Mr Speaker, I believe everyone will agree that we are living through dramatic days. The national leader of the NP is receiving one perturbing message after another. [Interjections.] One by one his team-mates are announcing their retirement and resignation. [Interjections.]

Chicken run! [Interjections.]

The resignation of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning has struck the ship of that party a mortal blow on the starboard side. [Interjections.] That ship is going to sink. It is merely a question of time. [Interjections.]

It is not necessary to become so upset! [Interjections.]

What makes it so important is the fact that it is the chief architect of constitutional reform who is now abdicating. [Interjections.] It is the draughtsman himself who is now leaving the drawing board.

Why are you crying about it?

Before the great battle on 6 September this year one of the chief generals is retiring. He has left. He is not taking part in the battle. [Interjections.]

The fact of the matter is that the Government has no more real constitutional plans that can work. [Interjections.] We have known that for a long time. It is now filtering through to the ranks of the NP.

Where is your homeland?

The NP has no more plans, and those plans with which they do come forward are not acceptable, not even to their most radical allies.

What does Carel Boshoff have to say? [Interjections.]

The present Constitution cannot work to the satisfaction of everyone. It cannot. According to some…

Is partition going to work?

Separate development worked, and it will work. [Interjections.]

Where is it going to come from?

The voters are going to give us a mandate to apply it. [Interjections.] According to some…

[Inaudible.]

Mr Speaker, the hon Chief Whip need not be so angry at me now. I do not harbour any ill-feeling for him.

I merely put a question to you. [Interjections.]

Order! This is merely the first of a series of scrums in the game that is taking place. The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition may proceed.

Mr Speaker, according to some it was in fact—this is a serious matter—this Constitution which caused the revolution among the Black people. Now I am not quoting anyone on the White side; I am quoting a person who expressed this opinion as his observation and from his experience. I am quoting from When Beggars Die, the author of which was a certain Claassen. The quote is on page 410:

That was the observation! After all those members talk about a perception. This is not merely a perception; it is what was experienced on the radical side, which indicates that when the reforms were introduced and only the Whites, Coloureds and Indians were included, it caused the revolution to begin among the Black people. [Interjections.] These are the emotions at the one end of the spectrum.

The hon the Minister then wanted to obviate the revolution by means of further reforms. Blacks were also to be admitted to Parliament! They were also to be part of Parliament. This was the great announcement of last Friday. It was blown up by the Sunday newspapers as the great announcement. Then the hon the Minister got the shock of his life. The House of Representatives said that he had still not gone far enough. His reforms still fell short of their demands and their expectations. Consequently they negatived his Vote. That was a dramatic event! The reward for his negotiation politics, the reward for his consensus politics was a motion of no confidence. This is rejection! This is the fact of the matter.

What are they going to do to you?

What happened on the other side of the political arena? Last Friday’s speech about one Parliament and the dramatic reports about it in the Press travelled like a shock through the body of the NP and its more conservative supporters.

They are only a skeleton !

There are Nationalists who have up to now refused to believe that the NP wanted one Parliament for Whites, Coloureds, Indians and Blacks. They did not want to believe it. If they do not want to believe me, then it is being said by those 14 Nationalists who turned up at the CP office in Wolmaransstad last Monday and said that they were finished with the NP. [Interjections.]

And in Brits!

And in many other places!

I like a little liveliness!

The message we are receiving from the constituencies is that of shock at the realisation that the NP has now unequivocally announced that what the CP has been warning about all the time is coming. We know the hon the Minister has been hinting for a long time that such a step was coming. That is nothing new! It is not news to us! That is precisely the way we elucidated it to the voters. It means, according to that recipe, that Black people will ultimately have representation in the same Parliament, electoral colleges and joint committees.

However, they apparently still remembered what the present hon Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning had said in 1981 when he, as the then Minister of Internal Affairs, addressed the leader of the then Official Opposition. He told him (Hansard, 4 August 1981, col 118):

This was an assurance the hon the Minister gave people. It was unattainable and basing everything on that trust, “slegs vertroue dit is al”, they carried on. What is more, they may perhaps remember what the present hon national leader told the Tukkies only a few years ago, by way of a great reassurance. I quote:

[Interjections.] At that same university the hon the State President said that the same people who were at that stage governing South Africa and the Whites would also govern them in the new dispensation.

Last Sunday one Sunday newspaper proclaimed in banner headlines: “En nou: Een Parlement!” as if it were a dramatic announcement which would cause the entire political body to quiver. Since then the CP telephones have not stopped ringing, and I assume the same applies to the NP telephones, as people have been ’phoning in to express their indignation and shock. [Interjections.]

What do the events of the past week mean? It means that one cannot reconcile left-wing radicalism with sound ethnic nationalism. One cannot draw up a constitution which accommodates the advocates of full integration and the advocates of separate ethnic freedom without a conflict. One cannot! [Interjections.] The constitution which must cause power-sharing among various peoples or groups to succeed and must guarantee political freedom for a specific people, is visibly failing here. It is failing in full sight of everyone.

I am not a prophet, but I maintain that we have reached the end of a failed political intermezzo. [Interjections.] The voters are asking for progress along the tried and trusted road of separate freedom. [Interjections.]

The question now, however, is what the new hon national leader says. What does the new hon national leader say? Will he tell us categorically what he thinks? I am now quoting what he said in 1977. This is rather long ago for the NP, but he did say this. He said (Hansard, 26 January 1977, col 257):

Does he agree?

At that time you still stood for a Council of Cabinets and Cabinet Council! [Interjections.]

Does he agree? He then gave the assurance that it was not sharing of power. We believed him at the time because he was in a leadership position. We cannot… [Interjections.]

Then you were still in agreement with our philosophy!

I want to ask the hon the national leader whether he agrees that there should be only one Parliament for Whites, Coloureds, Indians, urban Blacks and the six non-independent national states. Does he agree there should be only one Parliament and that it should be a normal Parliament? [Interjections.] Can we assume that under his leadership—a very great responsibility rests on him—for example the electoral college for the State President is going to include representatives of all these groups and peoples, and as his hon colleague said, that equal weight is going to be given to all those groups, regardless of their size?

We on this side maintain—we get no reply to this—that such an electoral college, with equal weight for all the groups, regardless of their size, will consist of an overwhelming majority of non-Whites. If it has to be equal weight and there are to be only 13 Whites, there must be only 13 Coloureds, 13 Indians, 13 urban Blacks and 13 times 6 in regard to the representatives of the homelands. If hon members differ with me about these figures, they must indicate it. However, this is the logic of that statement, namely equal weight regardless of the size of the group. We maintain that if one pulls in the details of that picture, there are going to be 130 non-Whites as against the 13 White representatives in the electoral college for the State President.

Will you delineate the boundaries of your homeland?

That is a ratio of 91 Black people to 39 of the other or 13 Whites to 130 non-Whites. We want to know where we are wrong.

The colleague of the hon the national leader, the hon the Minister of Finance, said in England according to the Cape Times of 2 May:

He denied it!

Did he deny it? [Interjections.]

Of course! [Interjections.]

Very well, it is on record that he denied it, but in any event it is the same kind of language his colleague, the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, used earlier.

Mr Speaker, may I ask the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition a question? It is a very fair question.

No, I am presenting the argument. [Interjections.] After all, the hon members are in a corner now. They must give us a reply. The hon the Minister is nervous now. [Interjections.] Perhaps he did not say those precise words, but perhaps something that was so close to it that that was they understood him to mean. [Interjections.]

Earlier the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs had said that if one shared power with Blacks, it was inevitable that one would have a Black majority government in South Africa. [Interjections.] Does the hon the national leader repudiate that? [Interjections.] If the hon the national leader does not agree, how does he think it can be avoided? How does he think it can be avoided, particularly when he himself says, and I am quoting as the Citizen quoted him:

This “full participation” is going to be without discrimination within one political dispensation in a unitary state, or rather one state. [Interjections.] We know that “without domination” is the refrain.

It is the heart of the matter.

the hon the national leader has never been able to tell us how that domination was going to be eliminated. [Interjections.] We said his entire statement fell flat at that point, where they would have to take the important step, namely of electing a state president. If the hon the national leader wants to act fairly there, he will have to elect a Black state president or cause a Black state president to be elected.

If one understands full participation to mean representation in Parliament and in the government, equal value for the votes of Whites and non-Whites at the polls—equal value; otherwise it is discrimination—or equal weight to the votes, then numbers must be decisive. the hon the national leader cannot say that he is going to bluff them somewhere. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister of Information, Broadcasting and the Film Industry went further and he said the following on 11 March:

Consequently they are going to water down the future post of the hon the national leader to such an extent that it makes no difference what the skin colour of the incumbent will be. We want to ask the hon the national leader whether he agrees and whether he wants to say something about that structure.

The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning referred several times to certain laws that were stumbling blocks in the negotiation process, namely the Group Areas Act, the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act and the Population Registration Act. The hon the national leader must now tell me unequivocally whether he is going to eliminate these stumbling blocks and abolish these laws. He must make that clear to us.

We maintain that if the Group Areas Act and the Population Registration Act are abolished, there will be no basis for separate voters’ lists, separate representation or separate Houses in Parliament. If the hon the national leader abolishes separate voters’ lists, he is accepting the common voters’ rolls of the DP and one undivided Parliament with a Black majority. That is the absolute, elementary logic of the matter.

The hon the national leader once said:

The CP says that White domination over other peoples must go, but at the same time we say that we want a definite dispensation which will prevent any other people from dominating Whites. [Interjections.]

Where?

They want to know “where”? Is there a White area in South Africa? Is there an area today which belongs to the Whites? Of course. That is White fatherland, we say. [Interjections.] What we want to know from the hon the national leader is whether the Whites are still going to govern in any way at all. The hon the national leader has apparently reached consensus with the hon the leader of the LP. [Interjections.]

That is to say, the hon the national leader has reached consensus with the leader who moved a motion of no confidence in his colleague here on Wednesday.

I read in the Sunday Times of 9 April:

I quote further:

[Interjections.] Bearing in mind now the inexorable demands of the hon the leader of the LP—which are the release of Mandela; the abolition of these three Houses of Parliament; the abolition of all apartheid, including the Group Areas Act, the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act and the Population Registration Act; and the abolition of separate schools—we want to ask what consensus the hon the national leader of the NP has reached with the hon the leader of the LP.

When the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning made his dramatic announcement about one Parliament it was far from enough for the LP. They rejected that hon Minister because he did not go far enough, but the hon the leader of the LP has reached consensus with the hon the national leader of the NP, who amongst some still has the image of being a conservative! This is outrageous. In other words, despite the image of the hon the national leader of the NP that he will keep the conservatives in the NP, the hon the leader of the LP says to him: “He is much closer to me than the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.” The hon the leader of the LP says they do not have any time for him—they negatived his vote—but they will get along well with the present hon national leader of the NP, because he is much closer to the LP! [Interjections.]

Is this the new South Africa? In Parow the hon the national leader made a speech about the new South Africa he stood for, and other speakers who advocated an open democracy associated themselves with this dream of a new South Africa. That “new South Africa” is merely another slogan. Earlier it was détente, then it was outward movement, then there was the total onslaught and then joint responsibility which subsequently became power-sharing and ultimately political abdication. [Interjections.]

That hon member over there, the former clergyman, need not shout so loudly. [Interjections.] He should continue to behave in an edifying way. Surely he knows it is against the rules to sit there shouting. [Interjections.]

The hon the national leader said it was a plan that made waves. That is true, and the waves are already there. The NP ship is being buffeted. The speech made by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning last Friday hit them like bombs, from the left and from the right. Those waves have by now become too much for five Ministers. [Interjections.]

The hon the national leader is so careful about the waves that according to reports he is not even going to participate in the election in a specific constituency. [Interjections.] We would have thought that a general at the head of his troops would not withdraw from a fight. He should stay where he is.

They must also tell us whether it is true—I do not know—that the candidates now standing for the NP must commit themselves, if elected, to vote for the hon the national leader as State President. [Interjections.] Do those hon members have no confidence in the members who are going to come here? [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, this morning we have merely had a repetition of speeches we have heard over the past three sessions, none of them containing anything new. There was a plan of a discussion and a discussion of a plan concerning the NP’s constitution and the NP’s view of the future, and there was not a word, not one sentence, from the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition about the plan which this alternative Government envisages for South Africa for the future. [Interjections.]

At no stage in the lifetime of the present House of Assembly have we once been provided with a blueprint of what the CP of South Africa envisages for this country if they were to come to power. [Interjections.].

I want to ask the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition—repeating what an hon member on this side of the House asked a moment ago—where that homeland is going to be and where its borders are going to be. The hon the Leader of the Officials Opposition said there was White land in South Africa which belonged to the Whites. I want to ask him whether that is going to be the homeland for the Whites of South Africa, or whether all the White land that exists in South Africa is going to form the White homeland which the CP foresees for the future of this country?

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition and his caucus members are trying to bluff the country that they are very honest with their policy and that they are the only White party that is honest with its policy. But ask them questions like this and the silence is audible. Furthermore, the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition actually has the audacity to say that the NP’s constitutional plans have failed. He does not say a word about what he would put in their place. He says absolutely nothing about that. [Interjections.]

Order! I want to point out to hon members that I have previously ruled that the shouting of Christian names across the floor is not appropriate in the House, and I am not prepared to permit it any longer. The hon member may proceed.

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition…

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: When my hon leader was speaking, did the hon member for Boksburg refer to my leader as “Driesie Partisie”? [Interjections.]

Order! I have given my ruling. The hon member for Kuruman may continue.

The hon Leader of the Official Opposition made another disturbing statement by saying that it was the fault of this tricameral Parliament that Blacks were excluded and that Black revolution has come to South Africa. I want to ask him what led to the revolution in schools when he was in control of Black education? What led to those class boycotts and that arson? Was it the constitutional plans of the NP or was it an unfeeling Minister who said: “We pay, we say!” [Interjections.]

One cannot simply snatch assumptions out of thin air, pile them up and then shoot them down again. I want to tell the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition that on 6 May 1987 this party received a mandate from the voters of South Africa to include Black people in the decision-making process in South Africa. We intend sticking to that mandate and the conditions attaching to that mandate. We will not deviate from it for any imaginary plan of a leader of an opposition who has no plans, who dreams dreams and sees visions, but can put nothing in writing and give no blue print of where this White homeland is going to be.

In response to the accusations levelled by the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition at the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, I want to pay tribute to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning for the tremendous job he has done in this country. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister was a man of vision, zeal and a capacity for work. He had perseverance which made him a true leader and a valued holder of a Ministerial post.

Those qualities enabled him to meet the challenges and find solutions to problems which would have made many of today’s so-called leaders weak the knees if they had been confronted with those same challenges. [Interjections.] His unpopularity among certain opposition members is attributable to the very fact that he could often turn disappointments into successes. [Interjections.]

He has certainly left an indelible mark on the politics of South Africa. As the chief architect of this tricameral Parliament, the signposts he erected have become signposts for the future politics of South Africa. [Interjections.] Long after the tracks of his critics have been erased by the winds of time, his tracks will still be there to indicate the direction the country must take in the future. [Interjections.] He was a thinker, a philosopher and a formidable opponent in debates.

In the same breath I want to tell the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition that he need not take delight in the Ministers who are now retiring and think that the NP does not have enough depth to replace them. [Interjections.] He need not take delight in that. The NP caucus has every confidence that its new leader-in-chief will be able to sift and choose the people he needs, and to have South Africa continue on the road we have followed up to now.

One is amazed to hear the criticism of the NP’s plans, particularly in view of the fact that there is such a scant positive contribution from hon members in the opposition benches. In his speech here last week the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning said certain things, mentioned certain ideas, with which I fully agree. Among other things he spoke about the federal concept which is incorporated in the NP’s future plans, its constitutional plans. [Interjections.] These are now being dismissed as being so-called new plans, as though there had never been any concept of federation in South Africa. [Interjections.]

The concept of a federation is as old as the history of South Africa. If hon members are at any stage interested, they can read what Sir George Grey had in mind for South Africa—a federation of Natal, the Free State, and the Western and Eastern Cape. [Interjections.] If hon members are interested, they can find out what the motive was behind the first annexation of the Transvaal. [Interjections.] It was nothing but the idea of a federal system of states in which the Transvaal, Natal and the Eastern Cape would have been included. If we were to look at the Constitution that was drawn up at the time of Union, we would find that there were many federal elements in that Constitution.

Oh, come on!

Yes! If the hon member for Barberton would take the trouble to go and read up that history—books such as those written by Dr Bernard Friedman—he would see that the idea of forming a federation was so strong at the time that the first convention had to be postponed and a second held at which a compromise was arrived at. It is true, yes, and that is why we had provincial councils in our provinces. That is why each one of the provinces had equal representation in the Senate. The whole idea behind this was to protect and control the provinces’ own local affairs and to refer general affairs to the central government.

The constitution at the time of Union was a mixture of federal and union elements. The equal number of senators also ensured protection against domination of the smaller groups. What is wrong with that kind of idea? Our present constitution with its tricameral Parliament has just as many unique federal elements incorporated in it as the Union constitution had at that time. This Constitution also has a central authority which deals with general affairs, as well as own councils in which groups are represented and which can deal exclusively with their own affairs, without interference by the other groups and the dangers inherent in this.

Group autonomy is protected in the present Constitution. There are also other inherent advantages. We have an undivided economy, which can be shared by all groups. We do not have a fragmented economy which would have a disruptive effect on our country’s prosperity. We retain the geographic configuration of the present South Africa and do not envisage further subdivision into smaller units. Nor do we envisage forced removals, compensation and large-scale expropriation. This is precisely what the plans of the CP involve, if one undestands them correctly.

To sum up, I want to say that every group must retain full control over the things that are its own and are free from the danger of interference by any of the other groups. The security and safety of the group is the primary objective of the debate on own affairs in which we are participating here today.

In order to achieve unanimity at the central level, use is made of negotiation and consensus. The framework of the tricameral Parliament, which has already been established and which, despite criticism, has proved itself to be a practical concept that can work, can be used as a foundation for any possible future model. [Interjections.]

The Constitution has brought about an understanding, on the part of the various race groups, of one another’s needs, wishes and fears. We are no longer strangers to one another in South African politics. We understand each other much better. Racial conflict has been turned into racial peace, and racial friction into racial harmony. The White voter of South Africa may rest assured that under this Government his wellbeing, his prosperity and his safety are protected by this Constitution. [Interjections.]

One group enjoying a privileged position at the expense of another or the domination of one group of people by another is the surest recipe for revolution and insurrection.

The CP’s concept of a privileged White group whose interests will be looked after before attention is given to the needs of other groups, is the surest way imaginable to make the Whites feel unsafe and threatened. It envisages, inter alia, the abolition of non-White trade unions, which would force them to go underground and eventually force everyone, even the peaceful ones, to politicise on the basis of the Cosatu and NUM model. The CP must ask itself how it intends to run the economy of South Africa with a work-force that is dissatisfied and a has been driven underground.

They are dissatisfied now and have also gone underground.

I also want to add that people who are purposely impugning the dignity of people with a different colour skin by their comments and actions, are gambling with the safety of the Whites and jeopardising the survival and future of the Whites. [Interjections.] If there is a threat to the Whites of this country, it is being posed by those who want to solve the problems of the future by running away from them and hiding behind their White skin. In the process race relations in this country are being bedevilled to such an extent that it would be difficult ever to restore them to normality.

What about our economy and the situation overseas? If one takes into consideration we no longer have access to credit overseas, how would overseas countries react to a CP government coming to power, a government which wants to place further discriminatory laws on the Statute Book and reintroduce the old ones? [Interjections.] I maintain that overseas countries will react in such a way that the last of countries with which we still have trade ties, such as Great Britain and West Germany, will close their doors to us and never open them again. [Interjections.]

Scare-mongering!

It is not scare-mongering, it is a reality. [Interjections.] When last did that hon member, who says it is scaremongering, talk to people overseas, to bankers and politicians from abroad? Now the hon member for Pietersburg says that it is scaremongering! It is a reality, it has taken place—we have sanctions and boycotts against us. I maintain if that party came to power and implemented its plans, we would have a total boycott and comprehensive sanctions against South Africa. [Interjections.]

In the coming election the voters in South Africa will again vote for the NP and return the NP to power. [Interjections.] That party, which has no plan of action, has no hope of ever occupying the Government benches in this country. The voters will again reject them. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, in the course of my speech I shall refer to a few of the subjects the hon member for Kuruman discussed. I hope the hon member will forgive me for not reacting to him in detail.

†There are three issues on which the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council must defend himself and his party today. They are, firstly, the creeping poverty and the steady reduction in living standards which all our people are suffering; secondly the pervasive corruption in and around the Government; and thirdly, the total collapse of the constitutional reform initiative as dramatised today by the resignation of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

*There are very few things on which the hon Leader of the Official Opposition and I agree, but I think we do agree that we are both seeing and perceiving that collapse today. [Interjections.]

†The House is entitled to demand that the hon the Minister tell us what his Government is going to do about the creeping poverty which is affecting us all.

I have here an authority which I do not think the Government will question. It is called Productivity Focus and it is the 1989 report of the NPI—the National Productivity Institute—which is a Government supported body. I quote first a few passages from pages 12 and 13:

South Africans became poorer by as much as that! The report goes on to state:

Not the great countries of Europe; of less developed countries—

That’s not the truth!

These are the dubious distinctions which the hon the Minister’s Government has brought us. But that is not all. There are figures here—as there should be—about productivity. Between 1981 and 1987 productivity in Korea grew at an average rate of 6,5%. Taiwan’s grew at 4%. South Africa’s figure was 1,1%.

What about comparable countries?

This House does not need to be told that unemployment is a very serious problem indeed in our country. We probably need to create something over 300 000 jobs per annum. In fact, between the years I am talking about—1981 and 1987—233 000 new jobs were created or about a tenth of what was required. But how is this done? How was this figure reached? The productivity report says:

Such limited job creation as we are achieving consists of fattening up the Government payroll at the expense of the more productive private sector.

Let us now listen to what the NPI says about personal savings:

As the hon the Minister well knows. It goes on to say:

Not my words, but the words of Productivity Focus. It states further:

Down to one quarter. It states:

because we were getting poorer—

Again the hon the Minister of Finance knows only too well. It goes on:

The money that the people might have spent on their own lives, was being gobbled up by the Government.

To sum up this part of my speech: The evidence is incontrovertible. This Government has been spending money irresponsibly; consequently taxing our citizens far too heavily; so causing savings to decline by three quarters; so causing investment to decline sharply, and causing our productivity and our economic growth rate to fall to totally unacceptable levels. If ever a government anywhere stood charged with impoverishing the people through its own profligacy and incompetence, this is that government.

*Mr Speaker, today I would have liked to have elaborated a little on all these tales of corruption, but time unfortunately will not allow me to do so. I find it ironic that the only one of all the well-known incidents which was in fact cleared up completely was that of my young namesake, the hero who won the constituency for the NP. He is sitting in jail because of the methods employed to achieve that victory. [Interjections.] We are still waiting in suspense to hear the full report on the other MP who resigned—the former member for East London City—the two Cabinet Ministers, as well as the reports on the investigations still in progress at the moment in the Department of Education and Training.

In addition there are the marathon reports we get to read almost daily about the illegal export of capital from our country, and many more. During the coming months the questions concerning all these matters will re-echo throughout this country. The hon Chairman of the Ministers Council would do well to prepare his replies to these questions so long.

I come now to the third matter—a matter which casts a long shadow over the future of our country and all of us living here. I am referring, as I promised, to the total collapse of the so-called reformed programme of the NP. [Interjections.] We are discussing this today against the background of the dramatic resignation this morning of the hon the Minister concerned.

What about Wimpie de Klerk?

Mr Speaker, the reek of failure hangs heavily around the hon the Chairman of the Ministers Council and his party today. The end of the career of a wonderful, ambitious person like the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning is always sad to behold. What we are witnessing here is not a melodrama; it is in fact a tragedy. It is not a case of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning having fought and lost the fight against the Labour Party or against the CP or the CP, although we all opposed and criticised him.

The truth of the matter is that he was ultimately broken by the impossible task he undertook.

Dead right! [Interjections.]

My intention today is to demonstrate that this is indeed the case.

Since 1948 all of us in South Africa have been struggling to devise a constitutional dispensation which could do justice to everyone and which could make peace and prosperity possible, because Heaven knows we are not experiencing any peace and no prosperity in our country today. From the start there were two ideas in this regard. The one was to do justice to each race group by means of geographic separation. The other was to adopt Western democracy, adapt it to South African conditions and then put it into operation here.

†Mr Speaker, well over thirty years ago, when I was a United Party backbencher in this House, one of my senior colleagues said to me we had to go for constitutional reform and we had to find some solid ground between the Nats and Peggy Ballinger. The Nats, of course, then stood for a policy of apartheid—geographical segregation—while Mrs Ballinger led the small Liberal Party, which stood for a Western democratic solution.

The United Party went out to try to find that solid ground, and it failed because the solid ground was not there. The NP tried to develop the apartheid solution, and they failed utterly. They promised us that in the year 1978 the flow of Black people from rural to urban areas would be arrested and reversed. Instead, it accelerated, and in the end the NP gave up and repealed the pass laws, but they then had no policy to put in the place of the one that had failed.

South Africans of today have almost forgotten what the phrase “government by consent” means. For 75% of our people—the Blacks—there are no effective political rights at all. For another 10%, the Coloureds and the Indians, there are segregated institutions with very limited powers. There is Government of the country by the Whites for the Whites—the very White domination to which the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition referred. And not all the Whites either. Those White people who do not have tickets for the gravy train are having an increasingly hard time.

*For more than three years now we have been governed by means of a state of emergency—the final admission that this Government is simply not able to cause any form of democratic government to apply in our country. Brute force is the only way in which this NP can govern.

The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning tried zealously to develop something better, and he was unable to do so. That is why he resigned today.

The separation idea to which I referred is today the property of the CP. It has already failed in the hands of the NP. Today I think there is less reason than ever before to believe that it can work. Today’s NP went in search of that “solid ground” to which I referred between separation at the one pole and Western democracy at the other. It was unable to find it because it does not exist. What remains? There is no cohesive policy that will be found between the separation idea and the idea of democracy.

There is no room in the middle!

The Government’s own Law Commission, in the working paper which was published a few months ago, offered the only answer. Take the democratic idea. Adapt it, and then apply it. An entrenched constitution, a testing right for the courts, a bill of rights, proportional representation and perhaps some other consociational techniques to protect minorities and decentralisation of power through a geographic federation will in our opinion be necessary. However, a start will have to be made by accepting the equality of every South African, and then negotiation must be proceeded with in a spirit of mutual respect. The negotiations will be long and tough, and will be accompanied by the implementation of measures to establish an open community. But this is the only road that offers us any hope.

†Apartheid has failed. The system of government in our country today is simply the oppression of the majority by a minority using military force. In the process, we see our country becoming impoverished and corrupt. We have to change direction and the only way to go is to a true South African democracy.

Mr Speaker, the hon the leader of the DP dealt with three themes, the last one of which I will return to during the course of my speech.

Initially he referred to creeping poverty and he delivered a well-reasoned lecture to us on economics. I will refer to facets of this problem but not comprehensively because this is essentially a political debate. Let me say immediately, however, that the NP and the Government are as concerned as the hon member Dr De Beer is about the plight of our people in difficult times. [Interjections.]

*The hon member referred to corruption. As stated by the hon the State President, our recently retired leader-in-chief, the NP is committed to clean administration. [Interjections.]

†This commitment to clean administration remains as firm as ever. The present state of affairs indeed gives rise to concern and the NP shares in that concern. However, I think we should avoid overreaction. Corruption and irregularity will always be with us. Throughout history it has occurred in all spheres and all sectors. Can I ask the hon member, during his long and impressive career in the private sector, has corruption not occurred in companies under his managing directorship?

Not on this scale. [Interjections.]

Can he honestly say that he managed these companies and that he eradicated corruption? No, he cannot. [Interjections.] He knows that we will be able to come forth with proof. Therefore I say that throughout history it has occurred in all spheres and sectors.

The NP rejects the efforts of the opposition parties and their newspapers to project an image of this party, its public representatives and of the Public Service as being corrupt and corruptive.

To tarnish a political party, as well as the whole Public Service, because of the irregular activities of a handful of people is nothing but petty politics by petty politicians.

The true test for clean administration lies in how corruption is handled when it occurs and what is done to prevent it.

With regard to the recent alleged irregularities and those proven, the Government has acted and is acting fearlessly in having each and every allegation fully investigated, irrespective of who might be involved. [Interjections.] Reports that have already been received have been published and possible prosecutions arising therefrom are receiving urgent attention. Further reports will similarly receive priority attention.

*With regard to preventive measures, I can give hon members the assurance that no stone will be left unturned to reinforce measures with a view to preventing any recurrence of this. Hon members know that we are considering extending the powers of the Advocate-General. Likewise other legislation is being prepared to reinforce our ability to deal effectively with corruption.

The overall picture that emerges, therefore, differs radically from the image the Government’s enemies are trying to project. Firm action has been taken and every allegation of corruption has fearlessly been followed up. The Government will not shrink…

You people are soft on corruption!

Order! Who made that remark?

I did, Mr Speaker.

Order! The hon member must withdraw it immediately.

Mr Speaker, I withdraw it.

Order! The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may proceed.

And then the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition spoke about ex-clergymen! The Government will not shrink…

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I want to ask whether you would not reconsider that ruling. I do not think that a remark about the Government being soft on corruption is unparliamentary. Would you please reconsider your ruling?

Order! To what remark is the hon the Chief Whip of the Official Opposition referring?

Mr Speaker, I am referring to the remark made by the hon member for Witbank.

Order! I heard the hon member for Witbank say: “You are all corrupt.” [Interjections.] Order! I have given my ruling. I am not reconsidering it. I have told the hon the Chief Whip of the Official Opposition what I heard. I am asking him to accept it as such.

Mr Speaker, I accept it as such. I just want to know, however, whether you will accept that the hon member for Witbank said that they were soft on corruption?

Order! I have indicated what I heard. If the hon the Chief Whip of the Official Opposition disagrees with me about this, he is welcome to come and have a cup of tea with me at a later stage and we can discuss the matter further. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may proceed.

We will not shrink…

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: May I tell the NP that it is soft on corruption? [Interjections.]

Order! If the hon member is looking for trouble, he will find it. The hon member must resume his seat. [Interjections.]

You people are soft on corruption! [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may proceed.

You people are definitely soft on corruption! [Interjections.]

You are soft in your head!

Order! Since the Chair is now being challenged, I am ruling that it is not permissible to make such a remark.

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Is that hon member permitted to say that the hon member sitting here is soft in the head?

[Interjections.]

Order! Hon members must refrain from making such remarks. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may proceed. [Interjections.]

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Do I understand you correctly to say that you are now ruling that it is out of order to say that the Government is soft on corruption?

Order! I have given my decision. [Interjections.] Order! The Chair has been challenged on that subject and I have given my decision. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may continue.

Mr Speaker, it is nice to see the House of Assembly beginning to fire on all cylinders again! [Interjections.] We shall not shrink from the challenge of ensuring clean administration.

Five of your cylinders are not there!

Today I again commit myself and the NP to clean administration and reject the smear campaign being conducted by the opposition parties. [Interjections.]

†I have the greatest respect for Parliament and the Public Service. The overwhelming majority of parliamentarians—I include all parliamentarians—and public servants, irrespective of their political affiliations, are dedicated, hardworking and honest people who are rendering a public service. They deserve much better than what they have been getting lately from the opposition parties.

Our future and the future of all the people in this country will not be secured by smear campaigns and negative propaganda. It depends on the constructive policies and orderly development which the NP propagate.

It is interesting to note that the first two speakers on the opposition side were the two leaders. I as the leader of the NP now find myself in the position of replying.

This causes me to raise the question of leadership. For obvious reasons I do not want to become involved too deeply in a discussion of the personalities who lead the various parties. I prefer in any event to play the ball rather than the man. However, what is important when it comes to leadership is the stark contrast between the NP and the DP in their approach to leadership. The NP was unexpectedly confronted on 2 February with the necessity to choose a new leader. It did so in a most dramatic manner. Immediately afterwards the party closed ranks behind the person elected. [Interjections.] Today the NP speaks with one voice. [Interjections.] I as its leader can rely on the full support of my party. [Interjections.]

The DP after months of planning and negotiation followed by a fully representative congress, supported by all the technological expertise which they can afford and they can afford the best…

Big spenders! Fat cats!

After all that the DP has three leaders. When the SABC offered the opportunity to its leadership to present its case, what did they do?

Three blind mice!

They tossed for it. Can hon members believe it! Three grown men, each one believing that he can lead this country, resort to a lottery to settle a simple question such as who will put the DP’s case on television! [Interjections.] In all seriousness, I shudder when I think of it. If they cannot solve simple problems such as who should appear on television, how can one ever trust them with a tough problem?

*The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition made one of his better contributions during this sitting today. I asked myself what the underlying reason was. At the end of his speech I found the answer. Today he did not try to speak like a statesman. He was his old self… [Interjections] … negative, semantic and noncommittal.

You do not play the ball! You play the man!

In the course of my speech I shall come back to most of the matters he referred to. I shall mention a few to start with.

He quoted from a speech I delivered at Tukkies. I did not check his quotation. He and I both know, do we not, that since then the NP has, on a democratic basis, changed its policy on this matter. He knows that we held a federal congress and that this was subsequently ratified by four congresses. He also knows that that new policy in respect of the Black people outside the Black national states is contained in a manifesto and that we specifically obtained the support of an overwhelming majority of the White voters for that policy change. [Interjections.] That is the truth of the matter, is it not? Why is he trying to mislead the voters, in the light of what this party publicly and democratically did, by quoting irrelevancies! [Interjections.] That is the only conclusion I can draw.

This party is constantly engaged in renewal from within. [Interjections.] We must also adapt to the demands of a specific era. I know that the CP finds it difficult to come to terms with this concept, because if one has become rigid, one cannot adapt. This old game of judging changes against an historical background and projecting this as negative development, is exploding in their faces, because the general public want us to keep abreast of the times and accept present-day challenges by effecting renewal.

He happened to refer, in passing, to the position and office of the State President and also to a speech by my hon colleague.

About the Office of State President I want to say the following. Within the framework of the constitutional viewpoint of this side of the House there is no question about the Office of State President simply remaining in its present form. In debates here I have said that we shall also have to consider fundamental constitutional reform in connection with those matters, reform that will have to go hand in hand with other circumstances. [Interjections.] I do not even know if there will be a State President in a totally new constitution. [Interjections.] In drawing up a constitution offering security to everyone in the country we shall have to adopt a completely new viewpoint.

Mr Speaker, may I put a question to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council?

No, Sir, I do not have time for questions.

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition referred to the Group Areas Act and the Population Registration Act. Let me refer him once more to what I said, on behalf of the NP, on 8 February. Surely he must have heard that.

You say so many things.

Oh no, I do not say so many things. When I speak, those hon members would do well to listen. [Interjections.]

That is just scare-mongering!

Order! Hon members are well aware of the basic rules of the House, and I am asking hon members to bear them in mind while the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has the floor.

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I want to draw your attention to the fact that during the speech of the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition a short while ago, in respect of which the same rules apply, the hon members of the NP made so many remarks that I objected to the Chief Whip.

Order! The hon member may rest assured that I also granted the necessary protection to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition, that I listened very carefully to the debate, that I duly noted the course of the debate and that he will have the same protection, in accordance with the prevailing situation in the House. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may proceed.

There I said very clearly that in connection with these matters, which are very sensitive, we would have to conduct serious discussions with other population groups and, through a process of negotiation, see whether we could not obtain a mutually acceptable measure to ensure community rights and security. I added, however, that we could not repeal these measures and create a vacuum.

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition must go along with the truth if he wants the support of the voters, and not have recourse to misrepresentations of what we on this side are saying. [Interjections.]

This session and the life of this Parliament are rapidly drawing to an end. [Interjections.] As always, a general election heralds the beginning of a new era. However, it also means that one takes leave of colleagues who have decided to retire. There will hopefully be an opportunity, closer to the end of the session, for us to take proper leave of these colleagues. We would also like to take leave of the numerous CP and DP members who are going to fall by the wayside, but we shall have to defer that pleasure. [Interjections.]

Permit me, Sir, to say a few words, even now, to the two colleagues with whom I have worked very intimately, ie the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and the hon the Minister of Home Affairs and of Communications. Apart from our ties as Parliamentarians and Cabinet colleagues, we have also shared a very special relationship as co-leaders of the NP in our respective provinces.

I want to thank them for their positive contribution, dedication and friendship over the years. They have given valuable service to the NP. They made every possible sacrifice for South Africa. We pay tribute to them and do not for one moment begrudge them that period of greater tranquillity and privacy which will hopefully be theirs.

There are—we heard so this morning—those in opposition ranks who want to cause trouble about the retirement of the two hon Ministers. I am sorry to have to spoil their fun, but I have not the slightest hesitancy in assuring them that they are wasting their time. [Interjections.] They do not have a snowball’s hope.

Why did Chris resign? [Interjections.]

All my retiring colleagues have been men of the highest calibre throughout their careers. [Interjections.] They have successful careers behind them, they have had job satisfaction, they have fulfilled their calling and they are all getting on in years. The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition should perhaps discern a message in that. [Interjections.]

I now come back to my two colleagues. [Interjections.] Both their decisions were personal decisions, completely devoid of any ulterior motives in regard to the NP or in regard to me as leader. They made that absolutely clear to me in prior discussions.

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition is trying to link the resignation of my colleague, the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, to what he called a constitutional failure. My hon colleague has numerous successes to his credit. The regional services councils are such a success that the Official Opposition cannot keep their members out of them. Those councils are such a success that the hon member for Ermelo’s hard-line challenge or appeal—I think it was at a congress in Kimberley—that they would break the regional services councils, fell flat on its face. They are cooperating, participating and, in certain places, even serving on the management. [Interjections.] Regional services councils are a success that is opening up new doors to a future South Africa.

Today the climate for meaningful change is much better than a year or two ago. Shortly I shall be meeting a whole succession of Black leaders. Arrangements have already been made for Monday morning at Jan Smuts Airport. Because of the activities of this colleague of mine a fairly representative forum of elected urban Black leaders has emerged at local government level. How can that be called a failure? There is a new dynamism in the process of negotiation. Hon members can therefore say what they like—it is all the same to me. We are telling them today, however, that the NP is dead on course in its efforts to build up a new South Africa which will offer all its people reasonable lebensraum and security. [Interjections.]

In the broader context our party will, on a suitable occasion, take leave of both these two esteemed provincial leaders who are retiring, and of our retired leader-in-chief, the hon the State President. This brings me…

Has he already congratulated you?

Of course the hon the State President congratulated me the first time I saw him.

This brings me to the announcement about a NP federal congress, which will be held on the evening of 28 June and the day of 29 June in Pretoria. The main object of that congress…

Order! This constant stream of comments must really stop. There is a great difference between an interjection and the constant stream of comments that are being made. I appeal to hon members to stop this. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Thank you, Sir. I merely want to say that it does, of course, take intelligence to make intelligent interjections. [Interjections.]

This federal congress has a two-fold objective. Firstly, as a party, to take leave of the hon the State President in his capacity of retired leader and, secondly, to properly launch the NP’s election campaign. Today I want to say that that campaign will be a responsible one. From now until 6 September the NP will, in its mutual interaction with the voters, get to the very heart of South Africa’s problematic situation. Unlike our opponents, we do not need to draw sustenance from grievances and forebodings.

†My party is not looking for short-term gains. Our country’s future is at stake. There is no time for silly election games and small politics, for razzmatazz and suspicion-mongering.

What is necessary, is a real breakthrough towards a workable and just system offering fair opportunities, meaningful participation and security to all the people of this country. That is what we are working for. It is for the building of such a South Africa that we will ask a mandate.

*The NP believes that the gist of the solution to South Africa’s problems lies largely in one single concept—justice for everyone. [Interjections.]

Oh, but everyone is in favour of that!

Everyone is in favour of that, but not everyone means it! [Interjections.]

We believe that in justice for everyone lies the real key to a safe future, and on this conviction we base our plan for the future. The NP’s aim, stripped of all particulars, is a just constitutional, economic and social dispensation.

†On the constitutional level we stand for participation by all without domination. Excluding the majority from full participation as the CP wants to do is unjust. They say they stand for a just and equitable dispensation. I say to exclude a majority which they admit will remain a majority in what they call White South Africa is inherently unjust. It will inevitably lead to conflict and finally to revolution, thus destroying the very security and freedom of Whites which the CP claims to be protecting.

The story of the past 40 years! [Interjections.]

On the other hand, including all South Africans on the basis of one man, one vote on common voters’ rolls at all levels in a unitary type of state, in terms of DP policy as clearly stated by one of their three leaders very recently, will inevitably lead to majority rule and domination. [Interjections.] That is unjust towards the electorate of this House and it is unjust towards certain other groups. It is therefore totally unacceptable.

The mere protection of language, cultural and religious rights does not meet the requirements of this country and cannot handle the forces created by the diversity of our society. It offers no safeguards against domination in all other spheres. Let me ask this of the hon leader: If he only wants to entrench in some way or other language, cultural and religious rights, can in his Parliament, with a majority of one, this country decide to become a socialist country? The answer is yes! Yes, if he really believes in democracy with a majority of one, this country can change its economic policy and say: “I go socialist.”

*In contrast to this, the NP says, in plain and simple language, that everyone must be able to participate in decision-making on questions affecting them. That is just. [Interjections.] We also say that where we have to decide jointly in the same bodies, the basis of decision-making must be consensus. A mere majority decision is unacceptable, because that is domination.

Why do you have a President’s Council?

We also say that if we do not achieve consensus, there must be a reliable referee.

You elected him.

Sir, I have anticipated every one of that hon member’s questions. He does not need to ask them; I shall reply to them. [Interjections.] We have a very strong candidate to oppose the hon member for Overvaal. His nerves are getting the better of him. [Interjections.]

I am saying that if we do not achieve consensus, there must be a reliable referee. The President’s Council can only act as a referee during a transitional phase, because it has been politicised and has a specific composition. That reliable referee is one of the key factors that we shall have to negotiate in the future.

We are also saying that the diversity of peoples and population groups constituting our overall population necessitates the recognition of the existence of specific own and unique interests.

We therefore believe that provision should be made for own power bases within which own control can be exercised over such interests. That is actually what the discussion of this Vote is dealing with. In our case it is the specific interests of the Whites which the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly is increasingly dealing with.

Having said that, let me add that there is a clear contrast between the three parties. The CP advocates a minority government in a South Africa which, by their own admission, will always be inhabited by a majority of people of colour.

That is untrue!

Is the hon member again saying this afternoon that they are going to relocate millions of Black people with a view to ensuring White majority occupation? [Interjections.] If he is, the hon member must speak to his colleague, the hon member for Overvaal, amongst others, because one cannot rely on what the CP says. When the CP is on its own, it tells the people it is going to bring about majority occupation, but not one of the hon members has every had the courage, in this House, to put forward an argument telling us that it is really possible. [Interjections.] We say that such a system of minority domination, now or in the future, is unjust and does not meet the demands of justice.

The DP advocates majority rule. In a country with such a diversity of people as ours, it is unfair to the smaller peoples and population groups. [Interjections.] Their policy does not meet the demands of justice either.

The NP advocates a joint system of government, in regard to matters of common concern, in such a way as to eliminate domination. [Interjections.] We also advocate self-government in regard to matters of intimate importance to the respective groups. In concert these concepts of joint government and self-government are just, because they ensure that everyone has a say and ensure security for everyone. [Interjections.]

Against this background I want to voice my strongest opposition to the inequitable conclusions which the CP, in particular, are drawing in regard to a speech made by my colleague, the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. [Interjections.] In his exploratory speech… [Interjections.]

Order! I am making a final appeal to hon members to co-operate with the Chair; if not, I shall have to take action. The hon the Minister may proceed.

One is characterised by what one does. In the exploratory speech he made, he did not deviate from the basis I have just sketched. What I have just sketched is a framework endorsed by the overall majority of our voters as far back as the election of 1987. [Interjections.] To conclude from his speech that the NP is now following in the DP’s footsteps and is moving towards a system of majority rule is malicious and untrue. The NP specifically advocates a constitutional dispensation which would not lend itself to majority rule or domination by a majority. [Interjections.]

I want to repeat what I said on 8 February. At the time I said that I wanted to give the White voters the assurance that in what the NP was doing to build up a new dispensation which would offer full-fledged rights to everyone, it would jealously guard their security and interests and those of other minority groups. As did my predecessor, I also commit myself to the undertaking that any fundamental constitutional amendments will be preceded by an election or a referendum requesting a mandate.

Let me add that when we go to the electorate with such proposals, we shall keep them fully informed so that they can express their wishes.

†The NP is also promoting a just and equitable economic and social dispensation for all South Africans. Through the promotion of, inter alia, private enterprise and small business development we seek to broaden the opportunities for all South Africans. [Interjections.] Through the improvement of education and training we strive for a better life for all South Africans. Through development we seek to create opportunities. Billions of rands are being spent on housing and facilities.

So I can continue. Even though at the moment we are severely constrained, as the hon member for Yeoville well knows, we are moving towards greater prosperity for all.

*In the process the interests of the Whites will still effectively be ensured by the Ministers’ Council. Even the hon the leader of the DP wanted to do some gossip-mongering about whether we were properly looking after the interests of the Whites in this Ministers’ Council.

Whilst good progress is being made in the improvement of the quality of life of less-developed communities, in the Ministers’ Council we can confidently say that White interests are not being neglected. On the contrary, the scope of our activities, of what we are doing in the interests of those entrusted to our care, has increased.

I want to mention a few examples. The assistance granted to farmers has increased from R93,560 million in the 1981-82 financial year to R237,108 million in 1988-89, an increase of 153,4%. In regard to subsidies, R33,319 million was paid out in the 1981-82 financial year, as against R489 million in 1988-89, an increase of 1 368%.

For whom are the farmers voting?

They are going to vote for us on 6 September. [Interjections.] The hon member for Barberton should start buying his little retirement cottage at the coast, and the hon member for Soutpansberg can start building a rest-room on his little farm in Waterpoort for his protracted period of rest there. [Interjections.]

†The Department of Education and Culture is responsible for 2 664 schools where 954 475 White pupils are being educated by 56 530 teachers. In respect of this service R2 427 million will be spent this year. This department is also responsible for 71 technical colleges, 11 universities as well as 8 technikons. There are also 18 teachers’ training colleges which brings the total amount allocated to the Department of Education and Training for this financial year up to R4 392 million, an increase of 17,1% on the amount of R3 750 million allocated for 1988-89.

In 1984 an amount of R479,977 million was spent on housing for Whites, 70% of which was used to provide housing for the aged. We are proud that we have provided housing for 7 272 aged persons over the past three years at a cost of approximately R50 million per year. The total expenditure in respect of functions performed by that particular department increased from R362,2 million in 1986-87 to R416 million in 1988-89.

The welfare budget has increased from R622 million in 1985-86 to a budgeted amount of R1 019 million for 1989-90. This represents a growth of 63,8%.

*One can see how both the State and the Ministers’ Council have combined to establish a just economic and social dispensation. We are not saying that we are managing to do enough, and we are only too aware of the pressing economic and financial conditions of our times. [Interjections.] It is easy for the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition to criticise. Does he want us to take steps to ensure that that becomes a permanent aspect of our lives? Does he specifically want us to display sufficient courage, as we have done, to prevent this becoming a permanent facet of our lives? Instead of supporting us—he is better informed than most hon members—he goes around gossip-mongering. The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition plays petty politics with the economic situation which he knows for a fact would be as bad, if not worse, if the CP were to come to power tomorrow. [Interjections.]

If we in South Africa were to succeed in having fairness and justice triumph, there would be hope for us, and we would be laying the foundations for good neighbourliness and for a firm understanding which would offer everyone a reasonable degree of opportunity and a reasonable degree of lebensraum.

If we were to adopt the DP’s course, we would be selling out the Whites and other smaller groups in this country, and we would become a typical African state, because with their friends in the ANC they would negotiate on a one-to-one basis and they would fold.

They have already folded!

The DP is naïve in its search for a utopia in which everyone will always be nice, in which people would never use their franchise and their numerical strength to the detriment of minorities…

What about South West Africa?

The utopia of a South Africa in which the deep-rooted differences between South Africa’s population groups would not have any effect.

The CP, its radical ally, would plunge this country into wretchedness and misery. Just as they have, within months, had Boksburg with its back to the wall, they would do the same to South Africa in a matter of months. [Interjections.]

They do not have an answer for the future. That is why today, in all seriousness, I want to ask the White electorate: That is not something I have begrudged you, but you have no choice.

Vote CP!

We are telling the White voters: You dare not destroy your future by pursuing the dreams of left-wing and right-wing groups. [Interjections.] The NP is the only party that does not run away from reality. That reality—everyone who is being honest with himself knows this, and I think that in their heart of hearts hon members of the CP also know it—tells us that the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely. Things will have to change quickly and drastically.

White security, which we are speaking about here this afternoon, can never be based on injustice towards others. White domination in the major portion of our country, as advocated by the CP, inevitably leads to a catastrophe, and it will not be they, but their children, who will have to pay the price.

†White security can likewise not be found in the unattainable liberal non-racial utopia projected by the DP and its partners. South Africa will have to accommodate its diversity in a meaningful manner in its future planning.

*Our future can only be a secure and prosperous future if a basis for co-operation between all the peoples and groups in our country can be found, a basis that is fair to everyone, including the Whites. White security can only be assured if we build up an understanding with the other population groups which would mutually protect us from domination.

Very nice!

White security is inextricably bound up with the creation of full-fledged opportunities for participation and progress for all the other population groups, but not at the expense of the Whites.

All this can only be achieved by a strong, vital NP which has to take the lead. Today we are telling the voters that in disunity lies our downfall; fragmentation diminishes our capabilities; petty politics, political scandal-mongering and the undermining of leaders destroy our hopes; and pipe-dream politics leads to revolution.

So vote for the CP!

If the overall majority of the White electorate continue to join forces in and around the NP, as they did in 1987, we can and will achieve success, and then there will be hope, the future will beckon, reasonableness will triumph and South Africa will be the winner.

I want to close on a more personal note. Today will be one of the last opportunities for me to participate actively in the proceedings of this House in my capacity as the member for Vereeniging. After due consideration, consultation with my fellow-leaders and fellow party members, I have decided not to make myself available as a candidate for the House of Assembly again. I was, amongst other things, strongly influenced by a unanimous request from the NP’s Transvaal Executive not to make myself available for nomination as a candidate in Vereeniging or anywhere else. All the NP Ministers of all four provinces, together with the Parliamentary caucus, endorsed this.

About the underlying motivation and the views of the NP and its leaders I do not want to elaborate. I shall continue to serve the NP and the country to the best of my ability, regardless of the role entrusted to me in the future.

Your next role is that of a pensioner!

It has been a privilege to represent my constituency, Vereeniging, for almost 17 years now, and I express my sincere thanks to all the voters and fellow party members there for their loyalty, confidence and friendship.

As leader-in-chief of the NP I shall never, prior to or after the election, cease in my efforts to achieve fair and just solutions for this country’s problems.

And a safe seat! [Interjections.]

Nor shall I ever shy away from exposing the absolute shallowness of the CP and the absolute naivety of the DP. [Interjections.]

Mr Speaker, it is a very great privilege for me to speak today after the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and the leader-in-chief of the NP. Today he yet again…

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: According to the speakers’ list in my possession the hon member for Lichtenburg is the next speaker.

Order! The list here in front of me indicates the hon member for Umhlanga as the next speaker. I have already called upon him to speak, and he may proceed. The hon member for Lichtenburg is the speaker after him on the list.

Then the hon Chief Whip of the governing party has not been considerate enough to inform me about the change in the speakers’ list! [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Umhlanga may proceed.

Mr Speaker, the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council today yet again produced a tour de force of dynamic leadership here, and what is more he gave a momentous statement of policy to our country. [Interjections.] I want to predict that with this leader-in-chief at the helm of the NP, particularly now that he is free to move throughout the length and breadth of our country, the onslaught from both the left wing and the right wing, which we are going to experience, is simply going to be crushed. [Interjections.]

Over and above the question of policy the voters are going to look critically at who every party’s candidate for the State Presidency is going to be. Neither the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition nor the DP’s troika, or the three dwarfs, as they are sometimes called, are going to survive in an objective comparison with the qualities of our leader-in-chief. I predict that they are going to be weighed and found wanting.

Earlier this week something very important happened to us as a party in Natal. This was when the provincial leader of the NP in Natal, the hon the Minister of Home Affairs and of Communications, announced that he was not going to make himself available for re-election as a member of Parliament. We in Natal are very sorry about this, but we can nevertheless understand it. We respect his wishes. The hon the Minister and his wife gave 15 of the best years of their life to the province of Natal—as MP, as Administrator, and also during the past five years as leader of the NP in that province.

During his term of office the NP in Natal reached the pinnacle of achievement in its history. During his term of office our representation in this Parliament doubled. Today there are 16 Natal members of the NP in this House, and in the process, I am happy to say, the PFP was destroyed, and after 6 May 1987 they only retained four of their seats in Natal. I am also happy to say that even in October 1988 the CP suffered a beating and did not get anyone elected in a single local authority or have a candidate who at least got a majority vote in the whole of Natal.

Tell us about the by-election in Newcastle! Go on, tell us about that!

