Mr Chairman, to begin with, allow me to address a word of congratulation to the department with reference to two special events that took place last year. I am referring firstly to the youth culture festival, which was presented in Pretoria and which I think was a great success. It was of such high quality that consideration could be given to making it an annual or biennial event.

Secondly, I want to refer to the meeting which the department arranged for the study groups of all political parties and at which the activities of the department were explained to us in an extremely professional manner. It was both interesting and instructive. We express our gratitude to the hon the Minister, the Superintendent-General and everyone who played a part in this.

To begin with this afternoon, I once again want to refer briefly to the CP’s education policy. This education policy, like that of every other political party in this House, emanates from its constitutional solution for South Africa. Those who advocate a unitary state, like the NP and the DP, as well as the LP in the House of Representatives, give effect to their constitutional policy in one education system for South Africa. One Parliament, in which Whites, Coloureds and Indians are accommodated on the basis of equal privileges and equal opportunities, logically also demands one education system—likewise with equal privileges and equal opportunities.

The CP is the only political party in this House which envisages something entirely different for South Africa. The CP believes that only one long-term solution exists for South Africa, namely the division of the country into separate, independent, autonomous states. We believe it is the right of every people to decide for itself, without any intervention, with regard to every facet of its existence. We find the so-called relative right to self-determination of our people, as advocated by the Government in its unitary state, inadequate and unacceptable. We say that relative self-determination is not real self-determination. Relative self-determination ultimately leads to the loss of political power, together with the loss of sovereignty in respect of every facet of the existence of one’s people—including its education. Any people that thinks it can share the political power in the country with a people or peoples more numerous than itself, and retain its education as an own affair in the long term, is sorely mistaken.

Own education presupposes that the people concerned wants to have the political power over its members in its own hands. For this very reason the CP is the only political party that acknowledges and respects the right of the Whites to determine their own education system. All the other political parties in the House, including the Government, voice the standpoint of shared authority in conjunction with people of colour in respect of White education. At the same time the CP is also the only political party that respects the right of every other self-respecting people to work out an education system of its own for itself in accordance with its own nature and requirements.

Unfortunately, I do not have the time this afternoon to go into our policy in detail but I should like to present it to hon members fully, as it appears in our policy document, because there are certain wilful hon members who do not take the trouble to obtain it and who then make all sorts of distorted statements about it. I quote:

1. 1. The party acknowledges and respects (a) the right of Whites to determine their own educational system with the retention of the principles of Christian national education and, in particular, mother-tongue education; (b) the right of every other nation to devise its own educational system.
2. 2. Accordingly, it is the party’s standpoint that each nation’s educational authority, educational structure, provision of education and educational institutions up to tertiary level, should be developed on the basis of an own responsibility and of separateness. Mingling in the formal, informal and non-formal education is not acceptable.
3. 3. The following objectives will be pursued: (a) to provide the highest standard of tuition and instruction, with due consideration being given to each person’s freedom to choose an occupation, each person’s aptitudes and skills, the labour requirements of the country’s economy; (b) to maintain and to extend the involvement and say of parents in education; (c) to further the involvement of teachers in all aspects of the education of children; and (d) to protect and to enhance the professional status of teachers and lecturers.
4. 4. The party will strive for interstate co-operation in the educational field, particularly with a view to the setting of educational standards.

I shall leave it at that.

I also want to take the opportunity this afternoon to say something about teacher training. Great success has already been achieved by certain churches, the business sector, universities and left-wing political groupings in integrating White private schools, technikons and universities. A great onslaught is presently being planned to achieve the same with regard to teachers’ training colleges.

I want to focus hon members’ attention on the situation with regard to private schools under the control of the department. Private schools at present have more than 107 000 pupils. Almost 15 000 of these, that is to say, 13,6%, are people of colour. In other words, approximately one tenth of the White school population is already sitting in mixed schools. The Government did not have the courage to oppose this, and gave in step by step to the demands that were made in this regard. As early as the late seventies certain churches began to exert pressure on the Government to allow them to open their private schools.

The Government defended themselves with the argument that this would result in the contravention of certain laws, including, inter alia, the Group Areas Act. Despite the Government’s opposition, however, the churches began to admit Black pupils to private schools. The laws with which the Government had threatened, were not applied. The upshot of the matter was that it was decided to allow exceptions “on merit” and that the provincial authorities would issue permits for this purpose.

The private schools ignored the permit system and as a result of its weakness, the Government had to retreat even further in this regard. A quota system subsequently replaced the permit system. White private schools were then able to admit a certain percentage of Black pupils. Once again the private schools ignored the Government. In the Transvaal the Roman Catholic Church refused to accept that quota system. The Government was so desperate at that stage that through the then Minister of National Education, Dr Gerrit Viljoen—I am pleased that the hon the Minister is here this afternoon—it was willing to relinquish all control, just as long as this would not cause political embarrassment to the Government in public.

In a report of the South African Institute of Race Relations, entitled Race against the Ratios, the author boasts about the fact that the strategy of the left wing was so successful that the retreating NP Government was prepared to throw in the towel. I quote:

Then came the final surrender. In 1986 the hon the Minister of Education and Culture announced that a new subsidy formula was to apply to private schools. All pupils, and not just Whites, would henceforth be subsidised out of the White education budget. The naïve condition attached to this was that those schools that did not limit the admission of Black pupils would forfeit their registration and would eventually be closed. Ultimately nothing became of this condition.

This was a radical turn-around in policy. Not only was the Government prepared henceforth to allow integrated private schools, but they were now even willing to subsidise these racially integrated schools out of the education budget of the Whites.

Precisely the same strategy was followed with regard to universities. First a permit system was implemented. Some universities ignored it and the Government turned a blind eye to this. In 1983 the permit system was replaced by the quota system. When the universities also spoke out against this, it was once again the then Minister of National Education, the present hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid, who made a concession by announcing that the quota system was not a law of the Medes and Persians, and that it would therefore not be enforced. The Government would, however, be grateful if a permit system were to apply in the case of certain courses. With hat in hand, the Government relinquished this condition in 1986 as well.

The concessions made by this Government since the acceptance of its power-sharing policy in the field of education read like the sorry story of a weakling who buckled step by step under the pressure. It was blackmailed and it did not have the courage to resist. It was intimidated, its laws were publicly ignored, and it sounded the retreat every time.

Insofar as technikons are concerned, I want to focus attention on an important component of pressure on the Government towards integration, namely the business sector. In 1982 the President of Assocom, Mr Issy Pinshaw, who at that stage was also an office-bearer of the NP according to this document from which I have quoted, appealed for integrated training at technikons. He was supported by the Chairman of Barlow Rand.

At that stage the Government was already in the power of the country’s business sector to such an extent that they replied in the form of a White Paper in which it was stated that the policy was that the various population groups should be trained at separate institutions as far as possible. Of course, these qualifying words “as far as possible” were ultimately a licence for the unqualified opening of all White technikons in South Africa.

I want to ask hon members, including those hon members within the NP who still subscribe to separate education, to read through this report of the SAIRR very thoroughly. If they do not want to have their eyes opened by the CP, then perhaps this report, which comes from an extreme left-wing source, will do so.

A strategy was devised to integrate education in South Africa, and that plan has succeeded to such an extent that the radical left-wing in politics is rejoicing about it today. They have largely achieved their objectives. The NP has trodden a path of concession after concession, a path of retreat and of ultimate surrender.

What practical realities has this policy of concession brought about in a so-called own affairs education department for Whites? Approximately 10% of the total White school population of a little over one million is today sitting in mixed State-subsidised private schools. Moreover, 12,2% of the students at White technikons are people of colour.

The percentage of non-White students at so-called White universities, including Unisa, has grown from 1987’s figure of approximately 26% to 28,5% at present. If Unisa is excluded, the percentage for residential universities is 11,5. The percentage at individual universities, such as the University of Natal, there are already 30,5, and 22,2 at the University of Cape Town.

If subsidies alone are taken into account, and all contributions to universities and technikons in respect of new capital works, interest and the redemption of existing projects are not taken into account, an amount of R4 704 000 in respect of private schools, R23 852 000 in respect of technikons, and R279 129 000 in respect of universities, is presently being spent on non-Whites out of the so-called White education budget—a total of over R307 million. It is increasing every year because in 1987 it was approximately R214 million.

Does this Government not want to open its eyes to the realities with which we are faced in South Africa? Will this hon Minister not simply take cognisance of a recommendation of a commission of enquiry into the disturbances at the University of Durban-Westville which was released on 28 April this year? The Natal Mercury of 29 April reported the following, inter alia, in this regard:

A little further on they said the following:

These are the realities in South Africa, which must also be taken into account with regard to an education policy for this country.

What I find alarming, and this is precisely what I want to focus attention on this afternoon, is the fact that precisely the same strategy that was followed with great success in the integration process at private schools, technikons and universities, is now being planned for teacher training. I have heard that a new Act with regard to teacher training may possibly be introduced later, and I want to issue a timely warning that the Government will not give up this last bastion of White education.

I have also heard that there is a willingness in Afrikaner teaching circles to make a concession insofar as English-language teachers’ training colleges are concerned, just as long as it does not apply to Afrikaans colleges. As far as the CP is concerned, we are opposed to the opening of any teachers’ colleges under the control of this department.

Firstly we must guard against placing teachers’ training colleges under the control of universities. If this were to be done under the present circumstances of fully integrated universities, this would also of necessity result in mixed teachers’ training colleges. There is no reason to do this. The training that is provided at colleges, is of an outstanding quality. Some of the best teachers I know received their training at such colleges. I cannot conceive of any more favourable circumstances for the moulding of a teacher than the circumstances at a teachers’ training college.

Secondly, I want to warn the Government against affording so much autonomy to college councils that they ultimately tread the same path as universities and technikons. It is a fact that the enemies of separate teacher training view the limited autonomy of teachers’ training colleges as one of the major obstacles to ultimately integrating them.

Thirdly, I want to issue a warning to the Government that it must ensure that it does not end up in a position in which the business sector determines education policy at teachers’ training colleges. It is a fact that for financial reasons, the business sector obtained such strong representation on technikon councils that they were ultimately also able to determine the policy of those institutions. It is an unhealthy situation that one sector, regardless of how important it may be to the country, viewed as a whole, should play a decisive role in a field which often merely serves as a means to an end for it, namely the making of money. Everyone in South Africa is aware of the fact that the Government is experiencing a shortage of money with which to implement its policy of power-sharing, and therefore also its policy pertaining to the redistribution of wealth. This embarrassment, and the associated weakness of the Government, will in future be exploited to the full in order to integrate South Africa’s education even further. Attempts will be made by way of financial pressure from the left wing of the business sector to exert a greater influence on the education policy of the Government. Only a strong Government will be able to withstand that pressure. The NP has proved that it is not able to do so.

South Africa must also take cognisance, in the field of education, of the fact that the CP is the only political party which is in a position to withstand pressure. The CP is the only party that will not permit itself to be forced into a situation in which it is dictated to by outside bodies or persons insofar as its education policy is concerned. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I think the hon member for Brits has talked himself completely out of the history books as far as education is concerned. I think that teachers, as I know them, are able to read, evaluate and understand the principal Act of 1969 and the Education Affairs Act of 1988 for themselves and therefore know what is going on in White education in South Africa. I therefore want both the hon member for Brits’s speech and what I want to spell out this afternoon as being the NP’s standpoint in South Africa weighed up against those two Acts.

In the overall history of education in South Africa, education has legally and organisationally never been better structured, from an educational point of view, than at the present moment. Furthermore, with the passing of the cultural legislation, which will be dealt with in the course of this week, we are rounding off this situation completely. With the publication of the Education Affairs Act, together with the regulations which will hopefully be introduced in the course of this year, we have rounded off and completed the entire system. Also as far as staff are concerned—in other words the people who man the structure—never before in history have we been better equipped for the task that has been worked out in this programme, namely for providing the answer to the problem of White education in South Africa.

Anyone who accuses the present-day Government of advocating integrated education or a single education department, is not only expressing his mistrust, but is also insulting the entire group of provincial directors of education who worked together and acted in an advisory capacity in respect of the formulation of the policy we have here. Such a person is expressing his mistrust of our regional directors who implement this educational legislation in every region and who jealously guard this process.

Such a person is also expressing his mistrust of the group of superintendents who, on a daily basis, ensures that this legislation is implemented in its schools. Such a person is also expressing his mistrust of the ability of the principal of a school, in his management council, to ensure, on a daily basis, that he is functioning within the ambit of the regulations of this department. He is also telling a parental community that the CP will not allow people to think for themselves at grassroots level, but that a more senior person will do the thinking and that decisions will be forced on them, irrespective of the prevailing circumstances. I commend the NP in the person of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture who, in the mere five years at his disposal, initiated the present-day educational structure, promoted teamwork, increased enthusiasm and a zest for work and established White education throughout the country as one of the most refined education systems in the world.

At a congress of the Educational Association of South Africa on 11 January 1989 this hon the Minister of ours laid down the fixed pattern and underlying philosophy of White education of the following three-point basis. I quote:

1. 1) Die skool is ’n unieke kultuurinstelling in ’n gedifferensieerde en in vele opsigte gespesialiseerde samelewing.
   Die skool is as kultuuruiting die produk van kuituur- en beskawingsontwikkeling.
   Die skool het dus ’n unieke taak, naamlik om onderwys te gee aan kinders onder weg na volwassenheid in ’n besondere samelewing.
2. 2) Te midde van ’n veelheid ideologieë en lewensbeskouinge wat homself op die mens afdwing, bly die onderwys in die skole Christelik van aard.
3. 3) Dit is vir die Regering ’n hoë prioriteit dat die kulturele karakter van die skool gewaarborg sal bly. Onderwys as eie saak, eie kultuursaak, is genormeer deur die onverbreekbare verhouding tussen kuituur en opvoeding. Wie hierdie eenheidsband wil deursny deur die skool ’n soort transkulturele of metakulturele instelling te maak, sal uiteindelik nög opvoeding nòg individu dien.

This year the theme for education is “Conserve and Innovate”. Withing the compass of this ideal that is being pursued, they also spell out that in this cultural community, mentioned a moment ago in the quotation from the hon the Minister, teachers must come from the same community, because the school must link up with education at home. This is the policy of the NP, and not the distorted version which the hon member for Brits made of it. [Interjections.]

The child must identify himself with the teacher. Without this, education is meaningless. However, cultural education does not mean stagnation or a rigid traditionalism. This education must build a bridge between the present, the past and the future. It must never be revolutionary. Change cannot take place without certain things being thrown overboard. This education must retain the values and the convictions that have withstood changes and which remain part of the legacy necessary for progress from generation to generation.

At the same time the child must find a safe refuge in his heritage, and it must become an uncluttered view of the values of the other cultures around him. The cultural and ethnic communities in the RSA have a common destiny. The elements within the diversity then become a shared loyalty to a society, a country and all its people. This makes the parental home an inseparable part of the school community, and together with this the Church. Consequently the strict selection of teachers and the balance between their academic capabilities and their professional development is of the utmost importance to us.

Let me go further by saying that in this motto “Conserve and Innovate” we are saying that the child must retain his own values, things that are familiar to him, the norms and the customs with which he grew up. He must open his eyes, however, to the inescapable diversity of a vast world in which he must live. We say the teacher should gather up within himself the factual truth which applies today. This must be inculcated, entrenched and assessed. His thinking must be assessed analytically, but he must open his eyes to burgeoning knowledge, a science which implies research, which opens up new fields, which finds new truths and which creates new horizons and possibilities. This must make the child want to explore things and must imbue him with confidence. It must challenge him so that he can make his influence felt and meet the future with confidence.

Nothing can more successfully destroy a generation than fear, warnings, threats and suspicion-mongering. It there is one thing we must never do in the life of a child, in the process of educating him, it is to give him a nagging fear of tomorrow. Consequently the subject content will have to be more oriented towards problem-solving, and therefore advanced reading skills will have to be learned.

This is a maxim which education has chosen for itself, the task it has set itself for today and tomorrow. Communication skills must be entrenched and entrepreneurship encouraged—all this within the context of the child’s capabilities. Pupils should be taught to think rather than to memorise. They must be made more aware of the calling of parenthood and the Biblical foundation to the institution of marriage. The schools will have to learn to make a contribution towards expanding the national unit of which they form part, within the boundaries of the world in which they live.

“Conserve and Innovate”. For the times in which we live I can think of no more valid or greater task one can set oneself than this. It is commendable that the profession itself chose to set itself this task. That those who work with the child each day are confident that this can work, is evidence of confidence in their training, their preparation and their ability, but also in their own self-assurance that the youth of today can absorb this, make it part of themselves and apply it in their lives. We commend this finest of professions for this idealism, for this awareness of its vocation and for the result of its analysis of what the future asks of them and of their country.

If adult life that lies ahead of them and all around them threatens to throw the values and spiritual assets of life overboard, if adults around them are forever wanting to exchange the game of living and the enjoyment of life for money, and when the player, rather than being the child’s hero, rather than having his picture hung above the child’s bed, quarrels and argues about the cheque he can get at the end of a match, I wonder whether I should not ask for the main match to be postponed until tomorrow because the youth are setting the example to illustrate how the quality of team-work, the break through the advantage line, the faultless support and handling of the ball, can ensure a victory for their heimat.

I believe in young people, I believe in their abilities, perseverance and faith, and I believe in their guts when it comes to getting the better of their opponent. Every new generation has the need to seek adventure. This is renewal. Every new generation has a need for discipline and for rules. This is preservation. They make fun of those who comfort the sick. Give them and their positive “onnies” the main match on the A field and let the Curry Cup teams play the curtain-raiser. Give them the privilege of showing what adventure and entrepreneurship can bring, without payment being an issue. For them achievement is still a living thing.

I remember my early years at the teachers’ training college at Potchefstroom. The first rule of life, which still applies in my life today, was based on the motto of that teachers’ training college: “Onderwys is lewe wek”. I therefore thank the hon the Minister and his department for the fine work they have done this year. We commend them for their optimism, the quality of their work and for the inspiration with which they perform their task. We should like to convey the congratulations of this side of the House to the hon the Minister and his people for what has been achieved over the past few years in this department. We are pleased to support this Vote.

Mr Chairman, it is my intention to make a remark or two on some of the matters the hon member for Brentwood raised in his farewell speech. However, I am pleased that the hon member kept mainly to subjects of a non-party political nature. The hon member’s speech was not controversial except for a remark or two. One point I would like to raise at the beginning which will permeate this whole debate is that we must never accept, using the hon member’s words, that the child’s own world that he brings to the school is the same in every case. It is not.

It is unique and it differs considerably both in its wider philosophical view as well as in the view on education that that child brings to the school. To attempt to impose a rigidity on that child I think is educationally indefensible.

I would like on behalf of the DP to extend our thanks for the activities and efforts put in during the past year by the Superintendent-General and the four provincial Directors of Education. I think all of us have been in contact with them at some stage or another about the problems that arise in education. We found them co-operative and helpful in all cases.

Here I have got somewhat of a problem with the hon member for Brentwood in attempting to link the criticism made of the hon the Minister and the NP’s policy to the officials in any way. I believe that these officials together with the many thousands of teachers throughout South Africa will carry on their task for the good of education in this country whichever government is in power.

That is an important point to make because the NP will not be in power for ever. They already have been in power for far too long. [Interjections.] The important thing is that we realise what a very real sense of stability there is in the officials and particularly the teachers who are educating the children of this country and will continue to do so.

On behalf of the DP I would also like to extend to those senior members of the Federal Council who are here today a very heart welcome and trust that they will enjoy the debate over the next two days.

The two major factors which this hon Minister and the department have been constantly wrestling with for the past few years are those of the racially separate nature of some of its institutions and of the increasing shortage of funds to keep those institutions running.

Interestingly enough, I am going to take up some of the points the hon member for Brits mentioned in his speech a little earlier but obviously from a totally different point of view.

Regarding the racially separate nature of these educational institutions the DP’s position is quite clear. It believes that all educational institutions funded in whole or in part by public moneys—by moneys collected from all South Africans—should not be permitted to be racially restricted. Race, after all, is not an educationally acceptable criterion for separation. Language certainly is and everybody accepts that. Sex—boys’ and girls’ schools we know about, is desirable characteristic amongst certain persons but race per se is not and never will be a desirable educational separation. Culture? Certainly! We can talk about schools in Belgium, Switzerland, Yugoslavia and Russia being culturally different but not racially different and not exclusive in that they forbid one of another culture to be admitted.

The DP wishes to have neighbourhood schools in non-segregated residential areas and falling—as the hon member for Brits has said—in line with all our party’s constitutional policies. The DP will praise anything that moves towards the institution of a non-segregated education system in this country.

We would like to congratulate the hon the Minister on allowing various things. We would like to congratulate him on allowing private pre-primary schools funded by Government subsidies between 0% and 80% to admit children of all races according to the desires of their boards of governors. Those schools are in existence at the moment and one can go into pre-primary schools in all provinces and one will find children in those schools—under this hon Minister’s department—of all colours. And we thank and praise him for it.

We thank the hon the Minister for biting the bullet on the private schools. It was a tough one. The hon the Minister knows that in 1986 it was a rough year on the private schools and he took a lot of flack. I think in the end—with the exception of one issue which still remains which I will raise just now—that the whole concept of a private school funded by a subsidy ranging between 0% and 45% being permitted to admit pupils who are not White as the school board chooses is a good one. There are now—the figure varies; I know the hon member for Brits has quoted one figure and I have another one—between 10 000 and 15 000 pupils who are not White within that private school system.

However, the point of objection—and the hon the Minister is aware of this because it is a constitutional point which he can do nothing about—is that the school must be 50% plus 1 White in order to fall under his department and get the higher subsidy. The moment it falls to 49% White, and falls under somebody else’s department, a lower subsidy is paid. The complicating factor—and the hon the Minister is well aware of this because it is a very hot potato being shuffled around at the moment—is: What happens to a private school which does not have a majority of any single racial group? What does one do with it? Nobody actually seems to want them at the moment.

They are closed down.

We wish to thank the hon the Minister for devising a sporting and cultural contact policy which penalises the segregationist schools and fosters more normal—although not completely normal—contacts between pupils and schools of all races. We think that that was a good move coming as it did in the wake of the Menlo Park debacle.

We thank the hon the Minister for removing any threat that a racial quota will be enforced in the universities falling under him. Today there are 12 879 students of colour at the residential universities and at Unisa there are 48 771. That number increases every year. The universities are not becoming more White; they are becoming more South African and we are very pleased at that.

We thank the hon the Minister for not enforcing the Group Area’s Act on private schools and university hostels because these are the very areas where human contact must be established.

We also thank him for removing the racial quota at technikons and allowing councils to select their students by the criterion they choose, which is one of merit.

We also thank him for allowing Zulu and Coloured correspondence teacher-trainees to register with a White college of education. Let the NP never say again that I do not thank the hon the Minister!

Are you going to join us?

But—and there we come to the end of the thanks!—it is very strange and totally lacking in logic or sensible educational policy for this very same Minister and party to be totally intransigent in the following areas regarding, firstly, the admission of all teacher-trainees who could be taken into the colleges of education that fall under the hon the Minister. There are NP MPs who are appealing that the colleges should be allowed to decide their own criteria. The hon member for Pietermaritzburg South is an example.

There are at the moment—according to the figures of the hon the Minister—3 567 vacant places at colleges of education falling under the hon the Minister. They will not solve all the problems. The hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid is fond of often quoting the fact that the opening of White schools or White colleges is not going to solve this problem. We have never said it would. What we say is that 3 567 vacant places can be filled at not very great expense. The physical facilities are there. In many cases, the lecturers can extend their lecturing load in order to take these students. Possibly a few more lecturers would be required, obviously in mother-tongue subjects. However, this hon Minister is very well aware that those 3 567 vacant places can be seen as an invaluable asset that this country is not making use of.

The hon the Minister also refuses to consider a chink in the racially separate White Government schools. We exclude for example diplomats’ children. He knows the policy of not opening Government schools must change. They all do. Every NP MP knows that. He knows that without mixed Government schools free settlement areas are a nonsense and that the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning’s statements regarding open group areas are so much rubbish.

Let me quote what was said by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning on 5 May. He says this is Government policy:

Where is the right of those who wish to attend Government schools on a non-racial basis? We go back to the question I posed earlier regarding the child whose rights must be protected. The Government is saying that a child must attend a school which flows from the home and from the church. What if the child belongs to a church which has as its head Archbishop Tutu or presiding Bishop Magoba; if he is used to attending Sunday School on a non-racial basis; if he has belonged to a mixed pre-primary school; if he has friends of all races at his home; if he knows that he is going to attend a mixed university; and if his father works in a mixed workplace? Is it the desirable outcome of his education to attend a racially separate school?

Does the hon the Minister think that children who go to segregated schools do not ask why their friends cannot come with them? They ask that. I have a daughter who is in Sub A and she asked that. The hon the Minister must be aware of that. The hon the Minister’s intransigence in this regard is going to disappear.

I want to ask him a direct question. The Weekly Mail carried an article concerning the shrinking capacity of schools for Whites in the inner urban areas and cited the example of the Johannesburg School for Girls—the oldest school in Johannesburg. This school has just over 250 White pupils left. All other things being equal, that school will close this year because of this hon Minister’s and that NP’s policy. The school has asked to be opened to all races and there are people of all races living in the surrounding area. It is in Berea and close to Hillbrow. That school can have 800-900 pupils again but this hon Minister will close that school. [Interjections.]

There are schools that have by overwhelming majority asked to be open but the hon Minister will not accede. There are more that 270 000 vacant school places—these are the figures for 1988—and at an average of R6 000 per school place the figure from National Education, this represents a wasted R1 620 million worth of unutilised assets that the hon the Minister is sitting with.

All of us across the face of South Africa are getting poorer and while we get poorer, the hon the Minister harps, as he did at the last provincial congress, on the one string of: “It is NP policy. If you want it, it is expensive and you will have to pay for it.” It is not the NP that is paying. It is the whole of South Africa that is paying.

The hon the Minister must call on his advisors. Let them talk and confer. The cold and hard reality is that this policy cannot carry on and the NP know it. We believe that education is the testing ground of this Government’s good faith.

If the NP policy is that separate can be equal—they keep on saying that it is—then millions of ordinary South Africans, not their political leaders, are asking that the Government show them that education is equal. They cannot show it, and if they cannot show it, their policy is a lie.

Last week the two other own affairs Ministers gave the figures for the financial shortfall in their two departments. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Representatives had a shortfall of R252,482 million and the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Delegates had a R85 million shortfall. I know that this hon Minister is short of funds. Let him tell us. Let him give a figure on how short White education is of the funds that he believes are necessary to run his department.

I believe that a letter he sent to me in reply to an issue on school fees which I raised, does not wash with parents or teachers. It evades the question of what is essential at a school. I would like to quote from that letter, unless the hon the Minister regards it as confidential.

No, I do not.

He states as follows:

I want to tell the hon the Minister that if that is so, and if the parents of South Africa stop paying towards their schools tomorrow, the education system as this hon Minister knows it, would end. It would end because he is not paying 100%. It comes down to the question of what is essential.

We have heard of compulsory tuition fees. What has become of compulsory tuition fees? I have heard they will not come about, since the NP believes they are politically unacceptable whilst other groups do not have such fees. Is that correct? Is this the last we hear of tuition fees? Yet voluntary school fees and trust funds escalate every year. This hon Minister has made no survey of them. He has told me as much. Yet even he must be aware of the increasing unhappiness over schools which do have money and those which do not have money. There are tensions in his department as a result of this.

*Mr Chairman, it is a well-known fact that some of the education bodies have actually voiced their opposition to tuition fees. Others, again, did not express an opinion. The Federal Council of Parent Associations has not yet come to a decision on the matter, but the hon the Minister cannot keep silent any longer. This is the opinion voiced in Mondstuk dated April 1989. I quote:

Which publication is that?

Mondstuk.

Which issue?

April 1989.

As recent as that?

Yes, as recent as that.

†It is not I, not the CP, not the DP and not even the NP who says this, but we should be concerned about it—all of us. Of the political dangers involved the hon the Minister will be well aware. A decision must, however, be made. It must be made now. A decision must be made for or against tuition fees; for or against making school-fund contributions compulsory and tying them in with tax deductibility. There is a way. It is either for or against a service levy on all Whites as devised by the White Ministers’ Council. We know that is under discussion.

Whatever decision is made, however, it will not be popular in some quarters, but the hon the Minister must nevertheless take a long view on this in the interests of all education for all South African children in order to ensure that well-funded schools become centres of excellence, open to all pupils. We cannot believe that saving money today which should be spent today on education in everybody’s interest… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, in a moment I shall return to the three speakers who have participated in the debate. It is a singular pleasure for me to convey my thanks and appreciation to quite a number of people before I come to the particulars of the debate itself. I want to convey my thanks and appreciation to those men and women who have, during the past year, done such an excellent job of promoting the interests of White education in the Republic of South Africa.

Firstly I should like to thank members of my department—Mr Terblanche and his head-office team, the directors of education, who are also present this afternoon, and also the four provincial education departments, the thousands upon thousands of motivated teachers who are providing dedicated service throughout the length and breadth of our country, and also the officials of the department who have again given significant proof of their expertise and have provided a highly efficient service.

In this regard I should like to quote Prof Vögelzang, Professor of Education Management at the University of Mainz in West Germany, who declared, after a visit to our country last year, that the educationists in my department are not only extremely knowledgeable, but also compare very favourably with the best in the world. I am not saying this with any arrogance, but with an innermost sense of gratitude towards the officials of my department because a person from overseas referred to them in such commendable terms. Of course I agree with him wholeheartedly, and I speak from experience. In expressing my gratitude I should also like to include the Ministerial staff who, with their wonderful attitude, their loyalty and their cooperation, furnished an excellent service.

I should also like to refer to my department’s valued partners, ie the Federal Teachers’ Council, many of whose members are here this afternoon, which carries out its task with great seriousness and a great sense of responsibility, and the Federation of Parents’ Associations of South Africa. Once the federation was recognised, parental say in the RSA gained a new dimension, and we have high hopes of our parents in this organised context.

I should also like to express my great appreciation to the provincial education boards and thank them for their indispensable contributions.

