Order! I have to announce that Mr Speaker has received a Message from the State President calling a joint sitting, as follows:

The meeting of the Extended Public Committee on Vote No 22—Transport, will commence immediately after the conclusion of the joint sitting.

Order! I have to announce that Mr Speaker has received a Message from the State President calling a Joint Sitting of the three Houses of Parliament, as follows:

*The proceedings of this Extended Public Committee on Foreign Affairs will therefore be adjourned at approximately 15h20 and will be resumed immediately after the Joint Sitting has been disposed of.

†The meeting of the Extended Public Committee on Vote No 22—Transport, will be resumed immediately after the conclusion of the Joint Sitting.

*The hon the Minister of Defence has asked me for an opportunity to make a statement. I should now like to grant him that opportunity.

Mr Chairman, as I have announced in the media, I ordered an investigation into Armscor and the SA Defence Force after the incident in Paris on 21 April of this year involving Mr Daniel Storm. Before I deal with the findings, there are three matters that must be taken into consideration.

Firstly, in 1977 a total international arms embargo was imposed on the Republic of South Africa by the UN. Its object is to make South Africa incapable of defending itself. Armscor’s task is, inter alia, to neutralise this immoral embargo. Practice has shown, however, that Armscor is inundated with offers. The overall majority of them are without any value, however. Where offers are in fact considered, their potential value and the credibility attaching to them must be assessed.

In instances in which time plays a role in the rapid development of certain technologies, or where it is obviously cheaper to obtain supplies from outside sources, Armscor gives consideration to such offers, depending on their value.

The international armaments trade plays by its own rules and has its own moral codes which are not consistently in line with the accepted principles of diplomacy and international law.

We did not make those rules—they were simply the rules that existed. One plays this game according to those rules, or one does not play at all, and then one runs the risk of going under. In this world, therefore, unconventional methods apply. For the sake of its security, South Africa therefore, of necessity, finds itself to be part of this world from time to time. As in the case of other countries, we are forced to become part of this, and we are not apologising to anyone for that fact. After all, it is a matter of our survival.

The second matter involves policy. Two aspects are relevant here, ie sales and purchases. South Africa’s policy on both these issues has repeatedly been stated: Owing to the singular position in which we find ourselves, South Africa does not indicate from whom it makes its purchases or to whom it sells. It is the Government’s unequivocal policy, however, that South Africa does not sell or furnish any armaments to terrorist organisations.

As far as sales are concerned, I have only made three exceptions to this unswerving policy. The most important was on 24 May 1982 in connection with speculations, particularly from the United Kingdom, about our alleged involvement in the Falklands War. I then stated categorically that South Africa had not furnished or sold any missiles or aircraft parts to Argentina, as alleged in the Press at the time, neither prior to nor during the Falklands conflict.

As far as purchases are concerned, we have never made an exception. It is, after all, the prerogative of suppliers to make this public if they so desire. We are not, however, going to embarrass them by revealing information about transactions they have entered into with us. The choice about whether to make this public or not is still theirs.

Thirdly it is a question of the flow of information and openness. The flow of information is a sound practice in the democratic process. This flow of information is, however, subject to realistic limits imposed by considerations of security and measures imposed internationally. Consequently, information that could affect the security of a country cannot freely be made public. This applies in the case of any self-respecting state. I think that any reasonable South African, to whom security and survival matter, would understand this and would agree.

Let me relate this to the private sector. It is significant that since economic punitive measures were instituted against the Republic of South Africa there have been many calls, in the business world, for South Africa not to reveal its trade figures. The defence family has had to deal with the United Nations’ embargo for a much longer time, however, and is perhaps more keenly aware than the private sector of the sensitivity of this situation.

Furthermore the Government cannot be expected to reveal or discuss those matters that other governments do not bring to light either. Our policy therefore remains unchanged, a policy of not revealing from whom we buy and to whom we sell.

The Government’s policy was stated last week by my colleague, the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and by me, and that is that South Africa is unequivocally opposed to terrorism and violence to achieve political ends. Our standpoint on terrorism and those who advocate it is also very clear. It therefore also follows that the Republic of South Africa does not furnish or sell armaments to terrorist organisations.

†This brings me to the investigation and its conclusions. Firstly, Armscor, as do similar organisations in other countries, works through arms dealers. In the Paris incident, an agreement was reached with such a dealer. Mr Storm was asked to act as a go-between on behalf of Armscor.

Secondly, it must be remembered that Armscor is not in a position to control associates and contacts of international arms dealers. When business is conducted with these dealers, Armscor, above all, is interested in satisfying South Africa’s requirements.

Thirdly, Armscor did not approach an Irish movement or organisation, including the relatively unknown Ulster Defence Association, on its own initiative. When the appointment was made with the arms dealer, it was not known that other persons would be present. It is now apparent that these persons were missile technicians, some of whom are members of the Ulster Defence Association in their private capacity.

Fourthly, it is a fact that neither Armscor nor the SA Defence Force delivered weapons to the Ulster Defence Association or any organisation in Northern Ireland. No weapons were given in exchange for know-how or technology and, furthermore, there was no such intention. It is so that anybody who is subjected to an arms embargo cannot pick and choose with whom they can fulfil their requirements.

Nevertheless, the investigation brought to light that there are State officials who were caught up in matters or activities which did not have the approval of the Government and which were unauthorised. To the extent that this is revealed by the investigation, appropriate steps will be taken against those concerned. Steps will also be taken to ensure that this will not happen again.

It is, however, clear from the investigation that the South African Government and Armscor were not directly involved in the sale or delivery of South African weapons to terrorist organisations.

In this statement, which concerns South African security and indeed its survival, I have provided perspective within the bounds of security and sensitivity. I shall not expand any further regarding this matter.

*In conclusion, it is a pity that the incident could have caused embarrassment to certain governments, ie Britain, France and Ireland. That was not, in any event, the intention. What we must all remember is that our defence family works in the interests and for the promotion of the security of our country and all our people. It does so under very difficult circumstances.

Mr Chairman, we listened to the hon the Minister’s statement. We accept it and, as far as we are concerned, the less that is said further about the matter the better. As regards the introductory part of his speech, I think we may exhort him to continue in that way.

Yesterday was one of the most interesting days I have experienced in this Place. The CP experienced, withstood and survived the first total onslaught of the new united left-wing front in South Africa. [Interjections.] This is a left-wing front which extends from the played-out, broken and confused Nat on one side across the entire spectrum to the friend of Swapo. This attack did not upset us. It was a typical confusion of tongues with the characteristic left-wing venom and intolerance regarding everything conservative. [Interjections.] This is a symptom known throughout the world to typify those who turn their backs on father, brother, friend and people and become useful to the enemy. [Interjections.] This is the same venom which conservatives throughout the world experience from their local leftists.

If one listens to their terminology, especially to that of the hon member for Turffontein, they appear only to be new voices in an old chorus. Examples of the terminology are the following: “New era. South Africa is tired of war. South Africa wants peace. Release Mandela. Reconsider emergency regulations. Re-examine our strategy.” One is surprised how quickly people can learn, even the stupidest of them. There is no fault to be found with some of these terms in a specific context but one recognises the meaning of the terms, however, just as the cattle farmer can tell his various red breeds apart and one therefore knows what is meant when there is mention of a “people’s democracy”.

The exponents of these schools of thought owe us one answer. That is the answer to the question of how one is to accommodate the diversity of South African population entities politically without one dominating the other. That is the question. The alternative is whether we shall survive on the meagre ration to which we have become so accustomed when we discuss these matters.

I read in yesterday’s Cape Times:

Today the same paper reports:

Another paragraph in the same report reads:

In a far more serious vein, I want to refer to the flirtation between South Africa and Moscow. My hon leader and the hon member for Losberg have already raised this matter in speeches. I said in the caucus of my party last year that it was coming and I do not have the least doubt that a more permanent diplomatic dispensation is far closer than even many hon members on that side of the Committee expect. The conditioning of the South African public is being orchestrated in a masterly fashion. First South African journalists visited Moscow and this resulted in newspaper reports on Afrikaans-speaking Russians, the story of the escaped Boer prisoners of war from Ceylon and how the Iron Curtain had been attacked by rust.

Yesterday this was pursued further in a discussion of Pretoria-Moscow relations in the SABC News Commentary. It is clear that this was planned to coincide with this debate. The beatitudes of hon members of this united left-wing front—we have just had an experience of this— against the CP followed as a matter of course yesterday afternoon.

My party’s standpoint on this matter is to be found on page 20 of our Programme of Principles and Policy. I shall quote from it:

Part of paragraph (d) reads as follows:

That is my party’s standpoint and we test our decisions against this, but also the decisions of the Government.

During his term of office, we saw the present hon Minister removing South Africa for practical purposes from what I call the Anglo-European sphere of influence and taking it into the American sphere of influence. We remained there during the Reagan era in “constructive engagement”, and now we are back with Mrs Margaret Thatcher and are making eyes right across Western Europe at Moscow.

What strikes one is the absolute naivety underlying the entire affair. Under this Government, South Africa is like an orphaned lamb which steals milk from every ewe in the pen until the ewe pushes it away and, when there is no ewe left, runs to the nearest nanny-goat to try its luck there. [Interjections.]

The Russians are laughing up their sleeves at us, they who times without number have bested every Western people, and especially the Americans, around conference tables. It makes no difference whether South Africa is high or low on their list of priorities. What does matter, is that they have seen South Africa and the NP Government coming all along.

When the NP took a firm stand, we gave the Russians the boot. Years ago there was a rumour that they had sent a message that they wished to reopen their consulate. South Africa was not interested. It is very clear that, since South Africa has held a weak position, it has started its flirtation.

The Russian reaction was the classic one. There first had to be change in South Africa’s apartheid policy. I quote:

This is blatantly prescriptive toward South Africa. Of course they will not turn their backs on the ANC, not even as regards armament aid.

South Africa, like any hot-blooded wooer, is blind and deaf to this and therefore rationalises. As regards Nixon’s warning, hon members said yesterday that Nixon himself had begun detente with Red China. How absolutely naive! Nixon, the President of the most powerful country, the United States, started talking to the Chinese from a position of strength. At that stage China was extremely undeveloped and threatened by Russia.

At the moment they obviously do not have eyes to see the USA’s lack of enthusiasm. They have long since forgotten South Africa’s own hon State President’s identification of the total onslaught on them.

In Sunday’s Rapport—I have to close on this note—there was a striking cartoon. A little boy says to his father, as a car passes carrying the Russian flag: “Pa, die totale aanslag is nou net hier verby.” This is the point to which the NP has rationalised the total onslaught within a matter of months. The CP acts in direct contrast with the NP’s naivety in this regard. We warn against it but we know that the Government will not listen. We know that the hon the Minister will not listen. We warn against it and we shall take them up on this at every available opportunity.

Hon members should read what the Russians themselves say about perestroika and glasnost. I want to refer the hon the Minister to the essay by Andrei Sinyavsky on page 89 of Time of 10 April 1989. In it he says that Russia and communism are like a pyramid. One cannot reduce it to the state of the Parthenon because it is as solid and eternal as the pyramids. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in the first place I should like to convey my sincere thanks to all the hon members who participated in this debate yesterday, particularly for the compliments that were paid to my department and myself. I also appreciate the general view which was sketched here, namely that progress has been made in regard to South Africa’s foreign relations and that we have gained a respite—I do not want to put it any stronger than that—for South Africa.

I should also like to take this opportunity to say that it is not one person’s work. It is team-work and in this task my department is of course supported by a whole series of other Government departments.

At the outset I should like to make one matter very clear, and that is that the Department of Foreign Affairs and the SA Defence Force co-operates very closely indeed. Obviously there is a difference in style and culture. It cannot be otherwise. However, we are fighting and striving to achieve exactly the same goal, and that is the safeguarding of our country, its trade and its economic power in order by so doing to maintain our military strength as well.

I also want to thank the CP, for while the complimentary remarks from all the other parties serve and will serve as an encouragement to me and my department, the negative attitude of the CP also serves a purpose. True, it is a negative purpose, but it does serve a purpose in the sense that the outside world can at least see what one of the possible alternatives to the NP is. South Africa can also see it, because I was looking at them when the hon member for Springs was speaking yesterday. What was particularly revealing yesterday was that they sat in complete silence while the hon member for Springs was recounting how a business undertaking had been excluded as a result of the bigotry of the Boksburg town council and as a result of which South Africa had lost investments to the value of R75 million, because that business undertaking is now going to establish itself in a neighbouring state. Let us tell one another in all earnestness here today that this is what the CP is going to do to the whole of South Africa. They are now bankrupting Boksburg and Carletonville, but they are also on the way to making the entire country bankrupt, the whole of South Africa. [Interjections.]

That is their objective, and then they talk about treason and sabotage. They want the whole of South Africa bankrupt, and South Africa plunged into an everlasting war. They do not mind. They talk about the cost of Resolution 435 in South West Africa, but why do they not tell South Africa what the cost of an expanding war would be? Surely talks have to be held after every war. There is no such thing as an everlasting war. It just does not exist. There has been an eighty years’ war, but there were talks at the end of it. I am going to come back to the South West African issue later.

On my part I should like to thank my colleague, the hon the Minister of Defence, for his statement here today about this very serious event which occurred in Paris, as well as its aftermath. I also want to state here that our Head of State, the hon the State President, is in direct communication with Mrs Thatcher on this matter. On our part we can only hope that the British Government will accept the sincerity of the South African Government’s word when I repeat that this Government in fact has no knowledge of any irregularities that may have occurred. We are sorry about this and we are sorry if it has caused her heavy pressure, embarrassment and pain.

That is why the CP supported you.

I took cognizance with appreciation of the standpoint of the hon member for Soutpansberg, and I do not hesitate to say so. I want to thank him for doing so, and I also want to thank him for having congratulated me here yesterday on my birthday on 27 April.

Yesterday, to a lesser extent today, but particularly yesterday, the hon member for Soutpansberg said that Resolution 435 was lying in tatters and that there was nothing left of it. Furthermore he said that we had been caught out and handed over to Untag, the UNO, and so on. That is not correct.

I did not rise to refute his statements. That was not necessary, it has been done over and over again. I rose to furnish another review of the relevant facts. As a result of the peace process, which was primarily initiated by us and in which we continually took the lead over a period of months, a positive image was created for South Africa abroad, and not only abroad because we also encouraged our own people. The proof is overwhelming. It is streaming in to us and to the Government from all over the country.

Gratitude and appreciation is being expressed because our public realises that we could not have achieved this degree of success—it was not full success—if South Africa had not been strong and determined as a regional power, and had not chosen the right moment to do the right thing. For that I once again want to express my thanks to the SA Defence Force for the foundation which was laid for the diplomats to take over the baton at the right moment and to run the relay race further.

The latest position in South West Africa is that as from last Saturday a period of 14 days has been laid down which ends on 13 May. A few days of the 14 have therefore already elapsed. Within these 14 days the representative of the Secretary-General of the UN, and the Administrator-General, must jointly agree and verify that more or less all the Swapo soldiers who crossed the border illegally are back in Angola and north of the 16th parallel.

When we look at the figures I must once again utter a warning to the effect that one cannot, in a situation in which one is dealing with 400 to 600 km of territory across which people are moving, pick up every single footprint and imagine that this is confirmation that so many or so many people came across there. Obviously the security forces and the SWA Police have their own sources of information. They try to the best of their ability to work with general numbers. But we are not dealing with precise numbers.

Against that background the present position is that altogether 312 Swapos were killed and 44 captured since this infiltration began. The estimate is that between 900 and 1 000 have returned. That leaves, on the basis of that estimate—remember I am once again saying “estimate”—between 200 and 300 left, or rather between approximately 15% and 23%. I would venture to say that unless Swapo were to make a renewed attempt to do another senseless thing, we have not fared too badly if there is only between 15% and 23% of the original wave of infiltration left.

I think that patience, determination and carefully calculated action led to us being able to prevent the implementation of Resolution 435 from collapsing and in particular to our being able to continue—this is important—to maintain the timetable for Cuban withdrawal. It will be remembered that eight years ago it was considered impossible that we would ever be able to negotiate a total Cuban withdrawal. To this Government one of the primary targets or prizes to be won was in fact to negotiate a Cuban withdrawal. Ultimately we succeeded, and all the particulars we have at our disposal indicate that the Cubans are withdrawing within their timetable.

On the one hand we must therefore prevent Swapo from evading its obligations, and on the other we must ensure that the Cubans do in fact withdraw according to their timetable. The indications are there, and during the latest meeting of the joint commission in Cape Town last week it was confirmed to me that the Cubans continued to maintain that they would withdraw according to the timetable.

In the meantime, too, six or seven Swapo arms caches have been discovered. On the basis of information obtained from our sources of information we suspect that even more still remain to be discovered. In the meantime the search for these caches continues.

I do not want to predict that on 13 May we shall definitely be in the fortunate position that the verification of the number of Swapos that had to return will have reached such a stage that we will be satisfied, but the indications are nevertheless there that we can arrive at a point at which the situation is resolved. Of course the Government cannot guarantee that other parties will honour their undertakings. All it can do is create the machinery, if they do not honour their obligations, to ensure that specific steps are taken within the framework of agreed procedures.

That we have done, and I want to make it clear that so far it has worked. It has gained us further praise in our own country from all South Africans who are in earnest about the future of Southern Africa, as well as from overseas countries and other important sources abroad. At this early stage I can say that there are indications that South Africa’s positive and correct conduct in respect of South West Africa has already brought about a relaxation of the crude, harsh attitude of certain overseas countries, and that investors and businessmen are looking at us in a more positive light. They are already taking a renewed interest. This positive publicity has convinced them that for years a false image of this country has been projected abroad. Ironically enough, South West Africa has given us the opportunity to display our true self—even though we might have to endure a little buffeting in the process. The fact remains—neither the CP nor anyone else can make any change to the status of South West Africa—that South West Africa never belonged to us, but if the CP says it is their policy to incorporate it—imagine wanting to incorporate an old German colony in 1989—I at least have a logical elucidation of their standpoint, but then they must say so. They must state frankly that their solution to South West Africa is incorporation as a province, but then they must take into account the reaction within South West Africa itself. They must tell the public what the cost—in terms of an uprising and resistance from South West Africa will be—of such a policy on the part of a CP government. It is very easy to criticise, but it is an entirely different matter to put forward a workable alternative.

In a certain sense it may perhaps have some value, although I am not pleased about our having to endure so much pain in regard to Boksburg and Carletonville, in the sense that the CP itself has given this country an opportunity to see what their alternative is. Now South Africa can judge. South Africa can now ask what has happened to house prices in Boksburg.

Friends come to me and ask me whether the Government cannot do anything about this. House after house is standing empty, and one business after another has closed down. They are still living on the tax income of Boksburg when the NP administered the place, or should I rather say when the CP was not administering it.

The situation is going to hit them even harder as this revenue begins to dwindle. This lies one year into the future. Only then are they really going to feel what they have done to themselves. Until then South Africa will simply have to expect these confused—I could almost say stupid—steps the CP is taking to continue. But South Africa will be able to pass judgement on their actions.

I want to predict that a time will come when they will come to their senses. I do not know when that will be, but the time will come when they will have to come to their senses. I have often wondered how one can possibly think this way. How is it possible that one can do what they do and get away with it? I want to predict that in our history Boksburg and Carletonville will become known as the ultimate turning point in CP thinking, because they have no answer to the inevitable consequences of their policy. They have no answer to the accusation that they want to make the whole of South Africa bankrupt.

The hon member for Losberg began by saying that even a bad, third-rate country attorney— these were his words—would ostensibly have been able to point out the flaws, deficiencies and shortcomings of the various treaties concluded between South Africa, Cuba and Angola. When we are engaged in our work in my sphere we are not engaged in a language competition. We are not engaged in academic language exercises. I concede that this is the task of other experts. Our task is to get results. One is dealing throughout with three governments and with Spanish, Portuguese and English versions. It is not always easy, no matter how fluent one is in Spanish, Portuguese or English, because the three cultures have separate dimensions in which they think, argue and formulate matters. The three must agree; otherwise one does not have an agreement.

What is important, and the hon member ought to know this, is that no agreement or contract which, to use the opposite of the terms used by the hon member, was drawn up by an excellent, first-rate urban attorney, is able to offer guarantees for everything.

It seems to me the hon member has something against country attorneys. It seems to me, according to him, as though there are only bad and third-rate attorneys in the rural areas. Apparently the bright boys are all in the cities, but in the rural areas there are only bad, third-rate attorneys. This is another matter which the hon member will subsequently have to explain to the attorneys, because I think they do outstanding work in our rural areas. [Interjections.] I want to make that very clear here today.

Be that as it may, even the most expert, first-rate urban attorney—I challenge the hon member for Losberg—will not be able to draw up the contract in such a way that it can prevent a party that wishes to break the contract from doing so.

It does not even have an arbitration clause. [Interjections.]

It is not all that easy, and no law, proclamation or man-made piece of paper will be able to prevent a party or an organisation from breaking away from its obligations if it wants to do so. If it wants to break away from its obligations, it will do so. That is why we have courts; otherwise we would not have needed courts. If the legal fraternity of this country, or any country in the world, had known the secret of drawing up contracts in such a way that no one broke them, they would have had no work. It is as simple as that, and I need not argue the point. When one enters into a contractual situation, one cannot guarantee that the opposing parties or the other parties are going to discharge their obligations. What is important is not the grandiloquence of the language, but that the machinery has been created enabling steps to be taken to clamp down on the parties which default, withdraw from or break the agreement. The reply to that is an unambiguous yes, and the hon members accepted it. The hon members experienced this at Mount Etjo. We experienced it in Cape Town recently when the joint commission was here. I just wanted to clear up that point.

Quote paragraph 5 of the Geneva Protocol to us.

Order! The hon member for Losberg can curtail his interjections. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, thank you very much. I sat perfectly still and listened when the hon member was speaking, but unfortunately it so happens that some people are born with their mouths open and their ears closed, and I can do nothing about that.

Be that as it may, the hon member asked a question about Mr Glenn Babb of my department. My information is that Mr Glenn Babb has made himself eligible as a candidate for the NP. [Interjections.] I am pleased about that. It will be a great loss for my department, but I think his taking this step will be a great gain for South Africa. My information is that he would like to do this, and I would welcome him to the ranks of our party, in which he can serve his country further and in which he can expand on the service he has already rendered in other spheres.

The hon member asked me straight out—I do not understand the relevance of the question— whether I knew anything about permits for cycads that had been exported to Madeira.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is it in order for the hon the Minister to refer to an official who is present here as a candidate for the NP?

Order! The hon the Minister may proceed.

Thank you very much, Sir. I do not understand the relevance of the question. I was also an official and I was also a candidate for the NP in my day—together with the hon member for Soutpansberg, and then he welcomed it. But that is history. [Interjections.]

I am dealing with the cycads. I should like to ask the hon member for Losberg whether he knew anything about the cycads.

No.

Very well then, I knew even less. Quite a good deal less. I had nothing to do with it. What my department and I know about it we read about in the newspapers. That is my reply. I was never anywhere near that matter. I do not know how it happened. I do not know when it happened. I know less about it than the hon member for Losberg, and I hope he takes my word for it.

You know nothing about the wicked deeds of your friends?

I know nothing whatsoever about it. I have no knowledge of it. I have no share in it. I invite anyone to prove the opposite of what I am now saying here. These are the simple facts. Efforts have been made recently to drag one into anything under the sun, no matter what it may be. If one has merely driven on the same stretch of road as another person I shall be responsible for that too one of these days. That will be the next accusation.

The hon member then asked me something about the Comoro Islands. I cannot understand what his problem is with the Comoro Islands. It is not quite clear to me. As I heard him there was also an implication of something which was not quite kosher there.

The facts are that a South African hotel group, which operates various hotels abroad, rebuilt the Itsandra Sun Hotel in partnership with other companies in the Comores and built a new 180-room hotel at Galawa Beach. The Itsandra Sun Hotel opened in November 1988 and is a resounding success. Although the opening of the new hotel, the Galawa Sun Hotel, has been postponed until June 1989, the hotel group expects that hotel to be just as successful as the other one.

Now I am asking the hon member whether the CP is opposed to South African undertakings operating successfully abroad. Are they opposed to that? They must tell me. They must tell this country that not only are they opposed to South Africa making economic progress internally, but they are boycotting our country in the company of the outside world. They, like the outside world and the UN, do not want any South African expertise or entrepreneurial initiative to prosper or be successful anywhere on earth. Why else was the question asked? Then the hon member for Losberg or another hon member of that party must come and tell this Committee why the question was asked. These are the facts. They must either refute them or they must apologise to this hotel group in South Africa. That is how simple the facts are.

The hon member for Losberg asked why “Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika” was sung together with Die Stem at a reception which I gave. While members of the CP were members of the Cabinet— and therefore still members of the NP—we of course did not know at that time that they would reject the undertaking they had given to obey the resolutions of the party congresses. We did not know that they would renege on that contract. We could not have predicted it, because even the NP constitution cannot bind absconders, cannot prevent people from holding secret house-meetings in the dark in order to devise plans for leaving the party in the way they did. That just goes to show hon members once again how patient paper can be.

Surely there were some of their members who also helped to make the Transkei independent. Surely there were some of their members who helped to make the Ciskei independent. We really need not argue about that now. I notice that the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition in the House of Assembly is nodding his head in affirmation. He therefore says yes and I thank him for doing so.

There were some of them who greeted the independence of the Transkei and the Ciskei as a step forward by the NP.

We still say so!

They still say so, yes. Some of them stood to attention when the national anthem of those countries, “Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika”, was played. They stood rigidly to attention. [Interjections.]

They probably saluted as well! [Interjections.]

Rigidly to attention! They displayed their full respect in a dignified way. Now a Ciskeian group sings that anthem in Cape Town. They stated categorically that they wanted to sing their national anthem, but they also wanted our national anthem to be sung.

Mr Chairman, have you ever encountered a more reckless, irresponsible, flagrant, cynical repudiation of an act which they themselves helped to commit? [Interjections.] One could almost say that they greeted the Transkei and the Ciskei with those national anthems. They were jointly responsible. They considered those national anthems to be dignified. They said it was a good thing. They said those countries were entitled to it. Now a group representative of one of those countries comes to this country. They come to South Africa and they say that they would like to play their national anthem and they would also like to play South Africa’s national anthem, but the hon member for Losberg sees in this a sinister, secret and terrible conspiracy. [Interjections.]

Oh please, Sir, I should like to make an appeal to those hon members. This cobwebby kind of approach to life I cannot understand. Always sour. Always surly. Lashing out at everything. I should so much like to give them some advice. South Africans are not like that. We do not act like that towards one another. Nor do we call one another the kind of names that are now being mentioned. [Interjections.]

Let us see what the hon member for Losberg did. He omitted to tell us how he came by his Cicero story of yesterday. He thought we would never know; never find out. Yesterday he pontifically quoted here what Cicero had supposedly said to Julius Caesar about treason. Hon members all heard him, did they not? Hon members remember how dramatically he tried to recite those words. When the hon member for Springs asked him to whom he was referring, he ignored the hon member. We are still waiting for a reply to that question. I have an idea this is what we call a self-confession. [Interjections.] Never mind, we shall simply leave it at that. [Interjections.]

It came from Mr McAlvany’s newsletter. [Interjections.] Mr McAlvany quoted those precise words in his newsletter. The only difference is that he did it in English. The hon member for Losberg’s Afrikaans translation was very poor. I shall say nothing further about that either. [Interjections.] Mr McAlvany quoted it in his latest newsletter in English, or American. In this newsletter the South African Government was accused of all kinds of things. I shall quote to hon members what this newsletter said. This is what Mr McAlvany said.

Mr McAlvany continued in this vein. He then referred to members of the South African Government and mentioned them, and I am quoting again:

That is what Mr McAlvany had to say. Yet the worst part of it is that Mr McAlvany called Pres Reagan a “genial idiot”. [Interjections.] McAlvany, the hero of the hon member for Losberg, described Pres Reagan as a “genial idiot”. [Interjections.] I want to tell the CP that they must stop associating with such weird Americans. They have no support in the USA. They mean absolutely nothing. This is a group which, in its thinking, is not far removed from the Ku Klux Clan. They can mean absolutely nothing to the CP. They simply give the CP an unsavoury name and reputation. People who regard South Africa in this light, who described their own president as a “genial idiot” … Oh, I certainly need not argue about this. Whether people liked Pres Reagan or not, he is nevertheless regarded as one of America’s most conservative presidents.

