain is at present far more sympathetic than in the recent years. Of course this does not mean that we will no longer have to put up with criticism; as a matter of fact the mere swing in our favour on the part of an influential sector of public opinion will encourage our implacable enemies to try to stir up strife against us with even greater venom.

In recent weeks we have witnessed the distribution of an ANC film about the so-called inhuman treatment of Swapo freedom fighters. This film is being shown in the USA at the moment. What else can we expect when even here in Parliament the newest recruit of the DP, the hon member for Claremont, is foremost in the row of accusers of his own country’s Defence Force?

This year, after visits to Venda, Bophuthatswana and Mozambique, I can also attest to how our regional relations in Southern Africa are yielding increasingly tangible results. Mozambique, which is theoretically still a Marxist socialist state, has only recently focussed its eyes and its hopes on South Africa. When one visits that country it is not difficult to understand why. Some of the big powers which arrived on the scene soon after its independence in 1975, and posed as that country’s allies, now stand exposed as exploiters, who tried to turn this young state into a dumping ground for their old and obsolete military equipment—so obsolete that today this equipment is standing there rusting because parts for them are no longer manufactured in their countries of origin.

In contrast with the deterioration and recession which 14 years of communist collectivity has brought Mozambique, the two TBVC countries we visited epitomised bubbling optimism and development.

†Even Venda, with a GDP of only R446 million, being the smallest of the TBVC states, is a hive of activity. Let no one think it is a country which is not viable. After all, eight independent African states enjoying international recognition and UN membership have smaller GDPs than Venda. Venda is a relatively poor country, with hardly any mineral resources, yet encouraging results are being achieved in the agricultural field, particularly in the production of tea, sisal and subtropical fruit, and it is hoped that the country will soon become a net exporter of food.

Sterling efforts by the country’s development corporation have resulted in impressive industrial growth, and steady progress is being made in the improvement of its infrastructure. To mention only one example: The country has seven telephones per 1 000 members of the population. In the whole of Africa only some seven of the 50 or more states have a better telephone distribution.

*Our visit to Bophuthatswana was a revelation to me because it was my first visit. I can confidently say that Mmabato is the most impressive African capital I have seen outside South Africa. Of course this country has sought-after minerals. Sixty per cent of the platinum mined in Southern Africa and almost 30% of the total world production comes from there. One need therefore not feel surprised that this state already meets 58% of its total financial needs from its own resources.

What particularly struck us was that the signs of strong economic activity are not confined to the capital. Although the growth of Mmabato puts that of many other capitals in Africa in the shade, the rural population is just as actively involved in development projects with very impressive results.

Last year’s abortive coup definitely did not have a negative effect on the population either, and everything points to the fact that the country has returned to normal. Although there are still no signs that states other than South Africa and the TCV states will recognise Bophuthatswana in the near future, the country is being visited to an increasing extent by prominent visitors from abroad.

Against the background of this growth pattern taking place in South Africa’s own emanicipated states, it is not strange that Mozambique is also prepared to forge closer links with the RSA. As we saw all too clearly during our visit, trade and other links between ourselves and that country are of the utmost importance, so much so that to an increasing extent Mozambique is turning towards the free enterprise system and away from socialism.

The success of the meeting between the hon the State President and President Chissano at Songo on 12 September 1988, and the positive reaction to the tripartite discussions on the independence of Namibia and peace in Angola, encouraged Southern Africa to take the initiative to seek ways of achieving peace in Mozambique.

In December 1988 the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs wrote a letter to the then Secretary of State of the USA, Mr George Schultz, in which he suggested that a peace plan similar to the SWA-Angola agreement should be implemented for Mozambique. The hon the Minister’s visit to Europe in March of this year contributed to this idea. He held discussions with the British Prime Minister, inter alia, on the current war in Mozambique and the possible role which the USA could play in South Africa in achieving peace.

In February-March of this year the hon the Minister himself paid a visit to President Chissano during which peace matters were discussed. President Chissano then said that the contacts between the Republic of South Africa and Mozambique were aimed at the full implementation of the Nkomati Accord and that he supported all peace efforts in Southern Africa.

Co-operation at various levels between South Africa and Mozambique was continued during 1988-89. I shall mention only two. The Commission for Economic Affairs with its different subcommittees, which was established in September 1988 in consequence of the meetings between the hon the State President and President Chissano, will play an important role in co-operation, specifically in the economic sphere. In this regard I feel I must specifically mention the name of the hon the Deputy Minister of the department because of the major role he is playing in this extremely important development in our region.

Co-operation at security level also continued. The joint security committee has met four times since the Songo meeting, and military equipment valued at R10,5 million has been donated to the Mozambican armed forces for the securing of the Cahora Bassa powerline.

It is a well-known saying that the prosperity of one’s neighbour strengthens one’s own security, and during the past year we saw this all too clearly in the three African countries I have referred to. Southern Africa has the potential to become a powerful and stabilising influence in Africa, and prosperity and stability on this continent can only benefit us. To achieve that potential it is essential for the states of the subcontinent to abandon their mutual mistrust of one another and build a strong economic power bloc together, no matter how greatly they differ as regards their internal body politic and their policy directions. The fact that this realisation is starting to take root to an increasing extent in Southern Africa is one of the most encouraging achievements of the past year.

Mr Chairman, as far as the short statement which the hon the Minister of Defence issued with regard to the Paris arms affair is concerned, we in the CP want to say that we welcome the fact that an investigation was immediately launched. We realise this is a sensitive matter, but we should like to emphasise one aspect. At this early stage we want to say that we firmly reject any negotiations of any nature whatsoever, if they took place with terrorists or related organisations.

There is certainly a long list of subjects which are being dealt with in the hon the Minister’s Vote and which we can discuss. As far as I am concerned one could refer to the imperfect agreements drawn up in respect of South West Africa. These agreements—I have already referred to them in previous speeches—are riddled with problems, and they contain poor judicial formulations and pitfalls which, in my opinion, would not satisfy even a bad, third-rate country lawyer.

One could refer to the fact that the Cubans and the Angolans, notwithstanding their obligations in terms of the Geneva Protocol, have allowed Swapo to cross the border and enter South West Africa heavily armed. This must surely have been apparent to everyone—including the Cubans, and Angolans.

One could refer to the Cubans’ and Angolans’ current tardiness in meeting their obligations in terms of the Mount Etjo Agreement and allow Swapo to return to north of the 16th parallel.

One could refer to the festive atmosphere in which the hon the Minister received the Cubans and the Angolans after the meeting of the Joint Monitoring Commission here in Cape Town, even though he must have known that they were not meeting their obligations as far as Swapo is concerned. Might I also refer to the singing at this occasion? “Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika” was sung together with “Die Stem”. We want to ask the hon the Minister whether this is symbolic of what he sees for South West Africa’s future. [Interjections.]

Scandalous!

If it is scandalous, why did the hon the Minister allow it to be sung there? [Interjections.]

I could talk about the many times the hon the Minister has already given Swapo an extension of time in order to meet their obligations in terms of the agreements. We could even refer to some of them. As far as the Mount Etjo Agreement is concerned, a great deal was made of the assembly points to which Swapo infiltrators had to report. Our armed forces were subsequently restricted to their bases for 60 hours in order to give Swapo the opportunity to move across the border. Now the hon the Minister is saying for a third time that Swapo can report to Untag troops at any point, and the reporting period has even been extended. We are asking the hon the Minister whether his view is that the reporting period can simply be extended and extended, until it is extended up to election day—1 November 1989. Was it not the hon the Minister who, in 1976, boastfully told the Americans that he would get our troops out of Angola?

I could also have referred to a whole series of other subjects which I cannot discuss in detail now, such as the hotel development programme in the Comoro Islands and the circumstances surrounding the export of cycads to Madeira by Mr J M R Berardo. In this case we even have the evidence of a question that was asked in Parliament, and the reply to this question. We are asking the hon the Minister whether he was aware of this export permit obtained by Mr Berardo for the export of the cycads, or was he not aware of it?

Furthermore I could also refer to the fact—I should like to come back to this—that in in the agreements on South West Africa no guarantees were obtained from Cuba that they would not move into South West Africa at the invitation of Swapo after independence. There are no guarantees in the agreements that the ANC would not be allowed to have bases in South West Africa. In this regard I want to refer to something that was said by Toivo Ja Toivo in November 1988. I can make it available to the hon the Minister, but I imagine he probably knows about it. He said:

Was this matter cleared up with Cuba in the Joint Monitoring Commission, and if it was cleared up, why were no relevant guarantees included in the agreements? Furthermore, Mr Thabo Mbeki has the following to say with regard to the independence of South West Africa, and I quote:

I want to ask the hon the Minister whether I misunderstood him when he said on occasion that the model which is at present under consideration in the case of South West Africa could, in his opinion, also apply to South Africa. On occasion he quoted words to the effect that the Brazzaville Protocol could be an example for the Great Indaba that must take place in South Africa.

The question of infiltrators in South West Africa reminds me very much of a conversation Cicero once had with Caesar in the Roman Senate. I have translated it somewhat freely, and I want to read it to hon members:

Order!

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

I do not have time for questions now. I quote further:

[Interjections.]

Order! Hon members must give the hon member a chance to complete his speech. The hon member may proceed.

In the last part of my speech I should like to make a few remarks with regard to glasnost and perestroika. These are the words which Mr Gorbachev made so famous, particularly in view of the fact that it is said that South Africa is moving closer to the Soviet Union, precisely as a result of this policy of glasnost and perestroika. May I make use of a quotation in this regard? I am referring to The Cape Times of 15 March 1989, and I quote:

This is what Mr Glen Babb, the Deputy Director-General of Foreign Affairs, said in London. We presume and we believe—it has not yet been confirmed, but perhaps the hon the Minister could confirm it for us—that Mr Glen Babb is going to stand for the NP in Randburg.

I want to ask the hon the Minister today please not to be as naive as he sometimes appears to be with regard to this new policy of the Soviet Union. I am not saying that the hon the Minister is so naive, but it appears so.

In this regard I want to refer briefly to a point the previous speakers also referred to. What did former President Richard Nixon say with regard to this new policy of Mr Gorbachev? I quote from 1999—Victory without War, page 40:

On this morning’s TV news we heard that a Russian dissident, Mr Vladimir Bukovsky, criticised the Soviet Union’s reform programme as being a one-sided attempt to rescue a failed system.

In this regard I want to refer again to this statement by former President Nixon. He said that nothing in glasnost or perestroika detracted from the principles and basic tenets of communism. [Interjections.] I could give hon members quite a number of those, but I want to deal with one basic principle of communism today, or more specifically of Leninism, and that is the military, material and financial support that is given to so-called liberation movements.

If hon members page through the documents of the UN, this view is apparent in resolution after resolution. If we look at the scene in Southern Africa today, we see the successful support which the Soviet Union has given to the MPLA in Angola, to Frelimo in Mozambique, to Swapo and also to the ANC. The objectives of the Soviet Union have already become a reality as far as current events in South West Africa are concerned.

Mr Chairman, the previous speaker quoted ex-President Nixon regarding Mr Gorbachev, but I would like to remind the hon member that it was President Nixon who opened doors to have discussions with communist China. If the hon member wants to quote ex-President Nixon as far as Russia is concerned, he must also bear in mind that it was he who opened doors towards the giant Eastern power of China. One should not quote that particular politician when it suits one and forget everything else, even the Watergate scandal.

I want to associate myself with the appreciation expressed for the efforts made by the hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister on the diplomatic front, most especially in relation to Namibia. I also want to congratulate the Director-General, Mr Neil van Heerden, as well as his efficient team of negotiators and the other members of his Foreign Affairs team, not only on the tremendous work that they have done in respect of Namibia, but also on all the other work that they have done during these difficult years to further our international relations.

As we have pointed out previously, it is usually the task of a department of foreign affairs, via its trade and other representatives, to foster better relations for the countries that they represent, but this hon Minister seems to be the only Minister really trying to promote the interests of our country, because South Africa has become the polecat of the world.

We realise that the hon the Minister has been placed in a very difficult situation because many of his efforts related to policies that we have created ourselves. We admit that, because of his diplomatic efforts, the Russians, Cubans and Angolans were in the mother city—our legislative capital—over the past week, in spite of their different and widely divergent ideological views.

Many years ago the hon the Minister—then a very young person—addressed the UN and declared that racial discrimination was dead. That was his vision. He was a political prophet at that time. The hon the Minister took a chance when he made that statement. I believe however that he believed in that statement because where there is no vision, the Scriptures say “my people perish.”

Recently the hon the Minister made another statement when he predicted—he was right as far as I am concerned—that South Africa could have a Black president. We all know what happened when he made that statement. We want to make it very clear here this afternoon that the hon the Minister and his team have done excellent work to promote relations overseas. His Deputy Minister, who is charged with affairs on the continent, and his team have done excellent work. In spite of that, there are both international and internal requirements. The hon the Minister and all of us here know—and here I must be able to use this expression—that we are sitting on a political volcano. We are sitting on political dynamite and that is why this war—because of different ideologies—is taking place and where we today find Afrikaner brother fighting Afrikaner brother—right here in this political forum where Black participation in legislative structures is needed. Some want to hold on to what they have got, some want partition, some want the old idea of divide and rule while some still want paternalistic prescriptive politics today. We know the vision that we have and the reform processes that have started and that we cannot go backwards.

We remember some years ago when the hon the Minister made a statement, namely that he was not prepared to die because of separate lifts. Those days are all gone. Previously one of our colleagues clearly stated that what was non-negotiable two years ago has become negotiable now. Many years ago politicians spoke out very strongly from rostrums that we—people of colour—could never sit in one Parliament. It was also clearly stated that we would have separate Parliaments, even against Calvinistic theology. Today we sit sit in Parliament and South Africa has never caved in. I have not become an Afrikaner neither have they become Indians and nothing has changed. We are all South Africans.

Requirement number one is Black participation in legislative structures. We say we are addressing this problem but it is linked to the release of Mr Nelson Mandela. The whole world is saying that. Any leader, wherever we have travelled and wherever we attend seminars, asks the question “why”. Admittedly there is a condition that he must first renounce violence but there are times—and I must be candid—when I ask whether one can set conditions before negotiations.

I want to put it to the hon the Minister very straightly. He is a member of the State Security Council. It is high time that our Government and the Executive Government realized that we need to go forward. We need to bring back South Africa to where it rightfully belongs and that is its place amongst the nations of the world. We should be able to release Mr Nelson Mandela. We should also consider the release of all political prisoners—the world is talking about it, and even South Africa is talking about it.

I go back to our own history. After World War II came to an end the Government then also released certain political prisoners who had also been charged with treason. That is clear. I am sure that history repeats itself. It is not an unreasonable request.

Fourthly, there is also another item on the agenda that the world is speaking about which the world leaders have addressed the hon the Minister, namely the unbanning of banned organizations. It is very clear that through his efforts and the efforts of his department and colleagues he was instrumental in bringing the Soviets right into Cape Town. The last time they were here was in 1950 and they were here on our soil again. I am sure that one of these days we will have to negotiate with the ANC. It is a must. We will have to do it.

Even the CP is singing a new tune. If the hon member for Soutpansberg gets the hon the Minister’s job—which is very unlikely—he will also have to negotiate with them. Anybody who says no is living in a fool’s paradise. The Nats said it, everybody said it. The non-negotiable becomes negotiable. That is history taking its course, unless we are going to reduce this country to ashes. That is all that will happen.

I want to be fair. The giant of Afrikaner Nationalism and the giant of Black Nationalism must not clash with each other. In the name of God I appeal; let us come together. We need to come together. These two giants must not clash with each other. Rather let us negotiate with one another. It can be done. We have 80% moderate people who are speaking.

I was speaking to the Deputy Minister of Angola when he sat at my table on Friday. He is not a man who wants to kill us. We spoke to people. They believe in negotiation. We met people from all over the world. They do not want to drop an atomic bomb on our country. I believe that South Africa has vast resources for all of us to live happily together. As I have stated before, it is not the intention of anyone to destroy anyone else. I recognise the fear of people. I recognise that everyone in this country is living in fear because of our separateness from one another. We recognise that.

What we have to do is to get to one another, to understand one another. The only way to understand one another is to negotiate and discuss the problems. The hon the Minister has had contacts all over the world with countries that were hell-bent to bring South Africa down on its knees, yet it is those very countries that the hon the Minister has negotiated with. [Time expired]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Rylands raised a few important matters and he also put a few questions to the hon the Minister. I think the hon the Minister will reply adequately to what he has said in due course.

*However, before I come to my speech, I want to reply to the speakers of the CP. I was really surprised this afternoon when the hon member for Losberg stood up in this House and complained about the singing of “Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika” at Friday night’s function.

The point is that if the hon member had been there—I did not notice any hon member of the CP there, and in all probability they had been invited, but they did not consider it worthwhile to put in an appearance—he would have known that “Die Stem”, the national anthem of South Africa, had been sung and played. It was sung and played right at the beginning and then, at the end of the programme, “Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika” was sung! [Interjections.] However, what do those words mean? They mean that God must bless Africa. It is a prayer. Must I now infer that those hon members of the CP are objecting to a prayer? [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Losberg must curtail his interjections.

The hon member must listen, because I did not shout while he was speaking. Or do they object to people expressing the prayer that God must bless South Africa in the form of a song? The hon members must reply to that question. [Interjections.]

Secondly, as regards the question of South West Africa/Namibia, I want to say that when the hon member for Soutpansberg was speaking this afternoon, I did not shout at him once. However, I want to refer to the hon member, because the other hon members of the CP, and the hon member for Soutpansberg in particular, got a real dressing down in this very Chamber when the facts concerning South West Africa/Namibia were being discussed. [Interjections.] That is so, and the hon member knows it. This was also the case during an interpellation in one of the other Houses. Nevertheless these hon members and this party come forward—they come forward, to use an example, like a punch-drunk boxer who has already been beaten—and attack in the hope that they might get in one or two more punches, because they might win the fight which has already been lost.

I am accusing the CP in this debate today of not wanting peace. They are opposed to peace, because when one listens to their arguments carefully, one comes to the conclusion that they simply, and sometimes unnecessarily, want to sacrifice even more of the lives of our young men on the border. That is what these hon members’ argument amounts to, but I shall drop the matter.

†In the time available to me I would like to refer to the subject of Black economic empowerment in South Africa as envisaged by the United States of America and the European Economic Community’s positive measures programme, which is also directed at the economic development of Black people in our country.

For many decades, when there was very little talk of real political reform in South Africa, our country received large-scale investments, technology transfers and markets for our exports from overseas countries. In the more recent past, when America was under the impression that their constructive engagement was not bringing about meaningful political change, President Reagan introduced selective sanctions by an executive order, largely at the behest of the United States Congress.

When one listens to Black people today, especially to their elected leaders, and one sees the results of public opinion research, it becomes more than clear that the majority of Black people in this country are opposed to sanctions and that sanctions are in actual fact counterproductive.

Those people the outside world was supposedly trying to help were the ones who were the worst hit by sanctions.

It becomes clearer by the day that sanctions are counterproductive. Other ideas are now being floated and foremost among them is the concept of Black economic empowerment. The supporters of this concept in America argue that it accommodates the following needs: Firstly, the need to assist in bringing about peaceful change in South Africa effectively; secondly, to satisfy Black Americans who are still very much aware of their own civil rights struggle in the United States; thirdly, to assist people who are referred to as victims of apartheid; fourthly, to ensure the continuation of a Western-type free market system and ethic among Black South Africans thus helping to neutralise revolutionary sympathies; and finally, to establish a policy which has the broad support of moderates of both the Republican and Democratic Parties in the US Congress.

A firm policy regarding Black economic empowerment has not yet been formulated as such and it is therefore not possible to judge its merits in detail. However, such a policy would presumably entail the transfer of substantial sums of money as well as skills and expertise to the Black population of South Africa. If this is the case then this would be most welcome insofar as it would reverse the present trend of taking money and jobs away from Blacks in South Africa through sanctions and disinvestment. A country like South Africa with its large Third World component cannot possibly meet the basic education, housing and health needs of all its citizens without the help of the outside world. This is becoming clearer by the day. We know that ways and means will have to be found to reduce the economic backlog which many South Africans are still experiencing.

A policy of Black economic empowerment would furthermore make no sense if sanctions and disinvestment were to be continued as the one cancels out the other. A strong input of Western free market values among the Black population would also help to counter the propagation of fallacious revolutionary ideas.

The European Economic Community on its part introduced what it termed its Positive Measures Programme in 1985. The programme includes such items as a code of conduct for EEC firms in South Africa, assistance in the education of the non-White community, the intensification of contacts with the non-White community and assistance to non-violent, anti-apartheid organisations. This programme therefore also contains an element of upliftment of the Black population in South Africa. The argument is used by the more important members of the EEC that it is definitely an alternative to sanctions which hurt rather than assisted these people. Other more antagonistic members of the EEC see it as a supplement to sanctions. There is thus a duality in the approach of the EEC which does not make for clarity. This is reflected in the channels which they use and the lack of transparency concerning projects undertaken in terms of the programme. This raises all sorts of questions as to whether EEC funds are always being used in South Africa for purposes which comply with the generally accepted norms of international behaviour.

In conclusion I would like to make this important point: while our country has a need for foreign assistance with social and economic upliftment programmes, we cannot tolerate foreign funding of domestic political or subversive activities. No self-respecting country in the world would allow such intervention by foreign interests. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I hope that the previous hon member who spoke will forgive me for not reacting to his speech.

I want to come to two other hon members, however, who also spoke here earlier today, the first of whom is the hon member for Southern Cape. Once again the hon member made a negative remark about my party in the form of an interjection. I understand the hon member’s problem. He is a frustrated person. It is very clear that in his speech here today he was competing for an ambassadorial post overseas or perhaps for that of third consul somewhere in a third-rate state. We know that that hon member, after we had compelled him to resign from the LP caucus, wrote a letter to the hon the State President in which he offered himself for any task which the hon the State President might have in mind for him in future. His motives in this House are very clear. He now has to spend his time here productively so that he may catch the eye of the Government and perhaps later be appointed to such an overseas position. [Interjections.]

I now want to come to a very important point which the hon member for Turffontein touched upon and elaborate on it. I want to do this with the seriousness which it actually deserves in this debate. In recent history there have been many dramatic breakthroughs to the Western world for South Africa. Many of these breakthroughs may be ascribed to the efforts of the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs. This could be the eve of a very great breakthrough for us back to the Western world in the overseas sphere. We know that South Africa is the polecat of the Western world. We are isolated economically. Our sportsmen and sportswomen can compete hardly anywhere in the world any longer. Our rugby enthusiasts have to be told the disappointing news every year that the International Rugby Board has not yet shown the courage and the conviction to send a team to South Africa.

Before we lapse into euphoria about all these events, there are still a few which have to take place. Here the NP Government has the key to the door. They alone can cause these events to happen in South Africa so that we may once more take up our rightful place in the Western world.

The first of these events is the lifting of the state of emergency. They do not always realise how dramatically the state of emergency is presented to people by the Western mass media. If one goes to see the film Mississippi Burning, one realises the traumatic experience the average American had during the civil rights struggle. What is taking place here is not even a quarter of the inhumanity with which the Negroes were treated there as recently as in the sixties. While this state of emergency lasts, people retain the same image of South Africa.

I also want to move on to the release of Mr Nelson Mandela and other long-term political prisoners, which is just as important a prerequisite. Quite a number of long-term political prisoners have already been released but nobody discusses them any more. They are irrelevant as far as domestic and international politics are concerned.

The hon the State President’s reaction that the conditions for Mr Nelson Mandela’s release remain the same is extremely disappointing because I believe that the time is riper now than ever before for us to play this card against the Western World.

Even if we are to have free elections in Namibia and introduce a fully representative government, we shall continue to experience many problems with the outside world while 70% of the country’s people do not participate effectively in the governmental processes of the country. The urgent handling of this problem, in the form of the negotiable forum, the National Council, which have already been instituted, is also in the hands of the Government.

The abolition of all the remaining pillars of apartheid—the Group Areas Act, the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, the Population Registration Act in as far as it legalises racial classification—these are absolute prerequisites before South Africa can take up its rightful place again one day in the Western World.

We have a very good Minister of Foreign Affairs and very capable officials who assist him. We have people overseas who are conducting an uphill struggle for South Africa. As long as these laws remain in the Statute Book and while what I have mentioned does not take place, this struggle will be in vain.

No person can really argue against these matters. I am sure that the hon member for Innesdal, who is soon to assume the post of ambassador to Holland, will realise what a superhuman struggle we have to conduct to sell South Africa overseas, simply because these matters still form a de facto part of the situation in this country.

I further want to make only one comment on this subject. The entire problem of Namibia has been discussed until it is so threadbare that—so they say—the Sub A pupils in Namibia already count 1—2—4—3—5. This matter has become as hackneyed as that. [Interjections.] Nevertheless I want to make one observation in this regard. I accept that Swapo were at fault. They broke agreements. They paid a high price for this. I accept this. I accept that our situation was legal. It was quite legitimate for us to stop Swapo infiltrators.

History might yet have taken quite a different course if South Africa, the USSR, the USA, Angola and Cuba had not spoken about or on behalf of the people of Namibia but to them. Perhaps history would have taken a different course if Swapo and the internal parties in South West Africa had been involved in the discussions which were held there on the implementation of Resolution 435.

But they were invited!

Nevertheless I am very grateful for the tolerance which exists regarding the Swapo infiltrators and I hope that we shall be able to effect a type of reconciliation so that the struggle will not be pursued after the implementation of Resolution 435.

I am also very grateful for the statement which the hon the Minister made here on the Storm case—the case of the South African diplomat who was arrested together with members of the Ulster Resistance Movement in Paris. I should like to add another three points here briefly although they are not directly related to the Storm debacle. In the aftermath of this debacle, however, further rumours originated in the foreign media which I think are of a very serious nature. The first of these is that South Africa provided G6 artillery to both parties in the war between Iran and Iraq. The second of these is that Sri Lanka was provided with Buffel vehicles which this country used there against the Tamil rebels. The third of these is that a handgrenade of South African manufacture was hurled at IRA mourners at a funeral in Northern Ireland by an Ulster activist last year. These are serious allegations and that is why we welcome the inquiry which the hon the Minister of Defence has ordered into this debacle. We welcome it because it may also hold serious implications for one of our few friends of importance in the Western world—Mrs Thatcher.

Then I also want to dwell briefly on another important aspect. This is the human tragedy which is taking place on the border between South Africa and Mozambique. The hon the Minister of Defence announced last week, or perhaps a week earlier, that 26 people had already died on our eastern and northern border with Mozambique this year as a result of the electrified fences which have been erected there. Since the fence was erected, more than 70 people have died as a result of this electrified fence.

The people there are desperate to come to South Africa in search of protection, security and food. I want to ask the hon the Minister what the possibilities are for our ambassador at UNO to inform the rest of the world about the dire straits of the people of Mozambique and the absolute desperation which causes them to flee to South Africa. What are our chances of looking at a renewed conciliation action, together with the Russians, who are playing such an important role in Southern Africa at present, to bring the Mozambican government and Renamo together? Is there nothing which we as South Africans can do in an attempt to curb this human tragedy which is taking place on our border?

In the light of these desperate circumstances in our neighbouring states it is tragic that there are still people in South Africa who are so embittered toward the South African Government, so embittered because of the existing dispensation, that they are prepared to see thousands of people die of hunger in South Africa in their struggle against apartheid … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I would like to compliment the hon member Mr Lockey on the content of his speech. I think it was very well delivered and very positive in many respects.

I, too, wish to add my voice to those of previous hon speakers who have complimented the hon the Minister, his Deputy Minister, the Director-General and other officials of the department on the patience and the professionalism that they displayed together with General Geldenhuys during those extremely difficult negotiations leading up to the implementation of Resolution 435. We must inevitably accept that the die is now cast and this country’s international credibility will stand or fall on how we handle and react to forthcoming developments, bearing in mind that acts of provocation will be deliberately thrown our way, and there will be many during the lead-up to the Namibian November elections.

No-one can deny that South Africa has up to now acquitted itself, thanks again to those negotiating on our behalf, with a dignity and resoluteness which has captured the understanding and respect of the outside world. It is so important that this achievement is not prejudiced by any overreaction on our part. We must not overreact either to the traps that will be set by those seeking to destroy deliberately the improved international status that this country has gained over recent months. I do want to emphasise that those charged with the responsibility of negotiating on our behalf must now be looking beyond the point of independence for South West Africa in order to ensure that this country is able to capitalise to a maximum on its enhanced image. Here I strongly support these sentiments expressed by the hon member for Turffontein and I, too, wish merely to indicate that the ship of negotiation must at all costs be kept on course.