Mr Speaker, I also want to predict that on 6 September of this year the CP is going to suffer another beating in Natal. [Interjections.]

An indication of the respect which the party in Natal has for our leader, is the fact that as recently as this morning the management committee of the party requested that our leader should not retire as the provincial leader at the end of July, as he had intended to do, but that he should stay on until after the election and lead us in the general election. After that we as Natalians can elect a new leader from our own ranks and we will then all support him as a team, no matter who he is.

In his statement earlier this week our hon leader made the following reference to our hon State President:

He also expressed his support for the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP by saying the following:

We as Natalians want to thank our leader for strengthening the hand of our leader-in-chief in this unequivocal way. I should like the House to take cognizance of the fact that the sentiments voiced here are shared by every NP member of the Natal caucus.

†We believe that the hon the Minister of Home Affairs and of Communications is retiring on the crest of the wave and that he is at the peak of a highly successful career in public life. He has handled two very demanding portfolios in an outstanding way and many people in Natal and throughout South Africa are very sorry to see him leave Government and he will be sorely missed. All objective people—I emphasise all objective people—acknowledge that he is a most effective administrator of his departments.

What did we find on the part of the DP, desperate in its attempts to escape its own back-biting and division within its own ranks? Without attaching too much importance to it, I would just like to refer briefly to the reaction of two of the three leaders of the so-called troika.

The DP co-leader, Dr Zach de Beer, asked in yesterday’s The Argus whether the hon the Minister of Home Affairs and of Communication was retiring for personal reasons and then he rambled on about divisions within the ranks on constitutional matters and so on. This is of course utter thumb-suck and rubbish. I want to say to him that this sort of attempt at petty point scoring is not doing himself or his party a favour at all. I would actually say he is demeaning himself.

His co-leader Dr Denis Worrall says he is puzzled—it seems as if he puzzles easily—by this decision. He says the hon the Minister’s decision to step down greatly improves the DP’s chances of cleaning up in Natal. We have become accustomed to this kind of big talk and no goods being delivered, but this is what he says. I would say he is whistling in the graveyard and he is bluffing himself.

What about Umhlanga?

He will be sent packing and they will be sent packing in Umhlanga as well, no matter whom they import from where. [Interjections.]

Dr Worrall also says the hon the Minister’s style and role in central Government “never reflected the Natal spirit”. I would submit that the progress of the NP in Natal and the unprecedented support for that party under the leadership of hon the Minister of Home Affairs and of Communications is all the proof that anyone needs of how absolutely far-fetched Dr Worrall’s statement really is. The irony of it is that Dr Worrall himself is desperately looking for a safe seat in Natal.

He cannot find one.

However, the die-hard Progs, like the hon member for Berea—who is unfortunately not here at the moment—are blocking Dr Worrall. If that is not so, I would like him to say so or to give up that seat for Dr Worrall.

The obvious implication is, even on the side of the left of the political spectrum and certainly from our side in the middle of that spectrum, that we in Natal obviously do not need Dr Worrall or any other imported politicians to tell us anything about the Natal spirit.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the hon the Minister for what he has done for Natal and all its peoples. I wish him well for the future. We shall remain in this Parliament and we assure him that we shall continue to support our hon leader-in-chief and follow the example that he has set for us in this House.

Mr Speaker, when I listened to the speech of the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP, I could not help thinking of Samson after his strength had left him. The hon the leader-in-chief made the same noises. He said that he was going to stand up and break the chains, but he is pinned down on the ground. He is powerless and means nothing. [Interjections.] He told us how he was going to make and break, but his own ally Die Transvaler told him yesterday:

It is his ally that said that. He still speaks like someone who is going to win. Is it not striking to note who it is that is describing and celebrating the hon the new leader-in-chief of the NP in the most glowing terms? It is the hon the leader-in-chief himself! It is striking. His hon members are without enthusiasm and one hears nothing from them. [Interjections.] They are no longer in ecstasy about their new leader-in-chief. The only one who still says “I am the leader-in-chief’ is the hon the leader-in-chief himself. He must confirm that. [Interjections.]

At the end of his speech he did confirm it. He said that he was the leader and was standing outside the ring. The men inside must fight to the bitter end, while he stands outside. [Interjections.]

In fact, we have come to a very serious moment in our history today. South Africa has undoubtedly arrived at the crossroads. The moment of truth has suddenly dawned during the past few days. If we look around us in the country, we see that decline and disintegration across a wide spectrum is the order of the day. Here before our very eyes we see how the NP is crumbling and disintegrating. [Interjections.]

Six hon members of the Cabinet, including two provincial leaders, have given notice prematurely or against their will. In every case it was premature or against their will. They are leaving the ship!

How many of your members returned in 1987?

Six of them, including the hon the State President, gave notice that they were leaving the ship prematurely.

How many of your members stayed away when your party split?

Ours went to fight and some of them lost. They are going to fight again and they are going to return. [Interjections.] Before us we see how the NP is disintegrating. We see how the Government’s plans are failing. Its flagship—its constitutional vision—which was announced last week by the outgoing hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, today lies dashed on the rocks onto which the LP drove it the day before yesterday. With this flagship they will have to enter the election, and over the week-end they were ecstatic about it.

Let us also look at our mother country—the giant of Africa. This giant has been wounded and it has been wounded by that party. In 1980 South Africa still had a real growth rate of 8%. We are now growing so slowly that we are all becoming poorer in South Africa.

What was the gold price in 1980?

We in South Africa are becoming poorer. The vital and stable South Africa which was a popular and sought-after investment field for world investors, has no credit standing today. It does not even have a banker.

As a result of the withdrawal of the Mobil Oil Company from South Africa, the managing director of Shell said that 550 overseas companies had withdrawn from South Africa over the past two years. It is not from Boksburg that they withdrew; it is as a result of the NP’s policy that they withdrew from South Africa. [Interjections.] A total of 550 companies have withdrawn!

The stability, progress and confidence has been shattered. South Africa no longer enjoys confidence. What is more, South Africa has become the victim of the extortionists of the world as a result of the weakness of this Government.

After 11 years this hon Minister has once again confirmed that he is going to fight corruption. They said that they were going to fight corruption 11 years ago as well. Therefore they have now been fighting corruption for 11 years, and now in the eleventh year corruption is worse than it ever was. It hits us every day like a “Blow Pipe”. The NP cannot prevent it. It gets worse and worse every day and every year. What South Africa needs is a new Government to put an end to corruption. [Interjections.]

This decline was envisaged, predicted and spelt out by the CP. It began when the NP accepted power-sharing. Power-sharing has a history of time and space In the world. Power-sharing has been applied in the world in many forms, in many places and over many decades. Powersharing has a consistent history of catastrophic failure which has left a trail of blood in every case. Since the NP accepted that policy, South Africa has found itself on this path of decadence and disintegration, and has gone into a decline.

We told the hon members that they could not travel halfway or part of the way down the road of integration. They must inevitably go all the way. We also said that the road to partition cannot be travelled halfway. One must follow that road to the end as well, to the point at which each people has its own country, government and full-fledged self-determination over itself. [Interjections.]

We said that the road of integration could not be travelled halfway. On Friday a new flagship, a new vision and a new hope was announced by the NP. It was a logical plan. It emanated from the acceptance that South Africa was not a divided state. One undivided South Africa must have one Cabinet and one Parliament. The hon the Minister confirmed this today.

The day before yesterday the LP told the person who had designed and announced that plan that it was not enough and that they rejected it. The plan is unacceptable as a result of the fact that an attempt was made to entrench certain things in it, namely the protection of groups, the elimination of numbers, consensus and arbitration mechanisms. These were entrenched in order to eliminate numbers.

A democracy does not allow numbers to be eliminated nor does it prevent them from playing their role to the full. Mr Ian Smith’s history of equal partnership is a striking example. It had a mechanism and a fantastic formula to eliminate numbers. There were 50 Whites and 16 Blacks in his Parliament. Based on the economic contributions of the two population groups, the Blacks had to be increased in that Parliament as their economic contribution increased. They estimated that it would take 400 years before the economic contribution of the Blacks would be such that it would justify the 16. They estimated that it would take 900 years before the Blacks would reach equality, namely 50 seats in Parliament.

Surely that is Prog policy! We reject it.

The fact is that it was a formula to eliminate numbers. The NP has another formula. In South West Africa the Government tried a similar formula with the Turnhalle. Where is that formula? Democracy in a unitary state disregards such a formula. The Government is heading towards one thing, and that is a unitary state with an election based on one man, one vote on a joint voters’ roll.

The hon the Minister said that he was going to eliminate the obstacles in the way of reform. The hon the Minister who is now resigning, said that there were three obstacles, namely those three Acts. The hon members of the LP and the other population groups say that they do not want protection of groups.

I am asking the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council whether he is going to eliminate the effect of these numbers. Is he going to eliminate this obstacle of the protection of minorities in order to allow reform to progress?

He owes South Africa an answer, he who is tied down on the ground like Samson.

I have answered that already.

He must now tell South Africa whether or not he is going to eliminate those obstacles. He says that he is going to do so. He is going to make all those concessions. These plans which were announced the other day are not good enough. He will have to give more. Why does he think that the Blacks of South Africa will be satisfied with less than the Blacks of South West Africa? Does he perhaps think that the ANC will be satisfied with less than he is giving to Swapo in South West Africa? I am telling that hon leader-in-chief today that he will have to give more. He will have to keep on giving until he has nothing left to give.

We know him. He is a record-holder. No one in the politics of South Africa can match him when it comes to turning somersaults, making U-turns and 180-degree turns. [Interjections.] He is the great champion and the record will never be broken. [Interjections.]

With regard to Windmill Park he promised his people that it would remain a White controlled area. [Interjections.]

That is not true.

It is stated in writing and signed by him. [Interjections.] Who asked that it should be a free settlement area? It was the Ministers’ Council of which he is the Chairman. I watched him that day and he did not even remember that he did that. That is how little he thinks of his people and of the promises which he has made! [Interjections.] That is his record. He tells them something in writing and then he is the one who places them in the stocks. [Interjections.]

I am saying that we have reached a very serious period in our history. We have come to the moment of truth. South Africa has never been in such a mess as it is now in the light of these factors, as well as a number of lesser factors. Having created this mess, they are now jumping ship and running away, but the CP will put matters right. [Interjections.] The CP will put matters right after this election.

That hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council spoke about progress, security and justice.

Those wonderful things will only be realised along the way of the policy of partition of the CP. [Interjections.] There is no other way in which they can be realised in South Africa.

The protection of groups of which he spoke, can only be achieved in one way. Those groups must each be sovereign. The way of sovereignty and of partition is the only way. [Interjections.]

With regard to the numbers of which he spoke, only partition can ensure that numbers play no role between groups. There is no other way.

With regard to domination, the CP has no desire to govern or dominate another people; on the contrary, domination can only be eliminated by means of partition.

With regard to humiliation, the CP does not take pleasure in humiliating a people; on the contrary, we have a deep-seated need to respect, and this can only take place by means of partition. There is no other way in which this can come about.

With regard to national pride, there is no other way in which national pride and the nationalism of the various peoples can grow and prosper, and in which the noble and good forces in every people in South Africa can be aroused to spur everyone on to greatness. There is only one way in which this can occur, and that is the way of partition. The way which the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has followed, is awaking the baser emotions and the destructive forces in every people and is plunging South Africa into chaos.

With regard to co-operation, this can only be achieved between the various peoples in South Africa by means of partition, in which each people has its own sovereignty, in which each people is safe, where each decides its own future, but in which each co-operates with other peoples on an inter-state basis.

The greatness of the various peoples and of the people of South Africa cannot be achieved by means of power-sharing, which is a proven recipe for failure and has failed throughout the world. Greatness can only be achieved by partition as it was achieved in Europe where it enabled Europe to expand into a factor and a great power in the world. South Africa can only achieve greatness by recognising the differences of its various peoples and making provision for them in all respects. In this way greatness will be achieved. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, before I reply to the speech of the hon member for Lichtenburg, I would like to address a few remarks to the PFP, alias the DP.

We know the viewpoint of some of those hon members on that side of the House in respect of talks with the ANC. Some of them, like the hon member for Randburg, demand safaris to talk to the ANC while others, like for instance the hon member for Yeoville, loathe the idea.

It is also no secret that the Cape Town City Council are PFP controlled. I have just heard a rumour that a number of Cape Town City Councillors and officials are going to Lusaka in June to have talks with the ANC. I regard this as a very serious matter and would like to put a few questions to the DP.

The first question I want to put to them is: Do they approve of this sort of mission; secondly, who are the people who are going on that trip; and thirdly, who is footing the bill for this outing? If local government starts involving itself in central Government matters, something must surely be done about it.

What are they going to talk about, who are they representing there and how are they going to further the welfare of their ratepayers by talking to the ANC? Public office demands that one acts in terms of what one has been elected for. One cannot at one stage say that one is acting in a personal capacity and the next moment say one is acting as a councillor. One cannot one day don a councillor’s cap and the next day take it off. Holders of public offices must remember that what one does reflects on the institution that one represents. I am very worried about this situation and I hope that we will have some answers from the DP as well as the Cape Town City Council.

*I would like to return to the hon member for Lichtenburg, who spoke before me. He has a good understanding of why he does his best to run down the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP. I also have a good understanding of that because the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP once again showed in this House this morning that he is an inspiring and strong leader. This young man is going to lead us into a new South Africa which will be built on justice. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Lichtenburg says that the hon the leader-in-chief is outside the ring because he is not going to stand in Vereeniging again. It is no secret that it is NP policy that our leader-in-chief is the candidate for State President. There is no doubt about that. I am not saying that with bravado.

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

No, Sir, I am not answering questions now.

We have faith and we believe that the NP is going to win again in the next election. The leader-in-chief of the NP will then be the NP’s candidate for the State Presidency. There is no doubt about that. What is the sense of having someone stand in a constituency only to have him resign 14 days later and once again cause an election? It does not make sense and it is not fair to the constituency.

The hon member for Lichtenburg says that they are going to win the election. He has just said that in this House. [Interjections.] If the hon member believes that, why is his leader standing in Waterberg again? Why do they not prepare themselves so that he will be able to take over the State Presidency? Surely they would then save Waterberg a lot of money. After all he need not stand. He could say that he was simply waiting for the outcome of the election so that he could become State President. Why would the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition now want to fight an election? [Interjections.] They are not going to get anywhere with that story. We are on the eve of an important election. All parties in this House want to win the hearts and minds of the White voters in this country, in order to gain their support. However, it is of cardinal importance that the White voters should not only know what the policies of the various parties are, but what is equally important, is that the White voter in this country should know what the consequences are of the policies of the parties. These consequences can affect the White voter of this country very deeply.

I would like to look at what the results would be if the CP should come to power. This would have an effect on the domestic as well as the overseas position of our people and our country. We have been with the CP in this House for eight years now and have seen what they do and what their policy is. There are certain aspects of that which I would like to look at today.

The first is the foreign policy of the CP. They are against Resolution 435. The hon member for Overvaal said in an interjection, “Untag must be expelled.” In other words, the settlement plan which has been drawn up for South West, must be destroyed. If they were to come to power on 6 September, that election in South West would take place only a few weeks later. What would happen then? If they were to fulfil their promise, they would have to mobilise the Defence Force again. They would have to expel Untag, and they would have to repudiate the settlement plan.

Does the White voter of this country know what the results would be for us if that happened? Swapo would receive open international support. Weapons would be openly placed at the disposal of Swapo. We would once again become involved in a full-scale war, which would make the war of the past few years look like a Sunday school picnic. Our sons—also CP sons—would again be mutilated and shot dead in large numbers on the border. I want to ask the parents who want to vote for the CP in all sincerity today whether they know that if they vote for the CP, and say that they are not voting for the NP because the Immorality Act was abolished, that that vote would be a vote for a war in South West. [Interjections.] That is true.

I want to ask the question: Is that how the CP is going to look after the interests of the Whites in this country? I am telling them that with this type of policy they are selling out the Whites.

Let us look at all the laws which the hon members say they are going to repeal. However, I can only refer to some of them, because my time unfortunately does not allow me to refer to all of them. Influx control: I am telling hon members that if they came to power and repealed this Act so that influx control could again be implemented, there would be only one way in which they could possibly attempt to enforce it, and that would be by means of the SADF. However, they must remember that the SADF would no longer be here. They would already be in South West. Now how would they enforce influx control then?

I want to predict that this would also have certain consequences for us internally. With the implementation of that Act, if it were to be reinstated, we would see a Black uprising in this country. One cannot give people freedom and then take it away again. One can simply not do that. Does the White voter of this country know that we would have to cordon off all our borders, which are thousands of kilometres long? Who will then do the work in the country? We will not be able to do that sort of thing in this country.

Hon members say that we must ban the Black trade unions—trade unions which are an accepted, respected institution in the world. The hon member for Carletonville will agree with me. He will also agree with me that there is strong solidarity between these various trade unions throughout the world. I want to make the statement today… [Interjections.]

They do not understand you.

Mr Chairman, there is nothing strange about that.

I want to make the statement today that the NP legalised and normalised Black trade unions just in time to avoid a world-wide trade union action against us with regard to the loading and unloading of our goods overseas.

If the CP continued with this, we would be back in the situation in which we would have a world boycott with regard to the loading and unloading of our goods. Our people should know that unemployment would be the result of that. The CP says that they are again going to implement apartheid in sport. [Interjections.]

Order! A conversation is taking place across the floor of the House here which is rather disturbing. The hon member may continue.

The CP says that they are again going to implement apartheid in sport, in restaurants and in marriages, by means of the Immorality Act. Later on there will be separate shops for Black people and for White people and the whole thing will, according to them, be re-lived.

How would that affect the Whites? We would no longer be acceptable to the rest of the world. The wrath of international sanctions would be let loose on us. Our White voters should know what this policy is. Ultimately, if everyone is sent away, there will be a White country. However, it will not be White as a result of colour, but it will have been bled white as a result of violence, sanctions and economic bankruptcy. [Interjections.] That is what the White voters of this country should know, and that is what we want to bring to their attention during this election.

Mr Chairman, it is always a pleasure for me to speak after the hon member for Parow. He will excuse me if I do not refer directly to his speech, but I would like to concentrate on the CP this morning, specifically on their hon leader, who has unfortunately just walked out. However, I see some of their senior hon members sitting there, and perhaps they will convey the message to him.

This debate is taking place on the eve of an election on 6 September. When the CP pertinently put a question to my hon leader-in-chief today, my hon leader-in-chief went to the trouble of rising and giving a clear answer to each question, which can leave no doubt in the minds of the voter, or in the minds of the CP.

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

Mr Chairman, I do not have time for questions. The hon the deputy leader of the CP, the hon member for Lichtenburg, stood up and accused my hon leader of being powerless. I am saying that that is not true. It is their leadership which is powerless, and let me explain why I say that.

They had a lot to say about corruption in the NP, but here in Hansard, col 418 of 10 February 1989 the hon member for Springs asked the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition whether he would take action against people in the CP if it were brought to his attention that there was corruption in his party, or if there was a suspicion that there was corruption and, if the suspicion existed, whether he would then launch an investigation and also act as forcefully as the NP by suspending the membership of a person and allowing the process to take its course.

We are still awaiting the answer. The hon member for Pietersburg has a frown on his face. Let me tell him this. In Pietersburg there was a mayor who, according to Rapport of 5 February, left under a cloud of alleged corruption.

Prove it!

I am not saying that there was corruption, but simply that the suspicion existed. When Rapport approached him and asked him to comment, he said, and I quote:

What did the hon member do about that? [Interjections.]

Report him!

Order! The hon member for Bethal will have a turn to speak, and he will then be able to answer all the questions of the speaker. The hon member may proceed.

In that same article of 5 February in Rapport, Mr Engelbrecht said the following:

I am now asking the hon member for Pietersburg to have the courage of his convictions before this election, in Pietersburg as well.

I want to bring something to the attention of the House. The suspicion exists that Mr Mars de Klerk knew about the property concerned which belonged to a Mr Venter. I shall provide very specific details. It is section 2 of erf 88 in Pietersburg. It is 714 sq metres in size, and he made an offer of R80 000 and obtained a bond of R130 000 on it at Trust Bank. The suspicion exists that that Mr De Klerk knew that the rights of use of the property concerned were going to be changed by the town council. At the stage at which he took that option, it was not yet known to Mr Venter, who was then the owner, or to any other person in the area, that the rights of use of that specific property were going to be changed.

They are soft on corruption.

The conclusion which can be drawn, is that Mr De Klerk therefore made use of secret information which was only available to him in his official capacity.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May an hon member say “they are soft on corruption”?

Order! Did an hon member say that?

Mr Chairman, I said that. I withdraw it.

Order! I understand that a ruling was given by Mr Speaker with regard to these circumstances to the effect that it could not be said that the Government was soft on corruption. The same will have to apply in these circumstances, an hon member may not say that another hon member is soft on corruption.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Concerning the ruling given by Mr Speaker, as I understood it, it was not that saying “soft on corruption” was unparliamentary. In that case Mr Speaker believed that an hon member had said—I do not know if the hon member said it or not—that those in the Government were all corrupt. It was that statement which the hon member had to withdraw.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: What the hon member said was correct initially, but Mr Speaker then gave a second ruling, and he ruled that it was unparliamentary.

Order! I want to put it to hon members as follows. I think one should understand—I personally listened over the intercom and heard what Mr Speaker said—that it is very difficult for a presiding officer to make a ruling with regard to such remarks. It depends on the spirit and the circumstances of the moment. I think that, in view of the present circumstances, I shall reconsider the ruling. I ruled that the hon member had to withdraw it, and the hon member did so.

I want to say something else, if hon members will grant me the opportunity. The mentioning of names in the House of people who are linked to a matter which could jeopardize their public life, must be done with great circumspection. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I was pertinently asking the hon member for Pietersburg whether he was prepared to have the matter investigated, because the suspicion exists that secret information, which was available to a certain person, was only known to him, and that it was made known to him in his official capacity because he served on the management committee of that town. Furthermore, the suspicion exists that that information was used to their advantage.

I want to mention a further point regarding Pietersburg. In the Noordelike Review of 20 January this year, there was an article in which it was alleged that R31 000 of the CP’s funds…

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

Order! The hon member did not want to answer a question earlier.

Mr Chairman, no I do not want to answer a question. It is being alleged that R31 000 of the CP’s money disappeared during the municipal elections. The article states that they struggled to trace the hon member for Pietersburg, but what is important here is that a party worker who was apparently confronted by the CP management of Pietersburg about the removal of the money, allegedly confessed. The hon member for Pietersburg then said that he did not want to comment, but he confirmed that a charge had not been laid with the police with regard to the matter. The question that I want to ask is why they did not lay a charge with the police. Do they not have the courage to do so, or are they afraid? [Interjections.] The question is, regardless of whether or not they recovered the money, why was the matter not reported to the police? I am asking whether or not they would have the courage of their convictions to take action. I see that the hon the deputy leader of the CP is back. Perhaps he can throw light on another matter for us.

We did not lose a cent!

We want a clear answer. We want a clear answer before 6 September. The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis—I have already mentioned this in the House—stated his opinion at one stage, and I quote from a court document of December 1988.

We want a clear answer in this regard. Is that the official CP standpoint and policy? If they ignore us, we are going to show this to the voters and tell them that it is CP policy. What is worse is that the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis said, and I quote:

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member is apparently quoting from the record of a civil matter which is before the courts at the moment. If he is quoting from those records, it is my respectful submission to you that the matter is sub judice.

Order! The hon member did not say that he was quoting from such a record, and until such time as he does so, I cannot say that it is sub judice. The hon member may proceed.

Thank you, Mr Chairman.

The question which arises here is how do Mr Derby-Lewis and the CP define the difference between a senior Black radical and an ordinary Black radical?

†The question is this: Is Mrs Winnie Mandela a senior Black radical and her football team just ordinary little Black radicals? Is Mr Nelson Mandela a senior Black radical, according to their definition, and Mrs Mandela and her football team just ordinary Black radicals? Is Mr Sam Nujoma a senior Black radical? We want to know because the CP have the distinction of being the only party who associated themselves with the point of view that we should not go ahead with Resolution 435, thereby indicating that they supported Mr Nujoma.

*We must be able to go and tell our voters clearly in this election what the CP’s definition of a senior Black radical is, and their hand-picked Parliamentary member, Mr Derby-Lewis and his colleagues who are now sitting all around him over there must help us with this. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP was able to state very clearly in his speech what the policy of the CP was, and then ridicule it. He was able to state very clearly what the standpoints of the DP are, and ridicule that. In other words, he has a clear understanding of where we stands with its policy. The voters also have a clear understanding of where the DP stands with their policy. [Interjections.]

When he began talking about NP policy, he told us that the single concept that he could identify as forming the crux of the solution to our problems was justice for all.

This is the single concept the NP is going to propagate as the concept that addresses our problems: Justice for all. It is a fine concept. I do not know of anyone in the country—no matter on what side of the spectrum—who will not support such a concept, but it is a concept which one could perhaps call “mother love”. To a party that wants to establish an alternative or a new constitution, it is an extremely poor concept to take hold of and cling to. In talking about justice for all, he was not talking about anything new. This was something mentioned by the NP in the referendum campaign as well as in the 1987 election. They are still clinging to a concept that everyone would ostensibly support.

The concept of justice is seen by the NP as consisting of own affairs and general affairs. We know that the majority of the population and the groups—if one wants to use the language of the NP—do not want own affairs for themselves. There may be approximately 6% of the South African population—viz the NP—who define justice as consisting of own affairs and general affairs. The rest of the population—90% plus—rejects this. This is the NP’s definition of justice, however, the justice they want to force onto the rest of the population. [Interjections.]

Since the implementation of the new Constitution five years ago, the NP has been unable to succeed by means of a negotiation process with other leaders—even with the other two Houses of this Parliament—in coming forward with initiatives that were reached by means of negotiation and were positive with regard to the constitutional sphere. Nothing has happened as far as negotiation is concerned during the past five years. Once again the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has spelt out very broad and vague guidelines, which almost look as if they comprise a racial federation. He spelt that out as being the NP’s policy, without there being any indication by any other party, group, population group or whatever that the concept was shared or that there had been negotiation on any such thing.

The only thing he can tell us is that he is flying to Jan Smuts Airport in order to talk to some representatives of a few local authorities. The NP has failed to assemble around the conference table any leaders worthy of mention from the other population groups, and they will continue to fail to do so in future. [Interjections.]

†The 1980s were taken up and wasted by the experiment of the tricameral system. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council said today that there may not even be a State President in a totally new constitution. He envisages a totally new constitution. We have wasted ten years during the 1980s on the tricameral system, and we are going to waste another ten years in the 1990s on a race federation, on a more complex constitution, through which the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and his party are going to push through own and general affairs against all possible odds and against the wishes of more than 90% of the South African population.

It must fail. It must fail because in the end NP policy, despite the nice-sounding words, still remains one of power sharing without losing control, and until we have reached the stage in which they genuinely share power with others without clinging to the control which they have, through states of emergency, through repression and through other resources, there will be mounting conflict. Security in 1989 is in a worse situation than ten years ago. Whites, irrespective of their political views, feel far more insecure under this Government than they did ten years ago, despite the tricameral system.

The new dispensation which the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council envisages will make that worse. Why? Because the overwhelming majority of South Africans are still being excluded. They are still being excluded from negotiations. The NP has achieved a situation in which an indaba is being mentioned. Merely hollow words! The National Statutory Council has been shelved. They cannot find any negotiating partners.

The DP does not have the approach that one can only talk with those with whom one basically agrees and that one can only talk with those who actually accept one’s agenda. We will therefore, in this coming election campaign, be very clear and specific about our policy. It is contained in documents and we will not fudge the issue. We will tell the voters that we will move towards a negotiated settlement with all South African groups, and not merely with the representatives of local authorities.

In the DP we say the concept of own and general affairs is an extension of apartheid. It is an extension of a policy which is designed to retain the privileges of one group at the expense of others. It is a concept which is based on discrimination. It is a concept which is based on race despite all the nice-sounding words. Voluntary association as espoused by the NP will remain a concept which will be based on race.

We will make it quite clear to the electorate that the approach of the DP is based on non-racialism, based on the view that the Group Areas Act ought to be scrapped, that the Race Classification Act ought to be scrapped, that the tricameral system ought to be scrapped in order that we can move towards a democratic system in which there is protection and recognition of language, religious and cultural groups, towards a system which brings government as closely as possible to the people, towards a system in which the powers of government at all levels are defined and enshrined and protected, towards a system in which we will have an independent Supreme Court which will not be muzzled by the State, and which will not be undermined by the NP, towards a system in which the Supreme Court will protect and interpret a bill of rights which will define the rights of all individuals irrespective of their colour or creed or religion… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not wish to deal for too long with the hon member for Durban Central, but it was interesting to listen to what he had to say about bringing everybody into the negotiations. I take it that that hon member adopts the standpoint that the ANC should be involved in those negotiations; in other words that they should negotiate with the ANC as well. [Interjections.] What he did not say is whether they will do so unconditionally. Will they ask the ANC to forswear violence before they negotiate with them? [Interjections.] That is the question that the hon member must answer to the voters of South Africa. [Interjections.] We want to know whether there will only be negotiation with the ANC once the bombs have stopped exploding. That is the crucial question. [Interjections.] That answer must be given to the voters of South Africa.

*So far this debate has leaned very strongly in the direction of the election on 6 September. The election on 6 September, as things are developing at present, will hinge in particular on leadership and on who is going to lead South Africa after that election.

I should like to associate myself with what my benchmate, the hon member for Parow, said here…

And you are soft on corruption!

… about the participation in the election of the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition in this House. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central said in a challenging and calculated fashion: “You are soft on corruption.” He was challenging the hon member to take a point of order. This is in direct conflict with the ruling given by the Chair on numerous occasions.

Order! Did the hon member say that?

Mr Chairman, I said the NP is soft on corruption.

That is true! [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Springs may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I can understand that when one is trying to hide one’s embarrassment, one wastes other people’s time.

To come back to the point of leadership and the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition, I want to go further than the hon member for Parow did and say that if the hon leader believes those banners with “President Treurnicht” that were put up in Bloemfontein, and believes that he is going to win the campaign, I challenge him to lead the campaign in that conviction. He must not stand in Waterberg. He must show us that he is convinced that he is going to win the election. [Interjections.]

The debate that is taking place here today is a very important one, and we have received a very important opportunity to compare the contenders for future leadership, which is what this election is all about. Who do we have on the NP side? We have a young, dynamic leader who has roused great expectations in the hearts of people both inside and outside South Africa since his election. [Interjections.] When he has spoken, one has no doubt about what he has said. One knows exactly where he stands. [Interjections.] He speaks clearly and logically, and he is a man who can take firm action.

Who do we have on the other side, however? As always, we experienced reactive speeches today… [Interjections.]… which were aimed only at attacking the NP.

Order! Hon members must grant the hon member his turn to speak. They must not talk so loudly across the floor. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, what do we find? If there is one sphere in which that hon leader is an expert, it is in saying afterwards what he did not say. This is a characteristic that recurs throughout his public career. We get conflicting statements—the hon member for Pretoria Central referred to this among other things—with regard to the position of the Blacks and the use of cinemas. They have one sports policy in Pietersburg and another in Springs, but there is no distinct leadership. [Interjections.] What we see here is a leader who says we must elect him first. Once they have taken power, he will say what their plan is. They talk partition, but the motivation…

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

No! They have wasted enough of my time. If we are challenged, we shall waste the time of each one of them as well.

You are scared!

They say their policy is based on partition, but what is the motivation or incentive behind that? If one analyses it carefully, it is separation. [Interjections.]

Dr Carel Boshoff says the CP policy has no moral basis. Has he ever been repudiated? No! A conglomeration of groups is being held together under that umbrella.

That party sells second-hand policy. They sell the old HNP sports policy and also a distorted and very dented former NP policy, which was tested and did not work. They are trying to rejuvenate it now. They do not have a single original idea of their own, however. Not one! It is all secondhand policy.

When one looks at the kind of guidance they get, that hon leader allows Mr Eugéne Terre’Blanche to overbid him on the platform time after time, because he is the one who attracts all the attention.

The question voters will have to ask themselves on 6 September is: Would I buy a second-hand car from this man?

Mr Chairman, I listened with interest to the previous speaker. One realises that the resignation of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning has had a tremendous impact on this establishment. His efforts will obviously not go unrecognised.

One has to be quite factual and practical here. The Whites in this country must accept that one cannot merely disregard the aspirations of the Blacks. They must also realise that it is not entirely up to them to take decisions in regard to the Blacks outside the homelands. These aspirations must be accommodated and, whether we like it or not, we cannot sweep this particular aspect under the carpet because the future stability and the security in this country depends on a solution being found which will be acceptable to all races. I want to warn that failure to recognise this fact will not resolve the existing problems which arise from the fact that the Black political aspirations are not accommodated under the present dispensation.

I would also like to point out that an enormous amount of goodwill exists at the present time. We need to capitalise on this. The reform that is in process at the moment is on the move and no means exist to stop this process, except through negotiation and by responsible means.

The Nats will try!

I would like to direct the attention of this House to certain trends that seem to be creeping into the manner in which the own affairs system is being applied.

The question here is whether we are not taking the own affairs philosophy too far. [Interjections.] It would appear that the concept of own affairs has been taken out of context from its original intended position in that there are indications that the system is becoming increasingly complicated and is too rigid. At the same time, it is primarily preserving exclusivity without due regard being given to the implications of or the overall need for such actions and decisions.

Accepting the fact that the concept of own affairs is complementary to the present tricameral system, I would venture that efforts should be made to work towards a strategy which would have the effect of gradually moving less sensitive issues away from own affairs in the direction of general affairs. I am, however, not for a moment suggesting that the main structures of own affairs be dismantled. These are fundamental to the concept of group rights, which I recognise. However, the present complicated over-emphasis on own affairs is resulting in unnecessary duplication, which again is adding to the costs of administration.

Now that certain personalities are disappearing from the political scene, one can only express the hope that present strains and stresses within the negotiation process will give way to a better understanding within the present tricameral framework. There is a need to remove the present confrontational attitudes that have dominated the functioning of Parliament and that have built up as this session has gone on. This has not only had the effect of neutralising to a great degree the effectiveness of Parliament, but has also been responsible for Parliament suffering a certain loss of credibility.

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr Speaker, on one occasion the NP was compared to a springbok on the vast dunelands of the Kalahari. When water is in short supply and grazing becomes scarce, the springbok pokes its nose into the air and goes off in search of better pastures. The point is that this does not weaken that springbok. It increases its chances of survival and strengthens its character. This describes the NP in 1989 on its path forwards, into the future for South Africa.

Since the NP is anchored in the conviction that South Africa’s interests must always be placed first, it is not difficult for it to make a course adjustment in its search for solutions to South Africa’s problems. The NP is not stagnant and unprogressive. The NP is vital and future-oriented because it is realistic. [Interjections.]

For many decades a great number of political opponents to the left and to the right have attempted in the same spirit as the big-mouthed hon member for Overvaal, to portray the NP as dealing recklessly with South Africa’s interests. Those political parties have come and gone. I want to predict this afternoon that the political parties which are sitting in this House as opposition parties this afternoon, will also tread that path. This will happen simply because they will not be able to stand the test of the times in South Africa. On the one hand they cannot stand that test because their message for South Africa is unrealistic, but particularly also because their participation in South African politics is anchored in opportunism rather than in service to this country and its people. We need not look far to find proof of this. There is no way in which any political party or any future government in South Africa can avoid power-sharing in some or other form in this country.

However, the CP builds its political philosophy around the rousing and stirring up of the emotions of White people in South Africa. They are doing this in such a way as to kindle White fears and to promote White prejudices, in an attempt to bluff people that they find solutions for South Africa’s problems in the breaking away or secession of a so-called White state in which there will be White majority rule.

Not only do I think that this is irresponsible conduct, but I also think those hon members would do well to test their supporters’ reactions to it. They could go back to those areas which they represent and hold a referendum there, after they have spelt out the responsibilities that will be placed on those voters in establishing such a state. They could bring those results back to this Parliament. The CP know that they cannot succeed in what they wish to accomplish, because they are attempting to gain power in South Africa through the misuse of White people. The realities of South Africa are not important to them. There is only one interest which that party serves, and that is obtaining political power. The CP is a power-hungry party.

This afternoon I want to turn for a moment to the DP, which is similarly unattuned to South Africa’s interests. This is a political party which claims that its message for this country is strong enough to enable it to build a unit from three parties which are being merged. Such a party should at least have the courage of its convictions in its present position to be able to advance leadership or to appoint a leader to interpret that party’s policy.

The three parties which have formed the DP, have not come together as a result of their inner convictions. The three leaders of that party differ radically from one another, and I want to refer briefly to each of them.

The hon member for Randburg—he is not here, and I see that there are only three hon members of that party in the House at the moment—who is moving under a cloak of conservatism, is on the radical left wing of that party and the fact that he is being tolerated as co-leader is attributable to the conception that he can unite a few thousand radical left-wing votes and a few misguided Afrikaners behind that party.

The hon member attempts to be all things to all men. On the one hand he clings desperately to Afrikaner sentiment, which of necessity implies that he affords special recognition to the Afrikaner group idea, and on the other hand he is the most active propagandist for co-operation with extra-parliamentary organisations, which do not exactly have the aim of recognising any form of group existence in South Africa.

He is the most active participant in a game which is aimed at placing South Africa’s character, norms and values on the negotiation table and at subjecting them to the approval and consent of the SA Communist Party and its fellow-travellers. In this he may perhaps be followed by hon members on that side of the House such as the hon member for Claremont and the hon member for Greytown, but this will not get him very far in South African politics.

The time has come for that hon member to shed the political cloak of sanctimoniousness which he has draped around himself and to approach the voters of South Africa in his naked reality and convey his standpoints to the people of South Africa like a man.

The hon parliamentary leader of the DP—I see he is not here either—is nothing other than a liaison officer between the captains of finance of the DP and the irreconcilable elements of that party. We have already experienced this in the past, and we are going to see it once again. If his party does not achieve the desired results in the coming election, according to the expectations of his sponsors, that hon member will become the next proverbial political portrait in the dustbin.

The contribution of the PFP component that is represented in the DP, has been reduced by the hon member for Randburg to the contribution they can make with regard to individual rights. That is all the great PFP, according to the norms of that party, is going to contribute to the party’s existence. I am afraid that this is not good enough to take that party to great heights in the coming election.

The NP also protects individual rights, but the NP’s standpoint is pure, and that is that the right of the individual does not entitle him by his actions to infringe the rights of other individuals or the rights of communities. We make no apology for that, because it forms the basis for the maintenance of order and stability in South Africa.

The third leader of the DP, Dr Denis Worrall, sometimes makes one yearn to return to the days of one’s childhood, when one still believed in stories about pixies and the like. Two and a half years ago that hon member of the troika returned to South Africa with a grand vision for South Africa. I want to ask everyone in this House this afternoon what has, in reality, become of that vision of Dr Worrall, who came here to save South Africa amid such great fanfare from the opposition Press and the opposition people. Where is Dr Worrall today? [Interjections.]

I want to go so far as to tell hon members that one gains the impression that the DP is not too eager to give Dr Worrall the opportunity to stand in a safe constituency during the coming election in order to return to this Parliament. One rather gains the impression that definite attempts are being made to keep Dr Worrall out of here, because this could facilitate the struggle of the Progs within the DP to retain Dr De Beer as party leader. [Interjections.]

South Africa is not looking for opportunists now. South Africa is accustomed to good, purposeful leadership, which the NP is once again offering this country. In the person of our hon leader-in-chief we have someone who looks beyond personal interest and popularity and who is reaching towards the future of South Africa, in full awareness and full acceptance of the realities of this country.

Dealing with new challenges is not a new or a strange experience to the NP; in fact, we are prepared for it, because every new challenge we face is a challenge that has grown out of the successes of the NP in creating better conditions with regard to the constitutional, social and economic development of South Africa, which has naturally led to greater expectations among people. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I must say in all fairness that it is an unenviable task to enter this debate after the monumental speeches of the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition and the hon member for Lichtenburg. [Interjections.] I say this in reverence and humility. This is evidence that they are in a class of their own and there is no one in the NP leadership who can compete in that class.

I am grateful to participate in this debate from the CP benches and not from those of the DP or the NP. [Interjections.] There are quite a number of good reasons for this. In view of the fact that we are discussing the Vote of the Chairman of the Minister’s Council in the House of Assembly today, who is also the hon leader-in-chief of the NP, the most obvious reason is that the CP is currently the only White political party represented here which can lay claim to stable, consistent and reliably definitive leadership. [Interjections.] I do not even want to try to imagine…

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

No, I shall not reply to the question and I am not prepared to answer any other questions either in the course of my speech.

I do not even want to imagine the situation of hon members of the DP where there are almost more leaders than supporters nowadays. The NP is experiencing a dearth of leadership—from the lowest to the highest level. [Interjections.]

At the lowest level we recently had the situation at the third tier of government, in the Johannesburg City Council, that the NP caucus took eight hours to have a motion of confidence in the hon leader-in-chief of the NP, the regional leader of the NP, the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Burger and Mrs Marx agreed to. It took them eight hours. [Interjections.]

At the highest level, the NP is experiencing a monotonous mediocrity of leadership. There were four contenders for the post of leader-in-chief, of whom not one really stood out above the rest. The caucus had to vote three times and even then the successful candidate won by a bare eight votes.

In 1978 one candidate started off with 22 votes which dwindled to 16. The second candidate withdrew from politics last night. He does not even refer to the current hon leader-in-chief of the NP in his statement. What is remarkable, however, is that in his statement, the official statement as it appeared in Die Burger, he ignored the hon leader-in-chief. [Interjections.]

The third candidate could not even live up to the expectations of the people who had laboriously started canvassing support for him since the last quarter of 1987. He has distinguished himself by taking the economy of our country from bad to worse in record time under his management. The late Dr Fred du Plessis said only last year that the position of the managing director of South Africa, Limited, was vacant.

The fourth candidate then became the leader-in-chief. He has distinguished himself on numerous occasions. His majorities in Vereeniging are declining further in every election. His calculations obviously convey to him that he should not stand in Vereeniging in this election. Apparently he is working on a plan to try to commit the new NP caucus now, before the election, through decisions of the present caucus, to nominating him as candidate for the State Presidency. [Interjections.] He has good reasons backing the plan. [Interjections.] Whether he stands in Vereeniging or not, he will not be able to be a member of that caucus after the election. That is why he announced here today that he would not make himself available in Vereeniging in the election.

This is in stark contrast to the conduct of my hon leader. [Interjections.] When my hon leader was challenged shortly after the formation of the CP, he accepted it. He resigned his seat and fought an election against a combined HNP-NP onslaught, and he came back, stronger than ever before. [Interjections.]

It is fitting to examine other occasions when the hon leader-in-chief of the NP has distinguished himself. His acrobatic manoeuvres always to avoid the fundamental choice between conservative and liberal caused the late Adv Vorster to send him a message: “F W, klim af van die draad; jou broek is blink geskuur,” or words to that effect. [Interjections.]

To avoid the fundamental choice between self-determination in a fatherland of one’s own on the one hand and Black majority rule in a unitary state on the other, he has become the exponent of the inherently contradictory and intolerable system of own affairs on the one hand and general affairs on the other; self-determination on the one hand as opposed to power-sharing on the other; freedom on the one hand and loss of that freedom by the Whites on the way to Black majority rule on the other; own residential areas and open residential areas; a White Windmill Park and a few months later an integrated Windmill Park; own schools and mixed schools; own beaches and open beaches; living space of one’s own and community life for the White and displacement of that same White from his living and residential spaces and, last but not least, the sophisticated policy in respect of parks and other public facilities which are both open and closed. [Interjections.]

With every respect, the hon the Minister is committing one contradiction after the other in almost every statement of policy he makes. He is working with false compromises between irreconcilables. On the one hand he guarantees that the White’s vested rights will be retained but on the other hand he seeks a Black majority to try to protect that White’s rights. On the one hand he argues for negotiation with an open agenda without conditions, provisos and prerequisites but on the other hand he guarantees that the Black majority will not dominate the White in the land of his birth.

On the one hand he is prepared to accept a Black majority on the council which has to thrash out the new Constitution and he foresees that there could be a majority of Black leaders in the new Government, but on the other hand he guarantees that South Africa will not have a Black majority Government. On the one hand he rejects a non-racial South Africa but on the other hand he is in favour of a non-racist South Africa, without anybody being able to understand what distinction he is trying to draw and without his making any effort to give substance to that distinction.

On 2 February this year the same ambiguity revealed itself in the hon leader-in-chief of the NP. When the hon the State President asked that the two offices of State President and chief leadership of the party be separated, and he resigned as leader-in-chief on that basis, the hon the Minister accepted the hon the State President’s resignation as leader-in-chief of the party but he did not accept the separation of the two offices.

On the one hand the hon the Minister accepts the chief leadership of his party but on the other hand he does not exercise that leadership.

At the moment the country is without a leader. The hon the State President is giving no leadership because his caucus has already given him his walking ticket. They want him to remove himself from the political scene altogether. The hon leader-in-chief of the NP wants to lead but he cannot because he does not have the power.

A telling example is the crisis in South West Africa. The hon leader-in-chief of the NP became the chief leader on 2 February but he has not yet uttered a word of guidance to the country about the crisis in South West Africa. [Interjections.] South Africa is asking where the leader-in-chief of the NP is. Perhaps the art of conciliation of the inreconcilable has become so much part of him that he can no longer reconcile himself with clear trail-blazing leadership.

A few weeks ago we heard an example of his leadership, or the lack of it, in the sphere of education, in his capacity as Minister of National Education, in the discussion of the National Education Vote, when he admitted that the ten-year plan for equal education was on the rocks. The plan has been suspended for all practical purposes—yet another example of the failure of that party’s policy. Only three months after the hon the Minister became leader-in-chief of the NP, half of his provincial leadership had already beaten a hasty retreat. I am referring to the resignation of the hon leaders of Natal and the Cape Province which have been announced. The only one to remain is the hon leader of the Transvaal, who is also the same person as the hon leader-in-chief of the NP. He is at least left with himself and the hon leader of the NP in the Free State in his party.

I think this is a fitting opportunity to pay tribute to the hon leader of the NP in the Free State because he is the only NP provincial leader who is prepared to stand for election in the coming election in a constituency. [Interjections.] The leaders of the Transvaal, the Cape Province and Natal are therefore all missing.

In contrast, the leadership of the hon leader of the CP soars above all this. He even commands respect from those who differ with him. His standpoints are clear, logical and understandable. [Interjections.] Nobody doubts where he is leading. His principles are fixed and non-negotiable. [Interjections.] Friend and enemy respect his political honesty, steadfastness and integrity. His word is his bond. [Interjections.] At a time when important decisions have to be taken, he is looked up to.

I should like to refer to the ambiguity in the NP as it manifests itself in the sphere of constitutional reform. We have heard many statements from NP leaders against a federation or against federalism. The hon member for Fauresmith, however, said as recently as 24 May last year:

I think it is fair, in the light of the hon leader-in-chiefs statement that he had no fault to find with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning’s speech last Friday, to ask how the hon member for Fauresmith’s standpoint is to be reconciled with the newly-adopted standpoint of the NP.

I should also like to refer to the ambiguity in the sphere of so-called own and general affairs. On the one hand the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP says that he stands firm regarding own affairs and that it is a manifestation of the recognition of the White’s right to self-determination and should be expanded.

On the other hand the hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture has said on two occasions, not in this House, but in the House of Representatives… [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, it is indeed an unenviable task to speak after the hon member for Potgietersrus. [Interjections.] Let me say at once that I am not going succumb to the temptation of reacting to his arrogance. I shall simply leave my comments about him at that.

I should far rather like to say that it is a very great pleasure for me to be able to participate in this debate of our dynamic young leader. I want to state clearly today that I am looking forward to the election under the leadership of our hon leader-in-chief. [Interjections.] Once one has fought against the CP two or three times in an election, one gets to know all their tricks and one knows exactly what they are up to.

Owing to their lack of a policy it has already become a characteristic of the CP to resort to emotional politics and to avoid as far as possible honest, viable alternatives for South Africa’s complex questions. As in the past—the hon member for Lichtenburg also very clearly did this this morning—they will probably once again portray the old story of partition as being the only model which can prevent domination and which can guarantee the future of the Whites in this country.

How this is to be achieved, no one knows, and no one wants to tell us. [Interjections.] The hon leader of the CP has had an opportunity on various occasions in the recent past to make a grand policy speech. He had the opportunity of doing so once again this morning, but what did he do? He stood up and attempted to draw up a policy for the NP. He set up his own Aunt Sallys and shot them down.

With regard to precisely how the CP would make the division and who would live where, he left that unmentioned. He said that there was certain land which belonged to the Whites in this country.

However, the CP prefers to avoid the implications of its partition policy, and what they are selling to South Africa in such fine-sounding words, is simply a dream. Likewise, their great cultural leader, Prof Carel Boshoff—I do not know whether he is still their cultural leader—had a grand dream, but these dreams of Prof Carel Boshoff have now become nightmares to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition. This is because Prof Carel Boshoff and his Stigting Afrikanervryheid wish to establish this great White country in precisely the same place as the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition wishes to establish his Coloured homeland.

Oh, so you do know what our policy is.

Of course, I know what their policy is. After all, it is simple. [Interjections.] The leader of the CP is not satisfied with Prof Boshoff’s plan, but on the other hand he does not want to tell us what his is. Perhaps it is still a secret. Perhaps we shall hear it during the coming election. Instead of spelling out his policy to us, he is relying on the emotions of those voters, who in fact, see in his partition policy an escape from reality.

As a Christian, however, I want to express my strongest disapproval today of certain actions of the CP and their hangers-on. We are on the eve of an election. I want to lodge a serious objection today to way in which they are dragging religion into politics.

What about Boy Geldenhuys?

That hon member is the one who really ought to listen. I want to object to the way in which they are attempting to bluff people that if one is opposed to apartheid and opposed to partition, because after all, this is their only policy, one cannot be a Christian.

Mr Jan van Zyl, the great economist and the former hon member for Sunnyside, went so far as to say in the previous election that if one voted for the NP, one might as well tear the New Testament out of one’s Bible. During the recent municipal election in Bloemfontein, the wife of a certain minister of the church stood at the polling booth and confronted the people at the polling booth, telling them openly “if you are a Christian, come and vote for the CP”.

I have here a pamphlet, and it is very clear that this pamphlet comes from the CP, because it was distributed by the CP candidate in Parys, and his address appears on it. He describes Paul with a great deal of verbosity. He tells how he sees Paul:

This man goes on to say:

He then continues, very cleverly, as follows:

Then he refers us to Nehemiah 4:14, and he says that we must let the following words resound in our hearts:

The “them” can only be the NP. One can see what these people are doing. [Interjections.] The problem with these people is that they want to reconcile their religion with their politics, and not their politics with their religion.

If that is not true, then why did these people establish their own White church? [Interjections.] There are quite a number of the members of this church sitting in this Chamber today, and they must tell us why. Are they elevating this policy of partition to an ideology, alongside the church and alongside the Bible, or perhaps even above the Church and above the Bible? Could this be what they are doing?

I have here in my hand a copy of the Volkstem, and I am sorry that I have to touch the thing, because just touching this thing is enough to contaminate one’s hand. On the front cover of this thing is a photograph of the hon Leader of the Official Opposition, and an article under the heading “KP woel al”. They go on to say that all eyes are on the leader of the CP, Dr Andries Treumicht. Below that they say that they must win; it is the only hope of saving the Whites from the clutches of the devil. One can see with whom the NP is being compared. This little newspaper also contains quite a number of articles on religion, theology, White theology, discrimination, racism, selection and differentiation.

Whose newspaper is it? [Interjections.]

That of your allies! [Interjections.]

It is that of your allies. That is the problem with those people. They are like these Black taxis. They climb aboard. Just as long as you are all right, you can climb aboard. The moment documents come to light, they want to dissociate themselves from them.

Do hon members know what is in the middle of this newspaper?

Do you suddenly no longer know Johan Pienaar?

Here is a photograph of the hon nominated member Mr Clive Derby-Lewis. [Interjections.] There is not only a photograph. There is also an acknowledgement. The following is written here:

[Interjections.]

Do you know whose it is now?

Hon members know that from time to time we are confronted at meetings with regard to the Parliamentary prayer. After all, the CPs are telling the whole world that we are praying for the Muslims.

That is untrue! That is untrue, and you know it!

It is true. I am going to quote it to hon members. [Interjections.]

Order! Surely the hon member for Overvaal knows better. The hon member must withdraw it.

I did withdraw it, Sir.

Order! I did not hear anything.

I withdraw it, Mr Speaker.

Order! that is better. The hon member for Bethlehem may continue.

Mr Speaker, you must listen to what is written here:

They say that we no longer pray to the Triune God No, it is simply a general god, so that the true believer can say that praying no longer takes place in Parliament. They go further and—I want to know whether those people over there dissociate themselves from this or not—they say:

Scandalous!

What is the truth regarding the prayer? I have here in my hand an official document regarding parliamentary traditions and conventions. In it the prayer, precisely as it is read every day, is spelt out. The following is stated here:

Hon members can therefore see what these people are doing. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I would like to use this opportunity to direct certain questions to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council.

Last Friday we were treated to a lengthy if somewhat confused exposition of the NP’s constitutional vision by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. I assume that the statements which he made on policy were made with the approval and the blessing of the leader of the NP.