Pres Reagan is the president who vetoed the legislation of his own congress to try to prevent sanctions from being imposed on South Africa. In the eyes of the friend of the hon member for Losberg he is a “genial idiot”. [Interjections.] I now want to make an appeal to the CP to drop this kind of childish adherence to naive Americans. South Africa does not need such American organisations. The CP does not need to suck the teats of sheep like that. [Interjections.] Sheep or goats, it makes no difference! What word did he use? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: In the standing rules there is a rule—I do not have the Standing Rules with me at the moment—which provides that a personal explanation can be given when a member’s speech is quoted out of context. I am now invoking that rule.

Order! No, the hon member can speak to me about this later. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, may I address you on this point of order?

Order! No, the hon member can see me about this in my office later, and he can avail himself of a subsequent opportunity to give the personal explanation, if necessary. The hon the Minister may now proceed.

Mr Chairman, I just want to return for a moment to South West Africa and say that 15 May, the date which lies ahead of us, is a very important date.

†It is an important date because on that date a number of important matters must be finalised or introduced. In the first place, by that date the verification of the Swapo forces, who by then would hopefully have left, would have to be completed. That must be done on 13 May.

On 15 May, that is six weeks from 1 April, South African forces will be reduced to 12 000 men and they will be confined to base; and, of course, Swapo forces will have to be confined to base north of the 16th parallel in Angola. That is also the date of the commencement of the return of exiles, those Namibians outside—for whatever reason they left—except Swapo. Swapo must be confined to base and remain there until the ninth week from 1 April before they can return through designated points.

Another important thing that must be done on 15 May is the publication of the election rules for the election in the country, as well as the completion of the repeal of discriminatory legislation and the dismantling of the command structures of citizen forces in the territory. One can therefore see that this is an important date and I trust that we in this Committee and elsewhere in South Africa will refrain from making statements or doing anything that may be seen as interference with this process in Namibia.

The hon member for Losberg asked me whether the recipe for South West Africa was to be the recipe for South Africa. No. The answer is no. This Government has from the start appealed also to the CP and other parties not to interfere in the political process of Namibia. We have made it clear that that is their country and this is our country. The people in this country will decide on our constitutional future and I think we ought to leave it to the people of Namibia to decide on their constitutional future. So whatever the two peoples decide for the future of their countries should not be allowed to form the subject of public political debates or even debates inside this committee.

*Mr Chairman, a great deal has been said about Russia, South Africa’s relations with Russia and so on. I really cannot understand why, on the part of the CP, skittles are again being set up now which they will then knock down themselves. I never set up the skittles they are now knocking down! Not one of us on the Government side has ever really expressed an opinion on what we think of glasnost, perestroika and demokratiza-tisiya—these are the Russian words.

In the short while left at my disposal, before the joint sitting begins, I just want to make a few remarks on Russia to place the matter in its correct perspective. The colossus of Russia is 22,4 million square kilometres in extent. South Africa is 1,2 square kilometres in extent. That give hon members and idea of the difference in sizes. The surface area of Russia is approximately 18 times the surface area of our country. That country has an estimated population of 285 million people at present. Geographically-speaking, it is the biggest country in the world.

Mr Gorbachev has been in power for four years. The question which now arises is what the concepts and the programmes, glasnost, perestroika and demokratizatsiya mean. What do they mean? That is the question. It is a question which must be debated, and I think it can be debated beneficially by all of us in an objective way. It is not all that easy to give final and decisive replies to these questions.

Many experts say it is the second revolution since 1917. However, the fact of the matter is that there are so many contradictions and anomalies, in these views as well, against the background of the history of that country that one must pause for a moment and ask oneself where all this could lead. Here I must say that I find myself siding with people, such as the hon member for Yeo-ville, who said that we must be careful. He said that we must be careful and should not form an over-hasty judgement.

Is it perhaps the same kind of effort Peter the Great made 300 years ago to save Russia from its backwardness and to open up Russia to a larger extent to Western influences? I do not know. What we can say with certainty is that there is more freedom now. It is quite certain that there is more freedom, but there are also fewer consumer items in their shops and the prices are rising. That is how simple it is. Furthermore, there is also the phenomenon that ethnic differences and nationalistic trends are becoming more prominent, as is undoubtedly happening in Armenia, Lithuania, Letland, Estland, the Ukraine, and other places.

Glasnost or openness has not always brought about perestroika, or the restructuring of the economy—in any even not so far as we can see. Once again it is a fact that this is an extremely dramatic event, because nothing like it has happened since 1917. In 1965 there was a limited effort, by way of price and production stimulation, to do something about the economy, but it failed. Russian economists themselves say that the 1975 efforts failed because they did not go far enough to prevent the decay of the system or to turn it around.

In Russia today it is generally accepted that it was the strict Leninistic and Stalinistic authoritarianism and planning machinery which caused Russia to find itself in these dire economic straits. Gorbachev himself said last year at his party congress:

These are harsh words. He said “we have underestimated the extent and gravity of the deformations” to his own congress.

Mr Nikolai Shmelev, a new-thinker economist, said:

These are striking concepts.

The budget deficit of Russia—here all of us are simply working with estimates—is 11% of the gross national product. There is a great deal of paper money, but no one can tell a person what it is worth in relation to foreign currency because their imports and exports are so meagre.

Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you for creating the opportunity for me to make a very brief statement.

*Hon members will recall that earlier this year I pointed out that in terms of the Constitution the life of the present Parliament will terminate on 5 September. Consequently Parliament will have to be dissolved at the end of the present session with a view to a general election later this year.

In considering a suitable date for a general election, it was necessary to take several aspects into consideration. Public holidays, days having a religious significance for various groups and also school holidays had to be borne in mind. These aspects were given very thorough consideration by the Government this morning, and after due consideration of the relevant aspects the Government came to the conclusion that a general election would be held on Wednesday, 6 September 1989. [Interjections.]

The necessary proclamations to make this possible will appear in the Gazette in July. I thank you, Mr Speaker, and I wish hon members success in the face of what lies ahead.

Order! I have to announce that Mr Speaker has received a Message from the State President calling a joint sitting, as follows:

The meeting of the Extended Public Committee on Vote No 22—Transport, will commence immediately after the conclusion of the joint sitting.

Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to participate here. Yesterday no member of the House of Delegates participated and on the work which the hon the Minister has delegated to me, no member of the House of Representatives made a speech. The hon the Minister will reply fully to the contributions of the hon members of this House. I shall therefore confine myself to speeches made by the hon members of the House of Assembly.

Quite a number of hon members discussed consumer matters, among whom were the hon members for Standerton, Stellenbosch and Bry-anston. I first want to deal in general with certain matters. In respect of consumer protection the Government must maintain a delicate balance between the interests of various consumer groups; among the interests of trade and industry on the one hand and consumers on the other. The general guideline, which was also quoted here, is that one cannot protect a fool against his own folly. One can go only so far and no further with consumer protection.

During the past week a request was made in Parliament, the purport of which was in fact that we should have a separate ministry for consumer affairs. This matter has been repeatedly investigated in the past. If one examines consumer matters one sees that various Government departments are involved in consumer matters. I could mention in this connection the Department of Agricultural Economics, which plays a very important role. It is therefore correct to say that there is an intertwined involvement of Government departments in consumer matters which will not be easy to unravel and place under one Government department. The question also arises whether such a step, if it should be possible, would lead to a better service for the consumer, and whether it would be cost effective.

The decision—and I think it was a sensible one—of the hon the State President in the past was to group consumerism with trade and industry. The ministry can then maintain a balanced standpoint in respect of the interests of the various groups. This does not mean, however, that the Government is not very sensitive and sympathetic to the consumer and his affairs.

I want to touch on a few matters pertaining to the Government’s involvement in consumer protection by way of a brief synopsis. If hon members were to look at the annual report of the Department of Trade and Industry, they would see that there are 42 Acts which we administer. Fourteen of those Acts deal exclusively with consumer protection. We are systematically examining the legislation in connection with consumer protection in order to keep it up to date.

The Harmful Business Practices Act, which was piloted through Parliament last year, is probably the most modern and best legislation in its sphere in the whole world. It laid a very effective statutory foundation for the development of meaningful consumer protection in future. This year we are engaged in another activity. We are re-writing the Credit Agreements Act so that we can submit a new Act to Parliament, possibly next year, which will also comply with the requirements of the time.

The hon member for Stellenbosch made an excellent speech on the responsibilities and the achievements to date of the Harmful Business Practices Committee. I want to thank him for that. I also want to thank him for the tribute he paid to the committee and Prof Tager. The Government considered the matter for a long time before it decided to approach Prof Tager and request her to become chairwoman of this committee. She is a professor in commercial law, and was dean of the faculty of law at the University of the Witwatersrand at a very young age. She is a very competent and very acceptable person to various sectors of the community— including the Black people—and is very involved in Nafcoc and deregulation. She is very acceptable in the greater business community, and because we had confidence in her equilibrium and views, we approached her. She agreed and promised that she would make it her life-long task to devote herself to these matters. It fits in very well with the other work she has done up to now.

In ten months this Harmful Business Practices Committee has performed a Herculean task. We put the Act into operation on 1 July 1988, and a few days later the first meeting was held. I also want to thank Prof Tager for the dedication with which she is doing her work. She is doing far more than any person could be compensated for.

It became very clear that we could, by using this Act and by taking full advantage of its flexibility, render a far better service to the consumer with far fewer staff members. We must now look at the departmental substructure which is necessary in order to be of service to Prof Tager and her committee. It became clear, and we also received such representations, that we would have to appoint at least one full-time committee member on a senior level in the Government department. At present all the committee members are from the private sector. Such a person must be well-grounded in commercial law. We are looking for a person with at least an LL B degree, who has specialised in commercial law.

The second activity of the Government in connection with consumer protection is support for the National Consumer Council. On this occasion I wish to convey my thanks to Prof Leon Weyers. From 1972 he has been a member of the National Co-ordinating Consumer Council, and for a total of 15 years from 1974 until the end of 1988 he was chairman and rendered unstinting services free of charge to the consumers of this country. Prof Weyers was recently appointed vice-rector of Unisa and cannot continue with his work as chairman. For the remainder of their term the Consumer Council appointed Prof van Rijn and Mrs Moolman—both well-known personages in the sphere of consumerism—as chairman and vice-chairman respectively.

On this occasion I want to say that for me it has been an unalloyed pleasure in my work to deal with the Consumer Council, and also with the National Consumers Union. They are people who selflessly give of their private time who give up thousands of hours in the interests of the consumer in this country. We can only thank them for this.

As a result of the publicity which the Government deliberately gave to the Harmful Business Practices Act last year, and also as a result of the debates on this matter which took place on TV and in the Press, a far greater consumer awareness has emerged in this country. We believe that consumerism is coming into its own in South Africa. The Consumer Council received 14 000 complaints in 1987 and 33 000 last year. In other words an increase, if one works it out, of 136% in complaints. This is a very large number of complaints. We do not like increasing the number of posts in the Government sector, but after long consideration in consultation with the Cabinet and the bodies advising us on these matters, we decided to add eight posts to the establishment of the Consumer Council to deal with this increase in the number of complaints.

I take it amiss of the hon member for Bryanston for having said here yesterday that the public found it very difficult to obtain access to the Consumer Council and to the Department of Trade and Industry. If this kind of thing does happen, the hon member should write to us about it and submit the evidence to us, but I have never had any member of the public—and I have been in this post for two and a half years—write to me and say that he could not gain access to the Consumer Council. I take this amiss of the hon member and reject his allegation with contempt.

We already have two offices for the Consumer Council in Durban and Bellville. There is also a regional office in Pretoria. In 1987 I opened an office in Bloemfontein. Last year it was my privilege to open an office in Vereeniging. This year we envisage opening an office in Pietersburg during the second semester. As our means permit we are therefore expanding the offices, depending on the need in the country. It is not possible to do more with the small appropriation, but every year we try to add one office to the number of offices, in order to render a service to the public.

The next activity which we are engaged in in the department is the directorate of trade inspections, which in 1988 carried a total of almost 44 000 trade inspections, according to the annual report, in terms of the Trade Metrology, Price Control, Credit Agreements and Unfair Business Practices Acts. A considerable number of fines were imposed and there were many prosecutions. Here, too, we have very effective action in the interests of the consumer. When we considered the functions of this directorate the hon the Minister and I arrived at the conclusion, however, that rationalisation was necessary. In our opinion a great deal of the activities of that directorate fall into the sphere of the SABS, that deals with the assizing of measuring instruments.

We caused an inquiry to be instituted and then decided in principle to give effect to the transfer of the functions of the department in connection with trade metrology to the SABS, which will render the service on a user-charge basis.

It is not the task of the Government to go around assizing scales. The Government can lay down requirements for scales to be assized and for the private sector to ensure that their scales are assized. It is not our function to go around assizing petrol pumps, but it is our function to intervene if offences are committed in regard to the flow meters of petrol pumps.

In this respect we are also moving towards a different philosophy, one in which the private sector has to look after itself. We are in fact engaged in an entirely new cost-effective approach to consumer protection.

I want to mention something an hon member referred to. I have forgotten who it was. He said that if one reads the letters in the newspapers, one notices the growing dissatisfaction of the consumer. I just want to say that this is something the Government set in motion. For example I encourage all the newspapers—and I hold talks with them about this—to have consumer columns. When Die Transvaler appeared in its new garb I wrote an official letter to the new editor of that newspaper and asked him please to establish and maintain a substantial consumer column. This is part of the awareness we want to create, and if more complaints appear in the consumer columns it is a good thing. We want to support the consumers in this country. The newspapers have a very important task and are carrying out that task in an excellent way. I want to refer, for example, to the very good services which The Star has been rendering over the years, and which Beeld has been rendering in the Transvaal. This is something we encourage most strongly.

Another matter I am striving for is the establishment of a well-supported chair in consumer law or consumerism at at least one of the universities. I hope that we will be able to give more attention to this facet in the ensuing year.

Several hon members of the House of Assembly also discussed commercial matters. The Department of Trade and Industry is rationalising and re-organising its trade promotion function in several respects. For example, after visits to foreign trade offices, we arrived at the conclusion that there should be better communication between our foreign trade offices and our head office in Pretoria, and then between the head office in Pretoria and the private sector. This should in particular be the case in connection with trade enquiries, so as to render a better and more cost-effective service. We want to render a better service, because today there are better means of communication, such as fax copiers and computer facilities, which we can use to ultimately utilise export opportunities better. There are enormous export opportunities in the outside world, but these are to a large extent not being utilised by the industrialists and merchants of our country. In conclusion we want to draw up a list of commodities that are available for export. On the other hand we want to bring available markets into contact with the suppliers of products in this country.

It is not all that easy to find extra products that one can export. Recently, as a new facet of our export trade promotion, we made counter-trade a prerequisite in respect of the rendering of services and supply of products to the Mossgas project by foreign companies. It is quite a considerable task going around in this country in order to find products to the value of, not R5 000, but say R1 000 million that are available for counter-trade. I am referring to countertrade on the basis that it must be new trade, that it is not a replacement of existing trade. This is truly a huge task, and there are services in the private sector that will in this respect draw up a list of products for us which we will be able to export.

While the private sector frequently complained that the Government had not reacted to their requests, we are now for the first time exerting strong pressure on the private sector to produce the goods. For example, there is considerable pressure on industrialists to introduce more shifts in order to supply products for the export market, because the industrialists are far too inclined to think that this is a one-off order, that a new shift will not be cost-effective and that in a year’s time they will find themselves without a market. One must simply believe in the future and market one’s products oneself, so that there will be a stable market in future.

The hon member for Constantia is not here at the moment. I hear that he did apologise. He made a very good speech on our trading strategy. I agree with him; these were in fact the points that were also emphasised here yesterday. It is our view that we should concentrate on various focal points of future trade potential. The EC is a very important focal point, as is the Far East and North America. Our trade with North America diminished after the introduction of certain sanctions, but it is rapidly picking up again. Some of the Eastern bloc countries are favourably disposed towards us. We cannot restrict our trade with them because we have a different economic philosophy and religious approach than other countries.

Trade is carried on by the private sector, and today international trade is becoming global trade and we must not wake up one morning to discover that we have missed the bus. There are enormous opportunities in this world and we must be certain that our merchants are prepared to participate in those commercial opportunities. In Africa we began at home. Firstly we made a thorough study, last year and this year, of our customs union agreement with the BLS countries. Basically we are satisfied with it. We reported to the Cabinet that it was working well and that we wanted to continue with the customs union agreement in its present form. Together with the TBVC countries we are bound into a South African economic community. We get along well with one another in that respect. I also want to mention, and this is general knowledge, that we have preferential trade agreements with Zimbabwe and Malawi, agreements to which we attach great value and which we will develop. In spite of the hostile statements that are sometimes made by Zimbabwe, our trade with them is assuming encouraging proportions.

The hon member for Constantia also referred to other trade groupings, such as SADCC in Southern Africa, which stated the standpoint that they want to become increasingly independent of South Africa. We have no fault to find with that; we should like to have prosperous neighbours, and independence from us means that they will be prosperous in the economic sphere. We shall help them to be prosperous. We should like to expand our trade with them.

As regards trade groupings in the world we want to strive in future to become part of trade groupings which will also give us preferential access to various countries. In conclusion, the purpose of all these things is economic development in our country and in Southern Africa.

The hon member for Constantia also referred to the possibility of an export processing zone— EPZ—here in the Cape Town harbour, which in certain parts of the world has led to sound economic development. I just want to say that the Government is re-examining this matter, under the guidance of the Department of Development Planning, which investigated this matter, particularly from a regional development point of view. I hear that the report has been completed. I have not yet seen it. It will be submitted to the Cabinet soon for a resolution. As regards our 470.03 provision in the Customs Act, we cannot entirely liberalise this, because it must also be possible for our own industries to make inputs for such a free processing zone. A free processing zone calls for far more concessions than customs concessions, which is something one must bear in mind. General provisos on our part affect the customs union agreement. They must be reconcilable with it, and must not affect our industrial protection policy for the remainder of the country. As far as this matter is concerned, however, we have an open mind and we shall look into all these possibilities.

The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis, if I understood him correctly, expressed an adverse opinion on trade with the Soviet Union. I have already said that this Government will not place any restriction on trade with any country. As long as the private sector—and it is they who engage in this trade—can arrive at profitable agreements for the purchase or sale of products, taking into consideration the laws of the country, customs agreements, etc, they can continue to do so and they are also very welcome to do so. I am opposed to trade sanctions of any description against us, and we shall under no circumstances participate in restrictions on trade with other countries or sanctions against them. We are there to promote trade, not to restrict it.

I want to devote the rest of my speech to ideas in connection with industrial matters on which hon members expressed their opinions. I thank them for the kind words they conveyed to me, the department, the Board of Trade and Industry and the NDC, which is primarily involved in this.

Let me just say that at the end of last year we took leave of Dr J Adendorf, who served for many years as a member of the Board of Trade and Industry. He was very ill at the end of last year and has passed away in the meantime. We also want to pay tribute to him for the great contribution he made.

We are also, as regards the industrial activities of the Department of Trade and Industry, reflecting on our departmental structure. We are reflecting on the precise functions of the Board of Trade and Industry, the Industrial Development Corporation, the CSIR, the Department of Trade and Industry, the SABS, etc to establish to what extent we can rationalise them. The matter is still being discussed and we shall probably take important decisions during the next few months.

I want to mention our industrial strategy briefly. The Government becomes involved in structural changes in our manufacturing industry for various reasons. Firstly the manufacturing industry is that sector of the economy which has the greatest potential for growth and job creation in the future. Without exception countries which are in the forefront of development and prosperity have a strong and growing industrial sector. Furthermore there is the very important point which the NBC calculated, namely that if we wanted to obtain a growth rate of at least 5% per annum and all respective sectors in the economy had to contribute to that, the manufacturing industry, to restore the balance, would in real terms have to grow by at least 8%.

So far we have devoted ourselves assiduously to the promotion of the interests of the manufacturing sector. Last year that sector, in real terms, grew by 6%. I am far more confident than many economists about the growth rate for the next year. If I go to industrialists and to the HSRC and ask them for data, they tell me that the industrialists are optimistic and that their order books are full. Consequently we expect another strong growth rate in the industrial sector this year.

We expect all these things against the background of a manufacturing sector in South Africa whose performance was very poor. By way of illustration I want to mention only one comparison. In 1970 the RSA output of manufactured products was the same as that of the Republic of China, or Taiwan. Today, 19 years later, Taiwan’s output is 30 times greater than ours.

In the eighties we even had a turn-around of export substitution in this country. We had export encroachment, so that certain products previously made here were no longer manufactured in this country. Consequently it was necessary for the Government to intervene in the manufacturing sector and intervene from the Government side to change the course of the manufacturing sector.

Our objectives were twofold. Firstly we had to enhance competitiveness in this country. Secondly we had to encourage exports to become part of the global economy which we are developing. We cannot survive and perform well as a first-class country with the economies of the next century if our orientation is an inward one.

Our attitude to competitiveness is the same as that of Margaret Thatcher who is now celebrating her tenth year as British Premier. We say: “You can’t support ailing industries.” We shall not do so. We want to move towards greater competitiveness. We want to encourage industries that will play a part in future.

As regards the export market, it became clear to us after careful analysis that there were three important requirements which had to be complied with in order to be successful. It is very interesting to know that one must first produce products of a high quality. The days when surplus products of a poor quality were exported are gone forever. If one wants to make it onto the foreign markets, one will have to deliver high quality products. Secondly one must have the ability always to deliver one’s products in time and in a reliable way. I want to point out that the price of the product is only third on the list. Price is only the third most important factor in world trade today. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to participate at the end of this very interesting discussion on trade and industry affairs and to react to some of the points and matters which were raised by some of our hon members who participated.

By way of introduction I may say that I am much surprised—perhaps “surprised” is not the right word and I should rather use the word “satisfied”—by the very high standard of the speeches which were made here. I include everyone who participated here. In a while I shall depart from this statement somewhat, but more in lighter vein than serious criticism because I do agree with what was said.

I hope hon members will pardon me that, when one reaches a period in one’s life when it is the last time that one, I almost want to say, has to deal with a task which one has learnt to love over the years, one has peace of mind that one has taken such a decision. It affects one emotionally, however, and I hope hon members will forgive me if, on this last occasion, I use the language in which I communicate more easily, that is my own home language.

I want to begin by saying something for which I shall perhaps not have the opportunity later. The personnel of the Department of Trade and Industry and the personnel of all the councils and boards which I should not like to name because I am afraid of omitting one, organisations like the CSIR, SABS and all those who resorted under the protection of our department, as well as the Director-General with all his personnel and deputies, the Liquor Board, the Tourism Board, the Board of Trade and Industry, are all bodies with whom one has been in close association. I want to thank all those people for a number of years of very pleasant co-operation. I should be grateful if the senior personnel present would convey my thoughts to the rest. I shall also be able to do this formally on another occasion but I want it placed on record that I personally gained spiritual enrichment from these years. They were productive years for me and very pleasant. One will have only pleasant memories if one thinks back in future.

I want to thank the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis as chief spokesman of the Official Opposition in the House of Assembly for the kind words and the very good wishes. I want to include all other hon members who associated themselves with him in this and thank them for the kind words, especially toward my family as well.

The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis made a very interesting speech. He started by referring to the mismanagement of the economy of the country and it is very pleasant, especially just before an election, to use such cliches without providing proof. He also referred in his speech to generalisations such as current expenditure which was financed through loans. We are aware of all those problems. I think managing South Africa’s economy with all its complexity is far more complex than most people who are not in the inner circle realise. It is easy to shout from the outside that a person should not fight on the inside but go in and help him fight or help him to make peace.

I want to make a contrary statement that the economy of South Africa is managed very capably. I am not referring to myself or my department here but to my colleague the hon the Minister of Finance. How does one manage the economy of a country in which the greatest component of its imports is crude oil, where one has absolutely no control or influence on the price of that crude oil? How does one manage this when the price of crude oil has been bought over a year from a price as low as $8 a barrel to the present almost $19 to $20 a barrel? That money has to be found somewhere because somebody has to pay that account. Let me tell you that this is no easy task. How does one manage the country and its current account when the greatest source of foreign currency earnings is from gold? I think my hon colleague referred to this. Control of the price of gold is altogether out of our hands. One produces and markets one’s own commodity to operate one’s economy but one has no control over the price that one receives for it. For instance, this morning the price is still standing at 375 dollars an ounce whereas it was far in excess of 400 dollars an ounce at one stage.

It requires the wisdom of Solomon to manage a country’s economy within those parameters. That is why I want to take off my hat to my colleague the hon the Minister of Finance because I know we have fundamental problems— the hon member is right—in managing the economy of the country but it is not mismanagement. In my opinion we should take off our hats to the successes which are achieved under these difficult conditions.

It has also been proved that our production capacity increased by 6% to 7% last year. We hope that it will increase by 8% this year. I do not regard that as mismanagement; it is a sign of very good management. Therefore I can continue and say that, in spite of the problems which we experience in managing the country’s economy, there is more evidence which points to good management of the country’s economy under extremely difficult conditions.

Mr Chairman, on the eve of an election it is very interesting, and I can possibly speak more freely about it now, that people try to find things in Hansard which they can print in pamphlets afterwards and then show the voters that they are recorded like that in Hansard. The entire corruption story is one of the matters which hon members, especially CP members, are handling in this way. In my opinion there is not a political party in this Parliament which is not entirely opposed to corruption and practising corruption and abuse. I do not believe that there is a single hon member of this Committee or this Parliament who is not entirely opposed to the abuse of power and privilege. This does not mean, however, that it will not happen! Nevertheless it is important that it be eradicated if it occurs. I do not think there is a party or an individual present in this Committee who will not agree with me that this is everybody’s approach and also of the governing party and its people. One should therefore be careful that one does not take this cliche to the point where it eventually reflects on oneself.

The hon nominated member Comdt Derby-Lewis said this but I like greeting him when I encounter him in the lobby because I think he has a friendly face and I actually like friendly people. I am praising him now because he did me the greatest favour which any hon member has done me over the past five or six years while I have been a Minister. He spoke for almost 15 minutes of his 18 minutes as if he had fathered the thoughts which he was expressing. He spoke about the jewellery industry and the platinum coin. The department embarked upon investigations into the jewellery industry long before he was in Parliament. The successes which we have achieved so far may be attributed to Government initiative.

What is of great interest is the fact that Dr Edwards is the man upon whom the Government imposed the task of taking the initiative. In other words, every word which Dr Edwards has said about this entire matter is a reflection of the Government’s philosophy on that industry. The hon member quoted Dr Edwards extensively. I am very grateful to him that he finally decided that the NP and the Government’s policy regarding these matters was right after all and that he used the NP and the Government’s mouthpiece to convey his standpoints. [Interjections.] I thank him very much for that privilege and the favour which he did me. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister why the Government, if it is so aware of these wonderful things, took so long to put them into operation?

That is a fair question but I should like to know from the hon member how he would have done it more rapidly. [Interjections.] For instance, we managed to lower excise duty from 35% to 28%. I almost want to assure him that we shall soon be able to bring it down further. The availability of gold in the jewellery industry was one of the greatest problems which we had to solve and we did this. Gold is available today. We were not the only body which had to decide about this, however; there were a number of them.

When we started with this campaign, practically no gem diamonds were cut in South Africa. We first had to establish a diamond board and since then—this actually falls under the other Vote but I shall dispose of it now— the jewellery industry started to make dramatic progress regarding diamonds. It was of such a nature that practically no gem diamonds suitable for cutting are produced in South Africa which are not cut here. The other day I went to look at a consignment of diamonds which we imported to supply our diamond cutters. We are now developing to the level which non-producing countries have already reached. I think we should thank the Diamond Board and the people involved in it sincerely for their very productive and successful efforts. That is the reply to the hon member’s question. This cannot happen suddenly because it comprises negotiating processes. If we look at the success which has been achieved over a very short time, however, we should thank those involved.

When are we to have a platinum coin?

The platinum coin was also one of Dr Edwards’s terms of reference. The points which the hon member raised in his speech were also probably obtained from those sources. The inquiry has practically been completed. The first report was submitted to the Cabinet Committee for Economic Affairs. It was referred to the task group chaired by Dr Edwards and I believe they have already carried out their new mandate and we expect their recommendations on this shortly. The matter is therefore being thoroughly investigated but many thanks to the hon member for lending it such prominence. This shows everybody that we are managing the South African economy well. [Interjections.] He is the man who has confirmed this for us.

I want to draw the hon member’s attention to just two matters. The hon the Deputy Minister has already dealt with one, that is that we do not prescribe to our merchants and industrialists regarding with whom they are to trade as long as ethical norms are maintained within that transaction. It would be an evil day if South Africa were also to mount the sanctions bandwagon. We refuse to do this.