It must also be borne in mind that there is every likelihood that international pressures on this country will increase as a result of internal political instability which is appearing to creep into certain European governments. This is a fact that should always serve as a reminder that the threat of further isolation is very real.

I wish to come to a matter nearer home and I want to tell the hon the Minister that I have received numerous reports that restrictive trade practices are being applied by governments of certain independent states on the entry of goods from the Republic of South Africa. The question I would like to put to the hon the Minister is this: To what degree are such contraventions of the customs union agreement tolerated by this Government? In other words what action is taken to ensure that the terms of the customs agreement are honoured and adhered to? It has come to my attention too that certain marketing boards, as well as subsidiaries of companies with headquarters in the Republic are acting in cahoots with governments of certain TBVC-countries in an attempt to establish monopolistic organisations within such states. This is obviously a contravention of the existing customs agreement and one that needs to be clarified particularly if the effectiveness of the agreement is not to be prejudiced.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Mooi River, who has just addressed this Committee, spoke about the failure to reach an internal settlement and said: “The threat of further isolation is very real.” I could not agree with him more. I intend to come back to this matter during the course of my address.

I too would like to compliment the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and his team on the splendid work that has been done and is being done for South Africa. From where I was seated, looking at the “Men from the Ministry” sitting there in the officials’ benches, I could not but ponder on the youthfulness of the staff of this department. I believe that this augurs well not only for this department but also for Southern Africa in general. We have youth on our side and it is youth that is going to play a role in the future of South Africa. Permit me to compliment by name Mr Neil van Heerden, the Director-General of Foreign Affairs. He is a diplomat who oozes confidence and who knows what he is talking about when he opens his mouth. One good thing is that he does not put his foot into it!

I also wish to place on the record the work that is being done under trying circumstances by South Africa’s representatives at our embassies and consulates abroad. Here I include all our representatives. On our recent visit overseas I was impressed by the assistance rendered, not only by the officials of the department but by their spouses too. I would like to express our appreciation to these wonderful people. They are a credit to our Department of Foreign Affairs and to South Africa.

It was a privilege to visit the European Parliament with fellow parliamentarians. The members of the European Parliament whom we met were appreciative of the role being played by South Africa in the quest for peace and stability in this region but at the same time critical of the apparent slackening of the reform process. These members of the European Parliament were in favour of continued contact with South Africa and pledged their support, as has been borne out by a recent statement by Dr Andriessen, the senior vice-president of the EEC, who is responsible for external relations.

On 18 April he rejected an appeal by representatives of anti-apartheid organisations that the EEC should terminate diplomatic relations with South Africa. He pointed out that he believed that one could best influence events in South Africa through talking to the Government the EEC recognised. He also pointed out the role that South Africa was playing with regard to the implementation of the UN Security Council’s Resolution 435. He emphasised that the South Africa of today is different to that of 1985. He further stated that it would be foolish not to encourage the evolutionary changes which were being effected by the South African Government at present.

During our visit abroad we observed that the people in Europe know that South Africa needs assistance. They know that South Africa must hasten the pace of reform and, above all, as was mentioned by previous speakers, they know that the release of Mr Nelson Mandela is paramount to the assistance being rendered and the peaceful changes that are envisaged. There is no doubt that the release of Mr Mandela is the key to future negotiations in South Africa.

South Africa’s resolve and determination in ensuring the implementation of Resolution 435 and the adherence by all parties to the Geneva Protocol are to be welcomed. In this process the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, as well as the hon the Minister of Defence, took the correct decision. They have created a more positive image of South Africa overseas.

Referring to the agreements reached by the delegations of South Africa, Angola and Cuba, the hon the State President said on 13 April 1989, on the occasion of the discussion of his Budget Vote, that the South African Government will continue to act in accordance with the undertakings and will adhere to the agreements which have been reached. South Africa cannot be seen to be flouting any agreements reached. After the independence of Namibia the eyes of the world will undoubtedly focus on South Africa. Here I am reminded of the words of Lord Dewar, a British politician, who said: “Nothing deflates as fast as a punctured reputation.”

The adherence of South Africa to the agreements is therefore crucial. There is no denying that peace in the Southern African region will depend on the internal settlement in South Africa itself. If actions of the South African Government were to be seen to be in conflict with the agreements regarding Namibia, the international goodwill which South Africa has gained until now will be shattered, and future developments in South Africa will also be in doubt and be viewed with a certain amount of suspicion. The crest that South Africa is presently riding must be maintained. It has taken a lot of tough negotiation and reassessments to get us there.

South Africa’s detractors will try anything and everything to topple us from that perch. There is nothing better than getting firsthand knowledge of a situation, and to this extent the visit of members of the JMC as well as of the delegations from America and Russia is to be welcomed. It is the visit of persons of this calibre which will contribute to South Africa’s breaking out of isolation. These visits will do more good than a thousand words spoken overseas by politicians.

The Department of Foreign Affairs contributes to the SABC in respect of the operating costs of the external service of Radio South Africa. I believe this is money well-spent. South Africa needs to nullify the false propaganda that is broadcast overseas. It was interesting to note during my visit overseas the number of persons whom I met who tuned in regularly to the overseas broadcast of Radio South Africa, and, I may add, who are very thankful for this service.

With the overseas media bent on excluding positive reports of South Africa from its dailies, it is more than necessary for the hon the Minister’s department to have funds available to combat the false propaganda and biased image of the Republic created overseas. Where this Government errs, is that we are duty-bound to expose the shortcomings but enough money is not made available for certain projects. Credit has to be given where credit is due.

I believe that in the final analysis, as was said earlier by the hon member for Rylands, history will-record that it has been this Department of Foreign Affairs and its brilliant team that have given South Africa the answers by reaching out to the outside in order to give answers to the internal problems of South Africa.

It is in a way unfortunate that the services of this hon Minister cannot be utilised both on an internal settlement basis as well as external. If we had more Pik Bothas, if I may say that, I think that South Africa would be nearer and quicker to finding solutions that have beset us for too long. Solutions are now overdue.

Mr Chairman, I wish to congratulate the hon member Mr Seedat for his constructive contribution in this debate.

*The hon member for Losberg referred to the wording of the settlement plan agreement in a derogatory manner this afternoon. It is a great pity that something like that happened because I think that it is an undeserved insult and a slap in the face for extremely competent officials who are well-versed in international law.

The hon member also had something to say about Russia. I should like to express a few ideas in this regard. It is true that Russia is in the news and that words such as glasnost and perestroika have been incorporated into the vocabulary of Western languages. They are even used with ease in Afrikaans. In the latest idiom, Mayday was celebrated in the usual manner yesterday, but contrary to the pattern of previous years it was celebrated in the USSR in a colourful, exciting and glorious way.

In the recent past there was also praise for the Russian contribution to the achievement of a settlement plan for the implementation of Resolution 435 and to the many deliberations on problems which arose with the accomplishment of the resolution. The Russian and American observers are present everywhere.

There are also signs that Russia has changed its foreign policy on South Africa in particular and Southern Africa in general. The special ambassador, Mr Ustinov, who visited South Africa last week, said that Russian diplomatic relations with the RSA would be reinstated if apartheid was abolished and a fair dispensation brought about in South Africa in which the Helsinki Treaty on human rights was clearly reflected. [Interjections.]

It has become clear that as a result of economic pressure, Russia cannot afford to be involved in regional conflicts all over the world. Russia does not have the financial ability to sponsor violence, and violence was the method by means of which Russia had wanted to expand its influence throughout the world.

However, we must never forget that Russia is still the paradigm of communism. There is no indication that Russia will abandon this policy. As a matter of fact one can trust the communists to be communists and to strive for it everywhere and in all spheres.

That Russia has the need to make adjustments to its policy is also clear, but it will be unreasonable to suddenly expect radical changes from a leader. Any immediate turn-about will result in a credibility crisis. Changes take place on an evolutionary basis and even when changes have taken place, they are always regarded with suspicion and it takes a long time before public recognition is achieved. We know—and hon members also know—how it is a continuous struggle to make people realise that changes have taken place in a society. We must not ourselves be guilty of measuring other countries with the same unfair criterion with which we are measured.

The present Russian change of direction away from violence as a solution to the problems of South Africa started in 1986 when the Russian academic Gleb Starochenko, proposed in a report that the non-violent changes in South Africa could be supported rather than violent changes.

In his “new thinking” President Michail Gorbachev has included this apparent change in his international political policy. According to this policy peaceful solutions for regional differences and conflicts are being striven for and international politics must be demilitarised and de-ideologised.

In addition I think it can be expected that during the present fluid stage of policy adaptation the USSR will not want to become involved in a dispute or conflict with the USA as a result of less important regional conflicts such as those in Southern Africa.

There is no lack of clarity either about what this peaceful change is that Russia wants to see in South Africa. I have already referred to the statement of Ambassador Ustinov. In March last year Dr Boris Asoyan, the former Soviet ambassador in Lesotho, told RAU students that the USSR was in favour of a democratic, non-racial and just South Africa.

Dr Asoyan is presently an adviser in the Soviet Union’s foreign ministry and, according to all indications, is one of the major actors in the evolution of the Soviet Union’s attitude towards the RSA. He is also strongly outspoken about the approach that there is no alternative to a peaceful solution to the RSAs problems. According to him no violence or revolution is a viable alternative to negotiation. Only last month the head of the Soviet Union’s Africa Institute, Mr Anatoly Gromyko, and the head of the Soviet Union’s foreign ministry’s Africa Division, Mr Yuri Yukalov, indicated that they were not in favour of the destruction of the RSA and that they would rather see dialogue between the involved parties. Such an approach will inevitably meet with the approval of peace-loving citizens of the RSA, because everyone yearns for a situation in which peaceful coexistence in South Africa becomes a reality in all spheres and in which the slaughtering of innocent people no longer occurs. One can only hope and trust that this Russian approach will have an influence on those citizens who still believe that they can bring about change in the RSA through acts of terrorism.

Even Mr Tebogo Mafole, the ANC’s de facto chief representative at the United Nations, admitted at the recent Carnegie Endowment for International Peace that the USSR was increasingly voicing its approval of a negotiated settlement, and added as an afterthought that the ANC had been thinking along these lines for a long time. Mr Mafole also said that the ANC did not see its way clear to abandoning the armed struggle, and emphasised that it had actually become more necessary now than ever before. He maintained that, regardless of Russia’s attitude, it remained the prerogative of the ANC to determine how it would wage the struggle against South Africa. However, it seems clear that the ANC feels somewhat unhappy about the new direction of the Russian policy. This does not mean that the Russians do no longer support them; as a matter of fact, on 13 April this year the Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Anatoly Adamishin, said that the USSR would continue to support the ANC until apartheid had been abolished.

It is common knowledge world-wide that the South African Government is prepared to enter into discussions with aspiring groups about participation in a process to negotiate a new and generally acceptable political order. The only prerequisite is that such parties do not advocate violence as method for change.

Against the background of his recent intimate experience of Russian diplomacy, the hon the Minister could perhaps give us an evaluation of the present relations between the RSA and the USSR. Entering into diplomatic discussions with Russia does no harm to the Western view of life which is also favoured by the RSA. We must not lose sight of the fact that sometimes it is our Western friends, whose friendships we nurture, who leave us in the lurch and apply punitive measures against us, while we have the genuine desire to allow the inhabitants of this country to participate in the state process in an orderly way.

Allow me to thank the hon the Minister for the outstanding work that he and his department having done during the past year in the interests of South Africa and to further peace in this sub-continent. We are truly proud of his diplomatic initiatives. A great deal of space will be allocated to these successes in the annals of the history of South Africa.

Mr Chairman, at the outset I should like to associate myself with the congratulations expressed to the hon the Minister and the department earlier today. They are a group of capable people, who do great work for South Africa. I have the privilege, and it is really a privilege, to be able to count some of the officials present here this afternoon among my personal friends.

I do not know whether or not the reports and rumours that Mr Glen Babb is going to be a candidate in Randburg are true. If they are true, the hon member for Randburg should know that he will have a real battle to contend with. When one looks at his first reaction to the reports, it is very clear that he is already rather nervous.

Furthermore I should like to react to something the hon member for Losberg said here today. He gave a free translation of Cicero this afternoon and described what he regarded as a traitor. [Interjections.] If that hon member waits a moment, I shall come to him. I should like to ask that hon member what the relevance of that part of his speech was. Was it aimed at anyone in this Committee? [Interjections.] If he is not a coward, he will mention the person he had in mind by name.

Order! The hon member cannot say the hon member is a coward or insinuate that he is a coward if he is not doing something. The hon member must withdraw that part.

I withdraw it, Sir.

If he has the courage.

In any case he did not have the courage to mention the person he had in mind by name, but that is how we have come to know him. If that is not what he had in mind, the only other possibility is that he did not take the trouble to work out a 10-minute speech, and then, like a poor student, who had “spotted” incorrectly, he came and waffled here. [Interjections.]

The hon member also quoted former Pres Richard Nixon of America in an attempt to motivate why we should not talk to the Russians or trust them. [Interjections.] When it comes to the total onslaught, that hon member for Brakpan was really like the child in the old joke this afternoon. He swallowed a grammophone needle and got stuck on the one old tune. The fact of the matter is that the hon member for Losberg quoted former Pres Nixon, and in doing so tried to say that we should not negotiate with the Russians, because one cannot trust them.

That same Pres Nixon negotiated with the Russians on various occasions, inter alia with regard to the restrictions on strategic weapons. Why did he do so? He did so because he regarded those negotiations as being in the interests of his country. It was a matter of own interest.

Now that hon member is trying to imply that the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the top officials who assist him have less insight than Richard Nixon had; that they do not have the insight to know that one does not enter into such negotiations in a naive fashion.

If it is in the interests of South Africa to negotiate with Russia, if it is in the interests of South Africa to continue the contact with Russia, the hon the Minister and the officials will be expected to do so, because their instructions are to serve the best interests of South Africa. Those are their instructions. If Russia can give us an opportunity or can help us to ward off the international economic war against South Africa, they must make use of that opportunity, and we and South Africa expect them to make use of those opportunities. What does the CP do, however? They are so obsessed by petty politics that in fact they are sabotaging South Africa’s international interests. That is what it amounts to.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is it acceptable for the hon member to say that we are sabotaging the economic interests of South Africa? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I am prepared to withdraw that and to leave it to the Committee to draw its own conclusion.

Order! I want to thank the hon member for doing that—it is a thorny issue. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, earlier this year, 11 international companies which employ almost 5 000 people on the East Rand wrote a letter to the State President with reference to the conduct of CP town councils upon the instructions of the CP’s central politburo … [Interjections.] … and sent me a copy of that letter. I merely want to read one short paragraph to hon members:

I do not know whether or not that is sabotage, but it is certainly very close to it.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I do not want to interrupt the hon member for Springs, but the hon member for Turffontein sits here and if we say anything—he said this to the hon member for Losberg too—he keeps on saying “You are sick.” “Sick” can mean physically ill, but it can also have a different meaning. I ask you whether it is permissible for the hon member for Turffontein to tell another hon member he is sick. [Interjections.]

Order! In the circumstances that is a comment on a person’s physical condition, and as the hon member actually wanted to know, it is unparliamentary.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Turffontein has been sitting here all afternoon quietly making interjections, including interjections about the hon member for Losberg. [Interjections.]

Order! If the Chair had to heed all the whispering that goes on here, there would be points of order all day long. Since the hon member has mentioned the point, I shall deal with it. Is that what the hon member for Turffontein said?

Mr Chairman, the hon member branded us as communists.

Order! No, that is not the point of order. Did the hon member for Turffontein say the hon member was sick?

Mr Chairman, I said the hon member was sick in the head. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member must withdraw what he said.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it.

Order! Thank you, it has been unconditionally withdrawn.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member branded us as being a lot of communists, and that is why I said that.

Order! Is it true that the hon member for Soutpansberg said that?

Mr Chairman, when the hon member referred to the CP’s politburo, I said the hon member was a communist.

Order! Did the hon member for Sout-pansberg say the hon member for Turffontein was a communist?

Mr Chairman, when he said that, I said the hon member for Springs was a communist.

Order! The hon member must withdraw that too.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it.

Order! The hon member for Springs may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I want to invite the hon member for Soutpansberg to repeat his allegation outside this House. I shall not ask him to withdraw it, but I shall deal with him in some other way. [Interjections.]

It will be bloody!

Repeat that outside too, and then, like the hon member Comdt Derby-Lewis, the hon member can withdraw that too. [Interjections.]

The fact of the matter is that that party is undermining South Africa’s international and economic interests, as I have proved here. [Interjections.] I can give another example of how deep-rooted this problem is. There is the example of an international company in my town which was told by its head office to freeze expansion that was to have created 400 employment opportunities and would have cost R75 million. This was done in view of the conduct of CP town councils on the East Rand. They should investigate the possibility of locating that manufacturing plant which is geared to exports to Africa, in one of our neighbouring states.

That is what those hon members do. Then they are sanctimonious about negotiations conducted by this Government in the interests of peace and prosperity for all the people of this country. We shall continue to expose these hon members and their central politburo, which gives town councils these instructions.

Order! According to my speakers’ list, it is the turn of the hon member for Yeoville now.

Mr Chairman, that is news to me, but I am happy to speak if you would like me to.

Order! I would not so prescribe! That is for the hon member to decide. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, our list is different again. [Interjections.]

Let me firstly apologise. I mean no disrespect in what I have said, but we have had terrible trouble with speakers’ lists and that is one of the trials and tribulations which we seem to suffer from at the moment.

I would like to begin by saying that it is unfortunate that the hon member for Innesdal is not here. However, I would like to wish him well in his appointment to The Hague. I think he is going to have a very difficult job, but I think that he will acquit himself well of his task. I would like formally to place my congratulations on record.

I would like to take as my theme something which perhaps other hon members have also spoken about, namely the change there has been in the world over the past few years and how that is actually affecting us. Hon members have referred to what has happened in the USSR and I must say that I am not one of the people who is so confident that everything is going to work out in Russia. I think that it is either reform or reaction and if there is reform in the process which is going on in the Soviet Union, it will bring instability with it, as has already been demonstrated. That instability may then result in a reaction setting in, and if that reaction does set in in the Soviet Union, I think it is going to mean new conflict for the world. I do not think we should live in a fool’s paradise regarding what is going to happen in the USSR.

We have a new President in the United States who is a pragmatist. We have had experience of the things that Republican presidents can do which Democrats are sometimes hesitant to touch. We saw that in the time of Nixon with his relationship with China. Whereas I hope that the new President of the United States will act in a manner which is perhaps close to the role that President Reagan fulfilled, I think we need to be cautious in respect of what is going to happen in the United States.

We have Islam fundamentalism in the Middle East which has introduced a completely new factor into that turbulent region. I think we have to be aware of that and its consequences for Africa as a whole. In Africa we have debt crises, the collapse of economies, starvation, instability and possibly a new plague, namely Aids, which is going to take its toll on this continent. I would like to give one statistic to demonstrate this: Since 1980 the per capita income of some 29 African states has dropped by approximately 1% every year. That means that those countries have got substantially poorer over this period. This is a problem, not only for them, for Africa and for the world but also for South Africa.

We have had the rise of new economic powers in the Far East which have pulled strings in various directions. There is now a new economic imperialism arising in the East.

In Europe we have a new economic order designed to meet the challenges both from the East and the United States and a desire to build up economic strength while keeping political independence. In Southern Africa, while I am one of those who is optimistic in regard to the situation in Namibia, we have to recognise as a fact that it could either be the fall of another domino or on the other hand actually the beginning of a new era of co-operation in diversity due to the necessity which exists in Southern Africa.

All of these things are factors which affect our existence. I do not differ with people who say that the key to our future in world relations lies in Africa. I do not differ with those who say that we have got to stop further sanctions from the United States. What I would like to plead for is a recognition of the challenge which is going to come from the Europe of 1992; the Europe where there are going to be 320 million consumers who in fact are creating a completely new issue; where there is a conflict as to whether or not the new Europe is going to be a protectionist state or whether it is going to be an open community led by the Bruges Group, led in turn by Mrs Thatcher. We must be aware of what the impact on us will be if there is going to be one economic policy for Europe. It has been said that in 10 years some 80% of all economic legislation in Europe is going to be European legislation and not individual state legislation. We must be aware of what the risks are in respect of that in regard to sanctions on South Africa from the European community as it will be constituted in 1992.

We already have very serious problems with the Danes and the Dutch. The issue is in fact whether the key role which Britain can play in the new Europe of 1992, which has already been demonstrated, can be played by the present British Government, whether that role can be played by Britain in the new Europe and whether the anti-sanctions approach of the British Government can prevail in the new Europe. I would like to make the appeal that while diplomatic efforts can be concentrated and planned to deal with all sorts of factors in the world I believe that we have to have a diplomatic effort concentrated and planned to deal with the Europe of 1992.

In that I believe there should be a co-ordination between diplomacy in the ordinary sense of the word on the one hand and the issue of our relationship with bankers and financiers on the other.

I accept that financial people go to Europe from time to time—the present hon Minister of Finance has just gone there. The contacts are kept. We have to deal with the debt rescheduling but the relationship between what has to be done in the financial and economic field and in the diplomatic field in Europe is so clear that particular attention needs to be paid to this. I make that appeal that we should not be caught unawares in regard to Europe of 1992.

The last point I want to make relates to the election campaign. The election is going to come and go but I would like to make one very simple point. Let us please remember that what we say in this election campaign is going to be heard by all South Africans whether they have a vote or not. What we say in this election campaign is going to be heard by the world at large, and what the world at large hears is going to be the thing that is going to effect us in the future. When we make reckless statements, when we do not have regard for what other people may do to us as a result of those reckless statements merely to get a few votes, after the election the whole of South Africa is going to have to pay a price for that recklessness.

I end by saying; please bear in mind that the rest of the world is going to listen to what is going to be said during the forthcoming election campaign.

Mr Chairman, it is always a privilege to be able to participate in this debate. Although we can certainly get at the hon the Minister on a few matters which went awry, it is a privilege to be able to congratulate his department on the successes and one also believes that, at this time in which we are fighting together for our survival, we should merely pause and see what he has done to point the way for us.

The prestige of the RSA has taken a positive turn in the world over the past year. The RSA has taken its rightful place next to the representatives of African countries and observers of the super powers to settle the disputes in SWA and Angola. By correct RSA action in very delicate situations, the false image of the RSA which has been created over the years by international propagandists has suddenly undergone a transformation. The RSA is viewed with greater respect because this country is doing everything in its power, in spite of treacherous Swapo action, to keep the South West Africa/Namibia independence process on the road.

The RSA should capitalise now on the advantage which we have achieved by correct action. This advantage should be applied elsewhere with due consideration. I believe that the confidence which the RSA has been accorded at international level should be put to use in South Africa as a prime priority.

The hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and his officials struggled for some years to improve this image and to create this situation. He said a few years ago that the road of the RSA to international acceptance ran through Africa. I believe that he agrees with Dr Craven regarding sport. Let us therefore make use of the successes of South West Africa/Namibia and Angola as the key to unlocking the doors of confidence to the rest of Africa for the RSA.

I do not want to pretend, however, that no doors are open to us in Africa. Just let us look at what the Republic of South Africa has already achieved in its striving for good neighbourliness. These are the successes which we as South Africans should proclaim from the rooftops so that the world may take note of the indispensable role which the Republic plays in Africa and especially of South Africa’s role as a regional power in Southern Africa.

†The Lesotho Highlands water project, seen from an engineering point of view, is the biggest project of its kind in the world. The first stage will cost R2 800 million, and the eventual total cost will be more than R4 000 million. Lesotho and South Africa will derive tremendous benefits from this ambitious scheme during the construction phase over the next 30 years, and for an indefinite period after the completion of the project.

Wide-ranging co-operation exists between the Republic of South Africa and Botswana despite political differences. Also important are the almost 26 000 to 28 000 migrant workers from Botswana registered in South Africa. The Sour Pan soda project, which was finalised in November 1988 after South Africa had agreed to impose protective customs tariffs on soda ash was followed by South Africa’s guarantee of free access to South African markets. Botswana will receive millions of rand in foreign exchange, and that project serves as a strong labour market for that country’s citizens.

*Mr Chairman, the Republic of South Africa is involved in a variety of development projects in Swaziland. This is further proof of the continued assistance which we offer Swaziland. We offer this assistance in a variety of spheres, for instance in that of roads, in respect of the foot-and-mouth project, the malaria project and in the sphere of training technicians and nurses.

In addition, we also maintain good relations with Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and also with member countries of the South African Customs Union and other regional organisations. The good relations between the Republic and Malawi were reinforced over the past year by the now well-known fact that Pres Banda strives for continued co-operation with South Africa.

Another important incident was the historic meeting between the hon the State President and Pres Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique on 12 September 1988 at Songo. This may be seen to underline the improved relations between the Republic and Mozambique as well as providing proof of the Republic’s efforts toward co-operation and progress in the southern part of the African continent.

During this visit the leaders discussed matters of common interest, such as the necessity for infusing the Nkomati Accord with new life and also the necessity for promoting the spirit of this agreement. The upgrading of the Maputo harbour, the improvement of existing road links, the Cahora Bassa hydroelectric scheme, as well as employment opportunities for Mozambican mineworkers in the Republic of South Africa were discussed.

After the meeting of the two leaders, relations improved at various levels. It was truly an historic event in Africa, especially in the context of Southern Africa.

Furthermore, it is also important to note the fact that the hon the Minister said on 25 October 1988 that we were determined to pursue the improvement in our relations. In spite of all this, however, I think we should confine our attention to a more recent event. This is that on 19 April 1989 Pres Kaunda of Zambia admitted, with regard to peace efforts in Namibia, that this was the first occasion on which African countries had made a joint effort to carry out a decision and in so doing granted recognition to the Republic of South Africa. This is definitely one of the most important statements of the recent years in this subcontinent concerning our relations with Southern Africa.

This important statement by Pres Kaunda holds the possibility for South Africa to realise its ideal of acquiring unconditional international acceptance. For almost a decade nine countries in Southern Africa have made an ambitious attempt to reduce their dependence on the Republic of South Africa and its economy. I am referring to the so-called SADCC countries. These countries have not yet succeeded in developing their economic potential and I believe that this is also a sign to the Western World that they cannot succeed in this unless they receive our co-operation.

I believe that we and the international world should learn the following lesson, which is that no development can take place in the Southern Hemisphere if South Africa is not included. I also believe that South Africa should take note that we cannot bring about peace in Southern Africa or South Africa if we do not recognise the children of Africa. [Interjections.]

Here at home the children of Africa are our fellow South Africans. I should like to see the children of Africa welcomed into our entire political, sociological and economic structure so that we may lead all our children to that goal of peace at the end of the road.

Mr Chairman, my sincere thanks for the opportunity to make a brief announcement about the electronics industry.

I think the Government and the department have come to the conclusion that the electronics industry might, in all probability, become one of the most important industries of the future. Several investigations have been conducted, for example that of the De Waal Committee and the recent one by Prof Christo Viljoen.

In November 1987 we appointed a task group to evaluate the findings and the information gathered in the course of those two investigations and others, and to make recommendations to the Government. The task group concluded its work and made representations to the Government, some of which the Government accepted.

I should like to announce what recommendations, having a bearing on the electronics industry, were accepted. We firstly decided that it was very important for the electronics industry to develop in certain niches as far as certain products, certain technology and certain innovations are concerned, and that the Government would have to grant positive support to this industry. It was subsequently decided to make an amount of R40 million available, over a period of five years, on a very selective basis, for selected projects, products and technology, in accordance with a system we have yet to develop, and we shall presently be making the necessary evaluation programme and guidelines known and issue a statement in this regard.

Secondly, in connection with Samec, the undertaking which manufactures integrated circuits for the industry, we have decided that in principle we shall no longer be supporting the industry but that we shall meet our commitment of approximately R19 million in regard to the industry, R8 million of which has already been paid. After discussions we held with the board of directors, in future Samec will operate completely independently of any State support.

On the basis of a recommendation it has also been decided to examine the rationalisation of the design capabilities in regard to silicon. Relevant discussions have been held. We are certain that there is very little overlapping, but the Cabinet has decided on a purposeful examination of the rationalisation of the existing capabilities in South Africa.