If hon members will permit me to introduce a personal note, I should also like to express my sincere thanks to the NP’s Parliamentary Women’s Club for their very good wishes to me this morning.

I should also like to congratulate my department on the annual report. I am convinced that I am also speaking on behalf of the opposition parties. Their time is too limited to express their sentiments about this, but I know I am speaking on their behalf when I say we greatly appreciate the fine way in which the department has compiled the annual report and the enormous amount of information that it contains.

Hon members will notice that the annual report is divided up into various segments. Firstly there is the department’s overall policy, followed by material about the head office and the various provincial departments. We greatly appreciate the work being done in this regard.

My department’s theme this year is “Education and Culture Conserves and Innovates”, as the hon member for Brentwood said. On the one hand this theme emphasises the necessity for education to reflect a tendency to conserve whilst, on the other, reflecting the fact that education may never be permitted to stagnate. I am purposely saying this for the Official Opposition’s benefit. This also gives the Education Department of the Cape an opportunity to celebrate its 150th anniversary with this theme in mind. Our heartiest congratulations to Dr Walters, the Director of Education in the Cape Province, and his department.

In this regard it is therefore lamentable that there are still voices raised against this aspect in education and training—ie the desire to preserve certain elements—insisting that the schools of my department, which are run in terms of the principles of the Constitution, and also in terms of scientifically-founded educational principles—that is the basis on which we administer education—must change their nature, their character and their mission in life.

Why am I saying this? I am saying this because, from certain quarters, there have been representations for schools to be opened up to all groups, as the hon member for Pinetown also argued this afternoon. Various philosophical arguments are put forward about why White State schools should be open to all population groups. In the past I have, on many occasions in this House, given valid historical, cultural, educational, pedagogic and practical reasons why it would be undesirable to do so.

The fact remains that the present policy is based on the Constitution. As the hon member for Brits also said, that party’s educational policy will be in line with their constitutional policy. We allow ourselves the same privilege. We claim the same privilege for ourselves. As far as that is concerned, we are in full agreement with the hon member for Brits. [Interjections.]

What I am saying is that the fact remains that our present policy is based on the Constitution, which is an expression of the wishes of the overall majority of the voters of this House, and we cannot get away from that. It is aimed at ensuring that the White man has the security of a community life of his own. In terms of the Government’s policy involving the devolution of authority, management councils and communities have the responsibility to act within the framework of present-day realities and legislation.

We can understand the needs that exist in other departments owing to certain historical factors, but no Government department, least of all an education department, can make itself guilty of a mere elitist gesture of convenience. Even though the hon member for Pinetown said that this was an argument that we on this side frequently made use of, it remains true and is still factually relevant and sufficiently well-founded. It would simply be irresponsible and unwarranted to allow only a few members of other groups to be admitted to a few select schools, when admission is denied to the masses.

It is generally acknowledged that opening schools to other races would not begin to solve the problems in regard to the provision of education for other groups. A survey has indicated that the overall majority of communities advocating such a procedure have virtually no available accommodation for this purpose. If these schools were to be opened to other races, the immediate question that arises is what criteria for admission the other groups would be subjected to. Would the criteria for admission not be experienced as being discriminatory by the other groups?

Further practical problems involved in the selective opening up of schools to other races include the geographic location of schools, transport problems, mother-tongue education, on which our system is based and which the hon member for Pinetown agrees with, and the fact that the admission of other groups would change the ethos of the school. As a Natalian, the hon member knows with what sanctity Natal regards the preservation of the ethos of that province. The same applies in regard to specific schools, in fact all schools. Further practical problems involve social tension that can arise and the provision of staff.

The fact of the matter is that it is much simpler to wax lyrical about this and say: “Let us open up the schools. Let us accept the responsibility for the needs of other specific education departments because they have a shortage of facilities.” Once one has done that, however, one must ask what effect this is going to have on the children of colour who are, for argument’s sake, admitted to a White school, or on the children in the White school and on the community as a whole. It is therefore not that simple to wax lyrical about this and make such a request, without asking oneself what the consequences would be. [Interjections.]

Let me make it clear. A school is not simply a building. A school is a community. Those two hon members are ex-teachers. They ought to know it, and they acknowledge it too, as they are now indicating to me. [Interjections.] A school consists of a network of relationships, an interwoven set of mutual agreements. It is not a knowledge-factory. That is specifically why community involvement—and now I want to hear whether the hon members agree with me, because a moment ago they nodded affirmatively—and parental involvement, in particular, are necessary.

Absolutely!

Both those hon members say yes.

[Inaudible.]

Without that there can be no education of any quality, and they will still agree with me. It is therefore a reality that significant community involvement cannot be achieved if the parents of the pupils have to travel long distances to reach the schools, and hon members know it. If one were to open up specific schools, and the parents of those children lived 20 km or 30 km from the schools, hon members know as well as I do that one would simply not be able to achieve parental and community involvement in the daily activities of the school.

Do you want to close the hostels at those schools as well?

The hon member for Sea Point must not interrupt me. At a later stage he may perhaps learn a bit about education, but let him just give me a chance now. [Interjections.]

There is sufficient research evidence that singles out parental non-involvement as a cardinal factor in poor achievement, negativity and deviant behaviour amongst pupils.

†Blackboard jungles are created quite easily. They develop in schools where there are substantial groups of alienated pupils—pupils who are alienated because their parents are not involved; because the subject offerings of the school represent a poor compromise in an effort to please all the constituencies represented; because the value system presented by the teachers often differs from their own; because the school cannot satisfy their particular needs and often isolates them from their own communities; and because the ethos of the school is different. The opening of the schools of my department to pupils of all races would be fraught with very practical difficulties of which hon members are quite aware. Although I have refrained from once more spelling out well-known historic, financial and cultural considerations which apply, they are nevertheless as valid as ever.

I am occasionally requested to allow open admission on a selective basis, which encourages discrimination and tokenism. I am asked to ignore the practical difficulties arising from the children and communities concerned. I refuse to raise the expectations of hundreds of thousands of pupils and parents of other race groups, knowing that it is not possible to meet them in this manner.

I am convinced that there is a point beyond which one cannot go. I am not insensitive to the needs of other communities, as is exemplified by my department’s track record of service to those communities, a track record to which I have also referred many times in this House. However, I am also sensitive to the needs of the community my department was established to serve, and I have as a first priority the needs of that community.

I wish to refer to facilities which have been placed at the disposal of other departments. Presently there are no fewer than 21 schools which are being rented to the Administrations of the House of Delegates and the House of Representatives.

What about the 42 that are not being used?

I foresee that this process will continue and be extended as time goes by to ensure that, as far as possible, my department continues to serve as far as it can the needs both of its own constituency and of others.

*It is therefore specifically on educational and practical grounds that the department wants to preserve its schools’ mission in life, but as far as we are concerned meaningful renewal is also a high priority. This year my department is launching specific renewal campaigns to which I should briefly like to refer.

Firstly, it is my department’s endeavour to ensure that the education we provide continues to be relevant in a changing world. This implies renewal, of course, but renewal which is primarily research-orientated and can be justified. We are proud of the excellent standard of education which our department offers, education which can compare with the best in the world, but we are still mindful of the needs of the year 2000.

An investigation to evaluate career education goes hand in hand with our initiatives concerning relevant education. Although our education as a whole is, of course, career-orientated, and the department is doing a great deal in this field, it will become increasingly important to prepare our pupils for a professional world which is still largely an unknown factor. A committee representing all interested parties and departments is currently reviewing possible strategies for the further promotion of career education in my department.

A dynamic project “Cherish our Youth 2000” has been launched specifically to tackle the social problems involving our young people. Interested outside bodies are also represented on this top-level committee. We are all aware of the wide variety of problems confronting young people. Let me just mention a few of those problems we frequently read about in the newspapers, ie child molestation and child abuse, promiscuity, alcohol and drug abuse, child neglect and suicides amongst children, decadence in family life, the undermining of moral standards and an increase in violence—I could go on listing them. These and other related matters are being examined by the committee I mentioned, and the resulting initiatives will receive priority attention.

A widely representative committee is also investigating all aspects related to parental involvement in our schools. A pilot committee is also considering the department’s contribution towards building up relations between peoples, because it is my conviction that we can hardly be relevant if we elect to isolate ourselves. That we cannot do, and that is why I have, on innumerable occasions in this House, and in public too, expressed my conviction that our Government and private schools, and all educational institutions and bodies, also have a bridge-building task aimed at promoting sound relations between peoples.

What is more, a high-level committee has just begun with an investigation into educational financing and rationalisation. The department is giving ongoing attention to strategies in regard to the population development programme. A comprehensive youth strategy is also being tackled. A wide variety of steps are being taken to improve productivity.

Each of these initiatives has the advantage of having, at present, a sound, justifiable policy as its point of departure. Views covering the whole educational spectrum are being considered, and this is consequently a dynamic campaign which attests to my department’s continued endeavour to ensure that it remains relevant in the future and that its efforts aimed at renewal are therefore justifiable.

I should now like to refer to only a few specific financing aspects. In regard to the scope of the budget, just the following. My department’s budget, for school education alone, is R2 427 177 000 for 1989-90. My department’s overall budget, ie R4 393 billion, is approximately 7% of the State’s overall budget. It is approximately R642 million or 17% more than the 1988-89 budget.

In respect of the remuneration of teachers I want to say the following. In spite of the present financial climate, which necessitates saving and cost efficiency, the Government was able to succeed in increasing the remuneration of CS educators by approximately 23%. Although there was a noticeable decrease in the number of resignations in a province such as the Transvaal during the first few months of this year, there is still concern about the resignation of every competent individual who leaves education.

It is true that there has been a decrease in the number of resignations, but it is equally true that if one loses one well-qualified, successful teacher, this is ultimately to the detriment of the child. There is consequently still cause for concern. I want to give the CS educators the assurance that remuneration and its concomitant aspects, such as the loss of trained manpower, is still receiving the urgent attention of the Government and my department.

In regard to tuition fees I want to say the following. I shall elaborate further at a later stage when I reply to the hon member for Pinetown. The department’s investigation into tuition fees has been finalised, and I have news for the hon member. A model is being submitted to our partners in education. I know that the hon member knows what I am talking about when I say that this has been submitted to our partners in education, because he also endorses the principle. After their findings have been received, a decision will be taken and, in due course, announced.

After the election!

I would have been able to tell the hon member even before he said it. We are not holding things back for the purposes of the election. The hon member ought to know that perfectly well, because if we just think of the increase in the fuel price, the price of bread, etc, we see that this side of the House is regarded by everyone in the country as an honourable Government which is not afraid to say what is in the best interests of this country, not only in the short term, but also in the long term. If we wanted to take steps on a short-term basis, we could have held back many of these increases, but even now we are not doing so. We are prepared to go to the electorate as an honourable House and Government that keeps nothing back. [Interjections.]

In regard to the curtailment of expenditure let me say that owing to the fact that the funds available for education are not unlimited, the expenditure on education has, of course, had to be curtailed. The curtailment of expenditure, however, must never be allowed to have an adverse effect on the provision of quality education. I want the hon member for Pinetown to listen, because he dealt with this point.

Today I feel myself at liberty to say that the head office and the four provincial education departments have, through careful planning, rationalisation and the determination of priorities, consistently been able to furnish cost-effective and quality education, in spite of cut-backs. It is not true that cut-backs necessarily mean that one has to sacrifice quality. The question is whether the cut-backs go hand in hand with cost-effective education. If it goes hand in hand with cost-effective tuition, one still maintains a standard of quality. This applies, in particular, to rural education about which I should like to make additional information available to the media.

All four provincial education departments have been able to report that all measures aimed at economising have been focussed on the judicious employment of available funds. Measures aimed at economising have therefore been structured around the non-essential components in the provision of education. In the process we ensured that the standard of education in the classroom was not scaled down. Parental contributions to the non-essential services in their schools are greatly appreciated. The hon member for Pinetown is, of course, correct. Parents have, in fact, made a significant contribution throughout the years, in fact for decades, in the interests of education, but this Government has never ignored or relinquished its responsibility when it comes to providing sufficient funds for the provision of the essential elements of education.

†In the context of the theme “Conserve and Innovate” my department will in 1989 continue to ensure that a correct balance is maintained between stasis and change, and that the dynamic underlying educational practice is never overwhelmed by a too rapid and indefensible change, or shackled and enfeebled by a grim adherence to outworn and outmoded practices. Our children and the future of education remain our highest priority, and I have no doubt that we shall meet with distinction and overcome with success the challenges which confront us.

*I would now very much like to react to some of the statements made by those who have already participated in the debate. Please just allow me, first of all, to refer to the chief spokesman on this side of the House, the hon member for Brentwood. I want to congratulate him on having spoken again today and having furnished a contribution, in this debate, based on his knowledge and experience of education. This is no reflection on those who have participated in the debate but who are not teachers. One thing is true, however. If one were to examine the contributions this hon member has made over the years, one would be able to agree—even though we can disagree on many aspects—that he speaks about education within the context of his own practical experience. That is one aspect.

The second aspect I should like to mention in connection with the hon member is that I have never gained the impression, from his speeches, that he did not have the best interests of the child at heart. I want to thank him for that, because ultimately that is what it is all about. I want to thank the hon member for the fact that in his contribution here today he clearly indicated the difference between the desire to preserve certain elements and the question of relevancy. We must have innovation with a view to future preparedness. It would be wrong for us to look solely at the present and past situation, without keeping an eye on the future.

Since this is now the hon member’s last session, and his last speech in the debate on education, I want to thank him for the singular work he has done as an enthusiastic chairman of the NP’s study group, for his hard work and for his spirited guidance. May I wish the hon member everything of the best, particularly since he is now leaving politics for a well-deserved rest.

I want to tell the hon member for Brits… [Interjections.] There is always a difference of opinion about this kind of thing. [Interjections.] Nevertheless, prompted by what the hon member for Pinetown said when he so movingly congratulated me on so many aspects, let me tell the hon member for Brits that I was somewhat concerned, because I do not know whether that was “the kiss of death”. [Interjections.] Thank you very much. I shall come to that at a later stage. I want to thank the hon member for Brits for having congratulated my department on the two aspects he mentioned, and I accept the fact that the hon member sincerely meant what he said.

The hon member began by referring to the CP’s policy on education. In the past I have made it my task to try to analyse the CP’s policy on education and then to say, on the basis of that analysis, where that policy differed from that of the NP. This afternoon the hon member again said repeatedly that the CP was the only party that did this or that, and he then mentioned things like Christian education, mother-tongue education and own education. That is embodied in the Constitution of this country, and has manifested itself in the educational legislation of this side of the House since 1967. All the hon member is—excuse my language—is a “copycat”. That is all the hon member did, because what the hon member claims for himself as so-called CP policy in regard to education, and these aspects which are dear to their hearts and which are non-negotiable, are elements of the policy of this side of the House. The hon member knows that, and I take that amiss of him.

The fact of the matter is that this side of the House has committed itself to the realities of this country, ie the fact of having both a general affairs component and an own affairs component. We have committed ourselves to that, and we know that there are specific conditions that do prevail. With regard to the general component, spelled out clearly in the schedule to the Constitution, we have told ourselves that we must have a single education department, ie the Department of National Education, but that in regard to the own affairs component we must also have own education. I know that the Official Opposition wants to make an effort to undermine that, as if own education has no value, but if those hon members were being honest, they would know that we are administering own education precisely as they would want to have it administered. [Interjections.] Let me say that the Official Opposition is ignoring present-day realities. That is the simple truth of the matter.

The hon member spoke about teacher training and teachers’ training colleges. The policy of my department and of this side of the House in regard to teachers’ training colleges is very clear. We say that one cannot create a schism between the education and training a child receives from his parents during his first six years, on the one hand, and what subsequently has to happen, on the other, because one cannot separate the education and training aspect from the cultural aspect. For that reason we say that the initial training at teachers’ training colleges is primarily geared to primary school education. That being so, we say that we will not “open up” our teachers’ training colleges. What we are doing—and we are also doing this in accordance with our agreement with KwaZulu in respect of the college in Natal where we offer enrichment programmes, in other words from M2 to M3 and from M3 to M4—is to offer further training so that people can improve their qualifications. That is something we are in fact doing, but as far as the initial training at teachers’ training colleges is concerned, it is still the view of this side of the House that this is solely for Whites.

In regard to private schools, the hon member for Brits spoke about the subsidy that would be forthcoming from the amount allocated to the Whites. May I briefly tell the hon member for Brits that in regard to private schools, and also in regard to universities and technikons, before the CP was established in 1982, hon members now sitting on that side of the House were members of the NP. Even at that stage there were many people of colour at the universities, and there were private schools even then. Those hon members never stood up on this side of the House and objected to that.

You know what happened in the caucus!

I know precisely what happened in the caucus, but that hon member is still a novice, and yet wants to join in the conversation. The hon member knows nothing about that.

You are making a very big mistake! Do you still remember where I was working at the time?

The fact of the matter is that these things happened even then. If that hon member wants to noise abroad the falsehood that it is White money that is being used, let me ask him please to stop doing so. I do not expect that from the hon member for Brits. Tell the public the whole truth.

What is the whole truth? The whole truth is that the Exchequer receives its contributions by way of the income tax paid by everyone in this country, regardless of race or colour. A second source for these contributions is company tax, various other forms of taxation such as sales tax, etc.

The second point, which goes hand in hand with this, is that the subsidy system has a numerical basis. In other words, for every individual, whether a person of colour or a White person, who is in an institution under the control of my department, we receive a subsidy—not from White money, but from the Exchequer. That Exchequer, I said at the beginning of my argument, receives its contributions from everyone in this country. What that hon member said is therefore wrong, and the hon member knows it.

I appeal to him, as an ex-clergyman, to stop telling these stories to members of the public. [Interjections.] Hon members are free to ask me questions at a later stage. My time is just so limited.

I just want to ask hon members of the Official Opposition—then I shall resume my seat; I shall come back to the hon member at a later stage—what the CP would do if it came to power. Would it furnish a service to people of colour? [Interjections.] I am asking the hon member for Pietersburg. He is a senior member. I want to ask him whether the CP would furnish a service as far as education was concerned.

The answer is to be found in our policy!

The answer is not to be found in your policy. I must therefore tell the hon member for Pietersburg that I take his answer to be that they would not furnish such a service, because that is not what is stated in their policy. It is not in their policy.

Go and read it in the Hansard of 4 May 1988!

It is not there. In other words, I must conclude—I shall say as much to members of the public—that the hon member for Pietersburg is saying that the CP standpoint is that they would not provide an educational service to people of colour. [Interjections.] I want to ask hon members whether they would agree that we should endeavour to achieve equal educational opportunities for everyone in this country. [Interjections.]

Order! I cannot allow a dialogue to take place across the floor of the House. Hon members who want to react to the hon the Minister’s question will have to do so when it is their turn to speak. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Let me conclude by telling hon members of the Official Opposition that after having listened to the hon member for Brits I am forced to conclude that they definitely do not have much respect for the business sector.

The left-wing business sector!

Here we now have a left-wing business sector and a right-wing business sector. The hon member must tell me at a later stage which is the left-wing sector and which is the right-wing sector.

When I listen to the hon member for Brits, one thing is certain, because he said that this business sector was quite simply helping to lead us down the path to integration. I now want to ask the hon member whether, if they came to power, they would only use the money generated by the left-wing business sector. Is the right-wing business sector no longer going to make a contribution? The hon member must not get panicky, because surely that is the implication of his statement. [Interjections.] That is all I have to say to the hon member for Brits.

Mr Chairman, I should like to associate myself with the hon the Minister and his good wishes to the hon member for Brentwood, who is retiring at the end of this session. He did very good work as the chairman of our study group. On behalf of this side of the House I should like to thank him sincerely and wish him everything of the best for the future.

In discussing this Vote and in similar debates on education in the past, I have often referred to the partnership of the various parties involved in education. The partners, viz the parent, the child and the teacher, and also the various education departments, all have an extremely important part to play.

In the first place education is concerned with the child’s education and preparation which will ultimately give him an opportunity to assume his rightful place in a complex society. It is no longer merely a matter of the completion of a prepared programme that has to be concluded. In the course of this preparation the child must be led in such a way that he will reach the other side as a whole person; whole in the sense that ultimately he will be a full-fledged human being.

Today’s demands cause the child to be exposed to an increasingly extent during the process of growing up. He is confronted with adult situations too often while still a child. Today’s demands force the child to face confrontations which we did not know as children. Today’s child, for example, is confronted at an early stage with the fact that he is not merely an individual in a limited little group. Very soon he becomes aware of the fact that he is in a larger environment than merely his parental home, his classroom, his school and the area he lives in. He knows from an early stage, or he should know, that there is a broader community than the one he belongs to, which lays claim to his knowledge and his awareness.

This brings me to the parent who, as the main partner, has to accept the commitment and responsibility for bringing up his child. The parent is no longer completely detached from the schooling of his child. Earlier the parent may not have needed to feel involved when the child was at school. To a great extent the teacher could fulfil that task. As a result of the demands of the time, but also as a result of the development of the education policy, the parent now has a further responsibility. As a result of the Government’s policy of the devolution of authority, management councils have obtained certain legal powers. Management councils, and therefore the parents, have received a greater say; a say which leaves them with a greater responsibility.

Unfortunately this has acquired a political complexion. As early as in 1984, the then chief spokesman of the CP on education in this House, Dr Frans van Staden, appealed at the CP congresses that it be ensured that the school committees and so-called school boards be dominated by the CP. He said, and I quote from Beeld, 6 August 1984:

What are you doing?

These and other statements on the part of the CP dragged parent involvement in education directly into the sphere of politics.

What did the principal of the Hans Moore High School do?

The Hans Moore case was dealt with very comprehensively by the hon the Minister.

The bona fide mistake was corrected.

It is a fact that since then there has been a constant political stir to get the candidates elected. Earlier the parents were uninvolved to a great extent. Only the active and interested parents used to turn up at an election, and the willing, hard-working parents who were elected as members of the committees. Those parents who were prepared to work and who were involved were the automatic choice. The situation has changed, however. The uninvolved parent can no longer remain detached. With the devolution of authority, the responsibilities and functions of management councils have become increasingly important. It is no longer merely a matter of social arrangements with regard to school activities or the filling of vacancies once or twice during the school year.

Although it is a pity that politics plays such a great part in the election of management councils, it is extremely important that the parent be aware of and accept his responsibility. When, therefore, a management council accepts its responsibility as the democratically elected body, it must be understood that all decisions and the formulation of policy in this specific school will be in line with only one criterion, viz what is in the interests of the child, the school and the community. The management councils must constantly ask themselves what is in the interests of education as a whole, and what is in the interests of the country. Political motives must be ignored, and one must look deeper than the mere political advantage that can be derived.

In future it will therefore become increasingly important for all parents to become completely involved in the election of management councils. The involvement of the parents will become more important, not to test the strength of the various political parties, but to ensure that the most capable people in the community are elected, irrespective of their political convictions or other commitments. They must be people who put the child and the school first. Consequently it will be necessary for all parents to take part in elections in future. In this way the most suitable people can be elected. Let us shift the emphasis from politics and lay more emphasis on the importance of electing suitable people as representatives in the respective management councils who can help the school in question. In this way we shall be doing education a service, because then the child can derive the full advantage of a well-ordered system of education, as it is available today.

I want to conclude by expressing my concern about the proportions child molestation and child abuse are assuming. This was also referred to by the hon the Minister in his speech. It is an aspect which is really assuming alarming proportions. I want to avail myself of this opportunity today to express the thanks of the parent community to the SA Police for the positive steps they are taking, and hopefully will continue to take, to eradicate this aberration. A child is not a sexual plaything for adults. A child is the darling of the community, and as such we want to protect him. We should like to express our thanks to the Police and all other involved institutions for what has been done in this connection. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Gezina has just made a moving appeal to the hon the Minister with regard to management council elections. I hope that the hon the Minister will take it to heart, especially after he made the announcement here in the House about a management council election which the NP won at a school in Pietersburg.

The provincial education authorities of the Administration: House of Assembly in our part of the Transvaal were recently confronted with a survey carried out in an English medium junior school in Pietersburg of the children of three accredited personnel members of the consulate of Venda. Although this falls outside the control of this hon the Minister, I nevertheless want to place on record here that during the negotiation process which led up to the establishment of this consolate, it was emphatically agreed upon that a diplomatic residence would be established in a very suitable place on the northern side of the Pretoria road. Furthermore, it was emphatically agreed upon that they would not place their children in White schools in Pietersburg.

This agreement was broken, and I have my suspicions that the Department of Foreign Affairs played an important influencing role in the breaking of that agreement. Whatever the case may be, the mixed school has now come into being in the meantime and the question now is what line this hon Minister’s department is going to take with regard to the admission of the children to White provincial schools.

The hon member for Brits put such a question to the department. He asked whether principals of schools and management boards of schools were being consulted in the decision on the admission of children of Black diplomats to White schools. The answer to this was a very clear yes. I now want to ask the hon the Minister specifically to what extent the standpoint of the principals of schools and of management boards of schools played a decisive role. I therefore want to know whether the department would give permission for the admission, despite opposition from the principals and the management boards of schools. I consider it necessary that the hon the Minister spell out the policy very clearly, because as we have been told, there are more applications on the way—also for other schools in Pietersburg—and we would like to know exactly what the decision of the school principals and the management boards are.

We would also like to know how the situation with regard to future mixed residential areas is going to be dealt with. I want to tell the hon the Minister that this situation is not simply being accepted, not even by English-speaking parents. I have here a petition which has been signed by more than 100 people, some of whom are parents of children in that school. They raised complaints and said that they wanted to remove their children from that school. However, when they approached the Afrikaans medium junior school, they were told that their children could not be admitted as their home language was English. That is what is happening in Pietersburg.

Secondly, I want to refer to the cultural task of this department. In this very neat annual report this is dealt with under the heading: “Directorate: Cultural and Youth Affairs”, and when one pages through it, it seems that as far as the history and memorabilia is concerned, the history of the two Wars of our Independence and the period up to and including the Rebellion in particular more or less fall under the jurisdiction of this department. I am referring for example to page 24, on which mention is made of the war museum with regard to the two Boer Republics, which is situated in Bloemfontein.

In response to the particulars in the annual report, and also in response to an answer to a written question by the hon member for Brits to the hon the Minister of National Education, it would therefore appear that museums and memorabilia which, as I said, deal with the two Wars of our Independence, also fall under this department. I believe that that is quite correct, because it was indeed the Afrikaner people who fought a heroic freedom struggle to escape foreign domination and tyranny.

It would now seem to me that certain aspects of historical events in the Afrikaner’s struggle are not enjoying the necessary attention which they deserve. I am referring particularly to war memorabilia in places such as Long Island, on the island of Bermuda and also on St Helena and elsewhere.

The hon member for Carletonville broached this subject during the discussion of the Vote of the hon the Acting Minister of Public Works and Land Affairs, but the latter did not even condescend to give the hon member a reply. For that reason I am now directing a request to this hon Minister to the effect that he should ensure that the cultural historical value of the remains of that turbulent period in our history is not permanently lost to future generations.

It was a privilege for me to visit the island of Bermuda recently with the hon member for Overvaal. The hon members for Springs and Houghton were also there on invitation from the Aspin Institute. During our visit to Long Island where there is a memorial in the graveyard of Boer prisoners of war, we were accompanied by the author of the book Boer Prisoners of War in Bermuda, Colin Benbow. For those of us on this side of the House, that was undoubtedly the highlight of our visit.

There we stood in the unknown, thousands of kilometres from South Africa, and there on a memorial one read the names of Boer soldiers who were buried there between 1901 and 1902—in a neglected graveyard. There were undoubtedly signs of neglect and decay. There is no doubt about that. If our generation does not do something positive in that regard, that priceless monument is undoubtedly going to disappear into oblivion within the next generation. I want to ask the hon the Minister to use his influence in other departments which may be involved, to prevent further decay and neglect.

Furthermore, we also had the privilege of viewing what is probably the greatest private collection of memorabilia, which prisoners of war made mainly by hand. It is the collection of the superintendent of the Bermuda police, Mr Andrew Birmingham. It is indeed a priceless piece of Africana, which is displayed in a sitting-room of a house in Bermuda. The question is what is going to become of these articles when Andrew Birmingham is no longer there. We asked him this. However, he did not have an answer. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether his department could not make inquiries and perhaps enter into negotiations so that that collection could ultimately find its rightful place in South Africa after the death of Andrew Birmingham. When one reads parts of this book which Mr Colin Benbow wrote, one is gripped by that struggle of our people. I want to mention only one situation which occurred on Burt Island. It is striking to note that at that time there were two groups of prisoners. There were those people who had taken the oath of loyalty to the British crown early on. They were in one camp. It was similar to the division in this House today. There were also the “bittereinders”, inter alia on Burt Island.

The “bitterbekke”!

They were the people who would never have sworn loyalty to a foreign government.

Is one a “bitterbek” if one is a “bittereinder”?

They were divided to such an extent that they had to be held on two different islands. This author wrote inter alia the following about the advent of peace:

He described the atmosphere which existed there, and wrote the following:

It is a gripping piece of history which still stands there on Long Island today. Those of us on this side of the House are making an urgent appeal to the hon the Minister to help us preserve this piece of history for posterity.

According to the hon member for Brentwood they were “bitterbekke”! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, primarily the hon member for Pietersburg addressed a specific question to the hon the Minister, to which I do not want to react now. However, I do want to react to one of his remarks, which strictly speaking does not belong in this debate. It has to do with the children of diplomats in Pietersburg. I want to ask the hon member what their attitude and standpoint is in connection with the children of diplomats and the international conventions which exist in connection with diplomatic affairs. Are they going to respect them or not? It is important to know whether they are also going to abide by the international conventions in connection with these matters, since they say that they could possibly become the government in this country. [Interjections.]

[Inaudible]

He says they will deal with it in specific ways. [Interjections.]

In recent years in debates on this Vote we have devoted a great deal of time to debating the political differences which exist between the various parties in connection with education. I think we must agree to differ, for we obviously have different views. Consequently I want to devote my time today to something completely different to politics.