I want to raise one point which the hon member mentioned. This is the question that we should withhold some of our strategic minerals from our clients temporarily. I want to know from him how long that “temporarily” should be. Should it be two months or two weeks or six months or a year? [Interjections.] He does not know.

I did a calculation last year and, if a vanadium mine or if a rodium production facility cannot sell its product for six months, six weeks, four months, where will it find money to continue? It closes. It closes as surely as each of us is sitting in this Chamber. Once some of those mines have closed, they do not open again easily. If we do that, we are practically telling ourselves that we shall introduce a “temporary” punitive measure. “Temporary” will become “permanent”, however, because we shall be unable to produce again and to regain our old clients. Clients which use these types of strategic minerals are very scarce. We are not selling pumpkins and radishes; we are selling highly sophisticated minerals. I therefore want to tell the hon member that the story about “temporary” withholding does not work. It becomes permanent and, once it has become permanent, somebody else faces the music. In this case it is South Africa.

It is just like the state of emergency; it goes on forever.

That may be true. I think our biggest ambition in life is to increase the standard of living for everybody as best we can.

*The hon member for Nuweveld made a very interesting speech. He appealed to us to protect the informal sector against a “war” waged by local authorities. I agree with him and want to appeal to local authorities not to obstruct the development of the informal sector but to lead it so that it may obtain a place in the sun of the economy of South Africa. I hope local authorities will take note of the hon member’s appeals. I take pleasure in supporting them and I believe that they are supported by the entire Committee. We must create the opportunity for as many people as possible to enter the real economy as speedily and easily as possible. In this way we are creating the opportunity for entrepreneurs to enter on a small scale which will increase later. I think we could relate a splendid tale about the success of the SBDC in leading the small, informal man into the economy. He becomes formal afterwards and he becomes big afterwards. I agree with the hon member and support his train of thought.

I am also pleased that the hon member supports the published legislation on deregulation, especially regarding licences. I hope he will support it vigorously when the legislation is tabled. There is just a small contradiction here, however. The hon member is fighting for the protection of the informal sector but the hon member for Heidedal says we should not protect the informal sector but the established formal sector.

He says that in Bloemfontein the formal chaps who were created by the SBDC opened their little stores and now the informal blokes park right in front of those little shops. Perhaps this is not an anomaly. Perhaps this is just a further appeal to local authorities not to persecute people or to permit them to develop as they like and then to persecute them but preferably to lead them and indicate to them which area they may develop if they wish.

The hon member for Nuweveld made a very good speech about the SBDC. I think that the SBDC has a splendid record in furnishing services to the formal, informal and small business sector. I should not like to repeat information from the annual report but I should like it recorded that 6 107 loans were granted by the SBDC in 1988. This represents a large number of entrepreneurs which it got off the ground and the amount involved in R114 million. I think this is an achievement on which we should congratulate the SBDC. Appeals made by hon members that the SBDC should be more helpful will not go unheeded. Nevertheless the SBDC does not have the capability to satisfy all the requests which it receives. It has to act selectively to some extent.

The hon member for Uitenhage is the new chairman of our joint committee on our department. We thank him for the good work which he has done recently. We hope that matters will go swimmingly in future. He also made a very interesting speech. My colleague the hon the Deputy Minister has already reacted to most of the the matters which he raised.

The hon member raised one point which I want to explain again, that is that we have reached the conclusion in the department— the hon member is quite right there—that unrealistic protective tariffs could be unproductive regarding the South African economy and that is why we are prepared to consider protective tariffs only if they can be used to establish fledgling or new industries in South Africa and to get them off the ground. Nevertheless it should not become a permanent protective measure because, once it becomes permanent, it is a smoke screen behind which the manufacturer hides to be unproductive and to adjust his prices accordingly. We support the hon member’s standpoint.

The hon member for Constantia made a very good speech. I want to associate myself with the hon the Deputy Minister who dealt with these aspects comprehensively. We agree with the hon member, especially regarding the three points which he made in his speech. We think they are valid and we should like to agree with them. The hon the Deputy Minister dealt with the EPZ in full.

The hon member for Stellenbosch spoke about the harmful business practices committee. This is a committee which has done excellent work in the short time it has been in existence. The hon member did justice in explaining this aspect to some extent so that we may accord the image which these people are building for themselves a little more status.

The hon member for Heidedal also discussed the SBDC. He made only one statement that loans should be more easily available to the informal small business sector and the formal sector from the SBDC. I think they are readily available but the SBDC will also have to act selectively with the limited means at its disposal. Hon members will grant me this. It also has to act selectively to some extent. If any application has merit, I have not yet become aware of any application which the SBDC has turned down. I have had scores of them investigated. Scores of those rejected were without merit. If an application does not have merit, we cannot simply give the money away at the expense of a person’s application which does have merit.

I should like the hon member to pay a visit to the small business centre at Vosloorus. I think the Vosloorus small business sector must be one of the most splendid examples of the type of support the SBDC gives the small business world. I think Vosloorus has one of the finest centres in South Africa.

I want to thank the hon member for Standerton for his kind words. I want to tell him, however, that I think he is very wide of the mark. After the next election Wonderboom is definitely going to be National. I do not have the slightest doubt about that. [Interjections.] The hon member said Wonderboom would not be National, but I say it is going to be, because I live there. I know the place, I know what goes on there and I know what the people there are capable of.

I want to thank the hon member for his kind words with regard to the CSIR. We are proud with the CSIR of what they achieved last year. The hon member pointed out what the CSIR had achieved financially and in the sphere of research. For an organisation such as the CSIR to be designated the Industry of the Year by the private sector is certainly an achievement which cannot easily be matched. I believe I am talking on behalf of everyone present here in congratulating the CSIR on that enormous achievement, viz of being designated the Industry of the Year in South Africa such a short time after having begun its restructuring. I want to thank the hon member very much for those kind words with regard to the CSIR.

I am going to leave the arguments about the petrol price for a little later, when we come to the next Vote, because I should like to say something about that.

The hon member spoke about the South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council as if this council were detached from the department. In fact, however, it is the department’s mechanism for absorbing complaints; it is the sponge with which the department absorbs consumers’ complaints. I thank the hon member very much for rating this council so highly. Personally I think they do good work, and I think that with their involvement in the business practices committee, they have given us muscle. The South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council has already achieved a whole series of real successes.

Time is catching up on me, and if there are hon members to whom I do not react, they must please be patient. We shall reply to their questions in writing. I want to thank the hon member for Sasolburg for a good speech. What he said about the creation of prosperity is very true. With greater exports, we can merely create greater prosperity in South Africa. Then we shall also be better able to deal with consumer spending. I think most of the arguments put forward by the hon member for Pinelands have been dealt with by the hon the Deputy Minister.

I also want to thank the hon member for Wellington for his speech. We hope we shall be able to implement the new Liquor Act as soon as possible. The hon member really did justice to the content of that Act.

The hon member for Heideveld spoke about the Small Business Development Corporation. He pointed out that disinvestment really led to serious unemployment. We agree with him. We hope that the people who fuel the disinvestment flame will realise that too.

The hon member for Boksburg spoke about the Boksburg issue. I do not want to elaborate on that. I agree with him. This creates terrible problems in trade and industry. He mentioned certain examples of import substitution possibilities. I can merely tell him that this is already being investigated, especially with regard to compressors for refrigerators. I received an oral report on that last week, and I think we are making good progress at the moment.

The hon member for Albany spoke about the question of tourism. I agree with him. I think that is one of the industries that deserve more attention in South Africa. The hon member for Swellendam spoke on this topic as well. Perhaps in the remaining few minutes I should talk about tourism. There is a great deal more that I should like to say this afternoon, but it does not look as though I am going to have an opportunity to do so. The hon member referred to Linda Taylor-King’s investigation in terms of which South Africa is very low on the list with reference to service. Unfortunately that is true. We shall definitely have to do something about that.

The hon member raised a few very important points with which I should like to associate myself. One of them concerns the tourism bank. One can call it a tourist trust fund or a tourism bank, but in my opinion it has great merit. I have sent Tourism Board personnel abroad, where such a tourism bank exists. They instituted a comprehensive investigation. That investigation and the report they compiled are available. It is our ambition to establish a tourism bank. I think a tourism bank will enable us to establish and develop tourist facilities on a selected regional basis, which can only be to the advantage of the tourist industry in South Africa.

At present we are involved in a scheme which I shall submit to the Cabinet shortly, and if the Cabinet approves it, it will provide us with a mechanism to obtain funds which can be used for a tourism bank and its activities, without the taxpayers having to foot the bill. We had discussions about this recently, and I have full confidence that in all probability we shall be able to start a tourism bank in the foreseeable future.

The hon member also made a comment with regard to regional tourism. I think it was very valid. If hon members look at the new legislation, they will see that the composition of the board will be such that in the first place we shall be able to provide for all the population groups that make up part of tourism in South Africa. Secondly, we are going to make provision for tourism to be dealt with on a regional basis, with a co-ordinating tourism board to deal with the general aspects. I am pleased the hon member said we should do this on a regional basis. That is our objective. We shall have to see whether we are going to have nine or more regions, and whether we can afford this financially and administratively. Nevertheless I agree with the hon member.

In the last minute at my disposal I want to associate myself with the hon member’s idea of another Blue Train or another tourist train. My standpoint on the Blue Train is very clear: We must stop rushing from Johannesburg to Cape Town in the Blue Train in 24 hours. The Blue Train must be a tourist train. It must stop at Kimberley so that that town’s tourist facilities can be utilised. It must stop at De Aar so that the large graveyard for steam trains there can be visited. It must also stop at Matjiesfontein so that people can enjoy breakfast in Matjiesfontein. We must talk to our hon colleagues so that the Blue Train can become a tourist train instead of an express train. [Interjections.] There is a beautiful example of this. In this connection I refer hon members to the May edition of De Kat.

Business suspended at 15h20 and resumed at 15h43.

Mr Chairman, I should like to conclude trade and industry matters by coming back finally to the hon member for Swellendam. I referred to the Blue Train. I referred to page 71 of the May 1989 edition of De Kat which contained a wonderful article about a tourist train from Johannesburg to the Eastern Transvaal, the Rofos-rail. The train covers 1 000 km from Pretoria to the Lowveld. It consists of seven carefully restored antique coaches which were collected throughout the country. The train has three locomotives which take it over various sections. One dates from 1893, another from 1926 and the other from 1938.

I think the hon member for Swellendam is quite correct. The time is coming for us to address a challenge to the private sector to establish a similar train service from Cape Town to Port Elizabeth. This can also be known as a tourist train. There are many examples of such trains in the world that can be fitted very nicely. It need not rush to Port Elizabeth within 25 or eight hours. It can stop at George; from there it can travel to Oudtshoorn. It can stop at Knysna or Storms River. A round trip on such a train should last a week. I am very much in support of the hon member, and I think we shall do everything in our power to get such a train service established between Port Elizabeth and East London.

This brings me to the end of my reply on the trade, industry and tourism matters. If I have not referred to certain hon members’ arguments, we shall reply to them in writing.

†I now come to mineral and energy affairs. I want to refer to Mr Danie van Zyl and want to pay tribute to him. He passed away on 12 April 1989. He was a member of the National Energy Council since 1987 as well as the chairman of the Johannesburg Management Committee in respect of which he served the Johannesburg Municipality as well as the municipal executive for several years during which time he also became president and vice-chairman of the Wit-watersrand Regional Council.

*He was a very frank and efficient person who made great personal sacrifices in order to serve Johannesburg and the National Energy Council. His death is a heavy blow to everyone who had dealings with him. I express my sincere sympathy to his wife and his family, and also my great thanks for the enormous task he performed for us in the establishment of the NEC.

Allow me also to avail myself of the opportunity to wish Mr W J van Rensburg what I am tempted to call a healthy and prosperous period after his retirement on 1 April 1989. He retired after 31 years in the Public Service and during his last year of service he was seconded to the NEC. We wish him and his family everything of the best.

With regard to Alexander Bay, hon members will know that we piloted an Act through Parliament to convert the alluvial State diggings of Alexander Bay into a State corporation. This State corporation was established on 1 May— two days ago. It will deal with the various activities in Alexander Bay, viz agriculture, trade, industry, township development and economic and socio-economic development.

Consequently it is a great pleasure for me to announce at this stage that the board of directors has just been announced. It consists of Mr Au-ret, a former Alexander Bay employee, Mr Bell, an industrialist, Dr Burton, Mr Hill, a geologist, Dr Hugo, who is the deputy director-general of the department, Mr Martin Jonker, who will also act as chairman of this board of directors, Mr Louw, who is a farmer in the Namaqualand area in the North-Western Cape. Mr Steve Marais, the chief executive officer, Mr Stone, an auditor and accountant from Springbok, Rev Appies and Mr Joseph, a former headmaster. We want to wish them everything of the best in a very great task, because they now have certain tasks that they will have to perform.

They will have to finalise negotiations with regard to steps concerning the rent or transfer of State-owned land which is being exploited at the moment by the diggings attached to the Corporation. They will have work with regard to the deproclamation of the alluvial State diggings as a State institution. The application for and processing of a mining lease for the Corporation will have to take place. The determination and valuation of assets with a view to their transfer to the Corporation, the issue of share certificates to the State in exchange for the transferred assets, and, lastly, the drawing up of a budget aimed specifically at the needs of the Corporation all form part of their task.

Allow me also to say something about an instruction I gave the Electricity Control Board with regard to the investigation into municipalities’ tariffs concerning the resale of electricity. Approximately one third of all electricity used in South Africa is supplied to end users by municipalities, of which most are private households. One can understand, therefore, that the price of electricity meets with a relatively emotional response when it comes to the man in the street, the chap who has to write out a cheque for the electricity consumption every month. The popular view is that municipalities make an enormous profit on the sale of electricity. One cannot simply accept that as being the case, however, because there are certain guidelines laid down by Government in connection with the quantum of surpluses that are permitted.

In the recent discussion of the Electricity Amendment Bill by the Joint Committee on Manpower and Mineral and Energy Affairs, there was a great deal of comment on the subject. It was argued inter alia that other population groups pay more for their electricity than Whites do. Specifically with reference to what was said in the joint committee, I instructed the Electricity Control Board to investigate the tariffs at which municipalities purchase electricity from Eskom and the tariffs at which they sell it. The first phase of the investigation is being restricted to the collection of information and a statistical review. This will indicate to what extent it will be justified to investigate individual cases in more depth, which would include cost structures and possible discriminatory formulas as well as profits. I want to give hon members the assurance that the Government is in earnest about establishing a just dispensation for everyone in respect of a commodity as important as electricity.

†I want to elaborate on the investigation cover. It includes variations in the cost of purchases by municipalities from Eskom; the main item of expenditure incurred by the municipalities in distribution to consumers; the surplus arising from the resale of electricity and the manner in which it is used, particularly the extent to which it is used for relief of rates; and to ensure that the results are meaningful, they will be expressed in cents per kilowatt-hour.

The variations in the prices paid by municipal consumers of electricity are due to a number of factors, of which the municipalities’ profits is only one. If the profit margin were to be controlled or eliminated, other variations should still be realised, and there may still be large differences between charges to consumers in different localities.

*Since this matter is so important, I requested the Electricity Control Board to submit the report to me by the end of May. I want to assure hon members that the Government will give thorough consideration to the results of this investigation.

Mr Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology on the time that he has sacrificed in the political world. I have just learnt from one of his officials, Mr Engelbrecht, that he has sacrificed a quarter of a century in this regard, which one can say did not just fall out of the air. The sacrifice the hon the Minister made was not only for South Africa, but for the whole world.

It is a fact that the natural resources required for the provision of fuel are slowly being depleted. It is therefore necessary for us to find substitutes for both coal and oil.

*We have just heard the hon the Minister say the oil price in America is so high. The oil prices in South Africa are swallowing us.

†There are two working groups. Working towards this end is laudable and one can only hope that every effort will be made to bring out a report on their activities. If it has not already been done, it should be done as soon as possible. I hope that these groups will receive all the support that it may need to complete its task. At the same time one wonders whether the efforts of certain individuals are being noted and investigated. It may just be worth the while sometimes to look at these inventions. Quite recently I read an article on a person in Uitenhage in the Eastern Cape who had manufactured a cooker using methane gas. He donated his finding to a family in Walmer location, who had been made destitute because their home was destroyed by fire. This cooker enabled the family to prepare food and cook water at a very low cost indeed. This is what we need in South Africa and we should encourage it.

The objective of the Directorate of Foreign Trade Relations is to promote and expand South Africa’s economic and trade relations with other countries. The question I wish to pose to the hon the Minister is whether this directorate is achieving its objective when one considers the success of the sanctions lobby overseas. The latest withdrawal of Mobil from South Africa is a typical example. Is the hon the Minister’s department doing enough to counter the sanction and anti-sanction African lobby as far as economic and trade relations are concerned? It would seem that the advocates for sanctions are having a field day to the detriment of the country’s economy. Could the hon the Minister kindly elaborate on the steps that this directorate is taking to achieve their objective? Are people of colour being utilised at our overseas trade based missions to state South Africa’s case and to promote our image?

I now come to the Small Business Development Corporation. An alarming aspect which I have noticed is the large number of cases on the Supreme Court’s roll in which some small businessmen take legal actions against certain small businessmen. Surely the department is there to assist these businessmen with the expertise and guidance to weather the storm. They are experienced during these bare times. I remember the days of the old coloured development corporation, when businessmen were given expert advice and guidance to manage their affairs, especially when they were experiencing financial difficulties. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, like the hon member for Strandfontein and many other hon members who have participated in this debate over the last day or so, I too would like to pay tribute to the hon the Minister for all he has meant to the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs over the past six years. [Interjections.]

*All of the officials of the department and I shall always remember this hon Minister for the great interest he took in each and every activity of the department, no matter how insignificant. He was enthusiastic about all matters dealt with by the department and followed them up with his characteristic sound judgment and decisionmaking.

†This hon Minister’s initiative runs like a golden thread through all the achievements and the restructuring of the department and of associated institutions. Since he became Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs in 1983, highlights in his career included—I can mention but a few of them— the inception of nuclear power generation at Koeberg, the establishment of the South African Diamond Board, the National Energy Council, the Council for Nuclear Safety, and the Alexander Bay Development Corporation, the latter of which he has just announced came into existence only a couple of days ago.

He also oversaw the restructuring of the Central Energy Fund (Pty) Ltd, the Nuclear Energy Corporation and Eskom, the securement of the Crude Oil Precurement Programme, the rationalisation of fuel prices, the privatisation of Sasol II, and of course, there is his enthusiasm for the Mossgas project.

I believe we all can only wish him and Mrs Steyn, together with their family—I believe he also has grandchildren— the very best in the future, and may the hon the Minister and Mrs Steyn have a very long and happy retirement. [Interjections.]

Another project which the hon the Minister initiated was the drafting of the new Mineral Technology Bill. I must say, in approaching the task of drafting this Bill the department had to take cognizance of Government policy as clearly laid down in connection with the need for deregulation, privatisation, the reduction, wherever possible, of State involvement in the economy, and the recognition of the free enterprise system, as well as the rationalisation of legislation and functions, and also, the acceptance of the Common Law principle that the holder of a mineral right has sole right to prospect for, to mine and to dispose of his mineral in a free enterprise system.

With these policy statements and principles in mind, as well as Government’s accepted responsibilities with regard to three main areas of activity within the mining industry, such as, firstly, the safety and health of mineworkers; secondly, the optimal utilisation of our mineral resources; and thirdly, the rehabilitation of the land after mining, the department undertook the major task of reforming our mineral laws.

*As from July 1988 a task group of the department has been working full-time on the consolidation and rationalisation of the mineral laws of South Africa. In the process nine different acts were consolidated and rationalised and published in the Gazette for comment on 15 December 1988. Comments were received from more than 120 different departments, mining groups, associations and other interested parties, such as for example the Chamber of Mines, the South African Agricultural Union, the Departments of Manpower, of Finance and of Agriculture, from universities, self-governing states and the Mining Trade Unions Board.

These comments were processed and on 8 March 1989 an amended draft Bill was sent to all institutions which had previously made comments, for further comment. The further comments are now being processed and discussions are also being held with various institutions such as the South African Agricultural Union and the Chamber of Mines. Discussions will also be held with institutions such as the Department of Manpower, the Mining Trade Unions and others.

†I want to stress that this is a major task which has been undertaken by the department. South Africa is presently undergoing major reforms in the social and political fields and it is therefore imperative that reforms also be made to the ground rules on which our economy is based. The existing legislation has served South Africa extremely well over the past 80 years or more. However, our economy is moving into a new era with new participants, new pressures and new challenges. We must therefore, adapt our mineral laws to meet these new challenges. However, I must stress that in so doing we must make sure that the sound principles of free enterprise, private ownership and of individual initiative, which have been at the very heart of the success of our mineral industries, be retained and strengthened for the future.

At this time I would also like to enlighten hon members on the progress made in implementing the new safety regulations and also the training of persons for the certificates of competency. On 16 September 1988 regulations were promulgated under the Mines and Works Act of 1956 which made the appointment of safety officers and safety representatives compulsory at mines and works if the number of employees exceeded 30. These regulations were in general welcomed by the industry and implementation thereof indicates that they will contribute to improve safety. The time of implementation is, however, too short for direct results to be indicated. The appointment of safety officers did not present any problems because at most undertakings a loss control department existed from which persons could be appointed without any further training. At some mines, however, problems are being experienced with the appointment of suitable safety representatives in certain working places because the National Union of Mineworkers has apparently instructed its members to refuse to accept such appointments.

That is a shame!

I must say that I find this most disappointing because, after all, these bodies have been set up to try to ensure the safety of their very members. I would hope indeed that they will reconsider their position in this regard.

“Since July 1988, when the regulations promulgated under the Mines and Works Act were amended to do away with the principle of a listed person so that certificates of competence could be issued to members of all population groups, a total of 1 375 blasting certificates have been issued, 1 278 of which were issued to Whites and 97 to other population groups, mainly Blacks. During the same period 751 banksmen certificates were also issued. Of these, 734 were issued to Whites and 17 to other population groups, mainly Blacks. A total number of 97 certificates of competence as crane-drivers have also been issued, four of which were issued to Coloureds and the rest to Whites.

†As a result of the present economic climate and especially the low gold price, the possibility of unemployment for some holders of certificates of competency exists as a result of the closing down of certain mines or a drastic retrenchment of personnel at certain marginal mines.

As a result of this there still appears to be a reasonable amount of uncertainty amongst certain White employees as to their job security. The different examination centres are however not receiving an abnormal number of applications from candidates for the various certificates of competency. Indications are that the industry itself is adjusting to the circumstances.

I would like to say that the advisory committees for the various certificates of competency are also functioning successfully. Regular meetings of the various advisory committees still take place and good co-operation exists amongst all members to increase the standard, especially as far as safety is concerned, of all the examinations. We hope the ultimate result will be that the new holders of the different certificates of competency will be more competent than their predecessors, who obtained their certificates before these advisory committees came into being.

In conclusion I would like to make a special appeal to all involved in these very important activities concerning the safety and the economic well-being of both employees and employers in our mining industry, to approach these changes which have taken place and are still going to take place in a mature and a responsible manner.

Mr Chairman, yesterday, and again a moment ago, the hon the Deputy Minister addressed words of tribute to the hon the Minister. We also noted with regret from press reports last Thursday that the hon the Minister was to retire from active politics. We have a heartfelt need, and this also applies to our NP study group entrusted with mineral and energy affairs, to say that we are sorry that he is going because in him we are losing a gifted Minister. He has managed the department successfully, and he has used his talents to the benefit of the department and of South Africa. On behalf of our study group we wish him and his wife all the best for the future and hope that he will enjoy a long and healthy period of rest with his children and grandchildren. Our best wishes accompany him.

Mr Chairman, I should like to thank the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs, and this naturally includes the Director-General and his staff, for their well-presented and enlightening annual report. I also want to thank the subdepartments which fall under the department, namely the Energy Council, Mintek and the Council for Mineral Technology, for their annual reports.

On reading through the reports one gains an impression of the scope and importance of these departments. They are dynamic departments, and departments of cardinal importance to South Africa.

In 1852 copper was extracted for the first time in South Africa, in Namaqualand. Thereafter followed the discovery of gold on the Witwa-tersrand in 1886, and the discovery of diamonds in 1887. This laid the foundations of an industry which is today a world leader in the production and supply of minerals such as gold, platinum, chrome, manganese, diamonds, coal and other important minerals. Of all these minerals, gold continues to command the largest market and, calculated by value, South Africa is responsible for 55% of the world’s free gold production.

The major percentage of South Africa’s minerals are exported to approximately 80 countries. Because minerals and mining play such an important role in the South Africa economy, research is continually being conducted by the research organisations of the Chamber of Mines, as well as Mintek and the research organisation related to mining, in order to improve and to adopt mining and related activities, such as beneficiation and safety, to changing circumstances.

According to the annual report it would appear that mineral sales increased by 16% to R33,41 billion. Exports of minerals increased last year by 13,1% to R23 billion. These are indeed remarkable figures. There was also a large increase of 32% in respect of local sales. Gold and coal were the largest earners of foreign exchange. Like any other industry, however, mining is suffering as a result of rising costs. During 1988 the increase in respect of production costs in the mining industry was limited to approximately 13%, as opposed to approximately 18% in the previous year. The limiting of the production cost increases in 1988 may be attributed mainly to the limiting of wage increases to below the production figure price index, and to mechanisation and new technologies where these were applied and where circumstances permitted this.

In order to ensure competitiveness on the world market, there will have to be quite a large further curtailment of production cost increases. Naturally, the limiting of wage increases alone will not solve the problem and attention will also have to be paid to higher productivity and to creating a more stable work force.

Although limited breakthroughs have so far been made in the field of mechanisation and technology which may be generally applied in the South Africa mining industry with its unique mining conditions, the industry continues to plan ongoing research in this field in order to find solutions.

Furthermore, the industry envisages becoming less dependent on migrant labourers and making greater use of a well-trained and more permanent work force, which will cut costs in respect of training and retraining. The present doublefigure inflation rate is one of the chief causes of cost increases in the industry and is directly related to the pressure for higher wages, the cost of equipment and related operating costs in general.

The rand-dollar exchange rate has so far favoured the industry and unless the inflation rate drops considerably, this entails serious implications in the long term for the South Africa mining industry’s ability to be competitive on the world market. In order to be and to remain competitive, the mining industry will have to strive for greater efficiency and increased productivity. The potential for increased productivity in the gold mining industry is very great, even if the gold mines do have to contend with greater problems than other industries.

The proof of the fact that productivity can, in fact, be improved, lies in the fact that a mining finance company declared last year at a conference on trackless mining that as a result of the use of rubber-tyred equipment for the transportation of rock and material underground in two of its gold mines, the production of various categories of employees has increased by between 34% and 267%. This had given rise to a reduction in staff, but also to an increase in the remuneration of those people who had achieved that high productivity. If consideration is given to the fact that thousands of employees are employed in the mining industry, then it is important to abandon the idea that labour in South Africa is cheap, but rather to realise that the potential of all the manpower must be employed productively.

Mr Chairman, I wish to associate myself with the hon the Deputy Minister’s words regarding the death of Dr Adendorf. I also want to tell the hon the Minister that, although we had our political differences, there was always a friendly greeting in his voice, and we appreciate that. We shall miss it.

South Africa is privileged to have not only exceptional human material, but exceptional raw materials as well. There is an abundance of minerals in the country.

One of the most important of these mineral resources is coal. Approximately one third of last year’s extracted coal was used by Eskom for electricity purposes. Eskom has also had a few successes. Amongst other things, it provided 97% of the electricity used last year. It has also completed an electricity network throughout virtually the whole of South Africa. There are many power lines across the length and breadth of our beloved country. Nevertheless, there are also many things which trouble one.

One of the major problems is the under-recovery in respect of Tariff B. The under-recovery has existed for quite some time now. Eskom has said that it is going to rectify the matter. It has also said that it is no longer going to permit crosssubsidisation. To recover everything from Tariff B consumers would entail a direct cost increase of 31,12%. All of Eskom’s alternatives boil down to the simple fact that the consumers are faced with increases. That is not to mention the annual tariff adjustments which must also be made. It is particularly the agricultural sector and farmers on remote farms who are affected by this.

Ninety-seven million rands cannot simply be recovered. The farmers are not prepared simply to pay up. They do not have the money. They really do not have it. I want to ask the hon the Minister please to take another look at whether a plan cannot be devised to provide the farmers on the border farms with cheaper electricity. These people are unobtrusively performing a tremendous job of work for South Africa, and it is for this reason that we ask: Help these people.