We also made a recommendation, which is at present being investigated by the Board of Trade and Industry, to the effect that in time we should abolish all customs and excise duty on electronic components so that we can make the potential for the manufacturing of electronic products more economical.

The last point on which we decided was that the purchasing of electronic products by the State would be rationalised and co-ordinated on a much better footing. This is already being done, but we envisage redefining the function of the committee we have appointed for that purpose in order to improve the situation even more in the future.

We expect to make a comprehensive statement later this evening or tomorrow morning.

Mr Chairman, at the outset, may I say that I shall be discussing, as has almost become my habit, both the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs, since, unfortunately, I have only one turn to speak. I have done this in the past, and I shall do so once again.

Firstly, I should like to convey our congratulations to the hon the Minister on his announcement with regard to the electronics industry as well as the abolition of excise duties. I thank him for that. It is a positive step.

I also want to take this opportunity to take leave of the hon the Minister on behalf of the CP and say to him that we shall actually miss him in this House. We in the CP have a high regard for him and we think he is a good man. It does not happen every day that one says goodbye to a political opponent like him. We hope his retirement will be enjoyable. I do not know what he has planned, but I know that there will be many things that he will want to do, and we wish him, his wife and his family well.

†I should also like to congratulate the officials of the departments on the tremendous reports they have submitted. It is quite obvious that they are doing their work and we are grateful to them. We are also very impressed with the standard of the reports. However, I do not intend to expand in this regard because there are other matters I should like to raise which are equally as important, if not more so.

I should also like to thank the hon the Minister for the new export incentives that he has announced recently. We agree with him that we need an expansion in the manufacturing sector. With the way in which this news has been welcomed by commerce and industry, we are sure it is going to have positive and immediate effects.

Now that the thanks are over, I should like to come to the nitty-gritty. The fact remains that the state of our economy is still causing everyone great concern. In their latest economic report Volkskas, as reported on in the Die Transvaler of 11 April, has the following to say:

*They go on to express concern over the fact—

They also express concern over the rapid increase in the interest on public debt. I know this is not the hon the Minister’s department, but the fact remains that during the 1988-89 financial year public debt costs increased by 26,6%. South Africa with its small financial base, cannot afford these things.

†Mr Chairman, I think I am right in saying that South Africa is actually now tired of the economic mismanagement that is impoverishing everyone. They are tired of fraud and corruption. Any other Western government would have resigned in shame had three of their members left within a week—including a Minister and a senior member of Parliament. They are tired of rocketing prices that see everyone fighting each month to make ends meet, and pensioners having to live on dog food. They are tired of crippling taxes that are the highest for Whites in the Western World. They are tired of rampant interest rates which make it impossible for the man in the street to keep or even to buy his own home.

On this subject I would like to thank hon members in the NP today most sincerely for the boost which they gave me by reporting about the loss of my house and other reports in their little newspaper—the so-called Die Nasionalis. This loss was also reported in other NP mouthpieces, for example Beeld. Die Burger went to the extent of even putting it on the front page, for which I am most grateful.

These reports have actually had the effect of endearing me to my constituents. Many of them are in a far more serious situation, than I am. They phone me and express this sentiment that they are glad to see that at least there are still some honest politicians in politics in South Africa today who do not resort to corruption and fraud in order to achieve their ends. [Interjections.]

I know I am right. Let me go so far as to say that I was very impressed that certain hon members in this House on the NP side contacted me and expressed their sympathies which I really appreciated. I think I am right in saying that South Africa has had its fill of the Nats and that the voters will deal with them appropriately in September.

We had the story of the petrol price. The hon the Minister spoke about it. Of course 0,3% of the increase was decided because the retail price of petrol had to be adjusted. My question is why? Is it just for the sake of giving them an increase? It is not going to get him any votes. It is in fact losing him votes because that is callous in the extreme. When publications like Finansies en Tegniek start criticising him, he knows that he has gone too far. However, it is no wonder when one sees that the total tax on petrol according to Finansies en Tegniek of 21 April is now 46 cents per litre.

*This does not include other levies for which the Government provides certain services, such as third-party insurance and the anti-sanction equalisation fund. They also mention that the Government defended its decision last year to increase the tax on petrol on the grounds that petrol was cheaper in South Africa than in most other European countries. However, they add that a more relevant comparison would be one between the hours that a worker in each country has to work to earn the price of one litre of petrol.

Moreover, the distances in South Africa are far greater than those in Europe and transport should, therefore, not be penalised unfairly. They also mention that public transport in South Africa is not as well developed as in Europe. This compels certain sectors of the community to rely on their own transport. They conclude by saying that this gives rise to the question as to what extent the economy will be able to accommodate an escalating petrol price without suffering serious damage, and whether the Government will be able to reduce the tax on petrol if that level is reached.

†I want to say this afternoon that if the Government does reduce the price of petrol it will only be because of our pressure on them and because there is a pending election. However, it is all right for the hon the Deputy Minister to laugh. I wonder if he will laugh when he realises that the price of petrol has jumped from 15 cents in 1975, according to this “skietgoed” which I was looking at the other day, to almost 115 cents today.

Today I want to repeat my appeal to the hon the Minister for further stimulation in the local gold industry. The hon the Minister will remember that I appealed for the total abolition of the ad valorem tax on gold jewellery last year. A concession was made for which we are grateful. However, I am convinced that with the small amount of money which comes in, far more advantage would be derived if the ad valorem tax was finally abolished so that our jewellery industry can take off.

I was reading the February 1989 edition of the F W P Journal the other day and came across a very interesting article by Dr Edwards, the president of the Council for Mineral Technology. It starts off saying:

He says this is all very gloomy, yet South Africa holds the key to its future prosperity. I agree with him; in fact, I have expressed these sentiments before. He says wealth does not come easily, and in a competitive and profit-hungry world countries must be resourceful. Only wealth can enhance a country’s gross domestic product. A healthy GDP in South Africa would lead to a multitude of employment opportunities and a national drive towards achievement so evident in the Far East. It would ultimately lead to the elimination of the greatest threat of all facing this country, namely the burgeoning population explosion. He says unless this explosion is curbed, it is guaranteed to blow this country into the Third World from where it may never find its way back again. He goes on to say:

I believe there is an estimated R31 000 million floating around from one share transaction to the other because people are for some reason or another reluctant to invest it.

We talk about the problems we have in connection with capital disinvestment. However, we have capital enough for the immediate developments we need right within the borders of this country, but nobody is prepared to invest. Maybe it is largely due to a lack of confidence in the Government. In fact, I am convinced that that is one of the major factors.

The fact that this happens, leads young people to choose careers in business rather than in technology, which means that when the technological revival really gets under way there will be insufficient technologists in this country to satisfy the demand. In my opinion we have to make a really positive investment in technology. I think the secret lies in the minting of a platinum coin. The House will recall that last year I made a call for the minting of a platinum coin, and I do so again in an attempt to shake up and wake up the Cabinet to the obvious advantages contained therein. In my contribution to this debate last year I covered these advantages. Most important is the off-take of platinum which, even if it equals only the depressed volume of Krugerrand sales, will provide an increased demand for 300 000 ounces of platinum. That is equal to 10% of the present production of platinum in South Africa.

What can the objections to this be? I am sure there are objections. I have heard for example the loss of foreign exchange being objected to, though I believe an extended market is going to be provided, and that it will not affect our foreign exchange at all. I have heard another objection with regard to platinum coins. If we want to have a platinum coin, we must keep platinum in reserve to back up the coinage. However, if a nominal value is given to the coinage this need for back-up is eliminated. Then the objection is uttered giving a nominal value to something which is worth so much more that will make a mockery of our monetary system. However, this is common practice in countries where other coins are minted. We all know for example of the nominal value of the maple leaf at $50 and the Koala at $100. Why cannot we do the same in South Africa?

There is another problem in connection with sanctions, having seen the effect of sanctions on the sale of Krugerrands. We produce 300 000 Krugerrands for domestic consumption. However, taking the drop in our gold production into consideration, I believe platinum could even replace gold. So once again I repeat my call, because in my opinion the immediate benefit of something like this will lead to increased employment. We will need at least another platinum mine to produce the extra 300 000 ounces we need. When it comes to technology, we can levy a percentage commission on the selling price of the platinum coin and finance the development of technology through that. As we know, no new technology is needed for coinage; we already do that.

I now come to another question, and I am going to talk to the hon the Minister of the Budget, because it affects sanctions and it affects something which he alleged in the House which was a distortion of the facts and which has led to disinformation being published even in the NP’s little newspaper. I refer to his speech in the House of Assembly on 23 February, col 1315, and I quote:

If he reads my statement he will see that the whole reason for my statement, which was made on 25 May 1988, just before the United States presidential elections, was that I appealed to the Government to suspend sales until the presidential candidates actually stated their policy as far as sanctions on South Africa is concerned, and not indefinitely. I think that President Bush stated very categorically that he is not prepared to entertain any further consideration of sanctions on our strategic minerals. However, it is interesting that the hon the Minister criticises me for saying we must force the US to purchase their strategic minerals from the Communist Soviet Union. That is a terrible thing. Now the Nats are actually giving parties for the Soviets in South Africa. What has changed since the time when we chased the Soviets out of South Africa? Has it got any better or has it, as I believe, got a lot worse? If there is one country in the whole world that need not fear sanctions—I will qualify my statement by saying it is only a government with guts like the CP will form—it is the Republic of South Africa. Therefore we must have the guts to pick our friends better. What sort of friends are we making under an NP Government? They are so-called friends that we threw out years ago when we still had a Government with courage. What has changed since then? They became worse and worse, but suddenly they are all right for us.

I have here the Ado Parker newsletter of March 1989, the treaty record of the Soviet Union. There is a whole list of treaties. In fact, it is just about the whole of an A4 page. Each one of these treaties has been broken or denounced by the Soviet Union at some time after it was signed. We do not need the Soviet Union; we can do without them. If we have to take the report which I received from the USA regarding the strategic importance of South Africa’s minerals to the USA, it is a clear indication of the USA’s reliance on South Africa. According to table 1 of the report, the USA’s net import reliance on selected minerals in 1987 from all countries, they are 100% reliant for manganese, for natural industrial diamonds, 89%, platinum group metals, 88%, and so forth. They then talk about alternatives to South African strategic minerals and they say except for two of the platinum group metals, platinum and rhodium, andalusite and a special type of industrial diamond and grade of chrysolite asbestos, alternative supply resources exist for the certified strategic minerals. They then talk about the uses and the industrial diamond, which has a classified use in defence communications, and they talk about the platinum group metals mainly used in catalytic converters. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am not going to react to the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis’s speech now; we shall react fully to hon members’ speeches tomorrow in our reply.

I want to touch on two matters at the beginning of the discussion of this Vote. Firstly, with reference to the investigation which we conducted into cotton: The Board of Trade and Industry has just made its recommendations regarding the important clothing and textile industries. The Government has agreed to the promotion of those industries. These industries are of very great importance. They employ approximately 243 000 people and their turnover is in excess of R5 billion per annum. The cotton industry in South Africa actually forms the basis of these industries. Consequently we have seen fit to have a development investigation conducted into the potential of the cotton industry. The Department of Trade and Industry coordinated it and the IDC did the work in this regard, for which I wish to thank them. I shall make a full press statement today on the findings and recommendations of this report. At this stage I just want to say that the investigation brought to light that the cotton industry in South Africa does indeed possess development and growth potential, and this has confirmed the close relationship between the cotton and the textile and clothing industries.

There are certain problems standing in the way of the further development of the cotton industry. These are indicated in the report and attention will now be devoted to those problems by various bodies.

The Department of Trade and Industry also envisages having similar investigations conducted with regard to the further development of the local processing of wool and mohair in South Africa.

The other remarks I wish to make relate to our foreign trade, and specifically to the development of foreign trade relations and the broadening of our commercial base.

The further diversification of our markets abroad is of very great importance to South Africa, for obvious reasons. The Government is working in very close conjunction with the private sector on initiatives to broaden our commercial base. The basic objective of the broadening of the commercial base is, of course, the promotion of export trade in a conventional manner, if possible. If it is unconventional trade that is taking place with a particular country, that trade must be transferred as quickly as possible to the conventional sphere.

I wish to refer firstly to the African countries, in which regard the Department of Trade and Industry is co-ordinating the actions of all Government institutions in the country which are involved in this matter. It goes without saying that Africa is of great importance to us for geo-political reasons, and that it is our natural market. We have established an Africa desk at the Department of Trade and Industry which also serves as a service point for the private sector at which they can receive a one-stop service with regard to information if they wish to conduct trade with African countries.

I also want to refer to the rapidly growing economies of the newly industrialised countries in the Far East. There are many economic opportunities there. It is a power bloc for trade in the future. It is already a sphere of influence insofar as trade is concerned, and the diversification of South Africa’s commercial base in the Far East is of decisive importance to our country and is being promoted by the Ministry and the Department of Trade and Industry.

I also want to refer to the promotion of trade with the Eastern Bloc countries. Steps have been taken to open up and to develop trading channels to these countries as well. Great emphasis will be placed on this campaign during the next year. As the liberalisation of trade in these countries progresses, trading opportunities and future markets of enormous magnitude are opening up for South Africa. Enormous markets are developing in the outside world, markets of which we must take cognizance. We must get a foot in the door so that our private sector will have export opportunities with regard to those places as well in future.

In conclusion I wish to refer to the EEC which, after 1992, is expected to be a fully integrated international market and the largest market in the entire world. There are 320 million people involved in it, a market without limits or barriers. I want to say that our Ministry and the Department of Trade and Industry, together with the private sector, are making arrangements and studying the matter so that South Africa can position itself in relation to this market.

Mr Chairman, before I begin I should like to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis on the retirement of the hon the Minister. We want to wish him everything of the best. He must enjoy his rest and he must leave the problems to the person who succeeds him.

Before I begin, I want to react to the press statement the hon the Minister has just released in connection with electronics. We know that if one wants to make progress in the sphere of electronics, it is very important to be independent. We appreciate the fact that the hon the Minister is going to assist the electronics industry.

I want to focus on the subject of the SBDC today. I should like to make use of this opportunity to discuss the Small Business Development Corporation. Since the SBDC was established in 1981, it has rendered excellent service and has helped many industrialists to establish own businesses. I appreciate the part played by the SBDC in the development of entrepreneurship among all our population groups. By developing small business, more employment opportunities and greater prosperity are created. It is true that large industrial and other enterprises play an important part in the provision and preservation of employment opportunities. They cannot keep up, however, and this state of affairs is emphasised by Dr Anton Rupert in the article “Roots of Enterprise” in the June 1988 edition of Leadership. I should like to quote him:

Sir, I want to associate myself with the view that it is the small business sector that makes or breaks the economy. That is where the employment opportunities must be created. It is preeminently there that unskilled workers and new entrants to the labour force are absorbed in order to emphasise the extremely important part played by the small business sector in the country’s economy. I should like to quote the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the February 1989 edition of the magazine Insig’.

Our people have a problem with deregulation, however. More of our people would be economically active if unnecessary administrative and legal restrictions were removed. Our people are the small businessmen who do business on the streets. Even if the stalls in the streets create traffic problems, the increasing participation of our people in the private sector should not be discouraged by unnecessary restrictions. There are still too many incidents in which local authority inspectors discourage our people because their papers are not in order. By saying this I am not condoning unhygienic conditions and littering. Unfortunately, however, there are too many local authorities that see their major task as being that of regulators instead of developers.

I want to give hon members an example. Someone wants to start a panel-beating or welding business, and he can employ approximately six people. Then there are regulations, however; he can operate only in an industrial area where he will have to incur high building costs. As a result of ventilation, roof heights, floor coverings and equipment that have to be purchased, he can no longer operate his business. Should there be deregulation, he could be an employer and could create employment opportunities. It is very interesting to read the following in the April 1989 edition of Special Dispatch, under the heading “Proposed law will unshackle businesses”:

The article continues:

I want to tell the hon the Minister that the LP is going to accept this legislation with open arms, because what it amounts to is that it will assist our people who live in the Coloured and Black residential areas. Apart from the important work already done with regard to deregulation on the level of central government, one may ask how enthusiastically this is going to be done on the level of local government. I want to ask the Government and the local authorities to do more to implement meaningful deregulation so that the small businessman can also have his place in the sun.

†In an interview in “Roots of Enterprise”, Dr Vosloo, the managing director of the SBDC, says the following:

*In conclusion I want to mention that it is the Government’s accepted policy to encourage effective competition in the private sector. In order to achieve this purpose, more people will have to be allowed to participate in the private sector and certain regulations will have to be amended. Greater participation in the private sector can mean that within a short period we shall enlarge our State and national revenue on a large scale while at the same time combating unemployment.

Before I conclude, I also want to react to what the hon the Minister said about the cotton, wool and mohair industries. I come from the Karoo, which is regarded as the area for wool and mohair.

[Inaudible.]

Unfortunately not. We appreciate the fact that the Government is going to institute an inquiry into the wool industry, because if we can process the cotton and the mohair in the Karoo ourselves, we shall be able to create more employment opportunities for our people.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to speak after the hon member for Nuweveld. Naturally the Government is serious about the development of small business enterprises. I also want to agree with the hon member that there is no better place to begin deregulating than on the level of third-tier government. Unfortunately I cannot react to the hon member’s speech any further, and I know he will understand.

Mr Chairman, it is an exceptional privilege to be able to take part in the discussion of this Vote on behalf of the Government today. So many positive aspects have emerged in the spheres of trade and industry recently that every objective observer has to concede that improvement, change and especially development can be seen in all the activities of this department. This is an indication of the good management of the Government and its decision-makers. In my opinion this is largely responsible for the climate of optimism that is being experienced in the country’s industrial sector at present.

In this connection I can refer hon members to a report in The Argus of 11 April under the heading, “Major SA Export Drive on the Cards”. I quote from the report:

No government can create such a climate on its own. This has to be achieved by sound business practices on the part of the Government on the one hand, but in close co-operation and consultation with the private sector on the other. That is how such a climate is established. It requires special understanding and knowledge of the needs of the private sector as well as of their sensitive points. In this connection even the critical Financial Mail reported very positively in the “Business Legislation”’ section of the 21 April edition. The article begins as follows:

Later on the article contains this very enlightening comment:

This was a very positive article by one of our critics.

Apart from the legislative aspects, constant announcements have been made by the hon the Minister and his deputy since last year, establishing far-reaching changes. This was done after proper consultation, and it underlines the seriousness of the Government with regard to creating prosperity and supporting the provision of employment by way of promoting industrial development.

The tempo of the announcements has been maintained, and today the hon the Minister once again made a very important announcement, this time on the electronics industry. This is an industry which has to play a key role in the world of high technology, especially with a view to exports and the promotion of exports. According to The Argus of 26 April, the hon the Minister said the following on the subject in Stellenbosch:

I am in complete agreement with him.

In these circumstances, of course, it is very pleasant to convey thanks and appreciation as well as praise on behalf of this side of the Committee to the hon the Minister, his deputy, the Director-General and the whole department. I think the well-prepared annual report underlines this commentary and, as the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis said, this was truly very good work.

I want to single out the hon the Minister, because he has managed something that is achieved by relatively few political figures, viz to announce his retirement when at the peak of his public career. After years of service and dedication to his country, he has managed to announce his retirement during a period in which the success of his labour is becoming very clear to all of us. This requires the exceptional judgement of an exceptional man. That which has come into being under his leadership will manifest itself completely and render positive results only long after he has left. We thank him and wish him everything of the best.

I want to refer briefly to some of the announcements and have this placed on record in this debate. I am talking about Botswana’s soda-ash project, the scheme for the promotion of the local television manufacturing industry, the export incentive measures, the announcements in connection with the promotion of the South African motor industry, announcements on the clothing industry and, of course, today’s announcement on technology.

I represent a constituency in the metropolis of Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage, and the motor industry there reacts exceptionally quickly to the general economic climate and measures that may have an influence on the industry. This industry dominates our economy. The enormous revival in our area can be directly ascribed to the motor industry and related industries. Naturally this revival is supported by Mosgas which is very welcome because it is broadening our region’s economic base. The Government is intensely aware of the sensitivity and importance of the motor industry, and they constantly remain in touch with the industry.

I want to come to the hon member Comdt Derby-Lewis who in my opinion made a very strange remark.

†I hope I am quoting him correctly where he said “we have sufficient capital in this country”. Consequently, he says, we do not need any capital from overseas. The fact that the main spokesman of a political party in this country can make this sort of statement shows an ignorance, a shallowness and a laissez-faire attitude towards our economy which, of course, we often see.

*I said the Government was aware of the sensitivity and the climate that influenced the motor industry. I also want to say that the CP has no feeling for or understanding of the economy. What is even more dangerous, however, is that they have no sensitivity to an economic climate. This lack of attunement to business led in our region to one of the greatest mistakes they have ever made. One of the CP candidates, a former member of this House, went so far as to indicate during the municipal election that they would not be too concerned if one of the motor giants in that area were to disinvest and move away from there. He was referring to Volkswagen in Uiten-hage which merely employs 7 500 people. That does not concern the CP!

It is this underlying insensitivity and lack of understanding that has also emerged in their conduct in Boksburg and Carletonville. Of course, this statement cost them the municipal election. That is not all. I want to predict that the hiding they got in the municipal election was not the worst thing that could happen, but that they are going to learn an even greater and dearer lesson in the coming election. [Interjections.]

The local content programme, with the emphasis on value instead of mass as a criterion, has a whole number of objectives and is being phased in over a period of nine years. It has been accepted very positively by the whole industry. Naturally the Government accepts that the system will have to be refined from time to time, that this matter will have to receive constant attention and that there will have to be consultation. There has been a great deal of positive reaction to this announcement, and I want to refer to some of the reaction in this connection. Rapport of 26 March reported as follows:

A report about envisaged expenditure of R10 billion followed in Rapport of 23 April. I should like to refer to this briefly:

I agree that the South African motor industry is going to make gigantic investments which can be directly ascribed to the introduction of this very positive measure. Sanlam also indicated earlier this year that R2 billion would be available for industrial capital specifically to enlarge upon this.

The Government already places great emphasis on the necessity of exports. In this connection hon members would do well to look at the annual report as well as the positive reaction to the hon the Minister’s statement.

With reference to exports, it is very important to quote what the hon the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology said in the Financial Mail. I am in full agreement with him where he said the following:

The hon the Minister referred to that briefly in his introductory speech. With regard to our foreign trade offices, the ministry did a rationalisation in order to facilitate communication so that existing and new exporters could make use of these services. The most recent announcements in connection with our balance of trade surplus which has shown a significant increase is, of course, extremely encouraging. According to the latest information our exports are rising sharply and investment is increasing immensely. The Government has always maintained an open-door policy with regard to its exports and the way in which it deals with trade and industry. I want to contend that we as a country are making a forceful re-entry into international trade and our whole economic view and policy are aimed at the further promotion and support of exports.

As the hon the Minister said, special attention is being focused on our unique situation in Africa, and we intend to work towards this to an increasing extent. He referred to the special desk that had been created and which is aimed specifically at African matters, because as a regional power, we want to disseminate our influence, prosperity and knowledge in our area.

Hon members who may have been in Mozambique recently would certainly have been impressed by the beautiful trade building that has been erected there. We are also prepared to support any new positive steps with regard to trade there.

It is clear that what we are experiencing in exports and investments at present is the result of a well-planned export strategy. I want to predict that if we predictably win the election once again at the end of the year, these aspects will develop even more dramatically. All this taken into account, one cannot but conclude that as far as this Vote and this ministry are concerned, matters are in excellent hands and the Government deserves every credit.

Mr Chairman, firstly, I would like to associate myself and the DP with the good wishes extended to the hon the Minister who is retiring. We wish him well in his retirement. We also congratulate the hon member for Uitenhage on his appointment as chairman of the joint standing committee. I would like to follow the thoughts of the hon the Deputy Minister, Dr Alant, and the hon member for Uitenhage in taking a view on South Africa’s relative position in the world trade scenario. Historically it is my view that we have been far too comfortably tied to the apron strings of our former colonial parents and major allies. As a nation we still have an inwardly-oriented mind-set.

At a time when major re-alignments are occurring in the trade relationships of the world, such an attitude borders on complacency and is dangerous. At the present time the pacific basin economies are surging and causing a major shift of capital and resources from the West to the Far East. As was pointed out, by 1992—only three years away—it is intended that a single European market of 320 million consumers will be achieved. Internally this market will be without frontiers or barriers between the member nations. The great danger that exists for us is the likelihood that access to that market from outside will be increasingly difficult. Thirdly, after decades of paranoiac isolation on the part of Russia and the eastern block countries behind the iron curtain there are signs that they may be about to break out of their closed economic systems and become major players on the western world’s economic stage. Those who follow this trend can derive benefits and those who position themselves incorrectly will face real dangers.

A fourth trend is the changing situation in Southern Africa. With the possibility of peace in this region increasing, the countries of the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference—SADCC for short—which is remarkably absent in the comments we have heard so far from the Government, could begin to assert themselves very much more effectively than ever before.

Taking account of these major economic trends it seems to me South Africa needs a threepronged general trade policy at this time. Firstly, no effort should be spared—I welcome the desk that has been formed, but I do not think it goes far enough—in forging strong co-ordinated and preferably integrated relationships with our neighbouring countries. I specifically refer to the SADCC countries which are among the most important countries in this region. If the Europeans can bridge centuries of enmity to cooperate to form their single market, then the countries of Southern Africa can do the same. I am disappointed that no special mention of a policy towards SADCC was made in the annual report and I ask the hon the Minister to spell out his policy towards this important regional body.

Secondly, we should encourage our business community to become established in the European market well before 1992. Let there be as much policy flexibility as possible to allow our businessmen to establish the necessary beachheads inside post-1992 Europe to protect the relationships we enjoy at present and to be positioned to develop new ones.

Thirdly, and this is in direct contrast with the attitude of the CP, we must launch a major drive to open up new markets and new trade relations with non-traditional trading partners. Let us go deep behind the Iron Curtain to do business if it can benefit our own South African economy. We South Africans must break out of a tunnel vision of the world and treat all trading opportunities on their merits as they affect our own interests. I differ directly with the approach of the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis of the CP of trying to use our mineral wealth to hold the free world to ransom. I believe that approach is reckless and dangerous. We are part of the world, and we have to operate as players on the world stage, taking cognisance of the rest of the world community.

With regard to this third strategy we will unfortunately be faced with severe political difficulties in opening up trading avenues beyond our existing relationships until our internal politics are resolved. However, in the meantime we must and can harness and direct the energies of the private sector to take a lead in that drive. In Austria, for example, the lead in foreign trade is given by the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber which is an autonomous statutory body under their Chamber of Commerce Act, which is funded and controlled by the private sector. Its strength derives from the statutory automatic membership requirement and from the fact that it has the leading role in the promotion of Austria’s foreign trade. The Austrian Federal Economic Chamber runs a major foreign organisation of about 90 Austrian trade centres in all important markets of the world.

The task of leading South Africa into finding new markets wherever possible throughout the world is so important that we cannot afford to allow this Government’s present international pariah status to inhibit the effort. While the Government certainly has a role to play, I believe a bigger role can be played if the private sector follows the Austrian example. I believe at this time the access of the private sector business people to non-traditional markets, especially behind the Iron Curtain, would be far greater than the Government’s access at present. I think there needs to be a partnership in this regard.

Allied to this general appeal for South Africa to be innovative and economically creative if we are to be competitive in a fast changing world, I would like to renew my call of last year for the introduction of the concept of economic free zones here in this country. I repeat my conviction that if Cape Town, for example, were to be given economic independence to use every available device to promote its economy in terms of free-market principles, it could very soon be the Hong Kong of Africa.

Today I would like to raise the question of the free port concept, alternatively called the export processing zone. A good example of what we can achieve is the Hamburg free port which covers some 16 square kilometres, has a turnover of some 60 million metric tons per annum, has over 1 000 companies operating in the free port area and employs almost 60 000 people.

The features and advantages of a free export processing zone are that from the sea to the free port EPZ and vice versa, vessels do not have to report to any customs office for clearance. Secondly, import, export and transhipped goods may be processed commercially; they may be loaded, unloaded, transhipped and stored without any customs restrictions.

In the sanctions climate which we must live in, it would be a major advantage to many overseas businesses to be able to use a South African free port without technically ever entering the Republic. In this way free ports could be used by South Africa to manufacture finished products with South African components and labour, but without the present stigma attached to “manufactured in South Africa”. They might still be sold competitively in markets presently closed to us. Furthermore, there is ample space in our presently under-utilized ports, of which Cape Town is a prime example, where warehouse and storage facilities could be made available at minimal cost for a wide range of manufacturing activities for export.