I would therefore like to ask their leader, the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, to clarify some of what I found rather confusing and contradictory statements made by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

This vision is in my view certainly the most patent example of deception by the use of fine and often liberal sounding words which on closer analysis boil down to nothing more than a rather transparent device to keep control and all meaningful political power in the hands of the NP—in short, a device to entrench White rule.

The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning asks:

And then he answers himself by saying:

These are fine words with which everybody—I would say even the ANC—could agree but how does the NP intend achieving democracy, full participation and equality?

Will all South Africans have the vote, because that is what I understand democracy to mean? Does the NP actually believe in a universal franchise? Does it believe in one man, one vote because this is what democracy is about. One man, one vote is no different from a universal franchise and a universal franchise is a prerequisite for democracy.

If this is not what it means the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council must tell us which groups or which section of the population will not have the vote. If the NP now believes in one man, one vote, let us accept then that this is no longer an issue, and let us not in this coming election see this phrase used to scare White voters. It is no longer a political spook. [Interjections.]

How will the NP achieve full participation in government? Are we to have a fourth Chamber of Parliament for the Blacks? Will their representation be weighed according to the number of voters, as in the present tricameral system? If not, does the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council believe that the scheme will have any chance whatsoever of being accepted by the vast majority of South Africans?

The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning speaks of freedom of association, freedom of group formation leading to what he calls a non-aligned group. How will this group be represented in Parliament? Will we have a fifth Chamber of Parliament? Where will this non-racial group be allowed to live? In which group area? Or will all people who choose to be non-racial and non-aligned, as envisaged in the NP’s constitutional programme, have to move to free settlement areas? Will they have to move to Woodstock, Hillbrow or Mayfair? What is the plan? [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning says the Government is often accused of being vague on its constitutional policy. Those are his words. One can understand his concern. He then goes on to say that the Government has a clear constitutional policy, a plan and a strategy to implement that plan. In detailing this plan, what does he mean by “the protection of groups wanting to be recognised as groups”? Those are his words. He talks about the protection of groups wanting to be recognised as groups.

I want to ask why these groups need to be protected. What do they have to be protected from? Is it protection from living next door to people of colour and from sharing beaches? Is it protection from sharing schools with children of colour? Is it protection from getting to know and to understand and to trust our fellow South Africans? Is this what these groups have to be protected from? Are these the dangers which the NP’s constitutional plan will protect us from?

I want to ask further whether the hon the leader of the NP can identify a single group in this country, other than the White group—fortunately, I might say, a diminishing section of the White group—who would expect to be protected from these things. If these are not the things then from which the NP’s constitutional plan is going to protect groups, he should please tell us what the word “protection” means. What are we being protected from?

Does the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council agree with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning that the NP is committed to the elimination of discrimination on the basis of race, colour and/or other bases? Those are the hon the Minister’s own words. He adds to that the words “including group classification”. That he wants to eliminate as well. If so, I should ask the hon the leader of the NP to tell the electorate before the election in September. I do not expect him to repeal these Acts now, but I want him to tell the electorate what he intends doing about the Group Areas Act, the Population Registration Act and the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, because, by no stretch of the imagination, can these Acts fall outside the ambit of what the NP claims to be committed to eliminating.

If he is not prepared to do this, then his party cannot blame the voters for rejecting the NP’s constitutional vision as mere sleight of hand. The crux of the whole matter and the test of the bona fides of this Government is whether it plans to introduce a true democracy; in other words, a democracy in which everybody votes and a democracy in which inevitably the NP is going to lose power. Clearly, Sir, I do not believe any voter in this coming election will believe that this Government is prepared to introduce that kind of democracy in which they will be put to the test by the people of this country.

Mr Chairman, it is a privilege for me to take part in the discussion of this Vote of the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in the House of Assembly.

When the NP was established in 1914, its motto was: “South Africa first”. After 75 years, that is still its motto. Since 1910 many parties have been established and dissolved in South Africa but the NP stands as firm as the rock of Gibraltar in South African politics. [Interjections.]

Let us look at the DP. The Progressive Federal Party was founded in 1958. When the Young Turks broke away, it became the Progressive Reformist Party. It accepted the concept of one man, one vote at that time, too. Upon the dissolution of the United Party, it became the PFP. It is from this party that the DP was born. Every time it is beaten at the polls, it attempts to mislead the voters by changing its name. [Interjections.] However, this party stands for the same principles as the PFP, its predecessor. Let us take a look at its draft programme of principles and policy—inter alia at the policy programme. Point III.1 provides for universal franchise on a common voters’ roll for every level of representation for all adult citizens of South Africa. Stated more simply, this amounts to one man, one vote.

Point III.3 provides, inter alia, that an electoral system may be composed of proportional representation, for example. This is the same system as the West German and Italian systems. The Whites make up approximately 15% of the population; therefore the Whites’ voting strength would make up approximately 15% of the total voting strength of South Africa.

No, parties receive percentages!

Under point III.8 it is also stated, inter alia that the racist basis for a South African constitutional dispensation is rejected, together with institutions which are built thereon, such as the tricameral Parliament, separate bureaucracies and separate local authorities—this is very important—and racist legislation such as the Population Registration Act and the Group Areas Act.

Let us take the constituency of Albany as an example. Grahamstown has approximately 12 000 Whites, 60 000 Blacks and 4 000 Coloureds. The number of White representatives on the town council, which consists of 10 members, would be approximately two. Port Alfred has approximately 4 000 Whites, 2 000 Coloureds and 14 000 Blacks. The maximum White representation here would therefore be approximately three. Bathurst Municipality, with its six councillors, would receive one representative. Alicedale would receive only one representative. This would also apply to Kenton-on-Sea, Boesmansriviermond and the rest of the rural areas in South Africa.

I want to make the statement that the DP is softer on security than the PFP was. Was it not the hon members for Durban Central and Greytown who were expelled from the party because they had negotiated with the ANC in Dakar? Was it not the hon member for Claremont who was forced out of the PFP because he had made a target of the Security Services?

Furthermore, it is also interesting to note that the hon members for Durban Central and Greytown have now received recognition in the DP for their good deeds and that they now serve on the chief executive of this party.

The hon member for Randburg maintained that he had spoken to the publicity chief of the ANC, Mr Thabo Mbeki, in order to convince him to put an end to the acts of terror. He said that Mr Mbeki had given him the assurance that they would end.

However, let us look at the facts as furnished by the hon the Minister of Law and Order for the period November 1987 to February 1988. During this period of 104 days there were 47 acts of terrorism, in which five people died and 48 people were injured. From 1 November 1988 to 12 February 1989—this is after the hon member for Randburg had spoken with the ANC—there were 64 acts of terrorism in which 14 people were killed and 79 injured. This is an increase of 64% in acts of terror and 75% in human lives.

We today are the descendants of the Free Burghers, the French Huguenots and the British and German settlers on the Eastern Border. Over a period of 300 years, blood has been shed in order to preserve civilised norms. We are not a nation of quitters. We are not weaklings. This party policy will continue to maintain law and order. The NP will continue to establish a constitutional dispensation that is based on a just dispensation and civilised norms.

Mr Chairman, I should like to refer to the dream of the hon member for Kuruman. I am sorry to have to wake him now. [Interjections.] I was actually referring to the dream he spoke about—not the present one.

If I may refer to his federal plan, I want to refer to an old pamphlet that reads “Die Verenigde Party se federale plan sal Blankes uitverkoop”. He may tell me that that is a thing of the past, but his dream about the federation plan goes back to Sir George Grey. He will probably not find it inappropriate if I quote to him from this. [Interjections.] This pamphlet says:

I do not know whether the federation plan is NP policy, but if the NP is moving in that direction, I must also refer to what the NP’s hon leader-in-chief said about it. According to Hansard: Assembly, 3 February 1975, col 86 he said:

[Interjections.] That was the federation plan and what the NP and its hon leader thought of it.

The hon leader also referred to something else this morning, however, and I also want to quote what he said about this approximately a year ago. He said:

It is significant that the other strong personalities have been disappearing from the organisation since the hon leader of the NP has taken over, or does the NP not regard the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning as a strong personality? The hon the State President is disappearing, the hon the provincial leader of Natal is disappearing and so is my hon opponent in Bethal.

But he is not a strong leader! [Interjections.]

He may not be a strong leader, but he is a valued person in Parliament and, as far as I am concerned, a valued opponent.

We were asked, with regard to this debate and the future, to think seriously about what is going to happen in the election. We were asked to approach this matter with integrity. I do not want to present the NP policy erroneously in this election. Consequently I want to avail myself of the opportunity to make sure that what I say to the people is correct. [Interjections.]

Hon members are all familiar with the report in Rapport of 7 May 1989. Here is the headline, and I want to show it to the hon the leader of the NP: “Nou een Parlement. So is die NP op die aanval.”

I ask the hon the leader of the NP, or any other NP leader, to tell us whether they differ with what appeared in this newspaper. [Interjections.] Is this incorrect?

I listened to the hon the leader this morning, and he said it was an exploratory speech. I ask the hon the leader whether there is anything in this report that is incorrect, or may I justifiably tell the voters in the election that this is what the NP stands for?

They are dead quiet.

Nothing is being denied. I assume, therefore, that I shall be correct in telling the voters that what is contained in this report is correct. That is the NP’s policy. [Interjections.] No one has denied that this is correct. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Sunnyside is making comments, but he is not denying that what is reported here is correct.

Read our information documents and not the newspapers! [Interjections.]

I ask the hon member for Sunnyside whether he denies that this is a correct rendition of their policy. [Interjections.] Does the hon the leader-in-chief deny—I could also ask whether he acknowledges—the words of the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology: “We are moving away from segregation”? Is that the NP’s policy? Can I present that to the electorate as being NP policy?

Yes, you can, because they are not saying a word.

There are numerous aspects on which we should like to have clarity so that we will not be accused of presenting an erroneous image of that party’s policy.

I want to ask the hon the leader of the NP whether he agrees with the interpretation given yesterday by the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare and the hon the Deputy Minister when they said that an own affairs hospital such as the J G Strijdom Hospital was also open to people of colour. Is that an own affairs hospital which is also open to people of colour? In that case, what is the difference between an own affairs hospital and an own affairs school? Are own affairs schools also open to people of colour?

No, not at the moment.

Why are own affairs hospitals open to people of colour?

It is done very rarely. [Interjections.]

This reminds me of the NP town council of Krugersdorp. Their policy was that if there were no more than 5% Blacks, the town hall would be open, but if there were 6% the town hall would be closed.

I also want to know whether, in this one South Africa we are heading for, and in which the Blacks will be represented up to the highest level, there will also be representation in the Cabinet. Can a Black man become President? Can he sit in the same Parliament as we do? Let us hear the answer of the hon the leader-in-chief to this. There can only be one Parliament in this unitary state, after all. There is only one citizenship. Are we going to get universal suffrage? There is no geographic division. Within the same geographic area, therefore, we are all equal. What is the power base that the NP want to reserve for the Whites, as they say? They say there is no geographic power base. In that case, what is the power base? Where are the Whites to exercise their power if not in a geographic area? We were told that new groups should be formed, which need not necessarily be ethnic groups. If new groups are to be formed, surely the old groups must be done away with. Is the Population Registration Act going to be abolished, so that there will be an opportunity for this formation of new groups? How long must this transitional period be? When is it going to crystallise into a new group? Is the Act then going to be implemented once again to identify the groups, since the hon the leader-in-chief always talks about group rights?

I want to know from the hon the leader-in-chief whether he agrees with his hon Chief Whip and the hon member for Langlaagte who say that Coloureds are part of the Afrikaner people and are part of the same people to which he himself belongs. Does he stand by what he said previously? On 25 May 1983 he said (Hansard: Assembly, vol 107, col 7882):

Does he still adhere to that, or has that also changed in the meantime? [Interjections.]

That was pretty recently!

It was on 25 May 1983.

It was not a decade ago.

If the hon the leader-in-chief does not adhere to the existing group definitions, and if one is no longer going to belong to a specific group by virtue of one’s parentage, surely there must be a period during which the new group must be formed and one can select one’s own group. Up to what age must this own group be formed, and when must it be selected, or are we going to carry on for an indefinite period?

Is this apparent transitional period during which these new groups are to be formed just another illusion? Are the existing group definitions going to be abolished, ostensibly in order to create a new group, but never redefined, with the result that everyone will be united in South Africa? Is that where he is heading?

We are constantly admonished about apartheid signs that we want to erect. We want to know when the NP are going to remove theirs. Are they going to remove their apartheid signs from their toilets, beaches and parks? Are they going to remove their apartheid signs in these Houses so that there will be only one House?

I gave a comprehensive…

Are they going to remove the apartheid signs when it comes to membership of their party? [Interjections.] Let us get clarity on that point, so that there are no vague areas when we enter this election. He must tell us what his choices are in that respect. [Interjections.]

I want to go further. I see the hon the Minister for Administration and Privatisation is not here today.

Order! I regret to have to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Speaker, I merely wanted to ask him whether he or Mr Gene Louw is going to be the next leader.

Order! There is no point in the hon member’s trying to say anything else. I also wanted to say something.

Mr Speaker, I do not have much time to spend on the hon member for Bethal, but I do want to say something. He said he wanted to ensure that what he said about our policy during the election campaign was correct. I immediately want to express my doubt as to whether the hon member is so desirous of getting the correct impression.

The moment he said that, he took refuge in newspapers. That hon member and everyone here knows that there is no party in this House of which the policy is determined by newspapers. I did not read the relevant newspapers in any case, but I want to suggest to the hon member that he engage in some intellectual exercise and read two speeches—the one made by the NP’s leader-in-chief in the Chamber of Parliament on 8 February and the one he made this morning. [Interjections.] That will make things much clearer to him.

The hon member for Sasolburg is going to speak just after me, and perhaps he will have more to say to the hon member for Bethal.

On 14 April I made a speech in the Chamber of Parliament in which I said (Hansard, 14 April 1989, col 5351):

The hon member Dr De Beer reacted to this on 17 April. I must say this was rather a superficial reaction. He referred to what I had said about the hon the State President (Hansard, 14 April 1989, col 5349):

That is what I said. In his reference to that the hon member Dr De Beer said I had specified all the population groups except the Whites as minorities. It goes without saying that that is nonsense. I then specifically said that the Whites were also a minority, but that they were not the only minority. The hon member was trying to build an argument on that misconception. He said we in this party used the South African reality of minorities as justification for having one minority, viz the Whites, dominate all the others. Once again that was complete and utter nonsense.

Where has the hon member been during the past few years? Where was he when our hon leader-in-chief said in Parliament on 8 February (Hansard, 1989, col 200):

We in this party are committed to doing away with all domination. The hon member then went further and said, or perhaps I should rather say insinuated:

Good gracious, Black majority rule is the final result of their policy specifically because they ignore minorities in their politics. That is precisely why they are heading for Black majority rule. That is what is meant by universal suffrage on a common voters’ roll for every level of representation and for all adult citizens of South Africa, as stated in their policy document. No one, but no one has ever had any doubt that that was where the former PFP’s policy would have led.

The hon member for Houghton stated that on more than one occasion. And, she says these days, the DP is the same as the PFP. She said this on 25 April during the discussion of the Law and Order Vote. I quote her words from her unrevised Hansard:

There we have it. In reality the PFP has merely had a change in name. Neither the principles nor the policy have changed, and these are exactly the same principles and policy that applied when the former hon member for Bryanston, Mr Horace van Rensburg, was still a member of the PFP. Let us look at what he wrote to his leader on 19 January 1987:

Nothing has changed. The renamed PFP is involved in the same kind of escapist politics as before. The only real difference is that in the persons of Dr Worrall and the hon member for Randburg, they have greater masters in platitudinous rhetoric than they had before.

Consequently the electorate must now be more careful than ever before. In his letter Mr Horace van Rensburg confirmed in unambiguous terms that their policy would result in Black majority rule on all levels. He was not kicked out of the party because of that. His letter continued:

That was the PFP policy of “let’s jump to it and hope for the best”. That is also the policy of the renamed PFP, as confirmed by the hon member for Houghton. This merely proves once again that an honest woman has great value. The renamed PFP knows by this time that the voters do not trust them with public safety. Now they are trying to look forceful. That is why their policy document says:

The hand of Dr Worrall can be seen in that. He is the leader of the forceful faction of the renamed party. But then the radical faction of the party is immediately placated in that such a state of emergency is made subject to the authority of the courts. I see the soft hand of the hon member for Randburg in that.

This must all have been a bitter pill for the hon member for Houghton to swallow. That is why she thought fit in the debate on the Law and Order Vote to indicate what particular circumstances could justify a state of emergency. She said such circumstances could entail a declared state of war or a national disaster, but then added immediately that the courts, and not the Government, should still have the ultimate authority.

The country must take cognisance of the fact that the old party with the new name will lead the country into war, but the courts will still have the final authority. The courts will control the war. How absurd! A DP government would indeed be tantamount to a national disaster of enormous scope. It would make a permanent state of emergency inevitable. It is clear that the DP merely wants to be a transition to a Black majority government in which Whites and other groups will permanently be stripped of equal political rights. They are placating us now by saying that our religion, language and culture will be protected.

Let us see whether it is in any way realistic of the DP to say they will protect our culture. Experts on education tell us that education is bound to culture and to the community. Experts accept that if that bond between education, culture and the community is broken, by the integration of all kinds of communities in schools, for example, the continuity between home and school education would be broken on the one hand, and the transfer of culture would be affected on the other. [Interjections.] The DP wants open schools, after all. How will they protect my culture if my children are forced to attend integrated schools? [Interjections.] They cannot do so. Their undertaking with regard to the protection of culture is no more than an empty promise.

Speaking of education, in March 1987 when Dr Worrall appeared on the scene, the opportunity to be educated in one’s mother tongue was guaranteed in his first election manifesto. This has quietly disappeared from all their documents since then, however. Let that be an indication to us of what their word is worth. I want to state categorically today that I am even uneasy about the future of Afrikaans as an official language when I look at those hon members and their friends.

Let us take a look now at the economic consequences of the DP’s policy. In my speech on 14 April I referred in passing to the fact that their adviser, Prof Sampie Terreblanche, had conceded that that which he and the DP stand for—I assumed this on the basis of his advising them—would in all probability kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, viz the taxpayer. [Interjections.] My source was the 10 March 1989 edition of Business Day.

In his reaction the hon member Dr De Beer made the accusation that what I had said was actually a distortion—he said I had wrested a sentence from Prof Terreblanche’s speech out of context “in a misleading way”. He referred to Prof Terreblanche as his “hon colleague”. I do not think the hon member really knew what he was talking about. I think he was simply repeating the words of the professor. Prof Terreblanche also telephoned me and made a full copy of his speech available to me. I should like to quote from it. He asked:

From the context of the entire speech, as I understand it, the Government neglected to train the Black workers to a high degree of productivity. Consequently one of the present options is that the Government should subsidise the difference between the worker’s productivity and his wage.

Goodness knows how one is going to apply that in practice with individual workers’ different levels of productivity. I do not know how one can ever promote productivity in that way.

Prof Terreblanche went on to say:

Socialism.

That is what he said. It is on record. The hon member Dr De Beer, who accused me, can do with that what he wishes. Perhaps the hon member feels that he wants to apologise to me.

On 5 May the hon member for Randburg said our policy was unaffordable, but what will theirs cost us? They want to establish a federation which is completely unnecessary, for their purposes in any case. What will it cost? It will cost more than it will to implement our policy. I want to quote once again from a letter written by Mr Horace van Rensburg. On 20 January 1986, when he was still a staunch Prog front-bencher, he wrote to his then leader, Dr Van Zyl Slabbert:

The DP is misleading the voters as the Independents did in 1987. They profess that the new party is different, but according to the hon member for Houghton it is the same as the PFP. They address their accusations with regard to Government spending to us, but do not say what their policy is going to cost.

On 5 May the hon member for Randburg spelt out six points of departure to us. He said five of them were “the dream of a South Africa in which we should like to live”. That was well put. They are pursuing a dream which has nothing to do with reality. It will change into a nightmare before they wake up. One cannot build South Africa’s future on dreams. Unfortunately reality is such that it cannot be ignored. Whoever tries to ignore it, as the DP is doing, will create chaos in this country.

The NP accepts the facts of the country and is eager to build a just and prosperous dispensation on that basis in which all South Africans will have equal political rights in such a way that no one group will be threatened or dominated by another.

We should all be enthusiastic about such a future. We would have been much further on our journey to that future had it not been for the left-wing elements in White politics which, by means of their statements, their policy and the way in which they denigrate our policy, create expectations which cannot be fulfilled.

Our leader-in-chief is heading for that future that I spoke about. A stream of South Africans is already following him.

Mr Speaker, the right-wing radical party is an ossified party. It is a pity that the leader of the right-wing radical party has taken to his heels because that party is suffering from stagnant leadership, a fossilised policy and an inflexible vision. [Interjections.] In contrast to this, there is the NP, and I can already hear people saying “F W’s young team is a winning team”. [Interjections.]

As has been the custom of the NP from time to time since 1914, it is undergoing a process of rejuvenation at the moment, not only in respect of the captain and the team members, but also in respect of its policy. The NP is preparing itself for a renewal of policy which will meet the challenges of the next two decades. The NP gives hope, it gives inspiration and it is going to take South Africa with it on 6 September into a future of justice, peace and prosperity.

The important thing we would like to know from our opposition parties is whether they wish to govern South Africa. I have heard that the CP have said, through their deputy leader, who is already leaving the Chamber, as he normally does when one wishes to address a few words to him, that they are going to win the election. Boastfully, and with great bravado, they said that they would be the government after 6 September.

Are you going to stand in Sasolburg?

Of course I am going to stand in Sasolburg. [Interjections.] Where is the hon member for Overvaal going to run away to this time? He is one member who is used to running away. He ran away from Jeppe to Overvaal. Where is he going to run to this time? Is he going to stand in Overvaal again?

I shall stay there.

He is going to stay there, and I hope he receives a deuce of a thrashing. [Interjections.]

Order! I am no longer prepared to permit the hon member for Overvaal to sit and shout so senselessly in the House. He must either make an interjection or keep quiet. The hon member for Sasolburg may continue.

The Official Opposition say that they are going to win the general election on 6 September. [Interjections.] I ask the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition to trust the people. [Interjections.] He must have the courage and the daring to show his mettle and to leave his political future in the hands of the voting public and the people. Let them decide whether or not he is to be South Africa’s State President.

I ask whether he has the courage to do so, to withdraw as a candidate for the Waterberg constituency and to tell the voters of South Africa that they must choose between him and the leader-in-chief of the NP with regard to who is to be the State President of South Africa. Although our leader-in-chief himself would not presume to say that he will be the candidate, I want to assure him that we, as his followers, will nominate him and that we will elect him as the next State President.

Let us look at the efforts of the DP and the CP. The poor old DP simply wants to try to become the Official Opposition. They say that they will attempt to govern at a later stage, but that after this first round they simply want to be the Official Opposition. The CP, on the other hand, say that they want to govern. In order to achieve these objectives of theirs, these two parties are now bedfellows and they are plotting in the dark.

If the hon member for Pietersburg were here now, I would have asked him why he was so keen to ask hon members of the DP every day whether they are going to field a candidate in Pietersburg. Why is the hon member for Soutpansberg so keen to know whether the DP is going to field a candidate? Why is the chief propagandist of the Official Opposition, with the aid of the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis, plotting daily with the DP behind closed doors? They want to see whether they can persuade the DP to field candidates in those constituencies in which they would otherwise lose. [Interjections.] Yes, they are going to lose their seats if they do not do so.

The same goes for the DP, who are active in the urban areas. Just look at how the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central is sitting and looking at me. The hon member said in public, outside this House, that they were going to arrive at a co-operation agreement with the CP and that they were going to ensure that CP candidates stood in certain urban areas in which they knew that they would otherwise lose. [Interjections.] These two bedfellows are standing together, as they did in the referendum, and they are once again playing footsy because they know that they are going to receive a deuce of a thrashing from the dynamic, vibrant team of the NP.

They are lying bodkin! [Interjections.]

The hon member for Parow says that they are lying bodkin; the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition is lying in front. [Interjections.] The right-wing radical party thrives on confusion.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: That remark about lying bodkin and about who was lying in front… [Interjections.]

Order! When an hon member is raising a point of order, he is entitled to do so in silence. The hon member for Bethal may continue.

Mr Chairman, I ask whether it is parliamentary language to insinuate what is being insinuated by that hon member with regard to the question of lying bodkin and of who is lying in front.

Order! I did not infer any insinuation from what the hon member said. Would the hon member for Bethal inform me because I really do not know what the point of order is about. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to inform you in private because I am not prepared to say it in this House.

Order! The hon member for Bethal may take the matter up with me privately later. The hon member for Sasolburg may continue.

Mr Chairman, the hon member need not worry because there are no sinister ulterior motives. All I am saying, is that they are bedfellows. They are attempting to persuade the DP to go so far as to field a candidate in those constituencies where the CP is going to lose its seats, in order to take a few hundred votes so that the Official Opposition can attempt to ensure that they retain some of these seats of theirs which are in danger. I say that there are 11 of them that are in danger. As the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central says, the quid pro quo will be that the CP will field candidates in seats in which it has never before put up candidates in order to see whether it can get some of the DP members back into this House.

You are lying.

Order! The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central must withdraw the remark “you are lying” as it is an unparliamentary expression.

Mr Chairman, the hon member is not telling the truth.

Order! The hon member must first withdraw the remark.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw the remark.

The hon member for Port Elizabeth Central knows I am telling the truth. The hon member for Overvaal is looking at him, and it is no wonder he blushes whenever he looks at the hon member for Overvaal. [Interjections.] It is the truth. They are negotiating with one another. Some of them are paying the others’ deposits so that they can stand in those constituencies in order to obtain a few votes in a hasty attempt to see whether they cannot perhaps retain those marginal seats. [Interjections.] The NP with its dynamic young team is going to take some of those seats away from them.

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

Order! No, the hon member may not ask the hon member for Sasolburg a question because his time has expired. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is the hon member for Sasolburg entitled to carry on repeating untruth after untruth in this House?

Order! That is not a point of order; that is a matter for debate. The truth or otherwise may be shown in debate. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Berea has broken the line. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, may I, in view of what the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central has said…

Order! I am not prepared to allow this House to lapse into disorder. On what grounds does the hon member for Sasolburg think he may remain standing? I have said that his time has expired.

That is precisely my point of order, too!

Order! The hon member for Sasolburg must resume his seat. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I shall reject the accusation of that hon member for Sasolburg with absolute contempt, because it is complete nonsense.

You were not there. How would you know?

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

No, Sir, I do not have time for questions.

In Stellenbosch in 1974 the HNP—there was no HNP candidate—wanted to vote for the PFP, whose candidate I was. I told them to forget it, and that I would not let racists vote for me. This party will not form alliances with any person or party that has racist policies. [Interjections.]

It is a privilege for me to take part in this debate today as a member the DP for the first time. [Interjections.] I am sorry that in the process I have disappointed those hon members on that side of the House, especially the hon member for Parow. Some weeks ago he bet me that I would not become a member of the DP, and even then he bade me “goodbye, Jan”. Today he had better say “hello, Jan” to me.

Hello, Jan!

Not only am I here as a member of the party today, but I want to assure those same hon members who are so keen to get rid of me that I shall come back to this House as the MP for Claremont after 6 September. [Interjections.]

In bidding the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning farewell in his absence, I should like to ask him nicely, since he is taking his things and leaving, please to take all his things with him—especially his completely failed and discredited constitutional plans. If he does that, if he takes his apartheid Parliament and all the conflict, violence and hatred this has caused in our community with him, I want to tell him that we will be even more grateful for his sudden departure.

It is my belief that no constitution can succeed in South Africa unless it accepts certain realities. The hon member for Stellenbosch said the NP accepted the realities of South Africa. I shall show him now what I think of that. Whereas the Government denies these realities, as illustrated by the present Constitution, it is my conviction that the DP not only accepts these realities, but in truth welcomes them.

†Mr Chairman, allow me to mention some of these realities. Firstly, South Africa is not an extension of Europe or a cosy little White enclave at the southern tip of Africa. South Africa is indeed part of Africa and, as is the case in Africa, South Africa is also overwhelmingly Black, in spite of relentless Government efforts to achieve the opposite. Those who do not want to accept these realities should not be living in South Africa and should rather leave our shores.

Do you believe in a Black majority Government?

Secondly, Sir, because people whose skins are not White form such an overwhelming majority they would also, in any truly non-racial and open democracy, form the majority at all levels in that society—be it the political, the social or the economic society—and also in the judiciary, the army, the police and in education. That is a non-racial society. In a real democracy numbers do count in spite of what the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning says.

Thirdly, Sir, I accept as a reality, in spite of all the Government’s propaganda to the contrary, that Black and White can indeed co-exist in South Africa, and that their demands and aspirations, although prioritised differently at the moment, are basically reconcilable once our country has been rid of the scourge of apartheid rule.

A party that accepts these realities and rather sees them as an exciting challenge, and not as an obstacle, as I believe the DP does, will be able to draft a constitution which will indeed include all our people, which will include the leadership of all our people, which will reach sensible compromises and consensus in order to ensure that the imbalances created by apartheid rule can indeed be rectified in a peaceful manner.

The party I represent here and I have a vision of a united nation where we will use institutions such as schools, not to build barriers between our youth, but to develop bonds across the race barriers so that we can build one powerful, united South African nation comprising people who are first of all South Africans, and only then Afrikaans, English or Xhosa speaking, Jewish or whatever, and where all our people will proudly sing one national anthem and salute one flag—contrary to what we have today.

This vision which I have and which is shared by the party I belong to, is shared by the overwhelming majority of South Africans of all races. This vision is shared by the overwhelming majority, with the exception of this Government and its supporters. It is time that this Government was removed, that the obstacle in the way of accomplishing this vision was removed, so that our vision of a new South Africa can indeed become a reality. We and the vision we stand for command the support of way over 90% of the South African population. That vision will come about in this country. This Government stands in the way but eventually it will not be able to prevent that vision of a non-racial, democratic South Africa from coming about.

Mr Chairman, I really pity the hon member for Claremont. He thinks that by joining the DP he has actually joined the winning party. I want to tell him, however, that the DP is a party without any substantial influence among the Whites. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, they are not willing or able in any way to broaden democracy in South Africa on a responsible basis. [Interjections.] They cannot do that, Sir, and that is why, as I have said, I really pity the hon member for Claremont. This is his third switch of party within two years. I really pity him! [Interjections.]

*Mr Chairman, I am merely wondering what has become of the so-called fourth element or fourth power in the DP. [Interjections.] Dr De Klerk has dissociated himself from the DP. Is he the fourth man? I said yesterday that he had dissociated himself from the “ietermatroika”. This was a political cartoon which appeared in one of the newspapers. They call themselves the “ietermatroika”. However, he has dissociated himself and one of their so-called strong elements has already fallen away.

I want to come back to something which has been debated ad nauseam in this House, particularly by the CP, namely Rhodesia. I must mention this again. The hon member for Lichtenburg said this morning that the NP was going the same way as Rhodesia and then he referred to the Rhodesian elements. I must react to this.

The CP only tells us one part of Rhodesia’s history. What they never mention is that in 1962 Sir Edgar Whitehead suggested an experiment to involve Blacks in the Rhodesian Government to a limited extent. What happened then? Mr Ian Smith joined forces with Mr Winston Field and they won the election. On what basis did they fight the election? I shall quote. They fought the election with the following slogan:

Then they came into power and what happened then? This they do not tell us. They take up the history from the following point:

It is time they told the voters the truth about Rhodesia.

When the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition was speaking here this morning, I merely wondered whether he really meant what he said. I should like to mention here—I am sorry the hon member is not here now—that he was the person who persuaded me when I was opposed to the 1977 proposal. He was the person who personally persuaded me to accept the 1977 proposals.

Who was that?

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition, Dr A P Treurnicht, the hon member for Waterberg. He did so in a personal conversation in Bloemfontein in 1978. Now he is humming and hawing here.

I want to proceed. I want to put a few questions to the hon members of the CP. I do not know whether they will be struck dumb again. We shall see. I merely want to ask whether the CPs always tell the truth in the House. I can hear them saying: Ignore him. It does not matter. I am assuming that the CPs always tell the truth, because they are, I assume, honourable people. I want to say thank you very much, because there are hon members who are agreeing. If they always tell the truth, this programme of principles and policy of theirs is a blatant lie. I shall prove this. Hon members must understand fully that I am not saying that these hon members are telling lies, because they are not telling lies. They have confirmed that they always tell the truth.

I want to mention a few examples with reference to this programme of principles. I shall use this to substantiate a few points in my argument. I shall also set this against the background of their policy in respect of justice. I am quoting:

1. 1) The Party upholds and affirms the independence of the Courts of South Africa.
2. 2) The Party upholds the principle that every person has the right of access to the Courts of the country in order to have justice done in accordance with the Law.

The question I should like to ask is whether the independence of the courts means that the courts as an institution will be independent of government interference. I see there are 11 men with LL B degrees in that party and I believe, as a person with an LL B, that the court will be independent of interference by the government. I am acting on this assumption and I think the reply is probably yes.

That is a stupid question.

Let us go on with my stupid questions. We will now see who is stupid. That hon pop star of the CP must listen.

Does the expression right of access to the courts…

Are you going to speak much longer?

Long enough to embarrass you.

Does right of access to the courts mean that every person, as they say here, will be allowed to settle a matter in court? Surely access to the courts implies freedom to practise law. However, when they refer to “every person” do they mean Blacks too? Is a Black man also “every person” or is he not? Can those hon members tell me what they mean? Is a Black man one of those persons who will have access to the courts? [Interjections.]

There you have the answer! [Interjections.]

It seems to me they are in quandary. Let us proceed. [Interjections.] They say here “every person”, but hon members can see what their state will be like. Blacks will not have access to the courts, because the CP are not prepared to answer this question. [Interjections.]

Let us go further. Let us assume Blacks will have access to the courts. Then I have a problem with the hon member for Ermelo. Hon members must realise that I have very great respect for the legal qualities of the hon member for Ermelo and other legal experts among them. He was and still is a senior advocate, and also has the status of an acting judge, but according to Hansard, 20 May 1988, cols 10666—10667, he said the following in reaction to an interjection by the hon member Mr C P Hattingh:

Does this statement represent an independent judiciary? Does this represent their standpoint on the access of Blacks and people of colour to the judiciary? [Interjections.] It is ridiculous! If that is not blatant racism, I do not know what is! [Interjections.]

I want to continue, because there is another element I want to mention. I am making haste to get to their labour policy. In their labour policy they mention inter alia that they will not give non-White peoples any trade union rights and that they will establish a good relationship between employer and employee.

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

I am not taking any questions! My time is limited.

When they refer in their programme of principles—in order to save time I am not quoting it—to good relations between employers and employees, are the hon members of the Official Opposition referring to good relations between White employers and Black employees or are they referring to good relations between White employers and White employees? What do they mean by that?

The hon member for Lichtenburg has so much to say about the extreme clearness of the CP’s policy, but it is as clear as mud! [Interjections.] Are they referring only to White employers or only to White employees?

Although he is not here now, I should like us to consider what the hon member for Carletonville said. The maintenance of good relations is at issue here. On 3 May he said:

[Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I would like to take up the issue of the absolute negative portrayal of the state of the economy by the DP. The hon member for Lichtenburg should also listen to what I have to say in this regard.

No-one in this Chamber should know better than the hon the leader of the DP what devastating effect the low gold price has on the economy and the mining industry. He should know that for every $20 that the gold price drops on an annual basis, it has a negative effect of R1 billion on the economy. [Interjections.] For the sake of the Conservative Party I shall mention that that means R100 000 million.

The hon the leader of the DP did not tell us this morning that the present gold price is less than $380 in comparison with a high of $800 in the early eighties.

All my figures were up to 1987! [Interjections.]

I would like to pose a question to him. Where would the mining industry have been if our rand was still the equivalent of the dollar? Imagine where Anglo American and the total mining community would have been if they had received only R380—not $380—an ounce. They of all people must indeed be thankful for the devalued rand, or they would have been out of business.

In a previous debate hon members referred to the vision of the late Dr Martin Luther King. I also have a vision of a new and free South Africa where people can live together in peace and where no single group will dominate others. This yearning was there until the hon leader-in-chief of the NP expressed this same feeling and forever enshrined this vision in crystal clear words and in such a way that everyone can clearly understand it. History will remember these words and on them we can build a future. With acclamation I would like to endorse the words of our hon leader:

*With these words the NP’s leader-in-chief committed the party to seeking a peaceful solution to our problems, a solution which will meet with a wide response locally and internationally and will give us all hope. Progress can already be seen as a result of a dedicated team effort of colleagues. In this connection I am referring in particular to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. We should like to pay tribute to him, in particular as a result of his speech last week which added momentum to negotiations. Incidentally, hon members are probably aware of the favourable reaction that speech elicited from Chief Minister Buthelezi.

On the international level South Africa is experiencing a political boom such as has not been experienced for years. The year 1989 is indeed going to be the watershed to a new dispensation, a dispensation of political and economical reform which will lead to greater stability.

South Africa is a First World country caught up in a Third World culture. There is only one escape route, and that is to escape poverty. The road of South Africa runs through Africa. We know that America, Europe and the East are important to us, but true recognition can only come through Africa. We trust that it will be possible to hold an Africa conference. Who knows what that can lead to? I believe that the ultimate acknowledgement and acceptance of South Africa by the OAU can mean even more to us than our membership of UNO.

No political dispensation and no economic strategy is possible unless sufficient economic growth and sufficient employment opportunities are created. That is why privatisation and deregulation must play such an important part. South Africa will have to concentrate on its exports, however, and in this connection productivity and technology in particular will have to be improved considerably in order to make us competitive internationally.

It was with great gratitude that we heard about the special Manpower bursaries for technology students at technikons. Much more emphasis is being placed on encouraging scholars and students to study in technical fields.

I am concerned, however, about the availability of technical teachers and lecturers, and our ability to meet the future additional demand. It is essential that there be a move towards technical training and the in-service training of teachers.

Perhaps in the case of technicians one should consider doing what was done in the past, viz to follow a graduate course with a teacher’s diploma at a teachers’ training college. One could permit technikon students to take a three-year technical diploma after which they could receive one year’s teachers’ training. This could be presented as a bursary-loan agreement which could be repaid by means of physical teaching. Should breach of contract take place, the loan would be repayable in instalments. The teaching institution will not have suffered any financial damage, and that qualified technician can be used to the advantage of our country elsewhere.

I think we are facing a new spectrum, a new political strategy, a strategy which holds the promise of fantastic opportunities for South Africa.

Mr Speaker, certain points which were raised here today merit further attention. Firstly, the hon member for Parow was quivering when he had certain things to say about Untag and South West Africa. I merely want to say that the man who again says inside or outside that the CP wants war is a public liar and a political rogue.

Order! Is the hon member casting reflections on any other hon member?

No, Sir, I was referring to anybody who said something like this again.

Secondly, the CP is not opposed to peace in South West Africa. It specifically questions this Government’s method of making peace and of negotiation. On the day that was to see the start of peace, the greatest surprise attack on South West Africa took place since the beginning of the war.

Thirdly, he said we would start the war all over again. I indicated last Wednesday that this Government had already handed over authority in South West Africa to UNO and that there was no way back for them.

That hon member is trying to talk parents into being frightened of the CP. He should tell them what their sons are still doing there, in the light of the quality of the peace which his Government has negotiated. He should tell our soldiers who were wounded and sweated in the north of South West Africa, and the parents, the wives and the children of those who died, what sense the deaths of their loved ones made in the light of what that Government has negotiated in South West Africa.

I shall now turn to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. In every speech he says that he is not ad hominem, or that he plays the ball and not the man, and then he fires away. It appears to me that his knowledge of Latin has failed him and he believes that, if a person is non ad hominem, one has to be personal. Otherwise, when he speaks Afrikaans, he seems to need a new pair of spectacles because his present pair causes the man to look like the ball.

I want to remind him that not a single question which was put by my hon leader to him this morning has been replied to by him in his speech and we are waiting for answers. [Interjections.] One of the most ridiculous and childish arguments which have come from that side today is that, because the leader-in-chief of the NP is getting out of Vereeniging cautiously, hastily and in good time, my leader should do the same in Waterberg. [Interjections.] If not, the CP is supposedly admitting that it does not expect to win the election.

Let us say this to one another. It is political tradition in South Africa for the South African Head of Government and/or State to be elected to the highest office from his parliamentary bench. [Interjections.] The hon leader-in-chief of the NP is the first person who hopes to break that tradition. That is what he hopes to do. [Interjections.]

He apparently argues that it is better to enter the election for the State Presidency as a leader-in-chief who did not stand than as a leader-in-chief who was beaten. I think, however, that there should be a lesson and a warning to him in what he and the NP caucus did to the current holder of the position to which he aspires.

The hon member for Sasolburg talks about “F W’s young team, the winning team”. He had better look out because it might become “F W’s kindergarten” and it is a kindergarten from which babes in the wood will go into the fray. [Interjections.]

I challenge that hon member to give me a name if he says I have asked a Prog or a DP to stand in my constituency. I want to tell him that I have never been in this Parliament as an appointed member. [Interjections.]

In any case, the NP candidate designate, who is an ex-clergyman, is such a Prog that they do not need another one to stand there. [Interjections.] We shall fight him alone.

The NP is going into the election to seek a mandate from the voters for a new South Africa. For a mandate to be given, it has to tell the voters who the recipients of the mandate will be in the sense of the leader. I want to assume, because my time is limited, that it will be the current leader of the NP. The point is, however, that the NP must tell the voters in all sincerity that it could also be the hon the Minister of Finance or the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs—in the light of the caucus record in this regard.

In connection with the mandate which is sought, I have no doubt that it is contained in the speech of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning of last Friday. I should like to know from the leader-in-chief of the NP whether this is the case and he must also say whether it is right or wrong. He said today that it had been an exploratory speech. It is a pity that the Cape leader of the NP is not present because the impression one gains, if one looks at his speech, is that it was not an exploratory speech at all.

That speech was riddled with terms like “we”, “the Government”, “die Regering het ’n plan vir die toekomstige staatkundige bestel van Suid-Afrika”, “ons beleid”, “we believe”, “ons plan” and then he says categorically at some stage “ek is besig met ’n beleidstoespraak”. That was stated by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. In other words, it definitely does not sound like an exploratory speech. It is a new policy speech. The hon leader-in-chief of the NP must tell us today whether the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning’s speech, as supported by his own speech today, was a statement of policy for which a mandate is being sought. [Interjections.]

If that is the new plan, and I believe it is and was the new plan, the reasons for the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning’s retirement become very topical. They then become clinically topical. I want to say today that I believe the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning resigned because his “worthy partners”, as he called them in his speech, refused to approve his Vote the day before yesterday.

That action of theirs was far worse than their refusal last year to approve the trilogy of Bills. It was a slap in the face to him and a total rejection of the work which he had done in the last 10 years of his long political career. To tell the truth, it is a total rejection of the NP’s reform policy of the new South Africa. It immediately made the hon the Minister’s statement of last week topical: “I wish that I could succeed in one thing and, when I have succeeded in that, it can be the end of my public life.”

By analogy, the hon the Minister was admitting that, if he could not succeed, it would also be the end of his public life. Nowhere else in his entire speech is there a trace of a possible retirement—neither explicitly nor by implication; not even in tone. The hon the Minister’s further speeches on his Vote over the past week contained no indication of such a possibility. This leads us to a single conclusion: The decision was instantaneous—the decision of a realist, based on his appreciation of a situation. That situation and that appreciation were: “What I am engaged upon is futile; what I have occupied myself with was a blind exercise; I have, with the plans, patience, hope and everything related to this, come to the end of the road—landed in a dead end; power-sharing is a myth; consensus politics are a dream.”

It must be a terrible experience for a man to see everything which has been striven for with so much zeal, so much commitment, yes, so much dedication too and in the face of enormous criticism and resistance to see what he probably regarded as his life’s work tumbling in before him like a house of cards. Only last Friday he could say that the secret of his success, here too, was to do what one had to do and not what one wanted to do and to do it with so much enthusiasm that people believed one wanted to do it in any case. It was a difficult responsibility and one which few people succeeded in carrying out, according to the hon the Minister. (I want to say, however, it is possibly a dreadful admission.) Less than a week later everything was over.

If I am correct in my view, only one conclusion remains. The NP is without a policy. It does not have a plan for South Africa on the eve of a general election. [Interjections.] It has nothing for which it can ask the voters for a mandate on 6 September. Consequently the hastily convened federal congress, probably to think out the umpteenth new policy since 1978. The advice of the chief architect of the NP’s reform policy to the congress will be, “Forget about it. It is hopeless. It will not work. Goodbye for ever.”

For the moment I want hon members… [Interjections.] No, I hear the hon member for Klerksdorp will probably be the new Minister of Defence. [Interjections.]

Oh heavens! He was not even a cadet! [Interjections.]

For the moment I have pity for hon members on that side. I want to believe that there are many who are wishing inwardly that the earth would open and swallow them up. I want to say to the hon leader of the NP, as I said in 1983 when I resigned for the battle of the bergs, that we are going to the voters now. He must present his plans to the Whites of South Africa. He must say for what he requires a mandate—not in vague terms out of which he can fashion a policy at will after the election. He must say whether there will be only one Parliament in which the Blacks will have seats. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I listened in some amazement to the hon member for Soutpansberg when he stated that it was the tradition for the Head of State to come from the parliamentary ranks, because that hon member should surely know more about the traditions of this place than I do. Does the hon member not realise that for the first time we are holding an election in terms of the new dispensation, in which an executive President is in the position that he must be elected or re-elected after a general election? Where does the tradition come from? When has it ever happened before that an executive President must be elected after a general election? The hon member spoke blithely about a tradition which exists in the South African parliamentary set-up. One can draw a veil over the rest of his speech, which was more or less at the same level.

It is quite clear that with a view to the forthcoming election, the drums of emotion are being beaten again in the right-wing alliance. It is quite clear that once they have worked themselves into a frenzy, they become brave and start telling one another how they are going to win the election. This is not a new story. For some time now we have been hearing here at grass-roots level that 1948 is going to repeat itself. For some time now, we have been hearing about the remarkable similarities between the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition and the late Dr D F Malan. For some time now we have been hearing that it is actually the NP which is now in the same position the UP was in, whereas the CP is in the position in which the NP was in 1948.

Surely that is far from the truth. I merely want to indicate two differences between the positions in 1948 and 1989 to hon members. Firstly there is the difference in the leaders of the two parties. Secondly there is a difference in policy.

Let us consider the leaders. The NP of 1948 was a political instrument of the leaders of the Afrikaner. It was the Afrikaner leaders, businessmen, academics and church leaders who guided the thoughts of the NP.

What about today? What do today’s Afrikaner businessmen say about the policy of the CP? How many businessmen support the policy they advocate? I want to ask what today’s Afrikaner academics say about their policy. What does their own Prof Boshoff say about their policy? What do the church leaders say, and what is the relationship between the Afrikaans churches and the CP? They are estranged from the leaders of Afrikaner thinking, unlike in 1948, when the NP had them at its disposal.

This brings me to the most significant difference, namely the difference between Dr D F Malan and Dr A P Treurnicht. If one considers the standpoints of these two leaders, we see that Dr D F Malan said that we must bring together what belongs together. What does the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition say? He says we must bring together everyone who is prepared to snuggle up under the same blanket, whichever way they lie. [Interjections.] They are going to contract political diseases under that blanket. [Interjections.]

Dr Malan had the integrity and the courage to dissociate himself from the undesirable elements that wanted to surround him. He dissociated himself from the Ossewabrandwag. He said that a choice had to be made between the two organisations.

What is happening here? We have a leader of the Official Opposition who even refuses to address a word in anger to the undesirable elements. He even refuses to address a word of warning to the AWB, the BBB and the drafters of the rightwing smear pamphlets—groups which all support him.

Would Dr Malan have participated in the questioning of his church’s policy, and this in the same publication as that in which propaganda was made for a schismatic church, as happened in the Patriot of 17 June? Would Dr Malan, for the sake of the kind of unity he was striving for, have refused to choose between important policy standpoints, as the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition did at his own congress? Would he have said they should first win the election and then inform the people about their choice?

No, but very important is the fact that Dr Malan would not have kept silent on the disgraceful misuse of religion, which was again quoted here in this House and which is taking place in that right-wing alliance. He would have dissociated himself from that and repudiated it. What is also very important, is the question whether Dr Malan would have tolerated his official party newspaper becoming a propagandist of lies. No!

Would he have been prepared time and again to allow doubts to arise with regard to the truth, as the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition is so fond of doing? I shall indicate to him how time and again he is allowing doubts to arise with regard to the truth. He is allowing doubts to arise as regards the authenticity and the truth of the so-called Boshoff document. Here in this House he said that objections had been lodged with the Media Council. What became of them?

Today he again repeated and intimated that the hon the Minister of Finance had predicted a majority government. Surely that is not true. Anyone who deduces that from what was published—“Barend predicts Government with Blacks”—is either dishonest, or very stupid, or very wilful. [Interjections.] I shall not pursue this matter.

What are the policy differences between 1948 and 1989? The NP of 1948 did not fight the election with a policy of 1907. They did not fight the election with a 41-year-old policy, because if that had been the case, their first priority would have been to win back the independence of the Free State and the Transvaal. However, they knew there were adjustments and other priorities.

The NP of 1948 also had contemporary solutions for contemporary problems. What do we find now? Old solutions are being dusted off or taken out of the freezer to be used in this election. Today we again heard one of the hon members saying that separate development had worked and would still work. But what is the international position, the economic situation or merely the lifestyle, aspirations and ideals of people today?

The NP will, while retaining stability, seek contemporary solutions for contemporary problems. For that reason it is of no avail for them constantly to tell other hon members and I what this or that leader in the past said. We do heed the best of these, but we must look at the contemporary problems and find the contemporary solutions. The hon members can rest assured that after this election a strong, young State President will govern this country with an enthusiastic, diligent and dedicated team supporting him.

Mr Speaker, today’s debate is probably one of the last debates in the House of Assembly prior to the election. We saw the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition and his front-benchers participate in a political debate and not say a word about the policy of the Official Opposition, the CP. There is a very good reason for this. The Official Opposition does not want to state their policy because they will not get voters to vote for them with that policy. By attacking the NP they are merely seeking the votes of people who will vote against the NP. They are therefore not seeking “for” votes, but “against” votes.

An anti-party!

They are an anti-party. The Official Opposition is afraid to come into power and take over the government of the country, because the Official Opposition will not be allowed to implement their policy either at home or abroad, if they were to come into power. They will not be allowed to implement the policy of partition.

What is the policy of partition? It is a romanticisation of the past. The older one grows, the further one had to walk to school and the poorer one’s father was. [Interjections.] Other than that everything in the past was very enjoyable. The longer ago it was and, the older one grows the more enjoyable the past was. They only remember the good things from the apartheid days of the fifties and sixties. They only depict the good things in Boksburg and Carletonville and else where for the voters. However, they sometimes get into trouble. They romanticise the past, but they know that the word “apartheid” has cost this country a great deal. So they simply found a synonym for “apartheid”, because it had become a term of abuse throughout the world, and they called it partition. However, the policy is still the apartheid policy of the NP of the forties, fifties and sixties. [Interjections.] That is the policy which failed. They know that it failed and that is why they are not even selling the policy of partition, not even here in the House of Assembly.

They know that they cannot afford to come into power with this apartheid/partition policy. They know only too well what price South Africa paid for this policy. They need only ask our sportsmen.

Is this your last speech?

They need only ask the sportsmen who participated in the Olympic Games for the last time in 1960. They need only ask our sportsmen whose international participation has been totally banned owing to the apartheid policy, which is still mistakenly being blamed on the NP.

They can ask our representatives over the years at the UN about the policy of partition and what it costs and the price which has been paid for it. Our membership of that international organisation was suspended. Just ask the hon the Minister of Finance and the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology what apartheid/partition has cost this country in boycotts, disinvestment, unemployment, poverty and the closing of the doors of foreign banks as regards credit for South Africa.

South Africa cannot afford their coming into power here. South Africa cannot pay for this. South Africa cannot afford their policy of partition, which is merely the apartheid policy of the NP in the sixties. The price that will have to be paid for putting the CP into power in this country, is far too high for South Africa.

In any case if they were to come into power—whenever that may be in the future; if ever—internal factors would not allow them to implement their policy. As far back as I can remember—it was in 1960, I was part of this, I was called up as a member of the Citizen Force…

In 1916?

In 1960 I was called up to assist with the state of emergency in that year. Since 1960 and prior to that this country has been experiencing a revolutionary climate which was the direct result of the apartheid policy of that time and the policy they are now advocating.

We had a Rivonia. We had Mandela, who is receiving an LL B Degree from the University of South Africa on Wednesday.

Overseas countries will never allow them to implement their policy of partition, because after the Second World War the Western World became so aware of human rights, and the disregarding of human rights in this country, that the NP has now appointed a commission to report on this so that justice can be done in this extremely important matter.

As regards their policy of partition, which denies the rights of the citizens of this country, the Western World will never allow them to implement that policy and govern this country.

From a security point of view, from the point of view of international politics, from an economic point of view, from any other point of view, South Africa cannot afford ever to put the CP with its policy of apartheid/partition in control of affairs in this country.

Mr Chairman, we are approaching the end of an interesting day’s debating. I think it will be on record as the day of the unanswered questions. [Interjections.] There were questions from these benches and from the CP benches throughout the day to which very few replies have so far been received.