The annual report of the department is a very thorough piece of work. One of the subdivisions, and the one I want to discuss, deals with the Transvaal Education Department. Since the establishment of this department in 1874 it has grown into a particularly large department with a unique and distinctive ethos in which an effort is made to render a service of high quality to its thousands of pupils and its parent community.

The size of this department is reflected in certain statistics. I do not want to bore hon members with statistics, but I would like to mention the following. This department is responsible for 697 618 school-children. In order to meet the differentiated needs of these pupils, there are 257 secondary schools, 3 art, ballet and music schools, 27 senior special schools, 5 clinic schools, 2 hospital schools, 692 primary schools, 161 provincial and provincially controlled primary schools, 45 schools for specialised education and 181 subsidised and 544 non-subsidised private schools.

I am mentioning these statistics to prove that as far as the Transvaal Education Department is concerned, there is not a single child, no matter what his circumstances may be, who is being overlooked, and that attention is being given to every particular child, whatever his needs may be.

When I consider the growth of this department I am consequently not concerned primarily with the quantity because when something is very big, one can be deceived by its size. For me, for hon members and also for all taxpayers the quality of the education provided is important. For this I should like to congratulate the Transvaal Education Department most sincerely and thank them for succeeding in providing excellent education, in spite of the fact that it has grown to an enormous size.

In order to ensure quality service the control structure has been decentralised and as far as possible power has been devolved to eight regions and 43 comprehensive units.

Frequently—one has been hearing this to an increasing extent lately—objections are raised and accusations are levelled that the standard of education is dropping. If one merely considers the attention which is being given to the inservice training and further training of teachers and teaching staff, this is one of the matters which totally refutes this accusation, because for this purpose 3 093 teachers have registered at the College of Education for Further Training in 1988.

In-service training of teachers also takes place by means of orientation, regional and decentralised courses and simposiums for principals. In addition teachers’ centres afford teachers the opportunity to share their expertise with one another. The fact that 29 681 teachers have attended meetings at six teachers’ centres in 1988, attests to the positive attitude of teachers towards their educational task.

We also want to say thank you very much to those teachers who not only devote themselves to the conveying of knowledge to pupils and children, but who also devote themselves to other activities, such as outdoor education by means of youth preparedness programmes through which they are assisting the children to become mature adults.

Every department has its own distinctive character and ethos. Possibly the outstanding characteristic of the TED is this department’s particular insistence on the partnership which exists between the school, the parental home and other partners, to which the hon member for Gezina also specifically referred. Because the TED believes that the school cannot carry out its function without the assistance, support and co-operation of its esteemed partners, parents are involved at all levels, namely in management boards of schools, in regional councils, and also in the Transvaal Education Council. Not only the organised parent representative bodies, but also the organised teaching profession have a say in the provincial advisory committees which advise the Director of Education.

*Frequent reference was also made to the more effective utilisation of money and existing institutions. In this regard I want to congratulate the department very much on the fact that it succeeded, for example, as regards the NKP campus, not only to establish the Onderwyskollege Pretoria there, but also the College of Education for Further Training in order to utilise this campus fully.

The old NKP is at present being used by the Pretoria College of Education. Rationalisation also took place at the Johannesburg College of Education in that the Central Rand regional office is also housed there together with the educational aid centre for the child guidance clinic.

It is therefore not true that the education department does not spend the money at its disposal to a maximum and optimum extent.

I could continue…

Don’t.

I know the hon member for Overvaal is sensitive about many of these matters, because he understands absolutely nothing about education and that is why he would pass a remark like that.

Allow me therefore to conclude by making an appeal to all interested persons—everyone who has an interest in education—to show the necessary interest and to give their support to other education departments—departments like the Transvaal Education Department, in which thousands of dedicated educators are involved every day in the education of our children and in equipping the future of South Africa as well as possible for the demands of our unique situation.

Let me therefore say, with the theme “conserve and innovate”, that it will be of no avail if one smothers what one actually wants to preserve, but that one must preserve it in such a way that it will grow in order to renew too, to adapt to the demands of the times. We want to thank the Transvaal Education Department for the fact that, in my opinion, they have also succeeded excellently not only in preserving what is precious—what is meaningful—but also in renewing it, and we wish them everything of the best. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the issue of open schools has been of importance in this debate, and I listened to what my colleague the hon member for Pinetown had to say in this regard. I also listened with interest to what the hon the Minister had to say. Certainly, while for me the attitude of the hon member for Pinetown was based on sound practical issues and thinking derived from looking at the needs of South Africa as a whole, I am afraid I cannot say the same of the hon the Minister whose approach it seemed was based more on the ideological attitudes of his particular party.

The hon the Minister indicated in particular that schools cannot be opened because the Constitution of the country does not allow for it. Of course, it is his party’s Constitution that he is talking about. He is, however, aware that there is much talk in his party at this particular time of the need for constitutional changes. This is one aspect of the Constitution his party is going to have to look at very carefully indeed. I believe that the practicalities of the South African situation are going to make it imperative that schools are opened to all before they are closed completely. It certainly seems to be the Minister’s attitude to close schools rather than to open them to all. That is part of his party’s Constitution, as he says.

The hon the Minister spoke of schools being an important part of communities in which they exist. I agree with him. I told him so right now. I agree too with the particular attitude that communities are important, that the school is important to the community, and where there are mixed communities, those mixed communities that want to open schools should in fact be allowed to open their schools. The hon the Minister did not say that but that is very much the attitude of the DP, as the hon member for Pinetown indicated. Where there is a community that wants an open school, that community should be allowed to have an open school. I want to emphasize that point to the hon the Minister. I have no doubt that the hon member for Cape Town Gardens will pick this point up later on.

I want to move on to other matters. I listened with great interest to what the hon the Minister had to say about the superb job his officials are doing. I have no doubt that this is in fact the case as they operate within the framework of his department’s structures. I listened too to what he had to say about rationalisation and his department’s awareness of this important aspect.

I want to make just one point in this regard. The report of the Department of Education and Culture certainly does make very interesting reading. One becomes aware, though, while reading it that the department itself is a huge structure. What I found particularly interesting in this regard—which is also a cause for very real concern—is the extraordinary number of officials employed by the department and, in particular, the number of officials employed at a very senior level. The number of chief education specialists, for example, is fascinating, as is in fact the number of chief directors.

I want to ask the hon the Minister in all sincerity whether they are all necessary—a simple question. It strikes me as being absolutely incongruous. On the one hand the head office can have chief education specialists for almost every facet of education, including three for Youth Affairs; it can have a large number of chief directors; a whole host of senior deputy chief education specialists and directors and yet, when a provincial education department asks for its second deputy director post to be filled, this request is turned down.

This is, of course, exactly what happened to Natal. I am not sure what this tells us about the so-called decentralisation process the hon the Minister talks about but I must remind him too that the Natal Provincial Education Council strongly recommended Natal’s second deputy director’s post be reinstated and filled. This recommendation from the Natal Provincial Council Education was also turned down. I will pick this point up later on.

I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he does in fact feel that his department is too top-heavy. Of course, we have to accept that this is what we have come to expect of the South African Government at the present time—large departments everywhere, huge bureaucracies, often extremely top-heavy. It would be interesting if a time-and-motion study were to be done to determine the value and necessity of all the top officials and to see whether in fact it would be possible to employ fewer chiefs—literally—and far more teachers, for what really counts in education is of course what happens in the classroom.

I want to stress again that the size of the head office makes a mockery of Government claims of decentralisation of education control. I look forward to hearing what the hon the Minister has to say on this particular point.

I would also like to make it quite clear now, however, that my remarks are not in any way intended as a slur on the people who hold senior positions in his department.

Oh no, this is no way to make up for it.

That is a fact.

We need to remember at all times that education is an own affair. The hon the Minister has stressed this point again and again. As a result of this particular fact we have a proliferation of education departments in this country and each and every one of them is a top-heavy bureaucracy. Let me just say in passing that it is therefore not surprising that there is so little money available for education in this country.

In the light of what the hon the Minister had to say about rationalisation I want to ask him how he feels about the size of this particular department. I know, of course, what answer I am going to get, but nevertheless I would like him to reply to that particular point.

On a different point, I would like to quote a paragraph from the 1988 report of the Department of Education and Culture. It reads as follows:

This is a very interesting statement and there are several points which I would like to highlight. One particular point is the reference to the “process of democratising education even further”. I believe that this might have been the point to which the hon member Gezina was referring when he spoke about parents having a greater input in education. I have said in this House several times before and I want to say again today that what has happened to the control of White education in South Africa is the complete opposite of what the Government claims has happened. Education control has not been democratised. It has been centralised and has become little more than an autocracy under this particular hon Minister. It is not clear to me at all how this hon Minister or senior officials of his department can refer to the democratising of education when one considers among other things the way in which the new Education Affairs Bill was rammed through Parliament last year. The Bill itself centralised control in Pretoria at the expense of the provincial control of education. Together with this we have, of course, the scant respect accorded those bodies which the Government itself has set up in order to give the lie to democratising education. I shall explain that further as well.

I want to refer here in particular to the provincial education councils, the so-called advisory bodies which the Government has established over the past few years. These councils have representation on them from a broad spectrum of people, including parents, teachers, universities, technikons etc. However, these provincial education councils have no real authority and are there to disguise the Government’s real intentions with regard to education control. Nothing has happened over the past few months to persuade me otherwise, and I therefore believe that the Government and the NP have hijacked education in all of the provinces for their own particular gain.

In a question put to the hon the Minister during an interpellation debate some weeks ago I asked him whether the Government intended changing the functions and the structures of the provincial councils. His reply was that there was no need to and that they were functioning effectively and were seen to be successful.

I wish to assure him again, however, that this is not the case. It may be the case in those provinces which are used to autocratic control, but in those provinces where a greater expression of real democracy in education control has been experienced before, the opposite has been felt. The provincial education councils remain little more than bodies behind which the Government can hide its true intentions with regard to education.

I want to quote from a member of the Natal Provincial Education Council, Prof Colin Webb, vice principal of the University of Natal and a man highly respected in education circles throughout the country. At a meeting of the Natal Provincial Education Council earlier this year he said that the council had no accountability and no decision-making powers and was constitutionally a virtually meaningless body.

He went on to say, and I quote:

He went on to refer to the council and I quote again—

These comments came very shortly after another council member, Dr George Harrison, a former Natal Teachers’ Training College rector, had resigned. I need to add maybe I do not need to add that Dr Harrison enjoyed an enormously good reputation in education circles and in fact still does.

He was a Minister’s appointee.

He was in fact a Minister’s appointee on the Natal Provincial Education Council. Dr Harrison had made it clear at the time of his resignation that his reasons for doing so were that the provincial councils have no authority, no meaningful power, no control, and that, and I quote, “all decisions were being made in Pretoria”. That is from a member of the Natal Provincial Education Council, a man who operated within the structure and found at the end of that time that the council was absolutely meaningless because all decisions were being made in Pretoria. He emphasised that the council was confined to a purely advisory function and that none of the advice given by the council had ever been taken by Pretoria. I quote him again:

And that is really the point.

The Department of Education and Culture can say all it likes about democratising education; the truth is that this is simply not happening. As Prof Webb has said, a grey uniformity is spreading through South African education. There is little chance of the provinces being able to retain their own ethos and their own character. A grey uniformity is gradually spreading over all provinces, and there seems to be nothing that one can do to prevent this from happening. I want to say that creating the provincial education councils and then making them advisory only is paying lip service to the process of democratising education control. It is paying lip service to the whole question of the decentralisation of education control. I believe that if the Government is sincere in this regard an urgent reorganisation of the whole system of education councils and the whole system of education control with real authority and legislative powers being given to these councils is absolutely necessary.

I want to say just a brief word about the regional committees which now exist in Natal. I listened with interest to what the hon member for Sunnyside had to say about these committees in the Transvaal. In Natal these committees, even more so than the education council, are a farce. They have no money, they have no authority, they have nothing, and I believe they are nothing more than a cover for the Government’s so-called democratising process. I believe that the hon the Minister should tell us exactly what the intention of these regional committees is and if he anticipates that they will ever be able to achieve what they are supposed to achieve, whatever that may be. They simply are not working in Natal and I look forward to hearing what the hon the Minister has to say about this particular aspect when he replies later on. I also want to emphasise to the hon the Minister that the point I am making is one very much on the increase in the eyes of a number of people in Natal, including a number of people who have served on those particular committees.

I want to touch very briefly on what the 1988 report had to say about consultation in the quote I read earlier. The paragraph I read referred to the “development of structures for consultation”. I sincerely hope that this is true and that the Department of Education and Culture is in fact now prepared to consult more meaningfully with people and groups and that proper channels for meaningful consultation do or will in fact exist. Education being the highly emotive subject it is makes it essential for proper channels for consultation and negotiation to exist. I am concerned, however, that the consultation spoken about here might be simply and only the consultation with provincial education councils or with other groups that are equally meaningless in the whole education structure. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Durban North addressed a couple of questions to the hon the Minister and I believe the hon the Minster will reply to them. However, I also want to have a quiet word with the hon member for Durban North today.

I have serious reservations about some of his antics in the field of education. Let us look at some of the actions and utterances of this hon member to illustrate my point.

Why don’t you answer his arguments.

In Hansard… I do not want to pick a fight with the hon member for Berea; he is my MP; I have been here for two years and not once did he invite me for a cup of tea or for lunch. I do not think I will vote for him next time.

Will the hon member take a question?

I have little time—unfortunately, no questions.

He just wants tea!

In Hansard of 29 April 1988, col 8 079 he makes it clear that he still thinks, as in his Natal Teachers’ Society days, that Natal should rather have an English-speaking Director of Education. The present one, Mr Olmesdahl, happens to be an Afrikaner. But in the very same column this hon member goes on to say:

Let us now carefully look at what we have here. On the one hand we have the plea that, since Natal is predominantly English-speaking, it should have an English-speaking Director of Education. I can understand that sentiment. But on the other hand the DP is dead against own affairs education. It is therefore explicitly against the principle and the practice of education provided for the White community by the White community from that same community.

Herein lies the irony: How can one be against this principle and simultaneously have the nerve to imply that Natal should have an English-speaking Director of Education because it is predominantly English-speaking? This is ambivalence in the extreme!

But this plea—supposedly made on behalf of White, English-speaking Natalians—comes from a party that unashamedly propagates an entirely integrated education department in control of fully integrated schools, situated in entirely integrated residential areas. If one considers that Whites in Natal comprise 8% of the population then what are the prospects for this White English-speaking Director of Education, I ask you?

The hon member for Durban North espouses ad nauseum the view that people should be appointed in all posts on merit alone, irrespective of cultural origin, race or creed. How does this correspond to his view and that of the NTS, that Natal should have an English-speaking Director of Education?

I submit here today that Natal has in Mr Attie Olmesdahl an Afrikaner Director of Education and that English-speaking Natal has accepted him. He does a sterling job. Likewise, Natal has in Mr John Dean an English-speaking Deputy Director and Natal Afrikaners have accepted him. He is a pillar of strength. Both these men have been appointed on merit.

I can see why the CP is not opposing you!

In Natal a former English-speaking Director of Education, Dr Gerald Hosking, has also been appointed as our Ministerial Representative. Dr Hosking does a fine job indeed—also for education in Natal. But in the same Hansard column I have previously referred to the hon member for Durban North makes it clear that he and his party do not trust Dr Hosking. The problem? He may be English-speaking; he may have been an English-speaking Director of Education—but he is a Nationalist.

It is indeed difficult to please the DP. It is indeed obvious that their so-called liberal values exclude everything that is not DP and English-speaking.

If these sentiments that so obviously warm the bosoms of typical DP members have anything to do with liberalism then the HNP is liberal. The liberalism the DP wants to impose upon the Natal education system is a far cry from its 19th century counterpart. The DP brand of it is intellectually bankrupt. In Natal it has become a mere mask for cultural prejudice.

This cultural prejudice flourishing in the DP has again recently raised its ugly head in utterances by the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central and his less-than-half a leader, Dr Worrall, to the effect that there is no place for English-speakers in the NP. I have news for them. Come and have a look at the NP of Natal.

In this respect the hon member for Durban North was once again not to be outdone. Already late last year he decided to raise the spectre of Afrikaner Christian National Education in Natal. He went on to threaten Natalians that Christian National Education, in its narrowest sense, will be foisted upon them, and he elaborated as follows:

This “gogga maak vir baba bang” campaign of his might indeed have succeeded in temporarily sending a few gullible and unsuspecting Natalians into the trenches defending the last outpost against this new imagined onslaught, but not for long. Natalians are far too mature for such tactics. [Interjections.]

Let me reiterate the position of the NP of Natal in this regard. We do not regard Christian National Education as an issue in Natal. Communities formulate their own approach in this regard. In Natal, we have wisely settled for a broad fundamental Christian ethos and a salute to patriotism. This is the way it will stay. We in the NP of Natal will resist any attempt to foist religious intolerance upon us. I do not notice any such an attempt. We shall, however, also resist any attempt to undermine the Christian basis of our education, as well as efforts to discredit a healthy patriotism in our children.

It is ironic that it is the DP of all parties which is now trying to drive a wedge between Afrikaners and English-speaking Natalians. They are the ones who want to exacerbate and exploit ethnic differences in Natal for political gain. This is the same party that professes that ethnicity should play no political role in society and that it should not be accommodated politically, but in practice they try hard to drive Afrikaners and English-speaking people apart by trying to engender ethnic prejudices. They must indeed be a desperate party! The present opportunistic, irresponsible antics of DP members make them the political Rip van Winkels of Natal. Natalians have outgrown that.

Talk about education.

I am still busy with the education of the hon member of Durban North. In conclusion I implore this hon member to let things cool down in education. I put this request to him in his own personal interests.

Let me explain the latter point. Hon members of the DP are at great pains to associate the Government, as well as NP members, with all manner of corruption, corruption not only confined to financial matters. [Interjections.] The hon members for Port Elizabeth Central and Sea Point even defined things like corrupt political systems and corruption of the mind. [Interjections.] If the latter type of corruption exists, then the hon member for Durban North is skating on thin ice. He is in charge of a company called Eduvision which produces so-called educational videos—and I quote from the Sunday Tribune of 25 December last year—which are intended: “To minimise the shortcomings of the Nationalist Education System.”

[Interjections.] I submit that the hon member for Durban North has a vested interest in the fortunes of this company, if not financially, then at least professionally. I submit further that the more success he has in portraying our education system as a failure, the more interest there might be in his company’s products. I submit finally that this hon member is on dangerous ground. [Interjections.] He runs the risk of confusing his priorities. He might too easily fall victim to this new disease called corruption of the mind which was created by his own party.

In terms of the very same principles which this party applies to us, I put it to this Committee that this hon member cannot afford to be a public representative actively involved in education as well as having a vested interest in Eduvision, a company which competes, as it were, with formal education.

You are not even taking yourself seriously!

In view of this I now suggest that this hon member should either now resign from politics or at least use the coming election as an excuse to retire gracefully, lest suspicious voters retrench him on 6 September. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the danger of the NP for the future of the White community in South Africa emerges most clearly in a debate on education and culture. If one examines the debate on education and culture, one finds that it is one of the debates where one after the other, speakers on the Government side try to be more conservative than the CP. That is the theme of one speech after the other.

During this process reference is made to certain legal measures, as the hon member for Brentwood did today, which ostensibly would protect the own character of White education and culture. Like the speech of that hon member, the speeches are characterised by the use of choice Afrikaans to reel off one political cliché after the other. This falls softly on the ear of the conservative voter.

The hon the Minister also stated in his speech that there was actually no difference between the education policy of the NP and that of the CP, as spelt out by the hon member for Brits. The danger lies in the fact that the White community of South Africa is going to believe this smokescreen. I am going to use this as my starting-point today. On the basis of certain aspects I am going to prove that the realities in South Africa differ greatly from this smokescreen the NP is presenting to us.

In terms of section 14(1) of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1983, own affairs is defined as follows:

According to section 14(2) matters which are mentioned in Schedule 1 of the Constitution, are own affairs. In terms of Schedule 1 education is an own affair, subject to certain general Acts.

As stated in the relevant Schedule, culture, which mainly affects the relevant population group, is repeated in Schedule 1 as an own affair. To summarise, what is at issue here is the maintenance of the White population group’s identity and the promotion of its way of life, culture, traditions and customs.

However, in the light of this background we look at the following. On page 1 of the Department of Development Planning’s 1988 annual report we read as follows:

On page 1 we read:

This inclusion of all population groups in all levels of Government is called a democratic development process on page 3 where the report states as follows:

We now wish to ask the hon the Minister of Education and Culture whether he agrees with this statement which boils down to nothing else than that the classroom will henceforth be used by the NP for the specific purpose of transforming society as a whole. If so, we wish to know immediately from this hon Minister which measures he is going to take to use the classrooms of White schools, colleges, technikons and universities to bringing about this transformation.

We ask furthermore how he reconciles this conduct and that of his hon colleagues with the whole concept of own affairs as defined in the Constitution to which I have already referred. The CP clearly states that we reject these influencing plans of the Government with the contempt they deserve. This is tantamount to nothing less than the planned misuse of White educational institutions for party-political aims.

We feel it also displays arrogant contempt for the present Constitution. However, it is in accordance with the aim of the NP to abolish the present Constitution.

A second aspect is the following. According to the NP Press the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs said the following during the second half of March this year:

According to the NP Press he condemned group areas and population registration based on racial descent. We should like to know whether this hon Minister of White Education and Culture, which by definition is connected to racial classification, agrees with the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs? If he agrees with him, when is separate education for Whites going to disappear? If he does not agree with him, why is this hon Minister still in the NP? Why is he still there?

He does not belong there!

Why does he not do or say anything to protect White Education and Culture from the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs and his spiritual allies in the NP?

Here comes the bogeyman!

A third aspect that I wish to refer to is the following. The Free Settlement Areas Act came into effect on 1 April this year. Certain areas were identified as possible free settlement areas as early as in September 1988. The President’s Council report on this matter contains the recommendation of NP members on schools for these mixed communities. To this day the Government has never spelt out what it is going to do with White schools that fall within these mixed free settlement areas.

Are the Whites going to be moved out? How is the Government going to handle this issue? I wish to say that it is high time that the hon the Minister or the Government in general clarified this aspect. The Free Settlement Areas Act has been functioning for more than a month. We want clarity on this issue now.

Fourthly I wish to refer to page 14 of the annual report of the White Department of Education and Culture for 1988. This is the latest annual report. With reference to the Land Service Movement, we read the following:

Nowhere in this report can one find what is meant by “democratised”. This reminds me of the annual report of the Department of Development Planning which was discussed in this year’s debates, in which the term “democratisation” was used to describe the inclusion of Blacks in the Government of the Republic of South Africa. In all fairness we now wish to know from this hon the Minister what the meaning of this word is in this case.

In the fifth instance—with reference to the cultural section of the hon the Minister’s portfolio—we are referring to the policy of the NP in terms of which it regards Blacks, Coloureds, Indians and Whites as part of one nation, with one Government and one Cabinet. In this connection we then wish to ask if it is acceptable to the hon the Minister and to hon members of the NP that White scholars and students are taught that traditions, culture and customs—I use the words we find in the description of an own affair in section 14 of the Constitution—such as polygamy, lobolo, witch-doctors, the belief in ancestral spirits and the blood feud—to name but a few—are acceptable as national traditions, cultures or customs. [Interjections.]

When the Black State President, envisaged for South Africa by the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid and the hon the Minister of Information, Broadcasting Services and the Film Industry, opens Parliament, and his praise-singer enters Parliament first and shouts out his eulogy for a quarter of an hour, will this hon the Minister accept it? [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Roodepoort did his utmost to try to impress upon us that the NP is on the road to integration. He has a problem. His problem is that they have been saying for the past year that schools will be open shortly. In my constituency they warned the people that within two years there would no longer be any White schools. This has not materialised. The hon member has a problem, because his chickens are going to come home to roost.

Who said there would no longer be any White schools?

He will now have to tell the voters that what they predicted has not come true. Very verbosely he did everything in his power…

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

Order! Is the hon member for Maraisburg prepared to answer a question?

No, he will have to listen for a while.

The hon member for Maritzburg is not prepared to answer a question. The hon member may proceed. [Interjections.]

[Inaudible.]

Order! If the hon member says he is not prepared to answer questions, the hon member for Roodepoort should not continue to ask questions regardless.

That hon member is going to come off second best. The hon the Minister will reply to him and provide him with a good explanation.

Would you repeat those untruths outside Parliament!

Then the hon member will realise that there is no question of the NP being on a road to integration. [Interjections.]

Lately child abuse has been under close scrutiny. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture expressed his concern during November last year about the harm that was being done to innocent children. At that stage he gave the undertaking that pupils would be assisted in every respect within education.

The hon the Minister of Education and Culture reaffirmed the policy of the Department of Education and Culture, namely that every offence of this nature is regarded in a serious light. The preparation of the youth occurs by means of youth programmes aimed at the education of the youth, and by means of the educational task of the school which is of academic nature. Specific provision is made for youth programmes which have educational guidance as their aim. During the year under review 249 385 school-going youths and 81 630 post-school youths attended altogether 646 projects which had educational guidance as their aim. Family education programmes were attended by 5 420 youths during the year under review.

Child abuse is an extremely emotional and contentious matter, in which education, as one educational partner, and the parent as the other educational partner, have a direct interest. The community, as the third partner, also has a particular responsibility towards the child. The teacher, and also, of course, members of the public, are not obliged by law to report child offences. However, everyone has a moral obligation to report child offences. People experience some hesitation in reporting offences against children because of the exposure to slander charges which can be brought against the plaintiff. Each teacher, however, is continuously mindful of any need that a pupil may be experiencing. In this connection certain reporting procedures have been given to school principals and staff. The sensitivity of the problem has brought about the necessity to treat all cases with great caution and with extreme confidentiality.

The Child Protection Unit of the South African Police and the Department of Health and Welfare also have an interest in combating the problem of child abuse and in the care of the victims. Of course, education still has the task of offering supportive after-care services to the child within the educational environment. Every child has the right to be cared for and to be protected within the family. Every child also has the right to be protected by our courts. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture said the following at the beginning of the year during the opening of the congress of the Educational Society:

The school and the department are doing everything possible to combat child abuse, and all the knowledge and specialised educational auxiliary services are utilised to their optimum in this struggle. Are the other two partners, namely the parents and society, also doing their part to combat the social problem which is increasingly threatening our system of values? I believe that the parents as partners cannot always identify the problem and also deal with it. Most cases of the sexual abuse of children occur within the family.

According to the SA National Council for Child Welfare there was an increase last year during the period from September to November of 231% in the cases of sexual abuse of children compared with the period between June and August. During July and August 97 cases of incest were reported, and in the following three months 325 cases were reported.

In 75% to 85% of the sexual offences committed against children, the attacker is known to the child. In 45% of the cases the attacker is related to the victim. Between 30% and 40% of the sexual assaults on children were by persons who were in a position of authority over the child.

Child prostitution is on the increase and every parent should be concerned about the dangers to which child prostitutes—boys and girls—are exposed.

Child molestation, child prostitution and child pornography have always existed, but society has become more permissive and many parents have a lackadaisical attitude towards their children’s activities. I also believe there are parents who are aware of their children’s involvement in child prostitution etc, but who do not act because it provides some income.

The parent is the most important partner in the education of the child and I believe that the parent who knowingly allows his child to be abused sexually for remuneration, should not be left unpunished.

The National Director of the SA National Council for Child and Family Welfare said in a recent article that communication between parent and child, a relationship of trust which is already established during the infant years, as well as an inherent knowledge in the child that he has the right to say no, is at all times the preventive strategy that can protect children against sexual abuse.

The Director-General of the department, Mr Terblanche, said the following during the opening of the academic year of the Port Elizabeth College of Education:

If parents have the same approach and the same attitude towards members of the family who molest their children, if the child is taught a few simple things and if the parents accept that it is also their responsibility always to know what the children are doing and in whose company they are, this evil can be effectively combated and the effect of this on a molested child in the long term, can also be prevented.

Mr Chairman, I agree entirely with most of the things the hon member for Maraisburg mentioned, such as the importance of combating the sexual molestation of children, the multifaceted nature of the problems and the fact that there are many people and institutions—families, the schools and others—that have a responsibility to ensure that this problem is countered.

I too would like to congratulate the Cape Education Department on their 150th anniversary, which they are celebrating this year. They have certainly done a great deal of good work in that time. There are many schools in the Cape Province that fall under their control of which they and the community can be extremely proud.

I think that one of the features of the department which has led to this situation is the fact that they have shown a degree of flexibility over the years which has been beneficial to the growth of the schools and the education system in the province as a whole.

I must, however, issue a warning to the hon the Minister. I had a look at a copy of the speech he prepared for this afternoon, and I was rather disappointed to see that he chose, at the beginning, to link the theme of the 150th anniversary with opposition to open schools.

I think it was most unwise, when he talked of preservation to say that that led him on to address the issue of people who are calling for open schools. I can assure hon members that if the hon Minister in any way wants to suggest to the people of the Cape Province that this anniversary is an anniversary of 150 years of closed White schools and is therefore a good reason for recognising it, he can forget about the cooperation of many parents and schools in these festivities. [Interjections.] I think that was most unwise. If the hon Minister is short of crutches for his argument against allowing open schools where they are requested, he should not try to spoil the province’s anniversary to try to provide himself with an extra crutch.

When one goes through the reasoning that the hon Minister sets out—and for once he does set out some reasoning as opposed simply to hiding behind the Constitution, which is his favourite ploy on the question of open schools—one finds that there are two features. One is the contradictions and the second is what I would call the arrogance. I do not mean this in a personally abusive sense but rather the educational arrogance of knowing what is good for other people.

One of the points the hon Minister mentions is that if schools open themselves to all races they could change their nature, character and mission. This is one of the crucial elements in this. By whom would the nature, character and mission of a school be defined? Who are we going to have define those features? Will it be the hon Minister, some other people in Pretoria, some of the hon Minister’s colleagues or the school and the community themselves?

Parents and teachers in a number of schools have indicated that they see that the mission and character of their schools is to prepare children for life. To be able, they believe and I agree with them, to prepare their children for life in South Africa where they are going to have to live, play, govern, work and worship with people of other races, they do not want racial exclusivity. They believe that the opening of their schools and having their children attend desegregated schools is preparing them for life.