Some sceptics ask why a free port EPZ will work in South Africa when subsidised decentralisation areas with assistance packages have failed. I regard the Government’s decentralisation policy as a ticking bomb of financial disaster, which has cost South Africa millions of rands on artificially created non-viable areas, such as Atlantis. In the current financial year R700 million is budgeted for the purpose of decentralisation. EPZs, on the other hand, rely on market forces for their success and not at all on subsidies.

The prime attraction of a duty free export processing zone lies in the freedom to move goods in and out without red tape, taxes or tariff barriers. At present there is a facility for business to import raw materials under special rebate of duty. In this regard I refer to item 470.03—goods imported solely for re-export. However, it has been pointed out that this is a hopelessly inadequate provision because, firstly, each item requires a special separate rebate application. Secondly, documentation and administrative requirements are extremely onerous. Thirdly, the rebate does not extend to capital plant and equipment. Fourthly, it has been proven very difficult to obtain this rebate in practice. I therefore earnestly appeal to the hon the Minister, his successor and the department to give urgent attention to the advantages of introducing free port export processing zones here in South Africa.

In the small amount of time remaining to me I would like to raise the question of lead in petrol … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to associate myself with the positive spirit of the previous contributions on aspects of the department’s functions made by several speakers, inter alia the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister and the hon members for Nuweveld, Uitenhage and Constantia. The hon member for Constantia made a good speech, on which I should like to congratulate him.

I want to dwell for a moment on the question of how the Harmful Business Practices Act is functioning at the moment. When the Bill was tabled in Parliament last year, it elicited considerable excitement in certain sectors of the financial press. Severe criticism was voiced against it. It was said inter alia that such a measure was unnecessary. It was also said that it would be used to suppress business. In spite of this criticism the Bill was passed by Parliament, and the Harmful Business Practices Act came into effect on 1 July 1988. The Business Practices Committee, which was appointed in terms of the Act, met for the first time on 6 July 1988. Now, ten months later, the criticism voiced last year can be evaluated on the basis of what happened in practice.

Let us consider first the allegation that the measure was unnecessary. Up to the end of last month 105 cases had been submitted to the committee for consideration, more than 10 per month. Those cases were reported continuously over this period. I can assure hon members that such a number of investigations kept the members of the committee and the officials concerned more than busy. The facts therefore confirm that a need exists. The validity or otherwise of the fear that the measure would be used to suppress business can now also be tested.

I have said that 105 cases have been submitted. In 17 of those cases the committee came to the conclusion, without a formal investigation, on the basis of the facts at their disposal, that insufficient reasons existed to believe that a harmful business practice existed or could develop. More than 16% of the reported complaints were therefore ruled to be unfounded, without a formal investigation on the basis of the facts. This looks like anything but an attitude of wanting to suppress business. In only 18 of the total number of cases the committee addressed formal requests in terms of section 6 of the Act for further information to be supplied.

As regards formal investigations, such an investigation into a reported case cannot be launched without prior notice being given in the Gazette in terms of section 8(4) of the Act. Obviously such a notice can be detrimental to a business undertaking to which it pertains. Consequently steps must be taken circumspectly. Whoever has the power to place such a notice must show responsibility.

This the Business Practices Committee does amply. For that reason in only eight of the 105 cases formal investigations were initiated after notice had been given in the Gazette. Seven of those investigations are still in progress. In only one case out of the 105 a harmful business practice has been declared illegal thus far. This was the case of the well-known Mr Adriaan Nieuwoudt’s sale of stamps which was ended on 23 February of this year in terms of the provisions of this Act.

Talking of Mr Nieuwoudt, I want to point out that his previous activities gave direct rise to investigations which resulted in the present legislation. It was his notorious Kubus scheme which finally brought the inadequacy of the previous Business Practices Act of 1976 to light. That Act had to be changed drastically to deal with his ingenuity. This meant the end of the Kubus scheme but also the end of that legislation. The fact that another ingenious scheme of his was the first to be smashed by this new legislation was another interesting historic course of events. This time it was definitely easier to take effective steps than in the Kubus case.

The statistics I have quoted thus far very definitely do not point to a suppression of business initiative. Let us however consider the typical course of events which has thus far given rise to the few formal investigations in terms of the Act.

A case starts when it is brought to the attention of the Business Practices Committee. This can be done in a variety of ways. A complaint may be made directly by a member of the public, or a complaint may be made via the Minister or the department, or by the South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council, or a member of the committee can initiate it on the basis of his own observations. Complaints have been laid in all of the above ways. The committee and its officials immediately investigate the information at its disposal. If further information is required, attempts are made to obtain it informally and with the co-operation of those involved.

During this process of informal discussion and negotiation the practice about which the objection has been made is usually abandoned or adjusted to a level which is acceptable. The positive objective of this legislation, namely the promotion of acceptable business practices, is therefore frequently achieved at this stage. Only in a few cases is it necessary to go further by formally demanding additional information and launching a formal investigation.

The committee therefore proceeds with praiseworthy circumspection. Indiscreet or inconsiderate actions in an effort to obtain quick results are therefore totally in conflict with the committee’s philosophy. The results achieved by the committee must therefore not be assessed on the basis of the number of practices against which steps have been taken or which have been terminated either. The success of the committee far rather lies in the fairness with which they handle all cases brought to their attention, and the degree of success they achieve with this style.

We in Parliament and the country owe a debt of thanks to the capable chairman, Prof Louise Tager, and her committee for the excellent work they are doing. Absolutely nothing came of the negative predictions made before the Act was passed. The responsible behaviour of Prof Tager and her committee contributed a great deal to this.

The successful implementation of this Act has the potential to promote the economy in more ways than one. In the past restrictive licence requirements were generally used to control unscrupulous businessmen and protect the public against chancers. Unfortunately such restrictive requirements affect everyone—including those persons who do not need it. The successful use of this legislation now means that the businessman’s freedom and right to do business is recognised and respected rather than burdening him with a multitude of rules he must comply with before he can even start. Effective steps can now be taken, in terms of this measure, against the minority who abuse their freedom and right. This kind of ex post instead of ex ante approach is nothing but fair towards the vast majority of honest businesmen who run their businesses honestly. In this sense this legislation is also promoting the essential process of deregulation and the development of the free market system. It is also promoting the credibility and acceptability of the system among its participants, many of whom are underdeveloped, poor, elderly or otherwise underprivileged.

As the Business Practices Committee makes progress with its functions and it becomes known how effectively steps are taken against such practices, the temptation to carry on such unacceptable practices will also gradually decrease. The scope and quality of consumer protection will increase to the same extent. In contrast with the dire predictions made, the Harmful Business Practices Act is a fine, positive measure which strikes a healthy balance between the interests of the entrepreneur and those of the consumer. This is conclusive proof of the Government’s commitment to promoting the economy in a way which is also in the interests of the consumer. However, this does not mean that the consumer must not look after his own interests as well. The public would do well to remember that generally speaking it is not possible to make money quickly in a way which is also safe and assured. Elderly people in particular, who cannot recover big losses in their lifetime, must bear this in mind.

Yielding to the temptation to try to make money quickly easily leads to instant losses. The basic rule for the consumer has always been: Be careful. This remains a sound approach. It is not the State’s function to prevent people from making fools of themselves. In any case, the State will never put an end to all exploitation. No government has or will ever create a perfect world. However the State has a duty to create a suitable and practical legal system and a proper business framework, as well as a responsibility to establish a balanced system of consumer protection. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am very grateful to be able to take part in the discussion of this Vote. Trade and industry do not actually constitute a political matter, but the approach adopted by the hon member of the CP was to take a firm hold of the subject and rant and rave about it. As far as that party’s boldness is concerned, I should just like to issue a warning that if trade and industry were to be based on their attitude of boldness and pluck, our country would very soon become bankrupt. The reason for my saying this is that I read an article …

About Boksburg?

No, Sir, not so much about Boksburg, but rather about the Budget that has been set out so well and in terms of which everything is up; salaries and so forth.

However, I wish to speak about the Small Business Development Corporation. We have spent, or provided, a great deal of money on small business development and we should like those people in the small business world who have borrowed money and who are being assisted, to be able to obtain a loan in an easier manner. We see that whenever the SBDC lends money to these people, there is no protection for the people in those businesses. For example, if the SBDC lets a building to people in order to run any type of undertaking there, I cannot understand how it is that similar businesses are developed near those shops. They are in direct opposition to this man who has borrowed money from the SBDC and who is now renting the building. Those similar businesses are then opened up on his front doorstep.

I shall give hon members one example. Quite a number of small business concerns have been established in Bloemfontein. A whole number of stalls from which precisely the same types of business are being run, have been erected in front of these people. This is detrimental to these people’s business. The people are dissatisfied. There is no protection against these people. People borrow money and pay the SBDC back. For this reason we must ensure that these people are protected and we must help them to run a business so that they can make a living.

Deregulation has captured everyone’s imagination. People have established businesses and borrowed money. Whilst appeals have been made in this House for small business development to be exempted from regulations, I want to ask that these people who also have such businesses should also be exempted from regulations. These regulations are ruining our people. For example, if one employs two people there is a regulation which determines what salary one must pay to each of them. However, one then finds that these people cannot keep their heads above water. We ask that whilst we are assisting the industrialists at the industrial level, we should also ensure that the small businessmen are in a position to make a living.

I appreciate the fact that a further R41 million has been appropriated for the motor industry and I am pleased to hear that exports have increased beyond expectations. It is wonderful that exports are so good. In view of this we in this country must realise that it is in our own interests to trade with foreign countries. However, our industries will always suffer under the hurtful and discriminatory legislation in the country. Will the hon the Minister please ensure that our industrialists are placed in a position to do good business in foreign countries, and that the apartheid legislation that is presently hampering our exports, is abolished.

The CP must please desist from wrecking industrial development in this country. It is due to their policy that our country’s economy is collapsing. I repeat that industrialists will not make any headway as long as they are being hampered by the pettiness of the CP. This country would have made a great deal of progress and we would not have been suffering under disinvestment and boycotts if the necessary development had taken place at the political level. Due to the sort of statements the CP makes, our country will definitely not be able to keep its head above water. We shall not be able to do so. Hon members know that the Coca-Cola company and many others have withdrawn from South Africa. Why? This ought to open our eyes. Those who wish to save the country and those who wish to help the country must stand together and support one another in order to help the industries of this country.

Mr Chairman, I hope that the hon member who has just spoken will pardon me for not replying to him, but I merely want to tell him that this country reached its peak in the economic sphere when the NP was still applying CP policy. He should therefore not be so quick to disparage us.

Mr Chairman, permit me in the first place to express a word of sincere thanks to the Director-General and all the officials of the department for the excellent service which they have furnished over the past year. I should also like to wish the hon the Minister health and happiness in his retirement and I hope that he will spend many happy years with his family.

I have always regarded him as one of the true gentlemen in Parliament. I see that his deputy, with whom I now have so much to do, Dr Alant, is following his example and I am grateful for this. The hon the Minister need not be concerned about his successor because we shall be nominating a person in Wonderboom this week who will succeed him in Parliament.

In the short time at my disposal I want to touch upon two matters in particular. The first is the Consumer Council. I have to congratulate them on their annual report. In it the Chairman of the South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council says that sustained price rises and unacceptably high inflation are indications that business morality still leaves much to be desired. The result of this low business morality was that the council’s personnel had to make every effort to deal with the rapidly increasing number of complaints. Furthermore the consumer, who is continually admonished to take in his belt a few more notches, has noted the continued exploitation, money-making schemes, corruption and rumours of corruption with concern. The exceptional increase in the number of complaints, by telephone and in writing, which have been received by officials of the council, are evidence of a growing need for consumer information and protection and the great dissatisfaction of the man in the street who always has to bear the brunt. The number of complaints lodged with the Consumer Council increased by 139,62% to a disturbing 32 126 in 1988. We thank Mr Jan Cronje as well as his staff at the Consumer Council who furnish most excellent service. A ray of light and a pleasing aspect is the business sector’s increasing interest in consumerism. Businessmen are now beginning to realise that it is in their own interests to have satisfied consumers as customers. The grinding economy and especially unpredictable interest rates cause consumers to find it almost impossible to be able to make purchases or budget judiciously. There are numerous examples of cases in which consumers could live comfortably within their budgets when interest rates were reasonably low but were then caught unawares and even got into trouble when interest rates suddenly soared.

The passing of the Harmful Business Practices Act, Act 71 of 1988, which was also discussed by the hon member for Stellenbosch, provided a ray of light to the consumer in my opinion. This legislation now makes it possible to deal with swindling and suspect business practices more authoritatively. This Act gives consumers considerably more muscle. It not only deals with individual swindlers, but also looks into suspect activities and excessive price structures. Consumers should realise that merchants may charge almost any price for a product. The onus therefore rests on the consumer to penalise businessmen by not purchasing their products or services if he is not satisfied with the price. Excessive prices are not to be tolerated. If a product or service is too expensive, do without it instead. Nobody can manage without the consumer’s money.

This also applies to exploitation. A characteristic of economic times such as the present is the drastic increase in the numbers of swindlers and exploiters. If the consumer falls into one of these traps, he should do everything in his power to bring such rogues and deceivers to book. The Government is not blameless, however, and to my mind is one of the greatest sinners as regards price hikes. The increase in the petrol price has consequences across a very broad front. The price of diesel was increased by 11,9c per litre and that of petrol by 7c. This will result in a motorist with a medium car having to cough up about R140 more a year and further price rises are not impossible. I want to make an urgent appeal to the Government to revise the tax element in the price of fuel as soon as possible.

Serious concern has also been expressed in agricultural circles because three rises in the price of diesel since September have increased farmers’ fuel costs by approximately R450 million a year. I contend that this increase was announced months in advance because it would have proved an even greater embarrassment to the Government shortly before the election. Our people’s memories are not so short, however, and the voters will certainly deal with these people and with the Government.

We continually see headlines in the newspapers such as “Big squeeze as taxes, bond rates erode buying power”, “Verbruikers sal meer moet opdok”, and “Horror scenario for vehicle prices”. I want to mention here that a well-known German model which cost R7 994 in 1984 costs R18 210 today, 2,3 times as much as in 1984. “Rente op huise styg weer”, “Water 16% duurder”. In Die Transvaler of 8 February 1989 we find headlines such as “Huise se paaiemente 36% hoer” and on 26 April 1989 in Beeld “Moeilike tye le voor vir die verbruiker”. One could go on like this. The consumer is bombarded with price rises of staple foods and everyday consumption merchandise and it is becoming more difficult for the man in the street to make a living.

I want to draw the hon the Minister’s attention in particular to reports which appear regularly in the newspapers and in letters which people write to newspapers. I am referring to a letter in Beeld from “Oom Albert van Springs” who wrote about “Inflasie, dodelike party”. He says:

He continues:

As a result of increased prices, pensioners and other people simply cannot lead a decent life today. I have received a list from the Consumer Council of price rises since 1988 which reads like a serial. If one examines this, it is actually the ordinary person who is affected. In this way, for instance, we see that for January 1988:

The picture for February was as follows:

And so it goes. The ordinary, average person simply cannot cope with these price rises any longer. As we have a state of emergency in the country as regards security, the question arises whether the time has not come, as far as our economy is concerned, that we should announce a state of emergency. It no longer helps for people in my constituency to work overtime because they are simply taxed on that. It is especially disturbing that 2,1 million South Africans out of a total population of 30 million are liable for tax according to the most recent tax statistics.

In the short time at my disposal I want to refer to another matter on a lighter note, viz the CSIR. It is pleasing to hear that the drastic restructuring of the CSIR over the past two years has already produced such good results and that the organisation achieved 90% of its objective in the 1988-89 financial year by earning R158,5 million from contract work. This is more than 40% higher than in the previous year. This performance is even more remarkable if one takes into account that personnel numbers were reduced by about 500. The CP wishes to express its thanks to Dr Louw Alberts, the chairman, and the other people involved in the CSIR. These people achieve performances of outstanding quality and our country is proud of them and of our scientists and I want to request that we grant these people our financial support for the work which they do.

Since its establishment 43 years ago, the CSIR has provided a significant contribution in making South Africa a scientific and technological power to be reckoned with. The CSIR’s Foundation for Research Development is aimed at high-level labour forces and research development at universities, museums and technikons. The FRD has obtained greater autonomy and the decisive role it has to play in the development of labour forces has been established for the great challenges which await South Africa in scientific and technological spheres.

An indication of the extent of this challenge is the prediction that ten times as much progress will be made in the next 12 years as in the past 12 years. One has to face the fact that, although there is a flood of school-leavers—and more on the way—at present South Africa is heading for a shortage because these people are not properly trained. I think that hidden talents which definitely exist should be exploited. Because universities are currently under pressure to rationalise, the responsibility of the FRD is increasing, not only to develop the hidden talent of our youth, but also to ensure that research and development work of importance is pursued at universities, museums and technikons. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Standerton says the blame for the unacceptably high inflation rate of 13% in South Africa should be laid squarely at the door of the NP Government. It is a fact that the NP is not satisfied with an inflation rate of 13% and that it is going to try by means of good financial management, the improvement of productivity and other measures to bring the inflation rate down to at least a single-digit figure and—if possible—to place it on the same level as that of our foreign trade partners as soon as possible.

It is truly a remarkable achievement that the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology and his deputies have succeeded in maintaining the real growth rate at 2% over the past few years and that we have an inflation rate of only 13%, in view of the fact that we are cut off from funds from overseas to a great extent, that investment has to be initiated out of our own capital funds, that there are sanctions and boycotts against South Africa, that disinvestment is taking place—as was the case with Mobil recently—and that it has to be financed out of our own capital funds. In view of all these facts, it is indeed an exceptional achievement and we congratulate the hon the Minister and his deputies most sincerely on their department’s achievement, particularly in the field of export promotion.

I want to pay a bit more attention to this matter. We hope in any event that the world will wake up and cease these senseless sanctions and boycotts against our country, because they do more harm to the people for whom this is intended than they help them.

We are bringing about peace in South West Africa as well as in Southern Africa in general. We are changing South Africa into a country where individual and group rights will be implemented without discrimination, and where people will accept the implementation and assurance of group rights without a sense of outrage. On this basis South Africa’s economy simply must improve in future.

It is a fact that increased wealth and job creation in South Africa will be based on exports to a great extent in future—exports with any trading partner. South Africa does not really believe in sanctions and boycotts. In fact, we do not believe in blackmailing other countries by means of our minerals or by any other methods whatsoever, because we know what sanctions and boycotts can do to one. It is a fact—I agree with the hon the Deputy Minister—that Africa is a natural trading partner and that the African continent is an enormous market which exporters should concentrate on to a greater extent.

We are also grateful to hear of the latest initiatives in the Eastern bloc countries and in the Far East—in Thailand and the younger industrial development countries. These are vacuums which we really should fill. The role of import replacement and inward industrialisation as a dynamo for economic growth in this country has been played out to a great extent. Obviously there is still room for further improvement in this area, and I believe that we shall make use of the gap, however small, which still exists in this regard. South Africa’s future economic growth will, however, depend mainly on exports.

South Africa has four export incentive schemes designed to achieve certain aims. There is the general scheme in terms of which aid is made available to all exporters and which is allocated according to a formula which promotes, inter alia, added value and increased local content for export products. There is also the structural adjustment scheme which is tailor-made and which the Board of Trade and Industry designs for a specific industrial sector with specific aims. It aims at job creation, a decrease in imports and the promotion of exports. Then there is also the so-called scheme B which contains tax gains for exporters in the form of a tax grant. There is also scheme D which will come to an end at the end of the 1991-92 financial year.

We want to encourage the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology and his Deputy Ministers to keep up these export promotion schemes, to make the necessary adjustments continuously in order to ensure that these schemes achieve their aim, namely to promote exports for South Africa, and to keep an eye open for any further shortcomings. We know the hon the Minister and his hon Deputy Minister are watching events closely in this regard.

Since reference has been made to the NP’s economic policy, I think that before the election one should take a look at the opposition parties’ economic policies. We must make sure that the voters who are going to support the DP or the CP will know what they are going to vote for.

The opposition parties to the left and the right of the NP have a hodgepodge of ideas and economic aims; it is a kind of stew. It is interesting to note that the more radical a person to the right or left becomes, the greater his inclination towards socialism. People such as Prof Sampie Terr-blanche who is known for his support of a welfare state, is caught up in the DP, for example. Then there is the hon member for Randburg who visits Lusaka every now and again to receive his orders. He also openly supports a welfare state. Since he visits Lusaka so often, I wonder whether he has not yet received the message there that the ANC is in favour of the confiscation of wealth on a large scale in South Africa. By the way, he is an interesting member to be told this. He has a very strong socialistic inclination.

The DP also has people such as the hon member for Constantia. We know he supports the free market and not socialism. He is a capitalist. However, there are people in his party who are very strongly inclined towards socialism.

Let us take a look at the other opposition parties such as the CP. The chief spokesman of the CP, the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis, favours the idea that South Africa should blackmail the USA and other countries left and right with its strategic minerals. Does the hon member know what that means? If the CP were come into power in South Africa and if he were to become the Minister of Economic Affairs, total sanctions and boycotts would be instituted against South Africa within a week. If that hon member becomes the Minister of Trade and Industry, our country’s growth rate will collapse to such an extent that no school-leaver—White, non-White or whoever—will be able to find a job in this country.

The CP is a party which is bent on looking for trouble for our country. The hon member for Carletonville’s viewpoint that traders and businessmen with Black clients should move to the Black townships, is a recipe for chaos and unemployment in this country.

The CP’s policy of placing South Africa’s economy in various economic compartments in all the homelands is a recipe for a failed economic policy. [Interjections.] It is a recipe for poverty in South Africa. [Interjections.] Five hon members in the CP are also members of the AWB and they are squarely in favour of national socialism. They are in favour of a policy in terms of which property and businesses belonging to non-Afri-kaners in this country should be confiscated and nationalised. Certainly that is what certain hon members in the CP also support.

Name them!

The members of the AWB gave a solemn undertaking to support the AWB’s policy and programme of principles. If those hon members have never read that programme of principles, they are welcome to go and see what it contains. Is it not those hon members who claim that privatisation in South Africa amounts to selling out the nation’s assets? [Interjections.] The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis is nodding his head; he says yes. It is selling out the nation’s assets. What do they want to do? They want the State to nationalise private undertakings. That is really what he wants to do. He will put the policy which the NP is implementing at present, into reverse when he becomes the Minister of Trade and Industry if the CP should ever come into power. [Interjections.] That will mean that he will nationalise the industries and particularly the larger industries in this country. In addition, it has to be placed in Afrikaner hands. That is the AWB’s policy and there are five of them in the ranks of the CP. [Interjections.] The CP, like the DP, have an inherent factor of socialism in their midst which is a danger to our country and will ensure that we become poorer. The NP is the party which will stimulate economic growth.

Mr Chairman, I would like to take issue with the previous speaker. To suggest, as he did a moment ago, that the economic policy of the DP is socialist I think is fundamentally untrue. [Interjections.] We have made it quite clear in policy documents that we have made public. I would suggest that he read them. We wholeheartedly support free enterprise and a free enterprise economy. [Interjections.] However, we recognise that in a country such as ours—where there is an enormous discrepancy between the very rich and the very poor and where there has been ongoing unequal opportunity for many decades—that the State has a significant responsibility in terms of providing for such people who have been disfavoured in terms of a free economic situation. Further I would like to say that to state that the NP is the only party that offers a policy which creates opportunity for economic development when we see the circumstances that South Africa now has to face in terms of the world-wide economy, is also fundamentally untrue. [Interjections.]

No hon member in this House can argue that the medium to long-term forecast for the South Africa economy is good. Whilst it is good to be positive, it is totally unrealistic and irresponsible to be over-optimistic. Like other beleaguered nations we show a growing tendency to be euphoric and to concentrate our thinking on the short term. For there is much that is wrong. A chronic shortage of foreign investment and a drying up of foreign loans, sanctions, disinvestment, etc, are indicative of where we are headed, and it is not a rosy picture.

Last week Mobil Oil, as mentioned by the previous speaker, decided to throw in the towel and to join the 520 or so other companies which have sold up and left—companies such as Coca Cola, Polaroid, Rank Xerox, Leyland, Ford and many others. Seventeen of them are from Australia, 21 from Canada, 10 from West Germany and a staggering 350 from the USA.

A second unhealthy tendency is to believe that poor economic performance is due to factors that are beyond our control. This is not so. Quite simply, the forces adversely affecting our economy all arise from the deliberate action of this Government, namely its R4 billion per year apartheid policies. These policies manifest themselves in four principal ways. Firstly there is the lack of investment, which I have touched on; secondly, a persistent double-digit inflation rate, largely caused by the high level of unproductive Government expenditure; thirdly, high military expenditure, both direct and indirect, through taking highly trained men out of productive employment; and fourthly, productivity, which is recognised to be low.

It is in the area of productivity that this department has to bear responsibility. Low productivity derives primarily from poor education, particularly for Blacks; being cut off from technological advances; long travelling distances and poor living conditions, and general alienation of the work force.

Under these circumstances it is foolhardy to bring down the shutters—as has been suggested by our friends in the CP—and to make enemies of our former trading partners. Yes, we have to protect our own interests primarily, but surely in the hope that we shall find our way back into international business circles. We have to be extremely cautious when considering actions such as breaking licence agreements in order to export. In this regard I am pleased to note that the legislation dealing with this has been held on ice, and I sincerely hope that it will not be necessary.

Many of these factors which I have mentioned I admit are beyond the control of this department, but they do determine the ground rules and the atmosphere within which we have to operate. Despite the gloom surrounding us, I believe this department has to free up the economy and promote business development and growth. We welcome some of the positive actions which have been taken, such as the new export incentive scheme, import replacement strategies, privatisation and deregulation, and many other measures. It is a fact that whilst we may have many well-run businesses, we also have those which have been cocooned behind tariff protection and other measures that encourage uncompetitiveness. Fresh approaches being taken by this department deserve our support. To succeed, Government needs business support, and must therefore act in such a way as to encourage such support.

I wish to take issue with this department on one matter, and that is the manner in which the 60% import surcharge was imposed in September last year. It is totally unacceptable not to grant relief to importers who are already committed to import. In some cases goods already on the water were subject to surcharge and this created financial hardship. If the surcharge is to discourage imports it was already too late in certain instances. The importer no longer had the option of cancelling, but had to find the additional cash. It amounted to retrospective action against which the importer was powerless to act.

I wish to read from a letter from a businessman who wrote to the department and said the following:

I am aware that there were instances where allowances were made, but I cite merely one example of a small business where this was not the case. His request was in fact turned down.

This sort of cavalier treatment does nothing to create goodwill between businessmen and this department. As I said earlier, this goodwill is absolutely necessary if we are going to make some of the good and sound measures work which have been introduced recently. It is illogical, unfair, and smacks of the worst form of bureaucracy, and I ask the hon the Minister to prevent this sort of thing happening again in the future.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pinelands will appreciate it if I do not follow his line, because I wish to touch on another subject which is a little bit easier. I think that at this stage of the day it is much more appropriate.

*As hon members know, the Liquor Act of 1977 was recently revised and replaced by the new Liquor Act of 1989. I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister sincerely.

The hon the Minister has announced his retirement. With this Act he has given us, may I wish him good health every day with the enjoyment of a glass of wine with his meal. We thank the hon the Minister and also the Chairman of the Liquor Board, Mr Tommy Vorster, and his board members as well as all the officials who worked hard to get this Act on the Statute Book. We are all aware that a revision of the old Act was essential and that this was an extensive task.

When one talks about a product such as alcohol, there can be great difference of opinion about the control or lack thereof of such a product. It is accepted world-wide, however, that control over liquor sales is necessary and is in the interests of the public. All that remains is the open question: To what extent must this be done? It is common knowledge that the old Liquor Act of 1977 had become obsolete and could no longer keep up with the interests of interested parties or the community and its changed needs.

Allow me, Sir, to single out some of the important provisions of this Act on this occasion. In the first place, in correspondence with the Government’s call for deregulation and privatisation, strong representations were addressed by the entire liquor industry that the large variety of licences be done away with. A number of authorisations existed. In this new Act, however, there are only certain categories of licences, which I believe is all to the good in respect of the entire industry.