What makes one unhappy is the fact that Eskom now wants to put pressure on the Tariff D consumers. Meanwhile cities like Soweto are completely satisfied. They have a great deal of power which is sponsored by the Transvaal Provincial Administration. Their power account is written off, whilst the farmers simply have to pay up. The viability of farmers who are suffering as a result of droughts and high interest rates is being further confounded by an almost inhuman burden of electricity costs.

I also want to say something about the Cahora Bassa Dam and the electricity programme. It will cost approximately R180 million to restore the power supply and this is apparently only for the approximately 1200 pylons, and so on, that were damaged. Then the Cahora Bassa Dam will be able to supply South Africa with 1 355 megawatts of power. This is some 4% of the total power we can generate locally. At the moment there is a complete oversupply of electricity in South Africa. Eskom expects that there will be an even greater surplus in three to four years’ time and that it will only be possible to work off the existing surplus in the late nineties. It is, of course, obvious that many employees of Eskom have voluntarily sought other employment. They heard that their power stations were to be closed, and who would wait until he had been paid off before looking for a job?

A great deal of the planning that Eskom has done in the past has been put off indefinitely. Incidentally, I think that in certain respects the planning was poor. Eskom has apparently experienced a reduction of some 10 000 people during the four years since 1985. This is partly as a result of rationalisation—which is praiseworthy. It is a good thing when one rationalises and thereby reduces job opportunities. It is also partly as a result of mechanisation and as a result of the reduction in the usage of electric power as compared to the estimated usage. Many people have had to leave Eskom. We are being saddled with an increasing number of unemployed people in South Africa whilst we have to import power. That is my point! One reason for this is that imported power is cheaper than our own. Must this apply throughout? We have to import maize; it is cheaper than our own. We have to import corn; it is cheaper than our own. Our own people are not to be protected! “It is cheaper” must be the yardstick. A country which builds its future on this type of reasoning is a foolish one. It is a country which no longer has a vision for the future. Besides, who is going to protect the power lines against Renamo? It will probably have to be our own young men. Surely we have seen what has happened in Angola and South West Africa. However, it seems to me that we are stupider than a donkey. It does not strike its foot twice against the same stone, but we want to do so. No, Sir, it is foolish to obtain a vital commodity such as electricity in such an uncertain manner from outside one’s borders. In its hour of need, South Africa is going to be left in the lurch.

Eskom is a utility company. In other words, it is concerned primarily with rendering essential services without making a profit. Profit motives do not apply to Eskom as the primary norm. How is Eskom going to be privatised? Privatising Eskom will mean that there will have to be greater profits. Will there be alternatives, such as on the toll roads, for example, where we are given a choice as to which road we wish to travel on?

Eskom’s sales have increased by 5,7% during the past year. We are grateful for this, but we are also concerned, because the purchases of large concerns have increased by only 3,7%. The purchases of mines increased by 4,5%, but that of households increased to a greater extent. This shows that the country’s economic growth is lower than Eskom’s sales increase, if one infers it from this. This shows that South Africa is moving further and further into a subsistence economy. Incidentally, I am not impressed by the growth of the informal sector if the formal sector does not also show a corresponding growth.

Politics must not play a role in the mutual relations of Eskom’s work force. Incidentally, some of the best human material I know—and I probably know many people—is associated with Eskom. Some of the thoroughly nice people I know work for Eskom. For this reason I do not like the sentence in the Chief Executive’s report which states that positive political change will, however, stimulate the economy. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, at the outset allow me to associate myself with the good wishes expressed towards the hon the Minister and his family for a happy retirement. He has worked and toiled for many years and we wish him well. I would also like to thank the hon the Deputy Minister for his efforts in the department. It has really been a pleasure to have been associated with him and to have worked with him during these past few months as our new Deputy Minister.

*We regularly hear the refrain from the hon CP members that South Africa should use its minerals to force the West to call off their trade boycotts against us. The hon the Minister referred to that this morning. The argument is also that we have strategic minerals which the West cannot do without.

This approach of the CP was raised by a former member for Langlaagte, Mr Salmon Barnard, and was raised again recently in this House by the hon indirectly elected member, Mr Der-by Lewies, as I call him.

I want to take a closer look at this approach of the hon member and the CP. Firstly, as the hon the Minister said, it means that we too have to institute trade boycotts. We now have to do exactly what we do not want other countries to do. We now have to act behave just as immorally as other countries behave towards us.

Secondly there is, of course, the great danger that Western countries will start looking either at different sources, alternative trade methods or a substitute mineral. Any sensible citizen, except the CP, will realise what effect this will have on our country and our economy. How does the CP think Sasol came into existence? How does the CP think our arms industry came into existence?

Let us continue our analysis of this political suicide plan of the CP. There has never been any rejection of or clear indication from the party leadership that the CP rejects the idea of a mineral boycott. We heard that from the hon member again yesterday.

During question time yesterday we were told that between 1 April 1988 and 31 March 1989, 130 656 and 21 965 154 ounces of gold respectively were sold by the SA Mint and the SA Reserve Bank. The total value of these gold sales was calculated at approximately R22 100 million.

There are two questions that arise. If we were to withhold only our gold from world markets, as some of those hon members profess we do, where would we get foreign exchange to the value of R22 100 million? With what would we replace the gold exports? With maize? With manufactured products? Or perhaps with CPs? [Interjections.] Would a CP government be able to keep the country going financially without gold? They must tell us how they want to do that. Do the CP members in their stupidity think that they will be able to borrow such an amount from the IMF or perhaps from bankers abroad? What do they want to use to pay for our imports?

Secondly, one must ask oneself to what extent we would be punishing the Western world by withholding what to us are strategic minerals. Let us begin with gold and coal. If, for example, we had withheld our total gold production for 1987 from the world markets, it would have meant that we would have withheld 605 tons of the altogether 2 076 tons of gold which had been supplied to the world markets, which was approximately 29% of the gold production. Does the CP really think that 29% of the total supply would have hurt the world if we had withheld it? The absurdity of this approach is also emphasised by the fact that only 229 tons of the 2 076 tons supplied worldwide were intended for industrial use. That makes up approximately 11% of the gold output. The rest was used for the manufacture of jewellery, for coins or for investments. Shame, just think how proudly the CP will puff out their chests when they say they have forced the world’s jewellery industry to its knees! The 229 tons intended for industrial purposes, and which could perhaps be regarded as strategic, would be replaced by the other world producers before breakfast. And those countries are definitely not going to supply a CP government with the essential foreign exchange; on the contrary, I think they will be laughing up their sleeves. And we will merely be punishing ourselves in the process!

What about coal? In 1987 our coal mines produced a total of 176 million tons of coal. Just over 42 million tons of that, making up approximately 24% of our production, were exported. That represents approximately 12% of the world market’s coal purchases. Does the CP think we are going to punish the world by withholding our 42 million tons? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, this debate has been characterised by expressions of good wishes to the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology who is to retire shortly. I too would like to take this opportunity of wishing the hon the Minister well in his retirement. Although we may not have agreed with him politically, we always found him to be a very accessible man. We found that he has kept quite a low profile in his position, but he has got on with the very important task that was entrusted to him. I would like to say that all in all the hon the Minister has performed fairly well.

I would also like to take this opportunity to apologise to the hon the Minister, because I have to attend another debate and it will therefore not be possible for me to listen to his reply. My speech will be on trade and industry and I deliver it simply according to the list of speakers we have been provided with.

I wish to refer to the statement made by the hon the Deputy Minister yesterday in which he emphasised the need for greater efforts to be made in order to secure world markets for South African exports. I wish to state immediately that I agree with him completely in this viewpoint. In fact, I wish to commend the various heads of the several desks in the department who deal with this matter on an ongoing basis. I am aware that they have played a very positive role in breaking down the economic barriers of resistance which have traditionally hindered our businessmen who tried to develop export markets for their goods.

These heads of department need to be complimented for their endeavours, which have been undertaken by them often in the face of tremendous odds. What must be clear to all is the fact that the greatest resistance to South African exports comes from the governments of importing countries whose implacable opposition to the policies of the South African Government have often dictated the exclusion of South African produced goods from their markets. I am sure that the task of the hon the Minister and his department would have been much easier if this were not the case. It therefore behoves all of us who do not wish us to become a banana republic, but a fully developed economic giant, to ensure that our race policies do not hinder our growth any longer.

I now wish to touch briefly on a matter which impinges directly on the matter of trade and industry in general in South Africa, although it is outside the bailiwick of the hon the Minister. I refer to the Government’s policy of decentralisation. I am aware that the basic rationale of this policy was to ensure economic development in the homelands of South Africa, which would provide employment for Black people who were and are resident there. However, this laudable objective flies in the face of economic realities which call for the location and the creation of an industrial growth point in South Africa according to hard economic laws.

This system, for which an amount of some R700 million has been budgeted this year, has been criticised by harsh critics, who have dismissed it as a waste of taxpayers’ money. If one were to examine the number of unscrupulous entrepreneurs who have used the loopholes in the law to enrich themselves unjustly, then the criticism— both economic and factual—appears to be justified.

The situation is exacerbated by reports that nationally about half of the recipients of decentralisation concessions are still not viable, even in their eighth year of operation, and that many of them are now expected to fold. This trend is contrary to the intention of offering decentralisation incentives in order to create employment.

I believe that this policy of the Government is up for review and that a report on the matter recommends far-reaching changes to current strategies. I have not seen the report, but it would appear from a Press report that it finds that the current policy has led to market failures, cost-ineffective spending of public funds and the distortion of development by a one-sided focus on industrial development as a cure-all for job creation and economic growth in underdeveloped areas. It has found that this has led to Government money being wasted on regions unsuited for development.

Whilst this report is being considered by the Government—and I am sure that this department will have a strong input into Government thinking on the matter—may I suggest that incentives in the present form of cash grants should be replaced by a more effective system which should ensure that successful decentralised industrialists be rewarded and unsuccessful ones penalised. It has been suggested that new applicants should be given three years in which to become viable and that third year concessions should be held back and should be paid only if it is shown that their fourth year of trading is profitable. In order to encourage applicants to take full advantage of the concessions, recipient industrialists should have bonus percentages added to their concessions based on their degree of profitability.

Finally I wish to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to what has been referred to as inflation realities. The question that is constantly being asked is this: Does the Government present an accurate picture of inflation, or is it misleading the public?

We believe that one sure way of testing the official figures is to adopt and apply the common test of simply comparing prices of today with previous prices.

If the official claims are correct, the 1972 rand is worth 17 cents today. If in 1972 one could rent a three-bedroomed house for R125, it implies an inflation-corrected amount of something like R735 today. The going rate, however, is much higher than that.

If one looks at the price of rump steak, for instance, it should cost R8,41 instead of the present R16,00 per kilogram. Chicken should cost R3,88 instead of R5,98, and so one may go on.

If one adds up all of these figures, they would indicate that as far as the prices of household goods are concerned, inflation over the past 17 years is probably twice as high as the authorities claim it to be. I therefore believe that the Government needs to explain this, and I hope that the hon the Deputy Minister will do that.

Mr Chairman, the hon member who has just spoken spoke about trade and industry, and since we are dealing with mineral and energy affairs and technology, I just want to touch on one matter that was raised by the hon member for Witbank. I want to ask him what the Government must do about Black towns, for example the Black town in Witbank. Must we refuse to supply them with electricity and allow ourselves to go back to the old days when we had coal stoves in such towns? Can the hon members imagine the smoke pollution we would have in our cities if we were to accept that policy of the CP? [Interjections.]

The hon member referred to utility companies. I think we must simply say that the CP is a futility company. [Interjections.] Before I deal with matters concerning their energy generation, distribution and sales in South Africa, I want to address the hon the Minister. I believe that I am one of the few members of the Institute of Electrical Engineers who is taking leave of him this afternoon on behalf of that group. I want to thank him very much. I believe that I am speaking on behalf of all the hon members of the committee and of those societies if I say that not only was he a good friend to all of us in Parliament, but he also treated all of us as his friends.

It is not pleasant to take leave of the hon the Minister, because for the past 10 years I have known him to be a unique person and outstanding friend, a brilliant engineer and a proficient administrator. I want to tell the hon the Minister that we shall miss him. We thank him for what he accomplished in the field of industrial development in South Africa.

As the Minister of Trade and Industry, and subsequently also of Economic Affairs and Technology, he rendered service together with these two deputies of his. I should like to start by mentioning that he was the manager of the Armscor Radar and Computer Plant, as well as the President of the Institute of Electrical Engineering. He started his career in Boksburg as a laboratory assistant at Satmar the first South African Torbanite manufacturing company. It was one of the first places where he was involved with energy affairs. In this way one can continue and elaborate on how he dedicated the years of his life to it.

However, I want to thank him for what he did to help the development of a very new instrument in South Africa. South Africa is soon going to experience a revolution in the field of the metering of electricity. He helped with this during the past two years, and I want to thank him on behalf of the inventors and the people who are now working on those systems.

During the past 60 years electricity in South Africa has been metered by means of that little instrument which is so well known in our houses, a meter which is periodically read by an official of the local authority and who then refers that reading to the Treasury department, who in turn process it into rands and cents, send the account to the consumer who then pays it, if he wants to. Under the guidance of the hon the Minister the department investigated this system and great progress has already been made with several systems that are being developed at various factories.

This will mean that we shall be able to pay for energy sales in advance. The hon the Minister agreed that the present system is expensive and outdated and he ordered this new method to be investigated. Today I want to pay tribute to him and his officials because we in South Africa are on the eve of revolutionary developments in the method of energy, water and gas sales in this way. I believe that before long, South Africa will take the lead in the sales area of these commodities. Together with Eskom and the SABS the department provides the manufacturers of this revolutionary method with close co-operation. The research and development in this field will ensure that South Africa becomes a leader in this field.

Presently the meter with the turning wheel will make way for a digital instrument that tells one what day of the year it is, what member of the family have a birthday that day, what the time is, how much water and electricity have already been consumed in that house and how much water and energy may still be consumed before more has to be purchased. These instruments can also switch various circuits in a house on and off at a given time. In other words if one has to leave the house that evening and the lights of a certain room in the house must remain on, the instrument will do it automatically. It will also have the advantage that it eliminates the peak-hour demand control at the local authority. At this stage the installation of such equipment amounts to approximately R0,5 million for an average local authority. However, such an instrument can be installed for approximately R2. This system will presently be known throughout South Africa and it saves an average local authority such as Tembisa approximately R2 million per year. This prevents—and the CP must listen to this— any bad debt in the future. The system is based on advance payment and it eliminates the meterreader and much of the labour associated with this job in the present system. Through the support of this hon Minister, South African engineers, as I have already said, found solutions for the non-payment of electricity accounts.

I want to thank the hon the Minister for what he did to get this system going, because by doing that he ensured that South Africa would be a leader in that industry. However, he also saw to it that … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I will join the hon member for Boksburg in the good wishes towards the retiring hon the Minister. I think it is a little unfair that Boksburg is being singled out for all these problems which have arisen. Perhaps, if the hon the Minister has had this connection with Boksburg of which I was unaware, that may well be a redeeming feature in respect of that particular town.

Hon members know that many people are going to retire voluntarily or otherwise, particularly as a result of this announcement that was made this afternoon. The hon the Minister announced his retirement before said announcement and in the media it was said that he was the second oldest MP. I have checked and I am pleased to tell him that he is in fact not the second oldest. There are more than two people who are older than him—I am not one of them by the way. [Interjections.] He is, therefore, actually retiring at a relatively young age. I would like to wish him and his family a happy retirement from Parliament, but I would also say that I rather think his skills as demonstrated in Parliament should not be lost to South Africa. I hope that the hon the Minister will continue to contribute towards the welfare of the country that we both love and want to dedicate our lives to.

I have another word of thanks to say and that is to the hon the Deputy Minister. It is a remark able thing. The Government Gazette is a best seller but it is a least read document. In it appeared what to some of us was an important matter, but perhaps minor with regard to the whole economy of the country. However, it was a matter which he and his officials treated with very great consideration, namely that there could be an exemption from the surcharge on a limited scale for particular religious groups in South Africa, not just one, but any religious group, where there was a particular need. I would like to thank him for the initiative he took in this regard, together with the hon the Minister who gave his approval to it, and I must tell hon members there are many thousands of people who are very grateful for what this has done, irrespective of any other considerations. Maybe it did not work so well this time because of the short time available, but I think many religious groups will be able to take advantage of this in the future. It is a correct approach and in accordance with the principle of encouraging people to believe.

I am one of the people, and I have said it before, who believe that those who believe are the people who create. I have said in Parliament before that I have never yet seen an atheist running a leper colony, but I have seen many religious people doing many noble things. Therefore we should all be a party to encouraging any form of religion because, fundamentally, religion teaches morality.

We are going through very difficult times in South Africa. The economy is in trouble and it is going to get much worse. The problem is that the difficulties are not short term or cyclical problems. They are structural problems. I am not certain that, despite all the White Papers, despite all the legislation and despite all the research, the structural problems are being sufficiently addressed.

In addition to that hon members should be aware, if they are not yet, and I think many are, of an anger which is swelling up in the community against price increases, corruption and exploitation. That anger is a very real anger and one has to be careful that the anger is not channelled into the wrong directions and that one will find people taking action in respect of other matters, for example during this election, where they may choose to vote in a particular way, not on economic policies but because of anger, and cause that anger to be directed into a political direction which can do South Africa harm. I think we must be very careful in relation to that anger and see to it that people understand what is going on.

One of the problems I have is the question of trying to solve fundamental, structural problems, for example the question of population growth, economically active people and insufficient action to create jobs in South Africa.

We talk about privatisation and deregulation. Today I want to say a thing which may shock people. In some cases deregulation has created a new kind of restraint— the restraint of intimidation and the operation of Mafia type organisations in deregulated activities. Hon members need only look at, for example, the taxi industry to see how the restraint is already creeping in there. If one has that kind of restraint in a deregulated society, you are actually doing nothing at all in order to benefit the society because you are creating a new problem. We have to make sure that that kind of restraint does not operate.

Let me talk about the concept of inward industrialisation. To my mind inward industrialisation is the key to many of the job creation problems in South Africa. However, we keep talking about it but we do not get going with it. We do not give the adequate incentives for it. To my mind there is a fallacy which is creeping in and I would like to demonstrate it. For instance, the Governor of the Reserve Bank, for whom I have great respect, says that now is an inopportune time for fixed private investment. How can he possibly say that? I do not know whether he is correctly quoted. He says, and I quote him:

That is the fundamental difference in philosophy. To my mind we need private fixed investment in order to create the kind of goods and articles which are consumed by the lower income groups in South Africa. We need to direct consumption expenditure into South African products. We need to discourage consumption of imported goods. That is what I would like to see implemented. If we, now when there is a degree of business confidence left, say that we should discourage private fixed investment, now when people want to invest, the tragedy will be that when we want them to do so they will not want to. We have to take advantage of that confidence when it exists. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member will understand that I cannot react to what he has said because of the time limit. Since I have been attending the discussion on Foreign Affairs the last few days and have arrived only this minute, I may just as well begin by bidding farewell to the hon the Minister and thanking him for what he is, has been and will be in the future. I wish him and his family everything of the best.

Since the promulgation in 1987 of the Energy Act, Act 42 of 1987, there has been a positive turn in energy affairs and the role of the State in energy affairs has been privatised further. Because of the change the private sector will henceforth share in South Africa’s energy affairs at the highest level and it has a proper say in decisions on energy. The energy function which previously fell under the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs is now vested in the National Energy Council as can be seen in the annual report. It is a council representing the interests of the producer, the distributor and the consumer of energy in South Africa.

This same principle has already been embodied in the composition of amongst others the Electricity Council of Eskom, the Nuclear Safety Council, the Electricity Control Board as well as CEF Pty Ltd and the affiliated company, Mossgas Ltd. The common denominator of all these energy-related bodies with the National Energy Council is that they are all involved in the formulation of national energy policies and the implementation of the co-ordinated energy strategy. Thus we have policy on the one hand and strategy on the other. The National Energy Council is inter alia involved in the following: Transport energy which includes petroleum, synthetic and alternative fuel; energy for developing communities—I would like to say something more about that—electric energy which includes nuclear power and coal.

†This aspect of energy for developing areas has been thoroughly examined by the National Energy Council. The council confirmed the universally accepted fact that energy constitutes one of the basic requirements for sustaining, developing and uplifting modern society and even more so developing societies. The National Energy Council being charged with the responsibility of an adequate stable and affordable supply of energy to the peoples of South Africa has a vital role to play in the Population Development Programme which was initiated and is being sustained by the Government for, amongst other things, the upliftment of the Third World part of our population. I have said before that if we do not succeed with the Population Development Programme we will certainly become a banana republic.

Less developed areas in South Africa and Southern Africa—predominantly Black communities—do not have adequate access to electricity for domestic energy requirements. Development seriously demands that adequate energy supplies must be made available to those communities for social welfare needs such as schools, clinics— that is education and health—and for production activities including agricultural and rural industries.

The Government realises the great need that exists for reliable low cost decentralised small power supply systems to help improve the quality of essential services in rural areas and to promote the development of small scale rural industries. The situation is so serious that there is clearly a need for more research to understand and document more precisely the demand and supply situation in this sector but, more important, to begin to explore and develop a range of energy strategies to meet these problems.

At present the Government awaits a report of the National Energy Council on various options to reach these objectives, amongst others by developing the concept of centres of expertise at universities. Unfortunately I do not have the time to go into that. The concept of centres of expertise at universities is being considered by the National Energy Council in conjunction with other interested parties. The concept of centres of enterprise entails a co-operative scheme between a university engineering department and a member or members of the South African indus-tries which will then benefit both parties and the country as a whole tremendously.

*Mr Chairman, I do not have the time now to go into the great advantages of these centres for the universities, industries and the country. The mere fact that they are so essential for the success of the Population Development Programme requires that all those concerned devote all their energy to making a success of this project. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to associate myself with previous speakers and extend good wishes to the hon the Minister on his retirement. It is a pity that I have only come to Parliament now that he is retiring. From our side I wish him, his wife and everyone associated with them God’s blessing.

If one were to analyse the South African economy in detail one would not be surprised at how integrated the country’s economy and all its various laws are. Every piece of legislation concerns the economy. If one looks at countries such as Britain, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan and notes their economic progress in spite of the fact that some of these countries are not blessed with minerals like South Africa, one cannot but come to the conclusion that the progress of our country lies in a completely free and partially free-market system. I am convinced that South Africa can beat many of these countries as far as economics and technology are concerned. Unfortunately, however, the Blacks receive no recognition. Their potential is not recognised and as a result they cannot develop. They cannot do what they are able to do. When I criticise, it should not be regarded as destructive criticism, but as constructive criticism.

†Mr Chairman if only the Government would heed the advice of Thomas Jefferson, and I quote:

Then South Africa will realise its vast potential. Judging from media reports I do realise that the Government is acutely aware that this country is endowed with mineral wealth and is extremely well located geographically with its natural harbours and fertile agricultural land. This Government is aware of its low population density and its easy access to Western markets, capital and technology. I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister that we should take full advantage of these facts. I solemnly believe that we have the solution right in our grasp. It is high time that we in South Africa look at all those many thousands of petty rules and regulations which prices goods out of the reach of the many poor people of our land.

Truly, standard regulations produce a multitude of ill effects. Firstly, they discriminate against small businessmen who cannot afford to enter the market if they have to comply with them.

*They curb the progress of those people.

†Secondly, they raise the cost of established businesses so that they have less money for wages which results in lower pay for workers and unemployment.

*I experienced this myself in our business.

†Thirdly, consumers—if I may use the word very humbly—are robbed of their freedom of choice to choose from a wide variety of standards and prices.

I believe that all regulations interfere with private economic transactions between individuals of all races in South Africa, especially when it affects the very poor and least qualified people in South Africa. We are the least qualified and the very poor in South Africa. If Government were to delegislate I am firmly convinced that Blacks would be the first to benefit vastly by this. The sooner Government repeal these Acts, ordinances, bylaws, regulations and policies which inhibit free enterprise in South Africa and encourages Blacks to participate fully in the economy, the brighter the future will be for all South Africans.

*Everything in this beautiful country of ours is overregulated and for this reason overregulation has a political connotation. In the first place hon members should consider housing. This is regulated and, when the rent increases, the Government is blamed. Proof of this is that when that happens, people start rioting, buildings are burnt down and shops are looted. Hon members should also consider transport. This is also overregulated and when the tariffs are increased, the Government is blamed. This leads to buses being stoned and burnt.

Finally, in the little time at my disposal, I want to say that I am very glad to be part of this Parliament at this stage of our country’s political history. I thank the Lord daily for this exciting time in my life. I want to encourage and motivate the Government with the privatising and deregulation of its parastatals. The sooner the Government divorces itself from these parastatals the better. Such action can only make South Africa a winning nation; in my opinion one South Africa, one nation.

Mr Chairman, it pleases me to follow on the hon member for Kraaifontein. I could probably talk all afternoon on the economic mistakes he makes here. He says we are going to have riots because he wants free enterprise, and that rent will rise. If he got his free enterprise, the people would not have had their houses in the first place. That is not free enterprise.

There are other hon members that spoke this afternoon who said that if we changed our laws and regulations then we would do well like England and a whole lot of other places in the world. Do they realise that South Africa’s GDP last year was higher than that of the UK, Switzerland and Australia?

We have a wonderfully, economically strong country. Our only problem is that any economy in the world would battle to keep up with the spread and the growth that our population have. Our economy is strong.

*The only sombre note in participating in this debate, which I feel grateful and privileged to do, is the fact that this is the last time that the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology will participate in this debate. He made a huge contribution in this capacity and his loss to Mineral and Energy Affairs will definitely be great. I wish him and his wife a happy retirement. They definitely deserve it.

†One of the nicest things I know about the hon the Minister is that he once lived in my constituency, namely Germiston. What a loss it was to us.

The hon the Minister and his department have deserved one wonderful monument for when they retire. They have overcome the oil embargo that was placed on South Africa. Nowadays Sasol alone can keep our Government vehicles going for an indefinite period of time. It is a leader in the field of fuel from coal technology, it is South African owned and it creates jobs and saves immense amounts of foreign currency. Mossel Bay, too, is a wonderful example of what South Africans can achieve. It is being built mainly with South African expertise, South Africans are working there and as far as possible South African minerals and substances are being used to build the place.

The progress of the exploration off Mossel Bay is very similar, if anybody cared to look, to the progress of the North Sea oil exploration north of England. First they found the gas, then they found traces of oil, and finally, when they had eliminated all the places where oil could not be, they struck the lake of oil. I sincerely hope that as we go deeper into the sea we, too, will find that lake of oil for which we have been looking for such a long time.

Aside from what is being done inside the country, South Africa has developed a mighty connection under the hon the Minister on the oil market and has developed expertise in this field, even to the extent that we are trading with the rest of the world in a very sophisticated manner at the moment. This is keeping our modern refineries up to date. I think it is one of the greatest achievements ever made in South Africa.

Sasol is also becoming a force to be reckoned with in the chemical markets as well as the oil markets with its by-products. Polypropylene will probably be exported in a developing multimillion addition to our foreign exchange reserves. It would be very comforting to be able to say in this House this afternoon that we could develop polymer blocks as well, because then, with our wool and our cotton, we would be one of the finest producers of clothing in the world.

The ethanol from sugar option is also very exciting. I think it is a wonderful way to produce fuel. If we can, we will be producing fuel from a source that never dries up, that never becomes depleted. Another wonderful thing about the sugar ethanol thought is that it is labour-intensive and that we will be able to use up all the ground in the north of Natal and the eastern frontier of the Transvaal to produce our own fuel and our own sugar. As the price of fuel goes up, so that project becomes more and more viable.

The one sadness I have this afternoon, is to say that we are going to lose Mobil from our oil markets. I have admiration for the fact that they have stuck to their guns for so long. I think we in South Africa say thank you for the jobs they have created here, for the oil and the petrol they gave to us in all those years. I suppose there is no country in the world that can survive if they are being taxed 72% of their profits and. I say: “Cheers, and good luck” to Caltex. I hope they can stand fast in a very difficult world. When we reach the new South Africa that everybody is talking about, I hope that Caltex will be able to say that they stood fast.

[Inaudible.]

It will be an NP one. I hope Caltex will be able to stay here and say it has helped to make this new South Africa.

Caltex is under more pressure than most of us realise. If anybody looked at the parade of 2 000 screaming young radicals at Shell headquarters in Holland, they would realise under what great pressure the oil companies work. However, we have to remember, with all these people that do sell the oil to us, that they do it for the purest economic reason in the world. They are making a profit from us and they take that profit back to their homelands. So the fact that we lose a great oil company like Mobil has its side-effects too. We will be gaining a refinery, technology and a whole distribution network.