For those people that is the essence of the mission of their schools, not a mission that has been defined by somebody else. By opening their schools they do not believe that there needs to be a change in the mission or essential character of the school because their mission and the character of those schools is not defined in racial terms. They are not sending their children to those schools for preparation for a White life or White moral values or because there is White excellence as opposed to other excellence or that there are White norms of good behaviour as opposed to other norms. They have a character and a mission, or they wish them to have them, in which race as such is not an essential component. I would ask the hon Minister not to attempt to impose on other schools and communities what he may believe—and he is entitled to his own belief—the essential mission, character and nature of a school needs to be or should be.

Were you at such a school?

I was not at such a school. I was, however, at a school with such a mission and character. It was not an open school because the Government would not permit it. I might say that the school that I was at made a point of attempting to admit and making space for Afrikaans-speaking children from the platteland so that we could have a broader South Africa education and not a narrow English-speaking one.

[Inaudible.]

If the hon Deputy Minster wants to ask a question he should stand up and do so. [Interjections.]

He never went to school.

Order! I am not going to allow this dialogue to continue. The hon member for Cape Town Gardens may continue.

I offered the hon Deputy Minister an opportunity to ask a question if he wants to. I am not scared of them. He is also incapable of asking good ones.

He cannot think fast enough!

The second point I wish to address is the hon the Minister’s statement that Whites-only schools are aimed at securing an own community life for Whites. Now one does not need to have a memory going back that long to know that exactly the same argument, although the terminology of “own” was not the “in” phrase at that time, was used in respect of universities. Is that not so? It was also used in terms of the Nico Malan Theatre. We could not open that to other races because it was for Whites and that it would spoil the White culture—it would make it unacceptable.

I want to ask the hon the Minister directly, could he tell the House whether he believes that the fact that the Nico Malan Theatre has been open to all races for the last 15-18 years has threatened the security of the community life of Whites? [Interjections.] He is allowed to look up.[Interjections.]

He said of course not.

I will answer you, I promise you.

Mr Chairman, I suggest that unless the hon the Minister really wants to get into the next edition of Mad magazine, he is going to have to say it has not threatened the security of Whites, and I would agree with him entirely. The point is there were people at the time who were arguing exactly along those lines.

Then there is the question of private schools. For years the argument was raised that one could not open them without threatening Whites. Most recently of all this argument was used in relation to technikons. Is the hon the Minister suggesting that opening all those things has threatened the own community life of Whites? Exactly the same argument was used and we know very well that those things have not been threatened. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister talks of devolution of authority but only when it suits him. Why is he not prepared to have a devolution of this authority to schools and their communities? He has brought in communities and I think it is relevant. Why does he not have some measurable test in which the school, the teachers, the parents and the community take a point of view and then allow them to make their own decision? Why is it that the hon the Minister believes that he knows what is best for everyone when each of us comes from a particular part of this country and a particular background?

The hon the Minister also lists practical problems. I do not have the time to go through each of those practical problems because most of them have answers. Those are, however, problems that the school or the pupil would experience. Why not grant them the freedom of choice? Here again the point of the arrogance comes in. Are the schools in the Cape Peninsula or parents who are thinking of sending their children to those schools, incapable of taking those factors into account? I have no doubt those schools would have no objection to the hon the Minister or one of his appointees addressing the parents of that school to warn them of all the dangers that he feels are lurking in the wings. They would not be scared of them—they have got the answers to them. [Interjections.]

I do not believe that they are insurmountable obstacles. Why, if they are, are they not insurmountable obstacles for private schools? Why are almost all conventional private schools—as opposed to cram schools and others—open? [Interjections.]

Debate interrupted:

Order! Before I call upon the hon member for Kimberley North, I shall give the hon member for Roodepoort the opportunity to give a personal explanation as he requested of me.

Personal explanation:

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Maraisburg referred in the debate today to people who were allegedly stating in my constituency that there would be no more White schools left there within two years. He linked me with these allegations by saying that my chickens would come home to roost and that I would have to explain why the allegations which had been made—according to him—had not come true.

I should like to emphasise that, in the first place, I have no knowledge of such allegations which were spread in my constituency and, in the second place, that I have no connection at all with any persons who could have spread or really spread such allegations. Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. [Interjections.]

Debate resumed:

Mr Chairman, I am pleased that at least the hon member for Roodepoort explained how the matters stood. In any case we shall accept that he is in favour of separate schools. I do not have a problem with that.

Today I wish to start by saying that formal education in South Africa dates back to the slave school in 1658, and is therefore 331 years old. In a lighter vein I should like to say that it seems to me education was already an own affair at that stage.

The establishment of separate education departments with there own heads of department, only became a reality on 23 May 1839 when James Rose-Innes was appointed as the first General Superintendent of Public Education, a title which was soon changed to that of Superintendent-General of Education. This year the Cape Department of Public Education, which is presently known as the Cape Education Department, celebrates its 150th anniversary as the oldest education department in the RSA.

†During the past 150 years the department has had a number of political bosses. At first it was the colonial government of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope; from 1910 it was the Cape Provincial Administration; and, since 1 April 1986 has fallen under central Government control as an executive department of the Department of Education and Culture of the Administration: House of Assembly. In spite of all these changes in control, changes in government and in policies, local wars and two world wars, droughts, depression and inflation, it has not only survived, but has also succeeded in establishing a tradition of excellence, as well as a unique style and ethos.

*In 1988 we had various festivals. Today I do not wish to compare the importance of these at least six commemorative festivals with that of the Cape Education Department except to say that this festival we are having this year, might be more important in the development and history of the RSA and its people than many of the other festivals.

Unlike most of last year’s festivals we are celebrating the 150th anniversary of teaching without a cent of the Government’s money. The approximately R250 000 which is required, must be obtained by means of sponsorships. Because I know that the CED will not ask for it, I wondered whether the hon the Minister does not perhaps have a few rands somewhere to give tangible recognition to these efforts on the part of the education department.

The CED serves a sparsely populated province of 645 767 square kilometres, or 56% of the total surface area of the RSA, and provides a few large, but in particular many small schools with education. It provides approximately 226 000 pupils, or approximately 23% of all White pupils, with education.

I lack the time to give a survey of all the festival activities at more than 700 schools and institutions from Robben Island to Walvis Bay. Owing to the fact that it is impossible to depict the great diversity of the education department, thereby taking the risk that schools spend so much time on that that normal education suffers, it was decided to present cultural festivals, with special emphasis on art as well as literature, so that the festival would in this way can serve as a display-window for the talents of our children on that level, where they do not always make the headlines.

Most of the festival activities will take place on local and regional level, with a provincial drama festival in Port Elizabeth on 27 and 28 July, a children’s art exhibition here in the Cape Town Civic Centre during August, as well as a gala music concert in the Nico Malan on 11 August, at which guest performances will be given by the other three provinces.

There is certainly no lack of enthusiasm for the festivities. During the festival year we have had the establishment of a Northern Cape regional youth choir, and this month the first art centre in the Northern Cape will be opened in Kimberley. It is important to note that this system of art centres, as they are managed by the CED, is unique.

The emblem of the festival portrays the three rings of Jan van Riebeeck’s escutcheon, which in turn forms an integral part of the coat-of-arms of the early Cape Colony. With slight heraldic improvements it became the coat-of-arms of the Department of Education and Culture of this House. By making use of the rings and the flame, the emblem not only symbolises the importance of both the past and the present, but has a specific bearing on the department’s theme for this year, namely conservation and innovation.

One of the real highlights of the festivities will be the opening of the Cape Town Education Museum on 14 September. The museum occupies the buildings of the former Aliwal Road Primary School in Wynberg. Some of the interesting articles which are on exhibit and which have been received from all parts of Cape Town, include things such as a magic lantern, slates, slate-pencils, benches and woodwork equipment.

I should like to take this opportunity to thank Mrs Anna van Wyk, the festival public relations officer, and congratulate her on her enthusiasm and the work she put into making this festival year something special. The festival year offers the opportunity to look back with gratitude over the past 150 years of striving and development in the interest of the youth of this province.

During the past 150 years the Cape was privileged to have leaders in the field of education with exceptional vision and abilities. From Dr Rose-Innes in 1939 to our present director, Dr Schalk Walters, they ensured that the vital initiative which has characterised education in the Cape since 1839, did not wane, and that pupils are still being led purposefully on the road to responsible maturity.

A leader is only as successful as his followers make him. That is why it is also important to pay tribute today to every teacher from the earliest years until the present, they who were prepared to give everything in the interests of our children.

I believe that the Cape can enter the future with confidence, because it knows that it has teachers who, as true educators, can think innovatively and are prepared to be co-creators of the future. When they look back they do so, as we do, with gratitude, but they also look ahead with trust and upwards in faith.

Mr Chairman, I gladly follow up on the hon member for Kimberley North. He dealt with the 150th anniversary of the Cape Education Department and I listened to him carefully and attentively. I think that the hon member spoke firstly as a man of education this afternoon, but also as a dyed-in-the-wool Cape man, and I congratulate the hon member on his speech.

In my speaking turn this afternoon I should like to emphasise the role of education in the development of inter-group relations. The hon the Minister referred to this in his introductory speech this afternoon already and I thank him for his clear standpoint in this connection. In my opinion, sound inter-group relations can be a great asset in the South Africa of today. As members of Parliament we are all to aware of the complexity of our inter-group relations. The conflict potential here, with all its terrible consequences, is realised by all of us.

I should like to make the statement that peace and prosperity in South Africa is primarily going to depend upon whether the peoples of South Africa are going to reach agreement with one another or not. I am afraid that there are still too many Whites, and especially White children, who still encounter Black and Coloured people in a master-servant relationship. I am just as afraid that too many Black and Coloured people encounter the Whites, specifically the Afrikaners, as insensitive people and sometimes as oppressors. Without generalising, I wish to say that the situation is nowhere near being an ideal one. I repeat that peace and prosperity will depend on whether or not we are going to reach an accommodation.

To strive for healthy inter-group relations, is of course the responsibility of the individual in the first place. Reciprocal understanding, respect and appreciation for one another as people with our own aims and needs, should be present in each individual but then we shall have to attune each individual to that need, or educate the individual if necessary.

Besides the parental home—I wish to emphasise the role of the parental home in this respect—education has an important role to play in the education process. We must educate our children to realise that our common destiny makes it essential to arrive at a mutual understanding. In my opinion, education has a crucial role to play in this respect.

That is why I am extremely grateful to be able to mention in this respect that under the direction of this Government and specifically the hon the Minister, the Department of Education and Culture has a well-thought-out and sensible policy. Among others it also makes provision for the education programme of a school, apart from cherishing what is one’s own, to pay attention to inter-group liaison and make real attempts to maintain and promote good relations with other groups without jeopardizing the security…

How?

I shall mention it to the hon members in a while

…. which one’s own school offers one in terms of one’s own community life. In practice it works like this. Principals of schools, in consultation with their personnel and the parents—the latter are represented by the management councils—must decide about the contact and opportunities for meetings whether in the academic or cultural field or sport. Such contact takes place in a natural and spontaneous manner. In various towns and cities there are already forums for discussions or relations committees in which pupils participate. In the fields of culture and sport contact between schools of all population groups also takes place.

Absolutely spontaneous! Not initiated by the NP!

Yes, if it is arranged as the department does it.

This development must be welcomed in regard to good relationships among peoples. Every individual, but also every school must be directed at the abolition of racism and the cultivation of reciprocal respect among the various culture groups. Only in this way will we succeed in establishing trust across the dividing lines of culture, language and colour. Therefore I welcome the standpoint of the hon the Minister as stated in July 1988 in Goodwood:

The standpoint of the Director of Education in Transvaal, Dr P H Bredenkamp, is also to be welcomed in this respect:

I think that Dr Bredenkamp has expressed the standpoints of all our Directors of Education in all four provinces. As a matter of fact, I read in the Annual Report of the Department of Education and Culture that it is not merely a question of a positive attitude, but that deeds and actions are not lacking either. In the Free State for example—and I am proud to say it—our education department is taking a whole series of practical steps.

Like the others, the Free State Education Department regards participation in such projects as voluntary for schools as well as for pupils and the parents. Parental consent for participation is regarded as a prerequisite.

If you do not want to?

Then you do not participate.

Yes, then you become an outcast!

Let me refer to a few of these activities. There is the Edutrain project which is a leadership course and educational tour by train and is attended by pupil leaders of all the population groups.

Then there is the Rali discussion group which is a leadership development project. A third project which I should like to mention, is the Eagles discussion group in which youth of White and Black schools in our province can participate.

Furthermore, prominent Black leaders are often invited to address school leaders. I shall mention two people who have already been guests at such opportunities: Mr Justus Tsungu, a well-known personality from the SABC, and Chief Minister T K Mopedi from QwaQwa.

There are also inter-school debating competitions. [Interjections.] The hon member for Potgietersrus will receive another turn to speak.

There are also choir festivals in which the various population groups participate and communicate with one another in this way.

This is outstanding work and on behalf of this side of the House, I wish to express our satisfaction.

In conclusion, may I ask the CP a few questions, because one of them has a turn after me and he might provide us with the answers. They are easy questions; they are not trick questions. The first question is: Does the CP support the importance of sound inter-group relations in South Africa? [Interjections.] The second question is: Does the CP agree that besides education, the parental home has a role to play in the promotion of these sound relations? [Interjections.] The third easy question is: Does the CP encourage schools to participate in these projects? We should like to hear what their replies to these three questions are.

Mr Chairman, proceeding from the discussion of the Vote of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture, I want to refer to the report of the Auditor-General, of which paragraph 5 on page 38 reads:

[Interjections.] I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he will give us an answer on this.

I also want to draw the hon the Minister’s attention to paragraph 8 which reads:

Certain amounts were recovered and others were cancelled—

I should like to know whether the court case has been disposed of and whether the hon the Minister can report on it.

There is yet another aspect which I find very alarming and I unfortunately have to address it in this House. I shall quote further from this report. Paragraph 8(2) reads:

I should like to know from the hon the Minister to what extent these matters are permissible and how much attention he is paying this case because we are very concerned about it.

I also want to inform the hon the Minister that we hear that Cape Province school principals feel deeply unhappy about the hon the Minister’s reluctance to respond to repeated representations to pay school secretaries salaries in accordance with their productivity. We hear that, after various teachers’ associations and the Association of School Secretaries had submitted repeated requests that the salaries of school secretaries be revised and that their posts be upgraded, school secretaries were disappointed once again.

Here they quote the points about which they are unhappy. They are inter alia that school cleaners and labourers, as well as hostel staff, received retrospective increases as from 1 November 1988 while these secretaries received a 15% increase only from 1 January 1989. There is an enormous gap between the salaries of school caretakers and those of school secretaries. This gap has been increased still further. The maximum salary for school caretakers is R14 088 and that for secretaries approximately R11 930. The wages of unskilled labourers are sometimes higher than those of part-time secretaries.

If the nature and extent of the work of these school secretaries is taken into account, we think the hon the Minister owes us an answer on this. I should like to request him to react to it. We request him to attend to this.

Have your facts been checked?

Yes, they have definitely been checked. I shall let that hon member have the circular if he will be able to understand it.

He will not understand it! [Interjections.]

I see that the hon member for Turffontein has moved back one seat. That hon member could have filled one of five Cabinet positions but they have moved him back. [Interjections.]

Look at where you are sitting!

Move to the back benches, André!

Secondly, we are very concerned that the provincial education departments have received instructions and requests to spend less. We on this side of the House specifically believe that there should be no tampering with White children’s education and educational aids.

I hope the hon the Minister will take my meaning correctly. To save is one of the principles which we learned from our parents. They taught us to save; in fact, I am a person who believes that saving and productivity are the cornerstones of a good economy. We also try to pass this principle on to our children but, when their education suffers because of it, we have to discuss it. The hon the Minister is to assure us, in spite of current rotten economic conditions, that this will not result in a lowering of our White children’s educational standards.

I did that when I made my first speech.

The hon the Minister did give the assurance and we received it but we are concerned that the economy is not going to satisfy the hon the Minister’s visions. We constantly see inflation eroding these splendid promises and then we have the same situation again. [Interjections.]

Order!

Next there is another question which I should like to discuss with the hon the Minister, that is the condition of school buildings. It is obvious that the roofs, guttering and so on of these school buildings require urgent attention. I now want to tell the hon the Minister that we also receive enquiries in this regard from parents who are worried about this and who are really serious about it. We see these things rusting and becoming dilapidated. I want to know from the hon the Minister whether it does not cost more to repair or replace these things than it would cost to keep his hand on this matter.

Lastly, I want to refer to whether teachers should participate in municipal elections or not. On 21 March this year the hon member for Brits put a question to the hon the Minister. The hon member asked whether the hon the Minister’s department had given certain teachers permission to participate in the municipal elections of 1988 on a party-political basis, whether such permission was given in writing and whether he would go into detail by furnishing names. The hon the Minister replied positively to the second part of the question and also furnished certain names, among those the name of Mr G C D S Joubert of the Belfast High School.

In reply to a note, the hon the Minister informed the hon member for Barberton, and I quote from a letter which he wrote to the hon member:

I should now like to know from the hon the Minister how these facts can be reconciled, whether written permission was granted or not, and also how this person could then have been a candidate.

Just go and read that letter to which you have had access; the answer is right there! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, in conclusion I want to ask the hon the Minister how it can be reconciled that someone—I am referring to a certain Mr Daan Hattingh of Rustenburg—who stood as a candidate for the NP, is linked to the following advertisement. I also want to know how this can be reconciled with the ordinance concerned. I have the advertisement in my hand. A photograph of Mr Hattingh accompanies it. On the subject of group areas he says inter alia:

Then he asks:

Then he continues and… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not really want to react to the hon member for Delmas. You see, Sir, I have great respect for the Noltes of Stompiesfontein. My wife came from a neighbouring farm, and I would not like to be vindictive. However, when one simply ignores a person who has preceded one, one is actually insulting him. I am the last person who would want to insult my good friend, but I do not see the necessity for replying or reacting to problems in connection with roofs, gutters and the like either. [Interjections.]

I therefore feel I shall deal with the theme I have prepared a speech on, namely universities, and specifically the role of the universities as research institutions; ie institutions at which the increasing of knowledge is actually at issue, and which through this activity make a particular contribution to the development of civilisation.

As is usually mentioned in definitions, a university actually has three functions. The first of these is education. The second is research. The third function is—for lack of a better word—so-called community service. Actually all three these functions amount to community service. However, what has happened here in recent years, and this was largely caused by circumstances over which the universities initially had no control, is that universities are considered as nothing but educational institutions. Therefore they are simply a little bit higher than ordinary high schools.

This results from the fact that John Citizen sends his child to university to receive training so that he can eventually follow a profession or do a job. He consequently considers it the function of the university to teach his child, and that is that. The fact is that this is also being encouraged, and even professions view it in this light, by the kind of training which is being given at universities, which does not actually belong there.

This actually developed in the fifties, and more than a decade thereafter, when there was a tremendous need for post-school training—actually training at tertiary level—and there were no other institutions that could accommodate training of this kind. The universities were actually compelled, and they were also frequently tempted, to introduce all kinds of courses which should preferably not have been introduced at universities. This happened to such a great extent that some of these so-called subjects and courses which are offered have absolutely no research potential, for example.

There is consequently no possibility of doing research in such a subject. The closest they can usually get to research is to undertake opinion surveys for some institution or other, to see whether or not they should throw open the swimming pools. This is referred to as research. Some of these people apply for practice participation, ie participation in, for example, an accounting practice in the town in order—this is the motivation—to discover what the latest developments in the subject are so that they can teach these to the students. When this happens, we are obviously not dealing with a subject which is functioning to generate knowledge in a university.

I believe if we stick to a too narrow definition of a university, we can perhaps emphasise that specific function, which I consider important in a university. It is true that a university primarily exists to give students a grounding in science with a view to eventually practising that science. This does not mean that one is simply going to practice that science by mastering all the prepared knowledge which has already been supplied. This means that one is going to develop the science and increase the knowledge of the science.

It is true that at the moment the public in South Africa are very grateful to our universities, which have had major achievements in research; and the circumstances under which research is done. The number of research outputs, by way of published articles, has increased tremendously. For example, between 1984 and 1987 it grew from 3 256 articles to 4 719 articles. These are articles published in journals in which articles are referred or selected. This increase can also be ascribed to the policy of the State to reward research outputs without considering the usefulness of those scientific findings.

Research has at least two possibilities. The one is research with a view to the development of high-level technology, and the other is research with a view to the development of the science—in other words research for the sake of the knowledge. This compensation which the State gives to universities for research outputs, has absolutely nothing to do with the practical usefulness or possibility of developing those outputs into high-level technology.

This is praiseworthy, because some of our greatest contributions to science were never made in a search for specific high-level technology by project teams that undertook research with a specific predetermined objective. It was discovered accidentally. It was motivated by what Margaret Thatcher—I am in very good company when I quote her—referred to as “the intense curiosity and dedication” of the scientist.

It is also true that this kind of research actually typifies what initially motivated and was the underlying reason for the development of knowledge. In this connection I am thinking specifically of Greek philosophy. At that stage all scientific knowledge was still known as philosophy. It was a very wise decision to call it that, because after all is said and done philosophy is all knowledge.

The Greeks believed it was a disgrace to work with one’s hands. It was a disgrace to work for business. They were actually a carefree nation, because they had many people around them who worked for them and could earn their daily bread for them. In this playful atmosphere science developed.

The Egyptians were worried about whose ear of wheat would fall into whose allotment, and so they worked out certain mathematical techniques to make certain measurements. The Greeks took these specific techniques and elevated them to a mathematical science. By being able to do this, they could of course extend its application a great deal. I have now actually been side-tracked, because science for the sake of science is really my first love.

However, we also have our “R and D programmes” or “research and development programmes”, as they are referred to overseas, which are actually parallel or similar to those of the overseas countries, although not comparable as regards the extent or the relationship between “research and development” which is encountered overseas.

The sums of money spent in other countries are astounding. A total of 2,8% of Japan’s gross domestic product is spent on research, of which 80% is contributed by private companies, and this 2,8% totals R43 billion. This research, as hon members can appreciate, is largely aimed at the development of technology, techniques and apparatus which have to be made and the solving of problems in the manufacturing processes.

However, all is not well with these programmes, and the Japanese are in any case not very satisfied with what they have achieved. For that reason they are in the process of trying to develop what they call a “centre for excellence”, in which they want to increase quality research.

Our quality research is in fact not that bad; as a matter of fact, with this stimulation which the State is giving research, they are making a praiseworthy effort.

Order! I am sorry, but the hon member’s time has expired.

Actually I still have a great deal to say, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, before I reply to the contributions, let me first deal with the matter which of course is very important within the activities of Parliament, namely the tertiary sector. I also intend devoting some attention to the cultural component tomorrow, and then we will have dealt with the three main components.

In this tertiary sector we are dealing in the first place with the 11 universities, which are the responsibility of my department, with 216 293 students, as well as eight technikons with 49 925 students. Although these institutions, in accordance with their nature and mission, also render service to other population groups, they of course render a key contribution to own affairs, for which purpose they were primarily established. In the 1989-90 financial year an amount of R1 338 055 000 was voted for this sector.

As far as the universities are concerned, I can report that further discussions have been held with the individual universities on growth restrictions. For undergraduate study a maximum growth rate was determined for each university. The object here is still to produce high-level manpower in accordance with the need and in the national interests, but to provide this training by means of a leaner university system. In this way cost-effectiveness is encouraged and the financial stability of the universities confirmed.

Good progress is also being made in regard to the rationalisation of pharmaceutical training. An investigation has already been carried out and AUT—the Universities and Technikons Advisory Council—has made specific recommendations. All the relevant inputs will be fully evaluated before a final decision is taken. A firm assurance that all those involved will be afforded an ample opportunity to consult applies specifically in this connection too.

In the technikon sector there has also been a diversity of positive developments, of which I shall mention only two. The conducting of examinations has now been fully devolved on the technikons themselves. Briefly this means that each individual technikon is now itself responsible for drawing up its own examination questions, appointing its own moderators and marking its own scripts. This development is a significant further step in the evolutionary development of the academic autonomy of this sector.

Provisionally the department is still dealing with the standardisation of points allocation, as well as certification. However, these functions will be transferred in the foreseeable future, as soon as the Technicons Certification Council is geared to carry out this function.

I have already stated on various occasions that the technikons must grow if we want to arrive at an essential equilibrium in the provision of high-level manpower. For that very reason it is gratifying to be able to report that a head count in the technikon sector grew from 39 067 in 1986 to 49 925 in 1988. Over these two years the technikon sector therefore grew by more then 27%. I think this is an excellent achievement that was accomplished under extremely inhibitive economic conditions. I should like to congratulate the technikons on this. The standard they are maintaining is paying fine dividends.

In regard to teacher training as well, with the teachers’ training colleges of my department being involved in the training of 10 366 students in 1988, meaningful progress was made during the past year. During the 1989-90 financial year an amount of R132 506 000 was voted for this sector. I should like to mention a few important initiatives on which my department is engaged in this sector.

An edited set of criteria for the evaluation of South African and foreign qualifications for employment in education has been made available. The updating of the criteria and the elimination of anomalies is taking place on an ongoing basis, but with the help of computerisation this matter has acquired a new flexibility, so that adjustments can be made with greater efficiency in future.

†Considerable progress has been made regarding a new policy for the recruitment, selection and employment of teachers. This policy is designed to ensure that supply and demand in the teaching profession is brought into balance. This is an extremely complex exercise in which various economic factors as well as the projected drop-out rate during training and employment need to be calculated and projected over a period of at least five years.

It should also allow equal access to teaching posts to all who qualify, irrespective of whether they receive financial aid during training or whether they finance their own training.

Finally, it should go a long way to ensure that recruits to the teaching profession are adequately trained and possess the personal attributes which good teaching demands.

A further occurrence of note is the signing of an agreement in terms of which my department is rendering a service to the Government of KwaZulu regarding the further training of teachers. Negotiations started during 1987 when I was approached by Dr Dhlomo, the Minister of Education and Culture of KwaZulu. During the negotiations it was established that a need existed for the further training of teachers and that my department was in a position to render the required service. An agreement was ratified on 27 February 1989 which provides for the further training of up to 100 KwaZulu students annually, upgrading qualifications from M+2 to M+3 and from M+3 to M+4. In the provision of these services, existing course material is to be utilised and the service is to be provided by the existing staff of the Natal College of Education. During January of this year, the first students were enrolled and an orientation course was held.

*I should also like to report on the successful negotiations which led to the meaningful rationalisation of tertiary education facilities in Bloemfontein, which has been beneficial to all interested parties. A new, practical campus adjoining the university will be placed at the disposal of the Bloemfontein College of Education.

Specific facilities will be utilised jointly by the college of education and the university. A practical campus will be placed at the disposal of the Orange Free State Technikon by means of the construction of a single new building and the re-utilisation of the old campus of the Bloemfontein College of Education. Various steps have already been taken to achieve these objectives.

These steps have the following result: All three institutions will, within a few years, have more practical facilities than they had before; all three institutions will utilise the facilities with a greater degree of cost-effectiveness than before. These benefits were attained in record time and with a capital saving—escalation included—of more than R100 million.

Although rationalisation is primarily the responsibility of autonomous tertiary institutions, my department would like to help where necessary. In certain cases the active co-operation of the State will be indispensable.

Various initiatives that are being launched in the tertiary sector, and in which my department is involved, are the following: The preparation for the introduction in 1990 of the legislation pertaining to teacher training; attention to more effective methods of conveying knowledge at tertiary institutions. Traditionally the conveying of knowledge takes place either at residential institutions with a high degree of lecturer/student contact or at distance institutions. Alternative methods of tuition and conveying knowledge require investigation. The extent to which educational technology can make a contribution must be scrutinised. These matters are also being researched by my department at present.

Resource provision in a milieu of dwindling growth is a further matter which will be studied. The education system was traditionally a growing institution and the managerial approach made provision for this. As is the case throughout the world, this approach no longer applies in the White education sector. Other data bases, other managerial techniques and other modi operandi are required. The department is engaged in identifying this expertise in the tertiary sphere as well so as to establish the most effective managerial style for the department.

The supply and demand of manpower in our country also compels us to develop the most cost-effective flow patterns within and between tertiary institutions and to make a re-evaluation of vocational education. These investigations will be undertaken by my department.

†In conclusion, I wish to reiterate: The tertiary sector of the Department of Education and Culture has produced solid gains in a number of areas. Where traditional approaches have remained relevant, they have been maintained and encouraged. In areas where traditional ways are no longer adequate, relevant factors have been identified and scientific investigations launched in order to determine the most viable approaches for the future.

This record of continuing progress serves us well. Our tertiary institutions are rendering an educational service which provides us with the backbone for our future development. Allow me to thank each individual who contributes to this worthwhile endeavour.

*I should now like to proceed to comment on contributions made by hon members. If hon members would pardon me, however, I should first like to refer to hon members on this side of the Committee, after which I shall proceed to deal with opposition speakers.

The hon member for Gezina spoke about the parent and the important responsibility a parent has in respect of education and training. This is of course a basic standpoint with which anyone who knows anything about education will associate himself. I thank the hon member very kindly for that.

It is very clear that pedagogical considerations must apply under all circumstances, particularly in the times in which we are now living. It applies to all parties on both sides of the committee that pedagogical and not political considerations must apply. The question, as the hon member made very clear, is what is in the interests of the child, and that is primary. The task of the school and its community is nurturing education and not politicking. I should very much like to associate myself very closely with the sentiments expressed by the hon member for Gezina.

In respect of child abuse, which he also touched upon, we are all very deeply concerned. As I have already indicated, we have at the present moment constituted a committee which is giving in-depth consideration to this matter. I thank him for his contribution.

I should like to refer next to the hon member for Sunnyside, who praised the Transvaal Education Department in particular for the exceptional contribution which the department made in that province in respect of education in the national interest. May I say to him and to the Transvaal Education Department that I have very great appreciation for the dynamic approach of the Transvaal Education Department, which is the biggest department and which performs its complicated task with so much expertise and dedication.