Secondly the liquor industry is grateful about the fact that the annual meeting of the Liquor Board will no longer take place in specific areas, but that this will now take place much more informally in the relevant regions. In addition the chairman now has the power to hold these meetings in a much more informal way. If there is perhaps a small mistake in an application in future, he will be able to condone it. I want to tell hon members that with this simplified procedure, we have succeeded in promoting greater freedom of competition with regard to the entire industry. We have succeeded in reducing the cost related to this considerably, but I want to tell the hon the Minister that in future we shall have to look at some of the provisions in which there can be even more freedom. I shall come back to that in a moment.

The interests of the relevant local communities will also carry much greater weight in the granting of licences when these licences are considered in the regions in future, because members of the board will then have much greater knowledge of the particulars of that locality.

In England we see the important fact that the hours in which liquor is sold by certain licenceholders were extended recently. This was done in Scotland approximately 10 years ago. Statistics now show that after the trading hours were extended and things were made easier, the offences as a result of drunkenness as well as drunken driving decreased considerably. Consequently I personally am very pleased that the trading hours of liquor have in some cases been extended in this new Liquor Act of ours. I am sure we are going to experience the same positive results as are being experienced in Scotland and now also in England. I should like to quote to hon members from the magazine Harper’s which in turn quoted from the Daily Mail in London:

I want to quote a last sentence:

†Mr Chairman, another amendment which has to be welcomed by the participants in the liquor industry as well as the consumers, especially the consumers, is the provision that liquor may in future be tasted at the premises of various licensees. These provisions will help the consumer in his choice between the various types of liquor, especially where the consumer must choose between our excellent variety of quality wines.

Wine farmers and co-operative societies welcome the relief they have been granted in respect of storage of liquor on other premises than the premises where the wine is being made. This improvement will definitely enable the wine producer to meet the demands of the consumers on my right and to my left in a more efficient way.

*In conclusion I should like to point out that the new Liquor Act ostensibly grants the users thereof more accessibility than previous liquor legislation. I repeat, that is very important.

The hon the Minister must be congratulated on this exceptional approach of his which is finding substance in this legislation. With this new Liquor Act, the hon the Minister and his department have facilitated the selling of liquor products to the public. The purpose of this is not to effect greater consumption as such, but to facilitate matters for the public.

I also want to thank the hon the Minister, however, for maintaining a good balance between free distribution on the one hand and stricter action against licensees who transgress on the other. One is pleased to see that. On behalf of the industry we are very grateful for that, because the hon the Minister has achieved a very good balance.

I am convinced that this Liquor Act will meet with everyone’s approval, because in my opinion it is to everyone’s benefit, from the producer to the consumer.

Mr Chairman, on behalf of my party I want to say that we are sorry to bid the hon the Minister farewell. We also want to thank him for the good work which he has done for South Africa. We wish him health and strength in the future.

To overcome poverty not only implies the transformation of agriculture, which includes the redistribution of land, but also a restructuring of the relationship between capital and labour. The question of power and possession is of the greatest importance.

According to a report in Die Burger of 25 January 1989, a Carnegie research project revealed that there were two million unemployed in the country in 1976. In 1981, 21% of the economically active population was unemployed and unemployment continues to increase. In certain areas up to 50% of the inhabitants are unemployed. Mr Chairman, a prime cause of increasing unemployment in South Africa is long-term declines in the world economy. This has been aggravated in recent years by an unfavourable political climate for private investment by local or foreign investors. I shall quote from Die Burger of 21 January 1989:

Last year about 30 000 Blacks lost their work owing to the withdrawal of American companies. Altogether 162 American companies had withdrawn from the country by the end of last year. This not only left people unemployed but also homeless and caused large-scale malnutrition. The latest Bill which aims to prohibit all trade with South Africa is the brainchild of the representative for California, Mr Dellums, who wants to have it passed by the American Congress next month. It also supposedly has to compel the remaining 149 American companies in South Africa to withdraw.

We as God-fearing South Africans see in the Bible, however, that God will not burden his children beyond their strength. American shareholders and the mining industry in particular run the risk of losing millions of rands because this legislation will force them to sell their shares. If they do not this, they will be prosecuted.

I want to quote the following from Rapport of 15 January 1989:

I also want to quote the following from Beeld of 23 February 1989:

In South Africa the Competition Board plays the key role in the process of deregulation by means of the advice it has to give the Commission for Administration. In this regard important work has already been done in the spheres of licensing, trading hours, taxis and the position of Black entrepreneurs in general. In spite of the general acceptance of deregulation at central government level at present and the important work which is done in this regard, the question is how much enthusiasm is brought to doing constructive work at local government level. It is at local government level in particular that the small businessman takes out his licence and submits his building plans and has to be accountable to the health inspector. There are unfortunately still too few indications of local authorities who evaluate their regulations critically and remove unnecessary restrictions. There are still too many indications of local authorities who see their main role as that of regulators instead of developers.

Another concept which, like deregulation, is the order of the day at present, is privatisation. This includes the transfer of assets or activities from the public to the private sector. This is motivated chiefly by the higher returns on assets which are generated in the private sector as a rule. There are certainly exceptions to the rule, but the private sector is generally more productive because survival forces it to be productive and the changing demands of the market compel it to be adaptable.

Workers and managers are not subjected to the discipline of the markets to the same degree at all. That is why they, with all due respect to the corps of hardworking officials, are inclined to be unproductive. Privatisation is therefore ultimately aimed at the more effective use of scarce resources in the economy.

It is only right that we should want to make our total economy more productive by privatisation. It is also a good thing that, as the hon the State President envisaged, returns on the privatisation programme will be partly channelled to development projects. One of the facets which we should also build into this privatisation programme is that the small businessman should get his share too. When we talk about large projects such as Sasol, Foskor, the SAA and so on, we should not forget the numerous smaller State assets and functions which can be privatised successfully.

As in the case of deregulation, we should first re-examine our local authorities with the small businessman’s interests in mind. Local authorities operate numerous services and activities which could be transferred to smaller private entrepreneurs successfully. One thinks of refuse removal, security, cleaning services, maintenance of buildings, etc. Are our local authorities engaged in a critical evaluation to create small business opportunities, and therefore greater prosperity for their communities in this way?

I spoke on deregulation earlier. There is an essential connection between privatisation and deregulation. Both comprise the scaling down of State intervention in the economy: Deregulation by cutting back on regulatory control of business activities and privatisation by decreasing State property and curtailing State activity in the economy. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in following on the hon member for Heideveld. He raised a few matters, one of which was sanctions. I want to state that sanctions would not have hit this country if it had not been for the CP’s stupid policy. [Interjections.] What we continue to experience today is still to be blamed on the CP image and the image which it has created of the White overseas.

In the first place, I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to consider legislation to curb industrial espionage. During the past year a case came to my attention concerning two people who visited a certain factory pretending that they were consultants to a city council and that they wanted to obtain more information about a new product from the factory concerned which would be used by them as consultants. Because the factory involved is developing this product in close co-operation with Eskom, these people were admitted and informed.

After they had left the premises, the matter was discussed with Eskom and it was discovered that they were engineers from an opposition group. The question was referred to the Attorney-General who later said that, for certain reasons, he was unable to prosecute. This indicates that a great deficiency exists in the legislation and I request that serious investigation be conducted into this urgently because we are living in a period in which South Africans come up with splendid inventions. That is why I believe that what we manufacture in our factories should also be kept from other people within our country. There are so many other countries which have investments and interests in our country that we have to preserve this. We cannot permit inventors’ rights to be eroded in this way, especially if we run the risk of State institutions being dragged into such charges of espionage.

A second case which I consider requires investigation is the ridiculous situation which is created by CP town councils. I am referring to what happened during the past week when a CP town council caused a restaurateur to be unable to serve people of his own race in his own shop. The Golden Lake Restaurant in Boksburg …

The town council says that is not true.

I do not care what the town clerk says.

The hon member should go and take a look at what decisions that town council has reached. Then he will know what we are talking about. He and his party cannot run away from this racist policy which they are engaged upon now. For years the Golden Lake Restaurant in Boksburg had the right to admit Chinese there. The CP town council has now decided that Chinese may no longer go there to have a Chinese meal. [Interjections.]

I want to tell hon members that CP members have been going there to have meals with the Chinese for years. They even hold functions there at which they present a Chinese theme. This is the extent to which Chinese culture has impressed them, but then they go and insult these people. They are our allies who have great interests in South Africa as regards trade and industry and who are assisting South Africa in combating those sanctions which we have just been discussing.

At various places in Boksburg … [Interjections.] … the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis …

Order! The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis has had his turn. The hon member for Boksburg is welcome to his turn to speak.

I have known him to be like that since the time of the provincial council. He just has a big mouth. There is no sense in what he says; he simply makes a noise. Because of the CP town council’s policy in Carletonville and that in Boksburg, businessmen are being harmed drastically. We are aware of various CP businessmen in Boksburg who are going under. I have brought proof to this Chamber of CP supporters who have written to me to say that they have to close their businesses.

Nobody is exempt from these CP’s foolish decisions and trade and industry is being adversely affected in our towns. It does not help to take legal steps against such a town council either, because the person taking legal steps is the ratepayer. He is paying to fight a case against himself, and that is why this requires our attention.

The councillor who takes decisions does not care a rap what happens to the business fraternity. He washes his hands of them. While he is enforcing this foolish CP policy there, he can do as he likes. We had the case of the hon member for Over-vaal’s stating that, if no buying was being done in Boksburg, he already had 800 people who would go and live there and buy there. Eight hundred people represent less than 2% of Boksburg’s buying power. Hon members can understand how this affects such a place.

In Boksburg the town council had already had two large projects to the value of R136 million approved. Both were placed on ice—one was to have been started in the centre of the town right in front of the town hall—because of decisions which this CP town council had taken. Assessment rights which would have been brought in by only those two business sites amount to R700 000 per annum. This is more than the total income of a town like Barberton. I see the hon member for Barberton is not here at present. I believe that the hon member for Carletonville’s entire town does not pay the same amount in rates as the damage which they did to those two business undertakings in Boksburg. I want to leave it at that for the present, but we cannot permit a town council to set aside decisions of a previous council and to affect the rights of citizens and businessmen in this way.

I want to mention the case of a baker in Boksburg who baked 7 000 fewer loaves in December than in the previous year. If hon members do not believe me, I invite them to come with me. I shall take them to that baker so that they may see how this businessman went downhill as a result of CP policy. We must prevent the possibility of this taking place.

I believe that the executive committee or the own affairs Minister involved should be vested with powers to be able to protect the interests of the business sector. It may be argued—this is how hon members argue—that democracy left Boksburg with a CP town council. This is only a half-truth, however, because more voters voted against the CP in Boksburg than voted for them. How can they pretend that they have a mandate to injure businessmen in this way?

Some of the country’s largest industries are located in Boksburg. We have already seen in the Press what influence this has on them, what steps they are considering and also how it has harmed them. [Interjections.] The hon member for Overvaal, all the hon members sitting there and their leader do not care a rap how they are harming large industries of South Africa in this way together with job opportunities which are being lost in so doing. I consider that the Department of Trade and Industry should undertake a serious investigation to see what legislation it can produce to bring town councils to book when they take such decisions. I believe that such decisions should ultimately perhaps be tested by a referendum of the inhabitants of such a town because it is the inhabitants who are affected by such foolish decisions.

Lastly, I want to touch upon a matter which I raised on a previous occasion, that is import substitution. I want to express my thanks for the progress which has already been made in this field. Import substitution is now receiving the department’s serious attention, but I think the average South African entrepreneur does not yet realise what resources exist in South Africa, not only for the local manufacture of imported goods but also for their export to the benefit of the country.

I shall mention the example of refrigerators. There are a number of refrigerator factories in South Africa, but there is not one manufacturer in the country who is able to manufacture compressors for those refrigerators. They consist merely of an electric motor, a cast-iron pump and a covering to enclose the unit. There is no reason why such a factory cannot be established in South Africa. Because of the growing housing market in South Africa, there will be a growing market for refrigerators and South Africa could become an importer and exporter of compressors. We would even be able to export refrigerators to neighbouring states in Africa. Therefore there are enormous opportunities if we start looking at import substitution.

I have also mentioned the case before, and the hon the Minister is probably still aware of it, of the brushes one finds in an electric motor. There is no reason why these carbon brushes cannot be manufactured in South Africa. I believe that this is a matter which should receive attention. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the biggest challenge facing us in this decade is that we shall have to create job opportunities for more than 300 000 people who enter the labour market every year. History has taught us that every economic depression is attended by unemployment. This results in riots and unrest.

Trade and commerce are probably the largest job providers in the Republic. However, there are certain restraints inhibiting our economy. Firstly, there is economic pressure from outside. I blame the DP and its predecessors for having contributed largely to this economic isolation. In this regard I want to single out the hon member for Claremont in particular. He made allegations in the Provincial Council and in these three Houses, for example about the alleged ill-treatment of people of colour by the SAP. He used the Provincial Council and Parliament as mouthpieces to cast a reflection on South Africa by making unfounded statements and noising lies abroad. I want to appeal to this hon member and to his colleagues to stop crawling around in the sewers. They should be proud of being South Africans. The hon members in the House of Representatives and the House of Delegates, who were victims of discrimination for many decades, are proud South Africans and set them a good example. If one has a product that one wants to sell, one does not go around telling the world how bad one’s product is. Let us market South Africa, and let us be proud of South Africa.

One of the largest job providers is the small business enterprises, and we want to congratulate the Advisory Bureau for Small Business Enterprises and the Small Business Development Corporation on an excellent job which has been most successful. However, one of the restraints is the fact that that the process of deregulation is being impeded by bureaucracy. Certain local authorities have built up a hierarchy of officials, and this makes life very difficult for the small business entrepreneurs. The urbanisation process as regards the White sector of the population has been completed. As regards the Coloured sector, it has almost been completed. For the next 20 years our cities will be subjected to great strain as a result of Black urbanisation. For that reason it is essential for us to develop rural areas in order to create more job opportunities. In this regard regional services councils can play an important role. However, I want to issue a warning to certain regional services councils. We must not allow departments within regional services councils to become a monster or the bureaucracies within these departments to have an inhibitive effect on development in our rural areas.

We do not realise the role played by our tourist industry as a job provider in our economy. As a result of the warped image of South Africa overseas the foreign tourists are our best ambassadors. I met a German tourist this weekend. He occupies a high position in the West German Government. He told me that his wife did not see her way clear to coming to South Africa because the negative image of South Africa in Europe had made her fear for her life. He was pleasantly surprised by this beautiful country and its tranquillity. If we encourage a large number of tourists to come to South Africa, this would help to improve our image and to break the isolation.

The influx of tourists to our Eastern Cape coastal areas is a sign that we are entering a period of unparalleled progress. However, we have certain needs as regards our infrastructure. For that reason tax concessions, especially to the hotel industry on a regional basis, are very important. South Africa is a beautiful country with beautiful beaches and game parks. Has the time not perhaps come for us to have a separate Ministry of Tourism for the further promotion of the tourist industry?

Mr Chairman, at the outset I should perhaps just draw attention to the fact that again speakers from the ruling party in the House of Delegates do not appear to be participating in this debate. They have not turned up, although their names appear on the list of speakers. Perhaps they do not pay any attention to the Department of Trade and Industry. Where are they? [Interjections.] Hon members of the House of Delegates should find their speakers.

At this stage I should perhaps add my good luck wishes to the hon the Minister. He and I have known each other for a considerable time. I wish him well in his retirement. He has always behaved in a gentlemanly, reasonable manner, unlike so many other hon members of his party. [Interjections.] I think this House will miss him. I find it strange that I am even today agreeing in part with the hon member for Boksburg. I do not agree with him very often but when he talks about the things that are happening in his town, I can only say that the CP is doing South Africa a great deal of damage. Our trade and industry is damaged by their action and I think that they should consider what they are doing, which is anti-South African.

I want to talk today about the consumer and the implications of Government mismanagement of the economy to the man in the street. I think nobody can argue with the fact that we are steadily getting poorer and poorer. Every year we get poorer. A vote for the NP is a vote for poverty. There is no doubt about that. [Interjections.] What is bad for the man in the street is worse for the poor, the old and the disadvantaged. How the elderly, the pensioners, exist today I do not know. The NP fat cats do not care. They cynically manipulate pensioners for electoral advantage. I just cannot understand how they can expect old people to live when the inflation rate is as high as it is. It is disgraceful and, of course, a tremendous percentage of the average old age pensioner’s budget has to be spent on food to keep alive, due to the high prices, especially higher food prices. Many of these people are very close indeed to starvation.

Other things the elderly have to spend money on include hospital visits, for example. It is a fact that visits of the elderly to the out-patients department have become fewer and fewer as they have become more expensive, because these people cannot afford them and they barely survive at the moment—old people, old consumers: Survival is all it is about for them. It is a battle for survival.

Other prices affect them too. Bus fares and the cost of other forms of public transport are examples of this, because many of them do not have cars. There is also the bread price, of course, because bread is very much a staple food for them. Postage and telephone services are other problems for old people. Rents have gone up because of higher bond rates. Even things like soft drinks are expensive. One is in a position now where a litre of soda water costs more than a litre of petrol, and believe me, the price of petrol is far too high, as we discussed during the interpellation time earlier today. Soda water costs more than petrol.

Don’t blame the Government for that!

The hon the Deputy Minister says I must not blame the Government for that. [Interjections.] Well, not this department, but I am certainly going to blame his Government, because what is given with one hand by this Government is taken away by the other. [Interjections.]

What is interesting on the subject of food prices is that a one-time professor in applied mathematics, Karl Posel, in an article in Business Day earlier this year, drew attention to the fact that every test that he had done …

Order! Will hon members please lower their voices? The hon member may proceed.

His article in Business Day described tests that have been done on food prices and made nonsense of the official statistics in this respect which claimed that inflation in the case of those prices was running at something like 13%. The private calculations done by this professor in applied mathematics indicated that it was probably closer to 24%. If food price increases were restricted to 13% last year I will eat any hat that the hon the Minister or Deputy Ministers are prepared to feed me, because food prices have escalated far in excess of 13%, far in excess of even 20%. Anybody who has to go to a supermarket …

Prove it!

That hon Deputy Minister said I must prove it. I do my own shopping for food when I am in Cape Town because my wife stays in Johannesburg. I am in the supermarket weekly. I see those prices going up, and I must tell hon members it is absolutely disgraceful.

The cost of living index over the past ten years has gone up by over 400%, but pensions have not. Pensions for Whites in 1978 were R97, and they are now R250 per annum. Actually, the consumer is neglected by this Government. The South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council regrettably has no real teeth, although it does a good job to the best of its ability with its limited powers and resources.

The Director of Internal Trade and Consumer Affairs says they are there to watch over various aspects of the protection of consumer interests in close co-operation with the Business Practices Committee, which was instituted in terms of the Harmful Business Practices Act of last year, and to confer with the South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council and other consumer organisations. It says that great importance is attached to keeping consumers fully informed regarding their rights and obligations.

I must tell hon members, though, that the average consumer does not find the department accessible when he has problems. He does not even find the South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council accessible. To get to somebody to lay his complaint and to make his displeasure known is almost impossible. I would plead that the department and the South African Coordinating Consumer Council should, somehow or other, become more readily accessible to the public so that they can lay their complaints.

One consistently reads in the newspapers of consumers who are being ripped off in one way or another and who have just not known where to go, whom to complain to, whom to ask about them even. The Housewives’ League of South Africa does not do a bad job … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not like following on the hon member for Bryanston. He tried to get away from the fat-cat image of the old Progressive Federal Party here, something which is simply not possible. The DP will never get away from the fat-cat image, because facts do not refute images. The fat-cat image of the DP is something which is part of their lifestyle and they will never get away from it. I can fully understand the fondness and the goodwill which the hon member for Bryanston suddenly wishes to shower on the elderly people of South Africa. The fact of the matter is that the aged, the elderly people of South Africa, have never trusted them with the future of South Africa. He can forget about them trusting that party with the future of South Africa in this election.

Today I should like to talk about something more pleasant. Since this is the last debate of the present hon Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology, it is a privilege for me to be able to participate in it. Precisely a year ago the South African Tourism Board held a tourism indaba with the theme: Excellence in South African Tourism. On this occasion a well-known international businesswoman from the United Kingdom, Linda Taylor-King, delivered a paper. It was interesting and yet perturbing for South Africa that she said that from a survey that had been made, South Africa occupied only the 24th position out of 25 countries. Many excuses can be offered, for example that we cannot compete with a First World industry. That is not a valid one, however, because Malaya was able to occupy tenth place under the same criteria. The only other Black state in Africa that had been evaluated, namely Kenya, occupied the 15th place. It is interesting to note that countries that were placed among the first 10 in this survey were all countries that had a strong, influential ministry of tourism. Perhaps it is opportune, at this stage, to reconsider the institution of a full-fledged Ministry of tourism for South Africa. Mrs Linda Taylor-King went further and said that although the image existed of South Africa being a tremendously hospitable country, this was not reflected in the services we offered to tourists. While Japan spent approximately 30 times more time per employee in changing his attitude to the way service was rendered, that is not the case in South Africa. It is also interesting to note that in this survey Britain occupied tenth position, whereas five years ago it had not been in the running. This brings me to a plea for urgent consideration to be given to a new, revolutionary tourism strategy in South Africa. The English Tourism Board recently did so very successfully in their publication: A Vision for England. Such a strategy would stimulate spending on specific projects that will enable South Africa to increase its lead when it comes to tourism in Africa, and keep it.

Here I cannot help thinking of the southernmost point of Africa at Cape Agulhas which is totally unutilised. I want to ask whether the South African tourism industry can afford not to show and to introduce this beacon in Africa to the whole world. Such a strategy would in the medium term change the development of tourism in South Africa significantly. The most important principle is that there must be a partnership between the public and the private sectors. That is why it is of the utmost importance that an investigation should be instituted into establishing a tourism bank, or in other words a tourism development corporation. In the past many people saw tourism as a high risk marginal industry, which was dependent on specific cycles and seasons. Such a new approach will bury once and for all this erroneous ad hoc policy towards tourism, and provide the building blocks for a first league industry which is so important to South Africa.

I have already said that the English Tourism Board recently announced its own strategic plan to place tourism in England on the winning road. In this investigation it became apparent that it was possible, within five years, to create 250 000 job opportunities in England. They expect to attract an investment of between £3 billion and £4 billion during the next five years and in addition to cause an investment of £570 million, or in other words, R2,5 billion from their tourism bank or tourism development corporation to take place.

Mr Chairman, in such a plan in-depth consideration will have to be given to a full-fledged Ministry of Tourism, the desirability of a full-time chairman’s post on the SA Tourism Board, the establishment of a tourism bank or development corporation and finally, because it is very important, a new approach to regional tourism in South Africa. In a recent study carried out by the Institute for Planning Research at the University of Port Elizabeth, it was found that the South African tourist industry was well organised, but after thorough analysis several problem areas did become apparent. I shall deal briefly with two of these.

Firstly, the regional classification—at present there are nine regions—had not been done adequately enough to allow regional tourism to succeed. What should be striven for is a subdivision which will be conducive to meaningful regional development, and this can only happen if every region is subjected to a thorough investigation.

Another problem which was singled out in the report was that, particularly on the regional level, a tremendously fragmented industry with little or no co-ordination had arisen. There are approximately 140 publicity organisations and other related tourist institutions. These are too many and co-ordination suffers. The importance of regional tourism in South Africa may never be underestimated.

If I have any time left at my disposal I should like to come to something more pleasant. I think I must ask the hon the Minister, during his last few months, to consider urgently whether we cannot have a Blue Train on the Garden Route. It must be a Blue Train travelling between Cape Town and Port Elizabeth and one which will not merely travel from one point to another, but will stop at specified places to allow tourists to alight for a time, and then travel further on this Blue Train so that tourism can flourish.

Finally, without being premature, I want to thank the hon the Minister for what he has done for tourism. I know he is a pioneer of tourism and that, apart from all his other duties, he has given a great deal of attention to tourism. I want to wish him everything of the best for the road ahead, and it is my personal opinion that he can, after his retirement, make a very beneficial contribution to the tourist industry. I really hope that the authorities will not allow the expertise of the hon the Minister in this connection to be lost, and I really hope that we shall perhaps see him again in a more formal capacity in the tourist industry. May he be the pioneer of the new strategic plan that I have been advocating here today.

Order! The hon member for Marais-burg asked for an opportunity to make a personal explanation. I now give him an opportunity to do so.

Mr Chairman, on 27 April 1989, during the sitting of the Extended Public Committee on Manpower in this Chamber, I inadvertently referred to the hon member for Krugersdorp, while in reality I had the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis in mind.

I am sorry if the said incorrect reference caused any confusion or embarrassment, and I ask that the record be accordingly rectified.

Mr Chairman, to promote more constructive debate, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to broach a few matters in advance.

†The first one I want to refer to is the matter of toll roads. I wish to repeat that toll roads are here to stay …

That’s a pity!

… as they are definitely in the long-term interests of South Africa. [Interjections.] The dedication of a levy on fuel specifically for road construction and maintenance is no longer Government policy.

Yes, but you still take the money.

We must therefore look at ways and means whereby the main routes of our road network can be kept in good condition and extended, without taking an unaffordable slice of the Exchequer’s funds.

One way of achieving this is the “user pays” mechanism, namely toll roads. This approach is used throughout the world. In my negotiations with the parliamentary representatives of the NP as well as with the hon members for Mooi River, Klipspruit West and Lenasia Central and other interested parties, it became clear that the tolling and privatisation of new roads is acceptable, and that the tolling of existing roads is less acceptable, mainly because of the argument that these roads have already been paid for.

Good argument.

Consequently I am at present negotiating with the two consortiums concerned that the toll on existing roads be utilised only for the maintenance and upgrading of the roads in question. The argument that roads have already been paid for, therefore falls away. This could have the effect that toll tariffs on the relevant existing roads can be significantly reduced, with the additional possibility of special concessions being granted to local communities and commuters.

*I should also like to refer to our domestic air transport market which is still subject to strict regulation with regard to entry into the market. For this reason I appointed a committee last year to advise me on a new policy of deregulation and to submit draft legislation for a new policy. We are making rapid progress on the basis of the following guidelines, viz:

• — economic decisions must be determined by market forces;
• — entry to the aviation market must be regulated only by quality and security aspects;
• — all participants must be subject to the same rules and must receive equal treatment in the use of airports, for example;
• — the user’s interests must be protected to prevent quality standards from deteriorating and aviation safety from being compromised.

I intend to submit legislation with a clearly defined plan for implementation next year. In the meantime the air services are free to apply under the existing legislation, if they feel they are ready to serve air routes between our main centres and can adjust to the deregulation plan. Our international services are regulated mainly by bilateral agreements with our foreign air transport partners.

†These international air services should be considered in conjunction with domestic air services. I have consequently agreed that an in-depth study of international air services be undertaken on completion of the domestic investigation.

Observations concerning the provision of services at international airports in other countries together with recent incidents locally, have convinced me to reconsider whether such services should indeed be provided within the Government framework. An investigation undertaken by management consultants on behalf of the Department of Transport to review the provision of services at the State airports, has revealed the following:

1. 1) The setting and monitoring of safety standards are to remain with the central Government and cannot be alienated.
2. 2) Overall planning and the establishment of guidelines for future development in aviation is also a function to be handled by the aeronautical authority.
3. 3) The provision, operation, maintenance and improvement, in accordance with passenger demands, of airports and airport facilities are of a commercial nature and where possible should be left to private enterprise.

At the present moment I am studying these conclusions and it is anticipated that we may in due course be moving towards corporatisation of State airports and the corporatisation of air traffic control services, which may include the provision and operation of air navigational equipment.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister if he could explain what he means by corporatisation? Does it mean turning it into a corporation and if so, what would the percentage shareholding between the private sector and the State be?

We have done the same with the SATS and it will be on more or less the same pattern as what we have done with the SATS.

Negotiations between the Department of Transport, its personnel involved with the provision of these services as well as the aviation industry making use of these services, will eventually determine how a more streamlined and efficient dispensation can be achieved.

*Mr Chairman, with regard to the deregulation of the road transport market I should like to repeat what I said last year, viz that we are actually ahead when it comes to implementing the programme with regard to entry into the road transport market in terms of the White Paper on the National Transport Policy. Nine areas, eight with an exemption around the main centres of a radius of 388 km and one of a radius of 150 km have been announced. An important step was the passing earlier this year of the Road Traffic Act. Urgent work is being done at present to finalise the regulations. In the meantime, however, I have decided to declare further exemption areas, viz the area within a radius of 450 km surrounding Upington and the area within a radius of 200 km surrounding Pietersburg. This should facilitate transport in those areas considerably.