As Armscor grew in the times when we had weapons embargoes, I hope that this country, with its industrial inwards movement, will be able to live through this trouble and maybe make up a network of oil distribution. Perhaps Sasol will be able to sell products throughout South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, there is an idiom which says that one should stick to one’s last. [Interjections.] I want to tell the hon member for Stilfontein that it is also applicable to him. This afternoon he made a speech on strategic minerals and devoted his whole speech to gold and coal. I do not know since when coal and gold have been strategic minerals.

For the prophets of doom I wish to provide the following information in connection with Boksburg. During the past four months building plans to the amount of R29 952 000 have been approved for people who wish to invest in that dead town. [Interjections.]

I wish to make use of the opportunity this afternoon to tell the hon the Minister we are sorry he is leaving. In my time I have seen various Ministers of Mineral and Energy Affairs come and go. In the past, as soon as a Minister could say pneumoconiosis, his portfolio was immediately taken away from him, because then the Prime Ministers had the impression he would have to do too much for the poor mine-workers.

In 1973 they brought some relief when they made it an occupational disease. I think the hon the Minister has held this portfolio the longest. I am glad he is not leaving Parliament under a cloud, as did his two immediate predecessors who held the same portfolio. I wish him and his wife a pleasant and peaceful retirement.

I now come to the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs. I wish to thank them for the fine report. We are glad to note that accidents have been reduced. There is one thing I am somewhat concerned about, and that is the transfer of the State Mining Engineer from Johannesburg to Pretoria. I do not know the reason for this. Perhaps there is a good reason, but he was nevertheless taken out of the front line in Johannesburg where he was amongst the mines and where one could get hold of him quickly to discuss one’s problems. However, he is now in Pretoria and one has the impression that it would not be so easy to contact him any more. I think it would be a good step to look into this. [Interjections.]

Another point I wish to raise is the question of environmental control officers. For three years we have been pleading for environmental control officers. The hon the Minister referred to the security officers who were appointed. As far as I am concerned those security officers do not represent a step in the right direction. These people are still working for the mine. The mine pays them and they say that you do not bite the hand that feeds you. We feel that the appointment of environmental control officers has now become necessary.

We have previously mentioned the dust problems caused by continuous miners. This has been the case since 1980. To my knowledge there has been no improvement. There is still dust and the people work in those dusty conditions. We have said previously that prevention is better than cure. Justice is not done to those people. I want to ask again for something to be done about the dust associated with continuous miners. The same is applicable to trackless mining. Trackless mining was introduced when the Blacks went on strike. Then we mechanised. This is a great success, but it also led to problems. For example, when one looks at the Randfontein Cook section, one sees that many tons of rock are being blasted. The large loaders then commence loading. They work in dust and diesel fumes and this cannot be good for their health. We also ask that this be investigated.

At present production is being pursued, and I must accept that the Government welcomes this because the higher the production, the higher the taxes and the more freely they can spend. However, we must also think about the health of those miners who work in those circumstances.

I wish to enquire something else of the hon the Minister. In 1987 there was an accident at the St Helena Mine where 63 people were killed. How far have they progressed with this investigation? What was the cause of the accident and are they going to prosecute? We would be glad to know what is going on.

I want to turn to the hon the Deputy Minister, who referred to the fact that 97 blasting certificates were granted to Blacks. His figure is somewhat outdated. This amount was valid for the end of March. Then there were 97 Blacks with blasting certificates. Two weeks before that, when I put a question in Parliament, the figure was 74. Therefore, if one looks at the short period of two weeks and one realises that there were about 24 new awards, I must accept that a few more certificates were awarded this month.

When the Act was amended, there was a request for the assurance to be given to mine-workers that their interests would be looked after. The draft regulations were promulgated in which provision was made for the requesting of security records from people. We were also told that the work requirement would be ascertained and investigated. We now see that this is not the case. No one is asked for his security record if he wishes to qualify for his blasting certificate. The work requirement is not established. They train as many people as they can. I wish to state clearly that this cannot be accepted.

The other point I wish to mention is that only South African Blacks were to be trained, or Blacks from independent or self-governing states which were previously part of the Republic. No mention is made of this in the present regulations. This comes down to the fact that, in the light of the fact that no security record is required, Blacks from communist countries like Mozambique—we know Mozambique is a communist country—can be trained. The Chamber of Mines train as many as they can. People from other communist and Black states like Zambia, Botswana and those places are now being trained by mine-workers.

The argument of the hon the Deputy Minister that the Chamber says there are not enough workers, is not convincing. More than 200 000 South African Blacks would have qualified, as against 200 000 Blacks who come from these states. As far as I am concerned there are enough Blacks and the original assurance could have been met. South African Blacks could have been trained and care could have been taken to train the right ones.

I wish to put it very clearly that there were and are enough White mine-workers to do this work. Last year 640 people received blasting certificates, and presently there are 986 people at the training centre. When one looks at the minutes of the executive council of the Chamber of Mines’ training college, one sees that they intend training 500 Blacks next year. What this amounts to is that they have already decided to train 500 Blacks. This means they will have to make room for 500 of them, in favour of Whites.

This cannot be accepted. It is explicit discrimination if a decision is taken in advance as to how many Blacks they wish to train. What is going to happen if they get Whites with better qualifications? This is why the Chamber of Mines are now insisting that the qualification of the Std 8 certificate should be changed to experience in the mining industry. This can never be allowed.

Talking about unemployment, at the moment we have a lot of unemployment in the mining industry. People cannot get work. I wish to point out here that mine-workers who are qualified— and this does not include only mine-workers, but artisans as well—cannot get work in the trade or career for which they have been trained. These Whites are used in inferior posts on the mine. There is no work for them for which they have been trained. The hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology has in his possession an affidavit pertaining to a J C Bester who is a qualified boilermaker. He cannot get work as a boilermaker and he has to work on the machines that load the dust. The same applies to Mr Van der Walt, a trained person whose sworn statement the hon the Minister also has in his possession. He cannot get work in the post for which he has been trained. We want to state very clearly that when the CP comes to power …

And when will that be?

It will be during the next election and the hon the Minister will see that. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister made one mistake when he said Wonderboom was going to be National again. The hon the Minister will be proved wrong during the next few months. [Interjections.] If the CP comes to power we will revoke the blasting certificates that have presently been issued to Blacks with retrospective effect to October last year. These Blacks can go and do blasting in their own independent states and we will help to train them there. However, there are enough Whites in White South Africa to man the mining industry and those people will return. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister says this is not true. There are presently approximately 500 Whites working on the mines in Botswana alone who could return to South Africa if they trained their own Blacks and let them work. That is why we say we will look after the Whites … [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, can the hon member tell me in regard to these Blacks who have blasting certificates in the South African mining industry and whom the hon member will now put to work in their own countries, whether this is applicable to all the Blacks in the mining industry?

Sir, we say no, in the first place I wish to bid you farewell, just as I have taken leave of the hon the Minister. [Interjections.]

Order! No, the hon member should wait a while. We do not refer to one another as “you”, here. We are “hon members”. The hon member for Carletonville should address the hon member for Hercules as such.

I also wish to bid the hon member for Hercules farewell because he will not return here even though he wishes to. Sir, we say … [Interjections.]

Order! I should just like to hear what the hon member for Heilbron has to say.

… that was my point of order, Sir.

Order! Thank you very much. The hon member may continue.

Sir, I wish to tell that hon member that in regard to what the Blacks are going to do in their own independent states, they may promulgate their own laws and regulations and that if they wish to have Blacks of other states working in their mines, they are welcome to do so.

Mr Chairman, I put a question in connection with the Blacks on our mines.

Sir, we are saying that they will not receive blasting certificates in South Africa. [Interjections.] They can do other work … [Interjections.] Sir, let me put it to the hon member like this: If they … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it was interesting to listen to the last speech of the hon member for Carletonville in this Chamber, because I should like to tell him that he is definitely not coming back. [Interjections.] Secondly I should like to tell him that the CP will never come to power in this country. The hon member should remember my words. There are too many thinking people in our country who will see to it that they do not come to power. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Carletonville referred just now to the hon member for Stilfontein. It may be true that gold is not a strategic mineral. However, I should like to tell the hon member that, regardless of whether it is a strategic or an “ordinary” mineral, or whether it is a product manufactured by us, we are looking for exports in our country to earn ourselves foreign exchange.

As a matter of interest I would like to mention to hon members that if we should for example take a mineral such as gold, and withhold it from the outside world for one year, it would imply that the personal income tax of every individual in this country would have to increase by R11 000 per year, or that GST would have to be increased to 26%. The CP should therefore forget about their foolish economic policy. It is totally unacceptable to South Africa and its thinking people. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I would also like to convey my compliments to the hon the Minister, his two Deputy Ministers and the officials and personnel of the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs. I would like to tell hon members that these people are doing an enormous job for South Africa behind the scenes, and not only for South Africa, but particularly for the economy of South Africa. We have already started to reap the benefits and there are many more great, wonderful and positive benefits to be reaped in future.

Before I say something about that, I should briefly like to say something about the hon the Minister. In my constituency there are relatively large industries and therefore I often had dealings with the hon the Minister. Today I would like to tell him that we were really sorry to learn that he is going to retire. I sincerely hope that we are not going to lose his expertise once he has retired.

The hon the Minister is a quiet and gracious person, but a man with a clear head. He is one of the hon Ministers who has made a very deep impression on me. As a member of his study group and also with regard to trade and industry, it was indeed interesting to note the commitment of this hon Minister in tackling his duties in the various areas where he was serving. His expertise on trade and industry and mineral and energy affairs, as well as on the economy, made him the right person for this portfolio.

He as well as his Deputy Ministers were always available at short notice to see businessmen and industrialists from my constituency concerning their problems and they were always prepared to seek solutions for their problems in a positive way. I would like to tell the hon the Minister that he has done an enormous job for South Africa and I really mean it from the bottom of my heart. He has done it not only for South Africa, but for its people and our economy as well. He has really made his mark in those departments which he has controlled, and we sincerely appreciate that. We would like to thank him for that.

On behalf of my constituency and its businessmen and industrialists I should also like to thank him for what he has meant to us in particular.

Then, too, I should like to address a special word of thanks to Mrs Steyn. We would like to tell her that we know of the sacrifices she had to make behind the scenes, we know that she has supported her husband with great understanding and she should know that we sincerely appreciate that. She must enjoy her rest, but I can assure her that we are going to miss both of them. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I was not present for the better part of the debate in this Committee because I was busy in another Public Extended Committee regarding transport matters in the House of Delegates.

Mr Chairman, I realise that the growth in the economy in South Africa is necessary for the well-being of the nation as a whole. The wealth of a nation depends on its economy. Our economy is almost at a standstill. In the last seven or eight years the volume of manufactured products has not increased substantially. Some people have expressed pessimism about this, but I am hopeful that we can improve the situation. It will not last forever.

If South Africa ever needed an economic boost, now is the time. Now is the time to export because we can compete with world prices. I might mention that our South African goods are of a very high standard and quality. The prices are low. Now that the dollar is riding high it can buy almost three times as much. South Africa cannot depend entirely on its gold. Therefore we are fortunate in that we have improved the quality of our manufactured goods over the years. David Whitehead in Tongaat in Natal produces some of the finest linens and curtains. We are also exporting our suits to America and England and elsewhere. The potential is there. All we need is to explore the possibilities and work a bit harder.

The Board of Trade and Industry could play a very important role in advising en encouraging the industrialist to look at products which could be exported to other countries. More incentives should be considered for industrialists and manufacturers to enable them to compete with others for the international markets. These incentives, in the form of concessions or subsidies or whatever, should encourage industrialists to invest and expand.

We need foreign currency to offset the deficit on the balance of payments. We must accumulate funds to cover South Africa’s foreign debt. The board could also play an active role in forays into the world at large—to countries like the Soviet Union, China and others in the eastern bloc to explore markets for trade. The Department of Economic Affairs and Technology cannot go it alone. We need other inputs.

I want to mention another aspect. Japan and Taiwan do not have the raw materials that South Africa has. They import ours, manufacture goods and sell them to us. We have been aware of this and have talked about it but we have not done anything about it. We must manufacture those goods here in our country and export them to those countries. If our product is good and cheap the world will buy it. We can sell to those countries who sell to us at present. I know for a fact that you cannot buy a good car in Australia. They come here and buy second-hand cars at very low prices for them and sell those cars elsewhere. We must concentrate on using our natural resources to develop our economy. In this way we can provide plenty of job opportunities for the masses of labourers in this country.

I have said that this department cannot go it alone. It needs to co-operate with other departments like National Education and Foreign Affairs. It has been said before that we must update our technical education to provide the skilled workers required to exploit our natural resources.

Much emphasis is being placed on primary industries. Our raw materials, like steel, are being exported and we buy the finished products. I have mentioned this before, but our own people here can be put through a system of education whereby they will be trained in the skills which will enable them to manufacture the same goods. I am very hopeful since I have heard that some Taiwanese have been to South Africa and are now trying to set up manufacturing industries in the field of radio and television. However, that will not be here in South Africa but in the Transkei. We can get some of those experts and improve. South Africa has done it by improving our technology in the field of defence. We have shown the world that it can be done and we need to do it in the economic field. We can then boost our economy which in turn will help our people.

There are people in South Africa living in Third World conditions and their standard of living could be improved. More jobs will become available and it will be a tremendous advantage to the country. Every man who earns something will see his standard of living improve so that a certain amount of appeasement and contentment as well as stability will be generated. No man can grumble that he does not have the opportunity, especially with opportunities being granted more and more today. We also have to defuse certain elements that work against the system of law and order and control of the country. The only way is by feeding the stomach so that there will be contentment and peace in the country.

I wish the hon the Minister well at his retirement. I believe he has provided a valuable service to the country. As the hon member for Yeoville said, he should not divorce himself completely, because we need every bit of help we can get for this country to become a better place for all of us.

Mr Chairman, following upon the hon member for Merebank I regret that I do not have the time to comment on points raised by him, most of which, I feel, were positive and very well made. However, I would like to associate myself with the good wishes and accolades expressed to the hon the Minister by the majority of hon members of this Committee.

Since the announcement of the fuel price increase on 14 April this year, in spite of clear statements by the hon the Deputy Minister and the National Energy Council, opponents of the Government—and among these I include certain sectors of the media—have gone about their sly and underhand task of totally misrepresenting the factual position. All types of comments which give a distorted picture to the public and the world at large have been made. For example a CP spokesman who remains unnamed, said that South African consumers are once again being called upon to pay the price for NP bungling. Furthermore, a CP spokesman said that the National Energy Council had been made the scapegoat for the month of April by a Government trying to deflect the guilt for serious economic mismanagement. Finally, a really priceless piece of disinformation claimed that South Africa produced more than 80% of its own fuel. [Interjections.] As usual the CP did not make themselves aware of the real facts or deliberately misrepresented them.

A Natal daily newspaper did its best to make political capital in an extremely biased editorial with the view expressed that the 36% increase in the price of fuel over the past eight months does not—I repeat, does not—reflect overseas developments. That is not the result of cosmic and malignant forces beyond the control of anyone. No, it is the result of South Africa’s political and economic policies. This is said with absolute conviction, using high-sounding words designed to impress or confuse the readers. Yet the front-page story of this newspaper does in its own subtle way set out the real reasons for the price increase for those who are able to sift out the facts contained in some very selective reporting. This is so typical of the liberal media.

Service station operators are said to be disgusted with the increase, but what they are really disgusted about is that of the 26c increase per litre since September 1988, they are only receiving about 112C. It is not the fuel price with which they are disgusted.

However, responsible comment was made by certain fair-minded bodies. The national president of the Housewives League said that increase was not unexpected because of the increase in the price of crude oil. Similarly, the managing director of the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut said the increase was unavoidable. However, it was an unwelcome shock for the business sector. With all the facts before them, how can so-called intelligent people have such divergent opinions? It is quite incredible.

Quite clearly the fuel price increase is being used as yet another political football by unduly politically biased factions in view of the coming election. However, what are the real facts? These are clearly set out in a statement made by the hon the Deputy Minister, Mr Bartlett. I would like to comment briefly in the short time I have at my disposal.

The international price of crude oil in US dollar terms has increased by more than 40% since September last year. We all know that. We all know that we have no control over the crude oil prices in the world. The selling price of 98 octane in January 1985 was 84,9 cents. The latest price at the coast is 106 cents per litre. This represents a 24,7% increase over a four-year period; less than 6% compounded per annum which is well below any inflation rate.

The fuel price in November 1985 for 98 octane was 98 cents per litre. There was a reduction in the purchase price of crude oil during 1986 and 1987. The fuel price was lowered in April 1986 to 83 cents and in July 1987 to 79 cents. There was no acclamation through the media or by opposition parties of the Government’s ability to lower the fuel price. However, now that an increase has become necessary through outside factors almost entirely they seek to place the blame on the Government for so-called economic mismanagement.

The Government has since 1980 made a determined effort to combat inflation by so managing the liquid fuel price structure as to maintain the pump prices at reasonable levels. A comparison of international pump prices against the prices in cents per litre in South Africa make interesting reading. At the end of 1988 in rand terms comparative prices were per litre in France R1,92, of which 75% is in taxes and duty, New Zealand R1,54, of which 50% is in taxes and duty, the UK R1,61, of which 65% is in taxes and duty and the Netherlands R1,86, of which 70% is in taxes and duty. The present South African price of R1,09 per litre for 97 octane includes a wholesale margin of 5,4%, a retail margin of 8,7% and taxes and levies of only 40%.

It is clear from these facts that the South African fuel prices both before and after the addition of taxes compare most favourably with prices elsewhere in the world. We actually do a lot better. However, it is sickening that the opposition media do not acquaint themselves fully with the facts at their disposal before coming out with distorted and misleading statements. However, what can one expect from those who appear to be driven by apparent hatred or insane jealousy of the success of the Government in largely achieving its financial goals against almost impossible odds? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I really think we have had a very interesting debate and I would like to comment on some of the points that arose, although I do not know whether I will have the time to accommodate every comment made today. I will, however, at least make an attempt in the 20 odd minutes that are available to me.

The first speaker was the hon member for Strandfontein. I want to thank him for pointing out that there is a great need to find substitutes for our energy reserves that we have in coal and also for the imported oil fuel which we obtain from overseas.

I would like to stress that these two types of fuel—crude oil and coal—are non-renewable forms of energy. I also want to thank the hon member for Germiston for raising the matter of ethanol, because while at the present time we are very heavily dependent on these two non-renewable forms of energy we should start looking—as indeed we are—at renewable sources of energy.

Some hon members have referred to other forms of energy, such as solar energy, but I would like to speak briefly about the ethanol project.

No doubt, many people are rather disappointed that by this time the Government has not given a definite reply to the sugar industry’s request for Government support for the erection of the industry’s proposed ethanol plant. However, the Government is looking into the economic viability and consequences of all these synthetic fuel plants in great detail. We must bear in mind that one of the greatest shortages we have in South Africa at this present time is capital. The erection of all these major synthetic fuel plants requires enormous amounts of capital. It is therefore absolutely essential that we plan these plants with the greatest care and this is indeed what the Government is presently doing.

We have already completed the cost studies on the ethanol plant project. It does show that for a period some government protection will be required against competition from overseas imported crude oil. On the other hand, one has to ask what socio-economic benefits will result from the development of such a plant. This is exactly what we have been investigating. I believe this very day the final meeting of the committee looking into this is being held, and I hope we will have an answer in that regard in the near future.

As the hon member for Germiston mentioned, the ethanol plant requires a renewable source of basic feed stock, namely sugar-cane. We have already calculated that the development of this plant will enable an additional 35 000 hectares of land to be planted to sugar-cane. This will result in literally tens of thousands of much needed new jobs being created, and I thank the hon member for Strandfontein for raising this particular issue.

The hon member for Alberton referred to the matter of productivity. I want to thank him for raising this particular subject, because if ever there was a time that the South African mining industry should look into its cost of production, it is now. I believe that in the next year or two this particular subject is going to exercise the minds of everybody involved in the mining industry, if indeed they are not already doing that.

I would like to say to the hon member that factors affecting both labour and capital productivity in mines are numerous. Of course there is firstly the type of ore that is being mined. Is it a soft coal or is it a hard gold-bearing ore? Then there is the thickness of the ore seams which also affects productivity, as well as the depth of the deposit. At present the average depth of our gold mines is 1 600 metres, while the maximum depth at this stage is about 4 000 metres. The planners are now planning to go down to 6 000 metres which is a tremendous depth and a very costly exercise.

Another factor affecting the productivity of our capital in terms of income earned is the grade of the gold-bearing ore. There is also, of course, the relationship between labour and mechanisation. All these factors, as I am sure the hon member will appreciate, affect the productivity of both labour and capital. Technological advances have increased the productivity in our mines over the years, but there is a great need for still more research into this subject, and also more training of the labour force and of engineers.

South Africa, however, compares very favourably with overseas countries, especially when it comes to underground mining. Take coal mining, for example. Australia leads the field, producing something like 3 560 tons of coal moved per man-year. South Africa is second with 2 880 tons, the United States third with 1 820 tons. West Germany fourth with 810 tons and the United Kingdom down at 500 tons.

Another very interesting point to consider when we refer to productivity is the relationship between labour salaries and wages and the number of persons employed.

It is interesting to note that in 1987 the total salary and wages bill in the mining industry was R7,3 billion and at that time there were about 788 000 employees, giving an average income of R9 342 per annum. In 1988 the wage and salary bill went up to R8,2 billion but the number of employees dropped by 5,4%, or 41 800 employees; while the average income increased by 18,2% to R11 042 per annum. I believe this is something that labour unions are going to have to take cognizance of in future, viz just how far can they squeeze the wage bill without putting either the mine out of business or their colleagues out of employment? Naturally, as wages go up the incentive to mechanise also increases, the net result being that some miners are likely to lose their jobs.

The hon member for Witbank referred to the fact that South Africa is fortunate in that we have the people, the mineral resources and especially coal on which we can build our economy. He dwelt at great length on Eskom. However, I will leave that subject for the hon the Minister to reply to.

However, I would like to say something about Cahora Bassa. He seems to be criticising the Government for wanting to have that supply of electricity restored. I must remind him that South Africa has a contractual obligation to assist in getting that power source restored. In fact, South Africa has also invested a lot of money in the transmission lines on the South African side, and until power starts flowing again, that money is dead money. I believe it is a great pity that he is making a political football out of Cahora Bassa. I do not know whether he has ever been to the dam and power station, but I want to tell him that I have been there, and it is really a magnificent engineering project. To my mind it is a great pity, and perhaps immoral in a way, that such a tremendous potential for development in the Southern African area is not being utilised at the present time. I would also like to tell the hon member that hydro-electric power is far cheaper to produce than that from coal-fired electrical power-stations. We should, therefore, try to make sure that we obtain access to that power source, and once again, it is a renewable source of energy which will run for hundreds of years. The CP must think seriously and logically about these things, instead of making political footballs of issues which should not, in my view, be in the political arena. [Interjections.] Finally, Cahora Bassa is a tremendous force for good and development in the South African area, and I believe that this fact should be on the minds of all politicians in South Africa.

I would also like to refer to the hon member for Stilfontein, who had some very kind words to say about me for which I thank him. He went on to talk about the CP’s proposed boycotts of overseas markets. He referred to the fact that boycotts against South Africa had resulted in the emergence of Sasol and Armscor. It is very clear that the CP do not really understand what this is all about. Some years ago Opec, the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries, endeavoured to do exactly what the CP is proposing, and that is to put the squeeze on their market, and what was the net result of their efforts? Certainly, initially the price of oil sky-rocketed to something like $40 a barrel, but then suddenly it crashed as the world reacted to this type of approach to international affairs. This action on their part stimulated fuel conservation measures around the world, which damaged Opec’s markets, the net result of which has been a world surplus of crude oil and low international oil prices over the past few years.

The hon member for Springfield spoke about trade and industry matters and these do not fall under my jurisdiction so I will therefore not comment on his speech. The hon member for Boksburg referred to the metering of electricity.

*I should like to thank the hon member for his contribution on the need for energy systems for the metering of electricity. I want to assure him that this issue has been receiving attention for a number of years, particularly with regard to the question of a system providing for advance payment for electricity as well as water and gas in order to avoid non-payment by consumers and to reduce other administrative costs.

†I have been told that Eskom is at present installing computerised utility management control systems—I believe the hon member referred to it—on a limited scale, with a view to the assessment of a practical, economical system, taking into account the social implications of such a system. The biggest problem appears to be that of cost. The installation cost of such a system amounts to about R1 284,00 per domestic unit, against the approximately R80,00 per unit of the conventional electricity meters.

I do not have the time to go into details, but I wish to tell the hon member that there are people working on this, and that it appears that the cost of this type of unit, as well as the prepaying units, will be reduced somewhat, and we hope that in due course this type of metering and payment system could become general practice in certain areas in South Africa.

The hon member for Yeoville complimented the hon the Minister, and I agree with what he had to say in that regard.

He also referred to comments made by the Governor of the Reserve Bank. He said that the Governor had said that the private fixed investment should be discouraged. Mr Chairman, I am not an expert on high finance, but I just want to say to that hon member that the one thing he has perhaps not considered is that at present we have a tremendous shortage of capital, which is placing tremendous pressure on interest rates. The hon the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Reserve Bank have to endeavour to achieve a careful balance between exactly how much money can be invested in the various private investment fields without placing too much pressure on the capital market.

This is, of course, the result of the debt freeze which the international banks have applied to South Africa, and once again it is not South Africa that is at fault here, but the short-sighted people in the international banking and political arenas.

The hon member for Langlaagte referred to an energy strategy for the less developed areas.

*The hon member for Langlaagte mentioned that the Government’s role in energy affairs had been further privatised with the establishment of the National Energy Council. The energy function that previously fell under the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs, will in future be vested in the National Energy Council.

†The National Energy Council is also charged with the responsibility of the adequate, stable and affordable supply of energy to the peoples of Southern Africa and has a vital role to play in the Population Development Programme. I wish to tell the hon member that the National Energy Council is at present investigating the use of solar energy for remote rural areas; that is to say, the development of what is called a photo-voltaic cell. This research is presently being conducted, and unfortunately I do not have the time to go into details, but I am happy to provide the hon member with some information on exactly what the National Energy Council is doing in that regard.

The hon member for Alra Park made an interesting and positive speech. I agree with what he said about President Jefferson’s view, that government governs best when the people govern themselves. The only tragedy in South Africa and many other countries is that the people often come to Government asking Government to do things for them. If one analyses the debates in the Houses of Assembly, Representatives and Delegates, especially speeches made by members of the opposition parties, and one reads what they ask Government to do for the people, one will realise that a lot of the things they cry for and ask the Government to do, are things the people themselves could perhaps do for themselves. Government is presently trying to remove the obstacles of regulation and to encourage Blacks to enter the economy. I truly believe that if hon members are honest with themselves, and if they have eyes to see and they look around South Africa today—look at this very city of Cape Town, or Johannesburg—and they see the number of small businessmen that are now operating in the so-called informal sector, I think they will realise that the Government has done a lot to deregulate over recent years.

*I want to thank the hon member for Germiston for his explanation of how the oil industry, in its present form, affects South Africa. He indicated that the RSA had opened all channels to purchase oil and that we were not experiencing any problems with the provision of oil. I should like to thank him for his positive contribution.

†Mr Chairman, I have approximately two minutes left. The hon member for Carletonville covered a very broad spectrum and I respect him for his experience in the mining field. However, I have figures of all the applicants for various types of certificates of competency for the five months since the inception of the new regulations and I have extrapolated these figures for a full twelve-month period. I want to give the hon member the assurance that these figures clearly show that of the blasting certificates which have been granted over the five months 11,9% went to Blacks. If one extrapolates this to twelve months, approximately 178 Blacks will have got certificates compared to 1 498 for Whites.

As far as banksmen and onsetters are concerned, the figure is 2,9% being issued to Blacks. I want to say to the hon member that he should perhaps look at these things more objectively. I should like to say to the CP that they should look at these things far more objectively because it concerns the safety and the health of miners and they should not make political footballs of these issues. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister a question? [Interjections.] The figure that the hon the Minister has just mentioned was taken over a period of one year, but people of colour have only been qualifying for certificates of competency since October. He cannot compare that …

Order! The hon member may not make a speech when he wants to ask a question.