The attitude of the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council is appropriate to that of a reasonably capable boxer on the defence, moving backwards while dealing out blows to the left and the right. As a result of the movement of the body, these blows are not very effective. This was also the case today.

†Mr Speaker, as usually happens, there have been various themes in the debate today. There has, however, been a major theme. It has run right through this debate. That is the question of whether the NP has a constitutional policy or not. We are trying very hard to find out. The hon gentlemen in the CP are trying very hard to find out, and we have been approximately equal in our lack of success in this regard. [Interjections.]

The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council did get so far as to say two things clearly. He said he did not agree with the CP, and he also said he did not agree with the DP. Surprise! Surprise! That, in both cases, I believe, is mutual. What we want to know is what the hon gentleman stands for. One of the most interesting passages in his speech this morning was the following:

We, being the various groups that make up the South African Population—

†Now, Mr Chairman, the word “consensus” is an extremely interesting word, because consensus is arrived at when everybody agrees, and when everybody agrees why does one then need a constitution anyway? [Interjections.] When everybody agrees there is no problem about constitutional policy. [Interjections.] It is a very convenient word behind which to hide. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, to be fair to him, did not altogether hide behind it. He said:

Fascinating, Sir!

As long as he can be the referee!

There is a referee in the game.

And he is that referee!

Well, we want to know who the referee is. The hon member for Overvaal thinks he does know, but we want to be told. The people must not be trifled with in this way. Who is going to take these decisions? We know that in the present constitutional dispensation the hon the State President has vast powers to decide about things. We know there is the President’s Council which is there to act as a referee. We know that the effect of all this is is that the 50% plus one of the hon members in this White House can do what they like with the rest of Parliament. Is that the kind of referee we are going to get again?

For our part, we are going to assume that that is the sort of referee we are going to get unless the hon gentleman can satisfy us otherwise. You see, Sir, for us it is simple enough. The referee is the people of the country. Government should be government by consent, and that means the referee is the people of the country. I do not believe that is what the hon gentleman has in mind, but I do want to ask him to let us and the country know who is this marvellous referee in whose hands our very destiny is going to be placed.

It seems to me that this is a person or a group of people or an institution of some kind with the powers of a dictator. In that case, where does his authority come from? I am referring to this marvellous referee.

Then, a little further on, there is another interesting passage in the speech of the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. I quote again:

*That is clear enough, but on the record of this Government it is another question that has to be answered. What is the Government’s policy with reference to minority rule and minority domination? After all, that is what we have today. We have the domination of the whole nation of South Africa by a minority. In addition it is interesting that in his speech the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council went out of his way to say he did not advocate domination by a majority, but nevertheless he did not define his attitude towards domination by a minority.

But what did I say to the CP? I condemned it!

What did the hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council condemn?

I condemned minority rule as well! That is what I said to the CP!

He therefore condemns minority rule and he also condemns majority rule. What kind of government does he not condemn?

Just quote the rest of my speech! [Interjections.]

I read the speech made by the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council very carefully. [Interjections.] As I have said, the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council is making it clear that he does not agree with the CP. Nor does he agree with us. What he does advocate—that is the great problem in this hour. That is the question to which we must get an answer. [Interjections.] Sooner or later the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council must get off the fence. We have all been saying this for some time.

†I have mentioned already that the present situation is that a minority of 50% plus one of the members of the House of Assembly can and do dominate the whole of South Africa. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister has told me now, by means of an interjection, that he rejects “minderheidsoorheersing”. Does he reject the present tricameral Parliament? [Interjections.] Will he tell us that? Is he going to get rid of the present tricameral Parliament? The people need to know.

I said on 8 February that we would have a totally new constitution.

Quite true. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has said he is going to change the Constitution. Ever since then we have been begging him to say how he is going to change the Constitution. [Interjections.] “Tjoepstil”, not a word do we get about the constitutional changes he is going to bring in.

The hon gentleman did not quite repudiate the speech of the hon the Minister for Constitutional Development and Planning who said that we are going to have a single Parliament which is going to have Black people in it. That sounded encouraging to us for a while. Will the hon the Minister tell us whether we are going to get it? [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I shall not react to the hon member’s allegations. [Interjections.] I think that basically he was addressing himself to the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP.

In the first place I want to set the record straight with regard to something the hon member for Johannesburg North said at the Joint Meeting in the Chamber of Parliament last Wednesday, specifically in respect of his motivation during the declarations of vote on the Bureau for Information as to why his party would vote against it. I should like to quote from Hansard:

For the record I want to inform the House of the background to the letter in question. The background to the letter is that the St Leo Congregation of the Catholic Church in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, wrote me a letter on 6 April about the problem these people of Potsdam were experiencing, and said among other things:

†Take note, “humanity”—

*What we have done now, as the members of Parliament responsible for that area—I can tell the DP that we work together as a team, and that we are waiting for them—was to write this church a letter. I am going to read some extracts from the letter, because I want the record to be rectified. We described among other things what had been done to assist these people in the meantime. We said:

We went on to say:

We went on to say:

That is a reference to the South African Government—

We then said:

We then went on to say:

In this regard I merely want to set the record straight, because in the way in which he approached this, the hon member tried to create certain impressions. We also said:

†We said this and urged this matter on because we are concerned citizens. The letter continues as follows:

*We then concluded with:

[Interjections.]

You refer to these South Africans and not to these Ciskeians!

Yes, that is correct. [Interjections.]

*I have a problem with the hon member for Johannesburg North, however. Mr Speaker, 1 do not know whether or not you are going to call me to order now, but I contend that that hon member wanted to mislead the Joint Meeting in two ways. [Interjections.]

I smell a rat!

What that hon member is smelling is his upper lip! In the first place he said:

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Is the hon member for East London North allowed to say that the hon member for Johannesburg North wanted to mislead the House?

Order! It is correct in the sense in which the hon member used it. The hon member for East London North may proceed.

The hon member said:

I say he cannot have any such letter in his possession.

Are you now trying to mislead the House?

He says he is in possession of that letter. He could have got that letter only in one of two ways. If the hon member has the letter, I shall withdraw my accusation. He could have got it either from the Daily Dispatch or from this church in Milwaukee. In which of these two ways did he obtain the letter? [Interjections.]

Does it matter?

Yes, it matters! [Interjections.] I want to know from the hon member whether he got it from the Daily Dispatch or whether he got it from that church.

It is not relevant!

It is relevant! [Interjections.] It is relevant because I… [Interjections.]

The angel Gabriel!

It is true.

†It is important that we know because it is a confidential letter. [Interjections.] It is a confidential letter. There is nothing to hide in the letter but I have to know. [Interjections.]

Look, here it is!

I shall then withdraw my accusation that the hon member misled the Joint Meeting. His last statement, however, reads as follows:

That is where he stopped. That is not what we said or what we asked for.

*I read the letter we wrote to the people.

†The hon member’s speech borders on slander!

*That is how this DP wants to enter the election, because they have nothing to offer the voters. [Interjections.] The job of one of the DP’s leaders, viz the hon member who is sitting here, is to try to smear us with a tar-brush of corruption at public meetings. I thought this hon member was an honourable person, but he uses the brush so extensively that it looks as though we are a bunch of crooks.

They said they were going to fight five seats in East London. I made an interjection this morning and said this was for the fat cats and the big spenders. [Interjections.]

†They are welcome to come and fight in East London.

*We shall send them back empty-handed. We welcome them, because they are going to waste their money in East London. We shall be able to use it to create a few job opportunities at least temporarily.

I should like to come to the hon member for Randburg. This hon member is on cloud nine. [Interjections.] On 20 April he said in Florida:

†That is what he said.

*The next night, 21 April, a limpet mine in a flower-box exploded at a garage in Brakpan. There were quite a number of incidents, but time is limited and so I cannot mention all of them now.

I want to quote to the Opposition what the New York Times of 5 May 1989 said. In an interview conducted by a certain Mr Christopher Renny with certain members of the ANC’s executive… [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I should like to thank hon members who participated in this debate, and in particular the hon members on this side of the House.

Where are they?

They will be along in a moment. [Interjections.]

They are planning their retirement cottages!

I also want to convey my thanks to the hon members on this side of the House who, in attack as well as in defence, stated the case of the NP in such an excellent way.

There was an interesting point. The hon members of the CP usually have strong arguments when it comes to the past. The further back one goes, the stronger they are. Today a few of our hon members tackled them about the past, and each time the CP lost. When the hon member for Sundays River tackled them with a thorough analysis of 1948, they were exposed for what they are, namely people who compare themselves with persons of the same calibre as Dr Malan and the NP of 1948, but who have been stripped of the Afrikaner support on which Dr Malan was able to rely.

I want to begin with the hon member Dr De Beer. I was really disappointed at the morality of his second speech, for he did absolutely nothing but let fly at targets he had set up himself and every question he put to me I had already replied to in my speech this morning. Either he did not listen or his memory is waning. First he said we were hiding away behind the concept of “consensus”, but then said he wanted to concede that we were not really hiding behind it. We have been applying the concept of consensus in political decision-making since the beginning of the tricameral Parliament. This is being done in every joint committee and at every vote. With the exception of the cases in which we were not able to reach consensus, it is surely working. It makes for better legislation, and legislation which is mutually acceptable. Surely the hon member is not trying to say that the decision-making process in all the legislation that is discussed and agreed to here is a demonstration of the failure of the process.

The hon member also kicked up a terrible fuss about the referee. He said they were now going to accept that we want a referee who will always be on our side.

Like the President’s Council!

Surely I said in my speech that the President’s Council could only play that role in an interim phase because the council is politically constituted, and we shall have to negotiate on what kind of referee—this means a decision-making body—will be mutually acceptable, will be objective and will be really reliable. [Interjections.]

Let us put them to a little test. They charge the NP and myself with not spelling out our policy in detail. I want to ask the hon the leader of the DP something. They say they stand for the protection of cultural rights. How are they going to word this in their constitution? Do they already have a model?

Did you read the report of the Law Commission on the bill of rights?

That is our report, and not theirs. [Interjections.]

Order!

Does the hon leader of the DP have a model? No, he does not.

May I ask the hon the national leader a question?

No, I am dealing with this hon member. The hon leader has no model. I want to ask him a second question. Is he going to draw up a unilateral model, or is he first going to negotiate on it? [Interjections.]

I am certain they are first going to negotiate. I know the hon member to be the type of person who will not think, even if he wins the election, that he can draw up something unilaterally and then force it down the throats of the people whom he wants to take with him. [Interjections.] He will probably work on a plan and then have that plan on the table during the negotiating situation. He will then say that other people can also put their plans on the table, and he will invite them to discuss the plans.

That is precisely what the NP is doing and will do. It would be inane of us, nor would it be in the national interests, to devise all kinds of detailed models, but I did depict a framework of principles to that hon member of the NP’s views on constitutional development. It was a framework of principles that have been thoroughly developed, and it is the most detailed constitutional framework of principles of all the parties in this House. [Interjections.]

That is why that old accusation that we are unable to say how is nonsense. The foundation of our proposals is clear. As the negotiation situation makes progress we shall place that proposal on the table. We say that other people who are participating in this negotiation process can place their plans on the table too. The DP can also place its plan on the table. They must come and tell us and show us how one should be more specific by placing a detailed plan on the negotiating table. The CP must also come and tell us how they are going to make their partition work. I shall come to that in a moment.

The hon member asked me whether I was opposed to minority government. I spelt this out on 8 February. I said it three years ago. I said it today, in my rejection of CP policy. However, I also said we were not prepared to exchange it for a new form of domination. To eliminate White domination is a goal, but is it the policy of the DP to replace it with Black domination? [Interjections.] Yes, it is. We say no to that. That is the essential difference between us, and that is why the DP is going to get the hiding of its life in this election. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Lichtenburg in the first place, as we should perhaps have expected from him, quoted a passage from Die Transvaler, which if one merely listens to it is absolutely damning, but in the very next paragraph the following is stated:

This is the NP—

That is typical of their style, but I should like to come to a theme which both the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition as well as the hon deputy leader of the CP put forward. This theme is concerned with the fact that I held talks with the hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in the House of Representatives, and the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition quoted a passage referring to what he had said. The hon member for Lichtenburg referred to this and said we were unable to reach consensus and therefore our policy was a failure. That is more or less, in brief, what they tried to convey.

In the first place I should now like to put a fair question. In the application of their policy of partition, are they going to seek consensus with the leaders of the peoples and groups to whom they want to give countries, or are they going to do this unilaterally? It is a fundamental question. [Interjections.]

Order! One or two hon members, particularly here on my left-hand side, only have one or two turns to speak left for the afternoon. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council may proceed.

Let me put an easy question. Was that hon member ever in the office of the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in the House of Representatives, or was he ever in that hon member’s office? Has he ever made a single effort to hold any kind of discussion of his policy with the LP, which is the legally elected majority party of the Coloured population group? I do not think so.

You are wrong!

In other words, their policy cannot succeed. They are not even on speaking terms. They have given up in advance trying to find consensus with the people for whom their policy is intended.

You are wrong!

They are going to ask some of those people to move away. They are going to ask many of them to disrupt their lives. Are they going to do it with bulldozers? Are they going to do it with the help of the Defence Force, or are they going to try to persuade them that they, the CP, have this wonderful ideal—this wonderful partition idea—which will be the salvation of everything, and that they must accept it. [Interjections.] Little formulas like this, namely that because we have not yet reached consensus, our policy cannot work, are surely nonsensical.

At the same time I want to say this too in reply to the hon member for Durban Central. Of course there are many people who speak against our proposals. Of course one would be able to argue that it really sounds as though the majority of the general population speaks out clearly against our proposals. They speak out against our proposals in a situation in which things are experienced in a certain way, namely that our proposals have been developed and that we want to uphold those proposals in order to prejudice them. That is not the truth.

We on this side of the House will persuade them that this is not the truth, because we are genuine in our intentions. That is why I believe and am satisfied that if one’s proposal is truly just, and this is what we are striving for, then it has the power of persuasion, and we shall convey that power of persuasion with zeal and with conviction in the negotiating situation. [Interjections.]

Let us come back to the CP, because they say partition is the answer and that it is the only fair policy. They say it is nothing new, but I think we should put it to a very thorough test for a change. The test I want to apply is the statements of Dr Carel Boshoff. If I understand them correctly before some audiences and some occasions they say that partition will work in a certain way and that they will not relocate many people. All they need do is to partition off Black states, retain the RSA that remains and gradually make it White. This is an unadulterated summary of the one model they are selling. What does Dr Carel Boshoff have to say about that? He says:

He then went on to say:

He goes on to say:

A damning, destructive refuttal of that model! If one pins them down they say there is another model. This he also replies to in his fifth question. He says:

The hon member for Lichtenburg should really enjoy this. He always says this with so much conviction. [Interjections.] Those who are not satisfied with this situation can leave.

In 1976, in a television debate, you also said it.

Yes, but I have seen the light. If I see that circumstances make it impossible to attain something, then I look for a feasible policy. [Interjections.]

The statement from the CP side is that those who are not satisfied with it can leave. It is not necessary to forfeit Black labour. The Blacks need the work, they will stay there and they will exercise their rights elsewhere. What does Prof Boshoff say about that? He says:

Surely that is what we say. Surely it is true.

He then goes on to say:

In other words, he says that if the CP should come to power they will begin where we were 20 years ago, and in 20 years’ time they will be precisely be where the NP is today… [Interjections]… but there is one difference. South Africa will then have gone up in flames. There is no time! We went through that process, and we have the time. The time has come for us to begin working on this matter now.

For that reason, however fervently and at whatever decibel level the hon member for Lichtenburg sings the praises of partition, I say that even though it may be a just theory on paper, a theory which cannot be applied in practice is not worth the paper on which it is written. [Interjections.] That is why the CP does not have a just policy, because they have an unimplementable policy. [Interjections.] We are therefore right to say, in the end, that whatever their good intentions may be, they will continue to cling to power as a minority government until this country explodes. [Interjections.] Or they will see the light and say that the NP is right. [Interjections.] What does Prof Boshoff say? They Afrikaners will have to move to a place where no one is really staying now and establish their own state there, and then hope that the Whites who remain behind in South Africa—I am now saying this in my words, but this is what it amounts to—will maintain things in such a way that there will be a sound relationship between this Afrikaner state and South Africa, because they will need them very badly from the point of view of the economy, infrastructure, etc. [Interjections.]

That is why say the CP does not have a credible policy. We do not deny that there are problems involved in the implementation of our policy and in persuading people to accept it. However the policy is fair and just. The CP’s policy is unfair and unjust towards those whom they themselves know will remain here. That is why it cannot work.

The hon member for Durban Central says that the majority of the population does not want own affairs. In a different way the hon member for Groote Schuur also asks the same question. He asked more or less between 20 and 30 questions in five and a half minutes. Let us consider the national states. Are the self-governing national states not a form of own affairs?

They want to be part of one South Africa!

Yes, but surely we are not saying that own affairs are not part of one South Africa. Where do we say that? What we are saying is that a person is part of one South Africa; you participate in joint decision-making on matters of common interest, but there is a sphere, a power-base, with or without geographic substance, in regard to one’s own, immediate, unique interests, over which one maintains self-determination. [Interjections.] Which self-governing national state, even if we were to establish a federation tomorrow, would want its legislative assembly and executive authority to be abolished? [Interjections.]

That hon member made the statement that people did not want own affairs. Which two of them ever said, let us amalgamate? I am not saying this in a derogatory manner—I do not want to quarrel with the other two Houses—but surely it is not on any agenda that, for example, the Houses of Delegates and Representatives should amalgamate. Nor do I blame them for not doing so. If they did they would really be short-sighted. This system offers them far more influence in decision-making, even now, with its failings, than the system of the DP will be able to offer them.

Let us consider the Indians—the smallest group. They would be dwarfed. Under these proposals they would become the most threatened species in this country, while they control an education system which is really excellent and of which they are proud. For a time I was their Minister, before the new constitution was applied. They have reason to be proud of it.

I could continue in this way to talk about their own services. They have acquired a power-base here which is really meaningful to them. Whatever the political rhetoric may therefore be, if we can undo the concept of the cloak which the opposition in particular wishes to wrap around it, namely that it is discriminating and is actually a system for continuing apartheid indefinitely, and we can get to the truth, the truth is that it makes sense for South Africa.

†Because of the diversity it makes sense. It is a non-discriminatory way in which to accommodate the diversity of our country into our system. [Interjections.] That is what we believe and that is what we will propound from every platform, as well as in our discussions with leaders. [Interjections.]

Hon members are in for a surprise, because we are making headway in that regard. [Interjections.]

*The hon member for Soutpansberg referred to South West Africa. He asked what sense the struggle in Angola had made. The struggle in Angola made a new Southern Africa possible. [Interjections.] It chased the Cubans out of Africa. [Interjections.] They are leaving very quickly. [Interjections.] The struggle in Angola made it possible to create stability in a very important neighbouring state. It led to a final agreement in terms of which the AG, who was appointed by this Government, will continue to govern until, after free elections, a genuine constitution has been established in South West Africa. [Interjections.]

However, I want to come to another point the hon member made. He wants to blame us for Swapo’s contraventions on 1 April. It is the same thing they are trying to do with corruption. [Interjections.] If an official or an individual politician does something wrong, it is the fault of the entire party, the entire Government or the entire system.

Swapo’s contravention was a contravention, and must be assessed in the way in which we dealt with it. What did we do?

You failed to prevent them coming in!

We acted immediately and effectively, and we succeeded in doing so with international approval and support. [Interjections.]

Order! I am not prepared to allow the hon the Minister to be subjected to a cross-examination while he is replying to the debate. Hon members should be fairer than that. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Thank you, Sir.

The hon member for Potgietersrus had the instruction this afternoon to wield the tar brush. He did it very ineffectively. I do not even feel insulted. I am pleased I do not have to live with his conscience. [Interjections.] What he describes as our weakness, for example that we make provision for joint decision-making, as well as for a group’s own decision-making, is our strength. It makes us a whole party, because they are half a party because they do not recognise the reality of the interwovenness of interests. That is what makes it necessary for a person to hold talks. There is an inherent compulsion for one to make joint decisions.

However we are not simply all the same, as the DP wants to make us. The deep-seated differences in culture, language and race play a role throughout the world. They play a role in America. After all, there is a Black caucus in America which is not called a Black caucus by this apartheid government but is a name they give themselves. It unleashes forces and powers, and that is why we acknowledge that own decision-making is in fact our strength. We are a whole party. We do not work with half-truths. [Interjections.]

†The hon member for Groote Schuur, as I have already said, fired some twenty to thirty questions at me in staccato fashion, all within about five and a half minutes.

All worth answering!

I do not write shorthand.

I managed to jot down a few: The hon member asked me whether all South Africans will have a vote in terms of NP policy. The answer is yes, but not on the basis that majority rule will be the result as would be the case according to the policy of… [Interjections.] No, they will have a vote to elect their leaders and their leaders will represent them and their leaders will participate in joint decision making on the basis of non-domination. The hon member asked me if we stand for a fourth chamber. The answer to that is no; we have never stood for a fourth chamber and we do not stand for it now. I also have a surprise for the hon member. The hon the Minister, Mr Heunis, also says that we do not stand for a fourth chamber. [Interjections.] The hon member asked me if I believe that our policy has a chance of acceptance. My reply is yes, and I have already dealt with that. The hon member asked me about the Group Areas Act and the Population Registration Act etc. My answer is that the hon member should read my Hansard as I replied to that question in my main speech this morning.

*I want to reply to a few facets mentioned by the hon member for Bethal. The hon member said he did not know whether federation was our policy now. The answer to that is no. The hon member should read the Hansard of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, because he specifically said that a federation in the ordinary sense was not our policy.

In what sense then?

I shall quote the Hansard of 5 May 1988, col 7701, as an answer. Perhaps the hon member will be able to understand it then:

That is the answer.

The hon member tried to spread a gossipmongering story about own affairs hospitals. I should like to ask the hon member this question: If they should come into power and a Black had been run over by a car in the street, would the hon member allow an ambulance from the White hospital to pick him up? [Interjections.] If the nearest casualty ward that could save his life was the one in a White hospital, would the hon member allow him to be taken there?

I shall simply take him there myself!

Very well, then there is nothing wrong with it. If there is special expertise and special, expensive equipment at a training hospital, and it is in the interests of a Coloured patient that he should receive treatment from a specific professor or medical practitioner using that specific equipment, would the hon member prohibit that? [Interjections.] No, I do not think hon members are so unchristian.

We who are involved in own affairs are not ashamed, within the provisions of the Constitution, to allow services sometimes to be rendered to members of other population groups, but we do so in order that the security of the people by whom we have been given a mandate to look after their interests are not threatened by this in any way. This rigorism in the attitude of those hon members is based on racism. It is an attitude of we are better, an attitude of rejection and an attitude of go away and warm yourselves at your own fire, an attitude of find your own salvation. That is not the attitude that we on this side of the House adopt.

I do not think the hon member for Mooi River is here. That is why I want to conclude by saying that in this coming election campaign we shall state our policy within this framework and do so in an impartial way because we believe in our cause. I am deeply convinced that the alternatives that are being offered have so many absolute deficiencies that they are not in the interests of South Africa. Our alternative also has deficiencies but these are not deficiencies that cannot be improved. We shall work on these deficiencies. We are not so arrogant as to say that we have all the answers.

Definitely not!

Order! The hon member for Overvaal has had his turns to speak.

That is precisely why we believe in interaction, dialogue and negotiation, and that by these means we will arrive at mutually acceptable answers, which will be truly fair, just and practicable and affordable. That is what we are committed to, and with that we are going to win on 6 September.

Debate concluded.

Mr Chairman, yesterday I used the expression “verbal terrorists” when referring to hon members of the opposition. I withdraw those words.

Order! That is accepted. I should like to congratulate the hon member for Border. Hon members may not know this, but he is 50 years old today, and I am pleased he is growing up now. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, only the most depraved politicians take delight in dealing with the coming to an end of the long political career of a politician like the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. In my book he simply rates as one of the more incisive NP members, one who long ago saw that apartheid in this country was doomed. Therefore I regard him as just another casualty of the monster of apartheid. No doubt others who may still try to give this monster of apartheid a facelift and manicure will meet the same fate. Let the message go out that those who try to maintain this evil creation by trying to market it in what they regard as a less offensive form, either by obfuscation or by sleight of hand, are ultimately devoured by their own product. I make bold to say that had the hon the Minister tried to make an ally of the LP by initiating true measures of reform, he might have been in a different position today. Instead he tried to develop a situation of total constitutional confusion and constipation. Look at the result! No doubt that same evil monster of apartheid is awaiting its next victim. Let the NP members, from the most powerful right down to the least, learn that the monster has no truck with those who try to appease it.

Mr Chairman, in his comprehensive address yesterday the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and Minister of Education and Culture directly captured our problem with modern apartheid in the following statement. I would like to repeat the statement because it needs emphasis. It was a long speech and this statement might have been lost in all the words which were spoken. I quote:

This is the key phrase—

• —is ’n oorskryding van R50 miljoen ondervind. Myns insiens is die woord oorskryding onvanpas. Dit moet eerder wees ondervoorsiening.

Mr Chairman, a little further on, not to belabour this point, the hon the Minister says—

That, to me, is the kernel of our political problem with the apartheid of today. Flowing from this statement it is possible to trace the various ramifications of apartheid and I wish to touch on a few.

It is said and we have witnessed the fact the NP has acknowledged that the apartheid system is a regrettable mistake and that it has caused backlogs to development in the areas which they have demarcated for groups which they have classified in racial groupings other than what they call “White”. Besides the field of housing this phenomenon also manifests itself especially in terms of educational facilities. Should they really be sincere about such a grave admission and be truly dedicated to reform, one would naturally suppose that their Cabinet would do one of two things. It could firstly scrap segregation and discrimination altogether and share every single educational facility which exists in this country—whether this facility be the half-empty Edgewood Training College in Natal or the derelict buildings of our Bechet Teachers’ Training College. That is the first alternative and the first thing one would expect them to do. Should they not be big enough to do that, one would expect them alternatively and before sharing to cut back on spending on the White educational facilities while pouring in specially allocated additional funds so as to wipe out the backlogs which they realise do exist.

While the NP Cabinet continues to expect the Ministers’ Council of the House of Representatives and other similar institutions—for example the KwaZulu Cabinet—to trot to them equipped with begging bowls for special funds to tend to the neglect for which the NP is responsible, their own affairs constitutional arrangement reveals itself as nothing more and nothing less than a protection of White privilege in this country. The LP has never begged and it will never crawl for that which constitutes a fundamental right of every single South African citizen. [Interjections.] Leave the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition alone. He has had a hard time and he could not even manage a speech yesterday. [Interjections.]

Any LP member will tell any NP member that the NP group concept is damned to hell if they expect us to beg them to see to it that we get the funds to enable us to create and upgrade educational facilities which they in any case were supposed to provide under their “separate but equal” banner of the past. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am very pleased to participate in this debate on education and culture. As a former teacher I consider it a privilege to speak in the discussion of the Vote which is headed by two dynamic personalities like the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and leader of the LP, Rev Hendrickse, and the hon the Deputy Minister, the national secretary of the LP, Mr A Williams.

I say that they are dynamic because we have been in this Parliament exactly 57 months today. [Interjections.] In 57 months the hon leader of the LP and his party have had 57 new primary schools and 50 new secondary schools built. [Interjections.] This could only have been done by the LP and its dynamic leader. [Interjections.] In 57 months we have increased the Education Vote from R726 million to R1 792 million. This could only have been done by a dynamic leader. That is why I say that I consider it an exceptional privilege to participate in this debate.

I do want to say something to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition this morning, however. The individual is always less important than the party. What he sees and interprets as confrontation politics we of the LP regard as strategy. [Interjections.] Interestingly enough, our strategy actually works. It seems to me, according to news flashes on TV and this morning’s newspaper reports, that the strategy we used on Wednesday greatly influenced the resignation from politics of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

I want to tell the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition that it is high time for him to start spelling out his party’s policy in this House and to the voters. [Interjections.]

He does not have a policy.

It will not help us at all to attack individuals. In this way he can and will never win an election. An election is won purely on the basis of a party’s policy. Abusive and recriminatory politics have never won an election.

I am speaking from experience here. It is a difficult matter to fight the LP. I want to let out a secret now. In 1984 I stood as an independent candidate against the LP. [Interjections.] Yes. Everybody saw in this that Douglas Josephs was very well known in the Southern Cape. No, Sir. I shall tell hon members now what I did. My opponent was a member of the LP. He issued a little pamphlet in which the LP ten-point plan was set out. I took that little pamphlet and I publicised that ten-point plan. [Interjections.] I pushed it with the voters while my opponent launched personal attacks on me. That is why I am sitting here today. That is why I put forward LP policy today. [Interjections.]

Order! I have permitted the hon member to proceed. He has spoken well, but he must return to education now and speak just as well on that. The hon member may proceed.

I have reached that now, Mr Chairman. [Interjections.] I explained the reasons for the high failure rate of our 1987 matriculants in this House last year, after Mr Sonn had blamed the hon the Minister and the education authorities for the low pass rate. I said inter alia that the hon the Minister and the education authorities had not disrupted the study habits and patterns of pupils. Neither had they caused loss of time because curricula could not be dealt with properly, nor had they undermined the respect for parents or for the authority of the school. The hon the Minister and the education authorities cannot be held responsible either for the relaxation of discipline at schools and can consequently not be blamed for the disruption at our schools.

I also referred to a few subjects as well as to the opinion of examiners in this regard so that we could establish where the problem really lay. I shall not repeat this today. Hon members, parents and children may look it up themselves in Hansard, 27 April 1988, cols 7730-7734. We all know that last year’s Matriculation results were disappointing. A total of 21 007 pupils sat the Matriculation examination last year. Only 14 235 of these passed. This represents a percentage of 67,7%, compared with the previous year’s 68,2%. The pass rate therefore declined by 0,5%. Year after year the Whites’ pass rate remains above 90% whereas that of Coloured pupils, whether it is a good or a bad year, lies in the 60% range. The question which everybody puts is why Coloured matriculants’ results are so poor.

Mr Franklin Sonn, Chairman of the SA Union of Teachers’ Associations, said the following in Die Burger of 23 December 1988:

He added that people outside education—the mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters of the pupils—were not aware of the tension which existed between the authorities and education. If Mr Sonn reserves the right to blame the poor results on the LP and to inform people outside education, parents and pupils, to this effect, then it is my prerogative and duty this morning as a former teacher, politician and member of the LP to inform our parents and students and to tell them what the real cause is of the poor results. [Interjections.] Has Mr Sonn forgotten that the pupils who were in Std 7 in 1985, who promoted themselves to Std 8 without sitting an examination, were in matric last year? Is Mr Sonn aware that there are teachers at schools who send pupils out of the classroom, lock the door and then play cards? [Interjections.]

Listen to what people who are totally committed to education have to say about the Senior Certificate Examination of 1988. Pupils and parents should take note of this. It is not the LP which is saying this, it is not Rev Allan Hendrickse who is saying this, it is not Mr Abé Williams who is saying this, nor is it Douglas Josephs who is saying this; it is the people who are totally committed to education. It is the education authorities, the examiners who say that, after the examiners’ reports on candidates’ work in the 1988 Senior Certificate Examination had been scrutinised meticulously, the irrefutable conclusion was reached that the poor results in that examination were to be ascribed to the quality of tuition which pupils receive. Listen to what the examiners have to say: There is talent but no teaching. They add that it is strikingly clear that pupils, with a few exceptions, are not properly taught. Books are not marked and plays are not produced after school. Nevertheless candidates are expected to handle a high-tension examination situation practically on their own. There is talent, but no teaching.

Pupils cannot handle multiple choice questions. The examiners say that they should receive more tuition in this type of question. The short story section is also frequently neglected. The examiners say that some centres were so badly prepared that they either avoided this section or could write only a few lines.

Candidates were also supplied with prepared notes on selected subjects on the background section which were inadequate and unsuitable regarding the questions which were set. They also represent an undesirable style.

The examiners say that the answers from some centres were of an exceptionally poor quality. Can one blame the LP for this? Are we in those classrooms? The general standard of work was really exceptionally poor. The section which necessitated hard, dedicated and sustained work received little attention. The examiners say it is obvious that teachers did not deal with the syllabus comprehensively. They say it is obvious that differentiation is not yet applied completely. I do not want to elaborate on this any further. All I ask is whether the LP can be blamed if Std 10 pupils cannot divide by 0,5? Can the LP be blamed if Std 10 pupils say that a lizard’s skin is moist and slimy? Can the LP be blamed if students are confused about fertilisation, pollination and reproduction?

Is Mr Sonn aware that there are CPTA school principals who do not agree with him when he says in Die Burger of 23 December 1988 that there is a cold war between the authorities and education in organised education? There is no war from our side. We are still extending the hand of friendship and co-operation. The hon the Minister emphasised this only yesterday, but now Mr Sonn says there is a cold war between him and us.

In the same newspaper Mr Sonn says, and I quote:

Does Mr Sonn know that his deputy chairman, Mr Randall van der Heever, does not agree with him? At the most recent teachers’ meeting at Mitchell’s Plain, Mr Van der Heever said in reply to a question from a teacher that, after discussions with the Ministers’ Council, the CPTA had no proof that political appointments were being made. I ask Mr van der Heever to be just as brave as when he accused us of political appointments and to state loudly and clearly to parents and pupils that the CPTA has no proof of political appointments. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a privilege to rise to my feet after the hon member for Riversdal. I do so with pride and gratitude, because I want to speak in support of this Vote. Before I continue I should like to congratulate the hon the Deputy Minister, Mr Williams, on his appointment. The hon the Minister performed his task so well with a well-considered speech that there will certainly be no false note in this debate. I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on his definitive speech and also thank him for his firm guidance in this very important department, of which he is the political head.

The speech of the hon the Minister is not merely a survey of the activities of the past year in his department, but far rather a look into the future, and that is why it is of cardinal importance that this House and our community, specifically our teachers and our studying youth, should know where the LP and its Minister of Education and Culture are going with them.

We have our eyes on a a single education system and department. We are thankful that the hon the Minister spelt it out so clearly and understandably in his previous and also in his recently delivered speech. We all know about the desire of the community that our children should receive the best possible opportunities in education. That is why it is a tragedy that the budget will not be sufficient. The hon the Minister calculated that there would be a deficit of approximately R250 million during the present financial year. It is a matter to cry about because we already have such a great backlog. To start the financial year with such a large deficit, is truly a tragedy.

What should actually have happened is that the budget for White education should have been curtailed, and that our deficits should have been made good. Additional funds should have been added so that we would not only be able to keep up with the development, but would still have funds available with which to reduce the backlog.

As a result of this deficit we now have to cut back. All facets of our education are equally important to us. We cannot afford to allow a single section to be neglected. I am of the opinion that the hon the Minister and every hon member present in this House today, has an extremely important task to fulfil, namely to inform the community and to convey the whole truth to our public. We must bring this unequal division of funds to the attention of our people. We must not try to protect the Government by making excuses for them. We must spell it out to our people in the greatest detail.

We must tell them how we plead, speak persuasively and speak harshly, and how we often even fight for an increase in our budget. I have wondered in the past whether it is not a well planned trick of the Government to discredit the LP in the eyes of their own people. However, today I want to tell the Government that they will not succeed in driving a wedge between the LP and its voters, because the voters know that their future, as concerns their children, is secure if it is in the hands of the LP. That is why we must keep our voters informed.

We all know that an illiterate and poorly trained person will be a poor contributor to the total economy of the country. [Interjections.] A poor labourer, apprentice or even teacher will always be a risky investment. That is why there are matters which have to be dealt with.

I should like to raise a few matters in the community which make me unhappy. I wish to speak about the matter of regional education boards. I wonder whether it is not time for regional education boards to be abolished or reformed completely. Is it not time to introduce the system of school councils? Regional councils are only there in an advisory capacity. I feel that the regional councils which exist at present could be changed into school councils so that every component of education, from A to Z, can finally be managed in such councils.

In the extensive areas such as Namaqualand in particular there is such a thing as a management committee. Virtually every important matter which comes before the meeting of the regional council for discussion is referred to the management committee. This is done to cut down on time and costs. I think that that is absurd, because if I read the regulations, I see no mention being made of a management committee. If there is I should like to see what the day, date and page number is in which a management committee is mentioned.

In Namaqualand a maximum of two meetings per year are held. If I read the regulations correctly, meetings should be held every three months.

Another function which these regional councils must perform, is the allocation of tenders with regard to school transport. I am not saying that there are anomalies, but I feel that the tenders for school transport must be taken away from officialdom. This aspect must be allocated to the regional education boards. It is easier to bribe one person than it is to bribe a group. I do not say that it happens, but it is possible. Every regional council knows its environment and the problems facing the tenderer.

There is also unequal competition. I wonder whether hon members have noticed that many of the transport tenders are granted to Whites, especially now that the period has been increased from three to five years. Their input is smaller because they already have an infrastructure such as buses, drivers etc. Our people who want to enter this market have to make a huge capital input. Those White tenderers also have the monopoly of the White bus transport service because we cannot compete with them on their own turf. I wish to request that we consider allocating this function to the regional services council.

Another matter which is disturbing is the so-called compulsory school attendance. We have been hearing about compulsory school attendance for quite a while now. This morning I want to tell hon members that very little has come of it. When there is sufficient space, and the child lives within the prescribed area of a school, he or she must be compelled to attend the school. Hon members also know that when a child is younger than 16, and enrols at the beginning of the year, he must complete that year. However, very little comes of that in practice.

I have already made excuses for children who do not attend school often. We say that both parents work; there is not sufficient supervision. We say that although the children reside within the prescribed walking distance from the school, they still live far from the school. The Namaqualand summers are very hot and the winters are very cold. It is difficult for the children to get to school. There are, however, also many cases where the parent does not even inquire after work whether or not the child has done his homework; let alone whether he attended school that day or not.

I think that it is our mission to make the parents aware of the seriousness of the situation and to encourage them to ensure that their children attend school. I may be speaking under correction, but during the past financial year in Namaqualand we have not had one prosecution of parents who did not ensure that their children attended school regularly. I think that we must do everything in our power to ensure that our children attend school regularly.

Another matter which gives me cause for great concern, is the matter of school buildings. Hon members know how hard we have tried during the past few years to use school buildings in the White areas, which are not being utilised fully or not being utilised at all, for our own purposes. It has been refused continually and now the Administration: House of Representatives has to erect buildings with the insufficient funds which are available.

I want to mention one example. In my constituency in Pofadder there is a wonderful school which belongs to the Roman Catholic Church. The school is virtually a monument and was erected by the handiwork of the members of the congregation in stone. It is virtually on the outskirts of the town and is nearer to the area which was proclaimed for our people. With the fusion of the two primary schools, that building is now empty. Since there is a need for a high school in that area, I should like to ask whether it is possible to mention Pofadder and try to take over that school or to use it as a high school. The Roman Catholic Church wishes to place that school at our disposal. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, there have been certain very important developments in the last twenty-four hours which I would like to react to very briefly. I want to place on record the LP’s official reaction to the resignation of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

The resignation of a Minister of such an important portfolio concerned with the planning of South Africa’s future is an indictment of the NP’s inability and unwillingness to walk the road of true reform. It is the NP’s lack of vision and non-cognizance of the reality of the South African situation involving other than White people which must be held responsible for the end of the political career of a person who has in his own way meant much to many people.

Mr Chairman, unfortunately the previous Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Representatives and now the so-called Leader of the Official Opposition in this House does not consider it important enough to be present during this debate. I notice that he refers to this action of the LP as a political “foefie” and in this regard he is in agreement with Die Burger who also referred to it as a “politieke foefie”. I believe it is time for the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition to realise that he has no power whatsoever, and that he is not, and will not be a factor here. His time will be better spent trying to find himself a retirement home in the Wilderness with the rest of his friends.

*This morning’s leading article in Die Burger refers to the obstructive conduct of the LP. I want to tell them that it is not we who are obstructing the matter, but the Government’s apartheid concept and policy. The leading article goes further, however, and refers to the difficult time we are having economically and the fact that possibly we shall have to extend the parliamentary session to some extent. If that is not the height of hypocrisy, I do not know what hypocrisy is! It was their own hon Minister of Education and Culture who referred to the great expense incurred by the Government’s apartheid policy. Yesterday our hon leader and Minister of Education and Culture in this House gave certain examples of what this senseless duplication of schools costs, and this happens despite the fact that we do not have money. We must see what we have done as a serious signal to the NP Government of our deep-rooted frustration about the Government’s unwillingness to initiate positive, serious and honest reform. In this connection Patrick Cull of the Eastern Province Herald reported the following about our hon leader, and I quote:

I think that is a shame!

I should like to congratulate the hon the Minister on his handling of this important and sensitive Vote. At the same time I want to congratulate the hon the Deputy Minister on his appointment.

Hon members know that a short while ago students from two different White schools paid us a visit. There were also so-called Coloured children from Coloured schools. They sat there together quite happily, which makes one wonder why those children cannot be in the same schools as well.

Hear, hear!

I now come to my prepared speech. [Interjections.] At the outset it is necessary to say that I am no expert on education, and consequently I should like to confine myself to the perceptions of the voters with regard to our education in general. These are perceptions that exist, and that we cannot ignore. Permit me, therefore, to single out certain aspects which the voters are concerned about.

There is the guidance in the senior primary phase. It is a fact that guidance in our secondary schools takes place on a relatively ad hoc basis and there is very little in the way of guidance in the senior classes of our primary schools. In the process thousands of promising academic careers are detrimentally affected and suffer alarming delays. After all, the primary objective of guidance is to make a positive contribution to bringing up a child to adulthood. It is a fact that primary pupils receive differentiated education as from Std 6. It follows, therefore, that they must receive effective guidance with regard to their subject choice. Since education is going to make much greater demands in future, the foundation that is laid in the primary school will become increasingly important for a pupil’s later education in his ultimate profession. It also follows that integration into the secondary school will be facilitated if the child is prepared and orientated in his Std 5 year in particular. I should like to assume that there can be little argument about what has been said so far and I want to ask why there is a lack, or rather a total absence, of effective guidance in our primary schools?

I should like to discuss nursery schools and pre-primary classes. I should like to address the voters’ problem concerning the question of their pre-school children. The education regulations provide that a child may not be admitted to a pre-primary class before turning five years old. I see no problem in this connection. The voters have a problem, however, with the demands that are made before a private nursery school can qualify for Government support. In my own constituency I can think of places such as Patensie, Port Alfred and Steytlerville. Let us look at one single requirement, however: Space per child. Indoors one requires approximately 2,8 square metres per pupil and outdoors one needs 5,6 square metres per pupil for them in which to play. It is a fact that the high standards laid down for nursery schools have placed them way beyond the financial capacity of our communities.

The advantages of attending nursery schools are proven facts, and I should like to point out a few of them. In the first place they promote school readiness; secondly it has been proven statistically that children who have attended nursery schools do not fall in the category of early school-leavers; and thirdly, such children perform better in general and seldom, if ever, are guilty of playing truant. Nevertheless, we blithely carry on placing this essential educational facility beyond the capacity of our communities.

I should like to proceed. With reference to teaching standards and norms, it is a well-known fact that our education is regulated by standards and norms which are sometimes completely out of step and are to the disadvantage of education. Once again I want to single out one aspect, viz the standard sizes of our schools, and I know that this has received attention from our Ministers’ Council in the past.

This proviso makes our schools unmanageable with regard to organisation and inevitably promotes a lack of discipline which ultimately contributes to a complete lowering of education standards. The hon member who spoke before me, the hon member for Hantam, referred to compulsory education, and I should like to discuss that.

There is concern among our voters about the question of compulsory education. As I see the matter, the legal regulations provide that the boundaries of compulsory school attendance should be as follows: The lowest limit is the year as from the first day of the school year in which the pupil turns seven, and the upper limit is the end of the school year in which the pupil turns 16, or passes Std 8.

In addition provision is made for the parents to have the responsibility to ensure that a pupil attends school regularly. It is clear, therefore, that a pupil is compelled to attend school for at least 10 calendar years and that any unauthorised absence amounts to irregular school attendance which is punishable in terms of the law. The Department of Education and Culture is responsible for the implementation of the provisions with reference to compulsory school attendance.

Nevertheless the community is confronted by an increasing number of early school-leavers and chronic truants. One wonders whether the provision was included in the Statute Book simply to salve people’s conscience, or whether it creates a broad infrastructure to implement the provision of compulsory school attendance.

There are daily appeals from the voters for the provision of education facilities. Two aspects with regard to this matter give cause for concern, however, viz the growing need for education facilities in our community and the insufficient funds to meet this need.

There are various ways in which one can attempt to solve this particular problem. We can either lower our standards, or we can accept the existing backlog as an accomplished fact and learn to live with it, or we can strive actively for a single system of education and the throwing open of facilities for all population groups, irrespective of race or colour.

In this connection it is necessary to consider the position of education in the geographic federal form of government. The main characteristic of the federal concept is the total devolution of authority from the central federal government to the various states of a federation. Within this given scenario, education will inevitably form a component of that which will be devolved to a federal state. Since the right to education will obviously be included in a bill of human rights in order to protect the interests of education, the primary idea remains that education must be controlled and operated at grass-roots level within the federal system.

In conclusion I want to say that the LP believes that this objective will create the necessary harmony in education, and we believe that every reasonable person will ultimately embrace the philosophy of federalism.

Mr Chairman, to start with I should like to thank the hon the Minister for the building of the secondary school and hostel, as well as the primary school in Kroonstad, which is being built at the moment. Hon members will recall that since 1985 I have made moving appeals in this House for the building of these schools, particularly the high school. It was a community project. This reminds me of 1986, when some of the pupils threatened to burn down the school. Today this fine school has been built, as well as the hostel and there is now also a new primary school. Hon members will recall that I said at that stage that education was being dreadfully neglected in the Free State rural areas.

However, before I start with my annual lamentations, I should like to thank the teachers in my constituency for their unselfish service, particularly their after-school service. Our rural teachers are dreadfully neglected, but they still play their part, in spite of all the shortcomings. Our rural teachers have overcrowded classrooms—there are between 50 and 60 children per classroom. They nevertheless provide work of excellent quality, in spite of these shortcomings. I thank them for this. I also want to thank the teachers’ council for the region for the work they are doing in the Free State. I think they have a good understanding with the school committees. I want to thank them for deliberately striving for a good relationship with the local school committees.

At present I am in the process of addressing both teachers and school committees in my constituency. I make it my duty specifically to proclaim the LP’s policy, and particularly to reach out a hand of friendship to the teachers in my constituency on behalf of the LP. [Interjections.] Education in the rural areas has been dreadfully neglected, particularly as regards funding for the building of schools. In this connection I want to make an appeal that there is still a tremendous shortage of classroom accommodation, in spite of the two schools which have been built, and that there is a tremendous shortage in the Free State rural areas.

Today I want to refer specifically to the second primary school at Bronville in Welkom. I have been making appeals since 1985 for the building of this second primary school. For the sake of Hansard and the teacher who uses Hansard for his Std 7 class I should like to read out a letter to hon members which I addressed to the education authorities in connection with an appeal for the building of a primary school in Bronville. I wrote this letter in consequence of a visit which I paid to the Ministry when I learned to my dismay that this school was not going to be built in Welkom. As I have said, I want to read out this letter for the sake of Hansard and my voters.

[Inaudible.]

I shall have to start again. [Interjections.] The letter reads as follows:

I must say these are fine plans, and we thank the education authorities for this new concept for the building of schools. I am continuing to quote from my letter:

I want the hon the Minister of Education and Culture to take this section into consideration:

The letter ends as follows:

I want to add “loyal support”—

I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to see whether this R3 million cannot be added to the R250 million, which will be a surplus next year.

As the hon members who spoke before me spelt out, this school cannot be built owing to a shortage of funds. I do not believe that my people in the rural areas are being ignored in the allocation of funds. We can use this R3 million well. I want to appeal to the Ministers’ Council, in spite of the entire position with regard to funding, please to vote money for the building of schools in the Free State rural areas, even if this means that next year’s budget will be exceeded. I believe this House will make arrangements for the budget to be exceeded next year. These shortcomings are the result of the historical backlog. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in my speech last year I made mention of the fact that in most cases, school committees really did not know what their functions were.

It is true that in most cases they are manipulated and kept in the dark by some principals. As a rule, the principals act as the secretaries of the school committees and I by no means think this is any longer a healthy practice. Among the complaints are that the principal rewrites the minutes to suit him or herself. The school committee sits in connection with nominations for teaching posts at their school, in which regard they make certain recommendations. The recommendations made to the regional education board by the school committee concerned are in many cases not a true account of the school committee concerned.

I recently learnt that the recommendations which a particular school committee wished to submit to the regional education board, were nowhere noted in the minutes. If this information is correct, then surely the school committee concerned, did not make nominations for a certain post. This would mean that the principal concerned submitted his own choices to the regional board.

Another objection is that it still happens that principals expel pupils from their schools without the school committee concerned and the regional office being informed about it. I immediately brought those cases which came to my attention in my constituency, to the attention of the regional chief inspector of Worcester. [Interjections.] Sir, may I have a little silence, please? It would appear to me that this expulsion from schools by some principals is assuming tremendous proportions. It seems to me as if the Department of Education and Culture is not taking strong enough action against such principals.

An interesting case which I want to bring to hon members’ attention, is that of a Std 7 boy who committed a certain transgression last year which ultimately led to a court case. The principal of the school concerned saw fit to expel that boy even before he had been found guilty by a court. When this came to my attention, I immediately contacted our regional chief inspector at Worcester. He told me he had no knowledge of the matter, but promised to look into it immediately. This was during the examination last year. When I investigated the matter, I learnt that the boy had to write the examination at the principal’s house in the afternoon. Fortunately, it was possible to put a stop to this and the boy continued his examination together with the other pupils and passed Std 7. He is now in Std 8.

I mention this because I am concerned that at a time like this, after so many admonitions, circulars and information sheets on the part of the department, there are still some principals and teaching staff who are making themselves guilty of such offences.

Another matter about which I am unhappy and about which I have spoken on a previous occasion, is that instances still occur of principals and teaching staff infringing the provisions of regulation S.28, relating to the infliction of corporal punishment upon pupils. I have also learnt that some parents have laid charges with the police. According to my information these cases have come to a dead end. I know of a case in which a ruling is being awaited from the Advocate-General as to whether action is to be taken against a particular teacher.

We are concerned about the actions of teaching staff, including the principal, who administer corporal punishment at this particular school. I shall furnish the name to the department and to the hon the Minister. I have also taught, and I want to tell hon members that the register that is kept at schools in which a record is kept of when a teacher or the principal administers corporal punishment, does not give a true account of what happens. I know of instances in my time of pupils receiving 30 strokes on the buttocks whilst four or five strokes were recorded in the register.

For the sake of interest, I should like to quote a letter to hon members. It reads as follows:

I shall withhold the name of the school:

What did he do?

Mr Chairman, the hon member asks what he had done. I am in favour of corporal punishment, but there are limits! I want to make a serious appeal to the education department that far more serious action be taken in such cases.

I support the hon member for Caledon’s statement that the appointment of temporary teaching staff to vacant posts at schools should not be left in the hands of principals alone. I want to request that very serious attention be devoted to this matter. In order to emphasise the gravity of the matter, I want to mention a case which recently came to my attention, namely one in which a certain principal had temporarily employed a female teacher at a certain school in January this year. The woman had a Higher Primary Education qualification and in my view she was qualified to teach a Std 4 class. My information is that the principal called her in at the end of the term and told her that she had to hand in her books because her services were being terminated. What is interesting about this case is that another woman was appointed to this temporary post in April, and she has training in the Junior Primary division—especially in kindergarten education. She is now teaching the Std 4 class concerned.

I also hear that there is some unhappiness among the staff members with regard to the principal’s actions. I want to know how long parents will have to put up with such heavy-handed actions by some principals. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to complete my speech.

I previously concluded by referring to the fact that the CPTA had no proof of any political interference on our part. The House must know that I was also accused of this and that I transferred a teacher from Mossel Bay to Riversdal. That teacher can only be at Riversdal and nowhere else in the Republic of South Africa. We are still looking for that teacher, but we cannot find him anywhere in Riversdal. Mr Sonn should therefore check his sources before he accuses the LP of interfering in education. [Interjections.]

Both the House and the parents—mothers and fathers—must take note today that we in the LP realise that our children are our most valuable asset. The LP knows that there is exceptional talent in the less-developed residential areas and that amongst these talented individuals will be found the future leader of the CPTA, the future moderator of the N G Mission Church, the future leader of the LP, the future Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and the future Minister and Deputy Minister of Education and Culture. Consequently this party will go out of its way to do its best for education. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture goes as far as to say that nothing will stop him from exceeding the education budget in order to meet the needs of education. He says so in this small pamphlet the “Labour Party of South Africa”. It reads: “Labour Party to ignore limited education spending”. The hon the Minister has gone to these lengths because he has the interests of our children at heart.

We in the LP go as far as to make funds available for the upgrading of our under-developed residential areas in order to make them viable areas for the residents. We make funds available so that bathrooms and additional rooms can be added and so that houses can be supplied with electricity. We do so in order to create better study facilities for the many talented pupils living in those homes and because we believe that our own doctors, lawyers, economists, architects, accountants, generals, admirals, directors-general, deputy directors, ministers and members of Parliament will have to hold their own in the new South Africa. We do so because we do not want our children to have to ask for handouts in the new South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, firstly I want to thank the hon the Minister very sincerely for the fine work he has done in the Department thus far. I again want to congratulate the hon member for Mamre on his appointment as Deputy Minister in the Ministry of Education and Culture.