The general deregulation of freight transport in particular is subject to certain prerequisites, however. Certain requirements which must be complied with are that cross-subsidisation must be eliminated, road traffic regulations must be announced, test stations for roadworthiness must be given sufficient time to adjust to newly set standards, compulsory periodic testing of vehicles must be phased in, the establishment of private test stations must be encouraged, on-the-road test stations must be planned and built, a system for issuing professional drivers’ permits must be established, training of drivers and instructors must be brought up to standard and an information system to address offenders must be established. As hon members can see, the task that lies ahead is an extensive one. We do not want to go about this haphazardly, and the whole process will probably keep us busy until February 1992.

Mr Chairman, before kicking off with the transport debate, I think it would only be proper to give credit where credit is due.

*After I broached the problem of “fish and chips” transport services, as it was called in the newspapers, during the last debate, there has definitely been a change in the main route trains. I think the hon Minister listened to us and we thank him for allowing the “bedding boys” as we know them, to now eat in the dining-salon and not in the compartments, †I am going to concentrate on toll roads today. I was reading through the RSA Policy Review of March 1989. I picked up certain sections where the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs had said certain things. He said, and I quote:

For South Africa that day has indeed dawned.

On p 101 the hon the Minister says amongst other things, regarding the debate in the Joint Chamber the other day:

I want to concentrate on the aspects of “boycotting one another” and “ignoring one another”. As we all know, the Grasmere toll plaza has become a swearword to many of our people in the areas of Grasmere, Ennerdale and Lena-sia. The hon the Minister said just now that the tolling of existing roads has not been acceptable to our people. I agree with him there, but if we were to approach the tolling of roads in a better way, through co-operation, speaking to each other, finding out whether it is acceptable, where it should be placed and how it should be placed, the whole situation surrounding toll roads would have been much more acceptable to the communities.

Ennerdale itself is a product of the Group Areas Act. These people have been moved 45 km away from the centre of Johannesburg to reside there. Previously, when they were planning this area, a circular was sent out which informed people what Ennerdale would look like and what was planned for the area. One of these plans was the road, which was a much shorter and easier way to travel, that would take them to Johannesburg, where 95% of the people work. Five years later we were shocked to hear that a toll road was planned for the area. I have no problem with toll roads being built if they are on new roads, and companies spend money on new roads and erect toll plazas on new roads. However, a toll on an existing road—one which people have to use daily to get to work—is not welcome in any community as it is a road the use of which people will have to pay for.

If one looks at the situation with regard to Ennerdale now, the cheapest mode of transport to town at present is the taxi. A single journey costs R3,50. If the taxis use the toll roads, the fare per person will be increased by 50c. We have no control over the taxis and cannot prevent them from increasing the fare. If they decide to increase the fare, they do so. They use the argument that there is a toll road on the doorstep of Ennerdale. The moment we heard that this toll road was being planned, we made representations to the hon the Minister. Unfortunately one way or another we were never heard. Only when the toll road was nearing completion did the hon the Minister listen to us.

I am thankful to the department for upgrading the old Golden Highway. However, the only thing is that a person living in that area and knowing it, realises that this should have been done 10 years ago because of the heavy traffic it carries. Even today the road is not in an adequate condition to carry that amount of traffic. A lot of heavy vehicles use it. The fact that Ennerdale is a developing area makes it even worse, because the number of heavy trucks going in and out of Ennerdale and using that road is unbelievable. The road was not really upgraded—a show was put on to change it to a four-lane road. The sections that were laid have already lifted and we are talking about a period of six months that has passed since the repaired road was taken into use. I know that not much money was spent on that road because there is a plan to upgrade the road to a full four-lane road in the future. However, we need it now. I think that we wasted quite a bit of money in upgrading that road at that stage. If we allowed the people of Ennerdale to use the toll road without having to pay the toll until the road was upgraded properly it might have been accepted by them. However, the whole toll road concept has become a bitter pill for people to swallow.

Order! There is an hon member who is talking too loudly. We cannot allow that.

Mr Chairman, the toll road system has been a bitter pill for many people to swallow.

I decided to state the case of the people to the hon the Minister in this debate. I decided not to use the debate as the other debates are used, to give the hon the Minister hell and not achieve anything much. I hope that the hon the Minister has listened to me today, and this is the reason for my changing the tone of my speech. I am glad that the hon member who is the chairman of the joint committee has been smiling since I started speaking. I suppose he expected me to fire away at the hon the Minister. I do have a second chance, and if the hon the Minister does not mention this, I will have to come up with the fiery speech. However, in the meantime I have something to give the hon the Minister from the people of Ennerdale. I would like to read it before giving it to the hon the Minister.

The poster reads, “Make up your minds now! Decrease petrol prices or remove tollgates, Mr E v d M Louw. I hate tollgates! Grasmere Tollroad will not see my money!”. I would like to hand this poster over to the hon the Minister. It comes from the people of Ennerdale. He can keep it and have a look at it, study it and go through it. He can then decide if what the people of Ennerdale are saying on that poster makes sense.

It looks like a bloodbath!

If the hon member wants to see it, I am sure that the hon the Minister will lend it to him. The hon the Minister must have a look at it, because it makes a lot of sense. He will then understand why toll roads are not acceptable. I would like the hon the Minister to look especially at the yellow vehicle at the back and what the person in the yellow vehicle says. It is something which I cannot repeat in Parliament. However, it is quite interesting to read what that person says. The hon the Minister should really take a careful look at it.

In future, when toll roads are being planned, it is important to communicate with the people who live in the surrounding area. It is important to speak to them and see how they feel about a toll road being built in that area, because it is something which affects their daily lives. As I have said, the hon the Minister should have listened to the people when the Grassmere toll road was still in its early planning stages. He did not have to move it further away from Ennerdale. He could have moved it closer to Johannesburg and still found people to use that road. Only because we were not heard, only because people were not prepared to listen to us, this issue has become a political one. Throughout the country toll roads have become unacceptable.

What made it worse was the removal of the toll plaza on the N13 in Johannesburg. It was moved at the time of the municipal elections. People can say what they want, and they can try and justify why that toll road was moved, but in the back of people’s minds they still think that it was moved because there was a municipal election which the NP had to win. It was for that reason that the tollgate was moved.

I am still speaking on Ennerdale. Separation of people costs a lot of money. People have been separated from their families, brothers, sisters and friends, because they were pushed out of Ennerdale. Because of the costs involved, roads and infrastructure have become very expensive. The State can no longer afford it. The State can no longer appropriate funds for roads to be built left, right and centre. The Group Areas Act is the cause of all this. Now one finds that the money is no longer available. People are pushed out of central areas where an infrastructure exists. They are forced to go and live in certain areas where the State has provided roads.

Because of the failure of the group areas policy, our people now have to pay for toll roads. They have to pay for the upkeep of that road. This is not something one can run away from. Everybody in the area is speaking about this. They say that it is because they are not White that they are being pushed out of the town and made to pay for the road. To some people this may sound like nonsense and they may not find this argument acceptable, but they should come and look at the areas in which we live. They should come and listen to what the people there have to say. It is there where it matters.

I believe that one should speak on behalf of one’s voters. I am not going to come here and speak in glowing terms about any other political party. I cannot defend the toll road system in this country, because it affects the people whom I represent. Those people are the ones who have to pay for this road. Those people have to pay to get to work. When they come from their place of work they have to pay again. They have to pay for everything and it is costing a fortune.

As I have said, Ennerdale is a fast-growing area, one of the fastest growing areas in the Transvaal. Many people have had to move out of the area, because they could not afford to live there any more. First of all, the interest rates on houses are too high. Then there are transport problems. There are problems with electricity. Everything in that area is a problem. To crown it all, a toll road was built and this sparked off an even bigger problem. At last week’s meeting on Wednesday, people threatened to drive through the tollgate without paying.

I can encourage those people, but I would not want to do it. They have a valid case for driving on that toll road. While the National Road Amendment Bill has not yet been approved, there is no way that a private company can toll a public road such as the one at Ennerdale. It cannot be done, because the law does not allow one to do so at this moment. It allows the State to do so, but I do not see the State spending more than R2,5 million to take the project over from the private company.

*I must finish scolding now, because my throat is dry.

†In conclusion, I welcome the hon the Minister’s announcement here this afternoon—it was not meant as an acceptance, but as a stepping stone for future discussions on the tolling of roads in the country—that we must discuss this matter. I am not only talking about myself, because neither I nor the hon the Minister may be here next year—in fact, many of us may not be here. However, there are people who ask that it be adopted immediately and we must negotiate and discuss this matter and see whether it is going to suit the people.

It is important to realise that we are running the affairs of the people outside Parliament. We have to see to it that they are satisfied. If they are not satisfied we cannot continue being here in Parliament. We should get out of Parliament and allow others who would satisfy the people outside Parliament to take over, because at the end of the day we are being paid with their money. It is their money that is keeping us here and therefore we have to see to their needs. They come first in this country.

Mr Chairman, unfortunately allegations are still coming to our attention which cause the suspicion of serious irregularities in even more Government departments to arise. As regards the Department of Transport, I should like to put a number of questions today to the hon the Minister, who is responsible for the National Road Safety Council.

Firstly, is it correct that a certain one-man enterprise was appointed by the NRSC in 1983, at a remuneration of R495 000 per annum for two years, as public relations consultant for the Road Traffic Year in 1984? Secondly, is it correct that no public tenders were called for prior to this contract being concluded? Thirdly, is it correct that remuneration was paid for the first year, but that the contract was subsequently terminated owing to faulty rendering of service by the enterprise?

Fourthly, did the owner of this enterprise have any personal relationship with any top-level official or officials of the Department of Transport? If so, with which official or officials, and what was the nature of that personal relationship? Fifthly, is it correct that this one-man enterprise is at present under contract with the NRSC, again at an annual fee of R25 000, for a project? Is it correct that the NRSC is going to send that person on an overseas study trip this year?

Sixthly, is it correct that the NRSC has budgeted R80 000 per annum for lobbying the Government for road safety, while the NRSC is a directorate of the Department of Transport? In the seventh place, is it correct that a competition was arranged between two specific schools in Bethlehem in the Free State, with an overseas trip as the winning prize for the winning team of four children, the children to be accompanied on their journey by an official of the NRSC, at an estimated cost of R45 000?

In the eighth place, is it correct that prior to the competition an amount of R50 000 was paid to a certain firm for “advance research”, as it was called? If so, how many people comprised the firm, and on what grounds were these moneys allocated to the firm? In the ninth place, why were these two specific schools in Bethlehem selected as the only participants in the competition in question?

In the tenth place, is it correct that an amount of R88 000 was approved in respect of a project dealing with the visit of the Pope to Lesotho, of which R25 000 was paid to a specific private firm primarily for liaison with the media?

In the eleventh place, is it correct that the road safety conference held between 11 and 15 June 1988 in Montreal, Canada, was attended at State expense by both the director of the NRSC as well as his wife, the chairman of the NRSC and his wife, as well as a professor at the Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education and his wife? Is it also correct that the former two couples subsequently toured for approximately two and a half weeks in the USA, while the latter couple subsequently toured for approximately one month in the USA? Who paid for that, and if the State paid for it what did it cost?

In the twelfth place, on how many previous occasions were high-ranking officials of the NRSC, together with their wives, sent abroad at State expense? In the thirteenth place, how many other officials of the NRSC were sent abroad at State expense during the past five years? In the fourteenth place, is it correct that in February 1988 four persons were sent at State expense to attend an international conference in Germany, while only one of them had to deliver a paper there?

In the fifteenth place, is it correct that for the 1987-88 and 1988-89 financial years the NRSC budgeted R400 000 per annum for the so-called parent-and-child project? Is it correct that a certain private firm, Snelco Pro, received R140 000 of that R400 000 for research and promotions during the 1987-88 financial year? What became of the results of that research?

Is it correct that in the 1988-89 financial year the same private firm received R90 000 for promotions and the training of instructors in the same project, while the NRSC regional offices and head office, together, received an additional R200 000 for the same project? Is it correct that another private firm received R90 000 for the training of pre-school children for the same project in the same year—that is 1988-89—while the Potchefstroom academic, to whom I have already referred, received R20 000 for research on the same project?

In the sixteenth place, is it correct that the NRSC sponsored an overseas cycling team in the Rapport Cycle Tour for an amount of R230 000, and has it during the past approximately five years contributed approximately R100 000 to the Rapport Cycle Tour every year as sponsor? In the seventeenth place, is it correct that the NRSC has already paid between R80 000 and R100 000 to a private organisation for research into a cycling competition that has still, ie a year after the initiation of the project, not taken place?

While I am talking about road safety—and the abovementioned are the questions I wanted to ask—I should like to make an appeal to the hon the Minister in regard to another matter. I want to ask him to negotiate with his colleague, the hon the Minister of Defence, for an improved national service system for traffic officers. It has come to my attention that in a certain municipal area, in which only 28 traffic officers are employed, 14 of them attended military camps in 1987 for a total of 1 153 days.

We want to suggest that consideration be given to allowing traffic departments to receive the same treatment in respect of military service as the SA Police. If a person then leaves a traffic department within the four years in which he receives exemption from ordinary national service, he can be called up to do ordinary military service.

I have seen with interest how the Government has come up against opposition from the public to toll roads during the past few months. We have just seen this illustrated again, here, in the speech made by the hon member for Klipspruit West. The court order on the N13 toll road which the NP-controlled city council of Johannesburg obtained last year against its own people in the central Government is still fresh in one’s mind.

In Natal it is alleged that recently about 24 motorists deliberately drove through the Toll Plaza at Mooi River without paying. On the front page of the Natal Witness of 14 April of this year a report appeared which stated that certain inhabitants of Estcourt would in future pay the toll, but would pay it in one and two-cent pieces in order to emphasise their protest.

The CP warned the Government that the toll road system could cause problems, and that the tolling of existing routes without adequate alternative routes was unacceptable. The Government rejected this advice, and now they are plucking the fruits of their own arrogance.

To illustrate the dilemma of the public to the Government I am merely mentioning an observation made by the present Director-General of the Department of Transport in regard to the tolling of existing roads, and a related observation made by the hon member for Boksburg. I am quoting what the Director-General said on page 108 of the Annual Report for 1987-88:

In August of last year, when I pointed out in a debate in the House of Assembly that certain provisions of the concession agreements curtailed the improvement of the alternative routes, the hon member for Boksburg, who was also deputy chairman of the Joint Committee on Transport and Communication, said the following and I am quoting from Hansard of 30 August 1988, col 16056:

While the Director-General, on the one hand, justifies the inclusion of existing roads in the toll system by citing the competition which must be established by means of properly maintained alternative routes, the hon member for Boksburg assures us that the NP Government will see to it that the alternative routes will always be of a poorer standard than the toll roads.

That is not true!

It is correct.

There can be no other implication. Who can blame the public if they become fed-up with the Government’s double talk?

Mr Chairman, is the hon member prepared to take a question?

I am sorry, but my time is limited. Perhaps I shall be able to take the question during my second turn to speak.

To emphasise the toll road confusion it appears that the alternative routes for the Mooi River toll road between Nottingham Road and Mooi River in Natal were in fact improved during the past year by the Natal Provincial Administration for an amount of R5½ million from the taxpayers’ pocket to cope with the traffic of those who wish to use it as an alternative route. The Executive Committee indicated that a traffic increase of approximately 400% was experienced on this alternative route, as a direct consequence of the toll road system in that area. [Time expired.)

Mr Chairman, in the debate the hon member for Klipspruit West said that the Group Areas Act has failed. I agree with him, because hon members of the different race groups are present in this Chamber without permits. This is an Indian chamber and therefore I think they should have permits. [Interjections.]

I also agree that when credit is due it must be given. I think the hon the Minister is doing a very fine piece of work, notwithstanding the fact that he has been asked to resign. He not only manages the SATS, but also the department. At the time when he was asked to resign, he did not resign and he was not kicked out—he has been given the portfolio of the Department of Manpower. I think if he had been given the portfolio of the entire Government of South Africa, he would have managed it well. I think the hon the Minister must be complimented on the manner in which he handles the portfolio we are discussing today.

I want to deal with one or two matters, and in particular Government transportation. According to the report submitted by the Director-General, in the 1985-86 financial year there were 29 reports of misuse of transport, of which 12 cases were proven. In the financial year 1986-87 47 cases were reported and 13 were proven. In 1988-89 42 cases were reported and two were proven. If in-depth investigations are conducted into the matter more cases will be reported and more will be proven.

I know of the case of a former hon Minister of the South African Government who used to have the free use of Government transport. He used to transport his children from his home to a school in Northern Natal—the distance was about 300 km return—and the chauffeur was a ministerial representative. Discrepancies of this nature will exist. Unfortunately this has not been brought to the attention of the department. Investigations of this nature are absolutely necessary because this is a misuse of transport.

In respect of MVA, the report also reveals that after claims were paid out, there has been a surplus in so far as the fund is concerned. However, what I cannot understand is that the surplus funds invested by the department are earning a very low rate of interest. Some of the monies have been invested in building societies, but some have also been invested in local authorities and close corporations as well as universities. This brings in a very low yield for the Government. I think the department must realise that the MVA funds are intended to pay out claims, and we do not know when claims may take place or what amounts will be involved. Therefore it must be fully equipped as regards earning the best possible interest on the monies it earns by way of levies.

In the course of the year four very important Bills came before the joint committee. One is the Road Traffic Bill while the others are the Passenger Transport Bill, the Deregulation of Traffic Bill and the Roads Board Bill. Each of these measures that came before Parliament emanated from the National Transport Policy put forward by the department. There was a committee that sat for a very long period in order to formulate this policy. It was in the best interests of the entire community that these Bills came before the committee.

Before I proceed, I want to place on record our thanks to the chairman, Dr Welgemoed. and the members of his committee for the manner in which they gave consideration to the Bills. They sat for days and days in Pretoria and Cape Town and came up with an answer in respect of the various Bills that were considered. When the Bills come before Parliament, I think we will have a set of uniform rules, a statute which can be used by all authorities as far as traffic is concerned.

I also wish to place on record our thanks to the Director-General, his legal staff and the other members of his staff, for the manner in which they went about briefing the joint committee and assisting members in order to get those Bills approved before the joint committee.

Some of the important aspects of the Bills, particularly the Road Traffic Bill, are that they bring together all the ordinances and regulations within the various provinces, including the State, by way of package-deal legislation for use by all authorities and the community.

The committee was very much against the use of cameras for prosecuting motorists, because they found that the camera prosecution was not a very fair one in so far as motorists were concerned. I think that this prosecution by cameras has been set aside for further investigation.

I wish also to bring to the attention of the hon the Minister the local road transportation board. This board was one instrument that was considered by the National Transport Policy Committee.

I think the National Transport Policy Committee very strongly resented it. It did not want the presence of this committee insofar as the consideration of many transportation issues was concerned. It cost the community a lot of money by way of legal fees and so forth and I think that the sooner the transportation board is disbanded, the better.

Mr Chairman, I am pleased to follow up on what the hon member said. I think he mentioned a few important matters that will certainly be discussed further.

Today I want to make a large number of requests about toll roads to the hon the Minister, and about debating certain aspects relating to toll roads. However, I am going to depart from my prepared speech and thank the hon the Minister for the further efforts he has made to solve the toll road problem.

The question of toll roads is a problem in South Africa, and we accept that there are certain aspects that must be put right. There is nothing wrong with toll roads in principle—they are essential to the RSA. In a moment I shall give figures to indicate why I think it is justified from the point of view of every possible economic principle—particularly that of user-charging, which the hon the Minister also mentioned—that the implementation should be looked at.

Furthermore I want to thank the hon the Minister for specifically dwelling for a moment on the deregulation of the domestic airways. It is high time we examined this aspect. This hon Minister got the bit between his teeth and has been charging full-tilt since last year. I want to thank him very sincerely for the fact that we have advanced to a point at which other people can also get the opportunity to compete if they think they are competent enough.

At a later stage I shall come to the deregulation of the exemption area which the hon the Minister announced. I thank the hon the Minister for this deregulation. However I am still concerned about one thing, and that is the implementation of the deregulation.

In his announcement the hon the Minister mentioned several points. I am very glad that he dealt with those points again and that he shed light on all the things we should watch out for in our efforts to achieve complete deregulation. However, there is another problem I shall deal with in a moment when I talk about road safety.

I am particularly concerned about the new road traffic legislation. The principles of that legislation are completely sound and I want to ask that we make adequate funds available in order to convey the whole concept of this legislation to the public as a whole. Every road-user is going to be affected by this legislation, whether he is a pedestrian or a motorist; a driver of heavy vehicles, a bus-driver or a minibus-driver. We must spare no cost in getting the message across. Nothing must be allowed to go wrong with this legislation.

This brings me to the important point in the Road Traffic Act which worries me. I agree with the hon member for East London North who talked about the place of the traffic officer in an earlier speech. We shall have to try to raise these people’s standards to a high enough level to allow us to implement the legislation.

Even if the hon the Minister had the best possible legislation at his disposal, the truth is that if the law-enforcement officers are not up to scratch, he will have another toll road debacle on his hands. Therefore I am asking the hon the Minister, at this early stage, to ensure that this legislation is implemented, in the proper and correct manner, by trained people who have the will and the inclination to do so.

I just want to say one thing about toll roads, and I also want to thank the hon the Minister for distinguishing between existing roads and roads that are being built. The hon the Minister is correct in saying that no road is fully paid for until the day one closes that road. And in saying that one is closing a road one is saying that one has spent the last cent on that road. [Interjections.]

Order! Will the hon member for Camperdown please be quiet!

We shall have to continue with the implementation of toll roads in this country. I shall now tell hon members what we need. At the moment, at all three levels of Government, we are spending in the region of R2 000 million on roads. We need in the region of R2 500 million.

At present value, without taking inflation into account, we shall have a backlog of almost R5 billion within ten years. We do not have that kind of money, and that is why I say that we should proceed to introduce toll roads selectively, but in the manner the hon the Minister announced today, which, in my opinion will be more acceptable to the consumer. I therefore support that point made by the hon the Minister. I am worried about the maintenance, construction, etc, of our road network, which is estimated in real terms— and this is the most recent figure I could obtain—to be lagging behind by 25% to 40%. We can postpone this for a few years, but at some stage the chickens will come home to roost and then we have a problem. We are going to ask “why did we not do this?” or “why did we not do that?”.

Roads have been built over the past 20 years, and it is true that large amounts of money have been spent over the past 20 years, but when we assess this in real terms, we have a major problem. I just want to mention two figures to hon members. Firstly, the expenditure on national and provincial roads—excluding toll roads in this case—increased by 180% between 1976 and 1987, but in real terms it decreased by 22%. If the hon the Minister asks for money, we must understand why he is doing so. The second figure, which is just as bad, indicates that during the same period expenditure on all roads—again excluding toll roads, but including streets— increased by 116%, but in real terms decreased by 42%. That is why people can say: “But look at what my streets look like!” The streets have holes in them!”.

Let us ask ourselves why this is so. The reason is that we do not spend enough, because there are not enough funds available. I therefore advocate that we continue to impose a penalty on the consumer for what he uses, in accordance with the economic principle of user-charging.

The search for alternative sources continues to be a problem for us. I want to state here that it is regrettable that the funds that were, in fact, designated for the construction of roads were taken away from the hon the Minister. There are good reasons why this was done. Let us not debate that issue here, but we should at least realise the effect of this when we are talking about this aspect. I want to go over to another problem which is worrying me a great deal at the moment.

I am referring to the problem of road safety. Everyone contributes to road safety. Nobody denies its inherent benefits. The NRSC, schools, the Press, the media—everyone contributes. What worries me is that last year we lost more than 10 000 people in road accidents. During this decade, which ends at the end of this year, the decade of the eighties, we are going to lose more than 90 000 people in road accidents—a figure equal to the total population of Randburg. Now I pose the question: Everybody does good work, so where does the problem lie? There must be a problem somewhere. Don’t tell me that everything is hunky-dory when we lose more than 10 000 people in one year. Last year’s provisional figures indicate that there were approximately 530 000 motor vehicle accidents. Something must be done somewhere. I am merely posing the question, because I do not have the answer.

If something is wrong, let us try to find out what it is. Something must be wrong. Perhaps the NRSC has tackled this from the wrong angle, I do not know. I do not know whether they are doing enough or perhaps the media are giving people the wrong information. All I know is that there is a need for a thorough investigation to be undertaken somewhere, an investigation such as the one launched by the hon the Minister with regard to deregulation, and specifically with the advent of competition at our airports and in domestic air travel.

I want to request the hon the Minister to devote some attention to this. There is a big screw loose somewhere. We cannot keep losing people at this rate, specifically top people in the country. I ask the hon the Minister to take purposeful steps and look into this matter.

We are on the threshold of major developments in the transport sector. There is the new Act, to which the hon member who spoke first referred. With this Act we are going to try to give people more of a say, so that they can participate in the toll road concept. This is the new National Roads Act which the hon the Minister will table in Parliament at some stage. It is the right road for us to follow. We have arrived at a new deal for transport, and that is where we are with transport at the moment. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to refer the hon the Minister to page 59 of the Report of the Department of Transport, where the Road Transport Quality Information System is mentioned. I take pleasure in speaking after the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Transport.

In the report it is stated that the intention is to phase out the permit system. I think that also entails the phasing out of the local road transportation boards. I am going to mention a controversial point in this regard. If the hon the Minister phases out the local road transportation boards, he is asking for chaos. This local transportation board has built up an infrastructure over the years. If we look at the present situation, with the kombi-taxis on the roads, if there is no form of control we will have tremendous problems. I would like the hon the Minister to consider what this local road transportation board has achieved. We can go through this and take out all those things which people are dissatisfied with, but it has built up an infrastructure which can be married to the present situation in order not to find ourselves in a chaotic situation in the end.

I also notice that mention is made in the report of six sub-systems which were identified during the investigation. I am quite happy to read about it, but I would have been happier had the hon the Minister elaborated on what these sub-systems will be and what they will entail. It is no use just mentioning to us that sub-systems have been identified.

I endorse what a previous speaker said about our moving into a completely new era of transport. It is an era which will affect a cross section of the community. It is an era in transportation which will make the illiterate people in our communities feel frustrated. I have previously asked in debates this year that an intensive scheme be launched whereby the people can be educated to prepare them for the new Road Transport Quality Information System which will be introduced.

I also want to mention a further point, namely boarding and alighting from taxis. Let us be honest with regard to this situation. Many of the local authorities have been caught with their pants down. Many of the local authorities have made no provision for what is happening at present. Everywhere one goes one sees that a chaotic situation prevails. This weekend I went to the Ciskei and King William’s Town and one thing that struck me is that there taxis move in an orderly way, park and then leave. Provision has been made for the kombi-taxis at the same place as buses. It works perfectly, perhaps with the aid of a little control. I could see that they were going to overcome their problems. However, here in the Cape there is a chaotic situation which I think has caught not only the city council, but also the former divisional council—now the regional services council—offside. They do not know what to do about the situation. If one takes a tour to Elsies River, one will be surprised at what one sees there. I am telling the hon the Minister that something has to be done. A thorough study has to be made with regard to boarding and alighting from taxis.

I now continue with the transport policy mentioned in chapter 7 on page 65 of the report. The hon the Minister makes mention of the Passenger Transport Bill. When one reads the report, one gets the impression that these particular Bills—the Road Traffic Bill, the Road Transportation Bill, the Deregulating of Transport Bill and the South African Road Transport Bill— have gone through the joint committee.

The hon the Minister also said that the intention of this Bill was to create a climate in which passenger transport could progress from complete economic regulation to safety regulation and greater competition. My question is: What has happened to this Bill? This Bill has not yet reached the joint committee. However, when one reads the report, one gets the impression that it has been to the joint committee. I would therefore very much like the hon the Minister to comment on this section.

I now come to another point. However, before I get to this bitter pill, I wish to say a few words on the training of traffic officers. I was on the road a few days ago. I was travelling from King William’s Town by car and I think I counted three traffic officers. There is a problem in that there are not enough traffic officers on the roads. We are faced with a problem. I think there is a staff shortage and something drastic has to be done about it. I strongly endorse the fact that if there is not going to be intensive training now, one will have problems in the future. I believe that only 11 people have been trained in the Cape Province. This number is inadequate if one envisages the new traffic Bill that is going to come into being.