I should very much like to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the hon member for Sunnyside.

The hon member for Umhlatuzana expressed appreciation for the Natal Education Department. Allow me at once to say provisionally—I shall elaborate on this later—that I am very grateful for and have very high appreciation for the Natal Education Department, from the Director of Education right down to the teachers and parents.

I also have very great appreciation for the contribution that is being made by the Provincial Education Council of Natal, notwithstanding the negative and destructive criticism of that hon member for Durban North. [Interjections.] I shall come back to this later and indicate how that hon member, who used to be a school principal—it is unthinkable!—was absolutely derogatory about the education, the teachers and the parents in Natal. I was astonished by it. I want to agree with the hon member on this side of the House who said that that hon member should take care that he does not go too far.

I want to say, with reference to what he said in this House today, that it is time this hon member was exposed, and I am going to do this today. I am very sorry that I am going to have to become personal about the hon member, but I shall leave that for later. I want to thank the hon member for Umhlatuzana for also having reproached the hon member for Durban North in this connection.

The hon member for Maraisburg devoted a lot of his time to child abuse and molestation. He quoted shocking statistics. These are statistics which cause every right-minded person in this country grave concern. I am grateful, as the hon member also knows, that investigations in various spheres are now being launched into these problems with which we are struggling. In respect of my own department a very knowledgeable committee has been convened, from various facets of society, to look into this matter. I want to give the hon member the assurance that within the ambit of “Cherish our Youth 2000” we are doing exhaustive research in consultation with all interested parties into this question of childabuse. It is very important that we implement the results of this investigation within the overall education programme to see whether a contribution on our part cannot be made to contain it. I thank the hon member for having brought this extremely important matter to the attention of this House.

May I now say at once that I know the hon member for Walmer is not likely to make himself eligible for re-election. I want to tell him that I shall miss him personally in this House. This House will be the poorer owing to the fact that this hon member has a wealth of knowledge, because he has devoted so many years with full dedication to the tertiary sector of the university. I want to tell the hon member that for me personally it was always a pleasant experience, as happened again this afternoon, to hear him drawing comfortably on his own knowledge. What the hon member conveyed to us in this House this afternoon of his beloved science moved us. In respect of the actual subject, namely research and the university’s role in research, I want to thank the hon member for his fine analysis in this connection. Of course I agree wholeheartedly with the hon member that basic research remains the foundations of all research, and this may definitely not be neglected. The increase in research outputs at all universities is sincerely appreciated. It is also true—I think the hon member is also aware of this—that the research output at technikons will in future also be subsidised. The fact that this will also be subsidised at technikons will mean that it will bring further stimulus to development research, which is extremely important in the tertiary sector. I thank the hon member for the exceptional and expert contribution he made, not only today but during other debates as well.

I now come back to the hon member for Pinetown, who is present in the House now. The hon member apologised for perhaps not being able to be here, but I see he is back now. May I immediately thank the hon member for the expressions of thanks and congratulations which he conveyed to this side of the House. I appreciate it. I do not begrudge any hon member from any of the Opposition parties adopting a different standpoint to the philosophy of education of this side of the House. Nor do I have any problem With an hon member expressing constructive criticism in regard to deficiencies within my department. I have never said, just as no one on this side of the House has ever said, that we are perfect, and have no shortcomings. What I do not like, however, is negative destructive criticism. I also want to thank the hon member for the way in which he presented specific matters. I know that he was also a teacher, and I know that he views education from that point of view, namely what is in the best interests of the child.

The hon member pointed out that political parties might differ with one another, but that education would carry on. Of course the DP has a specific constitutional and political policy, and I want to point out to the hon member that if the DP should come into power, it will base its education policy on its constitutional policy. The hon member must bear that in mind when he attacks us because we have a specific educational philosophy based on our views and the Constitution Act. The hon member will simply have to grant us this, although he may differ with us, because he as a member of his party will do precisely the same if they should become the governing group. When the hon member argues about culture, which can in fact be used as a norm of separation—rather then race—I do not want to take strong issue with the hon member. I merely want to tell the hon member that the fact that he accepts today that culture is a norm on the basis of which we can make this classification, proves that we have already come a long way. Let us not take this matter any further now. On the basis of the fact that there are cultural differences in this country it means that we can in fact have own education. This has been demonstrated throughout the world, as the hon member himself conceded, and we were at least able to agree on that point.

In respect of private schools, the hon member referred to the regulations, which provide that there must be 50% plus one Whites. This is not stated in the regulations, but it is true that I said this in this House. What I want to say to the hon member is that this is not necessarily the only reason why a private school does not qualify for the 45%. I know the hon member is aware of this, but I just want to say it for the information of the House.

For registration; not for subsidisation?

Yes, for registration. For registration it is of course necessary because, and I make no secret of this, I am primarily responsible for the Whites in respect of my department and that is why I can only cause an institution to be registered if the majority are Whites. I think this is surely an acceptable statement which everyone has to accept.

[Inaudible.]

No, from Whites, I specifically said Whites. Our standpoint in respect of the colleges of education that should be open, for which the hon member asked, I have already stated when I replied the first time.

Because the college of education is primarily concerned with the training of primary teachers, and the primary teachers deal in particular with the continuation of education of the child after he leaves school, it is not my policy—it is no use discussing this matter any further—to throw colleges of education open. We are only prepared to render a service as we did in Natal in respect of KwaZulu.

In respect of the State schools I also want to tell the hon member that we do not have a policy of throwing State schools open. I am afraid that we shall simply have to agree to differ now.

The hon member made a moving speech when he told about his child who went into Sub A or Std 1 and who asked why children of colour could not go with him to the same school. I understand that, but I also want to say to the hon member that in the same way we could find a White child asking why the Coloured child went to school with him.

Someone must ultimately make a decision and there are hon members here—I shall come back to that tomorrow—who argued that we are arrogant, seen, from a pedagogical point of view, because we want to prescribe how it should be. The fact of the matter is that someone ultimately has to take a decision. I shall come back to that later.

Why not freedom of choice?

I shall come back to that later. The hon member asked me what was essential in respect of the contribution made by parents. I have already conceded to the hon member that parents have over the years made a particularly welcome financial contribution. They shall also have to do so in future.

Because he asked what was essential it is not a question that can simply be replied to across the floor of this House. The hon member will have to agree with me that there are certain basic educational needs which will ensure that one is able to reduce education of a really good standard. This means that one must have teachers. One must have buildings, one must have educational aids in the class-room situation. It is not always necessary to have a luxury hall, playgrounds or sportsgrounds. In other words, there are quite a number of things that can be supplementary to education and can make a contribution. When we talk about essentials then I say that the Government commits itself to making sufficient funds available to meet these basic educational needs so that one does not have a decline in the standard and quality of education provided within the classroom.

May I ask the hon the Minister a question?

Is the hon the Minister aware that in some schools, at least in the Cape Province, they do not receive enough money now to cover all their books and stationery requirements?

I shall reply to that question of the hon member tomorrow. I undertake to do so for him.

It’s not a luxury!

Of course not!

At this moment I do not want to elaborate on this further. I shall give the hon member a specific reply to that question tomorrow.

This brings us to the end of the debate. It seems to me some people are already very tired. I myself am also very tired. I therefore assume that we shall proceed tomorrow.

Debate interrupted.

Mr Chairman, this is probably the moment at which to say farewell to the hon the Minister. On behalf of this side of the House I should like to say that the hon the Minister is a good man, and we respect him as a person. The better one gets to know him, the more one appreciates him. As one gets to know him, one realises that he may look very angry even if he is not really angry yet, and one might make the mistake of thinking he is angry and then tackling the matter incorrectly. We therefore say the hon the Minister is a good man, and we thank him for what he has done for agriculture to the best of his ability during the past few years. We want to wish him and his family everything of the best for the years that lie ahead. We wish him luck with his farming, and I sincerely hope that he will have a better Minister of Agriculture when he goes back to farming. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, we purposely do not want to evaluate the hon the Minister as a Minister today, because for humane reasons we do not want to bid him farewell in a way that might shock him. Consequently we must leave it at that, and I shall rather come back to the Vote.

With regard to this Vote, it is undeniably so—we cannot get away from it; one cannot deny it—that with this budget the Government has finally turned its back on the farmers. The Vote we are discussing today is of vital importance for agriculture, because it deals with research and extension, the promotion of plant and animal production, agricultural resource development, the development of entrepreneurs and agricultural financing, and this budget is R175 500 000 less than last year’s was—20% less. One cannot argue or think that matters are different when it comes to the Agricultural Economics and Marketing Vote; that is not the case either. The budget for that Vote is also smaller than that of last year, and with regard to the agricultural budget, this is a pattern that has taken shape consistently in South Africa during the past few years.

Consequently agriculture is no longer a priority on the Government’s list of priorities. Agricultural financing is reduced by R207 million in this budget in comparison with that of last year. That is a decrease of 35%. Consolidation of debt is reduced by R92 million, a decrease of 64%. It is true that there is an increase in interest subsidisation of carry-over debt, and we think that is a good thing, but it is nothing in comparison with the interest. The most recent 1% increase in interest alone amounts to an additional R140 million for agriculture, and if we calculate this only as from last year, the increases in interest amounts to an additional R1 billion for agriculture. This does not include the increase in the price of diesel and all the other increases.

On the other hand we see in this budget that the hon the Minister expects the capital repaid—the amount the farmers repay—-to increase from R95 million to R125 million. Last year too more was repaid than had been estimated. This indicates one thing—when the farmers are capable of repaying their debt, they do so. I want to tell the hon the Minister that he knows that the interest rate on the farmers’ debt at his department is lower than anywhere else. Naturally a farmer will therefore try to repay his other debt first, since the interest rate is higher, and to leave this small amount for last, but the fact that this debt was repaid more quickly than the hon the Minister expected it to be repaid this year, proves that the farmers repay their debt if only they are in a position to make a small profit.

The next point I want to raise is that agriculture is an economic enterprise, and it is based on the farmers’ free initiative. It is a completely economic enterprise, based on profit. As in the case of any capitalist system, this enterprise is based on profit. Profit is what encourages the farmer to produce more and better products; it is his remuneration and his entire driving force.

Unfortunately, however, the Government relies on the farmers’ sentiment and their love for farming, and there is no country anywhere in the world where farmers are as eager to possess land and as fond of farming and of their country as in South Africa. As a result of this phenomenon, land prices in other countries in the world which have unfavourable conditions similar to those in South Africa, but not as bad, have not dropped to nearly the same extent, because if the South African farmers are in any way capable of doing so, they cling to their piece of land.

In addition profit is the best form of financing. What we are talking about here is agricultural financing on the part of the State, because the profit is not there, but the best form of financing in any enterprise, also in agriculture, is own financing by means of the profit one makes. It is a fact, however, that the profit margins are shrinking, and with regard to maize, we saw this year that the production costs were R215 per ton. In the case of white mealies, however, the price is R212 per ton, whereas in the case of yellow mealies it is R207 per ton. More than half of the producers have therefore failed to begin with—they are not going to make any profit.

In the case of both maize and corn we have the phenomenon that the producer price and the consumer price are moving further and further apart. In both cases the producer price is decreasing whereas the consumer price is increasing. In the case of maize, the difference between the producer’s price and the board’s selling price is R142 per ton at the moment, and then the price paid by the consumer has not even been taken into account. A consumer in George also has to pay for the transport costs to George, which makes the difference even greater.

The fact is, however, that farming is a free enterprise which is based on profit, and when one analyses the situation with reference to that difference of R142, it lends itself to irregularities. We cannot avoid that, because it is based on profit. If the producer and the consumer share that gap, in other words if the producer takes R71 and the consumer takes R71, the producer, who at present gets R3 less than the average production costs, will make a profit of R68. And the man who buys it, viz the cattle farmer, the poultry farmer, the dairy farmer or whatever farmer, is going to make R71 more. In a free economy based on profit, one simply cannot expect this to lead to such steps. Surely that kind of person is not worth anything if he sees the gap and does not take it.

I want to tell the hon the Minister that there are two contradictions arising from this. The first is irregularities which are going to lead to his destroying the system. If the system should be destroyed, we will be faced by the biggest predicament we have ever experienced. We shall be back where we were before the Marketing Act. On the other hand, if this can be avoided, the domestic market will be enlarged, because people are going to buy more of this cheaper product. Consequently I want to ask the hon the Minister to what extent he is going to permit this avoidance of the marketing scheme to take place? Is he going to close his eyes to it, or what is he going to do? Hon members will wonder what our standpoint comprises. I think this is an appalling position to be in, and it is the result of the Government’s policy, but I think one should close one’s eyes for a short while so that we can see whether or not the market wants to enlarge and whether we can increase the consumption in this way. We must guard against endangering the system’s continued existence, however, because then steps will have to be taken. If we reach a point at which the system fails, we shall be where we were before the Marketing Act.

Are you referring to the single-channel fixed price?

I am referring to the single-channel fixed price. Mr Chairman, the problems in agriculture comprise in the first place the mountain of debt which has not been evenly distributed. The second problem is the decreasing profit margin, the third is inflation and interest, and the fourth and most important problem is our present Government.

What about the drought?

The drought is no one’s fault. We hope the drought has passed, and we are grateful that we are having a good year this year. That alone has led to an enormous change in the spirit of the farmers. They have courage once again and see their way clear to going on. The problem, however, is that they have to contend with these enormous stumbling blocks that I have just mentioned to hon members. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to refer to some of the matters to which the hon member for Lichtenburg referred. I shall not refer to everything now, however, because I shall come to some of the other matters he broached later in the course of my speech.

Permit me to say at the outset that it was very kind of the hon member to bid our hon Minister farewell, but he was rather too tongue-in-cheek when he did so. He could have told him he was a good Minister. After all, we know he is. He is one of the people who held out the longest with this task. The hon member said that one gradually gets to like him more. That is true, especially if one works with him in a more intimate relationship. Once he begins waving his arms about, the truth emerges, and that is what we farmers like. One must be able to tell the truth, and one must be able to stand firm. It was very important to us that this hon Minister of ours stood firm, and we thank him very much for that. Since he is going to farm now, he may be entering the more unproductive part of his life in any case, but may he at least enjoy it. I convey my sincere thanks to him for what he has done for agriculture in South Africa.

The hon member for Lichtenburg is a good debater, but unfortunately he gets carried away and then he exaggerates certain things. To say that the Government has turned its back on agriculture is simply not true. I listened carefully to the hon member and I could not quite understand the problem of the Government’s turning its back as he spelt it out. The hon member would be an even better debater if he would leave out the bits he exaggerates.

It is also unnecessary to point out to the hon member why the budget is smaller. Surely it is logical that one should not budget in advance for possible disasters. Instead disasters are dealt with on an ad hoc basis. A great deal of money was paid out in the past to farmers who had experienced disasters, and that is the main reason for the budget’s being smaller this year. The interest charges on agriculture, to which the hon member referred, are fierce. That is true, but one cannot hold this hon Minister responsible for everything. In the end we may be held responsible for the fact that there has been no rain. If hon members want to hold us responsible for that, however, I want to thank them very much, because we have had rain recently.

The hon member is quite correct when he says that one must overcome one’s problems with one’s profit. I shall come back to this point later in my speech, but surely hon members will agree with me that these aid measures were offered to agriculture in order to lead to a profit, and that is still the case. To say then that the Government has turned its back on the farmers is really not fair or correct.

I do not want to say much about the maize industry, but I do want to make one comment. Forgive me for saying this as a representative of this side, and especially of the Boland. In my opinion one should not link the price of one’s product to the cost, because then one arrives at cost-plus and in the end at indexing. We in agriculture are moving away from that concept. I am pleased the hon member said the maize industry, and so many others too, should be a free industry. When one is involved in a free industry, however, one simply has to be able to take the knocks that come one’s way. One cannot on the one hand propagate a free industry from which one profits and on the other blame the Government for not constantly giving one money. I shall come to this later too.

Mr Chairman, I should like to talk briefly about financing, and also about research and extension. There has often been speculation over the years about the possibility of consolidating the functions of the Land Bank and the Directorate: Financial Assistance, or Agricultural Credit as we know it. This is something that emerges every few years, especially in the case of organised agriculture, but no one has been able to convince me over the years of the use or desirability of such a step. In fact, the more one thinks about it, the more undesirable it seems. Consequently I personally am still opposed to it today.

It is true, after all, that the Land Bank has specific tasks, especially after the acceptance of a policy of market-related interest rates. The Land Bank does have an important function to perform in financing, inter alia marketing boards, co-operatives, mortgage bonds to the so-called category-2 farmers and various kinds of loans to individuals, but all of these at market-related interest rates. The philosophy and consequent policy of the Directorate: Financial Assistance is a completely different kettle of fish, however. Time prevents me from going into detail, but in general one can say that they have a responsibility and are geared to ad hoc measures. They are also geared to granting assistance to the so-called category 3 farmers, where the farmers’ abilities may count just as much or more than their creditworthiness. In other words, they do not set as much store by a balance sheet as the Land Bank does. I am not saying for one moment that the Land Bank Board and the bank’s style of management are not capable of doing these things. To me the problem remains the great difference in philosophy, viz the difference in the points of departure of these two institutions, as well as the actions that result from this. I therefore want to make a serious appeal that we leave the many things one hears at that until eventually we have spelt out everything for ourselves—from our objectives to the ultimate implementation thereof in practice.

Further to this I want to appeal for even closer co-operation between the two institutions so that we can eliminate even more red tape, because in the end this may lead to ultimate reflection on even closer co-operation between the Land Bank and the Directorate: Financial Assistance, for example with regard to the handling of all loan applications by a joint board. This could lead to the subsidisation of loans in appropriate cases, perhaps still within the philosophy and the terms of reference of the Agricultural Credit Board. I want to say that agricultural financing is heading for the crossroads faster than ever before. In my opinion the time has definitely come for us finally to get away from the view that agriculture is a Government-supported and a Government-financed industry. In this respect I now come back to the speech made by the hon member for Lichtenburg.

After all, there are industries in South Africa which have produced for many decades and have even exported without receiving any Government aid whatsoever. We must reflect very deeply on this: Why is that the case? The simple truth, taught to me by my father, is that one must farm a product where it does well and where the weather plays the game. If that is the truth, and I believe it is, the implementation of Government aid becomes much simpler, because then one can really let it take place on an ad hoc basis, such as when disasters occur. Then one can really consider these disasters. One can consider damage that has arisen as a result of abnormal conditions. The only thing that remains is to determine whether or not assistance in a region is justified: If the product that is cultivated there is flattened by hail every second year or is killed by frost every now and again or if droughts are more of a rule than an exception. We must decide that for ourselves.

Let us create a new image for agriculture, the image of a proud, independent industry in South Africa which is capable of feeding all the people in this country. That is a truth, and now I come back to the hon member for Lichtenburg. If one gives a friend money one loses a friend, because that person always feels ashamed and guilty towards one. If one lends a friend money, one not only loses a friend, but one makes an enemy. Consequently we in South Africa must get away from lending and giving just as much money as people request, so that on the long road ahead the Government can remain the farmers’ friend—which it has always been. Grant assistance where this is justified. We know it will always be necessary. After all, we know that there will always be disasters and droughts. And the taxpayers, I tell hon members, will understand that. They will understand it even better if agriculture can reflect a proud image of being able to stand on its own feet.

I should like to say something about research and extension. The establishment of an agricultural research council was envisaged. I want to say, and I think hon members will agree with me, that one is grateful about that because it can only benefit agriculture in the long run. I believe this can be regarded as a step in the direction, ultimately, of more deregulation and perhaps, to some extent, privatisation. It is clear, however, that the Government will have to remain the senior partner in this for some time, especially in respect of financing and co-ordination.

Over the years the Government has provided the farmers with extension free of charge. I now tell you that things that are received free of charge are never appreciated. In addition we know that the Government cannot keep up with the private sector when it comes to salary packages. The result was that these free services did not even exist in many cases. In addition these extension sources in the respective regions simply could not have sufficient knowledge to know something about all the facets of the farming in that particular region.

That is why I say that this agricultural research council will place agriculture on a new road. This road can be seen not as privatisation, but as the consolidation of the Government functions, Government contributions, research institutions such as universities, colleges and institutes, and also the private sector with all its ramifications. All of this is in line with the view of the South African Agricultural Union in a document entitled “Gesonde landbou-ontwikkeling in die RSA”. Paragraph 19.1 on page 17 reads as follows:

Paragraph 19.3.2 puts the policy very concisely:

The State President’s Economic Advisory Council said in its report of 20 November 1986 that the Government’s involvement was essential and that the Departments of Agriculture would have to do everything in their power to establish structural adjustments in agriculture and optimum utilisation of resources. That is the objective of an agricultural research council.

We trust that the results of research obtained by the agricultural research council will also be made known in an effective way. In my opinion the farmer must be assisted first in planning the utilisation of natural resources, manpower and funds in which regard the new technology can be used more meaningfully. What is being advocated, therefore, is that the establishment of the agricultural research council will lead to a new dispensation in agriculture in South Africa which in due course will be developed in an evolutionary way to an institution which will benefit everyone. I believe that it must and will contribute to establishing and entrenching the image of agriculture which we should like to see.

Consequently I should like to express the thanks of the farmers to everyone who has contributed to these new meaningful thoughts, this new process that we can implement, and specifically Dr Alex Heyns and his team and the Ministry for what they have done in this connection and for what it will ultimately mean to agriculture in South Africa.

Mr Chairman, a glance at the Estimates for the current financial year shows that although there has been a net decrease of R175 million, this is more than accounted for by the R207 million decrease in agricultural financing. This is the subject that I am going to concentrate on in this particular address.

In the total of all the other facets there has been a modest increase of expenditure ranging between 12% and 20%, higher in some than in others, but not entirely out of keeping with the rate of inflation. There is certainly very little criticism for the increases in the Budget in respect of the other facets. I am, however, concerned about the Government’s general policy and the extent of Government expenditure on agricultural financing.

I say this particularly, because I believe we are living in rather stringent financial circumstances at the moment. To a certain extent we do have a beleaguered economy, and I do not think that what has applied over the years in terms of agricultural financing and assistance to farmers should necessarily be applicable in the present circumstances in which South Africa finds itself.

In last year’s Estimates agricultural financing accounted for more than two thirds of the total expenditure under this Vote. This was only partly accounted for by the non-recurring provision of R100 million for flood relief.

This year the Vote provides nearly R400 million for agricultural financing out of a total Budget of R700 million. That is well over 50%. From what I understand, agricultural financing is essentially a financial assistance service to the farming industry and to the farmer in particular. However, this is only a small part of the picture as this expenditure only reflects the additional sum to be added to the total sum already in circulation, rendering financial assistance to the farming industry, the vast bulk of which obviously goes towards assisting White farmers.

In this Vote it would appear that the total amount must go towards assisting White farmers. The annual report of this Department for the year ending March 1988 shows that the amounts granted by the Agricultural Credit Board by way of loans and subsidies to farmers amounted to R322 751 000 000. Amounts allocated for settlement proposals totalled R21 million, amounts paid out as grants for assistance to farmers in designated areas totalled R41 million, and during the year awards of State land to farmers were made to the value of R5 million, which I assume is based on conservative State land valuations. Drought assistance to farmers cost the State R5,5 million in respect of rebates, R8 million in respect of loans, R24 million in respect of incentives and R44 million in respect of subsidies.

I am not suggesting that these figures are abnormal in the context of what has been done in the past. I am not suggesting that this is a new trend or that this deviates substantially from what has been considered to be the need in respect of these various areas in the past.

However, in addition to these loans, grants, cash subsidies and special relief which the State provides, further benefits are provided to farmers in various debt carry-over schemes by substantial subsidization of interest rates, and the figures mentioned in the annual report indicate that these subsidies on the interest rates range from 5,5% to 7,5%, based on the Land Bank rate of interest, resulting in the farmer in some cases paying as little as 4% interest on his debts.

I do not know whether I am correct in this assumption, but this seems to be what the annual report says, namely that R150 million was spent by the State last year in this subsidization of interest rates and the State was called upon to pay a further R12 million in guarantees to secure farmers’ loans, in the sense that debts that have gone bad had to be called in and the State had to cough up.

These subsidies do not apply only to the small struggling farmer who has overextended himself or who needs to be put on his feet because of limited capital or who has been hit by adverse weather conditions or other unforeseen setbacks. It would seem to me that State subsidies on interest rates are paid fairly generally to any class of farmer who finds himself in debt. The figure mentioned in the annual report for State subsidies on interest rates on loans is up to R750 000 per farmer. If that is the maximum that is provided for, then obviously the Department envisages, through past experience or whatever, that debts of that nature can be incurred and the Department is prepared to subsidize and to assist a farmer who has incurred a debt of R750 000.

I am not saying that this is the general rule or that there are necessarily many of these cases, but why else would we provide for this high limit if it was not envisaged that people with debts of this extent were going to be assisted? The total State expenditure during the year under review on the items mentioned above is well in excess of R600 million. It is not just what comes out of this Department. As we know, a vast amount of assistance is rendered to the farmer through the Land Bank. He receives very substantial allowances and benefits in the form of taxation.

I must stress that the reason for mentioning all this is not because I in any way want to advocate a system which is going to cripple the farming industry or put farmers out of business on a large scale. Certainly I do not believe that whatever remedial action needs to be taken, can be taken overnight, but I believe that in policy formulation on this subject one should look at the economy as it is at the moment, one should look at projections for the future and one should ask oneself whether it is possible, let alone advisable, to continue the massive extent of subsidization and assistance to the farming industry that we have been practising in the past and are practising at present. Nobody would deny financial assistance to farmers, particularly in times of adversity. As we all know, particularly in this country, adversity often befalls the farming industry. Unpredictable weather conditions—I think we possibly have more than our fair share of unpredictable weather conditions in this country—droughts, floods and crop failures put the agricultural industry in a category apart from your normal business undertaking.

Again I must stress that I am not suggesting that the agricultural industry and the farming business can be judged in exactly the same way as any other commercial undertaking where possibly one’s markets are more predictable and where one is able to operate in a more stable economic environment in terms of your particular industry. Things like inflation obviously hit the farmer. International sanctions, I accept, have had a very marked effect on the farming industry and in particular certain aspects of it. Nevertheless, one must question the policy of giving massive ongoing financial assistance to farmers in general, as opposed to assistance as a matter of disaster relief. At a time when the South African economy is under siege, when we have to cut back on education and housing, can we continue to afford a policy of extensive financial assistance to farmers, not merely to keep them on the land and to keep their heads above water in times of unforeseen disaster but as an ongoing policy of assistance, often to ensure that wealthy large-scale operators are able to make profits sufficient to enable them to live and spend in the style they have become accustomed to? Again, I am not saying that this is the general rule but it does happen.

Why make a statement?

I must stress that I am not suggesting that the small farmer with limited resources should not be helped to establish himself or to survive through difficult times. However, the public can be excused their scepticism with regard to subsidized farmers who own massive tracts of land. We all know that this does apply in this country. There are farmers who own very large tracts of land and a lot of them drive more than one expensive German manufactured car. And yet, these people are also catered for in the sense that when they get themselves into financial trouble assistance is rendered to them. My opinion—a humble one, because I am not a farmer; I do view this from the outside—is that…

That is the problem.

I believe that assistance should not readily be rendered to that category of farmer. I also question whether this type of financial cushion is healthy for the agricultural industry, and I ask: Would farmers not be motivated, as in any other business, to better farming practices and financial controls and to provide more during the good years to allow for the lean years? Would they not be motivated to generally practise better farming methods if they knew that their survival and prosperity depended on their own effort and wisdom to a larger extent, rather than to fall back on this State cushion of security?

I have already said that I have very limited personal experience of farming. I did farm for four years after leaving school.

Hear, hear!

Very successfully. I think that it is often a good thing to bring a measure of objectivity to a debate like this, to view the matter not only from the point of view of the fanner, because in all fairness I think fanners are inclined to look after their self-interests, but also in the context of the total economy, the needs of society and the broader political requirement. I believe there are many examples of farmers, both big and small, who have managed to be exceptionally successful in practising as farmers, in building up their farms to profitable operations, without having to rely on State assistance. I believe that, as in any walk of life, people who are not competent, people who do not apply the correct practices to their particular business, come unstuck.

One has two sides; one has one’s successes and one has one’s failures. Generally the rule is that if a person is a failure at what he is doing, he should be weeded out.

That is exactly what happened.

Well, I sincerely hope this is happening. However, if one looks at the degree of assistance rendered to farmers as an ongoing thing, one wonders whether the agricultural industry would not benefit by a reduction in that kind of assistance. In doing so, the natural process of a man who can succeed, who can farm properly, who can apply the proper economic considerations to his operation and who can provide for lean years will be allowed. That man should be allowed to succeed and expand and if need be, take over a farm from a man who cannot run it.

As I have indicated at the outset, it is not a criticism which is intended to be applied across the board or which I say was necessarily bad in the past. In good years and in times when our economy was more buoyant, this was possibly the sort of assistance which we could afford, but I would sincerely ask the hon Minister, as a matter of policy for future times and not as a matter of pre-election action—I would not expect him to do that—to look at this whole question of subsidisation and State assistance to the farming industry. I would like him to assess whether the extent to which it is conducted at the moment is still feasible.

There is one other thing I would like to deal with very briefly. I have not been able to find out very much, on the information which was furnished to us in the House, about the agricultural colleges which we have. The annual report says very little about it; there are very few figures and facts given about what is happening in the agricultural colleges. I do not want to make a political issue of this, but I would be interested to know—because I do not have the information; I am pleading ignorance—whether the agricultural colleges like Cedara and Grootfontein are still exclusively for Whites and whether they are admitting people of colour. If they are not, I would be interested to know whether there are other institutions which do provide training for these people.

Mr Chairman, I have listened to the hon member for Groote Schuur who, to my mind, made a public exhibition today of his insufficient knowledge and exposure to agriculture in this country. I think we should suggest to that hon member that he should rather explore the possibility of getting another spokesman for agriculture within the ranks of his party, because frankly I think the best thing that hon member can do, is to buy himself a farm or rent a farm and expose himself to the physical aspects of agriculture before he purports to speak in public on behalf of agriculture.

He was farming for four years!