Mr Chairman, I should like to give the hon member the assurance that I am personally watching these figures very closely. I asked the Government mining engineer to hold a watching brief on these issues. The Mineworkers Union spoke to us … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, again my thanks for this opportunity. I want to begin by extending my sincere thanks to my two Deputy Ministers for several years of exceptionally close co-operation. One can work with people without being “kindred spirits” in the process. It has been my experience, however, that we have not only worked together, but that we have actually been a single team. I want to thank my two colleagues sincerely, in the conviction that I would not have been able to function without their assistance and their very, very positive contributions. Earlier today hon members listened to the hon Deputy Ministers of Economic Affairs and Technology, Mr Bartlett and Dr Alant. It is very clear that they are members of the team and know their subject.

I also want to express my sincere thanks to the officials— the Director-General, the staff of the National Energy Council and of the Atomic Energy Corporation, employees of the Central Energy Fund and of Soekor; there are too many to mention—for their co-operation. I thank them for having been team-mates. We wormed our way into places no one could ever imagine, in order to ensure that South Africa had enough oil, something one does not make a great fuss about, subsequently wondering whether it was possible that we had ever been there! It was done with their co-operation and to ensure that South Africa could obtain oil at all times.

My sincere thanks to hon members for their kind words to me and to my wife.

The hon member for Strandfontein referred to power. I just want to add one further aspect, because I think the hon the Deputy Minister dealt fully with the matter. It is true that to a certain extent we are self-sufficient as far as crude oil or fuel is concerned. It is true that we must examine alternative renewable sources. The hon the Deputy Minister referred to that. We are examining ethanol, methanol and solarenergy systems. If possible, a brief statement will be released shortly indicating to people what we are doing in this regard.

Apart from ethanol and methanol, in conjunction with the Mossgas project we have simultaneously launched two other projects. The basis of Mossgas and Sasol was to make South Africa as self-sufficient as possible as far as fuel is concerned. Simultaneously we examined Gen-kor’s T project, the torbanite project which embodies the revival of the old Satmar of Boksburg, which I began working with, and the AECI project, which compare favourably with the Sasol projects. We began working with them on the basis that they would also be fuelmanufacturing projects.

Since the middle of last year our strategy has changed completely. We have said that the torbanite project and the AECI projects should no longer be fuel-orientated, but that fuel should be a by-product. They should basically develop into petrochemical industries because we believe that South Africa has both a local and international market in the petrochemical industry.

It is a pity the hon member for Yeoville is not present, because he accuses us of not doing anything about inward industrialisation. Let me invite him to visit me and the hon the Deputy Ministers one afternoon. We will present him with a breath-taking picture of the inward industrialisation we are engaged in.

We want to convert these projects into petrochemical industries, and not into fuel-manufacturing industries, for the simple reason that we have no difficulty in purchasing crude oil at present. We could therefore earn a great deal more on exports in the petrochemical industry than we could save in the crude oil industry. In other words, the economic benefits are so great that in co-operation and in terms of agreements with the private sector we have decided that we are no longer going to make them fuel projects, but rather petrochemical projects. We hope to receive the reports on the matter in the near future.

My sincere thanks to the hon member for Alberton. For many years he was one of our chairmen and, inter alia, also deputy chairman and secretary of our study group. My sincere thanks for his hard work and willingness to co-operate with us at all times in all the changes we have brought about.

He mentioned an important point about productivity in the mines. I think the time has come for a large-scale investigation into productivity in our mining industry, particularly in regard to the systems of transport in our mines. We have specific information that we have already conveyed to the Chamber of Mines on an informal basis. If one looks at the international gold price, however, and the increase in production costs, one sees that there is only one answer left, and that is to examine increased productivity in the mining industry. I have a feeling that in certain sectors of the mining industry—I am not referring specifically to coal, gold or platinum— the productivity is very high. In others it is very low. We shall have to examine this question on a very selective basis.

The hon member for Witbank unfortunately spoke about matters he knows nothing about. I do not mean this in a derogatory sense, because I also frequently speak about things I know nothing about, but I at least make sure that I check my facts from some or other source. The hon member had so much to say about Eskom and the tariffs that I cannot react to everything. I can furnish him with the information in writing. Many of the things he said are simply not true. The figures might be correct, but they are completely out of context. [Interjections.] The Cahora Bassa issue has been dealt with very thoroughly. It is not a question of our doing it because of power that is cheaper than our own. I wonder whether the hon member has thought about the fact that although we now have an overcapacity, owing to historical patterns of development, a time will come when new power-stations will have to be built in South Africa. I have already seen Eskom’s programme for the next 50 years. We shall have to build more power-stations, because we have confidence in this country and the potential of its people, and I think the CP agrees. If we could obtain power from Cahora Bassa, it would be cheaper than that from any power-station, whether it be a coal or nuclear power-station. This would mean that we could probably postpone the construction of our next power-station by six or seven years owing to Cahora Bassa’s existing capacity. The generation of electricity is a long-term programme. If we were to decide on a power-station today, it would only come into operation in 10 years’ time.

But how reliable is that source?

I think that is quite a fair question. One must take the reliability of one’s source into consideration. One cannot do nothing, however, because the source is unreliable. One must work on the reliability of that source, and that is what my colleagues are doing. We shall make it a reliable source. I have great faith in South Africa’s capabilities. In five years’ time I may no longer be here—he may be standing here. [Interjections.] That hon member, however, will remain a nominated member; he will never get a constituency. [Interjections.] Then he will admit, from this podium, that my colleagues and I were correct about Cahora Bassa.

I want to tell the hon member for Witbank that one should at least keep pace with the changes in Parliament. Eskom is no longer the responsibility of this department—it is now the responsibility of the Minister of Administration and Privatisation. It is two years now since I severed my ties with Eskom. I would have liked to react to many of the aspects he raised, but unfortunately I would perhaps furnish the incorrect information. There is one thing I am certain of, however, and that is that his statement about the D tariff for farmers does not seem to be correct. I have examined the tariffs, and that statement about a sudden increase seems unacceptable to me. I think it is based on incorrect information and is merely a story being spread with a view to the coming election. I want to state that it is not true, because I collaborated in determining that tariff and know what the relevant arguments are. The hon member should examine the tariff structure. Then he will see what the position is.

The hon member for Stilfontein did very good work as chairman of our joint committee, and I thank him for that, and also for his friendly co-operation. I wish him everything of the best for the future.

I am sorry I cannot react to the hon member for Springfield, because the question of decentralisation is not a matter that falls under the jurisdiction of my department. Unfortunately I am not equipped to react to this.

I want to thank the hon member for Boksburg sincerely for his co-operation, particularly at the engineering level. I think the hon the Deputy Minister has commented very clearly on the questions the hon member raised. I also want to thank the hon member for Langlaagte. He apologised for his absence.

I agree with the hon member for Alra Park. A wonderful thing happened here this afternoon. Everyone was shouting for the South African Government to deregulate. The fact remains, however, that deregulation is going to create new problems. If we think that deregulation is not going to create new problems, we are living in a fool’s paradise. Now the hon member for Yeoville comes along, and because, for some or other reason, this is creating problems for his people or his associates, he criticises deregulation. We must accept that it is going to create problems. We must therefore solve the problems and not stop deregulating. We must do so meaningfully. We must do it with a sense of responsibility. If problems are created, we must solve those problems and not suddenly throw the principle of deregulation overboard or criticise it. I am glad the hon member for Alra Park spoke about these regulations that placed restrictions on people wanting to enter the market, and I agree with him wholeheartedly. I think the necessary legislation has already been drawn up and will come before Parliament in the near future.

I now come to the hon member for Carletonville. I shall provide him with an answer to the St Helena affair. I cannot, however, do so off the cuff. My department will inform him about where we stand and what is going to happen. I think the hon member is somewhat emotional about the fact that we are now issuing certificates of competence to people of colour. I do not think the hon member’s statistics are correct. We have all the figures. He is exaggerating somewhat. There is no question of excessive training, and a scant percentage of people of colour are being trained at present. I think that the optimum number of Blacks with blasting certificates is in the vicinity of 11% to 12%. The figure is extrapolated over a year from information we have gathered over a period of five months.

The hon member referred to dust in mines. That is a valid point. We discussed that with the Government Mining Engineer yesterday. We are investigating the question of dust in mines as a result of the production process. We are devoting attention to the matter and will certainly be able to solve the problem in the future. I have no doubt about that. To say, however, that we can solely make use of Whites to run the South African mining industry is quite wrong. [Interjections.] I think the hon member should know better than that.

The hon member ought to know that we are shifting the economy from mineral production to industrial production, and a more highly skilled class of labour is needed in the sphere of industrial production than in that of mineral production because one has a different type of labour situation there. The White level of expertise that we consequently want will ultimately shift across to industrial production. That is where we are going to need them in the future, because one cannot go on building the economic future of South Africa solely on the mining industry. To tell the truth, for our economic prosperity we have, for too long now, depended upon the mining industry, totally neglecting industrial development. I agree with the hon member for Yeoville that we shall have to give attention to that. I have just heard that I have only three minutes left, but there are several hon members who did not speak; I shall simply have to take their time too.

I want to link up with what the hon member for Yeoville said. We have finished discussing industrial matters, but I do want to link up with what he said. Firstly I again want to invite him to make his accusation about our not doing anything about import substitution and the promotion of exports. I want to invite him to come to us. We will show him a picture which will persuade him, once he has seen it, never to make such statements again.

I think it was an irresponsible statement. Once more it was simply a political statement made with a view to the election. That is all it is—as if they have all the wisdom about inward industrialisation. They talk about it, but nothing is done. An enormous amount is being done, however. We have just made an announcement about the whole question of the television industry. There is also the motor industry, the textile industry, the clothing industry and the footwear industry. Those are announcements that were made during the past few months. Is that hon member a Rip van Winkel who does not know what is going on in the industrial sector of the country?

We could mention a whole series of them, but I want to make a few statements. To a certain extent I want to link up with his criticism of investment. I think there are a few things we should guard against. In industrial development we have learnt the lesson that one does not blast away at an industrial development strategy with a shotgun. One must take each industrial sector per se and develop a strategy for that sector specifically. One cannot mine gold in the same way one mines coal. It simply cannot be done. That is why one should implement precisely the same strategy in regard to industry.

If we look at the growth in consumer spending, we see that it is possible to distinguish three aspects. Firstly, consumer spending as a result of increased earnings which are not in line with increased productivity is dangerous to the country’s economy. Consumer spending that results from higher earnings must also be linked to higher productivity; otherwise we are restricting our competitive capabilities abroad and destroying our export potential.

Consumer spending on the basis of credit is even more dangerous, because one is spending today what one will be earning tomorrow. What are the consequences? There are a few consequences, one being demands for higher wages.

Let me come, however, to the third aspect of consumer spending, consumer spending as a result of the creation of greater prosperity. That is what we are looking for in South Africa. We want the people in South Africa to create greater prosperity, and if increased consumer spending is the result of wealth and prosperity, we want to encourage it in South Africa.

Having said that, there is only one thing left. Our growth must therefore result from increased production capacity, increased imports and import substitution. There are, however, shortterm problems involved, because although there is short-term development, one has to import capital goods and at the same time, while the undertakings are in operation, also import the products. Consequently there is a short-term balance of payments problem, but in the long term there is job creation and the creation of wealth. If we do not create wealth in South Africa, then surely we have no economic future. If we want to create wealth in South Africa, we must invest.

Therefore, to say categorically that this is not the time to invest, is wrong. I am saying that this is the time to invest, but it should be done selectively. One must invest in those industries that can enhance South Africa’s export potential. If hon members were to examine the policy structure we announced for industry, they would see that that was precisely what our aim was. One must invest in niche-industries that can enhance both our import-substitution potential and our export potential or merely our export potential. My department and I say the time has come to invest in that field. We have restrictions. The hon the Deputy Minister referred to them. We have certain restrictions when it comes to obtaining foreign capital.

If we look at the announcements made my Sanlam, we see that there are, in fact, bodies in South Africa with credit status. Sanlam has announced that over the next four years or so, I think, it wants to spend R2 000 million. That is the kind of investment we need to create production capacity in South Africa.

I just want to make one final remark. We asked for a study by the IDC into the expansion of production potential in South Africa. What is our problem in regard to sanctions at present? For every product manufactured in South Africa at present, a market has already been found. The criticism against us at the moment is that people who want to buy from us tell us that they have been in the country for so many days, but have found nothing to buy because we have already sold everything that we are manufacturing. Our production capacity is reaching saturation point. If, therefore we do not want to invest in these production sectors now, we are going to stagnate. Our economy will stagnate within the next three years or so. We cannot afford to have that happen and must therefore invest.

The IDC made the following calculation. If we want to maintain a reasonable growth rate in South Africa, our production capacity will have to increase by approximately 8% per annum. Last year it increased by between 6% and 7%, but with all the strategies we have developed, we intend to increase it by 8% this year. If we cannot do so, we shall not be able to maintain a reasonable growth rate in South Africa.

My sincere thanks for this opportunity I have had to participate in the debate.

Order! I want to thank the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology, on behalf of this House, for always being so pleasant, courteous and friendly. We appreciate it. I think it is probably because he is a Free Stater and, what is more, comes from Heilbron. We wish him and his family everything of the best.

Mr Chairman, I wish to congratulate the hon the Minister, the Director-General and the Chief Directorate: Civil Aviation on their achievements during the past year. It was a year during which there was growth, during which there were improvements to amenities and security services at airports, and during which the aim of the Chief Directorate: Civil Aviation, namely the orderly promotion of civil aviation and the creation and managing of airports, was successfully implemented. The annual report testifies to this.

Various hon members voiced their concern about the many deaths and road accidents and the chairman of the joint committee, the hon member for Primrose, requested the hon the Minister to investigate the high incidence of road deaths.

Approximately 10 000 people died during the past year in nearly 400 000 road accidents. Various hon members have referred to the role of the NRSC, mostly in a positive light. There was one hon opposition member who expressed misgivings about the activities of the NRSC, but I wish to associate myself with those hon members who had praise for the activities of the NRSC.

The role played by the NRSC in the combating of road deaths and collisions, is seldom appreciated. I agree with the hon member for Primrose that the hon the Minister must investigate the high accident rate on our roads. However, I want to suggest that they should also learn from the directorate of civil aviation about ways in which accidents can be prevented as well as about the training of their pilots and the airworthiness of their aircraft. I am serious when I ask that the hon the Minister, through the Director-General of Transport, should involve transport experts such as Messrs Claasen, Smit, Van Zyl, Huck-well and Booyse of the Chief Directorate: Civil Aviation and Dr Dreyer of the NRSC in its investigation.

Let us consider what is done by civil aviation that could contribute to their low accident and fatality rate. However, allow me firstly to tell hon members that I do not claim to be an expert. I want to share my ideas with hon members after having listened to several hon members and having had the privilege of studying the annual reports of the NRSC and the Department of Transport.

In order to give perspective to the statistics that are available with respect to collisions and casualties, I want to mention that during the period under review 114 South African registered aircraft were involved in accidents; that 173 people died in 10 of the collisions; that the 159 people who died in the Helderberg tragedy are included in the 173; that there were 268 382 aircraft movements, namely take-offs and landings, at the State airports and that at the same time there were 132 146 aircraft movements at Lanseria airport; that in March 1988 4 303 aircraft were registered in the RSA; that 6 994 valid flight crew licences were issued on 31 March 1987; that 95 persons took the senior trade pilot licence examination and that only 22 passed; that 342 persons took the examination in instrument grading and only 31 passed; that 34 persons took the flight instructors examination and only 8 passed; that 10 persons took the flight engineers examination and that only 1 passed. One hundred and seventy-six candidates took the flight navigator’s examination and 78 passed. At present there are 117 approved posts for air traffic controllers and 22 vacancies.

With this information, gained from the very neat and complete annual report of the Department of Transport, as background I want to indicate to hon members—and this is my own opinion—why there are so many collisions with accompanying casualties. The air traffic controllers are thoroughly trained and are under one authority. The pilots are also well trained and comply with all the health requirements, are responsible and those who do not comply with the examination requirements, do not pass. There is no bribery of officials. There are also no unlicensed pilots because every pilot must renew his or her licence annually. Do hon members know of anyone who could not succeed in obtaining a driver’s licence, or even, if necessary a false driver’s licence?

The pilot’s competence as well as his intellectual abilities are tested. The mechanic who repairs aircraft is licensed to repair a specific aircraft, as well as specific components. The emphasis falls on the quality of the repairs and not on the periodic inspection or testing of the aircraft.

Any person—he does not necessarily have to be a mechanic—can repair the brakes of a vehicle. The vehicle’s brakes are only tested every six months if it is a public passenger or commercial vehicle. Otherwise the brakes are only tested when the vehicle gets a new owner. However, it is an offence to make a sewerage connection to a mainline pipe within a municipal area or to work on the electrical wiring of a residence!

The factory that builds the aircraft, prescribes when certain repairs or adjustments have to be made. It is entered in a register that is strictly controlled by Civil Aviation. I know that it will be naive to think that the same standards can be applied in the road transport system, but there are a few things that can be done immediately to decrease the carnage on our roads. Decrease the speed on the country’s throughways. Combine the traffic police under one authority and increase their training standards. Enforce the carrying of driver’s licences. Let the NRSC co-ordinate and standardise all the training. Let the NRSC take responsibility for the training of all drivers of vehicles.

I am of the opinion that every individual has certain limitations with regard to competence. The vehicle, depending on the make and type, also has speed limitations. The average permissible speed on freeways should not exceed the limitations of the average driver and the vehicle that he drives. The competence, skill or standard of training—one can call it what you like—and the make and condition of the vehicle with which the average motorist travels on the country’s freeways, requires that the speed limit be decreased from 120km/h to 90km/h.

I also feel perturbed when local authorities, where the CP is in power, frustrate trained traffic officers by ordering them to ensure that people of colour walk through the parks but do not sit on the benches. [Interjections ]

There are a few minutes left. With respect to civil aviation, I wish to ask the CP a few questions. Hon members will be given the opportunity to reply. The CP must inform us whether there are going to be international airports in the Boere-staat.

That is a poor question. You know that we are not in favour of a Boerestaat. Do not talk rubbish!

There are 9 international airports in the Republic. How many of them are going to be in the Boerestaat?

Go and ask the AWB!

Are people of colour going to be allowed on the aircraft in the Boerestaat? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, deregulation and privatisation of the SATS are welcomed and cannot be over-emphasised. Privatisation of commuter transport in particular has to be addressed in the proper perspective. At this stage the SATS cannot completely hand over passenger transport to the private sector. While it encourages a free enterprise system, a measure of control and responsibility must prevail.

Countries like Britain and the United States of America have experienced and are still experiencing problems. Privatisation in these countries has not been a complete success, and yet these are developed countries with great stability and a common identity, unlike South Africa with its Third World conditions and inherent problems.

How much more difficult it would be to operate a free enterprise system in South Africa without the involvement of the SATS. Transport is the lifeline of any country’s economy and the SATS play a key role in our economic growth.

While the object of deregulation is to prevent the State from having to subsidise commuter transport, the State cannot withdraw itself completely. It has a responsibility to the people. The South African population is one of the largest users of public transport. That is understandable, because the majority are low wage earners who cannot afford their own transport or any other means of transport except those that are highly subsidised. We are talking about bus passengers and rail commuters. In addition they live considerable distances away from their working places. It takes long hours to travel those many kilometres. The agony of travelling alone is taxing. However, they enjoy the privilege of cheap transport subsidised by the State, as well as controlled fares.

I am afraid that if the SATS abandons its responsibility to these impoverished people, an explosive situation may develop and these people may be subject to ever-increasing fares and exploitation by the private sector. With these ever-increasing passenger fares, fuel price increases and toll road charges, the poor commuter will feel the strain on and the erosion of the pay that he takes home.

We need these people to keep the economic wheel turning. If they become frustrated they will despair and that will result in many actions. Hon members have heard of the burning and stoning of buses, rioting and striking. This occurs because the people cannot cope with the increase in fares. The Government must continue to subsidise commuters in order to keep fares reasonable.

I would like to mention briefly that at Chatsworth, Phoenix and Merebank in Durban, bus transport was carried on by private enterprise. The poor bus owners had to make ends meet. Now that the kombi-taxis are in operation they face fierce competition. It is all right during the peak periods because then they transport a full load of passengers but during the lean periods during the day they have to run a bus from point to point at tremendous cost. We have a problem. The people are becoming frustrated and they are annoyed with the bus service. Sometimes it takes anything up to two hours to travel about 15 km because the bus drivers have to go slowly, looking for passengers to cover the costs.

I would suggest that the hon the Minister should seriously look into subsidising these small operators because they are providing a very essential service. I do not see any reason why a big corporation should be subsidised when the small fellows doing the same job cannot be considered for some kind of concession. Any kind of concession would do, as long as his operation becomes viable and, most important of all, he satisfies the ordinary worker.

Kombi-taxis have become fashionable but although they provide a quick and efficient service they are not very convenient when it comes to getting in and out, the speed at which they travel and accidents. Comfort and security are not afforded by kombi-taxis to the same extent that they are provided by trains and buses. It is far safer to travel by train or bus than by kombi-taxi. Although it provides an efficient and quick service it does not solve the problem.

We have to win back the masses of people for train and bus travel, more so as I see that fuel price increases are going to cause the cost of travelling by car to become very exorbitant. If fuel prices are going to keep increasing at the rate they are increasing now, I am afraid the poor commuter will hardly have anything of his wage left to take home. He will have to spend all his money on fares.

I can go on to the road quality systems and discuss the working of the NITRR and give them some advice, but unfortunately time does not permit me to do so. However, I shall take that matter up some other time. I make these few recommendations to the hon the Minister and I trust he will consider them.

Mr Chairman, 6 September 1989 will go down in the history of South Africa as the day when the NP got to the end of its road. [Interjections.] The beginning of the end for the NP will be 6 September 1989. The real alternatives of that day will be between the policies of the CP and the policies of the DP. There is no room in between for a muddle in the middle. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister replied to the speech that I had made in regard to the fuel levy. In this I had said originally that the money had been stolen by the Government but I was then ruled out of order on that. I then said that it had been misappropriated by the Government. The hon the Minister sought to prove that I was wrong. However, I was quite right.

In the year that we are considering—that is 1987-88—the National Road Fund was paid R836 million from a fuel levy. Now that levy on the price of fuel was specifically passed by this Parliament in order for it to be put into the National Road Fund. That was the reason why Parliament passed that levy.

It was increased substantially and then subsequently the hon the State President said that no longer would that money go into the National Road Fund but straight to the Treasury instead. My estimate would be that in 1988-89 the inflow to the Treasury from this fund which was specifically provided for national roads would be of the order of R1 billion. [Interjections.] Is it any wonder then that I should say that the money has been misappropriated by this Government? It was originally appropriated by this Parliament for use in the National Road Fund but it is now going directly to the Treasury. That is the fact of the matter and there can be no denying that fact.

Secondly I asked the hon the Minister several questions in relation to Kings Parking and the operating expenses they were charging on toll roads which had increased dramatically. As yet I have had no answer.

The subsequent point that I want to make is that the Department of Transport is an excellent indicator of the growth of the bureaucracy in South Africa. We know that the Department of Transport is responsible for the subsidised vehicles that go to the various administrations. I want to read out some figures from the report that we were given the other day. The number of vehicles subsidised by the Administration: House of Assembly rose from 375 to 499 in two years. Those subsidised by the Administration: House of Delegates rose from 72 to 113 and those of the Administration: House of Representatives from 99 to 183 which is very nearly double the number. For the Department of Development Aid it rose from 105 to 200.

Finally, if one looks at the total of subsidised vehicles of all the departments it has risen in the past two years from 1 883 to 2 399. That is over 500 which means an increase of very nearly 30% in two years. That is the real growth in subsidised vehicles. In my view this demonstrates a very real growth in the bureaucracy for which we as taxpayers are having to pay. The reason why we do not have the money for the roads is because we have to pay for all the extra bureaucracy caused by the tricameral system of Parliament.

However, it is not only caused by that. If one looks at the Department of Transport itself, in the year in question the growth in that department was 299 members of staff. They now have no fewer than 3 511 staff members.

We are in an era of deregulation, or rather, we appear to be in an era of deregulation. Surely deregulation means that there are fewer regulations which the Government has to administer. If the Government has to administer less regulations one therefore needs less staff, not more! Deregulation is therefore not happening to the extent that it should. The only real proof of deregulation within the Department of Transport will be when we reach a situation where the number of staff of the department starts dropping and does not continue to rise. Only then will the taxpayers of South Africa start to look slightly more happy about things.

The next subject I want to touch on is airport security. Airport security has been tightened up tremendously, but I am concerned about it. In every airport that I have been to, entrances and exits, from airport buildings in particular, are restricted. Where provision is made for half a dozen entrance and exit doors, only one is now allowed to be used because of security checks. What happens in the case of an emergency? Are those doors automatically opened or will the whole crowd of people have to get out through one door? What happens if there is a fire or a bomb scare? Can those doors be opened automatically? If they cannot be opened automatically, we are causing a fire hazard of the greatest possible nature.

It stands to reason that if there is any panic people will try to get out of that building as fast as possible. As far as I can see, at the moment those doors are closed and there is no way in which one can open them. Somebody will have to be able to hit a panic button somewhere to open those doors automatically.

Finally, in the minute I have left, I want to talk about Port Elizabeth’s airport. The airport in Port Elizabeth, a wonderful city, has the misfortune to be called the H F Verwoerd Airport.

[Inaudible.]

Now we all know that the Verwoerdian era is long past. We all know that the NP has, in fact, moved away from the Verwoerdian policies of apartheid. The policies that that former hon Prime Minister introduced, are now over and done with. I ask the hon the Minister not to allow the airport in Port Elizabeth to remain named after a man whose policies have been totally rejected by everyone in South Africa, with the exception of a small and unimportant grouping. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, first of all I want to say to the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central that I have also queried the figures he read out here. Those figures he quoted on the House of Representatives, the House of Assembly and the House of Delegates, include the allowance for the subsidised cars we drive.

Secondly, I would like to say to the hon member that he was praising the CP a few minutes ago and he was saying that it would be a fight between the CP and the DP in the coming election.

That was not praise, I assure you!

However, I think he was wrong. I think the fight will be between the DP and the NP. We shall find an outcome there—I think the CP support has dropped tremendously after the Boksburg-Carletonville issue.

I want to speak about transport and concentrate on taxis. Yesterday the hon member for Bos-mont said there were 59 000 illegal taxis and 45 000 legal taxis in this country. The taxi industry has become a cause for concern in our community. The taxis that are operating today are not the kind of taxis we knew. The taxis we knew, one used to get into and one arrived safely at one’s destination without having to worry. Today taxis have become a hazard on the roads, as a result of a total lack of control over such taxis.

This morning as I was coming into town, I witnessed a traffic inspector stopping a taxi. Before he knew where he was, there were five other taxis around him. It almost ended in a fight. That happens because there is nobody to keep a firm hand on the taxi associations or the taxi-owners.

If one reads through the past week’s newspapers, in nearly every paper there is an article on a fight among taxi-owners. Deregulation is supposed to do away with pirate taxis. I do not see deregulation doing away with pirate taxis. It will create many more pirate taxis.

The reason for this is that one has to have a quality control system on one’s vehicles. If that particular person has his licence withdrawn and he is making his living out of taxis, he is going to go back to pirate taxis.

I am sure that the pirate taxi, too, is here to stay. I do not think we are going to get rid of it that quickly or easily. Those people bought that vehicle for a reason, and they will continue with it. It is because there was no control. If one looks at the bus system, the bus has to have a certain number of windows, a certain number of seats and a certain amount of standing room. It also has to be a certain height and one has to have a certain amount of foot space between the seats. In the kombis this is not required.

In the past I always used to defend the kombi-taxi, and I shall continue to do so, but we must face the reality, namely the problems they are causing. We shall have to find some solution to these problems and ensure that these taxis operate in a decent way. In the morning, if one tries to travel on any road, especially in the Johannesburg area—someone complained about the Cape area yesterday; but let him go to Johannesburg and see what it is like there because it is much worse; there are far more problems with taxis out there, including the pirate taxis …

Do they also drive right over you there?

Yes, I will come back to Vereeniging just now! In Vereeniging we really have a big problem.

Where is Vereeniging?

That is where the hon member lives, or rather, used to live. [Interjections.]

†In a place like Vereeniging, where the local authorities have taken it upon themselves to decide where, how and when taxis should ride, this is not fair on the taxis either. I was reading through a document that was given to me by Mr Cluver of the department on what should be done in respect of taxis. The taxi route must not be changed in such a way that the passenger suffers. Now, in Vereeniging it has been done that way. The taxi now has to follow a completely new route. He is not supposed to travel through the centre of Vereeniging. When I telephoned the town clerk, he told me it was a decision by the council that no Black taxi should travel through the town.