*Two or three years ago I mentioned to the hon the Minister a matter concerning the NRSC and national road safety. I indicated that there were only three non-Whites, two Blacks and—if that is still the case—two or three Whites in the Western Cape who served the whole area of the Western Cape with a population of almost 2 million. How on earth can those few people achieve the NRSC’s objectives? They get nowhere. They are involved in projects. I know that the schools have come to a standstill. There are no people. Factories are at a standstill because these people are only concentrating on projects. Thousands and millions of rands are being spent on these projects, but on the other hand nothing ever evolves from them. Therefore I absolutely agree with what the previous speaker has said. The reason why so much money is being spent with nothing to show for it must be investigated.

†I now come to the bitter pill and this concerns the airways. I have submitted a case to them with regard to one of the assistants who has been working there. Apparently he was found guilty by the department of having one or two miniature whiskey bottles in his pocket. After he had been found guilty he was summarily dismissed. After an appeal he was reinstated, but had to pay a fine of R75.

However, two similar incidents involving two other people also occurred. They were not, in fact, guilty of stealing. When they cleaned the aircraft, they found these bottles amongst the refuse. Of course, they thought that first class passengers are rich people who can afford to throw away these bottles of whiskey. They thought the passengers were not interested any more. Since they assumed that these bottles had been discarded, they took them. However, the managers searched them and the bottles were discovered. The two assistants were summarily dismissed.

The irony of the matter is that there was a case of three White employees who were also found guilty. The other two Coloured assistants did not go to court, because they were tried departmen-tally. The Whites were found guilty according to the “J14” at the Bellville court. They were actually sentenced, but they were not dismissed.

They are still working. The other three who were Coloureds, lost their wages and their bonus. In my opinion it is very unfair when people who are guilty of such minor offences—I believe microwave ovens, a fridge and liquor were involved— lose their jobs. Compared to what the Whites did, the amount was very small, but still the Whites were forgiven and they were not. This is discrimination at its worst and it contributes to frustration. [Time expired.)

Mr Chairman, the previous speaker made an appeal for the continuation of the local road transportation boards because in his opinion they do a very good job. I am afraid that I cannot agree with him on this matter, because in my opinion they are just issuers of permits and shufflers of paper. They do not contribute at all towards productivity in the transport field in South Africa and I would much rather that the salaries paid to these people who shuffle bits of paper, be paid to people who would get onto the road, police our roads properly, prevent accidents and ensure that a quality system applied amongst the Black taxi drivers.

In the seven minutes available to me in the discussion of this Vote I first want to call upon the hon the Minister to let this House and the whole of South Africa know what the up-to-date situation is with regard to the loss of the SA Helderberg. This tragic accident happened on 28 November 1987. In January 1989 the last pieces were retrieved from the bottom of the sea in a fantastic retrieval operation at the instance of the Department of Transport. However, since then we have not heard a word. We all know now that there was a fire in the cargo hold of the aircraft but that is all we know.

I believe that the hon the Minister should tell us how far the Margo Commission has progressed, when he expects them to report to him and whether—in my opinion this is most important— he will immediately make public the full contents of the report without holding back anything whatsoever. I would like his response on this.

I find the hon the Minister’s statement in regard to toll roads quite extraordinary. He says that the funds are no longer available for the roads. Why is that so? It is because the Government has stolen the funds that the taxpayers and the motorists of South Africa have been putting into the National Road Fund for years and has given them to the national fiscus.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon member permitted to allege that members of the Government—when all is said and done, that is what he said—stole money?

Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Order! I would appreciate it if the hon member would withdraw that remark.

Mr Chairman, I shall withdraw it. I did in fact not say “members of the Government” but “the Government”. I believe it is practice in this House that one can refer to the Government in this way. Whatever one wants to call it, the Government—allow me now to say “members of this Government”—have taken the funds which were in the National Road Fund and has given them to the Treasury for general taxation.

Those funds were specifically levied on the price of petrol in order to pay for our roads. What are they, however, paying for now? They are paying for corruption in the Ciskei and Transkei and other places. They are being used as taxpayers’ funds to help subsidise these places. Secondly, they are being used for the enormous perks such as the R75 million worth of watches that will be given away before the pending lollipop election. This is what the money that the motorists of this country have been paying into the National Road Fund, is being used for. It is therefore nonsense to say that the funds are no longer available. Of course they are available! They are in the Treasury and they are being taken from the motorists, but the Government wants to use them for something else. That is the point.

It is quite apparent that the Government cannot run their own toll roads successfully. In the year that we are dealing with the Government has made a loss of R19,2 million on their toll roads as compared with a loss of only R6,2 million in the previous year. I am particularly concerned at the escalation in their expenses.

If one looks at the expenses one finds on page 131 of the report that the toll road operators’ fees have increased enormously. In terms of the Tsitsikamma toll road they have increased from R341 000 to R682 000. It has precisely doubled.

In the case of the Kranskop toll road they have increased from R84 000 to R541 000. All these toll road operators’ fees are paid to King’s Parking Pty Ltd. I note that this company also receives a great number of the concessions to run the parking at airports. I would like the hon the Minister to explain how King’s Parking was chosen. Was this done on a tender basis, and if not, why not? Who are the directors of King’s Parking Ltd? I am disturbed to note that this is a private company. I think that if Government is giving out large contracts of this nature, the very least that can be done is in fact to give them to a public company.

As for the private toll roads, they are obviously an absolute debacle and they break every rule that is normally observed for toll roads. The alternative roads, for example, are not acceptable. We are all aware of this. There are no reasonable alternative routes in some of these cases, but more important is the fact that the Government is tolling sections of roads which were previously open to the public and which have been paid for by the public. It is no use telling me that they have not been paid for—of course they have been paid for. The public has had money taken from it for years in terms of a levy on the price of fuel.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member whether he had inspected the alternative roads?

No, I have not personally inspected the alternative routes, as the hon the Minister well knows. Certainly, however, I have been able to read very extensively what the public who have to use these alternate routes have to say about them. I appeal to this Government to get rid of the entire toll road system because they are quite incapable of running or controlling it efficiently.

I now want to turn to deregulation. I see I have only a minute left. I want to call for the immediate total deregulation of road transport. We need to dismantle the local road transportation boards. If one looks at p 159 of the report of the Department of Transport one sees that 192 000 public and temporary permits were issued by these road transportation boards in 1987-88. Think of the paper work involved in this! Think of how much this has benefitted the South African economy generally. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I would like to follow on the argument of the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central with regard to the toll roads and the alternatives to toll roads. Here I want to quote none other than a Deputy Minister of the Government, namely the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs. In a news report on 18 January 1989 he apparently complained that the alternative route was not suitable. He complained further that he had made representations to his colleague, the hon the Deputy Minister of Transport Affairs, but that he had not yet received feedback at the time.

I do not know whether the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs and the hon the Deputy Minister of Transport Affairs are serving in the same Cabinet or not. I am at a loss to understand how one Deputy Minister of the State calls for the boycott of a roads network controlled by his colleague who is another Deputy Minister of State. I would like to hand these clippings over to the hon the Deputy Minister and I will be pleased to learn from him what the real set-up is.

At this stage, however, I would like to say that I am proud of the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs for having publicly urged and called on people to boycott the Mooi River Toll Plaza.

[Inaudible.]

He says that the alternative is not so good. He is doing it, however, because it is his form of protest against the imposition of the toll on existing roads which have already been paid for. I think the hon the Deputy Minister owes us an explanation as to why one Deputy Minister of the State has to call for a boycott of a roads network controlled by another Deputy Minister and Minister of State. [Interjections.]

I would like to talk about the situation at our airports. I am pleased that security has been stepped up. What bothers me is that as soon as one enters these airports there are policemen who are trying to do a fine job and who then stick a sticker onto one’s baggage. These stickers then seem to find their way onto the walls and the floors. The adhesive on these stickers is of a quality which seems to leave marks on the floor. I think we are losing this particular fight.

I believe it ought to suffice for a passenger to pass the security checkpoint and for his baggage to be checked. I think these stickers are actually creating a problem with regard to the neatness of our airports and I do not think that Jan Smuts Airport, which I frequent, would ever be able to win the coveted trophy for the best airport of the year. I would like the hon the Minister to look at possible alternatives with regard to that matter.

In the very limited time at my disposal, I would like to make an appeal to the hon the Minister on behalf of taxi operators and particularly those people who, as a result of an oversight, failed to renew their permits timeously. What one must bear in mind here, is that the Road Transportation Board requires these people to fill in a completely new application—it is virtually treated as a new application.

In the interim this person has invested money in a kombi, he has taken a loan which has to be repaid and, for the period that the application is pending, he may only have a temporary permit over a certain limited period for which there is a reasonable amount of cost involved. On behalf of these poor people who have invested these monies, who are committed to making the monthly payments and who have to run their households, I want to appeal to the hon the Minister and ask him whether it is not at all possible to work out some or other alternative method in order for someone who failed to renew his permit timeously not to be subjected to this type of procedure. To my mind it is reasonably lengthy.

I am pleased to note that the department is assisting some of its workers to become home owners. I would like to know from the Ministry what progress it has made with regard to the further alienation of property, particularly in the larger towns and cities. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am not going to react to the hon member Mr Abram, except to say that I note that the opposition speakers refer constantly to the fact that the public is dissatisfied. My experience in Boksburg is that it is the opposition parties who are inciting the public. I believe that the CP is also guilty of this.

†To come back to the hon member who spoke for the DP, I want to say to him that I would like to compare a road to a pipeline. A pipeline is not paid for the day it is commissioned, because certain loans have been taken up to pay for that pipeline and those loans still have to be paid off over a period of time. If one says that that road will remain there for all those years and will never be improved, I again want to come back to the pipeline. In a few years’ time one will find that the pipeline can no longer carry the amount of fuel that it was designed for, so it will continually have to be improved, or else another pipeline will have to be laid next to the first one. I think a similar comparison can be drawn with regard to roads.

*In consequence of what the hon member for Roodepoort said I also want to point out that his speech dealt with equal standard roads which he ostensibly wanted built alongside toll roads. Now I want to ask him, if a K route, which would normally be a provincial road, were to be built alongside such a road, which is an alternative route, whether that road would have telephones and road patrols and whether it would be of the same quality as the toll road. The answer is no and if a government were to do that it would be foolish because then it would not have needed the toll road in any case. That is the twist the hon member gave my words.

I want to say a few words about the recent behaviour of the CP in Boksburg. The CP councillors of Boksburg issued an invitation to the senior officials of the Department of Transport as well as the senior officials of Tollway to come and inform the town council and the public on toll roads. After the mayor had welcomed these people at an open council meeting, the CP’s chief whip, Mr T J Ferreira, rose to his feet and announced that he was not prepared to listen to lies. He then left the chamber. Then the mayor, Mr Beyers de Klerk, rose to his feet and made a similar statement in support of his chief whip, and left the chamber too.

I immediately went to Mr Ronny Meyer, our Director-General, and Mr Ian Madden and apologised to them for this behaviour of the CP. It is simply unacceptable for councillors to invite people to come and address them, for which the State’s money is used, to inform those people and the public of that town, and then treat them in this discourteous and ill-mannered way. For that reason I again want to say that I apologise to those officials and that management for what happened that evening. I told them that if they wanted to withdraw from that meeting I would explain it here in Parliament. I believe this Committee would have supported me wholeheartedly.

I now want to ask the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition—I see he is not here, but his spokesman is—if this is the style which the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition will accept from a mayor of a town? Is this the kind of town he wants to be an honorary citizen of? Is this the town council to which he will say: “Pick me as an honorary citizen”?

You must check your stories.

On behalf of Boksburg and all its inhabitants—Black, Coloured, and White—and all those people who voted for the CP, I want to apologise to the whole of South Africa for the treatment meted out that evening to the officials of the Department of Transport and the management of Tollway. I believe this Committee supports my condemnation of such discourteous behaviour.

This behaviour is to be expected. The closer we get to the elections, the worse it is going to become and the more their venom and extremism is going to increase. The CP leadership has failed to formulate political formulae and clear guidelines which it can lay down, even in respect of its transport policy, to convince its voters to vote for it. That is why the CP is going to be increasingly guilty of this kind of behaviour.

After the town council had been informed in detail about the R77—the Hendrik Schoeman Toll Road—that evening, and no further reasons existed why the CP should oppose it, the town council decided that I should ostensibly inform my voters on my standpoints in respect of the toll road or toll roads, as if my standpoint as deputy chairman of the joint committee has not been put very clearly over the years.

My standpoint is that the CP town council misled Boksburg’s inhabitants—this happened during the municipal elections—in respect of the toll which was going to be levied and the alternative route which was available. It now seems that 95% of the people who would have used that road to get to Johannesburg, need not use the toll road. This became quite clear that evening. Now I want to ask the CP: Why do they not convey that message to the inhabitants of Boksburg and the East Rand? It is because they are afraid that the voters of that region will find out that they had the wool pulled over their eyes during the municipal elections.

You are going to get a hiding anyway.

This is the case because the actual tariffs were also different to those they presented to those people. Now that this false propaganda of the CP has been exposed, I want to say that my voters accept that toll road as well as the fact that if they do not want to use that toll road an alternative route will be available.

Nobody accepts your word.

That may be so. I merely want to point out that once the CP has been somewhere it takes one years to get that area properly informed, judging by the way in which they have informed the voters of Boksburg. I shall come back to this in a moment with reference to other aspects.

We on this side of the House accept that certain communities will be adversely affected by toll financing of freeways, because it just so happens that those people contribute to that toll road because they live in that region. That is why the joint committee insisted that discount tariffs and alternative routes must be available for local inhabitants. However, the CP will not convey that information, because they boycotted the meetings of the joint committee.

That is not true!

The hon member for Middelburg who wants to make so many interjections was one of them. During the three days we were meeting in Pretoria, he only attended the meeting for one or two hours. He cannot deny that.

If the local motorist still considers the toll tariff unfair, there are therefore other courses open to him. What we tried to do was to be fair to the local user and also to take the country’s interests into account. The privatisation of roads has a long-term advantage in that it reduces the State’s involvement in the provision of these services, and in this way will also reduce taxation directly or indirectly.

Particularly at the present stage of our country’s existence—in this regard I am linking up with the hon member for Primrose—where we have a population explosion and we are going to experience an increased level of income among the majority, or 80%, of the Black people, in consequence of that increased population we can expect these people with a better income to cause the vehicle population to grow at the same rate too. Then what previous speakers said here is quite true—our network is totally inadequate. This is an aspect we must take into account if we want to ensure our economic growth.

The privatisation of toll roads has the added advantage that it stimulates economic growth, broadens the tax base and puts market forces into operation to establish the road structure in each region far more quickly than the State would be able to do itself if it had to find another way of financing it. I am thinking specifically of the Witwatersrand and the Hendrik Schoeman Highway which is going to be built. We will be able to build a road there soon which will prevent economic stagnation in that region.

Bypasses have the added advantage that they link the metropolises of city councils in a different way. If one takes into account that one must travel from Springs to Randfontein along the old Main Reef Road, all the towns and cities along that main road were linked to one another and the road ran through the city centre of each of them. The Hendrik Schoeman Toll Road will bypass them all.

The tax of the local inhabitants which is used to maintain those roads, can therefore go back to them. For years large percentages of through traffic used these roads to the disadvantage of the local inhabitants. The funds of the local ratepayers had to be used to maintain roads for people who were simply passing through. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, since quite a few hon members referred to the toll road issue, I think that at this stage it would perhaps be fitting for me to say a few words about this once more.

I should like to extend my very sincere thanks to the hon member for Boksburg—his constituency is one of the constituencies directly affected by toll roads—for the balanced views he expressed here today. He is in close touch with his people, and that has also been my experience with people from that area who have held discussions with me, who have entered into negotiations with me and with whom we have been able to reach certain agreements.

I also want to thank the hon member for Klipspruit West for his reasonable approach. I agree with the hon member that the information originally supplied about the toll road issue was, upon reflection, too general. With hindsight it is, of course, easier to be clever.

This has covered a long period. This toll road issue covered a period of some years, and from time to time certain information was furnished. It was, however, information of a very general nature.

The fact of the matter—and I there agree wholeheartedly with the hon member—is that any project that is tackled in the future will be tackled on a more specific basis. We must approach the local authorities and the local communities and specifically negotiate with them about each of these matters. I agree with the hon member wholeheartedly about this, and in legislation we have already prepared, we make provision for the fact that local authorities within 20 km of the toll plaza must be consulted and that negotiations must be conducted with them. I do not think we have to argue that point any further.

I agree wholeheartedly with the hon member that the information campaign should be geared to more specific aspects and not mere generalities. In the case of Johannesburg, for example, I found them telling me that they did not have certain information at all. The information they said they never had appeared in newspapers and in the media. Again I am saying that one must negotiate specifically with these bodies.

I want to tell the hon member that as far as I can remember I never refused any request to see people. I am prepared to see people at any time about any problem. The hon member and I have also had several discussions with each other.

What places a question mark over toll roads? One single point, and that is that people do not want to be exploited. Motorists do not want to be exploited when they are using roads. Here I think that our legislators were very wise in saying that before one could proclaim a toll road, an alternative road should be available so that motorists cannot be exploited. I am now telling hon members: I carried out some research into toll roads throughout the world, and nowhere else did I encounter such a provision. It is only found in South Africa. When one starts discussing and arguing about toll roads, one presupposes that the motorist cannot be exploited.

The important point is this: Is it a road that is in a reasonable condition? As the hon member for Boksburg said, one can never expect it to be a road of the same standard. If hon members examined the deliberations of the select committee that investigated toll roads, they would find evidence stating “no matter how many twists and turns there are in the alternative route”. There must be an alternative. That is stated in the evidence. In other words, the road can never be of the same standard as the toll road. That is not, after all, possible in practice.

The hon the Deputy Minister travelled by car along the toll road at Ennerdale. I received no complaints about the condition of that road. I received representations, however, about the alternative route to the toll road at Mooi River. Last Friday I therefore took the time to travel that road myself. So the hon member for Mooi River or any other individual need not tell me any more stories. I now know exactly what the position is. I can now inform the hon member about that. I travelled that road at an average speed of 100 km per hour on a Friday afternoon. I found it to be 17 km longer than the toll road and ascertained that it took 15 minutes longer to travel that road. I found the road to be in good condition, comparing favourably with other provincial roads.

I must honestly say that those who try to make others believe that the road is not in a reasonable condition do not know what is going on in this country. How we would love a road such as the alternative road at Mooi River in the North-Western Cape! In Namaqualand there is a diamond mine, Kleinsee, which is one of the largest diamond mines in the world when it comes to semi-precious stones. It does not have a tarred road. What would those people not give simply to have a road of an equal standard to that alternative road at Mooi River!

What is the population there?

There are a few thousand people living there, more than are living in Mooi River. Surely that does not matter. The important point is that it must be a road that is in a reasonable condition. I must say that people gave me incorrect information about the condition of that road.

No, that is not true.

People gave me incorrect information. I did not say that the hon member had done so. I am glad he says that, because then am I not correct in saying that the hon member agrees with me?

I now come to the alternative route to Ennerdale. It is as the hon member for Klipspruit West said. It is the Golden Highway. It is a four-lane highway, a little shorter than the toll road. If one also takes into consideration, as I announced at the beginning of my speech, that we are prepared to negotiate with the local community and with the commuters, in order to grant them even more concessions, I can expect hon members to convey a more positive message to their voters. These are not the only steps that have been taken to prevent motorists from being exploited. There is still the fact that the toll fee may not exceed 75% of the saving. There are three officials on the board of directors of those companies.

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central intimated, in point of fact, that theft was being committed, or that there were gross irregularities, in connection with toll road income.

The Government is …

Yes, the Government has stolen the money. The hon member also said we paid that money into the Treasury, which is wrong. We never paid a single cent into the Treasury.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon the Minister allowed to misquote me? I said nothing about the fees from the toll roads, I said the national road funds were transferred to the Treasury.

Order! That is not a point of order, it is a point for debate.

Mr Chairman, the hon member said that the levies collected on fuel were paid into the Treasury, which is wrong. We never paid a single cent into the Treasury. We maintained that money in the National Road Fund and we utilised it on the roads. However, the point is that from now on the policy is that we no longer collect levies, which is in line with the rest of the world. Few levies go into the central Treasury, as is the position in the rest of the world. It is an indirect tax. It is an important measure to make it possible for the whole community, including the informal sector, to make a contribution.

*The hon member spoke in insulting and derogatory terms, as did his fellow party member, the hon member for … What is his name again?

Bryanston! [Interjections.]

Bryanston. He referred to the levying of toll fees as “highway robbery”. The hon member agrees with him. That hon member’s leader, the hon member Dr De Beer, was chairman of one of those companies. He was chairman when negotiations were being conducted with one of the companies his bench-mate is now accusing of “robbery”. [Interjections.] The hon member Dr De Beer is or was chairman of LTA which is one of the companies in the consortium. Now the hon member comes along and says they are “highway robbers”.

The Government are highway robbers!

Those hon members do not know what they are talking about. They are merely seeking publicity. Let me tell hon members that toll roads have started up an industry. Do hon members know that there are 4 500 people who are now employed, people who would otherwise not have been employed? Are hon members serious when they lodge pleas for the unemployed?

They are only looking for work for Van Eck!

No, one must put this matter into perspective. We are a responsible Committee. We are responsible to our voters, but we are also responsible to our country. In the long term we also owe it to the economy of our country. It is therefore important for us to maintain a high standard in regard to those main arteries for our businesses, industries and tourism. That can only happen if one also stimulates the interests of the private sector, as is the case at present. Those companies would then be quoted on the Stock Exchange. Any man or woman in South Africa would then be able to have shares in those companies. One would obtain share capital, allowing one to maintain a high standard of infrastructure.

Mr Chairman, my speech is directed at the taxi problems at hand. My appeal this afternoon is for the subsidisation of the taxi industry with the aim of maintaining proper records and order pertaining to the taxi industry.

However, in conjunction with subsidisation of taxis, I must stress that I agree entirely to the taxation of all taxis, but only if there is subsidisation from the Government. If one should observe all the input rendered by taxi owners, one will find that it is tremendous. Let us consider the purchases of new mini-buses. [Interjections.]

Order! No, I cannot allow a conversation across the floor.

Prices for these vehicles range from R38 000 to approximately R45 000 before tax. According to manufacturers taxi owners purchase between 300 and 350 16-seaters from them each month. Dealers report that the mini-buses are often bought for cash, but this does not mean that every taxi owner is rich. This industry is huge by South African standards.

According to a recent survey there are approximately 45 000 legal taxis and 50 000 pirate taxis on South African roads. Investment is estimated at an amount of R3 billion and 300 000 jobs were created for the unemployed. If one should calculate the contribution towards the State through the purchase of petrol, petrol prices amount to approximately 800 million litres per year, while 3,5 million litres of oil are purchased per year.

Let us also take into account the total number of taxis affiliated to Sabta. This is estimated at 300 000. Sabta practically controls 50% of the country’s fleet and the total input to this country’s economy. The taxi owner has to pay exorbitant insurance fees and the excess payment on accidents for these taxis is in the vicinity of R4 500. I believe the Government’s policy of fostering and promoting the small businessman should take priority.

In catering for the requirements of these taxis, one of the main issues is adequate taxi ranks situated centrally to all business districts. In this instance these taxi ranks should be convenient to the passengers to enable them to obtain easier access to all the amenities that are available. In the light of the present inadequacy of all subsidised public transport, commuters are forced to utilise taxis. Therefore the taxi is the only alternative insofar as the non-White public in general is concerned.

The taxi industry reflects the economic energy and dynamic self-sufficiency of Black entrepreneurs. It is the driving force behind economic growth and job creation. According to Sabta, which represents the majority of taxi operators in the country, Sabta is winning in spite of the over-concentration of industrial and economic power, over-regulation and little or no access to capital. It should be investigated whether all taxis need subsidisation and if so, whether it should be supplied.

In the April 1989 issue of Drive On, the monthly newspaper of Sabta, the hon member for Parktown said that drunk and negligent drivers should have their licences confiscated. He also said that tough regulations would be of little benefit unless they were strictly enforced. Traffic departments should be stricter with regard to the issuing of driver’s licences, as we must punish people responsible for the death and destruction on our roads. We must realise that taxis are here to stay, and monitoring these associations as well as their requirements would be appreciated.

Concerning the building of the Nasrec showground, the Shareworld Recreation Centre and the NFL Super Stadium near Johannesburg, I would like to know whether the hon the Minister has taken into consideration that the road to Baragwanath is not adequate to carry all the traffic. When is that road going to be upgraded?

I would like to stress the case of safety for all MPs when parking at D F Malan Airport. Last week we received circulars notifying us of the new parking space for MPs. The new parking area allocated for the vehicles of MPs is not safe at all as it seems that anybody can park there. There is no security and this is dangerous as a car bomb can be planted there.

Mr Chairman, I just want to make a few comments in regard to the speech of the hon the Minister. I am afraid that he and I have a complete difference of opinion in regard to the suitability or otherwise of that alternate road. I am referring in particular to the section of road between Nottingham Road and Rosetta. I find that quite an unacceptable alternative route. It was already outdated 20 years ago and to bring it back in virtually the same condition as it was then bears no relevance whatsoever.

I want to assure the hon the Minister that as far as I am concerned I am afraid that time will tell whether he is right or whether I am right in regard to the safety conditions on that road. While he travelled it in good weather last week I wonder whether he realises what it is like to travel on that road in misty conditions. It is mainly on the basis of the safety factor that I have always objected to the suitability of that road as an alternative route and I shall continue to do so.

I have also taken note of the comments made by the hon the Minister in his introductory speech relative to toll roads. I must make it clear that I do support the concept of tolling new roads. I still have serious misgivings about the tolling of existing roads and I wait with interest to see how the evaluation of the maintenance costs will be extended under the new system that is being considered at the present time.

I have neither the time nor the desire to delve too deeply into the historical facts surrounding what I consider to be the debacle of the Mooi River toll beyond stressing the fact that if the circumstances surrounding the establishment of that toll are an example of how Government intends to go about its programme of privatisation, then I can assure hon members that the concept is doomed to failure from the start.

As a public relations exercise—and I am glad to note that the hon the Minister accepts this—the Mooi River toll has been an unmitigated disaster in spite of my warning in September 1987 that the hon the Minister should discuss this matter with all those directly affected prior to the final signing of any agreement. I need hardly remind the hon the Minister, too, that his couldn’t-care-less attitude has aroused the ire and indignation of the public of the Natal Midlands as no other factor has done.

The tragedy is that the hon the Minister will not accept what I call constructive criticism, and so much of the unpleasantness that has evolved as a result of the toll at Mooi River could have been avoided if a little more consideration had been given to the feelings of the public. I want to warn the hon the Minister that the public will not accept the justification of the tolling of a section of road which they have had the use of for some 20 years. It is incomprehensible to me that the hon the Minister could have been so naive in the first place as to assume that there would be no outcry from the public who have suddenly found themselves saddled with an imposition of this nature.

I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to realise that it is imperative, too, that he should give consideration to certain aspects of the contract with Tolcon. These should be renegotiated in addition to those that he has already indicated.

Much is to be learnt from the information that is now filtering through regarding the estimated traffic flow, which is considerably in excess of what was originally anticipated. Furthermore, something should be done about certain extraordinarily benevolent clauses that appear in the contract which are undeniably favourable to concessionaires and where, as far as I am concerned, the interests of the motoring public have not been adequately safeguarded. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, at the outset I wish to congratulate the hon the Minister, the NRSC, its director, Dr Louw Dreyer, and the deputy director, Mr Eric Wise, on the short and concise report.

I do not want to take up the cudgels for the NRSC this afternoon, but I think that it would be unfair simply to leave the matter at that. In 1984, for example, I also participated in the National Road Safety Year. For us who were closely involved with the NRSC, it was one of the highlights. In 1984 certain heights were reached, and as far as the NRSC was concerned, we learnt a great deal from it. I want to encourage Dr Dreyer not to become despondent.

There is still a great deal of research that has to be done in the future. As we know, further information is still needed in many fields. I want to mention a few cases in which I feel that the NRSC must help the authorities who plan our roads. I know that many of the roads, especially the freeways, were built years ago.

In this case I particularly wish to argue in favour of the pedestrian. I have noticed that the accommodation of pedestrians, especially here in the Cape, has lagged behind. I want to ask for more fly-overs because our people have the problem that they are sometimes caught between freeways. They must then move across from the one area, for example where their families live, to the other side. That fly-over is situated in such a way that they have to move to the end of their area to reach it. That is why they take chances and walk across the freeways. I think that is how many of our people lose their lives.