He was farming for four years and that is exactly the hon member’s problem. I would just like to say that the hon member mentioned the fact that some farmers are driving cars of a certain German manufacture.

Order! I do not think the hon member need take that personally! [Interjections.]

I just want to tell the hon member that a farmer is also a businessman. He is also a capital generator and a risk taker, just like any other businessman. For that reason a farmer is also entitled to profits. And the more affluent farmers we have the better it will be for the agricultural industry of our country. However, I think by the same token the hon member suggested, when he quoted from the annual report, that it seems that interest-rate subsidies are paid to any kind of farmer. It is absolutely an incorrect statement.

*However, I do not blame the hon member, because he is not a farmer. Nor does he even act in an advisory capacity to farmers. He might have been a hick-advocate in his time. The hon member does not know that applications must be made for subsidies for interest and carry-over schemes. In terms of these schemes a farmer must qualify in order to get these subsidies.

Tell us the percentage of refusals!

The point is that the hon member makes utterances here which gives the impression that he does not know what he is talking about.

*It is very regrettable that the hon member is projecting that kind of image in this debate. I wonder whether, in view of the kind of things he has said here, I should not invite the hon member to come and hold discussions in my constituency. I shall invite him to a farmers’ meeting so that we can see how the farmers make mincemeat of this Englishman’s arguments.

I should like to endorse the hon member for Wellington’s kind words to the hon the Minister, who is dealing with his Vote for the last time. It is always an emotional occasion to take leave of a friend and an hon Minister who has, on the basis of personal experience, controlled and run an industry with feeling and compassion. In his private career as a farmer the hon the Minister experienced the many problems farmers right throughout the country experience from time to time—times of prosperity and times of hardship, times of good prices and times of poorer prices. And very often, particularly of late, the hon the Minister had to sit at the other side of the table to design schemes and to negotiate with the Government for help and support for the agricultural industry. He knew why he was doing so and how this affected the fanners, because he had been through the mill himself. It is with great appreciation that we shall look back on this hon Minister’s term in this portfolio.

Hear, hear!

I should like to link up with another point made by the hon member for Wellington, namely the question of the new image of agriculture, since it has become essential for us, as agriculturists, to say to each other that the time has come for us to realise that it is not physically possible for the State to shoulder all the risk for the agricultural industry. As a farmer I would venture to say that I am proud that there are certain sectors in agriculture that have never yet had to ask the State for assistance as a result of unforeseen, exceptional or abnormal circumstances. I think this speaks volumes for the skill of the farmers in those areas. I am thinking now specifically of the deciduous fruit industry in my constituency, the wool industry and other industries.

And the wine industry!

And the wine industry. With respect, Mr Chairman, the hon member for Wellington does not drink enough beer. He does not know any better!

I think it is a good point the hon member for Wellington made that we should all endeavour to develop a new image of agriculture, an agricultural industry able to shoulder its own risks as far as possible.

I want to come back to a more specific matter that relates to the potential-surveys in specific micro-areas, particularly with a view to the development and allocation of water from State dams. The hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply has a division which, at the request of the Department of Water Affairs, carries out very professional surveys in certain micro-areas of the economic, agricultural and other potential of such an area before a dam is built. And once a dam has been built, these surveys can serve as a guideline for the Department of Water Affairs to make allocations to the metropolitan areas or to agriculture. The surveys are carried out at both the micro-level and macro-level and, as I understand, are done very professionally across the entire spectrum of disciplines. I am not dissatisfied with the expertise with which the surveys are carried out.

However, the allocations from the dam development which are subsequently made by the Department of Water Affairs do, from time to time, create something of a problem in certain microareas because a very normal thing happens. The normal time it takes to develop a dam scheme is approximately 10 years. In some cases it is a bit shorter and in others a bit longer. It is obvious that when a potential-survey is carried out in the first year in a particular micro-area, that potential survey is probably quite correct at that specific time, based on the information which existed at that period and the way the information is used in the planning perspectives for the next 20 years, from an agro-economic and physical point of view.

However, what happens from the first to the tenth year is that the circumstances taken into account by the potential-estimate change dramatically as a result of changes in Government policy in fields other than agriculture.

I should like to refer to an example. When an agriculture-potential survey was made in the first year on this side of the Theewaterskloof Dam in the Riviersonderend catchment area, it was not foreseen—it could probably not be foreseen—that a totally new urbanisation policy would be developed as a result of new circumstances and new dynamics in the overall population configuration in South Africa. This could not be foreseen at that stage.

What happens as a result of urbanisation, however, is that certain agricultural areas around the urban complex are used for urban development, thus reducing the agricultural supply to the market of that metropole. A completely new set of circumstances arises in an area such as the Riviersonderend catchment area, because in the first year—when the potential-survey was carried out there, it was not foreseen, for example, that Philippi, previously the vegetable storehouse for the Cape urban area, would be overtaken by urbanisation or that urbanisation would increase to such an extent that the Philippi area would no longer be able to serve as the vegetable storehouse for the Cape area.

Therefore a new need arose with a considerably higher agricultural potential, a considerably higher water supply and a much better return per 100 litres of water than was the case in the first year when the potential-survey was made. I want to ask the hon the Deputy Minister whether it is possible for these potential-surveys which are carried out by the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, and on the basis of which his department makes the allocations, could not be reconsidered in the light of the new set of circumstances, and whether allocations, for example from the Theewaterskloof Dam, could be reconsidered in order to adapt to the new circumstances that prevail.

There is also a final point that has an important bearing on this. In his book Future Shock Alvin Tofler wrote about the proliferation of knowledge. He divided the entire history of mankind into life-spans of 50 years each. The conclusion he arrives at is that 80% of the information we have today was developed in the last 50-year life-span. What I want to say, therefore, is that the technology available in the first year when a particular potential-survey was made in an area, has increased to such an extent over a period of 10 years that a completely new potential, new possibilities and new levels of profitability have developed. I am afraid that in the long run the potential-surveys do not take these facts into account, and it is therefore necessary for them to be taken into consideration again in subsequent years.

Mr Chairman, this debate deals with own affairs, but I also want to make it an own affairs occasion as far as my constituency is concerned. In particular I want to make an appeal for an isolated community in my constituency, namely the community of Pongola. When I make this appeal here, I know that I am not the only one because the hon member for Umfolozi, who is also sitting here, can undoubtedly also identify with what I have to say here about that area. I am therefore appealing to the two hon Deputy Ministers who are particularly involved in this area and also know about the things I want to say here. I am referring to the fact that it is a special community. It is a special community which I believe deserves recognition because it is a community which has always taken action when the authorities themselves were unable to do so. They have shown themselves to be a community which, when all was well, was prepared to step into the breach themselves.

For example, they built their own hospital at their own cost for that area, a hospital which they still maintain today. At the same time they also erected apparatus for receiving television. From 1972 to 1988 they alone have carried the costs of that. Those were times when all was well for these people, but as a result of factors such as those which the hon member for Caledon referred to, when certain circumstances eventually changed, that community really went into a decline. They are experiencing this decline because there is no doubt that the land which was initially allocated to that community now appears to be too small. It is not the fault of the farmers. They are capable farmers, but the fact is that the land which was initially allocated to them in terms of the scheme, is no longer profitable enough. They can no longer make a living out of it. As a result they have had to consolidate. Pieces of land have had to be joined together in order to make a viable existence possible. According to investigations of the Department, we know that a third of the land of those farmers is too small to support the farmers. Objective assessments have been made and it has been found that they could not make a living on it.

However, they were not only outstanding with regard to the two aspects which I mentioned; they also anticipated things. They anticipated that they would need a stable water supply. As long ago as 1984 they appointed an advisory engineer at their own cost who conducted a feasibility study with regard to their needs. They were prepared to build a dam—essentially on a much smaller scale—to fulfil this need. However, when they applied to build the dam, the government of the day said no, because a State dam was going to be built there.

I know that the hon Ministers were there, and I know that they are aware of the need which exists there. I do not need to convince them of that. However, this matter affects the future of many people. Decisions must be made about the future of these people. Included among these farmers is a father and his son and other people who now, simply as a result of the fact that there is not sufficient land and water for them, have to pull out and go elsewhere. We cannot afford that and in a certain sense of the word it is also unnecessary. We want to ask the hon Ministers: Seeing that it is necessary for future planning, would you not tell us when that dam is going to be built? We asked for it five years ago, so that people could make decisions about their future. Even if the hon the Minister is unable to tell us that the dam is going to be built tomorrow, he could merely tell the farmers when, so that they would be able to make a decision about their future. There are people there who have never really been a burden to the State, who have really pulled their weight over a period of many years. We are saying that they deserve recognition, and the hon the Minister must please provide an answer to that.

We were told that a White Paper on that dam would appear this year. We still do not have it. This session is nearly over. Could the hon the Minister not lift the veil for us so that we could know? One reads all kinds of articles in newspapers, but are they correct? There was also a problem with regard to the allocation of sugar quotas and all that that entails.

Fortunately, as a result of the announcement of the hon the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology, great relief is envisaged for that community. One simply has to look at the statement of the hon the Minister to see that it is once again clear that all the prospects which go along with that are subject to one thing. The expansion of production in Pongola is subject to the availability of irrigation water. Once again, every facet there is subject to this. For any future planning this is therefore an absolute prerequisite.

Secondly there is the issue of the availability of State land. We know from departmental surveys that further State land which is available in that area for agricultural purposes, is land which borders on the Pongolapoort Dam. According to the surveys the area there which is suitable covers approximately 3 500 ha. We know that in the meantime this land has been given to the Nature Conservation Department of the Transvaal Provincial Administration.

However, this was subject to a condition, namely that this land, if it were needed for agricultural purposes, would be given back to the farmers. We want to ask the hon the Minister: Is that undertaking still valid? We believe that it is; we do not believe that he would break his promise in that regard. But if that is the case, we want to ask the hon the Minister: Is it not time that Nature Conservation is told that the land must be returned for agricultural purposes? Further costs of development in that area will then not be incurred.

The farmers are now withdrawing from a border area, and the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning says that they want to keep the farmers there. Should they not now be told that that land is going to be given to them? One could then also tell Nature Conservation that they have done well, but that they must remember that their planning must now be stopped. Let the farmers of the future know that that area has been allocated to them.

This brings me to another aspect. There is a ski-boat and fishing club which, in co-operation with Nature Conservation, is making wonderful contributions and providing information. Only a small part of that area would then actually be thrown open for those who wanted to fish from ski-boats. We want to ask the hon the Minister to look into this. Would he not like to give us positive answers to these two questions, namely: When are we going to get the dam, and secondly, what is being planned with regard to this State land? This is a request which I am making, and I trust that this will also be to the advantage of the hon member for Umfolozi.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Bethal made a wonderful appeal…

Ermelo!

… for some of his voters and I hope that his appeals will be successful. I am aware that his predecessor and the hon member for Umfolozi have already submitted requests in this regard and that they hope to receive a decisive answer in that regard one of these days. Nevertheless, I believe that a specific need exists there and I hope that he will receive good news from the hon the Minister in this regard.

While listening to the hon member for Lichtenburg, one could not help thinking of the words which he directed at the same hon Minister during the debate last year. The few kind words that he used now, made one think of the unflattering words which he spoke to this hon Minister last year, for example that this hon Minister had designed the R400 million scheme to fail, and of his accusation that this hon Minister was incompetent.

A few days before the parliamentary by-election in Schweizer-Reneke, the Patriot published a large front page article stating that as a result of insufficient aid from the Government to farmers, the Transvaal Agricultural Union had had to intervene to devise and develop a certain consortium scheme. The words which were used in this article, were: “Gebrekkige hulp deur die Regering aan boere het die Transvaalse Landbou-unie nou genoodsaak om self in te gryp.”

In other words, there was no doubt that the drought aid schemes which were designed and implemented under the guidance of this hon Minister, were an enormous failure. That was the gist of the attack of the Official Opposition on the NP Government and on our hon Minister; this hon Minister who had to drive the South African agricultural tractor through the most difficult years of drought in living memory.

It was his destiny to hold the reins during the most difficult years agriculture had known. I shall say a few more words about this later. The allegation was made that these aid schemes were a total failure. I think the time has come for us to start evaluating these aid schemes and to look at what effect they really had. I think that the hon member for Lichtenburg, who is an agricultural scientist, will ultimately believe the language of the facts.

If one looks at this year’s edition of the Abstract of Agricultural Statistics, one sees the peculiar phenomenon that the number of farmers in South Africa—as measured against the number of farms and the utilisation of agricultural land in White areas, which is the most accurate indication of the number of farmers in South Africa and who practice farming in this country—has already increased from an all-time low of 59 960 in 1983 up to and including 1986, and that is the most recent available figure, to nearly 65 000. There were already more than 65 000 and the number now fluctuates around this figure.

I went to the trouble of phoning the Directorate: Agricultural Economic Tendencies to find out how they interpreted this table and figures, and the statiticians assured me that although it was based on future estimates, there had at least been a stabilisation of the number of farmers in this country during this decade. In the previous decade, the number of farmers decreased by 26 000—from 90 000 to 64 000. There has now been a stabilisation in the number of farmers and there is even talk of the number of farmers having increased in the most severe years of drought which South Africa has known throughout its history.

It is not clear from the statistics whether all these farmers live on their farms—whether there has been an increase in the number of part-time farmers or in whatever forms of entrepreneurship—but the fact of the matter is that the number of agricultural entrepreneurs in this country has remained stable and has even increased slightly. I think one could speculate about the reasons for this, but I must say that it is the ingenuity and tenacity of South Africa’s farmers that has enabled them to remain on their farms during these years of drought, and we pay tribute to South Africa’s farmers today for not leaving their farms in desperation when the drought was at its worst, and for minimising the risks in agriculture by means of adapted farming systems to such an extent that they were able to survive.

However, I think that we should also praise the national Government and notably this hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, and that a great deal of the success, as it appears from the number of farmers, can be ascribed to his actions and to the aid programme which the Government created. It was this aid programme that enabled farmers to weather the storms and to remain on their farms; to harvest again next year, even though the harvest was a failure this year; to continue producing year after year. This year we are having a wonderful year, and we are very grateful to the Great Provider for His mercy. We hope that we are now entering a wet cycle (nat siklus) in South Africa again in which the farmers of South Africa will have a chance to pay off their debt and rise up out of the situation in which they find themselves.

A DP cycle!

Mr Chairman, when one looks at these statistics, it is interesting to note—I am just mentioning this in passing—that it appears that during the years of prosperity, such as the greater part of the previous decade, one had a large decrease in the number of entrepreneurs; that it is then the successful farmers who use the opportunity, while there is money in circulation, to buy out smaller farmers, and that when the Government establishes aid schemes in years of drought, such as during this decade, one then enables the farmers to remain on their farms. I think a scientific study is necessary to investigate this phenomenon, but it is simply interesting to note that it is precisely during the difficult years that the number of farmers is increasing.

I want to make the statement that these drought aid schemes, which were devised by this hon Minister in co-operation with the SA Agricultural Union and the many scientists we have, was largely responsible for the fact that we did not experience any food shortages in South Africa during these periods of drought. In the worst drought in South Africa’s history, there was no shortage of any type of food in a single supermarket. In the worst drought in living memory people did not have to stand in any queues to buy bread or meat. Sir, I think that is a feather in the cap of this hon Minister and the Government that they were able to provide the consumer public with food during difficult times.

When we look at other figures which are available in this Abstract of Agricultural Statistics, we see that there was no drastic decrease in livestock, neither with regard to cattle nor to sheep numbers. There was a small decrease of approximately 6% to 10% with regard to cattle and sheep numbers respectively, but it is clear that South Africa’s livestock is already recovering with regard to numbers, and South Africa’s livestock farmers will be in a position to provide for South Africa’s meat needs in the future. It was the aid schemes to livestock farmers that enabled them to continue maintaining their basic herds, and to once again build up their livestock numbers after the drought and to produce in order to be able to provide food to our consumers. I am also saying that these agricultural aid schemes and the way in which they were devised—to strive towards decreasing the numbers of livestock in conjunction with the subsidy scheme to farmers—was part of the reason for the fact that South Africa’s grazing was able to recover so quickly now that it has rained, after such a serious drought which was a severe blow to our grazing-land.

Mr Chairman, I was born and bred in the Free State. I have really never seen the Free State in such a wonderful condition as it is this year. It was these aid schemes that prevented the natural grazing-land in South Africa from being destroyed by this prolonged drought and enabled the land to recover after the rains.

The aid schemes which were implemented under the guidance of this hon Minister, have long-term objectives. They are aimed at bringing about structural changes and adjustments, further decreasing the risk factor in the agricultural industry and ensuring that in the event of possible future disaster conditions, the agricultural sector will be even more capable of coping with that situation and surviving it. I am also thinking of the grazing strategy which is linked to this agricultural aid programme. I am thinking of the land rotation scheme which enables farmers in the summer rainfall farming areas to transform their lower potential land into permanent grazing-land. These are all measures and aid programmes which were created under the guidance of this hon Minister.

For that reason I think that this occasion, on which he has now stated that he is going to retire one of these days, is the proper one on which to pay tribute to the hon Minister. He had to endure so much scorn and mockery in times when things were difficult in South Africa, especially in South Africa’s farming industry; in times when the CP harped on the distress and misfortune of farmers. [Interjections.] During those times it was this hon Minister who kept his head. He kept his head when the pressure was tremendous, Sir. [Interjections.] The hon member for Lichtenburg in particular suggested that he should write off the debts of the farmers. Can you imagine—that he should write off the debt of the farmers! However, the hon the Minister said that the farmer would not be able to maintain his self-respect, quite apart from the fact that this Government and the taxpayer could not afford it.

However, today the farmers are paying off their debts. The hon member for Lichtenburg himself referred to this. They are paying off their debts, and the ratio between the total debt and the capital assets is already changing for the better. When we look at the latest figures which were made available to us by the SA Agricultural Union, we see that the total debt, expressed as a percentage of the total capital assets, has already decreased from 26% in 1987 to 25% last year, and that it is going to decrease even further this year.

Mr Chairman, the South African farmers have maintained their self-respect and can hold their heads high today thanks to the actions of this hon Minister. We shall remember him as a Minister who was able to understand and listen. There is a saying: “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.” That applies to this hon Minister, Sir. During the tough times, he goes ahead; he does not lie down. We wish him everything of the best in his period of retirement.

Hear! Hear!

Mr Chairman, I have a few random matters to touch on. I shall start with one which concerns my constituency to a fairly great extent. Around the towns in our country there are many smallholdings and one finds that the people who are trying to earn a living there also make a good contribution by growing flowers and other products—intensive farming—with which a great deal of currency can in fact be earned in my constituency.

The trouble with many of these smallholdings is that they do not get assistance because they are too small to be considered economic farming units. Because they are not situated inside the municipal area, they do not get assistance from building societies to build houses, for example. They are therefore compelled to incur a lot of debt with ordinary commercial banks to build the houses. Consequently development is impossible. Can we not perhaps ascertain whether attention can be given to this issue?

I would say that these places are a good way of entering agriculture for people who are interested in this, and they are also ideal for people who want to farm part-time and make a contribution. I think it also helps a great deal to prevent people from purchasing small farms as a way of avoiding tax. There are a great many of these little farms in my constituency. I am thinking for example of the Little Mooi River where there are a number of small farms approximately 50 to 100 acres in size. Many of them comprising fine agricultural land are simply being used as weekend homes by rich professional people from the cities. They use them to avoid tax.

A Scotsman acquired one of these little farms and said that he was going to farm the way they do in Scotland. The family farms on the farm. He has a few sheep, chickens and many other things, and he really has a wonderful farm which can provide work for a family comprising a number of people, on one of these little farms, many of which are lying fallow. For that reason I want the potential contribution of these little farms, which are normally considered uneconomic units, but on which one can make a contribution through creative agriculture to be ascertained.

The second point I want to make concerns something in connection with the recent legislation on the combating of squatting. People in rural areas who are not bona fide farm labourers can be evicted from farms in terms of that legislation. This has already happened and those people are now streaming to the cities. I am in the position that I have farmers and other people living in the city near the KwaZulu area. We are also getting a large influx of Black people who are leaving the farms.

I think there are a few approaches to this problem. One can for example encourage people to use small pieces of land on farms where single crops such as sugar cane are being cultivated to see whether they cannot make a contribution by using intensive methods to keep people away from the cities. A small piece of the farm can for example be used for more intensive vegetable cultivation or whatever will thrive in that specific area. The farmers can also make a contribution and help to control the influx to the cities, because one knows that those people have no permanence.

The farmers of South Africa are in fact responsible for the welfare of millions of people; for their schooling, health, old age, for everything. The farmers are therefore performing a tremendous welfare task with regard to a large number of people. I think the State and the Department can make a contribution by seeing whether one can handle the problem. One can for example think of “rural villages”, where people can concentrate and where they can perhaps make a contribution by means of services to the farmer; where services to such people—schools, health services, etc—can consequently be concentrated. In other words, we must not simply talk about urbanisation, but in the same way we in the city talk about “inward industrialisation”, can we not see whether we can also introduce a process of “inward urbanisation” in the rural areas.

My next point concerns the report which refers to the problem in connection with 2,4D and the problem of Tala Valley. There are also a number of people in my constituency who are still very dissatisfied with the rate at which decisions are being taken to ban this substance completely, or at least to intervene at this stage. Although reference is made in the report to several surveys which have been undertaken, there are a number of vegetable farmers who are not at all satisfied with the way in which the matter is being handled. I should like to hear from the hon the Minister what the present position is.

Mr Chairman, over the weekend I travelled up the West Coast and I am very happy to say that at Citrusdal for example I was surprised to see how many young people are back in the rural areas. It is interesting to see how many young farmers are very active there. In any case, the later it got, the more the people had to say, as is the case when one talks to people in the rural areas in the evening.

What did you go and do there?

I went to talk about farming and other matters. The later it got, the less inhibited the people became and the more they had to say. Perhaps I should warn the hon the Minister.

Of course you encouraged them.

No, I simply listened. In any case, what is worrying me was what one of the visitors from deep in the Karoo said.

Where is that?

It is somewhere above Beaufort West. He had come to the coast for the weekend. He told me something I hope the hon the Minister will be able to reply to satisfactorily. He said that there had again been locust control using BHC products. He was not quite sure and would try to get hold of the information for me. However, I simply want to ask the hon the Minister whether there was spraying with those substances this season, and if so where this was done and precisely what the circumstances were under which it was done. We must see what can be done about this, but the hon the Minister must first be afforded the opportunity to reply to this and to say whether there is any truth in this or what the circumstances were.

The final point I want to make does not fall directly under this hon Minister’s department, although it does to a certain extent. I took a look at the proposed Kalahari East rural water supply scheme. All one can say in a country where most of the people do not have a say in matters affecting them, is that one comes across this kind of utilisation of funds. One does not want to deny or begrudge this water to the farmers on the 256 farms which are going to be served by this water scheme, particularly not those at Kuruman if they are going to get a water scheme in an election year.

However, if one takes a quick look and one sees that it involves 256 farms and R77 million, and one makes a quick calculation one will see that this adds up to R300 000 per farm. Provision has also been made for expansions. Let us therefore say that it totals a quarter of a million rands per farm. I think I said the same thing about the West Kalahari scheme a few years ago. It therefore seems to me as if one can virtually send every sheep which is thirsty a bottle of Caledon water every day so that it can drink that until the rains come or one can let that sheep travel first-class to where the water is. However, when one starts talking about R300 000 per farm, what is the value of that farm? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to say a few words. Before I respond to the hon member for Greytown, I want to address the hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, who is about to retire. You know, I have known the hon the Minister for a very long time and the first impression I formed of him still remains true today, and that is that he is a man who does not run away from trouble.

Hear, hear!

During the time we sat together on the board of Triomf, whenever trouble came along and the other men were frightened, he was the man who stood fast so that Mr Luyt could not enforce his will upon us. Since that time the hon the Minister has not changed at all. Two years ago he had the golden opportunity of vacating this tremendously difficult post which he occupied at that stage as Minister of Agriculture so that he would not have had to end up in the cross-fire concerning the R400 million scheme at the beginning of last year. Despite that, and despite the derision which the hon members of the Opposition showered upon him, he stood his ground. Therefore, although we appreciate him greatly, and although we do not begrudge him the rest, we are sorry to lose a fighter like him on our side, because we shall be in great need of him in the future.

The hon member for Greytown spoke reasonably at the beginning of his speech. He referred to lands that were lying unutilised as guest farms. However, this is not a problem to me. Those farms that are lying unutilised as guest farms simply prove one thing, and that is that the price of agricultural products leaves something to be desired. There is a surplus of agricultural products. That is why those people do not want to take the trouble to produce. The fact that they are not producing, helps us as agriculturists because the fact of the matter is that the agriculturist today is in what is called the cost squeeze. One side of the cost squeeze is oversupply to the market; overproduction. For this reason I have no problem with those farms that are lying empty. They can lie empty, they will not spoil. If the relationship between inputs and outputs were to improve, those farms would quickly become utilised economically once again.

I should like to say a few words about the R400 million scheme, because the scheme is at present in its third year of existence. It would therefore be fair to evaluate the success of the scheme now in terms of the stated objectives and in terms of the extent to which success has been achieved in attaining these objectives. It is true that the hon member for Sasolburg has succeeded to a very great extent in indicating to us precisely how successful this scheme has been. For this reason I want to leave that aside for a while and say that it would also not be unfair at this stage to compare the success of the scheme with schemes about which a great fuss has been made in the House, as if those schemes were of far greater value than the R400 million scheme. Before the principles upon which the scheme was based are discussed, it is necessary for us to know how the scheme originated and who devised it. You will remember that the hon the Minister was accused last year by the hon member for Lichtenburg of having deliberately designed a scheme to fail.

That is not correct.

I can show him his Hansard. I can show the hon member the Hansard which I read when I was preparing this speech. Let us go on to see how true it is. The co-operatives advised the advisory committee of the State President that there were 3 500 farmers who were about to be sequestrated. They also said that 1 500 of these 3 500 farmers could no longer be saved; that only 2 000 could be saved. It would cost R200 000 per farmer to save them—hence the R400 million scheme: 2 000 farmers at R200 000 per farmer. It is a fact that whenever the State appropriates money and State funds are applied, certain requirements must be complied with. The most important requirement which must be complied with, is that such money must be completely recoverable. This fact implies that there must firstly be adequate security to cover the loan and secondly that the production capacity of the farmer must be sufficient to service the loan. These, then, are the two basic criteria.

Within these parameters the scheme was devised by the Directorate: Financial Assistance in collaboration with the South African Agricultural Union; not the hon the Minister, but the South African Agricultural Union. In other words, the body which provided the information upon which the scheme was based, also helped to devise the scheme. Therefore, when the hon member for Lichtenburg said last year that the hon the Minister had designed the scheme to fail, he displayed his ignorance regarding the scheme, because it was not the hon the Minister who designed the scheme, but in fact the directorate and organised agriculture. These are people who have knowledge of the farmer’s business, people who are interested in the farmers because they are concerned about the farmers. They are not people who misuse the farmers for their own political aspirations. What other explanation could there be for the fact that the hon member, without acquainting himself with the facts, summarily levelled the accusation at the SAAU that the scheme which they had helped to design, had been designed to fail.

You are running away.

I am not running away. It is a fact. The SAAU helped to design it; the co-operatives helped to design the scheme. In his unseemly haste to make political capital out of the misfortune of the farmers, the hon member therefore insulted this organisation, whose only right of existence lies in serving the interests of the farmer. These people are now being told that they deliberately designed a plan to fail. Surely it is scandalous to behave like that. And then these are supposedly the people who say, “let us keep politics out of agriculture”. They are guilty of making statements which they do not even verify beforehand, and this simply for the sake of political gain. Furthermore, the hon member went on to say that it was a terrible indictment of the Government—this appears in his Hansard—that the Transvaal Agricultural Union wished to take over the function of Government aid to the farmer. That is to say, the Transvaal Agricultural Union wants to institute its own rescue action with the assistance of the private sector.

What are the facts of the matter? Is it true that the Transvaal Agricultural Union has a better case than the Government and that the Government scheme is simply a gimmick that was designed to fail, or is it, in fact, the scheme of the Transvaal Agricultural Union that is a gimmick? Let us take a look at the matter and decide for ourselves which one is the gimmick.

As I have already said, the most important factors at issue when money is borrowed are the security situation of the borrower and his ability to service the loan. The R400 million scheme was directed at those farmers whose security and/or ability to pay was of such a nature that the banks or other financial institutions, or even the Land Bank, were no longer able to help them.

The way in which the Government wanted to do this, was by taking over certain of the private sector’s debts, thereby reducing the private sector’s exposure to bad debts on the part of the farmers. However, there was a condition attached to this. This was that in exchange for this take-over of their risk, the private sector had to write off certain of their debts. This reduced burden of debt and lower interest rate with regard to their debts would place the farmers within the acceptable financial parameters for aid in respect of the security and debt servicing abilities of the farmer. And that is what it is about. The scheme was designed so that the farmer could be helped with State funds within the limits of normal standards and norms.

It must be remembered that at that stage the private sector was already levying interest rates on most of these accounts of up to 10% above the prime rate in order to provide for possible losses on these accounts. Therefore, if the Government were to have taken over these debts in full, this would have meant that the Republic’s taxpayers would have had to pay for a wonderful profit made by the financial institutions, because those financial institutions would then have been able to simply put that portion of the interest which they had levied in order to provide for possible losses, into their pockets as a surplus profit. Surely that could not be done, Sir. Surely the Government cannot allow the taxpayer’s money to be used to create surplus profits for certain bodies.

However, what did the hon member for Lichtenburg say about this principle? He said that we had upset the private sector and that for this reason they did not wish to help us. Sir, how did we upset them? We upset the private sector by standing by this principle that there had to be a quid pro quo. They had to make certain reasonable write-offs in exchange for the take-over of the agricultural risk by the Government. It is for this reason that they did not wish to co-operate in order to make a success of the scheme. Why should they co-operate to make the scheme work if they can have the Government blackmailed by their lackeys into using the taxpayer’s money in order to give the financial institutions a further profit? Through his statement, therefore, the hon member for Lichtenburg blamed us for not having given in to the private sector’s demands, and this means that in truth he would have been prepared to place some of the taxpayer’s money in the hands of the private sector.