This is not acceptable. This is not a CP town. That person travelling in that vehicle has got to go into that city for one reason or another. He contributes towards the growth of that city, whether he goes to work in that area or goes there to shop. He contributes towards the income and upkeep of that area, and I do not see why he should be restricted from passing through certain areas.

Look at the bus lanes we have in certain areas, particularly in Johannesburg. The kombi-taxi does exactly the same work as the bus, but cannot travel in the bus lane. We must come to our senses one day and try and work out something in regard to this kombi-taxi. We need the bus companies as well; I am not saying we do not need them. However, due to the lack of control of the taxis, our bus companies are in the process of disintegrating. One of these days we will have no bus companies left. Look at the bus company Putco; it is on the way out because there is no-one that can take a close look at these taxis.

Licences are being issued left, right and centre, but the funniest thing is that the licences are being issued to people who have taxis. These people are now sitting with between nine and twelve licences, and this is causing a problem. They go out and sell those licences for R11 000 to R12 000—they do not even use it. Therefore abolishing that licensing board would be a good thing. Yesterday the hon member for Bishop Lavis, Mr Isaacs, said this would not be so.

[Inaudible.]

However, I think it will be a good thing, because there have been many irregularities as far as that board is concerned. If a person goes to a certain consultant he will get a licence. If one does not approach that particular consultant, one will not get a licence to operate a taxi. This is totally unacceptable. If a person wants to apply for a taxi licence and he cannot get it, then so be it, but he must not get it because he approached a certain consultant or because he went to speak to the officials before or after the meeting. If the person is serious about his application, he must be allowed to run a taxi.

I was under the impression that deregulation was going to separate the men from the boys, but it has not done that. I was under the impression that the person who is running a taxi for the pleasure of running a taxi would disappear, but he is not disappearing and more and more of them are coming onto the market. The bus operator who has put a lot more money into his company than the person running a taxi, is losing out.

Some people might ask why we are worried about the bus companies, which are all White-owned bus companies anyway. However, we are not looking at colour here. We are looking at a person who is running a business and providing a service to the community.

If one looks at our roads in the morning, one sees that they cannot cope with the traffic because of the number of vehicles on the road. Imagine how many taxis we will have to have for each bus. Therefore I am not saying that we must get rid of the taxis—we need them too.

However, we have got to find some method to enable the taxi and the bus to run at a profit. If we do not do that one of those two is going to fall out, and taxis are already ending up in gang fights. They are starting to gang up and one of these days they are going to gang up against the bus companies. Then we will have had it. If they succeed with the bus companies the SATS will be next and then there will be no passengers riding on the trains either.

The hon the Minister might say that the passenger has the right to choose what he wants to ride. Yes, he does have the choice, but if we are going to limit his choice, then we are not succeeding in anything. We have got to have this as wide open as possible. If another two or three bus companies or more taxis want to come in, that will be fine. The individual must have the choice. He must decide what he wants to ride, but we have got to make it safe for him. Each life on the roads is important and the number of accidents caused by the taxi groups is unbelievable.

There was an article in The Star in Johannesburg some weeks ago in which they said taxis were causing havoc in central Johannesburg. It is not only the taxis. The planning of an area is part of it. One has got to plan an area to accommodate those taxis. We have got to plan an area to accommodate buses, even if it means having a special bus route or a special taxi route at certain hours to accommodate them and to ensure the safety of the people riding in those vehicles.

The on and off-loading places have also become a bit of a problem. It is said that a taxi driver can load passengers on and off the way a private vehicle can. However, this has caused a lot of traffic jams and a lot of ill-feeling among people.

There were quite a few programmes about Black taxis in the mornings and the unfair part about those programmes was that not one of the Black taxi-owners was asked to comment. They were all people in the street—unfortunately we have to use colour here—and they were all White people who were asked what they thought about the Black taxis and how they saw the Black minibus taxis. Everybody was negative.

We can all become negative and say that we do not want them and that we do not need them, but they are here to stay. We will have to find ways and means of making them work and of running a system so that we can all be safe on the roads. As I said the taxis have become a hazard. If people see a taxi behind them they pull off the road and decide not to go further because of the way they drive.

One of our hon members was travelling from Potchefstroom to the airport recently. He was travelling at 120 kilometres per hour when one of the minibus taxis passed him and in a few seconds it was gone. Hon members can imagine what speed it was travelling at.

There must be some way of controlling it. There must be some way the department could get in touch with the manufacturers of those vehicles to have them governed to a certain speed. Speeding and the overloading of those vehicles are the problems. The Rustenburg and Pietersburg roads are well-known for those accidents. If one looks at these accidents they were all because of speeding. It is unreal how those vehicles speed with the amount of people they carry. Most of them are supposed to be 15-seaters but one finds 20 to 25 passengers in them.

The traffic inspectors also cause problems. We have seen this over and over again. All the taxi driver does when he stops is to take out his book and to hand it to the traffic inspector. The traffic inspector opens the book, looks at it and tells him to go on. In that book is money; the money falls into the traffic inspector’s vehicle and the chap just carries on.

This is because we do not have traffic policemen who can see to this problem in our area. Our traffic system is divided into little bits and pieces all over the country. Each province and municipality has its own way of running a traffic department. Somehow or other we must get a traffic department for the whole of South Africa, so that the rule which applies in the Cape, also applies in the Transvaal and elsewhere. If not, we are heading for disaster.

Mr Chairman, one often speaks in a debate just to make use of the time.

†It is however very obvious that the hon member for Klipspruit West knows what he is talking about.

*I must tell him, however, that I am very frightened of taxis now.

Today I want to discuss a matter about which I think I know something. I went home this weekend especially to inform myself about the Huguenot Tunnel. To hon members who do not know what it is: It is a tunnel through Du Toitskloof which links the Berg River to the Bree River. When this tunnel was opened to traffic on 18 March 1988, 11 kilometre of very steep, narrow and dangerous road of the Du Toitskloof Pass was cut out and replaced by a safe and very effective road runnel which may be regarded as an exceptional engineering achievement. It is an outstanding piece of work. It is a splendid piece of work. I do not think there is a tunnel anywhere more beautiful than this Huguenot Tunnel. One drives comfortably through the tunnel. Even the access from Paarl has been completed.

The problem lies on the other side, however, on the Worcester side. Everyone is always very eager to get to Worcester because Worcester is the most beautiful town in the Cape Province; even the most beautiful in the country, including the Transvaal. Beautiful people live there and there is delicious wine of course. I want to tell hon members how heavy the traffic through the tunnel is at present. On average 5 000 vehicles use the tunnel daily and the highest number recorded on a single day was 15 000 vehicles.

There were approximately 152 collisions annually on the old road, including four fatalities and 41 injured. Over the past year there have been three collisions in the tunnel, including two fatalities and one injury. On the other hand we are therefore also having fewer funerals.

The route through the tunnel decreases the distance between the Western Cape and the interior by 11 kilometres. The saving in fuel for the 1,7 million vehicles which pass through it annually is calculated at at least 3,3 million litres valued at almost R3 million. Approximately R10 million was collected in toll fees and, after running costs had been recovered, there was a surplus of almost R4 million. It therefore seems like a good business to me.

Florence is the first wine cellar which one encounters after one has passed through the tunnel. If one does not know that it is a wine cellar, one can smell it. The road from the tunnel to Florence is now being built at a cost of R51,3 million. It is disturbing, however, that cutting out the remaining part of the old Du Toitskloof Pass has apparently been postponed indefinitely. According to my information, this project does not even appear on the programme of the National Road Fund for the year owing to a shortage of funds.

The cost of building this 12 kilometre portion is estimated at R50 million, which is an appreciable amount. It therefore costs approximately R4 million per kilometre. If one takes into account, however, that this portion is still a narrow, twisting road where accidents and traffic jams behind slow-moving vehicles still occur regularly, it is a pity that full advantage cannot be taken of this exceptional project.

Now comes my great request. I request the hon the Minister seriously to consider advancing the date for the building of the new road between the tunnel and Florence so that it may be commissioned as soon as possible. Would the hon the Minister have the scrap of road between the tunnel and Florence built as soon as possible, please. I want to put forward for consideration— and I think the hon the Minister should listen to me now—that toll fees be levied on this stretch of road too if this would expedite its building. Is the hon the Minister listening?

I also want to propose that the possibility be examined whether the building of an alternative road is necessary. The reason for this is that there is unfortunately no additional space available to fulfil this requirement. There is a deep river to the left below and on the other side is the massive mountain, where even a baboon walks with difficulty. The proposed establishment of a holiday resort at the exit to the tunnel has been abandoned. This delay no longer applies now. This is where the baboons sit sunning themselves on the road.

South Africa has many, good roads but they are expensive roads. In building roads, planning is done in such a way that it will cause the least possible disruption to the owner of the land involved and the public.

Which party do the baboons belong to?

I appeal to the contractors and the farmers to try to co-operate to avoid unnecessary distress. Once the road has been completed, we shall all benefit from it. Work should be carried out in such a way that the least possible number of vineyards are jeopardised. Land is very scarce where the road is being built in the vicinity of Rawsonville and Goudini. They tell me, and it is true, that when there is a funeral, the vine is lifted, the grave dug, the funeral held and the vine planted again—and then it grows again. That is an indication of the scarcity of land there. We have been promised that most of the access roads will be open again in November 1989, ready for the grape pressing season, because during this season one should not interfere with the farmer. As has already been said—and it has been repeated here frequently today—road building is an expensive process and the money must be found somewhere.

Tolling the tunnel is no problem to us. In fact, this way of obtaining money for road building by paying toll fees for the use of the roads is accepted worldwide and it is just as good or just as bad as levies on petrol, sales tax or any other tax. Funds have to be obtained for the building of new roads. If this does not happen, we shall be in a pretty pickle with our growing population, which travels increasingly regardless of the petrol price and is destroying existing roads.

Money can be obtained through the toll system, in which the private sector advances the money to the owner, which is actually the public. Toll contractors build the roads according to standards set by the State and maintain them in accordance with strict standards. Once the contractual period has expired, the roads revert to the State. During the preceding period, the State invests no money in the fund for the building or maintenance of the road. In this way the bottle-neck between Worcester and the Huguenot Tunnel could be eliminated in a very short time.

My thanks to the hon the Minister and the Department of Transport for our tunnel. This must be the best investment that has ever been made in South Africa. Worcester is flourishing at the moment. I want to thank Mr Meyer for this. He is a man after my own heart. He does not struggle when he has to do something. If something has to be done, he does it. I invite the hon the Minister, all those involved and all those present here to the opening of this road for which we shall really not wait long after this speech.

Mr Chairman, after the serious and convincing appeal made by the hon member for Worcester, he will see how seriously I am taking him. I am entering the debate immediately to reply to the questions he put.

I quite agree with the hon member that Worcester is not an unattractive place at all. I should also like there to be a good road to Worcester. I want to warn the hon member, however, that there are other people who think their towns are better than Worcester. I was in one of the lifts the other morning with one of the messengers. When I asked him how things were going, he replied, “Sir, in the Cape everything is wonderful!” Consequently there are other people who think that where they live is even better than Worcester.

I thank the hon member for the contribution he made here. Actually it is easy to listen to representations if an hon member also presents a possible solution. The hon member told me today that the road should be built, since it would make the investment made in Du Toitskloof even more valuable. He also said that if there was no money, toll financing would have to be found.

I think the hon members proposal was a practical one. I want to give him the assurance that I shall instruct the department to consider this with an expert eye to see whether it is possible. I do not think it is impossible, because it is not a longdistance road. It will cost quite a lot of money, but not too much in terms of road building. I think that financially this by means of toll must be investigated. Quite possibly we will be able to afford it.

The hon member referred to another problem which is also addressed by the legislation, viz that there must be an alternative road. I want to tell the hon member that I receive more and more representations for the building of toll roads where alternative roads do not exist. The hon member’s request is only one example of that. It would be completely impractical to build a toll road if one had an alternative. The hon member also pointed out knowledgeably that there was no room for an alternative road. In other words it will be necessary to amend the Act so that provision can be made for exceptions.

I think an alternative road is necessary to prevent people from being exploited. There is an exception to every rule, however, and the hon member for Worcester has just quoted a good example of such an exception. I thank the hon member for his contribution. We shall certainly consider it. I shall ensure that the department keeps the hon member informed.

I want to convey my sincere thanks to the hon member for Primrose, the chairman of the joint committee, for the contribution he made yesterday. He made a contribution befitting a chairman of a responsible joint committee of Parliament. It was a balanced speech which dealt with a whole number of aspects. The hon member requested in particular that sufficient funds be made available to make the requirements of the new Road Traffic Act as well as aspects with regard to the deregulation of transport known to the public. I want to assure the hon member that the department will definitely give specific attention to that aspect. We believe that South Africa in general will benefit if the public is well informed on this. It will also promote road safety. We shall definitely do that.

The hon member also referred to the large amounts of money that are needed to maintain and improve our road system. It is important, therefore, that we do not become emotional when we consider road financing. We must approach this from a practical point of view. When necessary, I must ask the public to put their hands in their pockets. Then we shall be able to ensure that the good road system the hon member referred to remains good in future. I thank the hon member for his participation in this debate.

I also want to thank the hon member for Klipspruit West for the poster he gave me. He can go back to his voters and especially to the artist who drew it up, and say that although we do not agree on all the points, we do agree on one thing, viz that we all like a bit of humour. I thank them for that. [Interjections.]

I want to thank that hon member for what he said here yesterday and also for what has emerged in discussions between us, viz that he supports the principle of toll. Toll and the privatisation of toll make money available which would not be available otherwise. In this way the companies’ share capital, which would not be available otherwise, is made available. This enables the public to have a financial share in the open market of the stock exchange themselves and that generates profit. The hon member for Roodepoort is shaking his head about profit.

I am nodding my head. It generates profit.

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon member that we at least agree on one point. It generates profit.

For whom?

It provides revenue for the Government and profit for the private sector.

There you have it!

That is precisely what an economy is built on. The countries that are financially and economically strong today, are places where free enterprise flourishes. That is the case because they make profits. Surely hon members can see that the socialists and the communists are coming to see how one structures an economy on the basis of free enterprise. The hon member for Roodepoort is laughing. That hon member has no understanding whatsoever of the basics necessary for the growth and prosperity of a country.

You would be surprised.

Profit is not a dirty word. One needs it, because it generates further profit, and that is what the hon member does not understand.

You create monolopies that make a profit.

Order!

I merely want to ask the hon member for Klipspruit West to spend some time explaining this to the hon member for Roodepoort.

I shall take him to Boksburg.

The hon member must take him to Boksburg and explain it to him there.

Order! There is too much of a running commentary.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Klipspruit West also referred to the question of law enforcement with regard to the taxi services. That is indeed a problem. It is not administered by this department, but it is nonetheless a problem. The Police and the provincial administrations are doing their best, and as the hon member can see from the annual report, some 7 500 prosecutions took place during the year.

However, it is not enough just to prosecute people. One must also prevent accidents and the misuse of our roads. We are continuously researching the situation to see what can be done. I can give the hon member the assurance that this problem is being given our ongoing attention.

The hon member also referred to the phasing out of bus services. I do not agree with him as I think there will always be room for bus services as well. The three modes of public transport, namely the train, the taxi and the bus, each have their proper place. I do think, however, that it will be necessary for our bus services to adapt to the new situation which they have to face. I think that they are doing that.

Our roads cannot cope with our traffic. The hon member referred to the peak-hour traffic. That is unfortunately the position. On the other hand, however, it is not at all possible to build roads to cope with peak-hour traffic problems. That is not possible in South Africa or anywhere else in the world. We must nevertheless try to keep our roads and the traffic control on our roads at the highest possible standard. I thank the hon member for his contribution.

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central made some points yesterday to which I have not yet replied. He referred to the deficit in toll financing. I am sure he knows that a toll road is in certain respects similar to a mining operation where one has a loss situation at the beginning and a profit at the end. The toll roads project was planned to go this way, in the same way that one plans a mining operation. One knows that one will get losses in the beginning but profits in the end. That is exactly the case with toll roads.

Not when you are in full production. The mines make a profit then.

The profits can be made earlier if one has a rich mine. Of course one can go into a profit situation at an earlier stage. In the case of toll roads it is estimated that one can have a profit situation after about seven to ten years.

The hon member also referred to Kings Parking Ltd and he wanted to know whether tenders were called for. The answer is yes. He also wanted to know who the directors were. That is public knowledge. The hon member can go to the Registrar of Financial Institutions if he wants to know that. I think one pays a small fee and then one gets the necessary information. I will not allow the names of directors to be mentioned across the floor here—I do not think it is necessary.

The hon member also referred to the 192 000 permits that were issued. Of these 125 000 were in fact temporary permits.

I think the hon member made a scandalous remark. He used toll roads and levies in referring to the meritorious service of state employees and the amount spent in rewarding them for their meritorious service. I think the hon member owes the public servants an apology …

There are too many of them!

… for not appreciating the services that they render to the State.

I talked specifically about the growth.

No, the hon member referred to R17 million used to reward meritorious service.

I referred to the watches.

Yes, that is right. I think that reveals a sheer lack of argument. That is why the hon member reverts to arguments like this. I think I can only expect that kind of remark from an hon member who insinuates that his leader is actually guilty of or associates himself with highway robbery.

That is not true and you know it!

Order! The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central must withdraw that remark.

I withdraw it, Mr Chairman.

Yesterday the hon member agreed with his bench-mate. The hon member for Camperdown said the same thing and the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central agreed with that.

What the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central cannot understand, as far as levies are concerned, is that there is a changed Government policy. He may not like it, but that is a fact. The policy has been changed and levies go into central Treasury.

As far as airport security is concerned, the hon member can rest assured that the aspect he mentioned is properly addressed by the authorities.

*The hon member for Roodepoort asked me 17 questions about the activities of the NRSC. The similarity of these questions to questions put to the Advocate-General by an unknown person is striking. As everyone has probably read in the Press, the Advocate-General submitted an informal enquiry to the chairman of the NRSC on the basis of a complaint to which he must supply answers. The questions to which he must supply answers correspond with the questions the hon member put to me here yesterday.

As soon as the provisional enquiry has been concluded, the Advocate-General will inform me and Parliament on his findings. I also want to remind the hon member of the open invitation addressed to any person, including him, by the NRSC to make inputs with regard to the activities of that organisation.

I am not aware of any such invitation.

Then I address this invitation to the hon member. He is welcome to go there, and they will inform him in that regard.

The hon member made another contribution which in my opinion was of a higher standard, when he requested that we reconsider the national service system with regard to traffic officers. We are attending to that request, and I think it was a good proposal.

†The hon member for Bishop Lavis asked what would be the substitute for the local transport boards. The substitute will be the licensing authorities. Those authorities will do that work and law enforcement will also be done by the existing authorities.

The hon member also asked for more facilities for municipalities. I can assure the hon member that from our department’s side we press this issue as much as we possibly can.

The hon member also referred to progress with regard to the Passenger Transport Bill. After thorough investigation into various methods pertinent to passenger transport, the Bill has been finalised and submitted to the State law advisers. That is where we stand at the moment. The hon member also referred to a few cases of theft. That is a matter for the SAA. I shall refer that to them and ask them to supply the hon member with a proper answer to his query.

The hon member Mr Thaver congratulated the department. I thank him for his kind words of appreciation. He referred to the misuse of transport. I want to stress that this is now the function of the provincial administrations.

The hon member also referred to the low-yield interest rates on investments. I want to inform him that the low-yield investments were made long ago. They are investments covering several years. However, our present policy is to invest for periods no longer than 24 months. I thank the hon member for his contribution.

*I should like to thank the hon the Deputy Minister once again for his contribution in the department, and for lightening my burden. He spoke about a number of matters, including the safety of small vessels. The hon the Deputy Minister is correct; any rules we lay down in that connection must be such that the industry can discipline itself and that we shall have only a co-ordinating function in that connection. I thank him for his contribution.

†The hon member Mr Abram asked to be excused since he could not be here this afternoon. He referred to the stickers on luggage. We shall certainly take that up with the Police and rectify the matter if at all possible. He also referred to applications and the time taken to reissue them. I can assure the hon member that in view of deregulation, the problem in respect of late applications and the reissuing of applications will of course fall away.

I have already referred to the prosecution in respect of 7 500 minibuses— the hon member for Bosmont also referred to this. The hon member asked that subsidisation also be instituted in respect of kombi-taxis. That has not so far been considered. The problem is that they do not run scheduled routes, and for that reason they do not really qualify for subsidies.

*The hon member for East London North, who also apologised for not being able to be here, referred to the overloading of heavy vehicles. I can tell the hon member that heavy vehicles make up a very large section of the backbone of transport in South Africa. We are also concerned about this, however; the damage caused to roads by overloaded vehicles amounted to as much as R130 million in 1987. We are planning a countrywide network of 28 control plazas where this overloading will be tested and where we will then be able to deal with it properly. The project is technically viable and the applicable equipment and necessary knowledge are available. I thank the hon member for his contribution.

I referred to the hon member for Boksburg yesterday. I want to thank the hon member for De Aar most sincerely for his contribution, especially his reference to our road network and the importance of keeping these roads of ours in a good condition. We no longer have those privileged funds; that is policy. We must accept that; it is a fact that we shall have to live with in future. It is important that transport competes on the same level as all the other sectors in our national economy. There will be no point in having the most beautiful roads in the world if we have no houses, schools, hospitals or police to control our townships.

It is a problem for the department no longer to have a privileged fund. This causes headaches, but at the same time we realise that there are other aspects that have to receive our attention in the national interest. I thank the hon member for his contribution in this connection.

The hon member for Vredendal referred to one of our hon colleagues— the hon member for Hanover Park—who lost a daughter as a result of the recklessness of an unlicensed person this past week. I should also like to express the sympathy of this Committee with that family. Once again this is a case of education, of training and of implementing the law. The NRSC will not stop doing that, because it is and must be an ongoing process. I thank the hon member for his contribution.

†The hon member for Mooi River referred to certain clauses in the Tolcon agreement. It was very negative in nature and if he will indicate in writing what those clauses are, I will of course give attention to it.

*The hon member for Opkoms also referred to an important matter, viz the accommodation of pedestrians. Pedestrians are a very important element in the accidents that take place. I want to assure the hon member that we and the local authorities regularly pay attention to this matter, and we do our very best with the available funds—also with regard to level crossings.

I want to tell the hon member, however—and he knows this—that people often do not make use of the crossings that are erected at great expense. Once again this is a question of education.

The hon member has taken part in Road Safety Council projects and I thank him for that. I am also pleased that he expressed some encouragement and appreciation with regard to the NRSC. Personally I think that that council does excellent work, and I should very much like to thank them for that on this occasion.

It is common knowledge that the number of deaths on our roads has shown a constant decrease over the past few years as a result of the NRSC’s work. It is true that accidents in respect of minibuses have increased, and the matter is receiving our urgent attention.

†The hon member for Camperdown asked why we also have to pay licensing fees if we have toll roads. If all the lengths of toll roads in this country—including the suggested privatised roads—are all put together, it only amounts to about 2% of our tarred roads. In other words the extra money is needed.

The licensing fees go to the provincial administrators and they are doing a tremendous job in keeping our roads in good repair and also in building new roads. It is therefore a source of income that we cannot do without.

Mr Chairman, I thank you at this stage. There are other hon members who must take part and I will have another opportunity to speak.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to participate in this debate. I want to apologise to the hon the Minister for the fact that I am not going to react immediately to what he said, because I should like to talk about problems the commercial fishermen in Struisbaai have with the ski-boat owners.

As the hon the Minister himself knows, since 1 November 1984 no additional line-fish boats have been registered and licensed. Consequently there has been no increase in the number of licensed line-fish boats. Something I am not happy about, however, as the hon the Minister himself knows, is that the number of ski-boat owners increases every year. I am grateful to the hon the Deputy Minister for having dealt with the question of the licensing of ski-boat owners. From October to March there is an increase in ski-boat owners who catch fish. And it is on this occasion that we have an influx, as a result of the large numbers of fish that are caught.

However, we have now found that the ski-boat owners cut across and break the lines of the commercial fishing boats. Last year we had so many problems that one of the ski-boat owners had to get out his revolver to shoot one of the commercial fishermen. I now want to make a request to the marine division of the Department of Transport Affairs which is responsible for the safety of the fishing boats at sea. I should like to ask whether they could not introduce a limiting distance for the operation of ski-boats, so that I will not have this problem with the commercial fishermen again in the future.

I should like to quote to hon members what the chairman of BOASA had to say about bus transport subsidies in the March edition of Bus. I quote:

He goes further:

I agree wholeheartedly with him. As long as there are group areas, one can rest assured that bus transport subsidies will remain. This is as a result of the NP’s policy that my community must travel great distances from where they live on the Cape Flats. In order to get them to their places of work, the subsidy has to be paid. South Africa simply does not have the infrastructure to replace the bus industry by other means of transport. Here, too, I agree fully with him. Inadequate road networks, longer travelling times, with a consequent decrease in productivity and a considerably higher accident rate, are only a few of the problems the Government will be confronted with if this does happen.

There are certain priorities that should not be negotiable for the Government. An effective bus service, run on sound business principles, certainly falls into this category. I should now like to come to the question of kombi-taxis. According to Die Burger of 7 March 1989, under the headline “Minibus-taxi’s gedy in vryemarks-telsel”, at the moment there are more than 10 000 taxis operating in the Peninsula, 2 200 of which are legal, the others being illegal. The spokesman of the largest taxi-body in the Peninsula, the Western Province Black Taxi Association, Mr Windsor Skweyiya, said in Die Burger of 8 March that there would certainly have to be stricter control in order to overcome the detrimental influence of so-called pirate taxis on the industry. The taxis have no permits, no roadworthy certificates and no public vehicle licences and they change their routes at will. In terms of his permit the legal taxi-owner is compelled to serve only his own specific route.

I should like to tell the hon the Minister how the kombi-taxi people pay the drivers who work for them. They are paid according to the income they generate. One can just imagine what happens. The hon member for Vredendal has already mentioned this. If the hon the Minister is re-elected after the election and is still Minister of Transport Affairs, I shall invite him to accompany us one morning in a drive from Laboria Park to Parliament. He will then realise that kombi-taxis can never replace the bus service. It is impossible. As many as 8 000 illegal taxis without roadworthy certificates are a danger to all of us. I should like the hon the Minister to get experts to find a solution to this problem. I do not agree that one can allow kombi-taxis to operate freely. I agree with the WPKA spokesman that the hon the Minister should introduce some form of control over these people.

I quote the article in Die Burger of 8 March 1989 under the headline “Taxi-bedryf soos losgelate wilde dier”:

Too few by far! I quote further—

Mr Smit goes on to say, and I quote:

I agree wholeheartedly with this. The hon the Minister’s road system will never be able to control these mini-taxis. Illegal taxis cannot even be controlled at present. What would happen if they were legalised? I agree with Mr Smit that our roads would not be able to withstand an increase in the number of Black taxis. We should rather look to the bus industry as a solution to the problem of transporting passengers.

Mr Chairman, unfortunately I have very little time in this debate. Consequently I shall speak quickly.

In the first place I should like to congratulate the hon the Minister on the apartheid signs in his constituency. Photographs were taken of the SAR bus stop in Loeriesfontein on 11 April 1989. On the photographs one can see the handsome large signs at the toilets. There are separate facilities for White and Coloured women. I want to congratulate the hon the Minister sincerely on these signs. We did not know he was an admirer of Boksburg, but we wish him everything of the best. [Interjections.] If he wants to change the signs, we merely want to ask him to do so before the election on 6 September.

I should like to refer to the speech made by the hon member for Boksburg yesterday. He referred to me among others and said, and I quote:

My speech appears in the Hansard of 30 August 1988, cols 16030 to 16040. My speech does not contain anything like what the hon member claims. The hon member launched a personal attack on the hon member for Middelburg yesterday with regard to his attendance of committee meetings. Unfortunately one sees that this trend started as early as 30 August 1988. It is being continued this year and consequently I must have certain rectifications put on record today.