Furthermore I do not want to forget to thank every official in the department and the Executive Director of Education and Culture, Mr A M Muller, for the good work of the past year. Nor do I want to neglect to express my thanks to every clerk in the department. To the humblest ledger clerk and to all the others we say thank you very much. It was only with their cooperation that this department could so successfully have expanded.

I want to thank the hon the Minister and his department for the completion of the beautiful school hall at the Swartberg senior secondary school at Caledon. Then there is the fine building that has been erected at Grabouw. I am referring to the beautiful school hall that was built at the Groenberg senior Secondary School. I thank the department and the hon the Minister very sincerely for this. I must also commend the hon the Minister and his department for building the fine new teachers’ training college at Kuils River.

As far as schools are concerned—and I am very well aware of what is going on in the schools—I must thank the hon the Minister and his department for the fact that there are no longer any complaints about funds for provisioning in our schools. The principals are very happy, because they now have enough funds for supplies at their schools.

I am now going to broach a very touchy subject and I must not be misunderstood. It relates to actual events. We now have parity in our schools, especially as far as the salaries of teachers in the C category and higher categories are concerned. The teachers in categories AA, A and B, for example, earn much less than those in category C. I now want to ask a very important question. If one looks at our matric results, it would appear that the higher salaries paid to people in the C category and higher categories are not commensurate with the productivity that is achieved. I believe that the more money one wants to earn, the better one’s work must be. Do the teachers in category C, who thanks to parity earn a higher salary, really do the work for which they are being paid? In my opinion it has been the people in categories A, AA and B who have been the best teachers throughout the years. They are the people who have worked.

I now come to school boycotts. It appears to me that the school boycotts are instigated by certain recently qualified teachers ie those who fall under category C. They have recently left college and have to go to schools, really to learn as it were, how to become teachers. In one’s first five years as a teacher one learns what it really means to be a teacher. However, it is during the five years of their careers as teachers that the problem of school boycotts arises. Are these people teaching or are they merely encouraging boycotts?

I now come to temporary appointments in our schools. At present the hon the Minister has very limited funds available. He simply does not have enough money. He complained about this again yesterday. As far as temporary appointments are concerned, a temporary allowance is only paid to an acting principal. No temporary allowance is paid in any of the other posts. Those who are employed in promotion posts in an acting capacity are those who have category C or higher qualifications. They do not want to be employed in an acting capacity, since they do not get more money. Therefore I am asking whether those people in category C and higher categories are, in actual fact, such conscientious teachers, because they do not even want to deputise in promotion posts in a temporary capacity without remuneration? What kind of an indication is this of their love for and pride in their profession? [Interjections.]

With regard to the next matter I want to ask the department to speed up the take-over of the Arieskraal Primêre Skool in Grabouw. We should like to see this matter finalised. Every year I lodge a plan for a new building for the Mount Pleasant Primary School at Hermanus. This school has been a temporary structure for more than 17 years now, it is still temporary and must now be made a permanent structure. I ask for attention to be given to that school. We have asked, time and time again, for the building of the senior secondary school at Hawston and I shall now give figures to show why I am asking for that school at Hawston. At the moment the pupils are transported from the Hermanus-Hawston area to Caledon every day—there are 403 pupils who are transported every day. There are 168 secondary school pupils at the Hawston Primêre Skool in Std 6 and 7. There are 54 Std 6 pupils at the Mount Pleasant Primêre Skool at Hermanus. There are 60 pupils from Kleinmond who are in the Swartberg School hostel in Caledon. These figures add up to a total of 685 pupils. A new secondary school at Hawston could start immediately as an Hl school with more than 600 pupils. Why is that school not being built? My request is that a start be made on that school this year, because it is high time it was built.

The Swartberg Sekondêre Skool at Caledon is so full to overflowing that the principal told me that the sooner we could get that school at Hawston, the sooner his situation would be alleviated. I can also tell the hon members that some of the children from Bot River have to travel through to the Swartberg school. However, because the Swartberg school is so full, there are some parents who transport their children to Grabouw every day. However they receive no remuneration for this because the department has not introduced transport for pupils from Bot River to Grabouw. Consequently the parents pay for the transport to Grabouw themselves. I am serious about the school at Hawston.

Next I come to another matter. Teachers’ salary cheques are now going to be paid directly into bank accounts. They will no longer come through to the principal at the school. At Hawston Primêre Skool teachers’ salaries have been paid directly into their bank accounts since January this year. There is, however, another problem. The poor teacher goes to the bank on pay-day and the bank manager tells him that the money has not yet been paid in. Do hon members now see the serious problem professional people are saddled with? They go to the bank and their money is not there. [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, when I rose earlier to take part in this debate I devoted my time to saying farewell to an NP member. I also used my time to warn other powerful people in the NP that they might suffer the same fate if they did not deal with apartheid.

This time I wish firstly to congratulate the hon the Minister on the presentation of his budget. I know he is battling hard to cope with the measly sums of money which are granted to him. I also wish to congratulate the hon the Deputy Minister on his appointment.

Furthermore, I should like to extend a special word of thanks to the officials of the department who are really beginning to put the department in a position of strength where they are regaining the respect of the teacher corps at large.

Without wishing to single out any particular person, I should like to mention the name of Mr Fortuin for the special assistance he has given us as go-between. [Interjections.] I shall always remember the institution of the remedial class in schools which he assisted me in getting.

I am grateful to our Ministers’ Council for the beautiful technical school which was awarded to my constituency. Because our White neighbours in Wentworth preferred empty benches to Brown faces in their classrooms, we were obliged to build this particular facility for Wentworth. I should like to put it across to the hon members of the Ministers’ Council and the hon the Minister that the people of Wentworth are grateful…

[Inaudible.]

Keep quiet, baldy! [Interjections.]

†I should like to add that that applies to the community in the whole of Natal for the massive improvement in school facilities…

Order! Who did the hon member tell to be quiet?

The hon baldy, Sir.

Order! No, we do not call one another names.

I withdraw “bald”, Sir.

Order! The hon member should refer to the hon member for Bishop Lavis.

It wasn’t me, Sir; I am not bald!

Order! To whom was the hon member for Wentworth referring?

I simply said “baldy”, Sir.

Order! The hon member is not allowed to do that.

I withdraw it unconditionally.

†The whole of the community in Natal is grateful for the massive improvement in school grounds and facilities all over the province. Never before has so much attention been paid to our facilities in that province.

I also want to thank the Ministers’ Council for heeding my calls for the building of a new facility for the high school which has been temporarily indefinite since 1968. The pupils of this naval prison, where I personally taught for more than 12 years, will move into their new school building shortly, and they cannot wait for that moment.

My special thanks must also go to the hon the Minister, the Rev Hendrickse himself, for not having summarily deposited pupils from Umbilo Road High School into this very same prison school which was found to be unsuitable so long ago for the particular set of pupils who are there at the moment. I am grateful for the letter in which he informed me that an architect had been appointed.

Now I wish to make a final appeal. We from Natal are saying: Please build our college. The Whites in Natal have two colleges, the one running at one-third capacity and the other at half capacity. [Interjections.] They refuse to share them, however, so they must be selfish. A new college will be one where selfishness will never be condoned. I appeal to the hon the Minister on behalf of Natal to attend to this problem.

Finally, the computers do not last in Natal because of the rust problem. Moisture gathers in the air in Natal because of the high humidity, but no provision is made for the repair of computers in that province, although computers are provided for our use. [Interjections.] I would appeal to the Ministers’ Council and to the hon the Minister of Education and Culture to have the whole matter of the maintenance of computers in Natal investigated and attended to.

Order! Before the hon the Deputy Minister starts his speech, the Chair wants to welcome the hon the Deputy Minister. This is his first speech and we want to wish him everything of the best.

Secondly I was told that the hon member for Rietvlei, Mr Harold Ross, also celebrates his birthday today. We wish him everything of the best. Unfortunately he is at present in hospital and in that regard we also wish him everything of the best.

Mr Chairman, allow me to first express my thanks to the hon the Minister of Education and Culture and the hon the Leader of the LP for the trust they have shown in me by nominating me as Deputy Minister to support him in his failure. Secondly, my thanks to each hon colleague in this House, as well as to each member of the LP, and in particular to members in my constituency, for their contribution towards this nomination. Allow me the opportunity as well to thank my wife and children for the support which they have always given me in all my undertakings. Everyone knows that without their help and support, our journey would be a dismal one. At the moment I am thinking of my parents in particular and of everyone who has shaped me and enabled me to make progress. [Interjections.]

I want to give the House the assurance today that I will do only my best to promote the important task of education in the specific area in which I feel I must make a contribution. First of all, culture is an important foundation of formal education. It is in this regard in particular that our children must become aware of cultural values in the community at a very early age. It is those things which are invisible, abstract and often indescribable, but which instinctively lead one to an absolutely positive or negative reaction of protecting them with everything at ones disposal. Last year in my contribution to the education debate, I referred to small things such as the tickey evening, the pancake evening, etc. Hon members had a good laugh, because in the so-called modern world these little things seem ridiculous. The most highly educated person in Scotland does not find his Scottish kilt ridiculous. That Scottish kilt occupies a permanent place in the heart of the Scots—the Scots who appreciate their cultural heritage and wish to pass it on from generation to generation.

The task and challenge which lies before me therefore requires far more than meets the eye. It is indeed a challenge to return to our people the pride which they once had, and those things which bound us together in an invisible way, without threatening our human dignity.

I also realised that I am not the only one playing a role in this challenge. There is a legion of role players, each one of whom has a significant role, no matter how small. For example, in an orchestra a musician may be required to make a contribution only once. The drummer may perhaps have to beat his drum only once in order to perfect a particular item. If he does not do so, the item will not be complete. I realise that I need the help and assistance, as well as the special value of all the various role players in order to successfully bring my task to fruition.

Firstly, there are the officials of the Department of Education and Culture, and there are the other Government bodies at provincial and municipal levels. Furthermore, there are the business world and the public at large, who all play significant roles. I want to appeal to them to help me in my attempt to bring the community back to those things which are in us, but which cannot find expression to the advantage of our community as a result of various circumstances, both within and beyond our control.

With regard to culture, many people have said many things at different times. Nevertheless there remains an over-emphasis of one or other aspect which is unique to the culture of a people. For example, Prof D J Kotzé says in his book Positiewe Nasionalisme that culture is man’s material and spiritual activity and the product of this; firstly that it relates to man’s conceptions, ideas or forms of consciousness—the “what”, secondly to his way of doing things—the “how”, and thirdly to the material and spiritual products of his activities—the “results”. Dr Waugh, Chief Cultural Officer, Humanities, says that culture is not what one creates, but how one creates—in other words not the “what”, but the “how”. Prof Mühlmann van Mainz, West Germany, said: “Culture is the totality of the typical life form of a population, including the underlying mental attitude and, in particular, its values.”

†I can fully identify with Prof Mühlmann, because whereas every group in the RSA may have largely or to a greater extent an own culture, there are some aspects which symbolise and display a common mental attitude, character and purpose. I believe that these tangent planes should be given more attention, with the prime objective of moulding them into a more prominent, typical phenomenon identifiable with the term “South African”.

Apartheid drove us apart. It brought about an identity struggle. I do not want to be classified a White South African, neither do I want to be classified a Black South African. I cannot change the colour of my skin, but I am a South African. I can understand that some cultural features would have developed because of my skin colour, but that should not overshadow the cultural features attached to my nationhood as South African. Whereas apartheid gave prominence to my skin colour, reform admits that it was wrong!

I venture to say that the final test to the common culture of a nation is displayed in the protection of its borders—its common heritage. That is the sole reason for man to shed his blood, to lay his life on the line. I dare the hon the Leader of the CP or any one else for that matter to impose apartheid on the battle field. He will be the first to perish, most probably at the hand of a White South African.

This is what culture ultimately is all about. It is sad to note that the Government fails to understand that culture in its totality cannot ever be an own affair. It does not concern a subgrouping per se. It concerns a nation. It concerns the South Africa of tomorrow. The South Africa of yesterday was only a glimpse of the South Africa of tomorrow, provided that we begin to display the correct and proper mental attitude. I will refer more fully to the affects of apartheid later in my address.

*In the light of this it is the policy of the LP to strive towards greater co-operation on the cultural front among the various communities, according to its founding principles. The department already follows a modus operandi which relates to this.

At this stage, that is to say until the message of the LP gets through to the Government, it is the policy of the department not to interfere in the activities of organisations in any way. However, the department does determine the needs. It makes known its modus operandi and it makes recommendations with regard to what can be done, for example, what sort of organisation can be formed etc. The department also makes recommendations with regard to the nature and extent of the assistance which ought to be made available as well as the conditions according to which assistance, guidance, counselling and facilities can be provided. In this regard the department is subject to the provisions of the Culture Promotion Act, No 35 of 1983.

The department is constantly assisting in the formation of organisations by means of the provision of inter alia financial assistance, but as the organisations get off the ground, the financial assistance is decreased.

†The department has made phenomenal progress in the field of culture and the scope of its cultural activities is expanding constantly. However, the emphasis was more on funding social and cultural activities initiated by the community. These activities serve an important purpose because it makes the community aware of activities emanating from their cultural environment. At the same time it provides a stimulus and an incentive for being together.

Because of the polarisation of the different communities in South Africa brought about by the apartheid ideology different groups have emerged with their prime objective, namely the dismantling of apartheid. In the course of this struggle for freedom to exercise, inter alia, culture as it should, culture itself took second place. The longevity of the struggle has ripped us totally apart from each other—each with his own idea of how freedom as a number one priority can be achieved in the shortest period of time.

In the meantime, however, culture was neglected. Birds of a feather started flocking together to a point where we started pointing fingers at each other. We started to drop out of attending the local football derby. We started to get into bed long before midnight on New Year’s Eve, desperately avoiding members of the other group. The groups rapidly increased and the polarisation in each community entrenched itself more and more. At this point in our history there is not a single group in South Africa that can claim general unity within its ranks. Yes, Sir, apartheid has destroyed the soul of the South African and because of this culture has suffered on a broad front.

Sadly enough this caused questionable incidents relating to the South African flag. It brought about legal measures to force children given by the womb of our mother, South Africa, to prepare themselves militarily to protect the self-same mother and her offspring. It brought about jail sentences for those who defied the said measures.

Deep down inside us the Springbok team still causes a twitch because, after all, it is the Springboks. However, because the Springbok of the apartheid era was White by legislation, it became a symbol of shame to the majority of South Africans and consequently it incurred the wrath of the majority of South Africans.

What we want to recaptivate is that all of us can be proud of the Springboks, irrespective of race, colour or creed, for the single binding factor is our South African culture. For this to come about, there is only one logic answer and that is that we must rid South Africa of apartheid by legislation in all its different forms.

The repeal of the Immorality Act went by as if it was nothing. I cannot even find the words to express myself to relate to the insignificance of this simplistic measure. The same applies to the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act. The abolition of the Influx Control Act did nothing to change the face of cities and large towns. I ask the Nationalist Government in all sincerity: Why hold on to the Group Areas Act?

*It is understandable that a sort of instinctive concentration should emanate from specific God-given compositions and natures of people. It is in fact characteristic of the culture of every people, and in this regard there is a natural gathering together of people who feel attracted to one another. That is what happens when teams or groups are formed. That is what happens when we support our home team, but when the national team runs onto the field, it is a different kettle of fish.

My request is then to “give culture a chance”. This boils down to giving the South African a chance. Give him a chance to discover himself. Let him be free so that he can cultivate the natural as well as spiritual wealth of his country to the advantage of everyone within the borders of South Africa.

In the light of this, I cannot but follow a direction in which culture in its true sense, namely the culture of the South African people, is pursued. For this reason the LP and I regret the fact that we are unable to support the Cultural Institutions Amendment Bill, which has been submitted to the Joint Committee on Education for consideration.

Despite the divisions which have been caused by apartheid, we shall continue at departmental level to find ways in which to give the values of culture a chance to build a bridge across the divisions. I am sure that all the hon members of this House are aware of the implications and complications incorporated in this. However, I trust that the message with regard to exactly who has a role to play in the fulfilling of this task, has been clearly spelt out.

On future occasions I will announce departmental aims and prospects in more detail, but for now suffice it to say “give culture a chance”.

Mr Chairman, I wish to thank all hon members who participated in this debate. Where issues of a local constituency are involved, I will reply to hon members personally in writing or otherwise.

I must respond to certain issues. The fact that the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition was not even able to use all of his half an hour is an indication of the half-heartedness with which he participated in the debate. However, I have to correct certain impressions he tried to create.

He said that I had approached him on two occasions in connection with an ambassadorial position. That is not correct. I did approach him on one occasion when I was approached by the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs who wanted to know whether I would be prepared to nominate anyone to be ambassador to state of Canada. Apparently the hon member is not aware of the two reasons for appointing people as ambassadors, viz a recognition of the person’s worth as a South African, but also to get rid of some people. [Interjections.] I wonder whether the hon so-called Leader of the Official Opposition remembers, for instance, the Chairman of the President’s Council who was high-hatted—the political term we use for it—to Washington. When a former Minister of Justice, Mr Erasmus, made a faux pas with regard to the banning of the Coloured Convention in 1960, he was high-hatted to Rome. So it is a way of getting rid of people who are a nuisance. This was certainly not a recognition of ability. If it was, the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition would still have been in the position he occupied at the time.

He also criticised us for the strategy we employed the other day in not endorsing the Vote Development Planning. From what I have been able to ascertain, from the Press and elsewhere, there is a body of opinion which is certainly complimentary of our performance on that score. If it has had an effect on the political lives of some people, I am afraid they must pay the price for the ideology in which they believe. There has been criticism too, but it only came from the NP. So, if the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition criticises that strategy and the NP criticises that strategy we clearly see where they belong. [Interjections.]

I also reject the accusation about the, let us call it, dismissal of Mr Donald Trevor Lee as director of sport in the Department of Education. There were two factors involved. One was that for a period of more than six months during which I was Minister of Education there was no report of activity whatsoever. When that particular person started his work as director I complimented him on a job well done in Graaff-Reinet, Port Elizabeth, etc, but it was done on a regional and not on a national basis. That position was subsequently used by that person to ensure that he was always present wherever Eastern Province played cricket. The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition who once held this portfolio should also remember that there was a possibility of a court case by the CPTA against our department because the post had not been advertised. For those two reasons we had every right to review the situation, which we did, and I believe the fact that that person is now politically residing where he is is an indication that we did the right thing at the right time. [Interjections.]

There is also the accusation that…

[Inaudible.]

That was also the accusation. The hon member knows why he is not here. If he had not been demoted as a whip he would still have been sitting here.

Not at all! You came…

Order! It is the prerogative of the hon the Minister who is replying not to be interrupted. Will the hon member please assist me in this respect? The hon the Minister may proceed.

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon member must please keep quiet now. The hon the Minister may proceed.

One certainly has to reject that kind of hit-and-run politics with contempt because they are not here to face the consequences. I am also referring to hit and run in the sense that it is an attempted hit…

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon member must please obey my ruling.

The fact that they are no longer there is an indication of the fact that they have tried to hit, but have missed, and therefore they are still running!

If one looks at the situation, one sees that I had no argument with the South African Council on Sport at that particular time. The LP was responsible for the institution. One of the members, the deputy chairman of the LP, Mr Norman Middleton, was the founder chairman of the South African Council on Sport. Therefore we have no objection to the principle. We object to how they have moved away from the original intention and to the fact that they are not able to recognise the achievement to date and reappraise the situation.

Therefore I have admiration for Professor Dennis Brutus, the man who gave his heart and soul to the whole question of sport as a strategy towards changing a political situation. I remember that Dennis Brutus sat alone, politically and otherwise, and the very people who usurped the powers and practice of the South African Council on Sport today, were the people who criticized Dennis Brutus, and said that sport was not a means of bringing about political change. Today I still say what I have said before. If monuments are to be erected in this country, they must be erected to Dennis Brutus and Peter Hain.

However, the important thing, as so often is said, and said by one of the leaders of the then Unity Movement, is that the boycott must never become a principle. One uses it until one has achieved something and then one reappraises the situation. That is exactly what Professor Brutus has now done. He said fine, we have achieved a measure of success, therefore we reappraise the situation and we determine a new strategy. My criticism of the South African Council on Sport is exactly that they want to remain where they were without reappraising a situation in preparation of where we want to be.

This is what the LP says. The preparation of the future begins now. We cannot wait for them and we cannot wait for the day of liberation to start preparing to take our rightful place in sport, education and the whole spectrum within the South African context. Therefore we have said that politically we are preparing ourselves now and one cannot stand back and say that we must not participate in the Police. How are we going to get people of colour at that particular juncture when South Africa is going to be new, who will be able to take positions of leadership in that particular department? How are we going to get people who are able to take over the running of the Army and Defence Force in this country, unless we start now? One must see the exploitation of the present situation as a preparation for then. That is the challenge to our young people today. That is our challenge to our pupils and to our students. They must use the present situation to prepare for then, irrespective of the political deprivation they are experiencing now.

I have on various occasions, and I do it again this afternoon, paid tribute to our teachers of the past. Many of us participating in the political struggle today are products of the influence of those particular teachers.

*During school hours, however, they did their work and they produced us. That is why we are in a position today in which we can compete with other people on an equal level. That is what we tell them: Not that people must sacrifice their political principles, but that they must do what is expected of them on the level of education. After school hours and outside school hours they can politicise the children and other young people.

There are people, however, for whom I have the greatest respect. I do not want to mention names here now. Hon members know, however, that a protest was recorded at the time of the take-over of education by the Department of Coloured Affairs and that there were people of principle who said: “Then we shall rather resign.” There is no point in criticising when sitting in a position with all its privileges, however. I must also mention at this point with reference to the question of the closure of Zonnebloem College that this was rejected by the leader of Utasa and the CPTA. When we closed the Bellville Training College last year, however, there was not even a murmur, because those buildings in Bellville are now being used by the Peninsula Technikon—Mr Sonn’s school. When he received the buildings of a college that had been closed, everything was in order. Now that we see the true situation, however, people climb onto the protest wagon.

I think I must also address a few words to those hon members who mentioned some of these aspects. In the first place we are already taking a look at the question of abolishing our regional councils. We are considering whether or not to establish a school board for a region or town, and compromising. Consequently the abolition of regional councils is being considered again at present.

With regard to the tenders for bus services, we have already addressed representations to the Tender Board, and we are still in the process of doing so. One of the things with which hon members must assist us, however, is the following. If a tenderer from our community received the tender in the past, he must be reasonable in his second tender. That is all I am asking for; reasonableness. We recently had a case in which a tenderer from our community who rendered an exceptionally good service trebled his original tender. [Interjections.] Now one has a difficult situation. With reference to the remarks that were made here today, we have given attention to this in any case in that we have approached the Tender Board. This is almost part of a continuation of apartheid, but we told them that since our people may not tender for the transport of White children where this has been reduced, only people from our ranks should be given the responsibility of transporting our children. Secondly we said—and we say it again—that these large companies are subsidised in terms of the Act and that is why they can compete. Consequently these companies have a monopoly with regard to the transport in a town or city, and therefore they have an income that our people do not have. We are dealing with the matter.

With reference to the functions of school committees, the details are freely available from my department and even from our party’s head office. If hon members need them, we shall be only too pleased to provide them with this information. Usually this is done when a new member is elected to a school committee or a regional council. We then provide him with those details.

I want to make another appeal to the hon members of this House. In the interests of education, of our underprivileged and in the interests of our country we must try to effect greater co-operation between education and our parliamentary representatives.

†We must reach or try to reach some understanding. We must not adopt an attitude of negativism, saying things such as that the principals or the teachers are always wrong. Let us see co-operation rather than confrontation in that regard too.

We shall take note of the other issues which have been mentioned, but before concluding, I also wish to say that one has to reappraise—I do make this appeal again this afternoon—the education situation in the light of attitudes. I believe that parents play an important role in this regard Several people have already made this appeal here on various occasions, and yesterday as well.

When one looks at the 1985 situation, one will notice that certain people—the pupils particularly—exploited the guilt complex of parents in a certain sense. They were able to ask parents what they had done about the situation. It is almost like the younger Jewish people in Israel asking the older Jewish generation who bemoan the death of 6 million Jews what they had done about it. So, in the same way, young people said to us that we had come such a long way under segregation, separate development, parallel development, apartheid, etc, and they asked parents what they had done about changing the situation. While the older generation had not been able to change the situation, the young people would do so. The result was that because of their guilt complex, parents allowed a free rein.

What I am happy to note is that parents are again discovering their parental authority. The parents are now saying to their children that they gave them an opportunity, they were proved wrong in the sense that they had become a liability, they had no certification and no jobs; the parents had to give the children food, protection and clothing, and now they as parents would make the decisions again.

I ask parents to continue in the light of that parental responsibility towards the child and towards the nation.

I also have to appeal again to teachers to reappraise the situation and their attitude towards education. I think attitudes are so important, because attitude determines action. So the attitude of the teacher certainly must be one of absolute interest in the future and welfare of the child entrusted to his care. That attitude must be one of responsibility and of example, inside and outside the school. In the eyes of the pupil the teacher is always the hero and heroine. Sad is the day when that pupil discovers that his heroes and heroines have feet of clay and are not the people that he thought they were. So we must also meet the challenges of the present, learn from the past and the examples set for us in the past.

I also wish to ask our pupils and our students to look at the situation, reappraise their strategies, and then start preparing for the future. The future, whether the White people like it or not, is a non-racial society. [Interjections.] The future of this country is going to be that of one nation, and a pride in being part of one another. [Interjections.] We have to prepare for it, however. We say to our students they have to prepare for it now. Do not be misled by people who have already exploited the situation for their own ends. Do not be misled by people who already have their doctorates and who already have their degrees and who are qualified already, and then tell the students that in an apartheid situation a degree is only a piece of paper.

We want to say to those students that now is the time for preparation for the future. We say to the politicians and to others as teachers that our future must be a complementary one, where we take one another by the hand and together walk into a brighter future which awaits us all.

Finally, besides thanking the hon members who participated in the debate and those, like our Chairman, who have presided over this occasion, I wish to thank all members of my department for their loyalty, their sincerity and their dedication. I am appreciative of the fact that I have in some small way been able to contribute to a new atmosphere of co-operation, rather than one of being dictatorial, Napoleonic, and what have you. [Interjections.] In that spirit we can only hope that together with my department we shall do what is in the best interest of the education of the people entrusted to our care. [Interjections.]

Debate concluded.

Mr Chairman, I think it is a sad reflection on this entire House that we have here one of the most crucial debates which affects the life of the Indian community, and we barely make a quorum. I think it is a terribly bad reflection on the hon members who are not here. Those who are not here are quite obviously not interested in the welfare of Indian education. The point is simply that the people who are supposed to be here are in fact paid to be here.

They are robbing the taxpayer!

I would like to urge the hon Whips concerned to take up this matter in their respective caucuses.

The debate thus far has been an interesting one as far as I am concerned. It has been characterised by some very quaint things. We have for instance had the hon member for Cavendish who attacked his own hon Minister in terms which I thought were somewhat unreasonable. We have also had the hon member for Isipingo who has in fact called for the resignation of the hon the Minister.

I believe in clean administration and the truth!

I accept that the hon member believes in clean administration and that he believes in the truth. I will presently take up that issue.

Then we of course also had the situation where the hon member for Southern Natal attacked a member of his own party, the hon member for Cavendish.

He also believes in clean administration and the truth!

Mr Chairman, I am pleased that he also believes in clean administration. He has not said anything in that regard though. Is the hon member his spokesman? If he is, then I certainly accept it on his behalf.

I am the spokesman of my party on clean administration!

Mr Chairman, I would like to begin by referring to the damning indictment made by the hon member Mr Abram during the closing stages of yesterday’s debate. He called upon the hon the Minister to resign because the hon the Minister, he said, had misled Parliament when he replied to a question—submitted by the hon member for Lenasia Central who is not here at present—concerning the re-marking of certain scripts of the daughter of the chief director of Indian education.

The submission made by the hon member Mr Abram was based on the contents of a secret report which he read out to this House. I must confess that I have seen this document and I am afraid that the submissions which were made are in fact valid and that the call is justified. I would like to tell this House that I saw a copy of this so-called “secret” document several weeks ago and I in fact advised the hon the Minister to do something about it because I was persuaded that the hon the Minister could have erred in giving the reply that was given. I believe that the hon the Minister had ample time to rectify that situation. Regrettably, instead of rectifying the situation, the hon the Minister has gone deeper into the mire after his speech of yesterday.

I would therefore again like to appeal to the hon the Minister to rectify this situation. I do not believe that he should carry the can for somebody else because if he does carry the can he will have to carry it toward his grave. If he has misled this House, the most honourable thing to do is quite obviously to resign.

Then of course, this House, unlike the other Chambers of Parliament, does not have an enviable reputation concerning the following of the hallowed traditions of Parliament. In this regard, I would also like to say that it is a shame that we in this House do not follow these hallowed traditions of Parliament.

Having said all of this, I would now like to congratulate…

What about the Ministers’ Council?

Well, certainly, Mr Chairman, I take the point offered by my benchmate. I am told that that report was discussed by the Ministers’ Council at the time. The hon the Minister in fact made mention of that fact. If that is so—as indeed it is—it behoves all members of the Ministers’ Council who were members at that time also to resign, if they really and truly believe in clean administration. [Interjections.]

Having said that, I think it is appropriate for me to take this opportunity to congratulate the hon the Minister, not for the wonderful work he has done over these past five years, because Hansard has recorded that I have often criticised him and his department, albeit in a constructive way. I have never indulged in personal attacks on the hon the Minister. We have differed on certain policies and I honestly believe that I cannot congratulate him on the kind of work he has done. However, I would like to congratulate him on the fact that he is the only hon Minister in this Ministers’ Council who in fact has presented and defended five Votes as Minister of Education and Culture in this Chamber. No other hon Minister has that reputation of having presented the same Vote for five years. We have had such jumping from one Ministry to the other on the part of several hon Ministers that that hon Minister in fact does stand out as far as that is concerned.

Therefore I was a little concerned when I was told the other day that the party to which the hon the Minister belongs in fact has not taken a decision, pending the election, to confirm that all serving members of the Ministers’ Council, if they are elected, will retain their portfolios when they come back next year after the elections. That denotes to me a lack of confidence in the hon the Minister, not only by his colleagues in the Ministers’ Council but also by colleagues in his party. If this is so, this is also a terrible indictment of the hon the Minister and other hon Ministers who are his colleagues, because if they do not enjoy the confidence of the Ministers’ Council and of their party, how can we have confidence in them? How can the Indian community have confidence in the ability of these hon Ministers?

I notice that hon members on the other side are silent on this point. Obviously, silence denotes consent, which means that my information is correct and that in fact none of those hon Ministers have the full confidence of their party in that regard. [Interjections.] I believe that that is a terrible indictment of each and every one of those hon Ministers.

I believe that this could well be the last Budget Vote that the hon the Minister will present and defend in this House, not only, as I said, because of the uncertainty of the coming elections—none of us can really say that we will return—but more particularly because of the reasons I have just advanced.

I have constantly in this debate spoken about the raw deal that the Department of Education and Culture has always received in the allocation of funds.

The stupid formula!

Mr Chairman, I shall come to that presently. Hon members will recall that I have consistently attacked the hon the Minister and his colleagues for the fact that they have failed to secure adequate funds for the provision of Indian education. I have also made mention of the fact that the Ministers’ Council has been bamboozled into accepting far less than what is required for the proper functioning of the department and for the proper provision of Indian education for the community and has in fact accepted whatever has been handed out by the White Minister concerned.

The hon the Minister of the Budget and other hon Ministers have rationalised their shortcomings by advancing reasons which they have learnt more or less parrot fashion from their White colleagues. In this regard what was said the other day by the leader of the LP, the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council of the House of Representatives, is the reverse. He, too, is in charge of an own affairs administration, and he too has problems with the amount of funds that have been allocated to him. His point was very simple. He says that he has not overspent. He says that there was an under-provision and this is why he had to expend the monies that were not provided for. It is very nice for our hon Ministers to come to this House very smugly and to say to us and their White colleagues that they have been able to balance their books. They were able to balance the books, but at what cost? At the cost of the community, I would say.

In this regard Frantz Fanon, in his book, The Wretched of the Earth and the other one, Black Skin, White Mask, describes this particular kind of situation as being typical of the effects of a colonialist tradition upon leaders which that particular system has spawned and which that particular system has bred, and perhaps he had the hon members concerned in mind when he wrote these books.

Our criticism of the amount that has been allocated to Indian education has been justified by the revelation last year that of the total increase in expenditure on education during the years 1982-87, only 1,4% went towards Indian education, as compared to 16,5% which went towards Coloured education and 17,9% for White education. This shocking statement—this shocking revelation—requires some explanation on the part of not only the hon the Minister, but I believe the entire Ministers’ Council.

The hon member Mr Abram mentioned that the magic formula was responsible. This House knows that I have in fact questioned the formula itself, and I have asked why it was that this formula was actually accepted. As I understand the formula, it has to make provision for a backlog. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to begin by reacting briefly to the hon member for Springfield.

By attacking him.

No, I just want to put the record straight as to how this party functions in identifying candidates and in supporting their Ministers. I think the hon member has his facts all wrong, because the party does not have the habit of shouting from the rooftops about what they do. They do their work quietly behind closed doors. [Interjections.] When the appropriate time arrives, then the party will of necessity make the necessary announcements. Therefore, I think what the hon member for Springfield ought to do is to look for another source of information.

I can tell him quite honestly that his source of information is not reliable. The hon member has been misinformed.

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

Sir, I would be happy to answer the hon member’s question at the end of my speech if time allows. Unfortunately my time is limited.

Tell us about the secret report! Why is it secret?

There are no secrets in public activities. However, some decisions take longer than others.

I want to start off my expressing my appreciation to the hon the Minister for the work which he has done. I also want to thank the Director-General, the Chief Executive Director and all members of his back-up staff at all levels of the administration, from the lowest to the highest. I also wish to express my appreciation to Tasa and all its members, all the principals of our schools, all the educators, all those people who clean our schools and those who are responsible for taking care of our children at our schools.

Sir, it is very easy to throw brickbats. It is very easy to find fault. It is one of the most common human failings, but I want to place on record that there is so much good that the people are doing, although the good is not always appreciated or underscored. For my part, as well as that of the Ministers’ Council, I want to thank everyone for a job well done.

I was a participant in a meeting with Tasa and I want to record my appreciation for the manner in which this meeting took place. A friendly atmosphere prevailed and there were no recriminations or shouting at one another. We were able to resolve long-standing problems which originated as far back as the days of the South African Indian Council. For this reason I am particularly grateful to have been there and to have played a very small role in establishing some rapport. I trust that this will be the pattern of all our future relationships with Tasa. After all, hon members must realise—and I want to place this on record—that Tasa serves our children. There is not a single person who does not have some relationship with the education fraternity. Tasa is serving our children and our grandchildren. There is therefore a sense of belonging. We must build on this sense of belonging because then we will go from strength to strength.

I wish to say a few things about education without intending to criticise the department. I just want to highlight a few problems that I find in my constituency. Being a Deputy Minister is one thing, but being a representative of a constituency is quite another matter. In my constituency I find that the travelling which children are forced to do to and from their homes is onerous. There are many aspects in this regard which need attention.

I also want to say that I was impressed by this publication, Home away from home, which was issued to us. When I looked at this, it reminded me of the representations which I have received and which I have verbally passed on. One has to investigate the possibility of establishing boarding facilities for our children somewhere in Northern Natal. When I say this, Weenen comes to mind. This is a particularly suitable place which may be able to serve the region. I also think of Winterton and other areas.

In my opinion the hon the Minister and the Director should give serious consideration to providing the same hostel facilities as those in the Transvaal for children from places in Northern Natal like Bergville, Colenso, Weenen, Winterton, Hlobane and Mooi River and especially for the secondary pupils and those in the Harrismith area in the Free State and Qwaqwa. This should be put on their planning programme for the future.

I want to refer to the matter that was raised by the hon member for Reservoir Hills when he spoke about introducing Zulu in our schools.

*I think free settlement areas will become a reality in our country. I therefore wish to suggest that open schools be built where all our children, Black, White, Coloured and Indian, are allowed to study together, to play together and to grow together, so that they can lead us in the new open society where peace, stability and progress will prevail.

†The problem at the University of Durban-Westville is that our children and the children of the Black communities are not able to find one another at the present moment. I believe that we should commence at primary school level and open our schools to all race groups. There is no point in only talking about this and in my opinion our department can take the lead in this matter.

In Weenen we have three classrooms in a school with seven or eight classrooms. There is a concentration of Black people. White pupils from Weenen commute to Ladysmith and other towns to make use of their educational facilities. We should now open lines of communication to the Black, Coloured and White education authorities and encourage open schools. We should encourage our schools to be opened up.

All schools.

All schools. However, then a start must be made where it is possible. [Interjections.] What I am trying to say is that there are under-utilised facilities in many areas. In Estcourt there is a White school which is a monument at the moment. It is gathering dust.

It is a white elephant.

It is a white elephant that is not being used. That school particularly lends itself to being a school for all race groups in that area. In Ladysmith there is a new primary school in the White area with a couple of dozen classrooms which is only being used partially.

We closed the school at Winterton. If there is no housing development at Bergville in the near future we shall also have to close the school there. In my opinion those schools should be saved. The school in Lidgetton West was also recently closed. All the small schools are going to close. Rather than closing these schools we should… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, yesterday I observed dissatisfaction and, on the other hand, satisfaction. The hon the Minister was complimented and there were also calls for his resignation. I took a very serious view of this.

If any reasonable hon member in this House goes through the budget speech and also the explanatory memorandum he would be able to establish beyond any reasonable doubt that there has been a tremendous amount of improvement in the field of education since the previous years.

I therefore cannot see it as a reasonable demand for any hon member in this House to call for the hon the Minister’s resignation. I can only come to the conclusion that it is perhaps only those persons who are now no longer in a position to receive the rewards and the favours that they used to get from the Ministry and department under discussion in the past, who are to some extent peeved. This is my honest conviction.

I think hon members must take cognisance of the fact that the Ministers’ Council under the able leadership of its hon Chairman, is doing an exceptionally good piece of work. We want to commend our Ministers for the manner in which they have been able to execute their responsible duties. They had a very successful meeting with Tasa over the past few days in respect of education matters.

The rift between Tasa and the Department of Education and Culture had indeed caused some dissatisfaction in the field of education. Tasa’s input was limited simply because there was a breakdown in the negotiations and because there was no objective thinking on the part of the previous Chairman of the Ministers’ Council to recognise this august body.

This state of affairs prevailed from the time when the SA Indian Council executive took control of education. It was then that the chairman of the executive committee of the SAIC tried to bring Tasa to its knees but he failed hopelessly.

Now, however, the situation has changed. We feel that we can play an important role but we need the partnership of the intellectuals in our community. I wish the hon the Minister to take cognisance of the fact that Tasa should be respected and its views should be considered very seriously by his administration. In this way we will be able to achieve much more for our children than in the past.

When one looks at the speech made by the hon the Minister yesterday, one notes with a great measure of satisfaction that there has been progress in the field of sports activities. I am pleased to note that there is presently a post vacant for a superintendent of education (sports promotion). This is a step in the right direction and I am of the opinion that the sooner this is put into effect, the sooner our school sports will make tremendous progress.

There is ever-increasing drug addiction in our community and it is because of the lack of sporting facilities that our children turn to devious practices. They then also influence their peers at school. I am of the view that school sports can play a vital role in moulding our children’s future.

Payments of grants-in-aid to State-aided schools have improved tremendously. I think the Ministry should be complimented on this because a cry has gone up in this regard from the State-aided schools and grantees for many years.

There is some concern regarding the take-over of State-aided schools. I think the fact that 47 State-aided schools are still being controlled by private bodies is a sad state of affairs and not a very healthy situation. Two schools are currently being considered for take-over by the department. The other 45 schools should be considered very seriously too because I am of the view that our children are being denied all the privileges that are accorded to those who are in Government-owned schools.

The other issue that I would like to raise very briefly is the question of education committees. These committees have never played a useful role in the past. The only role that they have played was to raise funds for the schools. In many schools the funds are not put to good use and school principals sit with heavy bank balances—for what reason, I do not know. I am pleased to note that the Ministry is reconsidering education committees. The proposed school boards will have much more muscle in staff matters, school curriculums and the administration of schools. I think it is the ideal option to consider.

We feel that the parents should and can play an equally vital role in moulding their children’s future in this country. I do hope the hon the Minister will consider taking this bold step as soon as possible, so that we will be able to make much speedier progress.

The other issue that I would like to raise briefly—I am very pleased to note that the hon nominated member Mr Abram is here this morning…

He is here. He is very much here!

Yesterday I pleaded with him for an opportunity to question him on one or two issues. However, he very conveniently tried to evade the issue and never gave me the opportunity.

I was quite surprised that yesterday the hon nominated member Mr Abram took this Ministry to task for twenty minutes. It was much more a personality assassination than a reasonable contribution to the debate. He was talking only about corruption and bribery.

I would like to ask the hon member whether he is true to his convictions and whether or not he is serving his community, because he has no constituency. As a nominated member he came here on an open ticket issued by the NPP. Therefore, he does not have a constituency, but as a member of Parliament he is morally obliged to serve his people. He talks about nepotism and corruption and bribery in education. I want to ask the hon member whether his mind is not also corrupted. Was he not in some way or other responsible in the past for bringing about corruption in the Department of Education and Culture? Can he deny being responsible?

[Inaudible.]

If he denies it… [Interjections.] I am prepared to give some answers if he wants to question me. I would like to make a submission for the record. I have before me a submission made by Tasa to the James Commission. I would like to read this one paragraph, which, I wish to emphasise, is an extract from a submission made under oath by Tasa to the James Commission. I quote:

At that time the ruling party was the NPP—

Tell him!

He can tell me absolutely nothing! [Interjections.]

The submission continues:

[Interjections.]

Bull dust! [Interjections.]

Order!

I want to quote again and I would like the hon member to listen carefully. It was said under oath:

The request was made for the transfer to Palmridge from Rylands, but the department had no place for this man at that school so he was appointed to another school in the Transvaal. What happened then? I quote further:

Is that true?

Bull dust!

That hon member says it is “bull dust”. He must have convictions. His mind is corrupted and he wants to corrupt the department further.

You are corrupted!

Order! The hon nominated member Mr Abram must not say that another hon member is corrupted. I ask the hon member to withdraw it.

Mr Chairman, does the hon member have the right to say that I am corrupted? You must be fair in your ruling. Why do you choose me and not him?

Order! I am about to request the hon member to withdraw that as well.

I withdraw it, Sir.

Order! I also ask the hon member for Havenside to withdraw it.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it. However the hon member must have a conscience. Is this not true even though it has been submitted by Tasa under oath?

I have a better conscience than you have and I will tell you the facts…

Order! The hon member may proceed.

I quote again:

The contact of the hon member Mr Abram had another contact in the House of Delegates, and I think the only contact he had at that time was another person who thought as he does, who is not in this House, and he could be no other than the former hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, who was the political head but is no longer because he corrupted the department.

Now Mr Mayes is at the school I think—I am not certain. The following are Tasa’s views:

If this type of thing goes on behind the scenes and that public representative sits here and conveniently calls for the resignation of the hon the Minister, I can only draw one conclusion and that is that the hon the Minister is not playing his tune. [Interjections.] If he had been playing his tune he would have complimented him, and he had done so in past years. Only this year he saw fit to call for the resignation of the ministry. Only this year, too, has he found time to introduce motions in this House, all aimed at the hon the Chairman of this House, in respect of doings he claims to know about over the past four years…

Which you also knew about.

The only inference one can draw is that he is peeved; he has lost his position at the tail-end of this Parliament. He is going to lose a lot of privileges which he enjoyed in the past.

I drove a Mercedes Benz long before you did!

Because of this he is disgruntled and disillusioned. [Interjections.] This is the truth.

I want to go further. That hon member came into this House on a nominated ticket, and his loyalty to the man that brought him here was so badly torn apart by his doings that we find this difficult to reconcile. That hon member was a member of the Labour Party when he got in here. He lost an election. However, the NPP, in response to his demand, accorded him an opportunity to come to Parliament as a nominated member and he was morally obliged to respect the party that gave him a seat here. He was first a member of the Labour Party. From the Labour Party he went on to the NPP. From the NPP he went on to Solidarity. From Solidarity he went back to the NPP.

I never joined you.

From the NPP, he formed the PPSA. He headed the PPSA. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon Mr Abram will have an opportunity to speak. The hon member for Havenside may proceed.

He then formed his own party, with ten hon members—I will not take into account the other one who is not a member of that party at the moment, and of course there are two others who are not in the House at the moment. They founded the PPSA, and the hon member became the leader of the PPSA.

You have got your facts wrong.

He was the man behind the scenes doing the dirty work. All the dirty work was done by him.

What happened when he came up with the PPSA to give Solidarity that support and that hand in calling for the commission of inquiry? He was under the impression that he was going to be the Minister of the Budget and he made it known by a submission in an affidavit that he wanted to be the Minister of the Budget. [Interjections.]

Order! I appeal to the hon member please to come back to the subject under discussion.

Mr Chairman, I am coming back to the Vote.

The hon member talks about corruption, and I am only trying to prove to him that corruption is not on this side of the House. We have destroyed corruption. We are running a clean administration. We have sufficient funds to look after the interests of Indian education, and we have the right type of personnel in the department. I can say that they will be able to play a very meaningful role in moulding our children’s future. The corrupted people are no longer with the department, and those that are have probably had a rethink.

Do you support that R300 000 loss in Pretoria?

Mr Chairman, I just want to come back to the Vote. I want to tell this House that the hon member is very disillusioned. He is trying to find fault with the administration of education, and he uses this forum to divulge things which are not true and correct, and he just wants to get even with Solidarity, since Solidarity failed to give him a high post.

We evaluated his past role and we found that he was not worthy of being a member of my party. [Interjections.] I want to go on to say that that hon member was trying to bring about disunity in the House, but he claimed to be bringing about unity by running around. He runs with the hare and then he hunts with the hounds- that is the type of person that he is. [Interjections.]

Order! I appeal to the hon member to come back to the Vote.

The hon member wanted to be the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in this House. That is what he was aspiring to but it was short-lived and he even lost his position as Chairman of this House. [Interjections.]

That is your stupid perception!

Mr Chairman, I was going to take a point of order, but the hon member has had the good sense to resume his seat.

Mr Chairman, a lot has been said since yesterday about education, subsidies for the disabled and subsidies for preprimary schools. However, what a lot of us have forgotten is that there should be another syllabus in the schools where the future parliamentarians are being educated at the moment. They should have a syllabus in the high schools on how to behave like members of Parliament instead of picking on personalities and washing dirty linen here. It does not bring any credibility and that is why we in this House are known as circus clowns.

Like the hon member for Havenside.

How did you get hold of secret documents? By devious means?

Because you people cannot look after them!

Mr Chairman, if they are finished I will continue.

Order! Let the hon member continue with his speech.

That is why I say that they should have another syllabus and I hope the hon the Minister takes this into consideration. The future parliamentarians should be taught in the schools how to behave as parliamentarians in the House of Delegates.

Promotions are not made on merit or demerit as I understand from some of the teachers. Good assessment does not merit increment now. Junior teachers with satisfactory assessments get promoted over teachers with good assessments. Teachers become redundant when the principal dislikes them and he also gives them extracurricular duties to perform after school hours. Even when they are due for promotion they are held back for reasons known only to the principal and not the teacher.

Teachers from Natal who work in the Transvaal are there for about four or five years and have to sacrifice family fife because their families are living in Natal. Owing to a lack of accommodation in the Transvaal they cannot take their families with them. It is a pitiful sight when the wife of a teacher comes to us asking us to help her to get her husband back because their children are crying at home.

Speaking of sports fields, there is a school in my area which has no playground attached to the school. The only ground is across the main road which is a very, very busy road in the area. Many requests were made to the planners but all in vain. I hope the hon the Minister or someone from the school planning department is here and that they will take note of this.

Many teachers are already employed as temporary staff without fringe benefits or holiday pay. I know of some who have not yet been paid for December and January. I want to know why. I can see the Chief Executive Director shaking his head. I think he is going to call me to his office and explain why.

In times of inflation children from poor homes should be exempted from paying school fees and also from buying expensive school uniforms. Their families hardly earn enough money to provide food, let alone to pay school fees and for school uniforms as well. I know it is not a compulsory thing, but some of the principals and teachers make it compulsory for these poor children.

Regarding travelling facilities, the transport that is provided to bring children from outlying areas to schools should be regularly checked. The drivers of buses should also be given a test, because it was not so long ago that schoolchildren travelling from Richmond to Pietermaritzburg were involved in a very serious accident. There were a number of casualties and many deaths. This was because the vehicle that was taking them to school was defective. The brakes were defective and the driver was reckless. These are some of the things that we should bear in mind. Also in the Transvaal a few years ago a driver crashed a bus into a dam and all the children died. These things need immediate attention, because children are the people of tomorrow.

Year after year I have spoken in this Chamber about the feeding of school-children. As I said previously, if there is no fuel in the car, one will not be able to drive it. If the children have no food in their stomachs, they cannot do justice to their studies. I do not know why we are not doing anything about this. Since the inception of the tricameral Parliament I have brought this to the notice of the Department of Education and Culture.

It falls under the Department of Health Services and Welfare.

Yes, but I am sure the hon the Minister of Education and Culture can bring it to the notice of his colleague.

Another matter regards a school where there are about 78 children and three classrooms to be used, but the principal is using only two classrooms. This does not do anything to promote the teaching profession to prospective teachers. The children cannot be taught as they would have been if three classrooms were used. In the White schools, I believe, there are only about 18 to 20 pupils in a class. Imagine 75 to 78 pupils in two classrooms in Indian schools.

These are some of the points I wanted to make. I thank the hon the Minister of Education and Culture for the wonderful Northdale Technical College that is serving the Pietermaritzburg area very well. I am sure that the staff and the people of Pietermaritzburg are very happy indeed. Our thanks go to the Department of Education and Culture.

Mr Chairman, it is with a considerable degree of sorrow that I have to support the call made by the hon member for Isipingo for the resignation of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture. Clearly, the hon the Minister misled this House grievously. I am not allowed to say he misled this House deliberately, but he misled this House grievously, in circumstances in which he either knew that he was misleading this House, or was so grossly irresponsible that he did not care whether he was telling the truth or not. Such a man, regrettably, is no longer fit to be an hon Minister of this Parliament.

The report marked secret should never have been marked secret. The hon the Minister claimed quite incorrectly that it was sub judice. It was never sub judice, and it is not now. He desperately tried to suppress it, even yesterday. This clearly indicates that there was gross “verneukery”. Gross fraud was committed in the re-marking of an examination paper of a Miss Dipika Arjun Singh. It is borne out in the signature of a high departmental official.

The report was prepared by Mr J A du Toit, Chief Director: Budgetary and Auxiliary Services. According to this report the examination marks in respect of Mathematics and Biology—which subjects this child failed; this would therefore disqualify her for the matriculation exemption certificate—were raised by 40% on her behalf. I know that if a child has failed by a few percentage points it is possible to give that child the benefit of the doubt, but the marks were raised by 40%. That is obvious fraud.

The fraud was clearly perpetrated by a senior official of the department—according to this report, a Mr Khadaroo. According to the report Mr Khadaroo knew at the time he had perpetrated the fraud that this child was the daughter of the then acting Chief Director of Education, Mr A K Singh. The report by inference suggests that Mr A K Singh could have informed Mr Khadaroo that the girl was his daughter. I cannot accept that inference because there is another possibility that the report has not taken into account, namely that the child herself, or somebody acting on her behalf, could have informed Mr Khadaroo that she was the person whose script was being marked.

On the evidence contained in this report it is clear that Mr Khadaroo perpetrated the fraud. It is not indicated that Mr A K Singh was party to that fraud. I must be absolutely fair here, but what is clear is that the hon the Minister either read this report and knew that gross fraud had occurred and he tried to suppress it, and having suppressed it, he misled this House, or the Minister did not even bother to read the report and came here and told us a poppycock story. In either event the hon the Minister—the man—is not fit to remain the Minister. He says that the Ministers’ Council was responsible for this particular action.

If what that hon Minister says is true—I have no proof that it is true, nor do have I any reason to doubt it—when he condemns his colleagues he is dragging his own colleagues with him into the cesspit. He said all those who were members of the Ministers’ Council at the relevant time must also resign. We cannot talk about clean administration glibly when this kind of dirt is hidden deliberately.

The Minister made a blunder when he attacked Tasa. Fortunately that blunder has now been largely expiated as a result of the actions of the entire Ministers’ Council. The National Chairman of Solidarity was utterly stupid in the insult which he heaped upon Tasa. He owes Tasa an apology. Solidarity as a whole owes an apology to Tasa.

In regard to the irregularities that were committed in the past, I do not accept that one has to take legal action in every single instance. I said quite clearly there is very little we can do about those who falsely benefited, except by legal action. However, as regards those who were unfairly treated we have two different figures. The hon the Minister says only one person was proved to have been unfairly treated. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council said 33 persons were found to have been unfairly treated. However, the answer really lies in getting an ombudsman appointed in the Department of Education who could be approached in private by teachers who contended that they were unfairly treated. That ombudsman must have direct access to all the files so that the teachers do not have to go to inspectors or school principals or anyone else with their complaints. They should not have to go to their immediate superior officials.