You are silly!

It is the truth, Sir! I think it would be a good thing for the taxpayer to take note of the fact that the CP will adopt this sort of irresponsible attitude when they come to power—that it does not make any difference whether or not one allows the taxpayer’s money to end up in the pockets of private institutions in an unfair manner.

[Inaudible.]

It is true! [Interjections.]

This scheme of the Government must, as I said earlier, be compared to the scheme of the Transvaal Agricultural Union, with which the CP have associated themselves. The hon member for Sasolburg has just quoted the extract from the Patriot in which the CP associated itself with this fact. Incidentally, the date of that edition of the Patriot is 19 February. The hon member may feel free to go and read it. No official information regarding this scheme, about which such a great song and dance has been made, has as yet been made available to us, apart from a third concept on 3 March, 1988. Since that date, however, no prominent person in SA agricultural circles has made further mention of this scheme or recommended it, and that is why I say today without the slightest doubt that this scheme was a ploy, because just as in the case of the R400 million scheme, the point of departure in the case of this scheme of the Transvaal Agricultural Union was also that banks have social obligations towards those sectors that are served by them and from which they make their money. At the stage when this so-called Bruwer-scheme was designed, it was already common knowledge that the financial institutions were not even prepared to accept the quid pro quo for which the Government had asked. If they were not prepared to do that, what made the Transvaal Agricultural Union think that they would be prepared to accept certain social responsibilities? That is why I say that this new scheme of the Transvaal Agricultural Union was an out and out political ploy.

What did you say? [Interjections.]

It was a political ploy.

It is you who say that we must keep politics out of agriculture!

No, Mr Chairman! I want to tell that hon member that I have no problem with bringing politics into this, because the hon members of the CP do not have the sole right in the House to decide when politics may be brought in and when not. When, last year and in previous years, the farmers were having a rough time of it, to put it mildly, they thrived on our pastures insofar as politics was concerned. Now that all these schemes have come to fruition this year, and we see our farmers making a decent living on the farms, they say that we may not talk politics. [Interjections.] What rubbish! [Interjections.] This scheme, which that hon member said was designed to fail…

It was designed to fail! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, when the hon the Minister saw that this scheme was not functioning as the SA Agricultural Union had foreseen it would function, what did he do? Did he say we could simply put the money in our pocket? Of course not, Sir. He then adapted the scheme until it worked. If the hon member for Lichtenberg were to go and look now at how many farmers were, in fact, assisted by the original scheme, he would see that this Government was honest with the farmers of South Africa. With regard to the money which the Government said it was appropriating for the farmers, it did, in fact, utilise it for farming. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am not one of those people who repeat what other people have said but, as a member who arrived here with the hon the Minister in 1966, I want to say “Goodbye” to him today. I think the hon members for Heilbron and Sasolburg are wide of the mark if they blame my colleague for what he did last year and now actually want to say that he did not mean what he said this year. I think it is quite wrong of them to do this. Although we did not agree with the hon the Minister and criticised him, we nevertheless say that we grant him recognition for the seriousness and dedication with which he carried out his task according to the views of his time.

I want to tell the hon member for Heilbron the following and the hon the Minister will have to assist me in this regard. I did not intend referring to this because I have problems in my constituency this year—other constituencies no longer have the problems which I have this year—but it seems to me that the hon member for Heilbron came to read out a speech here today which was prepared for him by somebody else last year.

Nobody need prepare a speech for me!

That is the truth, Sir. Hon members of the NP gave more competent replies to the hon member for Lichtenburg’s speech last year than that hon member tried to give now.

Only an advocate could argue like that!

It is a pity that I have to refer to the R400 million scheme but I think we should like to know how much of that R400 million was ultimately used in relation to the scheme. I think that is the test of the success of the scheme.

The other schemes were a great success! [Interjections.]

But the scheme was abandoned and then they blamed my colleague for telling them that the scheme was a failure! No, Sir, we should not try to make capital out of one another and that is precisely what those two hon members did.

Concerning the requirements which the hon member for Heilbron regarded as essential for State aid, the following: If it is one’s approach to State aid that one only furnishes aid—excluding disaster relief—when adequate security and adequate provision for the recoverability of the money exist, one is not furnishing aid; one is financing. I think that was precisely the dilemma facing those farmers. When the department wanted to spend that R400 million, not one of those farmers whom they wanted to assist satisfied the basic requirements for State aid.

Tom, you should spend a bit of time in the Joint Committee on Public Accounts and then you would know what finance was all about!

Thank you very much!

And then I want to say this regarding organised agriculture: I think the hon member for Heilbron has a grievance. He possibly has cause to feel aggrieved towards the Transvaal Agricultural Union. The fact that the Transvaal Agricultural Union climbed in to see whether they could not institute a scheme was a reflection on the hon the Minister’s department that they had not supplied adequate information.

I said it was a ploy, Tom. I spelt out to you why it was a ploy.

I want to say that organised agriculture in the Transvaal is still in the process of seeing whether they cannot institute something.

It is like partition; it can’t work.

I shall leave it at that. The farmer, whether an agriculturalist or stock breeder, is an entrepreneur who firstly has to feed the population and secondly earn foreign exchange with surpluses and choice products which are in demand in foreign markets.

Who wrote that, Tom?

I wrote it. I do not know whether the hon member for Caledon is also capable of writing it.

From what annual report did you get it, Tom?

I wrote it yesterday.

Order! The fighter vein is becoming too light now!

I shall try to do this quickly, Sir, because my time is running out.

The farmer is an indispensable component of the South Africa economy. Where employment is concerned, he is not only an employer. He is more than that, he is a supporter of a number of Black employees.

Thirdly, where he is a user of heavy agricultural machinery, fertilisers, pesticides, stock medicines, seed, fodder, fuel, etc, that is to say as a client, his contribution to the national economy is so fundamental that many parts of it would simply be unable to exist without him. The sparser the population where he is, the more important the part that he plays in national security as a member of a commando or as a police reservist. In this regard, as his actual physical presence is free of charge or at substandard remuneration, his contribution cannot be measured in terms of money. When the agricultural sector is furnished with aid by the State, whether in the form of subsidies, disaster relief in times of drought or flood, or area allowances, it is usually accompanied by negative reactions from the non-agricultural sector. Then State aid to the mining industry, transport subsidies, rebates on transport to certain industrial sectors, loan subsidies, etc are forgotten. I want to make so bold as to say that agriculture, in view of its role in South Africa, need not be ashamed of State aid which it has received and that it is probably not excessive in real terms, especially if it is compared with State aid to other sectors.

In our approach to problems of agriculture we should tell one another: A sound and affluent farming community is indispensable to sound economic development and for the promotion of social and constitutional order and stability. Furthermore we should accept as a datum point that in general there is an inherent inability in agriculture and that agriculture cannot make the grade without outside assistance. The test should be, all factors considered, whether the farmer can recover all his expenses from farming plus such profits that he can live well and affluently.

The hon member for Wellington says that the farmer should be able to take the knocks in a free economy. This is an unsympathetic comment from a friendly man who probably farms in one of the most stable agricultural regions. Can he recover this from farming? That is the test. Let us look at factors in this respect. I am not a maize farmer, Sir, but I shall refer to an example from the maize sector. In 1974 a 46 kilowatt Swedish tractor cost R3 000 net. This meant 937 bags of maize. At 40 bags a hectare, he could produce this on 23 hectares. In 1989 a 46 kilowatt green American 60 hp tractor costs R59 150. That means 4 612 bags of maize and, at 40 bags a hectare, he needs 115 hectares to produce them.

Let us examine the interest rates, Sir. My colleague has already discussed this subject. In the year we have just discussed they rose by 7%. They reached a turning point at 12,5% and now stand at almost 20%. What man can budget in the light of such fluctuating interest rates. A farmer definitely cannot. And then the farmer who has problems does not pay the prime rate which the hon member for Wellington possibly pays. The farmer who has problems pays interest which could easily be 4% to 5% above the prime rate.

I also want to say something about red meat production. The hon member for Wellington says we should get away from any form of subsidy, from wanting to give money. He says we should get away from the idea that we want to give money, regardless of whether it is in the form of subsidies or whatever. I have been informed that in all large maize-producing countries of the world the government supports the maize producer because maize is the most important animal feed. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the debate began in an interesting way with words spoken about the hon the Minister. I have been working with him for a long time; for more than two years it has been my privilege to serve under the hon the Minister and I am grateful that I had that opportunity. What was said here was true. Can I just add, with the information available in the department about conditions in agriculture, that if ever there was a person who served agriculture to the full, it was this hon Minister. He did not always agree, but he served agriculture to the full and he harnessed all his talents to the task. He will be quoted in the annals of history as the person who took over agriculture in a difficult period when it was heading for the abyss, as a result of a whole set of circumstances, and it was he who caused agriculture to change direction so that new hope was born. I want to thank him for doing so and for all the trouble and sacrifice he took in this connection and for the people he gathered around him. This man did not mind the criticism which was levelled at him, nor did he mind what others said. He always sought the truth, and that is how I will remember him.

Since I am going to mention certain names here I also want to mention that we took leave during the past year of the previous chairman of the Agricultural Credit Board, Mr Fourie Kritzinger, who did very good work. He was transferred to become head of the Agricultural College in Nelspruit. I want to pay tribute to him for having established a very important foundation in respect of the Agricultural Credit Board, one that relied on sound financing based on productive value and not on any other sentiments besides the real financial circumstances and financial rules. This was also reflected in the decisions taken by the Agricultural Credit Board. I think he made a very valuable contribution there. At the same time Mr Jan van Vuuren and Mr Naudé, who served for many years and did very good work, also decided to retire.

Before I reply to a few aspects of the speeches made by hon members, I just want to draw attention to the annual report published by the department. I do not know whether hon members have examined it. Last year we were late in tabling the report and a big fuss was kicked up about that. I find it interesting that hon members did not make any comment on it this year, because if one really wants to know what is going on in the department one need only see what is stated in the report. It is a summary and it gives one an in-depth picture of the wide field in which the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply operates. It tells hon members about the multiplicity of activities of the department.

I just want to focus on a few of these, such as research in respect of plants and animals, and the various other types of research being done there. Furthermore there is the development of agricultural products and resource development and entrepreneurial development, where attention is given to the various colleges and extension to farmers. Furthermore I can refer to the very interesting developments that have taken place in respect of grazing research, as well as the matter of agricultural financing, which frequently becomes almost the main theme of our discussions. Consequently there is a great deal more to agriculture than just agricultural financing; there is the question of the economies of agricultural production and many other aspects.

I want to emphasise interesting aspects, such as those on page 8, where a subtle observaton occurs, namely “Wheat lines with resistance to the Russian wheat aphid have been identified in material from Russia”. A little bit lower down this quiet reference occurs: “The breeding of genes that produce resistance to existing adapted winter and spring cultivars is proceeding favourably.” This shows that our agricultural scientists are not only active here but gather the best gene material for us from all over the world and breed them into our cultivars. Furthermore it demonstrates that they have access to the rest of the world on the basis of their specific knowledge and skills. On that basis we succeed in obtaining information and sharing knowledge. These are the aspects to which reference is being made here.

A further aspect which I found interesting in the report was that resistance to frost was examined by means of duo-technology and it is interesting to note that they found that those plants easily killed by frost have a bacteria secretion which occurs on their surfaces in the form of a protein secretion which forms a starting point for frost damage. They found that if they establish another bacteria on it which does not have that secretion, that plant offers far greater resistance to frost. In this way the problems we are experiencing in agriculture can be overcome.

There is also the question of the chemical control of agricultural pests in South Africa and the fact that we cannot afford not to apply this control. Damage to the amount of R57 million as a result of weeds, R460 million as a result of insects and R400 million as a result of plant diseases was suffered. For that reason we are examining biological control, so as to move as far away as possible from chemical control by encouraging the natural enemies of these insects and weeds to do the work for us instead of using chemical substances.

There are a large number of other factors I do not even want to touch on. Reference was also made to agricultural financing and from the report it will be clear that during the year we dealt with 12 000 cases at the Agricultural Credit Board. This number is approximately 1 000 less than last year. In addition 5 525 loans for assistance were agreed to, involving an amount of R323 million. In this amount is included production credit given to more than 2 900 farmers to help them plant a crop. Furthermore 1 158 farmers were assisted to an amount of approximately R114 million in respect of the payment of debts. These are only a few aspects hon members will find in this publication, and I think it is a remarkable achievement.

Having said this, I cannot quite understand what the hon member for Lichtenburg meant by his final few words. He said that the Government had finally turned its back on the farmers. The words in this document, describing all the activities, the alternatives, the identification of problems and the search for solutions and financing, contradict what the hon member said. The Government has not turned its back on the farmers. In fact, it is providing sound guidance and is placing farming in South Africa on a firm foundation to enable it to deal with the new circumstances.

The hon member argued in precisely the same way the hon member for Soutpansberg originally argued, and I listened to him comparing 1977 to 1989. The comparison is correct, but surely we are no longer in 1977 today. In 1977 we were able to export all our produce at a profit. One could export maize at a profit, one could export wheat at a profit, but today it is the Government’s fault because there is an over-production in other parts of the world.

No, that is caused by inflation.

When we consider inflation we arrive at another problem. The circumstances are different, but then the hon member must not attribute them to the Government’s policy in respect of agriculture. That basic problem will be experienced by any government governing this country—whichever one it may be. The hon member accused us of causing inflation in agriculture, but I can give the hon member the assurance that if the CP comes into power, what does he think will become of inflation then? Why does he not say this to the farmers as well, because this is the harsh reality.

We will show you what must be done.

The hon member will therefore stop inflation? that is what he is implying.

This was done successfully by many governments.

This Government has done more to stop inflation than that hon member thinks, otherwise we would have been saddled with even graver problems.

However, I want to go further with the quarrels the hon member for Lichtenburg has with agriculture. I do not know why he becomes so acrimonious about it. Let us rather seek solutions, for surely we have already arrived at quite a number of solutions. I do not want to go any further than to tell him that his arguments may perhaps sound fine for politics, but they are not very good for farming. They are not going to do agriculture any good. I am prepared to remove politics from agriculture, although one will never be able to do that completely, but the hon member compels me to return to the fray when he says that this department, of which I am part, has turned its back on the farmers.

I did not say that the department had done that, I said the Government had done so.

Very well, the Government has done that through the department as a result of its actions.

No, do not run away, the department cannot do that.

Order!

As far as the hon member for Wellington is concerned, just the following: Yes, our agricultural financing is at the crossroads. I think that we must create a new policy in agriculture in respect of productive financing, and we are rapidly doing so. We are doing so through the Land Bank and the Agricultural Credit Board. Hon members will also find that the example set by the Directorate: Financial Assistance on the basis of productive value and not on the basis of market value has now filtered through to the private financing organisations such as the banks and other institutions. Consequently they are no longer going to over-capitalise agriculture so readily, and in the end compel agriculture to cut the risks so fine that a person cannot meet his obligations after the slightest set-back.

†After listening to the hon member for Groote Schuur, may I say that farming looks easy from the outside but try it. It is not so easy. It is very much like the song about Henry and Lisa in which he tells her: “There’s a hole in the bucket, dear Lisa”. There is a hole in the hon member’s argument as well. If I could answer in short on the question of this budget…

But this budget is for White farmers.

Yes, it is for White farmers but it does not preclude other farmers from negotiating through their instruments to obtain finance. We are in a process of helping other own affairs departments in achieving the same sort of efficiency and we are putting our expertise at their disposal to assist them in order that they can budget and that they can implement the same measures that we have. It is therefore not a one-sided affair.

Secondly, there are limits to financing. The Agricultural Credit Board does not give subsidies in cases where loans are over R250 000 and the Land Bank stops at about R750 000. We also have a further limit in the sense that we help farmers in respect of one economic unit but we do not exceed more than two economic units. So, basically we operate within the range of the medium- to small-scale farmer.

The question of controls was also raised. There are controls. We have a system: In each magisterial district we have farmers on the Agricultural Credit Committees, that evaluate each application. Their comments are sent to the Agricultural Credit Board, that decides, within the norms, what the real value of that farmer is and then makes an allocation. It is done according to that; it is not done in a haphazard way.

I agree with the point made that cheap money will eventually destroy agriculture. Cheap money will destroy agriculture because it is out of line with the rest of the economic rules.

*The benefit of inexpensive financing, the benefit of what one is often seeking, namely a financing policy in terms of which one has a low input and a high profit and therefore stabilises agriculture in that way is what everyone is striving for. Everyone wants it and we should like to restore it to what it was. The moment we succeeded in doing so, however, this very scheme would carry the germs of its own destruction in it. Others will enter, precisely because it is profitable, and one will have over production. Ultimately one must strike a balance again within the economy and then the economy will adjust itself. One cannot want the real economic rules different in agriculture than in the rest of the economy. But that does not mean that one should leave farming alone in respect of assistance, as a result of circumstances beyond one’s control.

That is where this comes in: One must not cut this buffer between circumstances beyond one’s control and normal risks too fine and eventually venture into that sphere where one allows the State to bear the risk that the farmer should in fact be carrying. If we do that we destroy the industry. In that respect this hon Minister has succeeded in saving the maize industry, although things are difficult now, from great chaos and exposing it to the actual economic forces of the day. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is always a privilege to speak after the hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture. As a backbencher with an agricultural background I should like to tell our hon Minister that we greatly appreciate the work he has done. He knows what respect we have for him and we shall greatly miss him, and particularly his fatherly guidance, in the future.

I should like to exchange a few ideas about agricultural information. The importance of information cannot be over-emphasised. A well-informed person is usually much more balanced in what he has to say, has a better understanding of a particular situation and can accordingly make responsible decisions. If we could, for example, inform the general public about politics to the same extent as the average member of Parliament is informed, I am convinced that both the CP and the DP would die a quick death. Then we could have buried them along with the late PFP.

When a study is made of agricultural information one is amazed at the scope of this field. Within the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply for example, there are first of all popular publications. During the past year 175 new and revised publications were published in the various series, 120 newsletters were edited for publication and no less than 96 agricultural reports from the overseas offices were printed and distributed.

Secondly, there are scientific publications. During the past year 99 articles were published. In the Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research a total of 114 articles were published.

Technical articles on flowering plants of Africa and flora of Southern Africa and memoirs on the natural agricultural resources of South Africa were also published.

Thirdly, there is the news service. Approximately 50 issues of Landbounuus were published during the past year, at an average of 12 pages per issue. The emphasis was specifically on land conversion, financial assistance and drought and flood disaster areas and the national grazing strategy.

Fourthly, there were approximately 50 press releases, which achieved exceptionally good results, during the year under review. With regard to radio talks, in addition to the approximately 21 000 lines broadcast six days of the week in Afrikaans and English, daily news bulletins were also submitted to Radio Oranje. About 300 five-minute radio bulletins were broadcast in both official languages. This means that approximately 25 hours of broadcasting time were taken up by each of the official languages.

Then there is “Landbouradio”. The national grazing strategy, the land conversion scheme, financial assistance to farmers and the work done by the Jacobs Committee received a great deal of attention. Thanks to an increase in the regular contributions by the research institutes of the Department, more programmes with a practical bent could be presented. There has been cooperation with organised agriculture throughout. Reports and interviews relating to provincial and national commodity, conferences and congresses were broadcast. The introduction of new video-editing equipment last year was a highlight in the field of audio-visual services. This enables the Department to provide the SABC with contributions.

Order! No, the hon member for Sout pansberg should really not talk so loudly. I can hear every word he is saying. The hon member may proceed.

Eighteen contributions of about three minutes or more were given to the SABC, which broadcast them during the agricultural programme on the morning television service. Four slide programmes with their own sound-tracks were also completed.

This year the documentation centre again proved that it was one of the most important links in the provision of scientific information. The CAB data base meets more than 90% of the researcher’s needs. This data base currently holds more than two million documents. This year alone 120 000 documents were recovered from the CAB data base and put at the disposal of researchers.

At present there are 24 agricultural libraries and a further two are in the planning stage. The importance of the collections of the agricultural libraries for the country as a whole can be seen in the fact that 20% more inter-loan enquiries were received than was the case at other libraries. Furthermore, the library staff answered almost 55 000 research enquiries. The computerisation of certain library functions is receiving attention at present. As soon as the links have been established and the equipment can be provided, library users can expect a quicker service. The serious light in which agricultural information is regarded is apparent from investigations undertaken by the HSRC at the request of the SABC into agricultural programmes on television and radio.

Let us have a look at the agricultural programme “Agriforum”. The programme is shown at 07h30 on Saturdays on TV1. On the same Saturday the programme is repeated at 12h30 on TV2 and TV3.

A total of 18 000 farmers were reached in a nation-wide telephone survey. Sixty-seven percent of them stated that they had not watched “Agriforum” before. According to them the programme is not broadcast at a suitable time. These farmers say that the best time is in the evenings after 19h00, particularly between 20h00 and 21h00. It is interesting to note that the farmers who stated that they did watch “Agriforum” were well-educated, high-income group farmers. Almost half of them have a post-matriculation diploma or a degree and the gross annual turnover of their farms is more than R150 000 in most cases.

When one looks at the most important results of the research study in respect of the radio programmes “Landbouradio” and “Calling All Farmers”, it is interesting to see that only 19% of the bona fide farmers listen to “Landbouradio” and only about 7% to “Calling All Farmers”. It also appeared that the farmers were particularly interested in programmes that were of practical value to them. As far as the broadcast time is concerned, 05h30 to 06h30 is acceptable in summer. In winter the programme could be broadcast a little later, but not later than 08h00. Between 13h00 and 14h00 is not regarded as a viable alternative. The most important finding of this research is that farmers are particularly interested in practical suggestions and ideas, and that these should be the main focus of the programmes. It is clear that agricultural programmes must meet these requirements at the scientific and academic levels.

It is very clear, however, that there are shortcomings at the popular level. The incontrovertible proof of this is the lack of appreciation which the consumers of agricultural products have for the problems of the South African farmer. If methods for disseminating information could be found which would bring the farmer and the consumer closer together, this could at least contribute to restricting the middleman to an acceptable profit margin. Better information at this level could also contribute to a better understanding among farmers in various industries. It could contribute to greater unity among the farmers and give organised agriculture a better bargaining position.

Mr Chairman, I should therefore like to conclude by appealing to the Department and the media to strive for an increase in the quantity and quality of information on agricultural matters at the popular level.

Mr Chairman, I was very interested in some of the comments made by the hon member for Graaff-Reinet. If the hon the Minister ever thinks that some of the statistical questions that I put to him and which are answered by his Department do not see the light of day again he should listen to the farmers’ programmes, because many of those statistics are reported on the radio, and it is quite gratifying that they find them interesting.

Then why do you ask such a lot of questions? [Interjections.]

Well, Sir, farmers like to be informed and they actually use your answers and broadcast them; if you did not have those answers to give they would never see the fight of day. The hon the Minister must therefore be feeling very gratified today with all the hon members who have praised him as a Minister, and I am actually hopefully going to gratify him a little more by saying that I am very sorry indeed that he is standing down as Minister of Agriculture. He and I have been antagonists across the floor of the House over a broken period of time. I think the hon the Minister has been relatively kind to me and I think I have been relatively kind to him on occasion. We are, nevertheless, sorry that he is leaving. I think he has done the job to the best of his ability and I wish him well in his retirement.

You are now trying to be polite! [Interjections.]

Yes, I am always decent; there is nothing wrong with me in that respect! [Interjections.]

†I am a typical example of my party.

*We are decent people and we know everything about everything! [Interjections.]

†Mr Chairman, I want to get away from this flippancy and I wish to deal with aspects of the research programme undertaken by the Department. Before I do so, however, I would again like to place on record the viewpoint that I have expressed before, namely that the research function should really not resort under White own affairs agriculture. Research should be to the benefit of the total farming community—I know the White farming community is by far the largest. It just does not make sense that it falls under the Administration: House of Assembly. Two years ago I asked how many people of other races were employed by the Department in research capacities, and I can remember not being particularly satisfied with the reply given by the hon the Minister. I would feel a bit better about it if the hon the Minister would give an unequivocal assurance that there is no bar at all to people of other races being employed by the Department. If there are many of them on the staff complement already perhaps he could give us some statistics as to how many people of colour are working in this White own affairs Department and in what capacities they are working. I do not want it in detail, Sir; I think it is unfair for me to spring that on the hon the Minister but perhaps he could give me some idea.

I want to discuss the whole question of research into soils. I read with a great deal of interest the sections in the departmental report concerning soil physics and also action taken in various regions with regard to erosion determination, soil conservation and erosion control, and I believe that we are in a very serious situation with regard to soil conservation. In spite of what the hon member for Sasolburg has said about the Orange Free State, for example, where things were looking beautiful—after the drought years many areas of the country are looking very beautiful at the moment—I believe there are many areas of the country which have deteriorated to such a degree that it is doubtful whether they will ever recover completely. I have expressed my opinions in the past about the desertification of our country—the creeping desert—and we are not doing enough to stop this degradation of our country. The problem has to do with over-use—the over-exploitation of our land—and this is of course being worsened by natural phenomena like droughts and floods.

There is no doubt that flooding has become worse because the water retention properties of the land have deteriorated considerably and absorption of rainfall into the soil no longer takes place to the extent that it should. Heavy downpours of rain run off immediately and flooded rivers and general flooding result, and instead of these rivers being able to maintain a constant flow throughout the year, the floodwaters rush to the sea carrying millions of tons of our topsoil. There are many reasons for this, as the hon the Minister well knows. Over-grazing is one of them and I believe that we have been consistently allowing this to take place. I am now talking about the total South Africa; I am not talking about sections that might only have to do with the White farming community. Constant over-grazing has in fact taken place.

Many of the homeland areas are seriously overpopulated, to such a degree that the pressure on land has resulted in almost total destruction of the farming potential in some of these areas, as well as in adjoining areas because erosion affects us all, Sir. However well one may manage one’s own land, if your neighbour over-utilizes his land, your land is at risk. Even where an area is being well farmed we tend to use the capacity of that land to the absolute ultimate, and the line between acceptable use and over-use is sometimes very difficult to find. One has to find a balance.

This has been made very much worse by the absolutely desperate financial situation of our farming community because in these circumstances farmers are being forced to take out of the land as much as they possibly can. They have to pay their overdrafts and interest—they have to meet their debt in some way or another—and in the long term this over-use leads to the complete degradation of the land, with serious consequences for the future.

I believe we have been over-exploiting some of our land for far too long, and the question now is what we should do about it. There is no easy answer; I agree entirely that it is not a simple problem. How do we repair the damage that has resulted in severe flooding, for example? Some of the answers lie in the field of research and I want to make a special plea in this regard. Some research done by the Department of Forestry in recent years pointed to the fact that veld burning had an interesting effect on many soils in that for months, and sometimes years, after the burn had taken place, these soils had become impermeable. They were not able to absorb rain as they should and the result was excessive run-off. I would like to ask this hon Minister to get the soil researchers in the Department to explore this much further because I understand that investigation overseas in this regard has shown that there is a great deal in the results of the research undertaken and that veld burning does result in very serious run-off. It seems to me that a lot of the serious flooding we have had in recent years could well have to do with veld burning.

I am certainly not advocating stopping veld burning. We know this is a very useful and necessary tool in farming operations. Money spent on research, however, always pays dividends, and perhaps further information as a result of research into this particular aspect could provide us with some pointers as to the management of burning programmes.

Mr Chairman, I would like to say a few words to the hon member for Bryanston. I would like to agree whole-heartedly with him with regard to the over-utilisation of agricultural land. The over-utilisation of our agricultural land in this country is really a matter which is cause for concern in many ways. However, in this regard I want to add that I am pleased that we are also focussing the information campaign on the management aspects of farming to a greater extent, and also on the financial aspects, because I think that this is what will determine our land usage pattern in the future, because the issue is, as he said, that of financial results.

I am very sorry, because I had a few remarks which I wanted to address to the hon member for Soutpansberg. I also had a few remarks which I wanted to address to the hon member for Greytown, who referred to the “deep” Karoo. I still want to look for that place; I do not know where it is. I know that the Karoo is large and extensive, but deep? Well, perhaps. I do not know what he meant by deep. Everyone has his own idea of what deep is. I know that the hon the Deputy Minister cannot really talk about a Deep Karoo, because where he is it is really not deep. At any rate, the CP is conspicuous in their absence.

No, he is in another House.

Oh. But at least we have a few members here. We are engaged in an agricultural debate and agriculture is the very subject which the CP harps on and with regard to which they referred to the failure of the Government and said that the farmers are suffering. And then they came here and tried to score a few political points, and then they left; they were no longer interested.

One of them is prepared to take you all on.

Mr Chairman, that is not a true story which is now being told. I think it is simply a shot in the dark. [Interjections.] I want to hurry on because I want to say a few words about labour and particularly housing for labourers. Labour is a very important production factor in any system, and particularly in agriculture. I visualise that the labour pattern in agriculture will change. It has already begun to change. In previous years agricultural labour was not scarce and I think, I am guilty here as well, that it was not properly managed by our agriculturalists either. However, the picture changes as the children and young people receive better education at school; as their skills improve. This also holds a great deal of promise for agriculture, because in this way the skills as well as productivity in agriculture will improve considerably.

To retain these people, as well as the people of a higher quality, in the service of agriculture, the working conditions and the needs of families will constantly have to enjoy the attention of the agriculturist. Agriculture accommodates between 5 million and 6 million people in South Africa; nearly 21% of the population. Better housing for farm labourers is an important part of the working conditions. The opportunities for the improvement of the quality of life begin at home and in education around the home. Neatness, good behaviour, co-operation, pride in one’s home and personal pride and diligence; that is the place where these tendencies can be cultivated—around the home of every family.

Housing and settlement of agricultural workers is a buffer against metropolitan urbanisation. This is an argument which was used earlier in the debate here. I am saying again that we accommodate 21% of the population in agriculture, and if one looks at that, one realises how important good housing for agricultural workers is.

In the light of the serious housing shortage in the country I think we should regard housing of agricultural workers as a social service, and not necessarily only as a specific farming function. All of us sitting here know how important suitable accommodation is for all people.