In the speech of the hon member for Primrose on 30 August 1988, he and the hon member for Boksburg stated the following untruths. The hon member for Primrose said, and I quote from Hansard of 30 August 1988, col 16040:

That is a glaring untruth that was proclaimed by the hon member for Primrose at that time. He went on to say, and I quote once again from Hansard of 30 August 1988, col 16042:

The above ostensibly took place at a meeting of the committee. I not only think this is a blatant untruth—which it is—but also that it is a crude insult to the intelligence of the people who sat listening to his speech. He went on, and I quote from col 16042:

That is yet another blatant untruth! In his speech on the same day the hon member for Boksburg said, and I quote from col 16055:

Etcetera, etcetera. Once again this was a blatant attack on the person of the hon member for Middelburg. This attack was devoid of all truth. He then asked, and I quote from col 16056:

If this hon member had made that allegation outside Parliament, I guarantee him that he would have had a libel action against him the next day, because that is what it was. It is one of the most shameless charges that can be made against an MP or against anyone of any standing in society, and at this stage I want to know from the hon member whether he does not want to consider repeating it outside Parliament. He also said …

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon member?

I do not have time to reply to questions. When the chairman pointed out to him that he was going a bit far, he said the following, and I quote from col 16056:

Once again this was a blatant untruth. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, great hopes were raised that the 1987-88 budget vote of this Ministry would herald the much-vaunted transition to a new-look transport service. It was hoped that the hon the Minister of Transport would bring a fresh approach to bear on this commitment. We were led to believe that there were going to be quite fundamental changes in policy even when these were contrary to established Government principles.

However, what do we have instead? Either the brakes have been put on or the wheels have come off. Criticism of the department’s tentative move towards the privatisation of roads is legend. Road travel in South Africa is becoming an expensive exercise. I am referring here to the two fuel hikes that the consumers have had to endure this year alone at a time when there was no world-wide increase in the price of oil. [Interjections.] The motorist is already burdened with fuel levies, taxes and vehicle licences, as well as increases in parking rentals. This has been compounded by the news yesterday that there is a possibility of yet another increase in the price of fuel.

As if this were not enough, toll charges are also levied. The backlash against toll roads has been very strong and we welcome the news that the hon the Minister is considering reducing the toll levies. My own view is that he should put a stop to this reckless means of raising revenue to pay for roads, until a more just system is offered. In the light of this, I appeal to him to appoint a committee to investigate and report on a scheme to extend and improve the national highway system without hitting the motorist in the pocket.

Another matter that has been on the back burner for some time is the second access road to Chatsworth. As everyone knows, this road is incapable of handling the volume of traffic, which periodically comes to a standstill. An alternative route was recommended to overcome the problem. The former Minister of Transport gave an undertaking to the House of Delegates that the Government would finance the cheaper of the alternative routes proposed. That was a few years ago. What has happened since?

In practice the Government agrees that a second road has to be built. We must therefore not pretend to be deciding which would be more viable. The proposals set forth by the various parties and, in particular, the majority of the people who would be affected by the development, indicate that the choice is not only cheaper but also more viable, because it would be vital for the economic future of that part of the city. What is more, the argument for this alternative route is flexible to accommodate the sensitivity of the beautiful countryside of the Stainbank Nature Reserve.

We are not unmindful of the need to have green lands such as this one in the inner city limits and the peri-urban areas. As much as the environmentalists cannot accept the derelict site of industries, we also appreciate the beautiful landscape and rolling hills that the reserve offers. The only difference here is that one is not establishing power stations or industries. All that is happening is that there is a road traversing the area of green land.

My appeal to the hon the Minister is to let the breach heal in relations between the local residents and the authorities, both at local and government levels. The relationship between the people and the Government has reached a point where the residents are saying that they are treated with a mixture of a dictatorial attitude and contempt.

Mr Chairman, it seems to me as if the hon the Minister and other people have discovered a new economy, namely that one builds toll roads, and then they make money. There is still a lot of place in the Karoo. One simply has to build a lot of toll roads there, and then we can become a very rich country.

†The more the hon the Minister says about toll roads and road funding in general, the more the issue becomes clouded and the more it seems that the Government has no consistent philosophy on the matter. Let us look at some of the inconsistencies of the past two days.

The hon the Minister said yesterday that the dedication of a levy on fuels, specifically for road construction and maintenance, is no longer Government policy. Then he said in the same speech that we had to find other ways of financing and he came to the wonderful conclusion that we must use a “user-pay” mechanism such as tolls.

What utter inconsistency in logic! There is no better user allocation than a fuel levy because every time one uses the road one has to put in fuel …

Think a little further!

I will get to that. The more one uses the road, the more one pays. The heavier one’s vehicle, the more fuel one uses and the more one pays. By means of traffic counts one can know almost precisely on which roads the money was generated and how much was contributed to the general kitty. It also takes no genius to understand that the more highly trafficked roads subsidise the less highly trafficked roads. These are the roads—and they in fact include most of the N-routes—on which there is general agreement by most of the experts that they can never be viable toll roads.

To therefore suggest that other users would have to pay for roads which they never use—if one builds these fancy highly-trafficked toll roads—is complete hogwash. The only roads that have been identified as commercially viable are those very highly-trafficked roads, and we all agree that they pay most of the fuel levy anyway.

What the Government does is to say on the one hand that it takes away the fuel levy as a dedicated road fund. They are thereby taking away the most direct user system and replacing it by toll.

On what is toll based? It is not based on the road that one uses but on the road that one actually does not use. The Government says that it is part of the saving for not using the other road. Not even that is a user charge. [Interjections.] It is true!

[Inaudible.]

Toll roads are more expensive than the same roads without the toll. That is without question the case. The difference lies in the tollgate, the process of collection, etc. [Interjections.] Let us not argue about that.

I now come to the other set of inconsistencies and I quote from p 9 of the report as follows:

The hon the Minister repeated that in his statement. In his speech yesterday he said that they will review the situation in Mooi River and that they will look into utilising the toll money only for maintenance and upgrading, thereby making a reduction possible.

By making this statement, he completely contradicts the other statement which is in the programme and which says that toll roads cannot be commercially viable unless some of the existing roads are added to it. What the hon the Minister therefore actually said in his statement yesterday was that there would be no viable toll roads because they were going to tax …

Now you are completely confused.

Yes, that is as “deurmekaar” as the hon the Minister suggests. [Interjections.] It is therefore totally inconsistent to say that one will now reduce the Mooi River toll to pay only for maintenance—this the hon the Minister said—and at the same time say that the only way of making it commercially viable is to toll existing roads too. It is totally inconsistent.

In the end, therefore, toll roads are the roads with the greatest volume of traffic and are seen as a sitting duck. It is not the market that allocated them. When a member of the public puts his money in that little toll box, he must just remember that it is to pay another few rand towards the same Government he probably voted for at the ballot box. [Interjections.]

I want to touch on some other issues. The hon the Minister says that it is not right to say that the Government has stolen the money in the fuel fund. Can the hon the Minister then tell us where that money is? The balance sheet of the 1987-88 financial year says that the accumulated fund amounted to R556 million. In that same year the income from the fuel levy was R822 million. R270 million of that amount was an excess of income over expenditure and that went into the accumulated fund. The accumulated fund is therefore now in the black hole of the hon the Minister of Finance.

Let us look at this year’s budget. This year the fuel levy will probably be R1 000 million. The whole department’s budget for this year is about R878 million. Therefore, the whole of this hon Minister’s budget is covered by the fuel levy. This covers everything, from civil aviation to many other aspects. All I am trying to illustrate is that the hon the Minister must not come with the story of “user charges”, because if one wants to talk about user charges one does not take the most direct user charge and dump it into general funds.

The other aspect often referred to is the so-called market principle to justify toll roads. Firstly, market forces rely on choice and competition. Transport is not a primary need. It is the result of some other market forces. One does not simply drive around. One drives people and goods around.

Simple transport economics dictate which is the cheapest mode of transport. Therefore, within a 200 km radius of multiple origins and destinations, road transportation is the best form of transport. One cannot do it in any other way, such as by ship, train, balloon or whatever. Once that has been decided, the shortest route between the two points in question is obviously the best route to take. It is the most economical route. If someone then slaps a toll on it and says that the market dictated that the toll be imposed, it is again quite convoluted logic.

I do not seem to be the only one that thinks that things should be different.

*If we look at page 78 of the department’s annual report, we see that the future of road funding and so on is mentioned. It is stated:

This makes one wonder what has happened to the market. What reason other than the market could there possibly be? After all, it was stated that the market would dictate it.

In the next paragraph we read the following:

What is therefore stated here, is that the existing market cannot really be satisfied. We therefore have to find other ways. Since my university days I have maintained that simply using projections is in fact the wrong way to determine which transport system to use. It is an accepted fact throughout the world that transport is the one thing in respect of which the market is not the best indicator. That is why mass transport systems throughout the world, as regard tariffs, have to be heavily subsidised in order that the total economy of that modus may be determined. However, I see that we now have another method, and that is that we must use a supply-oriented approach. I would not call that market-related. “Supply-oriented” means that one implements the transport system which is economically the best. This is offered to the people even by means of, for example, the subsidisation of tariffs on mass systems. In that way one can, in fact, establish the best transport system. In the end it will result in the best economy.

The whole story about toll roads is simply to make a hole in the kitty and nothing else.

Mr Chairman, I do not have much time and I want to mention a few matters. I want to ask the hon the Minister when the building of the West Coast road from Velddrif to the junction on the N7 at the bridge is going to commence. I also want to ask who is going to build that road. Is it going to be given out to a private contractor by tender or will it be built by the roads department of the provincial administration? There are certain reasons for my asking. A road building contractor will of course be able to build that road much faster; the provincial administration’s road department on the other hand will not be able to work so fast, not because they cannot build a good road but because they also have other commitments as regards the maintenance and repair of existing provincial roads.

I also want to request the hon the Minister to inform us about the present position of the National Transport Commission’s five-year road building programme, and whether there are sufficient funds to complete the programme according to plan.

It is noticeable that our national roads are deteriorating slowly but surely. I often travel on our roads, especially the N7, to my constituency. Recently I was in Natal where I participated in the Extended Committee on Provincial Affairs of Natal. I had to travel by road from Durban to Pietermaritzburg—on the N3 of course. Although it is not a very old road, I found that this road had already started showing signs of deterioration. There may be various reasons for this, but I noticed that that road carries an extremely large volume of heavy vehicles, and I asked myself how many of those heavy vehicles operate within the legal freight limit.

This brings me once again to the legal enforcement of our road rules as far as the correct weight of the freight is concerned. Research by the National Institute for Transport and Road Research of the CSIR indicated that of 84% of all heavy vehicles carrying the correct lawful load, only 42% do damage to our main roads. Only 16% of all heavy vehicles which are carrying an unlawful load are responsible for 57% of the damage to our roads.

I said earlier that I am concerned about the way in which law enforcement takes place. That is why I want to suggest that offenders among owners of heavy vehicles be punished heavily. Before I continue, I wish to quote from the brochure “Skade aan paaie deur oorbelasde swaar voertuie”:

It is unfair that while the majority of our operators ensure that they stay within the Act, the rest only seem to be interested in the profit they can make and do not pay any attention to the damage they do to our roads.

I have a minute left and I want to take this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister and his department most sincerely for the good co-operation we receive during our joint committee meetings. We ask many questions, we ask for information and the department is always prepared and willing to provide us with the necessary information at short notice.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to follow the hon member for Vreden-dal. It is clear that he has done his homework. In a year when we expect our airports once again to show the figures of the golden years 1983 and 1984, I am honoured to take part in this debate on transport affairs.

Last year no less than 10 million passengers made use of our airports. Approximately 20 000 people are employed to ensure that the 10 million passengers travel to their destinations in comfort. Provision is made for their safety, their needs and their literature.

The service is becoming more fully staffed and non-racial. Approximately 33% of the public servants are Brown or Black people and in the private sector the percentage is somewhat higher. Approximately 14% of the Whites work in a supervisory capacity and approximately 10% of the people of colour are also supervisors.

†The airports are leaders in the privatisation stakes and many of their functions are in commercial hands. The restaurants are open for tender every 10 years and the food supplied on the aeroplanes is provided by the private sector. The parking at each airport has been privatised and the cleaning of the grounds is also handled by the private sector.

Perishable cargo is indeed also handled very successfully by the private sector. Everyone is aware of the many car-hire firms which operate inside the buildings and of the fine service which they render. The bars and coffee rooms are also handled on a concession basis, ensuring good service for the customers and an income for the State. There are hairdressers, florists, duty-free shops, bookshops, advertising services and coinoperated photographic machines. Tenders have also very recently been invited for clothing shops and chemists.

Long-range planners are already examining the possibility of all our airports being handled by private enterprise. This would be a logical step if the airways themselves were taken over by the private sector. There is nothing in the present steps being taken to improve the services at our airports that would impede the eventual takeover of the airports by private enterprise.

One of the most important aspects to be considered in such a move would be security. It is a problem that must be solved before any move is made in that direction. The State employees are also of the highest standard anywhere in the world, which is testified to by the infinitesimally small percentage of people harmed at the airports. As far as I can remember there has never been an attempt at a hijacking or an act of terrorism at a domestic airport in South Africa.

A bomb exploded at D F Malan!

I think the hon member is right and I must apologise.

I am pleased to say that the air traffic controllers are being relieved of some of the stress. It is pleasing to see that they have got 17 new cadets who should be qualified in three years time. It is also pleasing to see that a few of the people who left because they were disgruntled, are back in our employ.

At the moment a commission is examining the desirability of further deregulation of the legislation so that private companies can compete more effectively with the State-owned services.

Our hon Minister and hon Deputy Minister have paid personal attention to the cleanliness and the tidiness of their airports. The hon the Deputy Minister recently went on a tour of our major airports to make suggestions and to see what could be improved. When one knows how many airports we have in this country, one realises that he undertook quite a job.

However, he did get around. Many of the suggestions he made are being put into effect and those places are better. The moment we get enough money to improve the airports I think they will compare with airports anywhere in the world.

The really exciting news from the department is that the plans for the R50 million upgrading of Jan Smuts Airport are virtually complete and tenders should be in by the end of the year. They should start with the project by the beginning of next year.

The most dramatic improvement that will take place is that we will begin to look like the international airports such as Charles de Gaulle and Heathrow, with portable bridges from the top storey of the aeroplanes. The system will bring us up to date with Heathrow Airport and the modern airports of the world. Our tunnels will actually be better than theirs, because they will be two-storey tunnels, so that people leaving the plane and people boarding the plane will be separated and the one group will not have to wait for the other. The bridges will operate from the first floor, and will allow the normal airport traffic to carry on unhampered on the ground. Passengers will not have to walk across the tarmac, nor will they have to wait in buses to be ferried to the main building. They will not have to suffer inclement weather, rain or wind.

The luggage will also leave the planes more quickly than now and there will be five escalator belts delivering the luggage, instead of the three that we have at present. Two banks of bigger lifts will be built at Jan Smuts and they will carry the passengers and the luggage down to the closed areas where the parking is at the moment. Like Charles de Gaulle Airport, we will have the moving steps, or whatever one wants to call it, along the ground so that people can put their luggage on it and do not have to walk such long distances.

The restaurant will be improved and upgraded so that the airport will have a better image when one enters. At the moment, in overseas and domestic flights, there are altogether 60 checkout points.

How much money did you say?

R50 million. The 60 checkout points will be increased to 78 checkout points. The control area for passports and people entering the country will be bigger and the people will be processed far more quickly than they are now. This will, I think, also give a much better impression of South Africa as they arrive. The shops will be brought together in one area and the Springbok Lounge will be upgraded.

These improvements have to be carried out while 5 000 000 passengers per year move in and out of the buildings. It will cause them inconvenience. We will have complaints, I am sure. However, for the long term, I believe it is something that must be done.

The improvements to our airports are not confined to Jan Smuts. The new S-band radar systems have been installed at Jan Smuts, Ben Schoeman, J B M Hertzog and D F Malan airports. New runway lights are to be installed at the Louis Botha Airport and H F Verwoerd Airport. An electrified fence has already been installed at D F Malan. The new customs building is being built at D F Malan and the new terminal buildings for the Pierre van Ryneveld Airport should be completed by 1991.

There are 270 licensed aerodromes in South Africa. The Government is determined to maintain acceptable standards at all of them. There are 53 helistops and heliports which are approved by the Government, 14 of which are public helistops. The rest are used by private companies for passengers and specialised services. An increasing number of hospitals have helistops on their premises for emergency embarkation and disembarkation of their patients.

The department took over full control of the search and rescue services from the South African Air Force in 1985. Since then it has been planned that Jan Smuts Airport will be in control of all inland emergencies and that centres will be established in Cape Town harbour and Durban harbour. There are 19 different stations established along the coastline under the aegis of the National Sea Rescue Institute, which is subsidised to the extent of R130 000 per year by this department. The search and rescue operation has also received the co-operation of South West Africa and the TBVC countries. With their co-operation, many search and rescue operations took place last year.

The technical part of the running of the airports is a subject on its own, but suffice it to say that is being handled satisfactorily.

I would like to thank Mr Ronnie Meyer and Mr Japie Smit and their staff for the brilliant work they do and for the insight into the present state of the airports that they have afforded us. With these people behind them, no wonder the hon the Minister and his Deputy Minister have such a high reputation in this country.

Mr Chairman, I am very grateful for the few extra minutes I am getting to complete the points I was dealing with earlier.

With reference to the comments made by the hon member for Boksburg with regard to my and the hon member for Middelburg’s motives in leaving a previous meeting of the Joint Committee on Transport, I should merely like to point out that the hon member for Primrose pointed out on 30 August 1988 in his speech in front of the hon member for Boksburg that the hon member for Middelburg had expressly made his excuses and indicated that he was going to the funeral of an old friend of his and that that was the reason for his absence.

In addition I want to tell the hon member for Boksburg that this meeting took place during the recess and, as the hon member should know, there were circumstances that necessitated my absence as well. During the recess one has certain arrangements, unlike during the Parliamentary session, which also concern one’s private life and in respect of which one cannot change much.

With regard to the inaccuracy concerning what really happened at this meeting on the following day and our leaving the meeting, I should like to read the CP press release of 3 August 1988. This is the correct rendition of what happened. I quote:

There is another matter which I should urgently like to draw to the attention of the hon the Minister. We were disturbed to hear the hon the Minister saying in reply to a question that the SADF had already spent more than R4 000 in toll. It is not clear whether or not the SA Police also pays toll. We hear that the SADF has even consulted a toll consortium concerning the arrangement of payment of toll by the SADF. We want to express our strongest opposition to the payment of toll by the SADF and/or the SA Police using taxpayers’ money. It is conceivable that this is also in conflict with certain legislation concerning the SADF and the SA Police.

An aspect which gives cause for grave concern is the large number of extra heavy vehicles which enter the country from our neighbouring states and damage our roads without their making any significant contribution to the maintenance of roads in the RSA. In addition it appears that during the past 12 months, 3 051 citizens of independent Black states and 12 of self-governing territories have been fined for traffic transgressions in the Brits magisterial district alone. Of these offenders, the traffic fines were collected in only 1 447 cases, whereas 1 616 offenders could not be traced. Reminders were sent out, but as we know the RSA courts do not issue warrants against offenders from these states because they live outside the jurisdiction of the RSA courts. We should like to ask what steps the Government is taking to combat this unacceptable situation with regard to, first of all, the damage of the roads, and secondly, the evasion of paying traffic fines.

In the last place I should like to refer to a new epidemic that seems to be taking root in South Africa, viz the war between taxi enterprises and taxi drivers, in the minibus industry in particular. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to thank all hon members who participated in the discussion of this Vote which is now coming to an end. The discussions have taken place in a very calm manner and judging by the matters raised here, things are going well. I shall only reply to the last few speakers, but of course it is not possible to reply to all particulars. However, hon members are welcome to come and see us in our offices to discuss any administrative or other matters with us.

I thank the hon member for Vredendal for the good wishes and words of appreciation he expressed to the department and the officials. I assure him that they also appreciate his behaviour towards the department. I also thank other hon members who expressed great appreciation to the department and the officials.

The hon member for Vredendal asked when the West Coast road was going to be built, and whether tenders would be invited. I want to tell the hon member that I am naturally in just as much of a hurry as he is to realise that possibility. We are still in the planning stage and there are certain problems in connection with the route which still have to be solved. However, if all goes well, we foresee that we may be able to start building in 1991.

The hon member referred to the five-year plan and asked whether we could keep up to date. The hon member knows that our funds have been cut quite a bit this year. Of course this will mean that what we could have done within the space of five years before, we will now have to do within six years. However, we have no problems continuing with these projects we have already announced.

The hon member for Vredendal and other hon members again referred to the overloading of trucks and the road damage which this causes. I want to give the hon member the assurance that this is a great source of concern to the department and the provincial administrations. We are giving constant attention to this. We will address that particular aspect very carefully under the new road control system, because we will have weigh-bridges at certain strategic places in the country. I thank the hon member for his participation.

I now come to the hon member for Greytown. He was really a bit confused when he put his case here. I gave the hon member copies of my speeches. Perhaps he should read them again, because then he will see everything he would like to see. Perhaps he should also read the newspapers, because the newspapers are not confused about what I said. However, I will tell hon members what the hon member for Greytown’s problem is. In more than one respect that hon member performed an egg-dance. However, I will only refer to the one aspect which is at issue here. This is the fact that the predecessor of that party they represent here, and even the one before that, supported toll roads in the joint committee. There they supported the principles of toll roads. [Interjections.]

We rejected the Bill in Parliament.

Yes, hon members of that party rejected it in Parliament, but they simply thought up something artificial they could do for political reasons. However, in the joint committee they supported it. They also supported privatisation in the joint committee. Now the hon member for Greytown has come here and tried to bring it into discredit after he had performed an egg-dance. That is his problem. He need only read my speeches. The hon member is now arguing constantly about the matter of fuel levies and everything we could have done with them. I have explained to hon members three times now that this is no longer the policy. I wonder whether the hon member cannot understand that.

[Inaudible.]

I shall give him a few more particulars with regard to the position in the rest of the world in a moment. [Interjections.]

He will not understand it. Let us leave now.

The hon member for Gena-dendal raised the problem of ski-boats which catch fish. [Interjections.]

Order! No, the hon members for Greytown and Primrose must stop their private conversation. The hon the Minister may proceed.

I want to tell the hon member for Genadendal that Sea Fisheries decided recently that ski-boat owners who catch fish must in future acquire a B-licence, which means that in terms of the Merchant Shipping Act they … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon members must abide by my ruling! The hon the Minister may proceed.

… must also comply with safety requirements.

The hon member referred to deregulation and the accident figure in respect of kombi-taxis. However, he first referred to the issue of the subsidising of bus services. I agree fully with him that although it has been set as an ideal that bus subsidies must be phased out, this is not feasible. As the hon member said, this is an ideal virtually everywhere in the world, but it is not feasible. However, I can tell the hon member that we must find ways of applying those subsidies in such a way that there is greater efficiency in the service we are financing. We are doing something about that.

The hon member referred to the deregulation of the transport market and made particular mention of the kombi-taxis. I myself also feel that total deregulation would be wrong. This could very easily lead to chaos. However, the quality system is not absolute deregulation, but regulation in a way which brings about freer entry into the economy, with the qualification that it must be done in an orderly fashion and that it must be a quality system.

I want to tell hon members who referred to kombi-taxis that we are inclined to refer to the negative side here, namely the problems they cause on our roads. That is correct, and the authorities are taking steps against this. However, they also make it possible for many thousands of people to earn a living, and for that reason it is not this department’s policy to remove them from the roads. It is this department’s policy—we are propagating this—to regulate them and to ensure a quality standard. I thank hon members for supporting this view of mine.

†The hon member for Moorcross referred in particular to the second access road in Chatsworth. He is very well-informed about the whole situation there. That particular piece of ground is a donation and there is a proviso in this deed of donation—it is registered in the Deeds Office—that that particular ground and property can only be used for roads with the consent of the trustees. I discussed it with the trustees and they are under no circumstances prepared to waive the conditions in order for a road to be built through the property. They are only prepared to make a concession on the side of the property.

However, anyone here who has walked through the parks of London will know how grateful people are, once almost everything is built up, when there are still open spaces left. In that sense I want to thank the gentleman who donated that property—today it is worth millions of rands—to the people of South Africa.

The question of the second access road is being discussed at the moment. The hon member may be aware that I am also having discussions with the administrative council on this issue. I thank the hon member for his contribution.

*The hon member for Roodepoort entered the debate twice more. He took photographs at Loeriesfontein and he went to a great deal of trouble to find a notice board he could photograph. It would seem to have given him a lot of pleasure to try to insult me by comparing me with Boksburg. [Interjections.]

I now want to tell the hon member something in clear language he can understand, namely that the difference between the NP and the CP is that we are in the process of eliminating these things he referred to. When they were still with us, we said discrimination was not acceptable and had to be eliminated. We make no secret of that, and we are doing so every day. However, those hon members are in the process of bringing it back. That is the difference between us. The hon member will therefore probably be able to find notice boards elsewhere, but we are gradually removing those notice boards in an orderly fashion. [Interjections.] That is the difference.

Mr Chairman, I should like to ask whether the hon the Minister is going to remove those specific notice boards in his constituency before 6 September.

Say yes!

Mr Chairman, I have already removed thousands of notice boards. It is not difficult for me to do this. The point is that I do not even know where there is a notice board, whether there is one, and whether the hon member is telling the truth. The policy of the NP is to eliminate discrimination, and the CP wants to bring it back. That is the point they must go and ponder on.

Order! It is not clear to me whether the elimination or otherwise of apartheid notice boards really falls within the ambit of this debate, but the hon Minister may proceed.

Thank you, Mr Chairman, I have now finished discussing this. [Interjections.]

The hon member gave a long explanation here which may not have been quite clear to other hon members of the Committee. He reminded me of the words of Shakespeare: “The lady doth protest too much.” I do not know what the hon member was trying to explain here, but he protested a great deal. I assume that was because he could not quite succeed with something. [Interjections.]

The hon member referred here to tolls which the Defence Force and the Police pay. This is a departmental arrangement which will definitely be looked into. The hon member also referred to trucks from neighbouring states which travel on our roads. This is one of the good reasons why we must have tolls, because those trucks can then also make a contribution.

However, I want to tell the hon member that our vehicles also travel on their roads. It is therefore a reciprocal matter. The hon member need not be so strict on the citizens of those countries. They also bring prosperity to us and we bring prosperity to them.

[Inaudible.]

There is therefore nothing wrong with that. If they obey the laws of this country we are satisfied. If they do not do so, they are prosecuted, as the hon member said. [Interjections.]

†I thank the hon member for Germiston for his contribution and his words of appreciation.

*The hon member referred to the possibility of privatisation of certain elements of our airports. I have already made an announcement on this. I also thank the hon member for dealing with the position of our air traffic controllers. I also thank him specifically for informing the Committee about the matter of the improvements we are going to effect at Jan Smuts Airport which will enable pedestrians to board aircraft without being exposed to the elements.

This department is again in a rather uncomfortable position in this debate in that the fuel price and the payment of the fuel price is of course being associated with tolls and the department is being taken to task about this. The department does not actually have a say as regards fuel prices. The Department of Transport does not decide on this.

It is the Cabinet which decides on this.

Fuel prices of different countries cannot actually be compared, because in any country one visits one will probably find that fuel prices are considerably higher than in South Africa, when the prices are worked out in rands. The prices are sometimes far higher. However, I submit that one cannot really compare them, because we know how the value of money differs in the different countries.

However, I think it is a very important and significant comparison, if one considers what part of the fuel price in different countries is really the basic price and what part is the levy. I think this is a very important indication of whether we are really so out of step with the rest of the world as regards our levy on fuel.

I have had the graphs of quite a number of countries drawn up. In actual fact the levy is less than the price in only three of those countries. Those three countries are the USA, Japan and the RSA. Only in these three countries is the levy part of the fuel price less than the actual price part.

In South Africa the tax part of the fuel price is 44% of the price and the actual price part is 56%. In Australia those two percentages are equal at 50%. In the USA the price part is 74% and the tax part is 26%. In New Zealand the price part is 44% and the tax part 56%. In Germany the price part is 38% and the levy is 62%. In Switzerland the price part is 41% and the levy 59%. In Spain the price part is 37% compared with the levy which is 63%. In Britain the price part is 33% and the tax part 67%. In Belgium the price part is 37% and the levy 63%. In the Netherlands the price part is 29% compared with the levy which is 71%. In France the price part is 25% compared with a levy of 75%. In Italy the price part is 22% and the levy 78%.

If we compare the position in South Africa with that in the rest of the world, we see that in this regard South Africa is actually in a very favourable position.

In conclusion I want to say that, as regards the provision of transport by air, land and water, the function of this department is to set about doing things to the optimum advantage of the consumer and the economy of South Africa. I think the White Paper on transport, which we have published, underlines and explains this specific aspect.