John Stuart Mill said that education must be directed towards preparing a person for his functions in society. In other words, he said vocational training. After that we have the system of liberal education. We are now going back, to a large extent, to vocational education.

I accept that that is something which has to be done. However, one must be careful not to lose sight of the academic aspect of education. If one loses sight of that, one loses sight of the primary purpose of education, namely to prepare a child to think clearly for himself or herself. If a child is properly prepared to think… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the glossy report of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture has much information which is of importance to us as members of Parliament. On the other hand, some of this important information is also subject to criticism. I believe in honest and sincere criticism. Any criticism that comes from within the party or outside of it should be accepted in the spirit in which it is offered. I am positive that the hon the Minister of Education and Culture is taking this matter in his stride. For that I must commend him.

On going through this report, I find that much has been said by hon members about activities on the educational side. However, very little has been said about the Directorate of Cultural Affairs. I want to commend the Assistant Director for being the lady that she is. I think she has done a wonderful job as far as the cultural side of education is concerned. A number of activities have been held in many parts of the Republic and this is commendable.

One of the main items in the school curriculum is language, particularly the cultural side of the language. In order to propagate this, she has given it some exposure. I think that the Assistant Director of Cultural Affairs is doing a wonderful job. I want to commend her for her fine work. May she continue to do this work for many more years to come. I just want to say to the hon the Minister that he should have spent a little more in this field. Perhaps the report would have been lengthier than the two pages that we have here now! I once more would like to thank the Directorate for its activities.

I have said this many times before, but I once again wish to refer to the issue of upgrading schools. I particularly want to concentrate on the old schools. Some schools in Chatsworth were built more than 20 years ago and they are still in the same condition that they were in then. There have been no improvements to facilities, particularly as far as change rooms, libraries and administration blocks are concerned.

I have encountered some difficulties at certain schools in my constituency and I would like to mention them—the Ocean View Primary School, Truro Primary School and Fairhaven Primary School. These schools were built more than 20 years ago and they have been sadly neglected in respect of these facilities which I have just mentioned. On sports day girls had to run into the toilets to dress to take part in the sports activities. The boys had to go through a similar experience. This is very unsatisfactory.

Whilst the hon the Minister is spending large sums of money on building new schools and improving facilities at existing schools, I think that some attention should also be given to the old schools. The conditions at these schools should also be improved. I have had a reply from the hon the Minister with regard to one particular school, the Ocean View Primary School. He promised me that the facilities at this school would be updated. The neglect has been going on for many years now and I hope that the hon the Minister will see to it that the upgrading of schools will be done in the very near future.

I now come to another important aspect. We read daily in the newspapers of children, particularly school-children, who have drowned. I would like to recommend to the hon the Minister that swimming should be made a compulsory extramural activity in schools. The tuition of swimming should be made compulsory. I understand the difficulties, particularly because of the present chain of events and the misery it is bringing to parents. If it is made a compulsory extramural activity many parents will be appeased.

It cannot be extramural and compulsory.

It could be part of the sport activities. A number of schools are building swimming pools at present and the department is financing this on a rand-for-rand basis. If swimming pools are not built at every school they must be built on a regional basis so that the schools in the region can use a particular swimming pool. This could be used by a number of schools and that would alleviate the problem that we are experiencing. Seeing that the hon member for Reservoir Hills said that extramural activities cannot be compulsory, I want to say that swimming should be compulsory.

Another important matter that was touched on by a few hon members is the question of pre-primary schools. In this report the hon the Minister makes the point that as no specific provision is made in the education financing formula for pre-primary education, the rate of acceleration of this service falls below the community’s actual needs. Nevertheless, the department has been able to provide R3 772 000 for the continuing expansion of this essential service. I ask once again that this, too, receive more serious attention.

Rather than community organisations running pre-primary education I feel that the department should take it on itself to ensure that this becomes part of the schooling programme. The onus should lie with schools to provide preprimary education. Unlike many years ago, pre-primary education has now become a must and therefore it should be the responsibility of the Department of Education and Culture to ensure that it is provided for fully.

Having said that, I would like to express my sincere thanks to the hon the Minister and to the officials for their ardent efforts to bring Indian education to the forefront. We had an amount of criticism and many complaints about the manner in which it is being run. Any department always expects this kind of criticism.

What stands out is what is being done. In my opinion the hon the Minister and his capable officials performed to the best of their ability. I would like to express my sincere thanks to him for that. I hope that the department will take cognisance of all the criticism levelled at it and remedy matters where necessary. On the other hand we would like to ensure a clean administration. This must be the overall cardinal point.

Mr Chairman, I would like to start by complimenting my colleague, the hon the Minister, the Chief Executive Director and the entire administration for Indian education—despite the criticism that has been levelled at them. I do not want to get involved in the discussion of allegations of corruption or personality assassinations because I believe we are discussing a Vote which is of great importance for the future of our children.

I would like to bring to the attention of my colleague one of the aspects which I think does not only affect the Cape Province but the Transvaal as well. It concerns the provision of accommodation for our teachers. I want to state here that in Port Elizabeth the State has built seven homes for our principals, deputy principals and HEDs. In the past our experience was that because of the absence of provided accommodation we were not able to attract the best teachers to our schools.

I believe a similar situation prevails at the schools in East London and I also want to draw the attention of my hon colleague to this. In East London sites were set aside for about five teachers some five to seven years ago. These plots were allocated to the Department of Education and there were some discussions. I sincerely hope that while it is included in the budget for the financial year 1989-90, some serious consideration will be given to this as a matter of priority. These houses should be erected because the situation is becoming acute. I believe a similar situation exists in Cape Town as well. I think my hon colleague will appreciate that in the absence of provided accommodation for our teachers, one finds that there is a large turnover of senior staff members.

One of the other problems concerns teachers who purchase units. Seeing that their promotions lie in being transferred, they are really a roving society. This system of purchasing can be abused when teachers apply for subsidies when they buy a unit in a particular town and then they move away to another town. I would like my hon colleague to kindly give his attention to this and to see what assistance he can render in that respect.

Another point of concern is that of the regional cultural councils. I was pleased to learn from the report that it is hoped that we will ultimately establish some seven regional cultural councils. Of these four have so far been established in Natal, namely in Durban, South Coast, North Coast and Natal Midlands. I would like my colleague the hon the Minister to consider the fact that, over and above Natal, we have the Cape Province and the Transvaal as well. I think all of us are aware that the Cape Province is geographically the largest province in South Africa but it is very much neglected as far as the promotion of culture is concerned.

I quote from p 17 of the hon the Minister’s report as follows:

I am aware that some of the officials or the Director concerned would have visited Port Elizabeth but here too I want to express my concern. When these officials visit an area they should take into consideration the fact that there is also an MP who is very much involved with the local community. I want to have it placed on record that at no stage was I ever consulted.

In the Eastern Cape—or the Cape for that matter—the communities are very much starved as far as culture is concerned. If one takes note of the various cultural groups that arrive here from overseas, we in the Cape are not able to afford to pay for them to come to us because of the high costs involved. For that reason I believe that the Directorate of Cultural Affairs plays a very important role in promoting culture in the Cape, and I am sure in the Transvaal as well.

My hon colleague will remember that we do have our own various cultural groups in the Cape Province and the standard of their performances is so high that groups from Cape Town have in fact toured Natal and the Transvaal. I believe they attracted very large audiences there. I would like my hon colleague to remember that the Cape must not be neglected as far as the promotion of culture is concerned.

The other aspect which I wish to raise is the question of school halls. I am aware that at Braelyn in East London there were certain plans to build a hall at the school. I believe in certain areas where there are no community halls, a hall of this nature could certainly serve a multiple purpose. It can be used for recreational purposes and even for assembly when the weather is not kind to us during the winter months in the Eastern Cape and the Cape in particular.

Those are just two or three issues which have been of great concern to me and to which I wanted to draw the hon Minister’s attention. Another aspect that also has to do with cultural affairs is the various workshops. In the hon the Minister’s speech hon members will note the various workshops, particularly for Eisteddfods. I want to place on record my appreciation for this achievement. However, as I have said earlier I do believe that this should not be confined only to Natal. Generally speaking people seem to think that Indians live only in Natal. I have personally experienced this.

Not in Northern Natal.

At least in Natal proper. I do not know about Northern Natal.

I think people like us, who come from the Cape and even from the Transvaal for that matter, will agree that we seem to be completely neglected. I might just mention that we regularly travel back home on weekends and sometimes when I book in and get my reservation card to book my flight to Port Elizabeth, my luggage automatically gets tagged with a Durban tag. [Interjections.] Therefore, it is not unusual—even the SAA seems to be of the opinion that every Indian that leaves here lives in Durban. I think they must understand that we do have a large population both in the Cape and in the Transvaal.

And in Northern Natal!

Northern Natal is part of Natal.

Do not count us in.

The other point that I merely wanted to raise here, was the question of sport and coaching. My colleague is aware of the fact that we have discussed it at ministerial council level. While we appreciate the role played by the department in trying to promote the various sports and coaching at schools, it again appears to have been confined only to Natal. Of course, my colleague the hon the Deputy Minister should be very pleased that even Ladysmith has been blessed with that particular facility. At Ladysmith there is the Settlers’ Park Field.

In the Cape I think we have about seven schools, but such facilities do not exist here. We would very much like this to come about. At the moment, while we do not object to participation and even encourage interschool sport among the various other schools, I think if our children could get the opportunity of being coached we would certainly be able to turn out some very good sportsmen.

The last point I want to make also has to do with the admission of pupils of other population groups to our schools. I am pleased to note that something like 5 548 pupils have thus far been allowed to attend our schools. That is an increase of 1 316, which is most encouraging.

I think my colleague the hon the Minister is aware that we must appreciate that in the Cape in particular we have a cross-section of the community. In actual fact we are living side-by-side with members of the Coloured community and other communities, as in the old Sultan in Port Elizabeth and District Six in Cape Town. I am pleased to note that in East London the hon the Minister has allowed a little more than 104 children other than Indian children to our schools. That is most encouraging.

With these words, I just once again want to express my appreciation to my colleague the hon the Minister and the entire administrative staff of our education department for the role they have played as far as education is concerned.

Mr Chairman, it is always a pleasure to follow on the hon the Minister and he will forgive me if I do not comment on his speech. He will probably be relieved that I do not comment on his speech.

I would just like to take up the point that I was making when I was so rudely interrupted by a ruling that my time had expired. I was merely making the point that in my view the funds that have been allocated towards this Vote are not only totally inadequate, but, in fact, if compared with what has been voted for White education, are totally disproportionate.

To further prove my point that this administration has failed in securing its correct share of the education allocation, let me briefly tell hon members of this House what the allocation has been in respect of White education.

If one looks at the 1985-86 year, one finds that the per capita amount voted for White education was R2 374 per child, compared to the House of Delegates’ R1 386. Of course, this includes expenditure of a capital nature. However, when one looks at 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89 and then at the current year, one finds this disproportionate allocation of funds between White education and Indian education in fact becomes glaring. It becomes more so when one considers that it is the Indian community that has been disadvantaged. Even at the present time we have this backlog. I think it was the hon member Mr Abram who also alluded to that point.

Thus we find in 1986 an amount of R3,011 billion was allocated to White education in this country, as opposed to R355,537 million for Indian education.

A crying shame!

In 1987-88, the figures were R3,25 billion for White education as opposed to R393 million for Indian education. In 1988-89 the figures are substantially the same; the figures are R3,6 billion for White education, and R446 million for Indian education. Similarly, for the current year under review, the amounts are a whopping R4,3 billion for White education and an amount of R589 million for Indian education.

I am aware that the hon the Minister would say that there has been a fair increase in the amounts that have been allocated over the years, but that is not the point. The point is simply that adequate funds have not, in fact, been allocated for Indian education. In any case, the increases are in fact taken up by salary increases and other such expenses; not by a general increase in Indian education. Before I leave that point, I would again remind this House that despite this, we have had an R83 million cutback in education.

I now want to say that I am a little disappointed that having made an appeal to the hon the Minister over the years for the reintroduction of feeding schemes in our schools, we have heard nothing from him in this regard. I again want to say to him that in the present economic climate, with unemployment on the increase, we have to guard against children receiving education on empty stomachs. I think that somewhere in that report the hon the Minister made mention of the socio-economic factors which have had an adverse effect generally on Indian education. I would like to take this opportunity to again draw his attention to the fact that this is so, and that he in fact can do something about it. He can alleviate that problem somewhat by the reintroduction of feeding schemes in all of the State-financed schools under his control.

I know that the hon the Minister would say that funds have not been provided for this particular programme. However, that is just the point. I have just pointed out to him that there is such a disproportionate allocation between White education and Indian education—surely the hon the Minister concerned, his colleague who is in charge of the budget or the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council could in fact look at this matter very seriously and work out exactly what that would cost the administration. I am absolutely sure that once that is done, funds could be found. I am absolutely sure that the hon the Minister of the Budget could in fact approach his colleague and get him to agree to find that money, because this is urgently needed if one considers the plight of many of our children in those schools. To my mind there has been a dereliction of duty in that a survey has not been conducted as to how many children are involved and need this assistance, and what the cost of such a programme would be.

I think it was the hon member for Red Hill, when he sat on this side of the House, who constantly raised the question of school uniforms. I want to say again that this is an issue which has not yet been addressed by the Department of Education and Culture. I believe that one can have uniformity and neatness and yet take the cost factor into account. With the climate which exists, particularly in Natal, I see nothing wrong with children coming to school in a pair of shorts and an open-necked shirt for instance. The criteria of uniformity and of neatness would be satisfied.

Why do we then need to send our children to school in grey flannels and blazers? Quite apart from the costs involved to our community—which are substantial—there is the question of being comfortable. I again want to appeal to the hon the Minister and ask him to look at this very seriously. A call has been made in the other departments that the selection of uniforms should be left to the schools and to the parent committees themselves. Perhaps this is the line which the hon the Minister should take.

I would now like to refer to the University of Durban-Westville which regrettably no other hon member in this House has done. I would like to make several points in this regard.

Firstly, we are all aware of the report by Advocate Hurt which was published on the unrest which took place at that institution and the recommendations which emanated from that report.

I would like to make it very clear that we on this side of the House are opposed to any form of discrimination being imposed on any student—particularly Black students—for admission to that institution. I want to say that it is perfectly understandable and certainly in the nature of things in this country, that the enrolment of Blacks at institutions like the University of Durban-Westville will certainly be on the increase.

Let us not forget that by the year 2000 there will be that many more Blacks to train. They will obviously have to be trained at all the institutions which are around at present and the University of Durban-Westville will be no exception.

However, the hon the Minister has the right to appoint council members to that institution and it pains me that the hon the Minister, having been aware of the fact that we now wish to move towards a non-racial era, has not taken the trouble to appoint one single council member from the Black community. I am aware that we have Mr Zulu who has been elected to that council but he has been elected by the council itself. The hon the Minister did not take it upon himself to appoint a Black person to that council.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member if he is aware that we did make efforts as far as getting a Black man onto the council is concerned? We approached Prof Nkabindi but he was not available. We tried. We did our best.

You cannot have the principal of another university on your council!

Mr Chairman, that is a very lame submission by the hon the Minister. The name which has been mentioned is that of the principal of another institution and certainly if he was not available, the hon the Minister should have gone beyond that. If he would like to come and discuss this matter with me I will offer him the names of several people of some repute in the Black community. The revelation that only Prof Nkabindi was approached, is indeed shocking.

Is it because the hon the Minister is not aware of other colleagues in the Black community with similar qualifications? I mean, this is an indictment, not only of the hon the Minister, but also the entire Ministers’ Council. Perhaps he should move more frequently in that community.

It is also noteworthy that on the council of that institution there are several people who profess to belong to the Natal Indian Congress. It is interesting, because if I recall correctly, it was the Natal Indian Congress which took a principle stand against that institution. They took a principle stand, because they said it was a creation of apartheid and they would have nothing to do with it. Therefore I was quite pleasantly surprised to read the other day that Prof Govadeia, an executive member of the Natal Indian Congress, has said that because the university has now moved from Salisbury Island to its present location and because it is now becoming multiracial, it is now acceptable to them. He said that initially they saw it as an entrenchment of apartheid and because of that it was unacceptable for political, ethical, moral and social reasons, but that these reasons had now fallen away.

Let us not kid ourselves and let members of the Natal Indian Congress not kid themselves either. The University of Durban-Westville, like this Parliament, is an ethnic apartheid institution. In fact, that institution, like the M L Sultan Technikon, is an institution which falls directly under the control of this House and under the jurisdiction of the hon Minister concerned. It is this House which votes funds for those institutions and I think we are all aware that it is this House and that hon Minister who in fact… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to follow the hon member for Springfield, because he touched on something which I was going to talk about and I will just continue with that point.

With regard to the per capita differences, he explained clearly this morning that there is a vast difference. Whilst we accept, with reservations, separate education, are we actually getting equal education? Arising from the reply the hon the Deputy Minister of Transport Affairs gave us yesterday in response to a question by the hon member for Chatsworth regarding the number of people who are employed—women as typists and clerks etc—in his department, I want to say the following.

I serve on the Joint Committee on Finance, which is a very important committee. We deal with all the departments there, every one of these departments. It can be noticed very clearly that colour plays an important part. Only one group, namely Whites, are holding the official positions. I ask the question here: Are we marketing the quality or standard of our education today just to fulfill the needs of own affairs, or to fulfill the needs on a national level? Cannot our students fill those positions?

We have here a PRO who has been appointed. I would like to congratulate Mr S Maharaj on his appointment. We need to go into this to find out why our education is so restricted. Why are our people restricted to own affairs? Why cannot they be qualified to work in all the departments at a national level? We have the Department of Economic Affairs and Technology, the Department of Environment Affairs, the Departments of the Administration, the Department of the Auditor-General. When we attend the finance committee meetings, we only see Whites all the time. There must be something wrong with our education system.

Talking about pre-primary schools and bridging modules, sometime in 1978 I led a deputation to the then Director-General, Mr Krogh. A community-based organisation in Tongaat had decided to build a pre-primary school. We went to the department for funds and what happened was that Mr Krogh explained to us that we had a platoon system and as soon as the platoon system had lapsed, pre-primary schools would be introduced.

This was some ten years ago. The reason given to us was financial considerations. Ten years ago we had no money. Up to today we have no money. I think if one is to stimulate the economy of this country a fair and equal education irrespective of colour must be introduced. Whether one is White, Black or Brown, one must get fair and equal education so that everybody plays a part in stimulating the economy. We have a problem with what the hon the Minister says as to the bad state of the economy of today and that we cannot have the money. I do not think that is acceptable any more.

Years ago our community suffered. The Indian community will recollect that our people received education under trees. Our communities suffered, but then started building schools. They became State-aided Indian schools. At that time there was no representation in the Government. Today we as members of Parliament still have to go back to our communities to say that preprimary education is not part of our system and we still have to look to the Government and community organisations to give our children that opportunity, which is not fair. I think the hon the Minister of the Budget has to do something to make it clear to the members of the Cabinet that we need that money. I concur with every word of the hon member for Springfield when he says that we have been done down here.

This debate has been in progress since yesterday and many matters have been covered by many hon members. I would like to mention complaints received from teachers, ordinary teachers at schools. Their problem is the strain and stress and tension they experience at the schools due to the pressure of the work. Some of them say they no longer teach. The teaching role has been diminished because they feel they are becoming clerks, that the job they have to do today is more that of a clerk keeping records than actually teaching. That is of concern because I recently read in an article—and I am sure many hon members read the article too—that because of tension teachers have also taken to alcoholism. Many doctors are now treating teachers for alcoholism. This has become a matter for concern.

We also need to look at the number of teachers who are leaving the profession, and those who even leave for other countries. The reason for that one might say is because of the political situation in the country. However, I believe many people say that the conditions under which they teach are not good enough and there are better prospects for them elsewhere. I think this problem needs to be addressed.

I also read an article about the application for early retirement by a Mr Reddy. I had the same problem with a teacher in Tongaat, where he had to be boarded because he was not well. It takes a long time to process these applications. I think this issue needs to be addressed as well, because it is pointless eventually boarding a person when he is completely bedridden. He should be allowed a few years to live, which he could spend with his family.

I think the hon member for Allandale mentioned the age of 55 with regard to the retirement of a teacher. We have been playing around with the words “twilight years” of a teacher, but when a person reaches the age of 55 he is past his peak really where teaching is concerned. He then has years of teaching behind him. I think a teacher should be given the option, with a reduced pension, if he wants to retire at the age of 55, to let him retire. He will probably make room for a newly qualified person who is more enthusiastic, with more energy than a teacher who sits there, wanting to retire and only wanting to pass the day, hoping that one day he will reach retirement age.

I would also like to say something about the Division of Culture. The hon member for Bayview complimented the Director of the division. I think she is doing wonderful work in that division. I had the opportunity of attending some of the functions the division organised. I mention particularly the one in the city hall, which was well attended and well received. Unfortunately, some of those in the rural areas have not received full houses. Maybe it is due to general apathy, I do not know. However, I believe they are doing wonderful work with the establishment of the regional council structures in Natal. The hon the Minister of Health and Welfare did mention that the other provinces have forgotten to do the same.

I think that we should look into this matter, because we do not want to be accused at some stage of only looking after the people in Natal. This organisation should extend its services throughout the other provinces. We have a lot of local talent. I heard on the news that SABC-TV will be introducing Indian programmes. Maybe this organisation can play a leading role in supplying the material for these programmes. I would like to compliment that organisation.

I did not intend to mention it, but while I am at it, I would like to tell hon members of an unpleasant incident that took place, because it concerns an official. I do not know whether he works for the hon the Minister of Education and Culture. Recently a magazine titled It is never too late to learn was published. Somebody telephoned me and told me that my daughter’s photograph appeared on the front page. I had no objection to my daughter’s photograph appearing in that magazine. I asked this person who telephoned me to send me a copy of the magazine, but he only had two copies.

I then telephoned the department and spoke to the editor of Fiat Lux. I happened to see the picture prior to my telephoning him. In fact, I wanted to compliment the photographer who took the photograph. I wanted to ask him if I could possibly have a copy of the magazine. The editor was very rude to me on the telephone and I cannot understand this. I explained to him who I was. I asked him if I could speak to the photographer, but he said if I had anything to say, I had to put it in writing. I said, “Look, before you go any further, do you know who the person on the front page of your magazine is?” He answered, “I do not care who the person is. I do not care whether he is a member of Parliament, a Minister or the State President. I can use any picture I want to use. I do not need any permission.”

I then became very upset. I told him that the person on the front page happened to my daughter. However, what upset me even more was that, after I explained to him that she was my daughter, he told me that he did not need any permission, because all children had signed an indemnity form. My next response was that my child was not in any school. The photograph that appeared in this magazine was taken during a show which had nothing to do with the House of Delegates. After quite a lengthy discussion, the editor slammed the receiver down. [Interjections.] I discussed this with the Ministry. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, after all that has been done by the Department of Education and Culture, it is regrettable that hon members chose to highlight only the negative issues. My colleague, the hon the Minister of Education and Culture, as well as the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, have said in this House that if there is any merit in these allegations, an investigation could take place.

I was reminded of myself, because I have experienced the same problems sitting here. I was attacked and criticised while privileges and the protection of Parliament were used. I have been sitting on a committee which investigated the privileges of Parliament. I hope that when that is approved, it will allow those people outside the Chamber of Parliament the right to defend themselves. I do not wish to go into the merits of the issue, but I think that any person, right or wrong, should have the right to defend himself. The new proposal of having a joint committee on parliamentary privilege will certainly give those people outside this forum an opportunity to put their case. There are penalties which are proposed with regard to this particular issue.

In my view, the Department of Education has done a tremendous amount of work, from the hon the Minister himself to the Chief Executive Director and everyone else. A small group of people who were highlighted in the James Commission have given us some food for thought and action is being taken. In fact, the culprit who had allowed these things to happen, was removed. The former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council is not here anymore. As far as I am concerned, we should strive towards resolving some of the problems. From the undertaking given by the hon the Minister to the Ministers’ Council, I have no doubt in my mind that action is being taken to resolve some of the issues.

However, let us not paint the picture of Indian education in such a way that our children who will follow after us, and those who are at school, will think that we are a division that is not there to look after their interests. Education is paramount to all the other issues that we have been discussing.

When I was Minister of Housing I said in this House that if everybody were educated, those who were able to work would be capable of building their own houses so that we would not have to build them. Education is paramount and we must not paint such a picture. We must find the faults and criticise and I shall be the first one to support the investigation of my colleagues in the Ministers’ Council.

However, we must not only pay attention to the negative aspects. I am a welfare man myself and I was appointed to a committee along with the hon member for Reservoir Hills and Dr B T Naidoo. We have seen the work that is being done in the field of special education. However, nobody is talking about that. Nobody refers to the work that is being done. They only refer to problems.

The only statements that are being made are that everyone in the Department of Education is no good from top to bottom. I also have complaints, but these are handled, and I compliment the hon the Minister for the manner in which these issues are being handled this year. We should make a fresh start and have a new vision. Education has been given a bad name. The whole Ministers’ Council has been given a bad name. I also paid a price.

They were not given a bad name. They made it so themselves.

Yet I have come back fighting. We have not given up. Hon members must raise the issues that they wish to raise, but they must also allow the other person to put his case. The Chief Executive Director cannot defend himself here and he should be given the opportunity to do so.

I have not seen the documents relating to the matter that was raised in this House by the hon member Mr Abram and therefore I cannot say whether he is right or wrong. Those matters were already resolved in the Ministers’ Council by the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. If he wanted to use that, as he did with regard to many issues, he would have taken that to the logical conclusion because my colleague presented all the documents to the James Commission. The James Commission even saw the Director-General in connection with those documents and investigated them. One has to take the whole report into consideration in order to arrive at a decision.

It was a cover-up!

Does the hon member mean that the James Commission performed a coverup?

[Inaudible.]

That is an indictment of the commission itself. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, will the hon the Minister concede that the documents read by the hon member for Lenasia East indicate that there was a cover-up on the part of the Department of Education and Culture?

Mr Chairman, I am not going into the details, but what I am saying is that the document referred to by the hon member was in the possession of the commission’s investigating officer. Certainly, when one appoints a commission they must apply their minds to the matter, and at what conclusion did they arrive?

I am not saying that hon members should not highlight the issue here, but they are not giving the officials outside the House the opportunity to defend themselves. I, along with other hon members, am part of a committee formed for that purpose. The hon member for Sandton made allegations about a judge who, to this day, cannot reply to them. In spite of that, it has been recorded in Hansard and therefore it is a matter of parliamentary privilege. I am not saying that none of these matters should be raised but there are ways in which to deal with an issue.

The only way to deal with that issue is to raise it here in Parliament, otherwise it would be a cover-up.

Nobody covered up. [Interjections.] We can pick on matters that need improvement and issues with regard to which we can contribute to improving education. That is a debate on which we must spend our time. [Interjections.] I will be the last one to cover up because I took the previous Chairman of the Ministers’ Council to court, which nobody wanted to do. I would never cover up for anybody.

I did not say that you would cover up.

I would never do that. This House is much richer because of what happened. I shall not cover up for the Chief Executive Director or anybody else.

We are painting a picture of Indian education which makes it look as if our pupils will have to leave our schools tomorrow and go to some other institutions. In my view, Indian education has done much for which I am grateful. Many of us have attended those same institutions and are here today. The Department of Education and Culture is doing its best.

Allow me to say that what is important is to put positive issues before the House. I agree that we need more money—we support the hon the Minister in this—to spend on matters such as pre-primary education which we spoke about. I would say that pre-primary education is a prerequisite to education itself. I support the hon member in that. The hon the Minister is doing everything possible, and so are we. Those are positive issues that we must handle. Another one is to cut the pupil: teacher ratio. Those are the matters to which we must give our attention. We must also have facilities that are on par with other schools. I am proud to say that in many of our schools the facilities are far better than elsewhere.

As far as special education is concerned, we as the Indian community in South Africa have set a standard that is unequalled in South Africa. In fact, White and Coloured education have learnt from us. I am also proud to be able to say that the welfare system started with us—the hon member for Reservoir Hills will agree with me—long before any legislation was even formulated. This reflects our cultural life.

I want to touch on one other issue, and that is culture. The department is doing everything possible in this field. I want to say to those people who have left South Africa and who try to prevent cultural artists—it does not matter in which field they are—from coming to this country, that they will not gain anything through trying to stop those people. I disagree with the politics of this country but I want to say to them: Where does one stop? Those people will still come here and it will only be in other ways. My advice to them is rather to look at other issues worthwhile fighting for to help put South Africa right. They should not interfere in a matter from which there is nothing to be gained.

We do not want to be culturally poor. We have a great and a proud heritage through our forefathers from India which we want to preserve. I do not love everything that happens in India or in any other part of the world for that matter, but for heaven’s sake one should not do anything that will hurt our community. The White community will not solve that problem. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, when I spoke earlier, I had to end off without completing what I was driving at as far as the opening of schools is concerned. I wanted to say that the education formula was imposed on us. I hope hon members realise that it was not of our making but that it was imposed on us. It was arrived at before the advent of the tricameral Parliament. If the education formula that has been imposed on us is an inhibiting factor—and I believe it is…

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Deputy Minister a question?

No, I will not take a question. I do not have the time. [Interjections.] I want to say that this formula was imposed on us and it was arrived at before we came to Parliament—that is my understanding of the formula.

Now we have the situation that a formula for housing has been discussed. I want to assure hon members that that formula will not be accepted by us without a fight. We are at present holding up the formula, and I am proud of it. The House of Delegates is holding up the housing formula—a formula similar to the formula for education—because we feel that this formula is not directed towards resolving the housing problems.

If we had blindly accepted that formula without giving it due consideration it immediately would have been imposed on housing expenditure. For the past six months—and we have not shouted about this from the rooftops—we have been fighting that formula.

[Inaudible.]

In any case, the formula is there. I do not know why that hon member wants to waste our time.

You are wasting the community’s time!

I am not wasting the community’s time. That hon member is wasting their time. All I want to say is that if that formula is an inhibiting factor we must fight it. We must then go to the Treasury and ask for more money. We must see to it that our schools—which are closing throughout the whole area, in Winterton, Bergville and Lidgetton West—are not closed. We must go to the Treasury and ask them for more money and open the schools to all race groups, because people are moving away from the small towns and they are moving to large towns. Therefore, what I am advocating is that the formula must be fought.

We must not meekly lie down or throw up our hands and say that that is the formula. I say that we must fight back and say that this formula is doing us harm. It is inhibiting the growth and we are closing schools because of a shortage of funds. We cannot afford to do this. There are some institutions which have served the community over the years and it would be for the better if they were to be left open.

I want to come to a very sore point, as far as I am concerned. When my colleague here was the Minister of Housing in 1987, he told me that in 1988 we would have a community hall built in Howick. That community has no community hall, but during that time a regional hall was built in Arena Park. They found money for building a hall in Arena Park. However, the poor suffering people at Howick did not get a hall. I have been begging for ever so long for such a hall to be built. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister and the officials to do something about it.

I believe that community deserves such a hall. The community of Actonville also needs such a hall. I am told that because of other priorities this hall cannot be built, although it was on the programme in 1987. The hon the Minister told me this. I do not know who put a red pencil line through the plans for that project. [Interjections.]

If that community had a civic hall, or even if the White community had a civic hall that we could have shared, it would have been fine. However, there is no hall in that area and it is a facility that is necessary. The planning for the hall has been done and the plans are ready. I want to plead for the people in that area who sorely need such a hall and ask the hon the Minister to do something about this.

Unfortunately the hon member for Springfield took up much of my time. I had some important things to say and I want to ask the hon member to give me some time. [Interjections.]

School transport contract documents is a cause for concern. I believe that this must be looked at, because we are now in a position where we cannot adequately discipline our contractors. We do not want a repeat of what happened to the Richmond people.

[Inaudible.]

Order! I appeal to all hon members to give the hon the Deputy Minister a chance to conclude his speech.

The contractors are using buses that “continually break down”, are “dirty” and “not roadworthy”. I am quoting from letters that I have received. These letters further state that “unlicensed drivers are being used”, “diesel-pipes break”, “drivers arrive late”, “buses do not start in the morning” and “buses leave in the morning”. [Interjections.]

Unfortunately when parents go to the principal and he sometimes contacts our departmental officials they say that there is no documented record of these shortcomings. I merely want to say that I have been pleading for this in the light of my experience and I want my hon colleague and the officials to take cognisance of the fact that our contract documents are inadequate. These contractors are now getting away with a service which is not in the interests of the transportation of our children. We must be able to discipline these contractors. We must be able to draft a contract document with sufficient evidence; the evidence is available. I believe that if the evidence I have which has been put in writing is not sufficient to get a contractor by the scruff of his neck and throw him out, then there is something wrong with the contract document.

Sack the Minister!

There is nothing wrong with the hon the Minister. The hon the Minister cannot run the transport of children; there are people in his administration who must see to this. This is probably an inherited situation. [Interjections.] The Ministers’ Council…

Why do you not bring it up there? [Interjections.]

The Ministers’ Council does not deal with day-to-day administration of departments. I am appealing for something that has to be done. This does not mean to say that…

Will the hon the Deputy Minister take a question?

Mr Chairman, I do not have the time for questions.

I might be a Deputy Minister, but I am also a member of Parliament for a constituency, and it is my duty on behalf of my constituents to bring matters relating to my constituents to the attention of this hon House and to my colleague, in the same way as any other member. That is what the debate in Parliament is all about. Hon members want to deny me my democratic right to act as a member of Parliament. I will not submit to that. I am a member that serves my people and if there is any problem in my constituency then I must deal with it like any other hon member. At the same time, I am not going to come here and say what I do and do not do on the Ministers’ Council. That is something that happens there.

We do not want you to.

Then there is the question of the acquisition of land. In Greytown it has taken three years to acquire land for sporting facilities for the primary school. I believe that we must devise a system whereby we can adequately and properly, through the negotiating process, cut short… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I will not respond to the speech by the hon the Deputy Minister, save to tell him that we took note in his earlier speech that his party does not cry out things from the rooftops. Well, I think political parties are in business to cry out things from the rooftops.

[Inaudible.]

However, in case the hon the Deputy Minister does not know, I think I should tell him that he does not know about the goings-on in his own party because there is a troika running that party. That party has already decided on certain candidates, and I think they are keeping the hon the Deputy Minister in the dark. [Interjections.] I merely wish to tell the hon the Deputy Minister that there was a report in the Pretoria News on Friday which stated that Mr Boetie Abramjee confirmed that he would stand for Solidarity in the election for the House of Delegates.

I am not quarrelling with the hon the Deputy Minister; I do not want to do so since I have too much respect for him. However, I want him to know there are things happening behind his back that he is not aware of. [Interjections.]

I now want to respond to the hon member for Havenside. I did not in my speech yesterday afternoon attack the person of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture.

That is for sure.

If that hon member were to read my Hansard of yesterday, which unfortunately that hon member is incapable of doing, he will find that on the basis of the facts before us I said that it is convention that the hon the Minister is honour-bound to resign. [Interjections.] I want to tell him that the other day I advised the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning that he had failed to get negotiations in this country off the ground and that he should also go. The House of Representatives, by rejecting the budget of that department, has actually forced that hon Minister to go. I am sorry that he has got to go, but unfortunately it is so that he has failed in his mission, and if somebody has failed in his mission, he must go.

That hon member raised the issue of a Mr Mayes. I want to tell him that he does not know the circumstances under which the poor Mr Mayes was in this part of the country. He was a teacher here in Cape Town and he had a traumatic experience. He had a divorce on his hands. [Interjection.]

The hon member can laugh. The hon member loves to see a home broken up. That is how much respect he has for someone. He can laugh at the poor man because he does not know what his psychological and emotional state was at that particular time.

What I did when his aged father telephoned me from the Transvaal and told me with tears in his eyes that his son was on the verge of committing suicide—the hon member has no respect for life—was on compassionate grounds. I merely asked the department whether it was at all possible to help this person to get back to his family and his loved ones.

-Did you write to the hon the Minister?

Why should I write to the hon the Minister? What are the administrative staff there for? [Interjections.]

The hon member launched a personal attack on me but let me now tell him that he only preoccupies himself with working out what his pension will be for every extra day that he is in Parliament. [Interjections.] That is his problem.

He was talking about perks and privileges—I want him to know that I have half a dozen Mercedes Benz’s in my stable. I did not come to Parliament to own one. That hon member had to come here in order to get a parliamentary loan to… [Interjections.]

I do not blame him for the ignorance he displays here; for his lack of sensitivity to a family that was divorced, a home that was broken up; for his lack of sensitivity for the position of that person who could possibly have committed suicide because he was 1 000 miles away from his family. He was a Transvaler and he was alone down here. I realise that he has got no respect for that. That side of the House is so insensitive that when there was a limpet mine attack on my house, one hon member went so far as to say that I deserved it. That is how insensitive they are. [Interjections.]

Unfortunately the hon member for Bayview is not here but I hope that his colleagues will convey it to him. Yesterday afternoon while I was speaking, he passed certain remarks which were an attack on my religion of which I am proud. I want him to know that if he knows so little about my religion, he must not open his mouth because the next time I will stuff my whole hand into it. [Interjections.]

That hon member must not come and talk of corruption because was it not he who ran to the hon the Minister of Justice and asked for his son to be promoted to some position in the Department of Justice? Mr Mayes is no relation of mine. I did it for him because he is a human being, because he is a member of the human race. I am not interested in any… [Interjections.]

Order!

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

I am not interested in his questions. I will take any other hon member’s question but not his.

I did not go and speak for Mr Mayes because he is a relation of mine. He is a member of our community. His father is an elderly person and I spoke on behalf of his father, not on his behalf.

I want to tell the House something else about that hon member. When the hon member for Lenasia Central had a little altercation with the hon member for Camperdown, this hon member was decent enough to go to every other hon member of the House and say that he wished to apologise for what he had done. Do hon members know what the hon member for Havenside’s reaction was? He said: ‘It was time somebody gave it to that fellow. I am pleased that you did it.’ That is how insensitive he is to people’s feelings. All he is used for by that side of the House is to move a motion for the expulsion of the former hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council; to move a motion for the expulsion of the hon Chairman of the House. That is all he is good enough for. That side of the House must use him because he is a perfect condom. [Interjections.]

I now want to come to some real and parochial issues. I want to agree with my friend, the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, that there is a field where the Department of Education is doing good work. [Interjections.]

Order!

I withdraw the word “condom”, Sir.

Order! I ask the hon member please to use better language when he addresses this House.

Mr Chairman, I will use better language to better people.

Order! I ask the hon member to moderate his language.

Mr Chairman, I will do it to better people. I will speak very decently to decent people like the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture.

He touched on a very important point, namely the issue of special education. As far as special education is concerned, I want to bring the following to the attention of the Department of Education and Culture. In my home town, as a result of the involvement of the community, we have the Actonville Training Centre which is doing sterling work to help handicapped children. The department was kind enough to provide us with two kombis to transport the children, a very vital component of the whole set-up. We fought hard and got the municipality to provide us with land on which a centre could possibly be built. The land is available to the department to erect a centre and I want to ask the department to seriously consider putting up a centre. Our children cannot travel long distances. On the East Rand there is a major segment of the community for which this department is responsible and I appeal to them to do something about this particular issue.

Regarding technical schools, every time we have spoken about technical education in the Transvaal, we are told that surveys done at local schools show negative interest. I want the hon the Minister to know that every parent believes that his child is a genius. Every parent believes that his child should go to university, that he should become a doctor, a dentist, a lawyer or a liar or whatever. However, I do not think every parent is proud today to send his child to become a politician. I do not think so. We do not set that example here.

When pre-primary classes were originally introduced, we had difficulty even to get one or two classes going in Actonville. However, once they had taken off, parents saw the importance of that institution and today we have run out of space. We cannot accommodate more children. By the same token, the same could be true of technically-based education. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council always talks of educating our children in that particular direction. I can tell hon members that if I had to look for a plumber to fix a leak in my plumbing, I would have difficulty finding one, and if I did find one, the rates would be extremely high. Unfortunately, we do not have the facilities in our province, and as a result of the lack of those facilities our children cannot enter those fields.

One must realise that children who want to enter technical fields normally come from humble households and they cannot afford to send these children all the way to Natal. The White technikons are becoming difficult. They do not accept our children, but we will address that issue at another level.

There was a building which was offered to the hon the Minister. It was shown to him. It was vacated by Whites who had moved to the north of the town, because that is where the White population has moved to. This building is today utilised for various other purposes. I want to tell the hon the Minister that some group is now starting a disco in one of the buildings in that complex. Rather than discos and things like that, which will create further rot in the community, I believe that the department should give very strong consideration to the suggestion of establishing a technical school there.

I want to talk about the unfortunate children in Bloemfontein. One can never be satisfied with the sort of answers that we got in this House. I believe that it is this department’s responsibility, because it is responsible for so-called Indian education. Whilst this department is responsible, it is its duty to provide classes. Even if there are only 10 children, it is their duty to see to it that those 10 children are educated. Any official in the department who suggests to a parent in Bloemfontein that his child should go to Zinniaville in Rustenburg, needs his head read.

The people in Bloemfontein have nothing in common with Rustenburg. There is a distance of 500 kilometres or 600 kilometres between those two places. I want to ask that the department, even if it provides makeshift classes, should see to it that something is done. I was involved in negotiations with the Department of Education and Culture of the House of Assembly and I am aware that they were prepared to make prefabricated classrooms available. Until such time as something permanent is made available, something temporary has to be done. Unfortunately, we are still living in the era of apartheid and we will have to provide for these children.

There are teachers who apply for study leave and many of them go overseas in order to study and sometimes there is a reluctance on the part of the department to be of assistance to these people, even in regard to unpaid study leave. The department should also look at teachers as human entities, as people who have certain distinct rights and certain distinct requirements. These should be accommodated in the evaluation of their situation.

Regarding the transfer and placement of teachers, I want to tell hon members a joke that I was told. I was told by some people from Johannesburg who had gone to Durban that they had an envelope for someone in Belfast and they were asked if they would mind dropping it off on the way. Those hon members who know the Transvaal will know that Belfast is way off the route from Durban to Johannesburg. I am merely trying to demonstrate that there are officials, well-meaning officials, who try to place teachers, but are insensitive to the real needs of the particular teacher. That teacher should be sent to an area where the teacher will be readily acceptable. I ask whether the time has not come to decentralise the whole issue of the appointment of teachers and whether appointments for the Transvaal should not be done from Pretoria, where people who will be doing the job will be better equipped to know where these people must go.

This brings me to a real threat that was issued by the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council yesterday, namely that the people in the Transvaal should help to accommodate teachers who are placed there. I think the hon the Minister is in the ideal situation as Minister of Housing to provide the necessary funds to erect homes in these platteland towns, which can become the property of the department, and where such teachers can be housed in transit. Many teachers who are appointed to the Transvaal are normally appointed in transit, and this is no joke. They spend a year or two there, and then they are back in Natal after having been promoted. That also creates a great deal of frustration amongst local teachers who spend years in their towns without any chance of promotion whatsoever.

The hon the Minister told us that there are only 107 more teachers to place out of the 900 odd who qualified some time ago. This is a sorry state of affairs. Why cannot we provide employment for teachers in the platteland situation, where there are seven or eight children of one class and seven or eight of another all in one classroom, taught by one teacher? We can utilise the services of these teachers better by splitting the classrooms into standards, even if the numbers are low, and thus provide employment for those teachers. A number of these teachers who have been appointed are not on the permanent staff.

If they are not on the permanent staff they go without certain basic fringe benefits. I believe this is a gross injustice which is done to these poor teachers. Something ought to be done. The department has to address the situation and it has to find accommodation for those teachers, no matter what.

Insofar as the Mayfair area of the city of Johannesburg is concerned, as a result of the White population moving out and so-called Indians moving in, a number of White schools are becoming vacant. At present there are one or two school buildings which are very viable buildings. We do not need to build new schools in Mayfair. We need to take cognizance of the demographic tendencies. The demographic tendency in Mayfair is that a number of our people are moving into the area and they have educational requirements. We know that the apartheid own affairs educational system is structured strictly along racial lines.

In conclusion I want to address my hon friend with regard to his suggestion that Zulu be taught in the free settlement areas. The manner in which these free settlement areas are chosen, will bring about great conflict in future. They are being chosen selectively. There are only one or two areas that are being looked at throughout the country. What have we heard up to now? Very little!

The recipe for conflict and confrontation is built into this new fifth category group area. The free settlement areas are nothing less than a fifth category group area. This is just as bad as the Group Areas Act itself. I cannot see that this concept will work satisfactorily. I feel that a start should be made, particularly in Natal. Mina nkhulumu Sizulu! It is important that we learn to speak Zulu as a communication language. It is a language which is understood by the majority of Black people in this country. Whether they are Sotho, Tswana, Ndebele or whatever, they can all communicate with each other by speaking Zulu. Just as all people in this country can communicate commonly through the English language, so is Zulu as important.

I believe that a start ought to be made in our schools. The hon the Minister stated yesterday that not many people wish to take it up. I believe that we need to counsel people on the importance of this. The politicians who will be going out in the field need to do some counselling. They need to tell people about the importance of Zulu and why the Zulu language should be included as a subject.

I now come to the issue of school halls. I want hon members to know that Actonville has a population of close on 30 000. There is no community hall there and an application for this has recently been made. It is only since I became chairman of the management committee that we see a lot of progress taking place there. We were promised a school hall in Actonville for the William Hills High School. We have been waiting for quite some time now. [Interjections.] I do not want to decry the people of Howick, but I have a bigger population, 30 000 people, and there is no school hall there. If the hon the Minister is going to build two school halls, he should give one to me and one to Howick. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to follow on the hon member Mr S Abram. I want to say that there are politicians and politicians. I also want to emphasise what the essence of truism really is. When one speaks of truism, one must bear in mind that one should not transgress on the integrity of hon members in this House. At no stage have I or any of my colleagues on this side of the House attacked the integrity of other hon members, whether they are in the opposition or not.

I am reminded of some very wise words in the Urdu language. I shall, for the benefit of Hansard, translate it into English. It is said in Urdu: Naadaan dost se dana dushman accha.

Nadan ki Sohbat mé pares hani hé! [Interjections.]

It means: “It is better to have an intelligent enemy than an ignorant friend.” I am referring to hon members in this House who have indulged unnecessarily in rhetoric in order to attack my colleague and other officials working for the administration who cannot defend themselves in this House. It is indeed a sad reflection on this House. Let that apply to the conscience of hon members when they speak of politicians.

The very utterances of hon members in this House are a disgrace to our participation in politics and the highest decision-making forum in the country. We must not stoop to the low level of the kind of speeches that have been made in this House.

Having said that, I want to say that the cry was uttered why our people are not employed on the highest level of public service that this State can offer. It is sad to say that our community has been lacking the interest and inspiration to take those positions. The hon member for Tongaat, who is a member of the Joint Committees on Finance and Public Accounts said that the personnel who represented a particular department or Ministry were invariably White.

One cannot say that the situation is such because of the nature of the positions. It must be blamed on the fact that people of colour are not interested in entering public service. I as the Minister of the Budget have tried for the past two years to encourage our people to enter public service, but we do not have them. Nobody is interested.

I know that the Commission for Administration advertises vacancies which are not restricted to any particular race group, but there are no takers for the job. Must we blame the administration and the Public Service for the dearth of personnel, as it were, in the Public Service? We are to blame. It is not necessarily education that dictates those positions. All courses are offered up to matriculation level and beyond. If parents are really interested in public administration they should show interest in the welfare of the community.

Mr Chairman, will the hon the Minister concede that in the past the so-called South African Government created no opportunities for our people in that direction?

Yes, I agree. In the past it was a closed shop, but in the past ten years those positions have been opened, and I am not speaking in terms of the tricameral system only. I am aware of the fact because I served as chairman of the first municipal authority. We were looking for Indians or people of colour to serve as town clerks. Even to this day, people of colour are not properly qualified to serve even as town clerks of municipalities. [Interjections.] Therefore our difficulty is the neglect or the unmindfulness of our community to grasp opportunities. This is the message that we should be putting across.

I want to refer very briefly to the over-importance given to the marking of a student’s examination papers.

You have missed the point.

No, I have not missed the point. The point was made with regard to the answer that was given here. However, that matter received much publicity in the Press twelve and eighteen months ago. Where were hon members then? Why do they suddenly speak about it now? That matter was brought before the James Commission in the form of affidavits. [Interjections.] What did the James Commission say about it?

People repeatedly say that it was a cover-up. It is a favourite word of the opposition. What do they mean by that? [Interjections.] It was an important document before the James Commission and what did the commission do? It was of no consequence to the issues of irregularities, corruption or favouritism. It does us no good to indulge in rhetoric here.

With the greatest respect to my friend the hon member for Springfield, I am not saying that I do not allow him the opportunity to discuss matters or to break the tension of this House—as he heard from my hon colleague here—but I fail to understand the merit of the content of the document under discussion. This is the issue in which I am interested.

It is regrettable that our words and our actions will be a deterring factor in the community when the future elections are to be held. I want to say with the greatest respect to hon members here that I pray that the quality of the body of candidates that will come forward—if at all—should be above that which some of us have displayed in this House. [Interjections.]

I am not happy to say this, but an hon colleague of mine in this House needs to reach political maturity and so does my hon friend from Isipingo. One does not simply say things for the sake of rhetoric. One does not say that the ANC will rule this country.

Oh yes, they are going to! [Interjections.]

One does not refer to the ANC. One says a mutual body of people will rule this country. One does not say in particular that it will be an extra-parliamentary body.

I do not deny the fact that I have always been one of those who have said that there must be discussions with extra-parliamentary people. I have always said that the people in this Parliament are not the only ones capable of governing this country.

And they must release Mandela!

We have said that; I have said that. However, one does not say that a particular political party or a particular person must or will rule this country. We want all political people of all political persuasions to be members of the government that serves the people of the country.

I admire the hon member for Springfield. He speaks without emotion and without getting hysterical but he hits hard. I admire that. He is not a gun-toting politician and that is the right way to go about it.

I want to say to him that he referred to per capita expenditure. I am with him. That has been our cry all along. However, what we must appreciate is that the House of Assembly has a far bigger student population. They have a far bigger field to cover as far as universities are concerned.

Per capita.

Yes, I agree that it is per capita. However, when one looks at the number of people that they serve, they actually deserve more funds. We have been crying out about the disparity per capita. My hon colleague and all of us have been trying to improve this. However, when we are told that the state of the economy makes it impossible—and it is proven to us—then we cannot go beyond what is made available to us in spite of the fact that we are making an effort.

The idea of a feeding scheme was brought up by the hon member for Springfield. When I entered the Ministers’ Council I was the first to propagate this idea. I met experts in the field of welfare who said that one should not do that but that one should rather introduce relief to the parents of the children attending that school.

Help them both!

No, one cannot do that. It has a psychological effect on the child.

No, that is nonsense.

Oh yes, it definitely has an effect and a member of Tasa has agreed with us. A member of Tasa has agreed with me that one should not affect a child psychologically.

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

No, I have very little time.

If 50 children are standing in a queue at school and 100 other children are not in that queue… [Interjections.] Oh yes, there is a psychological effect. [Interjections.] Those were different days—one has to look at what we have today.

We have to accommodate all kinds of opinions and views. Nonetheless, it is the portfolio of my colleague the Minister of Health Services and Welfare and he will have to look at it. [Interjections.] I am not coming to the defence of a colleague. I am merely being pragmatic and practical on the issues that have been raised.

What will it cost us?

The cost is not the issue.

It is.

No, the cost in particular is not the issue. We can find the money. [Interjections.] The hon member for Reservoir Hills again spoke of a commission of enquiry. A commission of enquiry was appointed. I am referring to the James Commission of Enquiry. In addition there were the Thaver Committees, two house committees where matters of concern could have been raised.

Not specifically on the question of education.

Specifically on what could have been brought about as a result of the actions of Ministers.

[Inaudible.]

If they were summoned to come there, they should have come.

[Inaudible.]

This issue of… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I stand up once again and I wish to convey my grateful thanks to the many hon members who yesterday and today have contributed to this debate. I am grateful to them for the many good suggestions they have made apart from other matters they have raised.

I am constrained to say a few words at the beginning of my reply. From the tenor of the debate today and yesterday, it is evident to me that many hon members are struggling to impress their constituents before they return for the elections. However, I want to give them suitable answers to the questions they have put to me and thus assist them to answer some of those questions as far as their constituents are concerned. If I am able to be of assistance, I shall certainly do that. However, within the restricted time allowed to me—I have been allowed another half-hour—one of the most important topics I shall be able to deal with will be the re-marking of the examination scripts. This has been dealt with in detail and I wish to deal with it again, so that we can dispose of any fear hon members might have lurking in their minds.

I also want to deal with technical education and convey our administration’s standpoint with regard to technical education to hon members. Thirdly, I want to deal with bus contracts and how they are allocated and the importance of transporting our pupils in the various areas.

I also want to deal with special education and, finally, with the sending of the representative to the environmental course at the University of Cape Town. If I have time to my credit after dealing with all those matters, I shall be able to answer hon members’ personal questions. Otherwise, I can promise them that the questions they put forward here in the debate will be fully answered and mailed to them.