I must also congratulate the NRSC further. I read in the report that there was reaction to the fact that we kicked up such a fuss and asked for research to be done into a curriculum and that such a syllabus be compiled and incorporated. I am also glad to see that one of the research projects that is going to be undertaken is the basic study of the science and theory of Road Safety Education which will be completed in June 1989. The second project is the design of a Road Safety Education curriculum for the training of student teachers and teachers. This project was completed in April. A further project which functions on an ongoing basis, is the evaluation of the implementation of the NRSCs Parent-and-Child project.

I wish to support previous speakers by saying that I have found that we have a problem in South Africa. Unless we stimulate the child continually with regard to road safety during his early development, we are going to have a greater problem. For that reason we find such a large variety of behaviour patterns in South Africa. I think that we must do something about it, even if it means that we have to obtain information and do research overseas to implement it here—by that I do not mean that the NRSC must not do its own research here and perhaps compare it with overseas research.

I can speak from experience about the problem we have. I spoke to nursery school children about road safety. Sometimes I only get the opportunity to stimulate the child in that respect when he is in standard two.

We are faced with the problem that many of our people are not qualified to convey the message of the NRSC. As I also said in 1985, I think that we need greater community involvement in South Africa. I think that is all that will enable us to sell this message of the NRSC. Otherwise I think that we shall be wasting our time. Then the NRSC can go out of its way in vain and the Government can approve large amounts of money—I want to plead this afternoon that the hon the Minister give his approval to more money being made available to the NRSC. I shall be very sad if a drastic change has to take place in the NRSC. As far as I am concerned there is no country with a traffic system such as South Africa’s that can exist without an organisation such as the NRSC. I believe that the task of the NRSC will become more important in the future because we are a fast-growing country.

I want to mention briefly what our behaviour patterns are in South Africa. I am not a “fundi” but the experts say that we are faced with First and Third World conditions which we have to reconcile. I think that if we take the time to analyse our situation, an enormous task awaits the NRSC in the future.

I wish to ask the hon the Minister to ensure that the South African Bureau of Standards, if that is the channel through which it has to be done, effects a change to the trucks that have their exhaust pipes on the right-hand side. In January, when I travelled from Bloemfontein to the Cape, I found, especially after sunset, that one’s vision is obscured if there is a lot of smoke from the exhaust pipe with the result that it makes it difficult to overtake. I feel that it can result in people who are not all that careful, perhaps overtaking at the wrong time.

I took cognisance of the fact that the number of scholar patrols have increased. I want to enquire of the NRSC whether any accidents occurred during this financial year in which any of the scholar patrols were involved. It is very important to me because I believe that a motorist must respect a scholar patrol. We have such good co-operation in Bloemfontein that our traffic officers stand at scholar patrols on certain days to make the motorist aware that they are also in the vicinity. It is very important. Earlier we had the problem that some of the children were left alone at the schools to man these scholar patrols, but after we investigated the matter in 1981 I do not believe that it happened again that the children were left alone without being supported by a teacher or an older person.

It is important for me to be informed by the hon the Minister whether there has been an increase in the use of films on road safety and whether more of our people are making use of slides. I want to know because it is something that causes a little concern; these days I feel that there is insufficient publicity for the NRSC in the newspapers and on TV. Those media must be utilised. As I said, it is an enormous task and if we do not spend more money on, for example, the manufacturing of more films, we are going to fall behind. If our films and courses become so outdated, they will have to be brought up to standard again.

It was good to hear that some of our speakers welcomed the legislation. I said that I congratulated the traffic officers with the work they did over the Easter weekend, especially with the aid of the NRSC. That co-operation exists and I appreciate it. They worked long hours and we want to congratulate those men.

As some of our speakers mentioned, attitudes can sometimes be a problem. Sometimes I wonder if it is not due to the fact that some of the men work such long hours. One becomes a bit touchy when one starts getting tired. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I had actually thought that I should not like to react to the speech made by the hon member for Opkoms, but the last matter he dealt with compels me to do so and to continue with what he began to discuss here.

Before I begin to do so, however, I just want to tell the hon member for Mooi River, who is unfortunately not in the House now, that for some time now I have been following the entire debate regarding toll roads with a great deal of interest. In particular, I was really impressed this afternoon by the noble and earnest effort the hon the Minister made to subdue the entire debate with regard to toll roads and to place it in the right perspective. Despite that, the hon member for Mooi River once again came forward with his personal, parochial problems.

I wish to associate myself with the hon the Minister. I think that many of the people in our country in areas where there is perhaps an abundance of facilities of this nature, such as good tar roads, do not always realise what they have. The maintenance costs of roads, of which I have had personal experience, in respect of both gravel roads and tar roads, as a divisional council member of many years standing, are hopelessly underestimated by people who do not have any experience of them.

Against this background I cannot but say that I feel that some hon members rejected the principle of toll roads from the outset and that they sought any pretext on which to attack the Government. Instead of promoting the principle among their voters and holding discussions with regard to the problems surrounding toll roads, they have simply attempted to score some political points.

I wish to say a few words about law enforcement on public roads as well as in urban areas. This is, of course, a very emotional issue. Songs have been written and films have been made about law enforcement officers and their sometimes unenviable task. We are nevertheless pleased that the image of the man in the blue motor car under the tree, or behind the bridge, or down in the stormwater drain, is improving. It is the duty of every one of us to help our traffic officers to receive the recognition and status they deserve.

The slaughter on the Republic’s roads cannot continue. The country simply cannot afford it, and I associate myself with the hon member for Primrose in this regard. During a previous debate I mentioned the figures and I am going to repeat them because I think they are important. It is estimated that traffic accidents cost the country R5 013 million in 1987. That is approximately one half of the country’s Defence Budget and almost a third of the total Education and Training Budget, which is the largest single Vote in this year’s Budget. I shudder to think that the traffic on public roads is increasing annually by between 300 000 and 400 000 vehicles, and that this increase will, of necessity, accelerate as more people become economically active and involved. Figures 5.4 and 5.5 of the departmental report clearly reflect this trend.

A further source of great concern to me is my expectation that the quality and standard of vehicles will deteriorate in the face of increased traffic and economic realities, and if we do not do something drastic, the quality of drivers will also undergo a further deterioration.

I shall not deal further with road safety as such, but I must add that road safety and law enforcement are virtually inseparably linked at this stage. Traffic law enforcement must be viewed by the public as being both fair and essential. It must be accepted purely and simply as a method by which order is maintained and lives are saved. In such a climate the reasonable cross-section of motorists and road users will lend their spontaneous co-operation.

In such a climate the recognition and status of the men and women in traffic uniforms to whom I have already referred, will also spontaneously emerge. However, I believe that the public would gladly lend this recognition if a slightly more reasonable attitude were displayed.

The image of traffic officers, which most of them work at with good results, is being destroyed by some of the parking tickets, parking meter fines and so on which are being written out indiscriminately by a minority of officers. It is the considered opinion of many expert people that the public are negatively inclined towards the apparently aimless manner in which law enforcement often takes place—on the one hand because it must take place and on the other hand because it is probably a source of revenue— whilst law enforcement really ought to be used as a last resort in the promotion of road safety.

The actions of traffic officers must not result in a polarisation between road users and the traffic authorities. Their actions should rather be focussed on information, helpfulness and friendliness. In order to assist the traffic officers in this regard, we must also take certain circumstances into account.

The Republic is a large country with a good road network. Speed limits must be adjusted to take account of this. It is senseless to ticket a man with a safe motor car for a speeding violation on the wide open spaces of the platteland when he could get away with travelling at the same speed in a built-up area with heavy traffic. Heavy vehicles tear recklessly through small towns at the maximum permissible speed, whilst motorists who drive five kilometres per hour faster, and who have full control over their vehicles, are ticketed.

Heavy vehicles overtake one another on inclines and sometimes take minutes to complete the process, whilst a string of cars piles up behind them, at places that are actually intended for motorists to overtake heavy vehicles. Some drivers of heavy vehicles, and sometimes overloaded vehicles with their heavy bull-bars, have little consideration for the average motorist.

Law enforcement with regard to traffic violations has a further implication, namely that an offender may appear in court to defend his case, but only in the area of jurisdiction of the court in which the offence was committed. The cost aspect related to this gives rise to the fact that admissions of guilt are usually the cheapest option, as well as the one involving the least time, trouble and cost. This is a source of frustration to road users.

I want to say something about the Road Transport Quality System. The basic objective of the RTQS is to ensure that acceptable standards of public transport are maintained when deregulation takes place. These standards are aimed particularly at traffic safety in an equitable, competitive situation. The foundation for the law enforcement campaign is being laid by the supporting information system which is being developed by the Department of Transport in collaboration with provincial and local authorities. The heart of the information system is a horizontally-linked computer system which will contain information on operators, drivers, vehicles and offenders. By way of this system it will be possible to link offences and operators/drivers to one another. Habitual offenders and wilful operators will be identified and the task of the law enforcer nationwide, as well as in the neighbouring states, will be facilitated and made more effective.

Road blocks for the purpose of checking lights, brakes, direction indicators and licences, together with the planned network of testing stations on the main traffic routes, will be well received, provided certain practices are adhered to which will not expose road users to unnecessarily long delays and unnecessary repetitions of procedure, and this prosecution mania.

The attitudes of people—and I find this important—are the key to good law enforcement and general road safety. In this regard I also wish to thank two companies in particular which have taken the lead by providing motor vehicles and fuel, in co-operation with certain other bodies, for the schools driver training programme. From humble beginnings in 1981 at one school in the Western Cape, the programme has progressed to such an extent that 400 schools are now already participating. It is here that the foundation of driving skills is laid, as well as that of the good relations between the traffic authorities and the road user. According to what I am told, however, there is a problem, and that is that nowhere in the Republic is a course offered which enables a driving school instructor to qualify himself to become an instructor. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in the very limited time available to me, I would like to refer the hon the Minister to the report of the Department of Transport and of the National Transport Commission. On p 73 it says, and I quote:

I would like to support the first speaker this afternoon, the hon member for Klipspruit West. He raised the subject of toll roads, and speaker after speaker followed him in this. If it is necessary to privatise roads to meet the costs of the upkeep of roads and the building of new roads, I ask the hon the Minister why it is then necessary to charge for motor car licences.

In Natal, the smallest province in South Africa, the licence fees paid by motorists exceed R120 million per annum. There are four provinces in which these fees are collected. I would like to know what has happened to that amount of money collected in Natal alone.

Taking the true facts into consideration, I fully support the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central when he says the Government’s actions are actually highway robbery. He is quite right. He was absolutely right in the statement he made. The Government’s actions, and not those of the toll companies, are highway robbery. If someone would arrange time on television I will debate this point outside Parliament.

The Mariannhill toll road falls within my constituency. It was built through very rough terrain and it was an expensive undertaking. A bridge that was built across the river there cost four times what an ordinary bridge costs to build, and yet that toll road has shown an increase of 18% in income. The income derived from the toll road was 25c per axle for motor vehicles. Every day the people now pay 60c per axle for heavy duty vehicles and 25c for cars and there are no complaints from the general public. The income achieved at that toll plaza supports the reduction of the loan on the toll road.

Why was the Mooi River toll plaza placed on a road that was built 20 years ago and paid for by the public? It is by and large the motorists of Natal, who pay over R120 million to the Government in licence fees alone, who are involved.

The Huguenot tunnel which was built at a cost of R200 million is I think, the most expensive road construction in South Africa. The toll fees there are half those payable at the Mooi River toll plaza. If that is not highway robbery, goodness knows what is. This road was built 20 years ago and is already paid for by the public. Now there is a toll plaza as it has become a toll road and the fees are double those payable at the most expensive road construction in the country, which is R4 per car. I cannot accept the logic of that argument. It is highway robbery. I am in agreement with hon members who laid that charge before the hon the Minister.

What is very interesting is that according to the report issued by the Department of Transport and the Joint Committee on Transport, the total income of the National Road Fund for the period 1987-88 was … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Camperdown adopted the same tradition as some of his predecessors, and that is to lodge a plea registering his objection to the toll fee on the Mooi River toll road.

†I want to tell the hon member that only a short while ago I had occasion to meet a French politician with whom I had an interview. This gentleman said to me that he had travelled in the Cape Town area and that he was absolutely surprised that he had to pay no tolls on such a beautiful road in comparison with what he has to pay back in France.

This is the situation that we have. I think the hon the Minister has explained that on numerous occasions. If he has not done so, someone else has! We simply do not have the funds in South Africa to pay for this. This is not highway robbery.

It is daylight robbery!

No, sir. The hon member will pay much less if he drives through the Huguenot tunnel, because that tunnel is subsidised. The same applies to Mariannhill. Obviously there will have to be a big difference. Nobody is forcing anybody to travel on a toll road. There is always an alternative route. The hon member should also understand our position. We are entering a deregulated transport market in South Africa. We have to provide roads. One cannot do the one and not the other. It has already been estimated—this has often been repeated—that we have a terrific backlog. The hon member for Primrose referred to this today. If we want to make up the backlog, build roads at an earlier stage and provide a service to the public of South Africa in a deregulated transport market where people are going to make more use of the roads, obviously there is no other way in which to do it.

Mr Chairman, will the hon the Deputy Minister take a question?

No sir, I am not prepared to answer questions. How else are we going to do it? Are we going to tax the taxpayer even more? Are we going to ask the people of South Africa to provide additional loan funds at high interest rates when we already know that there is a shortage of capital for development in South Africa?

[Inaudible.]

Look, it is all very well for hon members to say that we have messed up the whole situation in South Africa, but it is not true! After all, we are going ahead with our plans. The hon the Minister has said so. Furthermore, we are making concessions.

The hon member Mr Abram quoted what I was supposed to have said and what the hon the Deputy Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture (Delegates) was supposed to have said. According to him the hon the Deputy Minister said that he had thought the representations to his colleague would at least lead to a reduction in charge, but that he had had no feedback on that. That is not true. The hon the Deputy Minister had some feedback. He wrote me a letter to which I replied. As a result of my visit to that particular area and the subsequent discussions, I also reported to the hon the Minister.

The hon the Minister said that he was not going to make concessions to the local people again. Tolcon has made concessions to the local people. How can the hon the Deputy Minister say that he has had no feedback? I am grateful to the hon member Mr Abram for having raised this issue so that I could reply to it.

*The hon member for De Aar and other hon members spoke about traffic officers. I just want to remind the hon member that when we passed the Road Traffic Act a few weeks ago, it contained a clause that also made provision for the training of those who wished to become involved in the system of traffic control. A special committee will be established by the hon the Minister to advise him on this. I suspect—no, I am sure—that we can improve the standard of traffic officers in this country by way of training. The hon member for De Aar and the hon member for Opkoms also spoke about the question of road safety. It is a source of great concern to all of us. As a result of road accidents 10 000 people were killed last year. America, a country with a population of 240 million, lost 46 000 people as a result of road accidents last year. America’s population is eight times that of South Africa. In other words, if they had proportionally lost the same number of people as a result of road accidents, the figure should have been 80 000.

South Africa lost 10 000 people, and the situation here is therefore much more serious than in a country such as America. One can only support the National Road Safety Council and its endeavours. The major problem it is faced with, however, is that it is dealing with motorists, drivers, reckless individuals and those who simply cannot keep out of other people’s way. To keep a constant check on the maintenance of road safety in South Africa involves a long-drawn-out process of education and guidance.

†The hon member for Bosmont raised the issue of parking at D F Malan airport and said that the area where we have just provided the 57 parking bays for MPs is not safe. If we had allowed MPs to park in front of the terminal there would not only not have been enough parking space, but it would also have been much more dangerous than parking in the area that we have recently allocated for that purpose. In my opinion it is much safer there and members of the public will also not get the impression that MPs are getting preferential treatment.

*The hon member for Bishop Lavis also touched upon the question of road safety. I thank him for what he said in this regard.

I want to refer briefly to the fact that hon members intimated here that the NP Government, the hon the Minister and I did not know how to regulate the transport situation in South Africa. In my opinion, however, a new day has dawned for transport in South Africa since the standpoints on national transport policy were published in the White Paper.

This White Paper has become the blueprint for deregulated transport, and the implementation of this programme is still going according to plan. In the event of unforeseen circumstances, the timetable could possibly be changed, but that is all. The Government is not going to deviate from its envisaged course, ie of having transport subject to all the forces of the private enterprise system.

There must be the maximum competition possible in the market-place, and clients must be able to choose who must satisfy their transport needs and how much they are prepared to pay. The approach is that the client and/or the passenger should have the widest possible choice of road, air, rail or water-borne transport. Regardless of the form of transport selected, there must be only two guarantees, ie optimum safety for the consumer and the highest possibly quality of transport.

†In my opinion we have taken major steps in implementing our transport policy. We have the example of our Transport Advisory Council which will have important functions to fulfil and which will advise the Minister on our present and future transportation needs. After all, no important industry can function without a body of this nature and no Minister would cope without the advice and support of such a body. We should also not underestimate the value of this body in the economic development of our country and the region in which we live.

The second example is the Transport Deregulation Act, which will lay the foundation for a smooth transition from a regulated to a deregulated transport market. The ultimate goal is the abolition of the permit system which caused unhappiness amongst transport operators and many unnecessary costs.

*The next matter I want to touch upon involves the South African Roads Board which we accepted last year. Here, too, we have increasingly given representation to the private sector.

†Road transportation is already playing a predominant role in transport, and the provision of safe and well-constructed national and main roads to link our main industrial centres and tourist attractions is cause for concern against the background of deregulation.

The hon member for Primrose made the point that our development outstrips our financial resources for road building, maintenance and rehabilitation. We also know that rapid urbanisation will add to our road-building programme. I believe that the Road Board, given the means and the support to provide this service, will not disappoint us. Roads must be looked upon as a service. Either the taxpayer or the user must pay, or we must have a combination of both.

*The Road Traffic Act is a further example. All these Acts indicate that we are assiduously implementing the White Paper. We are not acting precipitately. The hon the Minister told us today what he was going to do about the deregulation of aviation. Everything is being done in accordance with the programme. A pilot committee, about which the hon the Minister told us, will examine the question of aviation under the auspices of the Department of Transport.

Similarly we are examining the question of our merchant shipping. That is a sector of the economy which is generally regarded as already having been privatised. Here quality plays a role, and the seaworthiness of the vessel and the suitability of the captain and his crew are determining factors.

The Merchant Shipping Act is being implemented effectively. For various reasons, however, our legislation has not kept pace with international developments. Apparently steps will be taken to eliminate the backlog, and statutory amendments are possible.

There is another matter I want to raise, however, in regard to water-borne traffic. Has the time not come for all water-borne vessels, as in the case of all motor vehicles, bicycles and motorbikes that make use of our roads, to be registered and to have seaworthy certificates? [Interjections.] Many road-vehicles are never used for gain, but are nevertheless subject to strict laws and regulations.

The numbers of boats and small vessels are sharply on the increase. This is a sign of our increasing standard of living. In our navigable waters, on rivers, lakes and large dams, we see increasingly more of these pleasure boats of various sizes. In many cases there are clubs that lay down rules for their members and, to the best of their ability, look after their members. No one wants to interfere with the local rules of these boat-clubs and yacht-clubs. That is not the object. We are even less inclined to interfere with the functions of local authorities and regional services councils, but there is increasing activity on our local dams, lakes and rivers.

Is it not time for our department and its Water Transport Directorate to take the lead and draw up a set of requirements in accordance with which such boats should be designed and manufactured? This should also relate to those who are in command of such vessels. There should also be a set of acceptable rules for water-borne traffic. There is the prospect of a Bill in regard to small vessels. It must not only be applicable to sea-going vessels. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister for attention to be given to this matter. We try to keep death off the roads, and we must also try to keep death off the water.

Mr Chairman, from time to time one hears that South Africa is a seafaring nation. I think this is a false premise. The only connection that the vast majority of at least the White section of our nation has with the sea is the fact that our forefathers came to this country by ship.

*I want to confine myself to coastal shipping on the route with Durban and Walvis Bay as terminal points. I also want to refer to safety at sea. I now see that the hon the Deputy Minister has beaten me to it. One would have sworn one of us was a plagiarist. However, I am just as much in earnest about safety at sea as he is, specifically when it comes to small boats, but I shall come to that later in my speech.

In the early development of our country shipping played a major role. Cargo was conveyed between Cape Town and the harbour of Saldanha, Port Nolloth, Lüderitz, Walvis Bay and eastwards towards Mossel Bay, Port Elizabeth, East London and Durban. Many of our smaller harbours, such as Knysna and many others, were touched on as ports of call during the conveyance of people and goods.

†Today the major harbours are being serviced by mainly one shipping line. Their fleet consist of cellular container ships, two “roro” ships, two multi-purpose ships, two tankers and two oil rig supply ships.

I would like to say that water transport is the most cost-effective mode available. In the first place there are no roads that can be damaged. The sea also has an infinite ability to expand its carrying capacity free of cost. Infrastucture is available at our harbours and this infrastructure has virtually inexhaustible capacity in terms of our development potential.

The South African shipping industry has also made a significant breakthrough. Through experimenting, they have developed a previously unused by-product of Sasol into an efficient marine bunkering fuel known as Synthol-W 020. At the moment they are almost fully reliant on this South African product. They are saving this country enormous sums in foreign exchange.

*Other hon members spoke today about how our roads are being ruined by heavy trucks that are overloaded. Earlier this year we piloted legislation through Parliament in terms of which we wanted to consider the quality system of our roads and wanted to ensure that a quality system was applied to our drivers and the vehicles they drove, according to safety standards, and also the freight they were carrying.

If we consider shipping, we will note that the Government of South Africa does not make it compulsory to adjust to a quality system. The quality system for shipping has been in operation for years. If we have to consider the requirements with which shipping has to comply, we will probably keep ourselves busy here until 19h00 or 20h00 this evening. Even if we considered only the legislation on the aims and functions of safety at sea, certificates that must be issued in respect of shipping and the examinations and navigation training with which ships personnel must comply, we could keep ourselves busy for a long time.

I said at the beginning of my speech that we profess to be a seafaring nation. I also told hon members that that was not the case. Since we have this open road and we have no need to impose any tolls on this road, I want to bring it to the attention of the hon the Minister that in my opinion not enough use is being made of this mode of transport. We have problems with our roads in that they are sometimes overutilised. Although this industry has subjected itself to a quality system, I want to tell the hon the Minister I hear from people in the road transportation industry that some operators are now—until such time as the new quality system is in full operation—overloading their trucks or their rigs—as they call them—to such an extent that they are sometimes 100% overloaded. We just do not have the means of bringing these people to book.

I want to tell the hon the Minister that the feeling among the general public, among the taxpayers, is that these people who are destroying the roads should be treated as nothing less than criminals. They are criminals because they are stealing. They are destroying the roads and by doing so they are forcing the hand of this department, the provincial administrations and local authorities, who then have to waste more taxpayers’ money in repairing those roads. I want to warn the hon the Minister that these people are in the meantime abusing the situation.

I share the concern of the hon the Deputy Minister in regard to smaller vessels. As he said, rules have been laid down by ski-boat clubs, at least in my area this has been done, but these rules are not being strictly applied. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can walk into a shop—I would not be surprised if one could walk into a hypermarket these days—and buy a “rubber duckie” and fit it out with an engine. The purchaser then takes to the first piece of open sea he comes to.

Control must be exercised over this practice, and it should be done as quickly as possible. It costs the State an enormous amount of money every time a person gets into difficulties owing to his own ignorance and carelessness. I heard that the recent rescue operation after the theft of a yacht by two school children in Gordon’s Bay cost the Defence Force alone R40 000.

I am not trying to say that we should have left these people to drown, but one should in some way be able to introduce control so that the owner of such a vessel can also get into trouble. In the same way we are going to clamp down on the operator when his driver errs, we must also be able to deal with the owner of such a vessel. We must be able to compel him to safeguard his yacht in such a way that it cannot be stolen for such a purpose. I am not referring specifically to the unfortunate owner of this yacht, but I feel that one should think of such a solution in future.

I should like to ask the hon the Minister, coming back to roads now, whether he has already declared the North-Western Cape—I am thinking specifically of his main town Upington as the middle point—as part of the 300 km zone.

It is 450.

The hon the Minister must forgive me. I am a member of this joint committee, and of the study group for Foreign Affairs that was convening below and I am also a member of the one sitting opposite. I am actually supposed to be sitting below, and I do not know why. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, before I resume my seat I should like to congratulate the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister, the Director-General and the senior personnel sincerely on the wonderful year they have behind them. With the legislation which came through we realised how much work had been done behind the scenes. We as a joint committee come into contact with a half-finished product—or I might as well say an 80% finished product—and then we begin to work on it.

I must say, however, that there is tremendous appreciation for this among members of the joint committee. Unfortunately the public do not understand these things very well, but there is tremendous appreciation for what is being done behind the scenes.

Mr Chairman, I want to thank the hon the Minister for his announcement on the West Coast road last year. We do, however, have certain reservations, and I shall be referring to them at a later stage in my speech.

Today I feel a touch of sadness about this matter. It is not very easy for me to speak to hon members today. I am going to speak about road safety for the most part, however, and if time permits I shall also get around to discussing national roads.

I am a person who advocates justice. That is why I firstly want to speak about those who have to enforce the law on our roads, on our national roads, in our towns and on our through-roads. The reason why I am speaking about law enforcement is because, in my opinion, our law enforcement officers spend too much time on speed traps to balance the budgets of their local authorities or to collect money for their local authorities by some or other means. I am also certain that when law enforcement officers set up their speed traps in the streets of our towns at the end of the month, they are doing so on the instructions of certain local authorities.

I now want to speak about the actual work of law enforcement officers on our roads. Their job is to ensure that road users use the roads in such a way that they do not endanger the lives of others. This afternoon it is difficult for me to talk about law enforcement because the daughter of an hon member of Parliament, a member of my party, was killed on her bicycle on Sunday evening by a 15-year old boy driving without a licence.

I should like to illustrate the situation by way of a comparison. If I were to take my firearm and place it in the hands of an unlicensed person I would be responsible for what happens. The firearm could be confiscated. I therefore want to say that if the owner of a motor vehicle allows his car to land up in the hands of a person who does not have a licence, and something like this takes place, or even if someone were not killed, if a law enforcement officer were to come upon such a person driving a vehicle without a licence, that vehicle ought to be confiscated, in the same way as a firearm can be confiscated. Then we would begin to combat this problem of people driving without a licence. I have children of my own. My children have also taken my car at times. If this were to happen to me, the law would have to take its course. I should like to have us examine those instances of minors driving cars without a valid licence.

I now want to deal with another aspect of road safety. If one travels from the inter-town areas to Cape Town in the mornings, particularly on the N2 one is taking one’s life in one’s hands. The problem lies with taxi-drivers. They are the death of us. They travel hither and thither on the shoulder of the road. They have no respect for oncoming traffic. Nor do they have any respect for human life. I am not averse to people driving taxis. I am not opposed to the industry as such. I am opposed to those who have no respect for the lives of others. Let me tell hon members that virtually every day I travel in my own car from Laboria Park. I have decided to leave Laboria Park at a quarter to six in the morning so as to be at the office at twenty past six or half past six so that I can avoid those taxis. Those people are the death of one. They do not care how they drive. We must please examine this aspect.

I want to quote the following passage from South African Transport of April 1989:

Die Burger of Tuesday, 7 March 1989, had the following to say about pirate taxis, and I quote:

The owners of pirate taxis do not have to have their vehicles tested for roadworthy certificates and are therefore driving taxis which are not roadworthy at all, thus posing a danger to our people on the roads. I think I have said enough about this.

I now come to our most important national asset, ie our national roads. In terms of section 7 of Act 74 of 1948 the object of the National Transport Commission shall be:

In order to achieve this objective, certain goals were set, ie the design, construction and maintenance of a network of major roads in the RSA to augment the existing system, the drawing up of a priority list of roads to be constructed and improved and the design and construction of various special roads which are in the national interest. Toll roads fall under this heading.

I am very glad the hon member for Klipspruit West adopted a different tone in his speech this afternoon, and I am also grateful for the way in which the hon the Minister dealt with the matter raised by the hon member. In principle I have no objection to toll roads. Last year I had an opportunity to be in Europe where people pay a toll when they travel from one capital to another. As soon as one crosses the limits of one town and enters another urban area, one has to pay a toll. We saw this on the autobahn. We know that South Africa is the only country in which there is also an alternative road available if someone does not want to make use of the toll road. [Time expired.]