With regard to the report, I want to say that the re-marking of the examination script of Miss Singh has been blown up out of all proportions. As mentioned earlier by my colleague, the findings in this report were published in the Press a long time ago. It took a long time for hon members to bring it to Parliament. However, I want to give them the assurance…

At the instance of Mr Rajbansi.

That may be the opinion of many people in this House.

It is my duty, therefore, to set the record straight concerning the re-marking of examination scripts mentioned earlier. At the outset I wish to make it absolutely clear that I did not at any time misinform or mislead the House, nor did I shy away from the truth of the matter. In support of this I shall quote the relevant sections of the document which record this sad episode in detail. The relevant paragraph of the minutes of the meeting of the Ministers’ Council held on 28 July 1987 under the chairmanship of Mr Rajbansi reads as follows:

For the information of hon members here, there are very many internal investigations which are concluded and, if the findings are satisfactory, that is the end of the story. We do not bring all that forward. The recommendations mentioned in the minutes are, and I shall now quote from memorandum BA 13/87:

These are Mr Du Toit’s own words. Mr Du Toit was Chief Director: Budgetary and Auxiliary Services.

I now want to go on to read this paragraph to illustrate that there is not a grain of truth in this. The report is based on a false assumption, and it merely insinuates that the Chief Executive Director had been in cahoots with Mr G Khadaroo.

I quote further:

He says “it may have been”. I doubt, however, whether it was Dr Naidoo, for he could have advised Mr Khadaroo that the candidate required only 5 more marks to obtain a standard grade pass in biology.

[Inaudible.]

The finding that Mr Singh could have informed Mr Khadaroo of this fact is libellous because it too is not substantiated. The reason given by Mr Du Toit is unreasonable, because Mr Singh, as the head of the department, could also have known that his daughter required only five marks for a pass, and yet Mr Du Toit erroneously presumed that only Dr Morgan Naidoo could have computed this mysterious fact.

So you reject your own judge!

Or, on reflection, I am now convinced that Mr Du Toit was in fact in cahoots with the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council.

You are disgusting. You are an absolute disgrace.

He was undertaking this under the guise of objective investigation. I say this because I can substantiate it. Mr Du Toit told me on his departure that this job allocated to him was the most unpleasant task that was dictated to him by the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council.

Were you not the Minister at the time? Have you no shame?

I am speaking. Will the hon member give me a chance!

This is getting worse and worse!

It is very strange that only deliberately selected documents have been leaked to the mischief-makers who for their own personal gain are having a field day at the expense of innocent victims.

You are a sorry spectacle!

So is the hon member.

Order! I appeal to hon members not to engage in crosstalk with the hon the Minister when he is delivering his reply.

Mr Chairman, I would like to ask the hon the Minister if he can get away from the fact that in his response to a question in this House, he did not make all the facts known?

I did not say that. I said that it was not brought in earlier but I have now presented all the facts to the hon member. Even now it is not too late.

Then the hon the Minister must not talk of mischief-making!

Mr Chairman, I have been unjustifiably accused of misleading Parliament, yet the evidence supports my contention that I had all along stated the hard facts and had in fact categorically stated the truth.

I stand by my statements and answers given on 14 March 1989 and now go so far as to add that candidate No 068128 would have passed had Prof Grobbelaar been the sole moderator, since he would have allocated a mark of 82 which was above the minimum required for a pass in this subject. Why has this vital fact not been disclosed by those who are engaging in this attempt to besmirch the character of an innocent child and her father? I want to say that at this stage…

Mr Chairman, I would like to ask the hon the Minister in what way that has been an attempt to besmirch the character of anybody.

I am not taking any more questions.

Nobody accused the father or the child.

I want to assure this Committee that I am referring this whole matter back to the Ministers’ Council for them to decide if they want to go further and investigate. They will advise me and I want hon members to bear that in mind.

For the benefit of those MPs who have the habit of releasing sensational inaccuracies to the Press, I have to emphasise that the Ministers’ Council had all the reports at its disposal. It took into account all the explanations of Mr Khadaroo and accepted them in arriving at a decision. It was on this basis that a decision was taken and my reply was based on a reasoned decision.

Having done that, I want to remind the hon member for Reservoir Hills in this connection that the increase from 72 to 101 is 29. The total marks were 320.

Twenty-nine over 72 is 40 per cent!

The increase of 29 marks represents a 9 per cent increase in the marks and not 40 per cent. The hon member is wrong.

Somebody wrote that for you!

You cannot even count!

The hon member is wrong.

In connection with technical education which a number of hon members queried, I would like to say that the department has under its control a number of technical colleges—there are in fact three—namely Sastri, St Oswalds at Newcastle and Northerdale in Pietermaritzburg.

The Northerdale Technical College was opened on 18 January 1988 and is the first custom built technical college of the department. The college has three divisions, namely apprentice training, commerce and general studies and cultural enrichment, each with a head of department.

The student enrolment for 1988 was 2 566 while at present the college has an enrolment of 1 257 students in the following directions:

The Cato Manor Technical College, which will replace Sastri College, is in the planning stages and it is projected that this college will come into operation in January 1994. An amount of R569 600 has been earmarked for an additional computer laboratory and audio-visual equipment for the college. To supplement theory learned in the lecture room, it is necessary to equip laboratories in electronics, electrical welding and motor mechanics to enable students to have hands-on experience in these subjects.

I want to go on to say that the assistant-director in charge of technical education is at present playing a vital role in promoting the need to pursue courses in a technical direction. On Wednesday this week he visited Secunda to discuss matters there with senior management. We are therefore keeping in touch with the private sector as well.

As far as special schools and training centres are concerned—and I think this will answer the questions of a number of hon members who queried this aspect, including the hon member for Reservoir Hills—the basis of subsidies for special schools and training centres is as follows.

The full salaries, wages, allowances and leave gratuities of all approved staff are paid fully. A maintenance allowance not exceeding R430 per annum per indigent pupil who boards in a school hostel is also paid. The full transport expenses to and from the school of non-resident pupils, which include the purchase of vehicles, servicing, repairs, licence fees, third party insurance, fuel and comprehensive motor insurance, are paid. The full transport expenses when vehicles purchased for the transport of day scholars are used for the transport of children on educational outings and to and from hospitals and for doctors, are paid.

In respect of buildings, including alterations to existing buildings, architects’ fees, survey fees and other costs, 95% of the capital expenditure approved by the hon the Minister is paid. In respect of furniture and equipment, 95% of approved expenditure is paid. The full S&T expenses of State representatives and board members, in accordance with the tariffs laid down by the Treasury, are paid. Teaching material and other aids necessary for the education and training of pupils are subsidised 100%. In respect of other approved expenditure, such as hostel replacements, maintenance of buildings and grounds, municipal charges and miscellaneous requisites such as telephone insurance, office stationery, etc, 75% is paid. The cost of meals and a training programme offered to all pupils, subject however to a maximum rate of R50 per pupil per annum, is subsidised on a 75% basis.

I want to say that there has been a misconception that the health department subsidises this. It does not. It is the Department of Education which bears the brunt of the expenditure in this respect.

As far as bus contracts are concerned, I want to say that when we are dealing with bus contracts, all aspects of the contract are taken into account. When contracts are awarded, all relevant documents are furnished and it is seen to that they are legal in all respects.

When such complaints as were mentioned here earlier are received, the matters are taken up immediately with the relevant authorities. An agreement is signed between the contractor and the department, which covers all aspects regarding the bus and the pupils. It is up to the traffic department to look into the matters such as unlicensed vehicles or vehicles driven by unlicensed people, faulty vehicles and the violation of traffic regulations. That is not the duty of the administration, albeit when these matters are brought to the attention of the administration, they refer them to the relevant sections.

I want to complete my speech by referring to the sending of a representative to attend the environmental course at the University of Cape Town. If I may say so, the department will not be dictated to by any outside body as to who should be sent to attend a course and who should not be sent. In the wisdom of the department those who are academicians and those who are professionals know best as to who should be sent. If a university or any institution makes a request for a particular person, and if that person is not available, the department or the administration is not bound by duty to send that person only. They have to see to the smooth running of the administration and therefore any other suitable person available is chosen to represent the department. That is the crux of the matter.

I am fully aware that the particular person mentioned in my case was available at that time and was in Cape Town to attend another course.

That might be known to that hon member there.

The department is fully aware of it!

My department knows best who should be sent. If there was any manipulation from outside, I am not sure of that fact. However, the fact is I stand by my administration if they send a suitable representative to attend such a course.

I would like to react to a few other matters mentioned here. The hon member Mr Abram spoke about the Actonville Training Centre and I want to say that the growth and development of the Actonville Training Centre is a matter of much concern to the department. This type of school requires a highly technically trained staff, technical equipment and buildings. This cannot be duplicated easily. The matter is being looked at.

It is a fact that the Joosab Technical Secondary School is not fully utilised. There is still space in that school.

Is the hon the Minister referring to the school for handicapped students or to the technical school?

Order! The hon member Mr Abram must not speak to the hon the Minister directly.

I am sorry. The hon member is correct. This is the school for handicapped children. May I in passing just mention that the Joosab Technical Secondary School still has ample space for technically-oriented pupils.

The appointment of teachers in the Transvaal has always been done in consultation with the Chief Superintendent of Education in the Transvaal itself. However, I thought I heard the hon member mention the decentralisation of the appointment of teachers in the Transvaal. I assure the hon member that decentralisation of the appointment of teachers will, sadly, bring about disadvantages as far as the Transvaal is concerned. We have had great difficulty in getting matriculants to go to the training college in the Transvaal.

I also take note of the fact that I was criticized that not enough people were taken from the Transvaal. I want to put the record straight in this regard. Not enough students from the Transvaal were available and therefore we had to supplement their figures from Natal. Natal came to their assistance. We have 100 teachers who are being trained there in their first year. The hon member also highlighted other matters. I can assure him that we are taking note of these and he will be receiving an answer shortly.

I also want to remind the hon member for Lenasia Central that he admitted to having copies of letters in the handwriting of the official. He must tell me how he got these letters, as they are the property of the department.

Find out!

I do not have to say where I got them from!

I would like the hon member to give me copies of those letters if he is not afraid of anything. The hon member should make those copies available to me, because it will assist me in my investigations.

Malgate is another Watergate! [Interjections.]

That is your opinion, Sir, not mine! At this stage I might just mention that this is a matter for the police.

They were faxed to us!

That is the first time you have said something!

This is a matter for the police. The hon member for Lenasia Central must be able to assist to some extent.

I have no problem with that! I have the documents right here!

I also want to refer to the evaluation of teachers. Much has been said about this and also as far as Tasa is concerned. I want to say that our relationship with Tasa is on track again. It is going very well. There were certain misunderstandings, but they have been cleared up. My department—from the Director-General’s office at the top to the bottom—was not at fault at any time. The Director-General had made it clear in a document to Tasa that the department would be available at least four times a year to meet at a structured meeting with a properly formulated agenda. However, that was not forthcoming. That was drawn to Tasa’s attention, and they did apologise for that. They were man enough to do that. I want to thank the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council for having called this meeting, because many misunderstandings were cleared up.

He acted on good advice from the hon member for Reservoir Hills!

I want to say to the hon member for Merebank that evaluations which are being done this year, have been undertaken in consultation with Tasa. The hon member should bear in mind that this aspect was discussed with them. I think it is a happy situation that they will be taking part in this. The teaching fraternity need not be afraid of the fact that the department alone is doing this.

I also want to say that I have taken note of the fact that Tasa should be recognised for being on the placement committee. That matter was already exercising the minds of the administration. I can assure the hon member that that aspect will also be looked at.

As I have mentioned, the results have improved. I want to thank the hon member for having noted that. The department is moving fast in giving headmasters more freedom to run their own schools. I think this atmosphere has been spreading through schools where headmasters are aware of the fact that they have greater freedom in running the education of their institutions. The hon member’s suggestions as far as sports administration is concerned, will also be noted.

I now come to the hon member for Newholme. I want to tell him that bus services provided by the State are regularly checked. I think I have mentioned that the Assistant Director is always keeping tabs on this matter and that there should be no difficulties with bus contracts.

With regard to the accident in Richmond I wish to say that the accident occurred as a result of negligence on the part of the driver and that not the State contract bus but the other party was to blame for it. That matter was looked into.

Debate concluded.

Debate on Vote No 2—“Local Government, Housing and Agriculture”:

Mr Chairman, when the hon the State President appointed me as Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and Minister of Housing on 22 March I accepted the demanding and challenging responsibilities attached to these portfolios. This was not done lightly, but was done in the belief and trust that I do not stand alone. I rely upon the co-operation of my colleagues in the House and in the Ministers’ Council. I rely too on the diligence, perseverance and loyalty of all the officials in our administration as a whole, but especially in the Department of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture. I would also very much like to rely upon the sincere and objective views of the Official Opposition in this House, especially as regards housing and related matters where consensus is needed for the benefit of the community.

The housing portfolio’s objectives include the promotion of acceptable housing and housing conditions and all matters pertaining thereto, such as land acquisition and the effective development and disposal thereof.

The primary role of my department is not to provide a house for everyone but to support and promote the provision of affordable housing and housing conditions mostly for people in the lower income categories who need to be assisted in acquiring their own homes. It is the policy of the department to bring home-ownership within the reach of as many Indian families as possible. This is, in the main, achieved by providing the necessary finance by way of loans and often land to local authorities who service sites and build houses for sale at predetermined, affordable prices to buyers whose incomes do not exceed set limits.

A variation in this method is for private developers to be involved. This is done by making housing loans available to individuals and also by subsidising the first-time home-owner. Every person cannot for economic reasons be a homeowner and in such cases houses are built not for sale but for letting. However, in all instances the common factor is affordability.

My department is not unmindful of the fact that, historically, it has not only been the poor who have experienced housing problems. At the other end of the scale, many middle and upper income Indian families have, despite being able to pay their way without assistance, been quite unable to build houses because of the unavailability of suitable land at any price as a result of the Group Areas Act.

I am happy to say that, without in any way jeopardising schemes aimed at the less fortunate, my department is, in collaboration with developers and local authorities, also taking steps to provide serviced sites at market-related prices, of course for the more affluent.

Acceptable housing encompasses the entire field of housing and includes the elimination of inadequate, dilapidated and squalid housing conditions and their replacement by roomier, sanitary facilities. The process is frequently complicated by the presence of squatters. I will say more about this when I deal with planned land usage.

On the subject of acceptable housing it is also important to ensure that rented premises are of an acceptable standard, that landlords charge reasonable rentals and that they maintain the premises properly. This function is performed by the rent boards. They are administered by the Administration: House of Assembly on an agency basis for the Administration: House of Delegates. I, as Minister of Housing, nominate members for appointment on the different rent boards.

I would like to deal with the means by which my department and I attempt to meet the housing challenge under the headings of legislation, finance and organisational arrangements.

Legislation

As from 8 April 1987, when a separate Ministry of Housing was created the Minister of Housing in the Ministers’ Council of the House of Delegates was assigned powers in relation to the following Acts in respect of areas declared for use of the Indian population group:

1. 1. By virtue of the State Land Disposal Act, 1961 (Act 48 of 1961), control, sale and letting of certain State land can be effected by means of delegated authority within my department.
2. 2. The Expropriation Act, 1975 (Act 63 of 1975), ties in with the provisions made in terms of the Housing Development Act.
3. 3. The Housing Development Act (House of Delegates), 1987 (Act 4 of 1987), has been in force since 1 April 1987. For purposes of setting policy and for realising goals in the housing field, the Housing Development Act is the main instrument. Revision has now become essential in order to correct several deficiencies, many of which were highlighted in the reports of the Thaver House Committee and the James Commission of Inquiry. The proposed amendments have been tabled today and could, with your assistance, be finalised during this session of Parliament.
4. 4. The Group Areas Act, 1966, although not administered by my Department, regulates and directs practically all the actions of my department. I have addressed this House many times in the past reflecting on the hardship and bitterness created by the Group Areas Act. I have always been vehemently opposed to this legislation and with my assumption of duty as Minister of Housing, I have not changed my attitude to it in any way. The Group Areas Act has created an artificial supply and demand situation in as far as the availability of suitable land for housing is concerned. That Act has presented my department with numerous other obstacles which have been mentioned before and which I am not going to repeat.
   Notwithstanding what has been said, tremendous headway in housing has been made and while that Act remains, my department is legally bound to comply with its provisions and will use such provisions to the best advantage to accelerate the pace of providing housing. While that Act remains in force, all the money in the world would not solve the housing crisis in our community as there simply is not sufficient land available to satisfy existing requirements. I, therefore, unequivocally state that the obnoxious Group Areas Act must be removed from our Statute Books.
5. 5. The circulars and instructions issued by Treasury in terms of the Exchequer and Audit Act, 1975 (Act 66 of 1975), govern practically all the activities performed by my department with regard to housing. I would like to see not only the continuation but also the expansion of the services which are presently being rendered by my department and I believe that this could be achieved by tailoring spending according to real and accurately established needs and priorities, by requiring that payment for services rendered to the public is cost related and by ensuring that moneys owing are collected.

Having touched on certain salient aspects of financial administration, I will now address the process of financing the activities of my department.

Financing

I limit my discussion of financing to what is related to housing projects as shown in programme 2 of the Estimates for the 1989/90 financial year as compared with those for 1988/89.

In addressing the funds allocations, certain background aspects which require explanation for the sake of perspective will be highlighted. I do this to set at ease the minds of hon members and to avoid any misunderstanding with regard to this matter.

I have at the outset explained that my department has the role of advising and financing local authorities and individuals in the provision of housing. Local authorities are consulted beforehand in connection with their expected requirements, in order to make provision in my department’s budget. Their stated expected expenditure is seldom met.

That is one explanation why R25,8 million is shown as an addition in respect of housing and R10,5 million for development projects for the 1989/90 financial year whereas the additions were R29,3 million and R19 million respectively in the previous year. These amounts totalling R36,3 million merely reflect additions to the Housing Development Fund, which is a revolving fund. The total amounts available for the provision of housing and infrastructure, namely R109,6 million, and for development projects, namely R44,5 million, are obtained by adding the net additions to capital to the expected capital repayments and interest earnings.

Hon members will observe that there is a reduction in the amounts it is hoped to spend on housing for this year. Our spending tempo is to a large extent dependent on the pace maintained by local authorities with housing development. In order to augment the housing programme my department has embarked on a number of departmental development projects, in respect of which R22,2 million is to be spent this year on land acquisition and R18,7 million on the provision of services in Lenasia Extension 13, Lenasia South Extension 4, Villa Lisa on the East Rand, Lotus Gardens in Pretoria and Bonela and Wiggins in Durban.

Hon members must realise that the provision of housing is an ongoing process, starting off with research regarding the numbers and socio-economic aspects of the people to be housed. The most important activities in the entire process include fund allocation, land acquisition, township planning, provision of services, infrastructure, township registration, housing development and finally the allocation of housing units to the aspiring occupants.

All these procedures do not necessarily apply in all cases, and several of the procedures may carry on concurrently, but that does not detract from the fact that multi-million rand projects like these take from two to three years to complete and that the expenditure would not necessarily be in equal proportions every year, for the simple reason that there are continually obstacles to be overcome, which tend to be time consuming.

I quote my colleague, the hon the Minister of the Budget:

I may mention that presently contracts for 7 000 housing units and 8 500 serviced sites are in progress and will be completed in 1990. This doubles the achievements of previous years.

It is also necessary to highlight the diminishing rate of capital repayments, falling from R26,1 million last year to R22,1 million this year. Two of the reasons are the increases in subsidies payable in terms of the so-called “new formula” which drew an unexpected amount of criticism, and non-payment of instalments and rents. It goes without saying that such increasing subsidies and non-payment of rents and instalments actually erode the reserves in the Housing Development Fund.

Financial arrangement go hand in hand with the organisational arrangements which I will now discuss.

Organisational Arrangements

It is evident from the findings of the Thaver Committee and the James Commission that disregard for or ignorance of the organisational arrangements were responsible for the embarrassment of my department and officials, not to mention the effects this had on this House. As sound, effective and clean administration is desired by everybody, the organisational arrangements must be acknowledged, fostered and applied at all times.

Hon members must realise that my department constantly operates under full scrutiny of the public eye and must always present an excellent image. In the housing field politicians and officials come in close contact with the individual, his desires and aspirations. These are dealt with formally within the organisation. Hon members will be aware of innumerable individuals and organisations who prefer not to act within the formal lines of communication. Yet they purport to further the interests of the people. It is evident that they must be enlightened and assisted in following the correct avenues and procedures.

In dealing with the organisational arrangements pertaining to my department, I wish to make special mention of the Housing Development Board.

Housing Development Board

I have pleasure in announcing that with effect from 1 April 1989, the following persons have been appointed to the Housing Development Board for a period of two years: Mr C H Kotzé as chairman, Mr J G Brand as vice chairman and the following members, Dr D S Rajah, Mr J C Taljaard, Mr Y S Chinsamy and Mr K A Finlayson.

The Housing Development Board was established in terms of section 3 of the Housing Development Act (House of Delegates), 1987 (Act 4 of 1987), and has now entered its third term of existence. The board is a juristic person in terms of the Land Act and is charged with the objects and functions related to the provision of housing. All expenditure incurred by the board in performing its functions is met from the Housing Development Fund. My department is responsible for the administrative work connected with the functions of the board.

The Housing Development Board meets every second or third week and undertakes regular inspection and orientation visits to projects financed from the Housing Development Fund. In the 1988-89 financial year, the Housing Development Board considered 904 applications and approved housing projects to the value of R232 174 462.

Having dealt with organisational aspects for purposes of clarity and orientation, I will now deal with matters relating to land.

Planning for Land Usage

It must be realized by everyone that land is a scarce and expensive commodity and must be utilised in such a manner as to extract its full potential to foster and preserve the well-being of the people.

This can be done only on the basis of careful planning. Haphazard development and imprudent use of land designated for housing result in greater demands on valuable farm land. The wanton destruction of our national assets must be checked and I call on your support in this regard. Through proper apportionment of our national assets it is within reach of everyone to enjoy a place in the sun; it is within reach of everyone to be decently and acceptably housed.

I, being part of Government, commit and dedicate myself to this worthy cause not only for the comfort and well-being of everyone, but also for peace and prosperity and stability in this beloved land of ours.

The usage of land is carefully monitored by various State departments. This is to ensure that the land in question satisfies the provisions of the Group Areas Act and related legislation. After acquisition, a township has to be planned. Planning takes time. Once the planning has been completed, the local authorities and State departments comment on the proposed township. After the necessary amendments have been completed, the town planning proposals have to be submitted to the appropriate planning authorities with a view to effecting final township registration.

Only after the prescribed steps have been followed and the Board has approved the development can tenders be invited for the installation of services. Thus it can be seen that the finalising of planning can take from 1 to 4 years. In some cases it may even take longer. Providing a local authority with funds while the required planning has not materialised will not solve the housing problem. All aspects of planning must be completed before funds for development can be made available.

Hon members should therefore bear this fact in mind before they complain that their constituencies did not receive sufficient funds to execute any project. If the required planning has been done, I will assure hon members that funds will be made available for development subject to the proposed development providing affordable houses and the availability of funds.

Another problem faced by my department is how to satisfy the land requirements for housing and for agriculture, both being worthy contenders. Very often the most suitable land required for housing purposes happens to be the best agricultural land. In an effort to reconcile the needs of housing and agriculture the following approaches are being considered.

Firstly, all steep land which was previously considered unsuitable for low cost housing will now have to be utilised for this purpose. This is not the ideal solution but the premium on land demands that this action be taken.

Secondly, present planning procedures will have to be reviewed to provide for high-density development. Although free-standing units are the ideal, the available land has to be utilized in such a manner as to maximise its potential. It is nevertheless being borne in mind that it is my main concern to promote the provision of affordable housing.

Housing development cannot be addressed adequately without having regard for matters such as the following.

The Importance of Housing Development

It is necessary to take cognizance of and acknowledge the positive achievements in the provision of housing for our people. These achievements reflected by bricks, mortar and roofs form the basis for continuation and will not be deviated from. Housing in the developing sub-continent with the exclusion of up-market housing for the more affluent who can afford to provide for their own needs, should never be anything other than a continuous process wherein central and local government resources are combined with the resources forthcoming from the individual and the private sector. By saying this I confirm that the housing projects initiated by my predecessor and which have been commenced, will be continued with. Furthermore, the rate of provision of houses will be maintained to the best of our ability.

This assurance is being given in order to allay the fears, trepidation and discontent so commonly experienced in respect of housing and housingrelated matters, because housing is such an important amenity. In reality it encompasses infinitely more than a piece of land with a building on it. A house provides shelter in the widest sense of the word, it is “home” where the family assembles and where the children grow up and receive a homely upbringing. It is also a sound investment offering financial and social security.

A house while under construction offers job opportunities for a variety of people and stimulates the building materials trade. The job opportunities thus provided presuppose various forms of formal and informal training and tuition. These spin-offs from the provision of housing can be added to infinitely, which tends to show that the provision of housing is important for the individual, the family and the local authority.

Responsibilities and Methods to Achieve Acceptable Housing

Although the promotion of acceptable housing is the function of my department, the responsibility for physically providing the housing is shared by the individuals, local authorities, statutory housing utility companies and developers and builders in the private sector.

My department, through its Housing Development Board, has the responsibility of financing these projects, with the exception of those initiated and built by private developers, in which case the department may, on contractually agreed conditions, sell the serviced land to them for the purpose of developing a housing project.

It is sometimes necessary for the department to initiate and develop housing projects. This is done only where it is deemed absolutely essential. The purpose of such action is not to hamper or to enter into competition with the private sector. I acknowledge with much appreciation the fact that private sector developers are seriously and actively involved in efforts to overcome the existing housing backlog. Their efforts are largely centered on up-market development for the more affluent home-seeker, whereas those with whom my department are involved can by and large be described as families and individuals who lack the resources to successfully compete for the housing made available in the housing market.

The only competition emanating from this situation is one involving the use of land. My department must necessarily guard against private enterprise taking up and developing prime land and leaving the less desirable land for housing for our people in the low income categories.

It must be appreciated that whilst my department is dedicated and committed to cultivating and fostering the general well-being of the community, it is not possible to please everyone. There will always be disgruntled and critical members of the public. My duty as Minister of Housing requires me to keep abreast of the developments with regard to housing in the various centres across the RSA. It would be of great assistance to me if all the hon members of this House would also play an active role in the promotion of housing in their constituencies.

1 appeal to hon members of the House to urge and assist the local authorities within their constituencies to actively participate in housing development in partnership with my department to meet the housing challenge. This partnership will be mutually beneficial to them both and to the community at large. I want to advocate close co-operation between local authorities and my department in order to minimise problems and to eliminate misunderstandings which cause delays.

I want to make it quite clear that the staff of my department are well versed and qualified to attend to all the facets in administering housing and matters related to housing, and in carrying out projects full use is made of expert consultants.

The promotion of acceptable housing being the object present in every action taken by my department, there are a number of avenues open for the home-seeker to follow. The ultimate choice of the home-seeker will depend on his ability to pay. Where possible, preference is given to the provision of serviced sites and to encourage the individual to make his own arrangements for the building of his house. This and the other alternative methods of providing acceptable housing are described in the Housing Code.

Housing Code

The Housing Code for the Administration: House of Delegates has been completed in draft form. I expect to have this code ready for issue very shortly. Although the policy guidelines previously applied have been used as a basis, certain changes in emphasis have been introduced to cater for the unique needs of the Indian people.

The approach applied by my department will not necessarily correspond with those of other own affairs administrations, although the objectives may remain similar.

Sales Campaign

In accordance with the hon the State President’s declared policy of home ownership, a sales campaign was launched on 1 July 1983 whereby all houses had to be made fit for sale and were then offered to the tenants at substantial discounts, should they choose to purchase these homes. The object of the sales campaign is to bring home ownership within the reach of as many persons as possible.

The fact that 72% of the houses included in the sales campaign, namely those having been built before 1983, have been sold to tenants, is an indication of the extent of our success. I appeal to hon members to encourage tenants to avail themselves of the benefits available under the sales campaign.

I shall now discuss the past and future of housing development. The history of housing development by my department is encouraging because it shows an upward trend. Since 1984 housing units were provided at a steady rate of more or less 3 000 per year. This jumped to 4 200 in 1986. It is expected that 7 200 units will be completed in 1990. The provision of serviced sites averaged approximately 1 200 during 1984 to 1986. In 1987, 5 500 sites were provided and in 1988 4 000. The indications are that for the 1990 calendar year 8 500 sites will be provided. This accounts for dwelling units and sites funded from the Housing Development Fund alone.

I will do my level best to ensure that a steady and concerted effort to promote housing and the provision of serviced erven is maintained.

Having said this, I must mention the fact that escalating building costs are adversely affecting the housing programme and affordability has become a factor of crucial importance in the promotion of housing.

There is no need for me to sketch the economic situation prevailing. My colleague, the hon the Minister of the Budget, has done that adequately. The factual situation is that the relatively high inflation rate and unemployment rate are complicating the task to provide affordable housing considerably. This accentuates the necessity of giving affordability prime consideration.

Affordability and its Determinants

There is no point in providing dwellings which the end-user cannot afford. On the contrary: Such action is doing the family thus housed an injustice. Income, job security and the number of dependents are indicators of what a person can afford to spend on housing. At present the income of the breadwinner is taken as a guideline for affordability. On that basis persons who earn up to R1 000 per month are afforded housing benefits from the Housing Development Fund. They are accorded the highest priority.

Building standards such as the size of the house, its finishes and the inclusion of hot water installation are amongst the determinants of building costs and therefore affect affordability.

Rental and instalments, that is, interest and redemption in respect of a dwelling occupied by the family of a breadwinner earning less than R1 000 per month, are calculated on a percentage of his income alone. The lower his income, the smaller the percentage which becomes payable by him and vice versa; the maximum being 25% of his income if he earns R1 000 per month. The proviso is that the level of income is also coupled to the cost of the house. If the cost of the house is too high for the specific income level, the occupier has to pay in accordance therewith, thus defeating the aims of the assistance contemplated. The current limit is R30 000 for both land and building. Although this limit is restrictive, it has to be adhered to for the time being.

During the past few weeks, following upon my assuming office as Minister of Housing, it has become abundantly clear to me that the cost of raw land and provision of services of a standard in keeping with the demands of the soil structure and topography of the area being planned is of such an order that the ceiling of R30 000 on the cost of both land and building places severe and unreasonable limitations on authorities charged with the responsibility of building homes for the lowest income group. In the circumstances the question of the selling price of houses cannot be allowed to be dealt with on an ad hoc basis, but should be the subject of an urgent review by the authorities at the highest level.

Whilst the planning of housing development in a particular area could take between three and four years, there have been several instances where further delays have been experienced after it was found that the tender prices for the houses planned, coupled with the cost of the building plot, were well beyond the ceiling placed by the Housing Development Board.

With regard to the problems being experienced as a result of the existing price ceiling on houses, two major projects, one in Stanger and the other in Verulam, have been unfortunately delayed owing to the fact that the prices tendered in each of the projects would have resulted in the total cost exceeding by far the ceiling price.

In the discussions with both these local authorities and their consultants it was evident that a high standard of servicing was necessary in both instances and this, coupled with the tender price of the houses which were designed for the areas in question, resulted in the Housing Development Board being unable to approve the commencement of the project because of the overall financial considerations involved.

I have canvassed this matter at some length because it is a serious problem and is largely due to the topography and soil conditions obtaining in areas where housing schemes are being planned. I am afraid that these problems will increasingly manifest themselves as limitations are placed on encroachment onto agricultural land.

Should any cutbacks on sizes and finishes result in the end product not being acceptable, other options will have to be explored and at present the purchasing of a serviced site and the building of a house by means of a materials loan appears to be a most promising one.

Recently members of Parliament, accompanied by officials of the Urban Foundation, visited areas on the North Coast where utility companies operating under the auspices of the Urban Foundation are promoting housing development and I must confess that we were pleasantly surprised at the extent to which self-help housing is progressing in the Brookdale area of Phoenix. I am detailing aspects of this project for the benefit of members of Parliament and the community at large. Hon members will observe from these details that this development merits the greatest measure of publicity so as to embrace all those who are in search of homes and are prepared to put in sweat equity.

Some 1 450 sites at Brookdale were sold by the Durban City Council with finance from the House of Delegates for self-help housing. After participants have acquainted themselves with the project, chosen a plot and paid their participation fee of R350 they are allocated a housing loan. This is approved by the Durban City Council, subject to the qualifying requirements. In April 1989 terms this loan amounts to approximately R24 904. This allows for approximately R6 690 for the land, R1 440 for service connections, R740 for capitalised interest, R200 for community facilities and the balance for the materials with the administration levy included. A levy of 14% is charged on all the materials issued currently to pay for the administration of the project.

The loan available provides for a basic standard house, but the participants may add extra money to the loan amount to be able to upgrade the specifications of their houses or have alternative materials. Sites allocated range in size from 240 square metres to 550 square metres. The participants are provided with a platform, foundations and a slab already built as this helps to ensure a continuing good standard of building. The participation fee includes a plan which the participant could use.

As an annex to my speech copies of the types of plans have been attached to show hon members what is available. I want to briefly add to what I have said, that thus far with regard to this project which we visited in Phoenix, I would suggest that the opportunity be provided for all hon members of Parliament to go out there and see for themselves how man and wife, children and well-wishers are producing homes of an acceptable standard, of good quality, in a nice setting, by generating community effort, which, if given recognition, and receiving publicity in the media, could well help to accelerate the pace of construction. It could in fact generate demand for similar plans elsewhere in the country, which I believe has the commitment to make the optimum contribution to the provision of housing development for all the race groups throughout South Africa, with regard to the increase in the price of building materials and labour, etc.

Financial Assistance to Home-owners

Prospective home-owners whose earnings are below R1 000 per month enjoy the protection and assistance of my department to, wherever possible, own their own homes. The sales campaign as a means to this end has already been mentioned. To effect this substantial subsidy, schemes are put at the disposal of these people. This is one of the efforts of my department to promote affordability. Please bear in mind that the rate of interest on housing projects financed by the Housing Development Board is 11,25%.

Apart from this, the following subsidy schemes are available:

1. Differentiated Interest Rate Subsidy on Housing Projects based on Income
R1—R150 per month: 5% of income with minimum of R2,50 per month
R151—R300 per month: 3% interest plus capital redemption
R301—R350 per month: 5% interest plus capital redemption
R351—R450 per month: 7% interest plus capital redemption
R451—R650 per month: 9% interest plus capital redemption
R651—R1 000 per month: 11,25% interest plus capital redemption
R1 001 and above: Standard Treasury rate of interest plus capital redemption
The income is verified by means of regular income surveys.

2. The Updated Formula
The basis of calculation is the income of the breadwinner determining the amount of rent or instalment payable. The income categories are expressed in R50 per month increases, and the percentage of income payable is calculated on the median of each grouping. The percentage of income payable commences at 3% for income categories up to R50 per month and thereafter increases gradually to 41% in respect of a person earning R1 200 per month. The income categories correspond with certain rent values reflecting the cost of the houses.
Income is to be verified by means of regular income surveys. This formula is of considerable benefit to the tenant or purchaser, provided that the house is not priced above the income level of the breadwinner of the family. There are literally hundreds of combinations possible, but three examples can be cited for the sake of clarity. The position of a new tenant and that of an existing one is given:

2.1 For a house costing R25 000, a person earning R800 per month will pay R249 according to the old formula and R194 per month calculated according to the new formula. This applies to a new lessee, as well as to an existing one.

2.2 For a house costing R28 500, a person earning R600 per month will pay R230 per month in accordance with the old formula. Under the new formula, he will pay R133 if he is a new tenant and R107 if he is an existing tenant. The house is not commensurate with his income and therefore he has to pay 23% of his income. The existing tenant would not be penalised and would pay 18,5% of his income. The appropriate house for a person earning R600 per month would be one costing R24 000.

2.3 If a house costs R30 000, a person earning R400 will pay R201 on the old formula. A new tenant will pay R94 per month and an existing tenant R47 per month.

To be able to reap the benefits of the new formula, it is essential that the house is in the price range of the person to whom it is allocated. In other words, in order to benefit from these formulae, people must go for the homes which fall within their categories of income and try to improve them by using their savings.

The new formula was approved by the Committee of Housing Ministers for implementation on 1 July 1988. There are local authorities who have not implemented it yet. There are also local authorities like Durban where the application of the formula elicited strong criticism. The matter is under the investigation of a working committee and will again be referred to the Committee of Housing Ministers.

3. Housing Saving Scheme Subsidy

In order to encourage prospective home-owners to save, the abovementioned scheme was introduced in 1972. My department pays an additional 3% interest to individuals who utilise this saving scheme. This 3% is over and above what the applicant receives from his financial institution. The individual can invest up to a maximum of R20 000 in this scheme. A total amount of R42 929 was paid to 121 applicants in the last financial year.

4. 33⅓% Interest Subsidy Scheme for First-time Home-owners

The conditions applicable to this scheme have been revised recently. The currently applicable general conditions include, inter alia, that the applicant must be a first-time home buyer; that the subsidy is based on the construction cost of the unit not exceeding R45 000; that the total cost of land and house must not exceed R65 000; and that the subsidy calculated on a five-year basis, is now payable over a seven-year period on a sliding scale.

This scheme is proving to be extremely popular. The number of participants increased from 682 in October 1985 to 5 259 in December 1988, involving amounts of R93 000 and R525 809, respectively. The concession to include existing housing was recently approved in principle by the Committee of Housing Ministers, but the economics of its application is being examined by my department and hopefully an announcement will be made in the near future.

5. 90% Loan Scheme at 11,25% Rate of Interest

This is another way of providing financial assistance. The maximum loan amount allowed under this scheme for land and house together is R33 000. Of this total, 90% or R29 700 is granted as a maximum loan. This loan is granted for building or buying a house. For the years 1985-86 to 1988-89, 91 loans were granted, at a total amount of R1 529 843.

I regret to have to conclude my discussion of housing development on a somewhat sombre note. I must address the problem of arrear rentals.

Arrear Rentals

As at the end of October 1988, a total of 1 822 residential tenants were in arrears, totalling R882 530. The department is following the prescribed procedures to recover the arrear amounts by sending reminders, doing collections and encouraging the payment of arrears in instalments. Because these actions are not pursued up to eviction stage, they have met with minimal success.

The total amount of arrear rentals has been growing steadily ever since 1985 when the approach regarding evictions was changed drastically. The department then instituted relief measures in order to assist indigent families in the community. Obviously, the time has come to address this problem of arrears very seriously.

Everything possible will be done to maintain a sensitive and understanding approach, such as referring the cases to the Department of Health Services and Welfare and encouraging tenants who are in arrears through no fault of their own, to purchase the houses, whereby the arrears incurred can be capitalised against the purchase price.

The hon the Minister of Education and Culture will complete my speech for me.

Whilst each case is treated on its own merits, it must be realised that the department has a moral and social responsibility towards the rest of the Indian community. If we allow arrears to escalate it means that we are depleting the Housing Development Fund and so depriving thousands of other needy people on our waiting lists of the assistance they desperately need. At the same time we are sure to receive the statutory criticism of the Auditor-General, whose task it is to report to this House on irregularities and deficiencies in the management of the Housing Development Fund.

The position regarding commercial properties is more serious. Arrear rentals calculated to the end of April 1989 amount to approximately R2,5 million. The Ministers’ Council recently resolved that my department should submit proposals for the increase in existing rentals to full marketrelated rentals, such increases to be staggered over a period of three years, and that a concerted effort be made to recover the arrears due to the Housing Development Board.

In this regard, steps have already been taken to have market-related rentals determined and a letter of demand has been sent to each tenant who is in arrears. The response to date has been favourable and many tenants are now endeavouring to pay off the outstanding rentals.

I may add that urgent attention is being given to finding ways and means of selling all shops and commercial properties owned by the board. We can under no circumstances allow the depletion of the funds of the Housing Development Board.

I now wish to deal with township development and supporting services.

Township Development

In the light of specific problems encountered with township development I will address this issue in some detail, quoting a number of specific townships.

DURBAN

1. Cato Manor

The Indian group area of Cato Manor comprises three separate townships known as Umkumbaan, Bonela and Wiggins. The position of each of these townships is as follows.

This survey was necessary as the presence of ecca shale had to be thoroughly investigated. A total of 141 special residential sites are now available for sale and a further 36 will be released for sale shortly.

Wiggins

Although a preliminary new layout plan for this township was prepared some time ago, private consultants will be appointed shortly to amend the plan and increase the density by a further 1 000 units to a total of about 3 000 dwelling units. This is in line with previous statements regarding the increasing of the density of houses to maximise land usage.

Bonela

The registration of the township will be attended to in at least 3 phases. The first phase is where the 181 houses have been erected and the second phase is the area where it is proposed to hold a housing exhibition later this year. The third phase comprises the remaining land. Details of the housing exhibition are still being finalised. What I can say at this stage, is that this exhibition is designed to encompass the latest alternative building methods.

2. Newlands West C A 5 (Bankside)

This area was purchased from the Durban City Council and has been replanned by the Department’s town planners. A total of 1 000 special residential sites will become available once the township is serviced and registered. Problems in having the layout plan approved by the Council have been encountered and this has delayed the project by approximately six months. It is expected to commence with the installation of services in the last quarter of 1989.

PIETERMARITZBURG

1. Mountain Rise

This township was inherited from the former Department of Community Development and various matters still have to be finalised as regards zones 1, 3 and 4. Zone 2 was finalised by the former Department of Community Development.

Zone 1

This zone comprises 3 separate pockets of land which have to be consolidated and resubdivided. Certain services have to be installed and indications are that this work will be carried out in the 1989/90 financial year.

Zone 3

The land of approximately 8 hectares in extent was sold to the housing utility company Clarion Homes for the sum of R450 000 to enable housing development for persons on the local authority’s waiting lists who qualify for the first-time home-owners’ scheme. Transfer was registered on 31 August 1988.

Zone 4

The Department has finalised all the matters which were outstanding and it will now be possible to give transfer of a number of special residential sites which were sold some years ago. There are 33 special residential sites altogether.

2. Copes Folly-Dunveria

It is proposed to develop this township in 6 phases which will provide approximately 3 000 housing units. The installation of bulk services for the first phase has commenced and the construction of internal services is likely to proceed during the second half of 1989. The first phase alone will provide over 1 000 dwelling units. A preliminary layout plan for phase 2 has been prepared and is being examined by engineering consultants. This phase will provide almost 900 dwelling units.

Richards Bay

The registration and proclamation of phases 2 and 3 of this township are expected to be finalised within the next few months. In the meantime the planning of the fourth phase is being investigated.

Savanna Park (Pinetown)

Progress with this township suffered a severe setback during 1987 when the services which had been installed were damaged by the floods. The stormwater services had to be redesigned and this task has been completed. The installation of the internal services will be completed shortly and every effort will be made to have this township proclaimed as soon as possible.

Howick West Extensions 1 and 2

Although the general plans for these townships were registered in 1982, it was decided to amend both the township layout plans in order to provide an additional 31 special residential sites. It was consequently possible to erect a total of 186 houses for the low income group. The amendment of each general plan has unfortunately delayed registration and proclamation but the matter is receiving attention.

JOHANNESBURG

(i) Lenasia Extension 2

This township was proclaimed on 8 February 1989 and the Department is now in a position to transfer plots which have been sold.

Mr Chairman, on a point of correction…

Order! There is no such thing as a point of correction. Is it a question?

Yes, Sir. Will the hon the Minister take a question? [Interjections.] I am not criticising—I am asking for information.

No, I am not taking questions now.

(ii) Lenasia South Extension 4

The servicing of this township, which will provide approximately 3 300 units, is proceeding according to the programme and should be completed by the end of this year.

(iii) Lenasia Extensions 9, 10 and 11

The non-proclamation of these three townships is very much regretted, but the department is confident that many obstacles have now been resolved and that the matter is receiving priority attention, as was the case with Extension 2.

(iv) Lenasia Extension 13 (North of Nirvana Drive)

This township will comprise approximately 1 600 units, mainly for the lower income group. It is being serviced at present. The services are expected to be completed within the first quarter of 1990.

BOKSBURGIBRAKPAN

Villa Lisa

When developed, the entire group area will provide approximately 7 500 erven. The first phase of the township is receiving urgent attention and, provided that there are no unexpected delays, the services should be installed by the end of April 1990. A total of approximately 2 000 dwelling units will be available in the first phase.

Order! I shall have to interrupt the hon the Minister. I think it is now an opportune time to adjourn for lunch.

Business suspended at 12h58 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION AND CULTURE (for the Minister of Housing):

Lotus Gardens

This township will provide approximately 1 600 units once it has been developed. The department is presently negotiating the supply of bulk services with the Pretoria City Council.

Tenders for the installation of the internal services have been invited and are presently being adjudicated. It is hoped that the work can commence at the end of June of this year.

CAPE TOWN

Pelican Park, Phase 1

The department is attending to three consolidations in this area which have to be effected prior to the registration and proclamation of the township.

The Surveyor-General has endorsed the three consolidation diagrams for registration in terms of section 26 of Act No 4 of 1987. This means that all the title deed conditions will automatically lapse upon registration of consolidations except certain conditions pertaining to mineral rights. The Department of Public Works and Land Affairs has been requested to cancel these mineral rights.

In addition a number of component properties have still to be registered in favour of the Housing Development Board. This particular township establishment was beset with many problems, but my department is now in a position to instruct the State Attorney to attend to the first of the three consolidations.

Pelican Park was developed and fully serviced by September 1984 when we Parliamentarians arrived in Cape Town for the swearing-in ceremony. Now, some five years later, the plots in question have not yet been released to potential home owners. Having regard to the prevailing high interest rates, the final selling price because of the time lag could be materially affected by the unfortunate delay. Enquiries reveal that the reason for the delay in releasing plots for sale is due to certain restrictions which constitute conditions of the original title deeds in respect of various properties which have been consolidated to constitute the existing township.

In the light of the above experience, it is necessary that all problems likely to impede the proclamations and sale of the township stands, should be identified at the early stages and be satisfactorily resolved even before the application is lodged with the Provincial Council or any other competent authority for the approval and registration of the township.

In certain locations, more particularly Natal, having regard to the difficult terrain, the planning and erection of services have been found to be extremely costly. In addition it is understandable that the approving authority is demanding a very high standard of servicing where difficult terrain is involved to avoid problems likely to arise following upon heavy rains as has been the experience in many areas following the heavy rains in December 1988. The problems referred to, coupled with other delays in regard to township approval, create very serious problems and escalate the final cost of building plots.

This inevitably results in moves to decrease house sizes to satisfy cost ceilings whilst completely ignoring the fact that a family requires a minimum living area having regard to the number of persons who comprise such a family.

I believe the points canvassed above are of a sufficiently serious nature to warrant a review of the limitations placed on housing costs, as in my opinion it would be unwise to deny persons on the waiting list with their minimum requirement based on family size for the reason that the land price constitutes a large percentage of the overall cost component.

Supporting Services

Moving on to supporting services, my department is also responsible for the erection of schools and colleges required by the Department of Education and Culture. I will present a brief overview of activities in this regard.

Capital Works

Schools

In the 1988-1989 year my department completed the construction of 23 secondary schools at a cost of R47,5 million. Nine secondary schools are under construction, the expenditure incurred thereon in 1988-1989 amounting to R11,5 million. Eighteen primary schools were completed at a cost of R27 million. A further 6 primary schools were commenced with and a total amount of R1,3 million was spent.

In the present 1989-1990 financial year, a total of 15 new schools will be commenced with—10 of those being primary schools and 5 secondary schools. Tenders will also be invited for major additions and alterations to 19 schools in the Republic at a total estimated cost of R10,3 million.

Repairs and Renovations and Minor New Works to Schools

This constitutes a major activity in my department, an amount of R3,2 million having been spent in 1988-1989 on repairs to 139 schools. In the same period R700 000 was spent on minor new works carried out at 50 schools. During the 1989-1990 financial year R7 million will be spent on repairs and renovations to 126 schools and R1,7 million will be spent on minor new works at 121 schools.

Hiring Accommodation

The amount spent in 1988-1989 was R861 000 in respect of schools and R2,3 million in respect of offices and accommodation. The envisaged expenditure for the 1989-1990 year is R3,4 million in respect of both services.

Finally I wish to add that officials from my Ministry and I, along with the hon the Minister of Local Government and the hon the Deputy Minister of Housing, have had discussions with the Development and Services Board and Mr Peter Miller, MEC, with a view to laying down a basis for regular consultation and with a view to expediting housing projects and matters related thereto in areas falling under the jurisdiction of the Development and Services Board.

In this regard I want to express my appreciation to Mr Peter Miller, MEC, for his support of the arrangements entered into between my department and the Development Services Board which will prove to be beneficial in expediting the provision of housing in the rural areas.

In conclusion I must emphasise that my department is entrusted with an enormous task, presenting possibly the greatest amount of exposure of all the activities of the administration. I have touched on a few problem areas which will require specific attention, such as the affordability of housing, expediting housing projects in order to save time and money and the question of whether the emphasis should be shifted to the provision of serviced sites.

Special attention will be afforded to the arrear rentals issue. The formula for calculating rentals must also be investigated and adjusted where necessary in order to achieve the objective for its introduction.

I have also instituted enquiries in connection with possible remedial action to counter the constant floods experienced in Chatsworth. School sports grounds with high banks are also being investigated in order to avoid landslides.

I have noticed with satisfaction that despite problems and setbacks, the work of my department has proceeded as well as can be expected. I want to express my gratitude to the Director-General Mr R P Wronsley, the management and staff for what has been achieved. I will do my utmost to affect whatever is required so that my department may improve on what has been done up to now.

Mr Chairman, I have taken note of the speech of the hon the Minister of Housing. It would have been far preferable if what is contained in the speech—which I regard more as a report than as a speech—had been made available to us quite some time ago so that one could have studied it and prepared oneself fully.

In spite of that, I note that the hon the Minister of Housing had a slight throat problem. I hope he is feeling better now, because he reminded me of a motorcar in winter which does not really want to start. I hope he feels much better now.

What I would like to mention is that what is contained in this report seems to me to be basically a continuation of the old regime and of what the old Ministers’ Council had been doing. I do not see anything new in this report, nor do I see any new innovations. There is no new thrust that could address the problems with regard to housing in our country.

At the outset I want to make it very clear that as a member of the opposition, my task is naturally to be critical and at the same time to be constructive. I want to make it clear, as a matter of principle, that we believe, even more than ever before after having read this report, that we need a single ministry of housing in this country which can tackle the housing needs of the entire population. This sort of racial compartmentalisation is taking our minds away from other communities and from what is happening in other communities. Housing should be an issue which affects every human creation of Almighty God in South Africa.

In responding to what is a mere continuation of what has been happening, I firstly want to start with one of the things that is lacking in our community. There is a definite need for the appointment of some people who will, wherever new developments are taking place, be able to advise the community on their personal needs and requirements and how to go about things. One must remember that one can offer a person an erf, but having offered him the erf, the buck should not stop there. I am pleased to learn that the department has been practising certain things in certain projects, where some of the rudimentary services, for example the laying down of slabs, etc, are made available. Loans are made available to people so that they can eventually start building their own homes.

I think there are many people in our community who would welcome such a starter housing programme. This has been sorely lacking in the Transvaal and I believe that this sort of thing ought to be extended to the Transvaal, particularly in the major metropolitan areas such as Lenasia and the new township of Villa Lisa. [Interjections.] That hon member can joke about it as much as he likes. Villa Lisa exists and it is a fact. Lotus Gardens is of course another area.

We would like to see the dance.

Oh, shut up. You want to see everything.

*Go and have a look at your wife tonight.

†What I would like to point out is that that sort of thing is absolutely important and necessary.

Order! The hon member Mr Abram must stop using the expression “shut up”. It is unparliamentary.

Mr Chairman, in that case I will say: Keep quiet.

†Mr Chairman, that is absolutely vital and necessary. I want to give an example. In my hometown some five years ago, about 180 erven were allocated to people. As far as I am concerned, the majority of them were allocated to people who really needed housing. However, those people did not have the know-how to go about constructing a home or even to go about trying to get a builder or a loan from a building society, etc. What happened is that wealthier people, in pursuit of obtaining more property, bought these people out. I can safely say today that almost half of those erven ended up with people other than those to whom they were originally allocated, for the simple reason that the people did not have the know-how. I believe that this department ought to create some place where people can go for help and advice.

In short, the same person could also play the role of an ombudsman when it comes to this sort of thing. Various builders do take people for a jolly good ride.

They do it at different speeds.

Exactly, at different speeds. Some of them do it faster, others slower, but they do take people for a ride. Unfortunately they take them for rides in crocks.

I want to tell the hon the Minister that the department of his counterpart in the House of Representatives at some stage or other advertised for the services of such a person. I do not know whether such a person was eventually appointed, but I am aware that they advertised for such a person who could advise members of the community as to how to go about this. To many people this single investment is one of the most major investments that they will ever make in their lifetime. It is therefore important that we assist these people from start to finish so that nothing goes wrong. I say this because of the absence of the so-called free market system in the housing sector in our community, which is subject to all sorts of constraints created by the stupid laws in this country, the major one being the Group Areas Act. Thank goodness the Minister implementing it is no longer there.

As far as the first-time home-owner subsidy is concerned, I am disappointed that the hon the Minister has not been able to take a decision. He stated in this report that they are busy looking at the financial implications. When the House of Assembly announced this early this year let us face it, they are a far larger community—they must have taken the financial implications into account. We have so much less to look at. The first-time home-owner subsidy must be extended to our people who wish to purchase an existing home. At the moment, as the conditions stand, it is merely for people who go into new homes.

*You can build very little for R45 000. You cannot build very much for R45 000.

†Therefore the first-time home-owner subsidy is absolutely vital. The White people have already made their announcement. They are already enjoying the benefits of that, and again we are lagging behind. I want to remind the hon the Minister that for every year a person lags behind, one must subtract five years from his life expectancy, because that person will enjoy the fruits and the benefits of his home for so much shorter a period of time. I want the hon the Minister to place himself in the position of such people and address this problem most urgently.

A statement has been made in this report about the issue of commercial property owned by the department, where there is apparently a massive backlog of rentals. Unfortunately this department is now being charged with carrying out the dirty work of the old department of community destruction. What they did was to take viable business communities and place them in shopping complexes. Why? It was done purely on the grounds of race, because they were not of the right skin colour. “My only sin is the colour of my skin”, as they say in South Africa. They were taken out of CBDs and placed on the outskirts. Many of them had built up goodwill where they were in the cities. These people are at the receiving end today, not because of their own greed.

I believe that since the department took over the mantle of the old department of community disruption, their task is to look after those people, and not to wield the big stick, as it were. I am totally opposed, and I am certain that many of us on this side of the House are too, to imposing market-related rentals on such people who were kicked off their premises, through no fault of their own.

I believe that this department owes it to these people to find some or other method whereby they could be compensated. I am totally opposed to market-related rentals being enforced on those people. I am sure that any right-thinking hon member will support me in this.

In the first place, if that person had gone into a centre which was created as a result of a viability study for commercial reasons, it would have been a different matter. These people were merely posted out from point A to point B because of the implementation of the vicious laws of our country. I trust that the hon the Minister will look after that particular sector of our community, because it is they who keep our social, religious and cultural institutions going in this country. Every time one wants to build a temple or a mosque, it is they whom we have to go to. They are not there by choice, but by compulsion. I want the hon the Minister to react to this. He must tell us whether he intends to dispense with this whole issue of market-related rentals for displaced traders.

I now come to the question of townships that are currently in the pipeline. I am pleased that a housing exhibition is being planned for some part of Natal. However, I want to ask the hon the Minister if it is not perhaps time for his department to invite private enterprise to come forwards with plans and suggestions for those areas where we have the biggest problems, namely our metropolitan areas. They could tell us what they would do if the department was prepared to make land available to them.

I am not talking about the sort of thing that happened in 1985. When the former Minister of Housing was in hospital, land was allocated to friends and political allies. I believe that that sort of thing should be stopped. Unfortunately it has continued for too long. We do not need certain elements who might be underworld characters to cast a shadow over us all the time. We do not need them around. Such people were given land in the past.

One should genuinely get the major names in the country, people who are interested in real development. The Urban Foundation is one example. If they are prepared to extend their activities to our sector, let them come forward with plans and suggestions. Provided they are prepared to work within certain guidelines, I believe that they should be given the land to develop and to provide much-needed housing at reasonable and affordable prices to the community.

I want to make out a case for those people in our community who fall within the economic income bracket. I want the hon the Minister to know that in my part of the world they constitute the overall majority of people who today still need homes. The man who could look after himself, has already bought property, possibly in a White area. The majority of them have already moved into those areas. I am concerned about the small man towards whom this department has a real responsibility.

I would like the hon the Minister to know that I make regular visits to my favourite Villa Lisa. Unfortunately there is no Lisa that I can go and visit there! [Interjections.] At Villa Lisa the progress has been formidable. I want to congratulate the former Ministers’ Council for the work that is being done over there and for the speed at which contracts were given for services that are being installed. Of course there was a great deal of politicking in the time of the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, when certain elements from Benoni would run to the people and say: “No, do not go for this area. Go for that one.” That took up two and a half years of our time. By now my people in Benoni would already have been living there. They would already have been housed.

I want to ask the hon the Minister of Housing, in my capacity as chairman of the local management in Actonville, that his department do something right now. His department should get developers or builders to come forward with suggestions as to the type of homes that they are prepared to put up at certain prices for the economic income bracket. If that can be done now, the department will be in a position to choose from a variety of builders as to who would be prepared to give the best package. Thereby one would be able to serve the community better.

I want to tell the hon the Minister that to start off with we immediately need a minimum of 1 000 dwelling units in this income bracket. The last time we received money from the Department of Housing or the Housing Development Board was when we received an amount of R1 088 000 about three years ago. Prior to that, we got money from the department in the 1970s. There is therefore a backlog and the department owes us something.

I believe that this can be done in Villa Lisa. I was told by the people on site that the first phase of the stands will be available in July 1989—that is two months from now—for handover to the local authority to provide the electricity reticulation. The major services like stormwater drainage, roads and sewerage will have been provided by then and the first phase will be available. Commensurate with that phase being available, I would like to see the development of homes for the people.

I want to refer to the Free State goldfields. An area was investigated by the Group Areas Board at Hennenman in the Free State where homes are already available at the moment. There are about 50 homes which belonged to White’s Portland Cement Company before. The whole township is now owned by the municipality of Hennenman and the municipality is willing to sell this township to the department.

We were told by the previous Minister of Housing that his department did not have any money. I hope that this hon Minister will find the money to buy that township. I want to remind him that the kind of people that have settled on the Free State goldfields are not the kind of people who are able to buy a stand for R20 000 to R30 000 and to build a house for R60 000 or R70 000 on it. They are all battlers—that is why they went to greener pastures. Now there are 50 homes which can be occupied immediately by these people.

Before my time runs out, I want to refer to an issue with regard to Port Shepstone in the local authority area of Marburg where a company known as KGVK Properties operates. I am given to understand that amongst its directors are the hon member for Southern Natal and the hon the Minister of Housing. I do not know whether the hon the Minister is still a director.

However, be that as it may, the Marburg municipality provided certain services for the subdivision and creation of a little township owned by this company. Subsequently, guarantees for the sum of R40 000 were put up for the installation of certain sewer services. These guarantees have never been met. I am given to understand that this amount is still owing to the Marburg Town Council and therefore to the ratepayers of that particular town.

Seeing that a member of Parliament is involved in moneys which rightfully belong to the community, I would like to know whether the hon the Minister of Housing can shed any light on this particular issue or whether he would request the hon member for Southern Natal to do so. I believe that an explanation is definitely necessary because it cannot be allowed that people use their positions of power in a particular town to be able to do whatever they wish to do.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member whether this is the place where that matter should be raised? He has the right to raise it, but… [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Minister must ask the question.

Is this the place where that question should be asked? However, if it has to be answered here the hon member for Southern Natal, who is unfortunately not here this afternoon, would be the appropriate person to pose that question to.

Mr Chairman, in my opinion this has very much to do with housing. I say with all due respect to the hon the Minister of Housing that I was given to understand that he was also a shareholder in this particular company.

In all fairness, in my opinion we are here to be accountable to the public. I do not mind answering questions about anything in which it is believed that I have a finger. I shall be prepared to answer it. One should not have anything to hide. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I listened very attentively to the hon nominated member Mr Abram’s response to the attitude adopted by the hon the Minister of Housing. I would also very much like to say that I cannot agree more with the hon member Mr Abram insofar as his conclusions regarding the concept of own affairs housing are concerned.

I do not want to unduly criticise the hon the Minister of Housing for what should have been done but unfortunately was not done. However, I want to make the categorical statement that, when looking at the housing programme of the past four years, there is nothing that we in this House can gloat about with regard to progress in housing.

While the budget speech gives insight into some aspects of the policy, it certainly does not set out the programme that will be undertaken with the funds budgeted for the financial year. It does, however, indicate some housing projects that will be undertaken. I mention this because moneys have been returned to the Government which could have been farmed out to dozens of persons who want to build houses. It should not be a difficult matter—in my opinion it could be concluded in a fortnight’s time before we have to account to the Treasury.

In some constituencies the housing problem has reached alarming proportions. There are many important issues relating to housing. It must be admitted that we are operating in a vacuum. From time to time we must communicate with the people for whom housing is required.

In this regard I want to make the submission that we should hold a conference on housing for the Indian community. This may be approached on a regional basis. I can tell hon members that we can do our best as far as housing is concerned, and people will still complain. We know that these people will complain, so why do we not get them around a table and discuss the problem? Let us get feedback from them as well.

In the past four years more money has been allocated to the development of housing for the Indian community than in previous years. Despite this, the progress made by the House of Delegates is extremely disappointing. I cannot help but blame the past Ministers in charge of housing and their departments. If there is any area under our control that is in a hotchpotch situation, it is the area of housing.

The new hon Minister of Housing has a tremendous task to put the various parts together before the housing project can move forward. The problems in my own constituency in this regard have given me insight into the matter, and I can tell hon members that this is the way that we have to move. At the moment we can get no further in this House than only discussing the problem.

I would like to illustrate my point by using the constituency of Cavendish as an example. My area is a vast one, yet not a single house has been developed here in the past four and a half years. The Shallcross housing problem is to the best of my knowledge the worst in Natal. The housing scheme was developed by the Department of Community Development some 20 years ago. To date no provision has been made to accommodate those living in overcrowded conditions. The situation is pathetic.

I want to cite a few cases to illustrate the plight of residents in Shallcross. Case number one concerns Mr Ashuk Sookrajh of 301 Himalayan Drive, telephone number 495781. There are 20 people in that three-roomed house which has been extended by two additional rooms. There are 12 adults and 8 children all living in a three-bedroomed house extended by two rooms. There are four separate families living there.

Case number two concerns Mr G Naidoo, Flat 2, Block 754H, Ridge Road, Shallcross, telephone number 491963. There are a husband and wife with two children which makes four. Then there are a mother-in-law, two unmarried sons and two unmarried daughters which make five persons more. There is a married brother with his wife and three children which make another five. Then there are two grandchildren, who had been left in the custody of their grandmother. That makes 16 people living in a two-bedroomed house.

In another case 19 occupants are living in a two-bedroomed flat that belonged to Soobramoney Veerasamy of Shallcross. I can list dozens of such disadvantaged cases.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is it desirable in terms of parliamentary procedure for the names of the people belonging to these households to be bandied about here in public?

Order! The hon member may proceed.

I have the consent of these people and dozens of other people to use their names here. [Interjections.] I do not know why people want to hide these things. I invite everybody to come and see what is happening. Only when I saw it, did my heart bleed for those people. I can tell hon members that they should not be fastidious; they will at least feel some compassion when they go there.

I shall now indicate the reasons for such overcrowded conditions in Shallcross. Some 60% of houses in Savanna Park could be made available to eliminate overcrowding in Shallcross, but what is the position in Savanna Park? The problem would have been overcome if the housing programme in Savanna Park had progressed according to plan.

A housing project in Savanna Park had been scheduled to start in 1977. I clearly remember that year because I was at the Shallcross High School when the officials from the Department of Community Development came there to discuss it. It was then delayed until 1984 when a start was made. The infrastructure for this housing development had been completed a few years before, but to date not a single house has been provided.

I come to Buffelsbosch, phase 1 and 2. With regard to the Buffelsbosch housing scheme, in 1987 an infrastructure for phase 1 had been completed. There again, not a single house has been provided. The applicants have been assured time and again that their houses would be completed. There is really no valid excuse for the delays. I think the interests of the people who are affected have been grossly overlooked by policy and decision makers. The housing department has left these people confused and the department is plodding on at its own pace.

When I send letters to officials and meet them afterwards, they do not know where these letters are. Such a letter goes to a number of people. I get a reply with different references. I ask the hon the Minister what is happening in these departments. Are the heads of the departments really working? I feel very concerned for the people and I think this matter must be rectified in the interests of our community.

As a result of these events the House of Delegates has lost the confidence of the people. Something must be done along business lines to ensure that the administrative officials for housing function efficiently and deliver the goods. In order to achieve this, I wish to submit the following suggestions.

The housing authorities must be activated to function systematically and efficiently. Invariably the departments are in chaos, lacking efficiency and without the necessary information and direction. The authorities must be requested to provide progress reports regularly. The authorities are to keep in mind the particulars of applicants—they have no idea how many applicants there are, what type of houses to build and according to what method they are going to allocate the houses. The other day a senior official told me they might follow the principle of sequential order. He then said they might follow some system of allocating points. However, nobody has decided on this. For more than ten years we have kept a community guessing when their chance will come.

The excuse that housing developments for the Indian community cannot be pursued for want of land, is not always true from what I have seen. I may mention Arena Park… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I mean to make it clear at the outset that I do not cast any aspersions on the hon member for Glenview nor upon the hon member for Red Hill, but according to information at my disposal, these two gentlemen were just shareholders in a company called KGVK Properties (Pty) Ltd. The directors of this firm at the relevant time were Mr K Moodley, who is the hon member for Southern Natal, a Mr V S Rajah, who is an attorney in Durban, a Dr D M Naidoo, a former Natal Indian Congress man who is a medical doctor, and a Mr R S Naidoo who is a businessman.

My only concern at this stage is with the hon member for Southern Natal. I am sorry he is not here. One took it for granted that with an important debate like housing, which affects large numbers of our people, and especially in view of the unhappy experience we had with that portfolio, with a new Minister in charge, all hon members, particularly senior hon members, would have made it their duty to be present. I took it for granted he would be here.

It would appear that at a time when the hon member for Southern Natal was in fact a member of the Marburg Town Council, of which he was, either then or later, the chairman, a deal was arranged between this company called KGVK Properties (Pty) Ltd, which was developing a township within Marburg, and the Marburg Town Board, whereby instead of the township developers—this company called KGVK Properties (Pty) Ltd—spending its own money and providing the sewerage services which the Private Townships Board required had to be provided, the town board agreed to provide the services using its money, on the understanding that a sum of R40 000 would be paid back as recompense as soon as the township was declared.

The township was declared in 1979 but the R40 000 has never been paid. Now, I am not making any allegations or pointing any fingers. All I am saying is that because of the fact that the hon member for Southern Natal at that time was intimately associated with the Marburg Town Board, and because the money was never paid, this has very unpleasant and unsavoury connotations.

At one stage an acknowledgement of debt signed by Kisten Moodley as director and V S Rajah as director was furnished to the Marburg Town Board. When the money became payable, the Marburg Town Board, through its solicitors, Goodrickes in Durban, sent demands. They sent the demands to the gentleman who was the attorney for this company called KGVK, Mr V S Rajah. I have seen the notes and the correspondence. That attorney, Mr Rajah, on behalf of KGVK Properties, simply played for time, strung the Board’s attorneys along, and eventually did nothing. Subsequently it was alleged that the claim was prescribed. Now, I know a little about the law. No claim is ever prescribed. Prescription is a defence which a person can claim.

I know that the hon the Minister of Housing and the hon the Minister of Local Government are people who want to protect their reputations. I ask them to investigate this immediately and absolutely thoroughly and find out from their colleague, the hon member for Southern Natal, why this money was not paid, and ensure that the public in Marburg, the ratepayers who have been defrauded…

Has it not been paid up to now?

It has not been paid up to now; that is my information.

It must be seen to it that the public are recompensed with this R40 000 plus interest, compounded at the prime bank rate. That is the only way in which this matter can be rectified. If it is not so rectified, I hereby give notice that if I am re-elected, I will press when we come back for a full-scale judicial inquiry into this matter, since as I have said it has very unsavoury connotations. We do not like that kind of connotation to persist in this House after we have got rid of a certain gentleman.

[Inaudible.]

I now want to deal with the portfolio handled by the hon the Minister of Housing since he took over. We know he took over a mess. It was a really sordid mess when he took over and anyone who took it over would have had difficulty clearing out the Aegean stables left by the hon the Minister’s predecessor.

On behalf of the people affected I first of all want to say that we are very pleased—I say this as a member of the opposition—that the rental formula has been changed to one of affordability, and that the hon the Minister has firmly committed himself to a request made by us from this side last year that no person should be required to pay more than 25% of his income as rent.

The hon the Minister has given us that commitment and for the sake of our public I am happy with that commitment. It is absolutely essential that people should not be put into a position where they have to economise—skimp—on food and on the necessities of life other than housing. However, what I am upset about is the statement in the hon the Minister’s report that there has been a reduction in the amount which is hoped to be spent on housing for this year. He explains:

With respect I cannot accept that explanation as being satisfactory. We know that the House of Delegates has housing as an “own affair”. We know that most of the municipalities which really control the matter of the provision of housing, are general affairs and we know that the hon Ministers in this House have no direct influence over those local authorities. However, that is not sufficient. If necessary, legislation should have been brought in to remove the question of control over the provision of housing from the local authorities to the reasonably capable staff we have. Now that they no longer have political interference, that staff will be able to shoulder the burden.

The total population of the Indian community is, after all, only 930 000—less than many cities—and it is insufferable that there should be this delay because of neglect or sometimes deliberate sabotage on the part of local authorities. The hon the Deputy Minister of Housing on a previous occasion pointed out instances of a deliberate go-slow on the part of certain so-called White local authorities. That is definitely not acceptable.

We realise that people cannot be permitted just to stay on in premises without paying rent, but where there are genuine cases of indigency, illness and some kind of personal calamity which results in financial hardship, welfare assistance is clearly not enough. In those cases—as the Durban Municipality has done in Chatsworth and Phoenix on several occasions—there ought to be a remission of rent after satisfactory enquiry.

We know that housing requires careful planning. We know that it sometimes takes up to 18 months to obtain the necessary proclamation, let alone the further physical development. However, if the administration and the Department of Housing in the House of Delegates had done their work ab initio from September 1984 we would not have this terrible problem that the present hon Minister is confronted with.

All I can say to the hon the Minister is that there are 24 hours in a day and there are seven days in a week. I invite him to spend 20 hours of each of the seven days together with his staff to accelerate the pace of development.

The other guy was doing the same thing 20 hours a day!

There is the unavailability of adequate land, and servicing costs are also very high. To service a 900 square metre lot today costs something like R13 000, whereas if that same lot was 450 square metres the servicing cost would presumably be reduced by half. That would make housing more affordable.

It is necessary to take the appropriate steps to see to it that certain municipalities which behave as if all the people within their area are rich, are compelled—by law if necessary, by legislation introduced by this House if necessary—to see to it that the Venter Report is put into effect. In terms of the Venter Commission Report, 280 square metres, where the land is flat, would be acceptable. In the Cape we see this. If one goes to Madras or New Delhi, one will find that lots are only 280 square metres. They call it a “ground” there.

Also, certain steep land is in fact developed for habitation. One can go to Sea Point, or to Schotschekloof in the Tafelberg constituency. One does not even have to go to Portugal or Nepal to see that land which has a drop ratio of one to ten is in fact used for housing purposes. Higher density can be achieved by having simplexes or single detached buildings on smaller pieces of land.

However, Heaven forbid that we should go into high-rise residential development. In the United States and in Europe they are actually breaking down these high-rise tenements, because it has been found, after careful study, that the psychological disturbances created by residential occupation of these high-rise tenements is harmful to adults and also to children. I think it is absolutely essential that we should follow that very carefully indeed.

I now want to deal with the question that the best agricultural land happens to be suitable for housing purposes. I see no reason why certain types of agricultural land should not be taken over for housing. Near Effingham estate, at Avoca, there is ample agricultural land. The sugar cane that is grown there could easily be grown in Pongola or elsewhere. There is therefore no reason why such land should not be taken up. We know that even in Tongaat there is substantial land available within a highly developed region which ought to be made available for housing purposes.

The hon the Minister cannot say that he has no control over that land. He is part of the Government of this country. He must go to his associates in the organs of government and demand that that land be made available. Merely lamenting the Group Areas Act and its ill effect in this Chamber in this report is not adequate. He can open those doors. He has access to his colleagues. I am warning him now that he must not tell us that the Group Areas Act makes it impossible. If he puts up the fight, he can get the land. He has the capacity to put up that fight. I do not need to remind hon members that it is because I knew he had the capacity to put up the fight that I pushed him into putting up a fight for Cato Manor, and we got part of Cato Manor. Let us therefore push him into putting up a fight for getting more land for our people.

The municipalities—and here again I say that if necessary, we must legislate—have certain bylaws which are archaic. Those by-laws were made for a time when South Africa was under colonial rule and the White people made those rules for First World conditions. It is unreasonable that the floor-space index in Durban is only 40%. In the Cape it appears to be more. In other parts of the world one can actually use an FSI of 75%. In these days when labour is expensive and sometimes even difficult, people cannot afford large gardens in any case. As long as there is reasonable space between the houses for movement of air and access to some light, I can see no reason at all why the FSI should be as low as it is in Durban.

In regard to the Urban Foundation I had the honour, when I was a director of the Urban Foundation, actually to suggest the formation of a public utility company. Inova Homes in Durban was established and a similar utility company in the Transvaal as well. I am glad that the hon the Minister has recognized the efficacy of the work of the Urban Foundation and that at no personal profit. They do not make any profit as they take no director’s fees. They do not have hidden profits under the table, unlike one so-called utility company which paid R90 000 to the son of one Solidarity member, the hon member for Central Rand.

The Urban Foundation does not pay undeserved money to anyone. They spend money economically in helping people to get houses at afford able rates. Here is an agency that will actually take away a great deal of the burden from the shoulders of this hon Minister and those of his department. All that he has to do is to make land available at reasonable prices. The land is available in Lenasia and there is no reason why the experience of Brookdale should not be transferred to Lenasia and to other areas where the people are desperate to obtain the necessary housing at prices which they can afford, without killing them.

I want to say to the hon the Minister that we are grateful that the ceiling was increased from R45 000 to R65 000 in respect of first-time buyer subsidies, but already inflation has caught up with that and R65 000 is too low. The hon the Minister should put pressure upon the hon the Minister of Finance to get him to agree to raising that limit to R85 000. One cannot today buy a three-bedroomed house for less than R85 000 for the middle class and lower middle class. The people in those classes must not be made to suffer. They are also our people. They are also people who need housing.

In Chatsworth, as a result of “verneukery”, certain shopping sites were given to certain people. A Mr Vally bought one shopping site. He paid for it and quite properly the Housing Development Board allowed him to become the legal tenant at the current market-related rental, which is fine. There was another man called Pillay—and I must tell hon members immediately I do not like that man, I despise him—whose position was identical to that of Mr Vally. Why should the department treat one with the good eye and the other with the bad eye? Is this simply because Vally may be a good man and the other man may be somebody whom I do not like? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in my contribution to the debate of my colleague, the hon the Minister of Housing, I want to touch on a few aspects of the report. It is true that by the time the rental formula was introduced in 1986, it was already becoming outdated in terms of inflation. In fact the formula, when used by local authorities, was found to result in problems in certain categories. I am glad that by the time we joined the Ministers’ Council, the matter was being resolved.

I believe the time will come in South Africa to seriously look at this formula with regard to the percentage that the individual will have to pay for his home. Nobody has noticed this issue and I issue a warning here, since the Government is already privatising most of its functions. In the old days one got subsidies for many of these Government services. On that basis it was decided that 25% of a man’s income should be sufficient. If transport, for example, is privatised it does not mean it will be cheap.

The index of the cost, which the Port Elizabeth University normally calculates, will have to be revised as all these services which are going to be privatised, will have an effect on the primary household level. I believe that we need to look at this formula again. I issue the warning that these indexes are worked out by experts who take into account what the current issue was in 1985 and 1986. Starting now will be transport, the Post Office and other services. These are all going to add on to the cost.

In Hong Kong the percentage of a man’s income is about 15%. What happens there is that one pays for most of the other services which are not subsidised. This is what this Government is coming to. I cannot see that most of our families who are earning up to even R800—that was the old level—would be able to get affordable housing. We may have to start with what the hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister have foreseen, namely a self-help injection as well as other types of assistance.

There is another matter which I want to touch on, namely township proclamation. When I was Minister of Housing, I inherited some townships in the Transvaal. Some of them were already four years old. Just the other day I went there and those townships are still not developed. The hon the Minister has a difficult job. One hears one excuse after the other, but the hon the Minister, Mr Amie Venter and myself met to discuss this. Mr Venter, of course, was the man who made these recommendations. I reminded him of section 74 (a) of the old Community Development Act, as well as section 23 of the Housing Development Act.

It was expected that these Acts would provide the Minister with the ammunition to proclaim townships as if the Surveyor-General had proclaimed them. In other words, he was given all the certificates, the plans and so on. I piloted a test case in 1985. The Administrator of the Transvaal, through the Surveyor-General, threw it back at me. It was decided that the Ministers of Housing of all Houses would have to effect certain amendments.

It is to be hoped something will come of the initiative which we have taken to amend this piece of legislation, possibly even by the end of this session of Parliament. It may not be possible, but it should be done since to all intents and purposes, my view is that Government townships are already developed. The roads, sewerage and electricity systems have already been developed. Sub-economic and economic houses have also been built. There is no way that it can go bankrupt. There is no way that the Government will let anybody down. Possibly one will have to give some kind of certificate of authority. If this is not done we, and the hon the Minister of Housing, will be in trouble.

I want to mention, in his defence, that it is not his fault. The people cannot take transfer. They cannot borrow money for additions. This bureaucracy has created many problems. It is, however, necessary. If one is a conveyancer, one will know that one needs these things when it comes to development. This is where deregulation must come in. I have said to the hon the Minister that this matter will have to be reexamined.

When I went to Italy, I spoke to the director of planning. He said to me: “If a man is in a discipline such as town planning or architecture, what is wrong with him stamping it as being the correct plan? Why must it go back through all the different departments again?” We must find a way of counteracting the delays in the development of these townships. One should not wait 9 or 10 years for a township to be proclaimed.

The next issue is one dealt with in the report. The hon the Minister has difficulty in expanding housing development. The hon member for Reservoir Hills has also referred to this. We need land for housing. It is true that the Group Areas Act was the creator of this problem. One will never be able to solve that. The other day I went to investigate agricultural land for housing for Tongaat—I see that the hon member for Tongaat is not here. I tried to resolve that so that the hon the Minister of Housing could possibly have 89 hectares of land, plus some other land, as well.

I have heard—and hon members must correct me if I am wrong—that the Department of Constitutional Development does not want to release land, because there is still 89 hectares of land which was previously agricultural land. Now it can be used for residential purposes.

It is funny how it works, because the total number of people in that area—Tongaat is an expanding area—will require double the quantity of land. It is actually increasing in price while we are fighting over whether we can have this or that piece of land.

We are still in the same situation in which we were when I left two years ago. This matter is still not being rectified. This House moved that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning should get his master plan and identify the land throughout South Africa, because projections of numbers and movement of population have been made with the help of demographic charts. It has been done scientifically. South Africa has technical experience and yet we cannot resolve this issue. This is a very big problem.

The backlog was estimated at 40 000. Hon members have heard that when the housing lists are looked at, it is estimated that fewer people need houses. However, many of them have not applied for housing, because they have become fed-up with waiting for it. As it is, their homes are over-crowded by parents and their married children. Even in a suburb nobody takes that into account. Therefore I believe that the Indian housing waiting list would be far beyond 40 000 if one looked tomorrow at who needed housing for themselves.

The last issue that I want to touch on is that the RSC has given us one indicator and that is that housing must be planned on a regional basis—we were unhappy about that—so that one does not have one local authority like Durban refusing to build any more houses because they have no land. One will then find the Minister of Housing running around from one local authority to another until somebody is prepared to do something. The RSC has given the very vital indicator that housing could be planned on a regional basis—it was discussed during the investigation—so that the population in a region could be shifted, taking into account the industrial development that takes place.

The answer is that some authority—in my opinion it must be the RSC—must take over. Besides other recommendations which I wish to make during the discussion of my Vote, I wish to recommend that housing must become part of a regional authority so that it would be able to develop a region with Government funds. [Interjections.]

I want to conclude by saying that the job of a Minister of Housing, particularly in his case and of course in mine too, because we have just started with it recently, is not an easy one. I ask this House to give the hon the Minister a fair chance. Unfortunately we are coming to the end of this session, but he has already started and we are working together to see what we can do. He is a man of vision. I know he wants starter housing and we have already discussed this issue. In my opinion we can solve some of our problems and the Government must definitely take the initiative by releasing land for housing and ignoring the Group Areas Act, because it has already given us too many problems.

Mr Chairman, I wish to assure the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture that we shall give the necessary co-operation to the hon the Minister of Housing. We are indeed already doing so. We are not sheep, however. If that hon Minister does something wrong, we shall pounce on him like a tiger. He can also expect that from us. [Interjections.]

Earlier on, I was dealing with these shops in Chatsworth and I want to explain why I said that I despise Mr Dave Pillay. I despise him for several reasons but one of them is that he took my name in vain. He said that he had had dinner with me six times and the hon member for Arena Park said that twelve times sounded better than six. In point of fact, he never had dinner with me at all, except that my client brought him to meet me at lunch-time because he was a witness in a case which was going to be heard. My client gave us both a nice lunch and I was there taking the particulars from this man, Dave Pillay. I must say that I not only ate good food and made use of all the other facilities but also charged for the consultation. [Interjections.]

It was time-consuming. [Interjections.]

It was consuming of time and consuming of his money. We do not have much time.

The hon member will recall that the Thaver Committee recommended that a man called Mac Naidoo who was a de facto businessman in the Moorton bottlestore be granted the tenancy and that the tenancy to Jivan Seebran be cancelled because Jivan Seebran was only a ghost. It was to be given to Mac Naidoo at economic rentals. Unfortunately for Mac Naidoo, he did not cooperate with the Commission so nobody even expressed any sympathy for him.

The man Pillay, however, cooperated fully with the Commission after some false starts. I would therefore say that he deserves to be given the tenancy of the shop, the business of which he actually purchased. The evidence was that he paid R30 000 to Mr Rajbansi or Jivan Seebran or somebody else for that business. That being the case, there is no justification for treating him differently from the manner in which Mr Vally was treated. I think the hon the Minister has a moral obligation to see to it that this is rectified. If it is not rectified, he will find that this tiger has claws as well as teeth.

In Wiggins, and in Cato Manor generally, the hon the Minister agreed with us some time ago—and I want him to reaffirm that agreement—that the victims of the Group Areas Act will be given first priority in the allocation of housing sites and housing units in Cato Manor. I will not let him off that undertaking and it has to be done absolutely meticulously. Only when the claims of the victims of the Group Areas Act and that of their children—within reason—have been satisfied should those lots be made available to other people. I am not a victim of the Group Areas Act, so I will not qualify.

With regard to Newlands West I want to say to the hon the Minister that we need two things done very urgently and it is up to him as the hon the Minister of Housing to see to it that the necessary steps are taken. There is a desperate urgent need for a road which will go along the northern banks of the Umgeni River through what is called Bishops Place. It will run from Parlock to Bishops Place and it will act as a second access road to Newlands West. We do not want to have the same kind of trouble that we are having with the Higginson Highway. Let that be undertaken as a matter of the greatest urgency.

Then we need a bridge connecting Reservoir Hills to Newlands West. It will have to be in the fullness of time because I realise that we cannot do this very urgently—it has to be done through the National Transport Commission. After all, these people have bought within my constituency and it is ridiculous that if I want to see my constituents in Newlands I virtually have to get a helicopter or make a 15 mile trip. This is outrageous because as the crow flies we lie within 2 kilometers of each other. I therefore ask the hon the Minister—not for my benefit but for the benefit of my constituents—that this matter be considered.

If somebody, say Munsamy, is living in Pemmary Road and his brother is living in Newlands West then it will be impossible for Munsamy to visit his brother unless he makes a 15 mile trip. In winter, of course, he need only take off his shoes and cross the river and then he will be in his brother’s home. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I would like to compliment the hon the Minister of Housing on a very edifying report, although he has not as yet produced a single house. However, I am not castigating him for that because I realise that he has been the hon the Minister of Housing for only a short period of time. I am certain that with the acumen that he has—especially in the financial field—coupled with his normal zest for this type of help to people, he will certainly deliver the goods.

Although the waiting list in Pietermaritzburg—I am talking parochially right now—reflects approximately 2 700 people, physically there are approximately 5 000 people that are in need of housing. Those who did not apply had good reason in that they felt that it was definitely a hopeless case. Since the advent of the House of Delegates not a single house has been built in Pietermaritzburg except 26 houses for the flood victims.

The population of Pietermaritzburg is as follows: 76 000 Indians, 68 000 Whites, 19 000 Blacks and 16 000 Coloureds. Indians are forced to live in outhouses and garages and have to pay exorbitant rents. There is a dire need for low-cost housing—I repeat, low-cost housing—and the hon the Minister emphasised this in his report. About 8% of the Indian population of Pietermaritzburg earn less than R150 per month, 10% earn under R250 per month, 30% earn under R450 per month, 25% earn under R650 per month, 13% earn under R800 and 10% earn under R1 000. Only 4% earn over R1 000. These figures merely reflect the incomes of those that are on the waiting list.

I have slightly modified my theme today—and I hope the hon the Minister does not take it as a swan song—and I am not going to be very hard on the hon the Minister. I am referring to Copes Folly-Dunveria. This particular land was identified on 15 June 1967 by the city engineer’s department in Pietermaritzburg. I want to quote extracts from the summary of the city engineer of Pietermaritzburg.

On 15 February 1977 the following is reported, and I quote:

On 28 March 1979 the following is reported, and I quote:

On 12 September 1980 the following is reported, and I quote:

After the House of Delegates came into being, on 19 December 1984, the following is reported, and I quote:

On 9 January 1985 the following is reported, and I quote:

On 27 March 1986 the following is reported, and I quote:

On 11 May 1987 the following is reported, and I quote:

On the 18th of the same month the following is reported, and I quote:

On 20 July 1987 the following is reported, and I quote:

On 16 October 1987 the following is reported, and I quote:

On the 30th of the same month the following is reported, and I quote:

Mr Chairman, it seems that I do not have much time, so I am going to skip many of these things. Let us look at the entry for 18 March:

What year is that?

1988. I quote further:

There is a lot more I could say, but it seems that my time, like the hon the Minister’s time yesterday, seems to be running out and I am not going to say much more. I still want to quote the following:

It seems as though the House of Delegates was trying to avoid paying that money, and I agree with them because I feel that the City Council should not have two bites at the cherry, since after all, the House of Delegates does do the servicing and pay for it, while the City Council will reap the benefits from a rates point of view and so on. However, this seemed to be holding up the whole works. I do not know if much progress has been made, but it is not necessary to continue this procrastination which has resulted in a great deal of inflation, which the end-user has to pay.

The delay in providing reticulation services is costing about R400 000 per month. Whether the council or the House of Delegates has to pay it, is a matter for the hon the Minister to attend to immediately. However, the work must go on. The poor need a roof over their heads. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, housing is an important aspect of the life of any community, and as such the House of Delegates, particularly the Department of Housing, should do everything in its power to leave no stone unturned to help those communities that are under their jurisdiction.

I understand that the hon the Minister has the role of financing and assisting local authorities and individuals in the provision of housing, as he so ably says in this report. However, I am concerned at the level at which we are trying to assist people in certain income categories. I say this because those who earn up to R1 000 per month are the ones being assisted, and in present circumstances, the price of everything has gone up—food, milk, butter, cheese—everything has gone up. The petrol price has also gone up, and this level of income should also go up, since a person earning up to R1 500 today is finding it extremely difficult even to have a house of his own. I think the department should raise that level to at least R1 500. In this way we could be able to assist those who really need to be assisted.

The other important aspect which was touched upon by the hon member Mr Abram is the first time home-owner. At the moment the State subsidises a house of R40 000. This level, too, should be raised. It is impossible to buy a house for R40 000—even for R65 000 including land value.

It is very difficult. As a property consultant myself I can tell hon members that it is very difficult to get a three-bedroomed house for that price. Therefore as everything else goes up, this limit should also go up. I leave this recommendation in the hon the Minister’s good hands with the view that the necessary recommendations could be made so that these levels could be raised.

In his report the hon the Minister mentions school boundaries and where during heavy storms extensive damage has been done to the houses below the school boundary. Here I must mention that for the last 25 years we have been experiencing tremendous problems with first the Department of Public Works and—now the Department of Housing. During heavy storms damage is caused because of the water flowing off from the school boundary. That is because of inadequate drainage around the school boundary.

You can’t blame the hon the Minister. That is bad planning.

I will concede to the hon member for Lenasia Central that it is bad planning, but I think that the department should do something to alleviate the problem. When this does happen the reason given is that it is an act of God. Those people who are most unfortunate and have not taken out household insurance policies, are inconvenienced by this kind of damage. I would also further recommend that the department should be held responsible to compensate the householders for such damage caused to residents living in those areas because of the bad planning of the schools.

Having recently met with the Durban Municipality, with the city engineer’s department and with the town clerk under the able leadership of the hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, we have been able to establish that there has not been very good liaison between the city engineer’s department and the House of Delegates’ engineering department.

I think this relationship has to be improved and when such construction is done, the department should liaise with the local authority. I do not think the department should feel that because it falls under the wing of the Government it is supreme and can therefore neglect the local authority. Local authorities should be consulted and in such circumstances engineering services should work in liaison with the local authorities. Only then can we see some relief and good services being provided where schools are concerned.

I also observe that repairs, renovations and minor works are carried out at schools. Earlier on in the education debate I pointed out a number of schools which have not been attended to for over 20 years. I think that query should fall directly on the lap of the hon the Minister of Housing.

I ask him also to consider some of the old schools. Rather renovate and make additions to the schools than build new schools and find half the classrooms empty. If the hon the Minister could look into this matter, I would appreciate it very much.

Finally, during the short time since the hon the Minister has taken over this portfolio—since 22 March as he says in this report—he has done a good job. I have also noticed that when we need to meet with the department or write to the department, the response is much quicker than it used to be.

No, that is not true.

The hon member for Cavendish always complained that when we wrote to the department, the letters were not even acknowledged. I am talking about the department, not the hon the Minister. I must concede that the department now at least sends us an acknowledgement when we write to them, and replies are also more quickly forthcoming. As far as the hon the Minister is concerned, I have had few dealings with him, but I do have dealings with the department.

I only hope that the provision of housing, particularly for those who cannot afford it, can be speeded up and take place more quickly than at present. Operation 25 000 has now died down. I only hope the new hon Minister will create some new operations so that we can work towards those targets.

Mr Chairman, it gives me great pleasure to participate in this debate, and I am grateful for the opportunity afforded to me.

One of the major factors that encouraged participation in the tricameral system was the fact that finance would be made available for a largely deprived community and that the House of Delegates would enforce the provision of suitable services, amenities, facilities, etc, to the people to whom these things had been denied in the past. It appears however that a further backlog has been created, instead of the wrongs of the past being addressed. This is a serious shortcoming and casts doubt on continued participation in the tricameral system and the credibility of the House of Delegates.

The first Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture, the present hon Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, on a visit to the towns of my constituency, promised to provide adequate housing, recreational and educational facilities. These visits were followed by visits from the former Minister of Housing, the hon member for Arena Park, and on these visits the people of the towns pointed out the lack of housing facilities, recreational and educational facilities and services. Despite a period of four and a half years passing by, little, if anything at all, has been realised. The voters find this very disturbing. This places a serious question-mark over the tricameral system and our continued participation.

In the Transvaal towns the Indian residential areas are overcrowded. Demands for extensions have met with negative reaction because of a lack of sufficient land for expansion. This is a matter of serious concern, as insufficient land and overcrowding has a number of detrimental consequences, such as providing a fertile breeding ground for crime, violence, slums and other forms of social abuse. The Group Areas Act prevents expansion, and therefore that Act must be abolished forthwith.

In Trichardt the Indian community is still without housing facilities, due to group areas restrictions. The same can be said for Bronkhorstspruit. The problem facing the State is compounded by the fact that it has to address the dogmatic and backward attitude of municipalities controlled by the CP. These municipalities are exploiting the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act to the disadvantage of people of colour. I appreciate that the hon the Minister of Law and Order has not attempted to prosecute such transgressors, but this is not the answer. The answer lies in the the complete repeal of the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act as well as the Population Registration Act.

I would like to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to a few pressing matters in the Eastern Transvaal constituency. The Valencia Park Management Committee has submitted proposals on the layout of economic and sub-economic housing units. Any further delay in finalising the proposals would make home-ownership difficult and will certainly mean higher prices and smaller units. The hon the Minister is requested to deal with Valencia Park on an ad hoc basis and instruct the council to proceed immediately by calling for tenders.

I call upon the hon the Minister to proceed with the sale of the remaining Indian shopping plazas. They are in Bronkhorstspruit, Bethal and Heidelberg. I want to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to numerous attempts by the respective traders’ associations who cannot raise loans in these rather difficult times, because they do not own the stores. This is an opportunity for the hon the Minister to realize funds for some pressing projects.

Promises were made with regard to funds for a swimming pool in Middelburg by the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. I am now saddled with problems. I am being pressurised to deliver the goods. I appeal to the hon the Minister to look into this particular aspect carefully. Pledges made in the past should be honoured.

I now come to the plight of the residents of Trichardt. The town is near a Sasol complex. Our people are living in congested conditions, with no room for extension. Employment opportunities cannot be taken up as there is no accommodation whatsoever. Ministerial visits have been made, but to this day there has been no formal investigation as to the identification of an area for the people living there. The declaration of a free settlement area may also be an option although I am pessimistic about the local platteland council ever supporting this concept.

The problem that has been lingering in Balfour for years, is the issue of finalising the price of erven in Extension 1.

The Indian area of Bronkhorstspruit has been identified as an area that has growth potential and holds tremendous opportunities for Indian industries and employment. At present directors and other workers travel here daily from Laudium, Midrand and other Johannesburg areas. The local resident Indian families have been sandwiched together in blocks of flats for the past 20 years. I call upon the hon the Minister to appoint a special team, consisting of our planners and regional officers, with the directive to prepare a report with a view to reaching a conclusion on this situation. This should occur without the usual red tape involved. The hon the Minister is reminded that in this regard promises were also made by the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. The hon the Minister is invited to visit the problem area at any time that is convenient for him.

Mr Chairman, I would like to convey my appreciation to the Administration: House of Delegates, especially the Department of Housing, for erecting the R2 million school in Malakazi. The unfortunate part of the R2 million that was spent is that this school will be a white elephant, because this department failed to look at Malakazi with clear sight. Some time in the past the present hon Minister of Local Government and Agriculture visited my area and promised the people of Malakazi that he had R50 million to spend there, but that promise had not been realised. At present we have a new Minister who has great visions. He is a man with ability and I hope and pray that his vision is fulfilled.

The people of Isipingo have been suffering tremendous hardships. Houses were built there in 1978. Up to this day they are still paying occupational rent. I have been pursuing this matter since I joined the SAIC. It is with deep regret that I have to announce here this afternoon that I will not be standing in the coming elections, because I have failed to keep my promise to my people. I blame the House of Delegates and the administration for this failure. At that time I had promised my people that the prices of homes would be finalised. Up to this day those prices have not been finalised. These people are going through hardship. What occupational rent are they paying? It is not 11% or 12%. These people went and bought homes, because they were promised it would cost no more than R17 000. After 10 years the occupational rent has just escalated. What about these poor people?

It is a sad day for me to announce that I will not be standing in any election, because I could not keep my promise to those people. I may be retiring from politics, but I blame the House of Delegates for that. Yesterday I told hon members during the Education and Culture Vote that we must adapt or die. I believe that we must learn to adapt. Housing should be controlled by one ministry. If there is one ministry, money will be allocated proportionately.

Nizzie, has Chris Heunis influenced you?

No, he has not. However, while we are speaking about the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, I just want to say that it is sad to see an hon Minister of his stature leaving Parliament. We are definitely going to move 10 years backwards if he leaves. What has happened to him, is sad. He was the man who was responsible for bringing us here. It is really sad that he is leaving. It is sad, but I know that I have failed my community, the people of Isipingo, especially as far as housing is concerned. I once more wish to reiterate that I blame the House of Delegates for this.

I now come to Clairwood. I moved a private member’s motion last year. It took 30 years to call for a group areas hearing and I wish to thank the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning for this. The hearing was heard and a certain decision was made. The Durban City Council is failing to carry out that decision.

Clairwood is being neglected day by day. It is notmy constituency, but thank God the man who represented Clairwood for 51 days, and who robbed the taxpayer of almost half a million rand, has announced that he will not be standing in the coming elections! [Interjections.] I hope that my party will look for a vibrant candidate to improve the situation in Clairwood.

I would like the hon the Minister of Housing to pursue the matter in Clairwood. He should speak to the Free Settlement Board and ensure that that area becomes a free settlement area, because the different communities—Whites, Blacks, Indians and Coloureds—have lived there side by side for the last 107 years. It was one big family. The infrastructure is there in Clairwood. We have our religious sites there. We have the mosques, the churches and the temples. We have the graveyards, the burial facilities and the schools. I want the hon the Minister to pursue the Durban City Council to proclaim Clairwood an open area. With these final words, I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chairman, I want to start by referring to the last speaker, the hon member for Isipingo. I hope that he will, after some reflection, change his decision. I think that in public work, and particularly in the kind of work that we are engaged in, it is not always possible to deliver the goods on time. There are other factors involved. If the hon member has actually failed his people, I can understand his decision. However, if there are factors beyond this member’s control and he has really tried his best, I think that he should reconsider.

I would not want to apportion blame on anybody else, but I have just been speaking to the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs. I have had telephone calls at home from people who have said that they have bought houses which the local authority had built via agents. The agents wanted certain deposits, which they had paid. Now they are told that those deposits are not enough and that they must go and find some more money.

If that is so and if the matter can be resolved by the local authority, the agent and the people, we shall certainly set the machinery in motion. The hon the Deputy Minister knows something about it. I called him and asked him to draw up the documents and I want to assure the hon member that the Deputy Minister and the officials will try their level best to set in motion machinery to re-investigate this matter with a view to bringing relief to those people. I want to give the hon member that assurance.

I believe we are all agreed on the question of subsidies. If the subsidy scheme which has now been accepted by the House of Assembly can be introduced in the House of Delegates and elsewhere it is going to make a contribution because the cost of houses do not differ on the basis of colour or race. What is more, if anybody really needed a subsidy with regard to the cost of land, it would be us, because we pay prices that are totally disproportionate in relation to the market.

In my opinion the hon member for Allandale should move a resolution in Pietermaritzburg to change the name of Copes Folly. I think we shall have problems there as long as we keep the word “folly”. [Interjections.] It was a folly when he looked at it in the first place, it was a folly when we bought it and it is folly now that nothing is happening. He should therefore call it something else and maybe things will start moving then. However, I shall investigate the matter on his behalf and respond directly to him and advise him on what the position is.

I want to ask hon members present here why they are not submitting their problems directly to the ministry and following them up.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister a question? Till last week I repeatedly wrote but nobody considered my letters.

I still ask hon members to submit their problems to the ministry.

You must write again!

There are twelve months between these budget speeches and if the matter is brought to the attention of the department without their responding to it, it is the duty of the hon Ministers here to investigate what is going wrong. Even if the rate of success is 25% better than the kind of answers hon members are getting at the moment, we are moving forward. I appeal to hon members to report to us if they do not get a response to their letters. We shall follow it up. This is one way of getting things moving. I want to co-operate with all hon members and I ask them please to respond positively to my plea.

It is a pity that the hon member Mr Abram is not here, because he was in fact complimenting me without knowing it. He talked about a new approach to housing and referred to the Urban Foundation. We have established that the Urban Foundation is doing work that suits a particular section of our community. A similar category of building development is present in the Transvaal. All we have to do is to transform this kind of work over a wider area.

The department must seriously consider making it possible for members of the Housing Committee across party lines to visit these areas in order to see for themselves what is happening. We do not want anyone in particular to advise people. In most of these areas there are management committees and local affairs committees. These people should act as a liaison between the local authority and the community. The local authority is also the machinery which is available for liaising with us on housing.

I want to tell hon members who markets the homes at Brookdale. The building activity is the agent. People see with their own eyes how husband, wife and children are building. They see others coming across and giving a hand. That is putting the message across. I trust hon members understand what I am saying. It is worthwhile going to Brookdale and standing on one of the higher points just to see what is going on.

The people in that group, given the kind of starting facilities such as windows, cement, tiles, timber and everything else available within reach of the housing sites, have been spurred on to get their elbows greased and introduce sweat equity, as we call it, from which they will profit immensely. They will experience the pride of having planned and built their own homes with their own hands and with the assistance of their children and other members of their family. I believe that the hon member Mr Abram, in acknowledging that, should also accept the challenge in Benoni and introduce this system there. Villa Lisa is moving forward and I am sure that the officials present here have made a note of the thousand families who want economic housing. That matter must be attended to, as must the needs of the people in the lower income group.

With regard to Hennenman in the Free State, I want to say that I have taken note of that and we will look at this matter at the earliest opportunity.

As far as Shallcross is concerned, I know that the hon member’s problems are also big, but what I said earlier applies equally to that hon member. There is no better way of getting something moving than by using the twelve months between debates on housing to probe the department and to see if one cannot make certain demands on them to ensure that work is in fact taking place. At Savanna Park outside Shallcross a township has been planned and has been developed over the past five or six years. It has run into problems but I have been told that those problems will be resolved shortly and hopefully we can then make those sites available to the people. One thing that I must concede from my experience gained over a very short period of time, is that registration of a township is delayed by the existence of rights on properties which comprise a township…

Consolidation?

Yes. What is also apparent today is that housing schemes are put up with funds made available by this administration, and I am sure it applies to others too. The nature of the services must be such that they also provide for increasing families. In other words, the reticulation of water, sewers, power, etc must provide for reasonable increases. Local authorities, after assuming the right to administer a township, do not want to find themselves in the position in a few years’ time where they have to upgrade these services. They are therefore demanding services with a capacity far in excess of the immediate needs of those townships. All this adds to the cost of servicing land and this must be borne ultimately by the individual to whom the site is allocated. It is very important that we know about this.

As far as the hon member for Reservoir Hills is concerned, I have made a note of his suggestion concerning a road and a bridge. I hope that by the time the elections take place there will be water coming down the river and his party will give him a ferry with which to cross it. [Interjections.] We will suggest that somebody lends him one if necessary.

Mamba Valley! [Interjections.]

The point made by the hon member for Reservoir Hills has been taken and I think the Deputy Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture will find a reasonable solution. Local authorities are charged with the responsibility of providing homes and if they do not respond positively and come up with plans and make use of the money made available, then something should be done to avoid the delays and the consequent price increases.

In so far as high-rise buildings are concerned, we spoke to the representatives of the sugar association. In the Tongaat-Phoenix area they are the people who have to part with land which is presently being used for growing cane. This raw material goes to the mill in Phoenix which provides employment for our people. They said that they realised that there was nothing they could do about having to part with the land. They said, however, that surely the planners could make better use of the land they were getting.

I think that on a steep piece of land one might be able to build at most a three-storeyed building, but the approaches could be from different angles so that one would not have to climb up two flights of stairs. These things were discussed during the course of that meeting and I am prepared to look at the problems.

I think we also need to make optimum use of land that is given to us. At the moment there is serious concern in a different committee with regard to the fact that agricultural land is being taken up for housing. I agree with the hon member for Reservoir Hills that if the land in question is marginal land or land sandwiched between housing estates, it would be easy and cheap to provide services, and it would have to be used in any event. However, I am talking about when one sets one’s sights on thousands of acres of valuable farming land.

More particularly here in Natal on the North Coast we can only move onto land used for sugar plantations. At the same time it could very well affect an industry which provides a tremendous amount of employment for many people across the colour line. Therefore we must try to examine every possibility that can help to make the best use of land in order to give homes to our people. In a way that can, particularly in regard to low-cost housing, reduce rentals for people in the lower income group. I think the challenge is worthwhile addressing.

As far as Cato Manor is concerned, I want to say quite loudly—I am grateful for the support of hon members of this House—that in fact there is an understanding that when Cato Manor is developed the houses will be made available, firstly, to the people who are living in that area, but, secondly, to the families of those who were moved out of there to Chatsworth, Merebank and elsewhere. If there was anybody in such a family who qualified for housing, they would be given preference. I think we need to remind ourselves and our department of that, so that when planning is done, sight will not be lost of that undertaking and understanding.

They are taking too long.

I also believe that demands that have been made on that portion of Cato Manor that has been released to us for a training hospital and other educational institutions planned for that area are certainly disproportionate to the acreage of land that is available. That is why it is important that Randgebied—which was part of the area occupied by the Indian community and which even at the moment has not been touched for White housing—should be handed over for Indian housing to be part of the overall Cato Manor development to compensate for the loss of land for institutional purposes.

I want to advise hon members—and I also trust that hon members will convey this to the members of the management committees in the areas where housing programmes are being pursued—that one of the difficulties we are experiencing and which has been pointed out to me by our hon Deputy Minister of Housing on a number of occasions is that adequate attention is not being paid inasfar as low-cost housing is concerned. Low-cost housing is provided for people earning less than R1 000 per month. In terms of a salary R1 000 might not be very low, but as has been explained by hon members here, people in that category are also in need of assistance when it comes to housing. Members of the local affairs committees and the management committees must take some interest not only in businessmen but also in the people who are not better off economically and are in the lower income group. In planning one should contribute towards satisfying all these people. In a matter of three weeks I have received complaints from people in the lower income group that they are not being catered for and that their problems are not being attended to. Often they are forced to move into homes which are not entirely satisfactory. We must all take the blame for that, because we have not shown an interest in their needs and requirements.

For example in Lenasia!

Wherever it is, let us give equal attention to the needs of every segment of our society. Let us give equal treatment to the needs of the workers and those of the businessmen and then the people in our constituencies will respect us as parliamentary representatives, because we are working for the entire community. [Time expired.]

Debate interrupted.