I now want to refer briefly to the existing scheme. We have an existing scheme in terms of which R10 million of the agricultural budget is made available annually by the Financial Auxiliary Services Division for the housing of labourers. This is a loan scheme with a subsidised interest rate and the period of repayment is approximately 20 years. However, we were not nearly able to satisfy the needs for housing of agricultural labourers with the scheme, especially not in recent years. I am pleased to be able to say that I am under the impression that agriculture is considering better housing for its workers to an increasing extent. Farmers have become aware of the fact that housing for labourers is very important. In 1989-90, the present financial year, applications to the value of R13,6 million have already been received, which must be made available to satisfy the need for agricultural accommodation. However, in my opinion the existing scheme has an unnecessary amount of administrative red tape and a prodigious application form on which one has to provide all personal particulars, possibly even one’s grandmother’s maiden name!

And how many women you have.

Yes, and some of us would have difficulty in stating that. I think these are some of the reasons why the scheme has not been such a great success in the past. I am pleased to say that a new scheme is being negotiated, an improved scheme, as a result of representations which were made by the South Africa Agricultural Union. On instructions from the hon the Minister of Finance, in response to the representations the Central Economic Advisory Service is considering a scheme that will operate through the existing housing fund.

The existing housing fund amounts to approximately R1 000 million. We also argue that agricultural housing should also qualify for financing from this central housing fund. We are asking the own affairs department in the Administration: House of Assembly for the meager amount of R25 million per year. It is good to see that in this scheme we are negotiating a 50% subsidy; a one-off payment which will also cost the State less in the long run. It will require less administration, no bonds will be registered against properties of farmers and I think that in this way one can actually make between R50 million and R54 million per year available for housing for agricultural labourers, which will be erected according to certain standards.

I envisage that those of us in this House will make strong representations to the hon the Minister of Finance to give us access to this amount. It can be adjusted annually. In fact, if I am not mistaken, the committee which investigated this matter, recommended that R50 million per year be made available for this function in terms of the budget.

I want to take the opportunity to thank our hon the Minister very sincerely for his contribution in this regard, where they are still negotiating the scheme. Sir, while I am thanking the hon the Minister, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank him in the sense that he is the hon Minister of Agriculture who is strongly in favour of co-operatives. I want to thank him very sincerely for that. In that regard he has done a tremendous amount of work for us in firmly establishing this business arm of organised agriculture.

I must also refer briefly to the other scheme which has elicited a great deal of comment in the Press, as well as in certain debates and Vote discussions. This is the scheme to which the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development referred in the discussion of his Vote. He requested that the South Africa Housing Trust submit a scheme to him for the purposes of his constituency. We must understand that this scheme was meant for very limited application in his constituency, Ceres, and the Koue Bokkeveld region. They have their own specific needs. However, there are interesting possibilities. They envisage three possibilities for the scheme: According to the one, labourers’ houses on farms are registered by means of a servitude so that farm labourers can obtain proprietary rights to accommodation in this way and as the value of the property increases, they will be able to build up a capital asset during the period in which they work there. Secondly, they are looking at farm villages, which provide a service to a number of farms in an area. And then, thirdly, they are looking at housing for farm labourers in municipal areas. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I think the hon member for De Aar made a very constructive speech and I support him very strongly in his remarks relative to the need to provide adequate accommodation for workers on the farms. Farmers, as we know, have been urged repeatedly to improve the conditions of employment and there is no doubt that accommodation is one of the most important features of this exercise. However, what I think one must not lose sight of is the fact that the farming community is providing a social service which would otherwise fall on the shoulders of the State. I think that is a very important aspect that should always be borne in mind.

I notice that the hon the Minister has left the Chamber for a while and I would ask the hon the Deputy Minister to convey to him my deep appreciation, not only as a friend, but also for the manner in which he has served the farming community.

I realize that he must almost be punch-drunk with praise today, but the one thing that has come through very clearly is the sincerity of that praise, no matter from which quarter. Not only this House, but farmers as a whole respect the services that he has rendered agriculture, particularly during these very difficult drought years. It has been one of the most difficult terms with which any Minister of Agriculture has had to contend. I know that I am speaking on behalf of the farming community when I say we wish him well in his retirement may his own farming operations flourish now that he has more time to devote to them. May he also be the beneficiary of decisions he has made as Minister to bring about stability to the industry.

It is inevitable that matters raised in today’s debate on own affairs agriculture will spill over into those of general affairs, which brings me to the point I have made in other debates regarding the need for steps to be taken to move away, wherever possible, from the own affairs concept and to consolidate under the one umbrella of general affairs. Agriculture, as I see it, affords the ideal platform from which such an initiative could be launched, which would ideally close the gap between own and general affairs. This in itself would eliminate the duplication that exists at the present time, where separate departments of agriculture are responsible for the administration of a single industry while—let us face it—having similar problems and requirements. Furthermore, such a move would, apart from eliminating unnecessary duplication, to which I have already referred, result in a substantial reduction in administration costs, which is a factor that demands the ongoing attention of the Government.

I wish to turn my attention now to a somewhat controversial matter, and that is the Government’s decision to write off the R460 million stabilization fund debt that the Maize Board has incurred over the years. The difficulties that the maize farmers have experienced during recent years are well known and one cannot but have the greatest sympathy for these farmers for the setbacks they have suffered during the drought years. However I must warn that in spite of these facts and my concern for these farmers, I have certain misgivings in regard to the precedent that has now been set by the writing off of so large an amount. I realize that I am treading on dangerous ground, but the question arises now as to whether debts of other marketing boards are not also deserving of the same consideration. Here I refer particularly to the foreign exchange losses incurred by, for example, the Wool Board on overseas loans, which I understand were originally taken up on the grounds of the advice received from authoritative banking establishments.

The question I would like to put to the hon Minister is this: What is the criteria employed in assessing whether or not the debt of a marketing board will be written off? I recall, when I was a member of the Dairy Board, that milk producers were required to pay substantial levies to meet the costs of exporting butter, cheese and powdered milk at a loss, with negligible assistance from the Treasury. In other words, it was the producers who were required to carry the burden of overproduction. I want to warn too that the Maize Board’s intention to extend control throughout the country solely for the purposes of extracting levies from as many maize growers as possible is, as I see it, highly irresponsible and undesirable, in that this action will threaten the stability of the maize industry as a whole. It will result in many livestock farmers turning away from maize production and maize consumption to other grain crops. Let me point out too that rigid control in any industry inevitably inhibits the distribution and consumption of the final product. This could not be more pertinent to the maize industry than at the present time. I must admit that I was somewhat disappointed that the findings of the commission of enquiry were not more positive and did not give a clearer lead as to how the problems in the industry might be met in the future.

I also want to have my say on the implications of the rising input costs. I would like to stress that the increased returns from livestock farming in the past 12 to 15 months have provided welcome economic relief for many farmers, particularly those involved in semi-intensive operations. However, this relief is now showing signs of being shortlived on account of the phenomenal increases in input costs over the past year. Here again I must stress that increased interest rates and fuel prices have played no small role in bringing about a situation where the viability of farming undertakings is once again in question. It must not be forgotten too that it is products from semi-intensive areas that provide the backbone of stable food production in this country. Financial distress in these areas as a result of escalating input costs could jeopardize the availability of certain basic products, whose availability on supermarket shelves is so often taken for granted.

Mr Chairman, I find it a pleasure to follow on the hon member for Mooi River. We value his astute contributions on agriculture. And I suppose after Saturday he and I are very proud of Natal rugby!

A very topical issue, particularly in Natal, over the last two years has been environmental pollution, the main suspect being hormone-based herbicides. Wild media speculation such as that “Agent Orange” dioxin was present in 2,4-D appearing on shelves in South Africa have not helped the public at large. Following urgent investigations which I had called for, the Ministry of Agriculture found that the above allegations were unfounded. I wish to inform the House of the factual situation by means of a chronological rundown of events, as experienced by fresh produce growers.

Since 1975 to 1985 there were continuous investigations to determine reasons for crop failures in vegetables at irregular intervals. By a systematic process of elimination and scientific testing all other possible causes were excluded, for example fungus, bacterial diseases, eelworm, management, irrigation techniques, rotation etc. During 1985 the problem was diagnosed by Cedara as probably being from herbicide drift—probably 2,4-D from neighbouring sugar farms. The immediate farmers were approached privately to point out the problems caused by the chemicals. The chemical companies’ area representatives were at that time also made aware of the situation. Ninety five percent of the farmers were co-operative and immediately changed to alternative chemicals. However, damage continued in the 1985-86 season, and it was getting worse.

The vegetable farmers were getting agitated and began sending telexes to the Minister of Agriculture, demanding that something be done. In October/November 1986 scientists from the department visited Tala Valley to inspect plant life. This resulted in a gazetted ban in Tala Valley on 16 January 1987. At the same time monitoring of the air was started. In April 1987, following continued severe damage, the ban was extended to include all the hormonal herbicides which had previously been excluded erroneously. Despite this action the damage continued unabated. In July 1987 the Minister of Agriculture formed a committee to advise him on all aspects of the hormonal issue. This committee had representatives of all the involved parties and to date has met six times. In October 1987 the banned area was increased on a voluntary basis. Rain samples as well as air samples were now being tested, and positive results were now beginning to trickle through, some at levels which gave extreme cause for concern. The air monitoring was then discontinued as it was felt that rain sampling was easier, cheaper and more accurate.

As some results were embarrassing for certain parties and the figures were being published in the press, the Department of Agriculture decided to keep the results of the analyses and other research to themselves. As a result of this decision farmers started taking their own samples and sent them to private laboratories. The damage in the meantime continued and in September 1988 the banned area was again extended, but due to heavy lobbying by one of the chemical companies, two of the chemicals were removed from the banned list, against the recommendations of the Minister’s own advisory committee. However, the damage still continues to date and the last damage was observed on 5 May 1989. Vegetable farmers have been requesting a total ban on hormonal herbicides in Natal since 1987 and, since the measures taken by the Government have had no effect, have been forced at considerable expense to everybody to take the matter to the Supreme Court for a decision. The farmers are about to issue a summons on all the chemical companies. However, it is still not too late for the Government to take positive action.

Recently a laser test method has been employed by the Natal University and these tests are now available. For the first time plants themselves can be analysed for the presence of hormonal herbicides. So far all samples analysed have tested positive, mainly showing a tricopone, 2,4-D. Crops that were tested included the whole spectrum, such as tomatoes, cabbages, citrus and avocados from areas such as Greytown, Richmond, Thornville and Tala Valley itself. There are currently 150 samples in the pipeline to be tested.

The South African Cane Growers Association have adopted a most responsible approach, namely to advise all their members to co-operate with a voluntary ban for the coming season to allow the Department of Agriculture the necessary breathing space to carry out and to finalize the necessary research, which must be conclusive in establishing the ultimate destiny of this chemical. Cane growers have compiled an illustration of all the media coverage to motivate their appeal. Likewise, the South African Timber Growers Association have given their support. I wonder though if this is enough. What if we have a few transgressors that will negate the whole exercise? A number of municipalities have already gone as far as banning the use of 2,4-D in their areas, such as Durban, Pietermaritzburg, Westville and Scottburgh, and others throughout the country are following their example.

For the last two years I have been concerned with the financial implications brought about by the problem. Consultants place a figure of R6 million plus losses on turnover on only a handful of farmers who have gone to the trouble of employing them. For production to continue many fresh produce growers were helped with loans from the Department of Agriculture’s Credit and Land Tenure. Following a recent meeting with the manager of the Land Bank, further steps are being taken to consolidate and delay repayments to help these growers to get over their cash flow problems. As repeated damage has occurred—as recent as 5 May 1989—angry farmers are looking for direct State assistance. At the end of last week I relayed an invitation by the Beaumont-Eston Farmers Association to the hon Deputy Minister to attend a meeting to help thrash out the problem. I look forward to that visit.

I am pleased to see that the Environment Conservation Bill has been tabled. Recent experience gained by our technicians in monitoring and identifying the causes of atmospheric and other areas of pollution should give South Africa the necessary teeth to achieve the aims of that particular Bill.

Mr Chairman, this afternoon I want to bring to the hon the Minister’s attention by way of a practical example a very serious problem with which many farmers are struggling. It deals with problems which farmers on the borders of the independent Black states are experiencing. Their crops are being destroyed and the theft of stock and other agricultural products is the order of the day.

In August 1988 the coriander crop of a hardworking young farmer in my constituency was totally destroyed by cattle from Bophuthatswana. Assessments by two directors of the Magaliesberg Co-operation confirmed this in writing. The estimated yield before the damage was 2,5 ton per hectare on the 17 hectares that were destroyed. He informs me that his damage amounts to between R60 000 and R70 000.

The then magistrate of Brits confirmed in writing that this particular farmer had already complained in November 1987 about cattle from Bophuthatswana destroying his growing crop. He was advised to have the cattle impounded approximately 50 to 60 kilometres from there, which would be a very expensive exercise.

A few days after the incident I informed the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs in writing that I was of the opinion that citizens of the Republic of South Africa should be able to rely on the Government for protection against such losses. I also requested that this particular farmer be compensated for the losses he had suffered with funds allocated by the Government to assist Bophuthatswana. Needless to say, despite various efforts by the officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs—and I want to credit them for that—nothing positive has happened. There was very little reaction on the part of Bophuthatswana. In fact, it seems that in this case they do not want to accept any responsibility for their citizens’ actions.

In a letter from the Secretary of the Department of the President of Bophuthatswana, dated 16 November 1988, the following was said among other things to the Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs. I quote:

Mr Chairman, as a last resort I now turn to the hon the Minister and the hon Deputy Ministers who are present here, with a polite request to contact their colleague in this regard as a matter of urgency. Unfortunately this is not an isolated case. Numerous complaints have been received from throughout the Transvaal of stock theft on the border and of farmers’ growing crops being destroyed.

In the case to which I referred, the Department of Public Works reacted immediately to the request that an international boundary fence be erected in this area. The Department of Development Aid assisted them with that. Today I want to thank the officials of this department in public for their understanding of the situation and for their immediate and firm action.

However, I want to add that in this case the boundary fence did not work. The strands of wire—13 of them are being put up—are cut almost daily on this particular farm, so that the cattle can be herded through in order to drink at the water canal. For a very long time this farmer could not sow any crops, and this resulted in further losses.

The hon the Minister will appreciate that at the moment this farmer simply can no longer meet his obligations. Only this afternoon he informed me on the telephone that he could not meet his obligations towards the Land Bank, and that he was considering selling his land because he could not carry on in those circumstances. I think that if there is one case that really ought to receive attention, it is this one.

At the moment this farmer is again trying to sow a harvest, but the cattle are still coming into his lands regularly. I fear that the fare that befell him last year will be his fate again this year. I want to request that the hon the Minister immediately take up this matter with the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Tell him that for once he must put his foot down and demand reaction on the part of Bophuthatswana. They apparently have no control over their citizens. Our people—and for that I want to give them special credit this afternoon—have behaved irreproachably in this situation so far and have acted with great self-restraint.

However, I fear that they are losing patience. Only a few years ago there was an unpleasant international incident in the Brits district. Through sheer desperation a farmer killed cattle from Bophuthatswana which had ruined his growing crop for the umpteenth time. I should not like to see the repetition of such an event.

Secondly, I should like urgent attention to be given to compensation for this farmer. An ordinary citizen cannot afford to plead his cause in an international court. That is what he will have to do if he wants to do justice to himself in this case. He has the right to expect his Government take up this case on his behalf.

Thirdly, I want to request that the type of fence erected in such circumstances be looked into again. In certain circumstances razor wire will have to be considered if the State really wants to put up effective fencing. I realise that it will be an expensive enterprise, but what is the use of doing something and ultimately not getting good results?

Fourthly, I want to ask the hon the Minister to make urgent arrangements for patrolling to take place in this case. I hear from organized agriculture that in the Eastern Transvaal patrolling teams have already been established in cooperation with the South African Police. Patrolling has become essential if this farmer wants to save his crop, which is still growing at the moment. Furthermore his life and the lives of his wife and children have been threatened and approximately two weeks ago a Black person was arrested in this connection.

Fifthly, I want to ask the Government to consider creating a negotiation mechanism in order to try to prevent border incidents of this nature. The farmers themselves should have representation in such a negotiation structure; it should not consist only of officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs. I should appreciate it very much if the hon the Minister could assist me in this regard and give his urgent attention to this matter.

I wish the hon the Minister, who is retiring on 6 September, a blessed retirement and I want to thank him for what he has tried to achieve for agriculture under difficult circumstances.

Mr Chairman, I listened to the hon member for Brits and I have great sympathy for the problems he has. However, I hope that he will pardon me for not reacting to his speech at this moment. I hope there will still be time left at the end of my speech to react to it as a representative who has had something to do with borders and foreign states, and to give him some friendly advice on how to solve that problem.

Today I wish to speak about State aid to beginner farmers. If one speaks about this subject, especially about beginner farmers, it is essential to define this concept first. I do not want to give it a long definition. A beginner farmer is a farmer who starts farming between the age of 20 and 40 plus, who starts on an uneconomical farming unit or one which is only just an economical unit, and then proves that he can manage that farming unit.

I do not wish to criticise the present aid to farmers. We know that section 10 of the Agricultural Credit Act was abolished in the early eighties and that beginner farmers no longer received assistance in buying land. I do not wish to criticise, but I think it was a mistake when that section was abolished.

I wish to give this committee a practical example, something which happens in everyday life. As I have already said, I cannot really find fault with the way in which they determine whether a farmer can be assisted or not. However, it does happen that certain worthwhile cases are not taken into account, as in the case I am now going to present.

This man was a beginner farmer who started farming on an uneconomical unit which he rented from his father. He immediately realised that it was an uneconomical unit and tried to rent an additional piece of land in order to make his farming economical. When the first piece of land which bordered on the land which he rented from his father, came on the market—it was also an uneconomical unit—he decided to purchase it. He went to Agricultural Credit for financial aid. They replied that he did not have sufficient security and that the land which he wanted to purchase, was not an economical proposition. He had to turn to the private sector, where he borrowed the money to pay for the farm. He paid off the debt very soon and then he had property to his name.

The additional land which he rented in order to exercise his right to pasture rotation so that he could have optimum use of his land, was then sold. This farmer was then forced to purchase a piece of land in the same area to practice his right to pasture rotation. It was also an uneconomical unit. Once again he approached Agricultural Credit for financial assistance. He was of the opinion that he qualified for financial assistance. At that stage Agricultural Credit told him that the distance of 15 miles which separated his farm and the piece of land which he wanted to purchase was too far, that the land was not an economical unit and that therefore he could not be assisted.

This beginner farmer kept on farming and saved enough for a nest egg as soon as possible. He promised himself that he would purchase an economic unit. In the meantime his father died and he inherited the piece of land which he rented from his father. Then a fine economical unit came onto the market. He decided to purchase this unit, and as he still regarded himself as qualifying for assistance, he applied to Agricultural Credit for financial assistance.

Their reply was that he was no longer considered an Agricultural Credit case as he possessed sufficient property and that he had to go to the Land Bank or another financial institution for the funds to purchase the land. He then went to the Land Bank. Their reply was that he had paid too much for the land and they could therefore not finance him. This farmer had to turn to the private sector again and run the risk of being financed.

Towards the end of the seventies and beginning of the eighties, the interest rates increased dramatically and this farmer realised that he would find himself in financial trouble as a result. Because his farming industry was strong enough, he decided to sell half of his livestock in order to redeem his bond with the private institution. He did this and great was his surprise the following year when he was taxed by the Receiver for one-and-a-half times more than the amount for the bond which he had redeemed.

This farmer then decided that he would consolidate the pieces of land into one strong unit so that he could qualify for a Land Bank loan. He then sold all the loose pieces of land, incurred debt once again, and consolidated the land into a fine, large, strong unit. Because the Receiver proved that he was an economical farmer, he applied to the Land Bank for a loan. The Land Bank’s reply was that they did not assist farmers who owned economical units. Once again he had to incur a risk by borrowing money in the private sector.

That is why I should like to ask today, since we are living in a time of privatisation, whether the Government cannot consider whether a person, who starts farming on a farming unit such as the example I referred to, and especially since land prices are so high today, cannot be assisted by the usual banking institutions and approved by the Land Bank or Agricultural Credit Council with recommendations by an agricultural credit committee in which the State only underwrites a fixed interest rate so that increasing interest rates do not ruin the farmer financially. In this way criticism from the CP can be averted. By the way, this farmer is still a Nationalist today. In spite of all his disappointments, he is not a member of the CP today. I wish to advocate that we look after the beginner farmers so that these who qualify can be assisted by means of our usual banking institutions.

While I still have time at my disposal, I want to tell the hon member for Brits that he must go back to the farmers and that they must establish a relations committee in co-operation with the Black State. The hon member laughs, but all of us whose constituencies adjoin independent states have had the same problems. We established relations committees because they work, and it is not only the police action because the Black chiefs must be informed otherwise one only bedevils relations. We established relations committees in conjunction with Lesotho and the Transkei and we have no trouble with our neighbours. We have no cattle theft, or else it has decreased to such an extent that we hardly even complain about it any more.

Finally, on behalf of the wool farmers, I wish to use this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister, who has indicated that he is going to retire, for what he has done, not only for agriculture but also for the wool farmers of South Africa. We pay tribute to a Greyling Wentzel who had the interests of every farmer in South Africa at heart during difficult times.

I should also like to thank the Land Bank and the Directorate: Financial Assistance for the understanding they have shown the farmers of South Africa during these difficult times. Thank you very much because these are truly difficult times. Better times will come and then we shall say that Greyling Wentzel, the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, really kept the farmers going during those difficult times. Thank you very much for this opportunity and I gladly support this Vote.

Mr Chairman, on my own behalf and that of my party we express our thanks to the Directorate and the officials of the Department of Agriculture for the services they have furnished to the farming public over recent years. I want to assure the hon the Minister that I shall not attack him. Considerable mention has been made of beginner politicians and I have learned one thing as a beginner politician, that is that I should not alienate a potential voter. The hon the Minister has received many tributes today and I hope that he will permit me to extend my personal good wishes to him. On behalf of the voters of Bethal I want to say thank you very much to the hon the Minister for what he has done for that constituency over the past 23 years.

I want to assure him that there is appreciation for what he has done although there may be people who differ with him politically. I am a political opponent of the hon the Minister’s but I want to thank him for the way in which he and I could work together and that, although we are political enemies, we could become friends, as one person to another. I want to wish the hon the Minister and his family a happy retirement in the Bethal constituency and that he will farm prosperously there. I want to add that, if he runs into trouble, he should approach his MP because I shall always help him.

Mr Chairman, there are two aspects to which I want to refer today. One of these is the question of compensation which is paid by mining companies to farmers whose lands are damaged as a result of mining and in particular in consequence of the new high-extraction mining method, the so-called rip-pillar method. We have one problem, which is that mining companies present farmers with one story and, when the worst comes to the worst, that theory does not work juristically. Farmers are told that they will be compensated in full. Dr Mostert, Mr André du Toit, Mr De Waal and Mr Botha were with the hon member for Standerton and me when we visited that area and they gave us both the assurance that they would compensate farmers in full. I asked them what they meant by “compensate in full”. They explained to me that they would have to be able to purchase the same as they held at present with the money yielded. I asked them whether they therefore intended paying at replacement value. They confirmed that they would pay at replacement value because, if a person had a good crush-pen, even if it were somewhat overcapitalised, they would say that he had spent that money and that he was entitled to have the same crush-pen on another farm. If he had paving which was done in brick, he should also be able to have those bricks laid elsewhere. He should be able to buy what he had sacrificed. They said that market value did not play a part because they intended compensating the farmer for what they were taking from him. The moment it comes to compensation procedures, however, expropriation becomes operative and then their legal representatives say that the farm is overcapitalised and that the crush-pen is too smart. Then they say that his crush-pen is constructed of piping but that an ordinary wooden crush-pen would have been adequate. They say, for instance, that they will not pay compensation for that type of crush-pen but only for a wooden crush-pen. That is where the problem arises with Sasol in our constituency. They make promises but, when the matter goes to the legal department, the norm is different. We pointed this out last year when the amendment to the legislation was dealt with here and then the hon the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs told me that I had not done my homework. What is taking place now is exactly what we warned against.

I also want to broach another aspect. This is the question of veld fires. Veld fires are becoming a great problem in the Eastern Transvaal—and I think in many other places too. Today veld fires do not originate only as a result of negligence. I do not want to enlarge on this because I think this could only serve to encourage some people, but we do know that it is said that wars can be won with matches. There is a strong suspicion—and this was confirmed by the Police—that there is deliberate arson in our neighbourhood. I want to request that we examine these aspects in good time and that penalties for arson be reviewed as a matter of urgency. Arson causes enormous damage, not only to farmers. Eskom recently held a conference during which they indicated the extent of power loss as a result of heat which is caused by veld fires and what influence this has on industries and the supply of electricity. I think there could be co-operation between industries and bodies like Eskom and Sasol in the prevention of fires. I have already brought this matter to the attention of the SA Agricultural Union because we know that the Forest Act provides that, if a fire breaks out on somebody’s farm, there is suspicion that the farmer was negligent and that he is fiable for the damage which such a fire may cause. We shall have to give serious consideration to constructing proper firebreaks, especially round our employees’ houses where they still use firewood so that we may prevent fires. One cannot permit a situation in which a person driving from Pretoria to Bethal sees a black shroud covering the veld. It is said that veld fires are just as great a contributory cause of atmospheric pollution as other causes of smoke. I therefore request that we give this our serious attention and that there be liaison with other sectors with a view to proper fire-fighting and that we pass legislation in an attempt to combat this problem.

There is something else to which I want to refer briefly, and that is the question of termites. I think that termite damage is not always fully appreciated. If one is standing near termites, they sound almost like a flock of sheep grazing. [Interjections.] I hear someone at the back speaking about termites in the CP. That hon member is running from Potgietersrus because these termites will devour him there.

I request that we treat termites on the same basis as locusts, that we regard them as a plague and that we take urgent steps to promote the extermination of termites; that, as in the case of locusts, we take the necessary steps to regard them seriously as a plague because it does not help to rest a paddock and then to see it disappearing before one’s eyes without any cattle ever having been in there.

Mr Chairman, today I should like to give the hon the Minister some good advice at the end of his period of office here with us. I should like to give him this advice: Do not allow a song of praise to side-track you; I wish you a better representative next time.

In the few minutes at my disposal I should like to refer to the problems agriculturalists are experiencing in the Vaalharts irrigation area. I would not say that these people are battling quite as much as the example to which the hon member for Aliwal referred, but they are also battling.

As reasons for their problems I should like to single out the following: In the first place there is the matter of water supply. The annual water quota is only 7 700 cubic metres per hectare per year. Between 1983 and 1987 the water allocation varied between 40% and 60% of the normal quota owing to the drought. The floods at the beginning of 1988 resulted in only approximately 50% of the normal crops being harvested. Furthermore the canal capacity is only 4 mm per day and consequently only a specific rotation of crops is possible.

A second reason which is advanced for the problems being experienced is the increased input costs and the attendant lower product prices. In this regard a comparison is drawn with the price of wheat and reference is also made to high interest rates. From surveys and calculations made by the Vaalharts Farmers’ Union it is apparent that one must have an average yield of 5 tons of wheat per hectare in order to break even. The average wheat yield at Vaalharts is only 4 tons per hectare.

I am told that in 1968 with the income earned from 31 tons of wheat one could buy a small 33Kw tractor, and this is not the same tractor the hon member for Soutpansberg referred to. In 1988, 20 years later, one must sell 120 tons of wheat to be able to buy the same size tractor. From all the factual information which can be gathered, it consequently seems as if the price the farmer is receiving for the product is not keeping pace with the input costs.

I think there are fairly acceptable reasons for the facts I have just mentioned; reasons which are also appreciated and accepted by the irrigation farmers there. Unfortunately the reasons which can be advanced do not improve the actual financial position of the people. Furthermore the farmers have farming units of approximately 24 hectares, which simply cannot be considered economic units any longer.

Today I should like to tell the hon the Minister and the two hon Deputy Ministers that I do not want them to gain the impression that my people are a lot of whining farmers who are forever asking for hand-outs. No, Sir, they are 600 or so proud farmers who are still battling in spite of full dams. They do not begrudge others their share, but cannot always understand why fellow farmers in neighbouring districts, who went through the same drought that they did, all received R40 000. Stories are even doing the rounds that members with good parliamentary salaries got the money, whereas they were not privileged to share in it, because they live within an irrigation scheme.

I have told you that my people would like to help themselves. That is why both I and they believe in the old proverb: If you give me a fish when I am hungry, you have merely given me a meal, but if you teach me to catch fish you have given me a career or a profession. For that reason I should like to make a few requests on their behalf.

The first matter I should like to discuss is water supply. We took very grateful cognisance of the fact that approval has been given in principle for the water quota to be increased. Today I am asking the hon the Minister please to announce more particulars and possibly tell us when a start will be made on increasing the capacity of the canal. I can just mention that according to tests which have been done rotation of crops can be implemented to the optimum with a canal capacity of 10 mm per day. I mentioned a while ago that it is 4 mm at Vaalharts. According to the investigation the difference in the financial results on a 72 hectare unit resulting from the said increased canal capacity, would be that a shortfall of R20 000 could be converted into a surplus of R80 000.

The second aspect I want to mention is crop structure adjustment. I should like to place on record my thanks to the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply for the task group under Mr Skinner, which investigated the viability of structural changes at Vaalharts. I understand that this task group has completed its work. I want to ask that the report of the task group be made available to the farmers’ union at Vaalharts, so that they can study it and that an opportunity is then created for the farmers’ union possibly to sit down with the two hon Deputy Ministers and discuss which of the recommendations can possibly be implemented, and how this can be done.

Meanwhile some of the farmers have already started looking for alternative crops with the assistance of the local co-operative. Emphasis has specifically been placed on perennial crops. A total of 150 000 citrus trees have already been planted. A further 50 000 trees are going to be planted in August of this year. The establishment costs of these citrus trees are, however, high; they total approximately R8 400 per hectare up to and including the one-year stage. Of course, it also takes quite a number of years before one can achieve one’s full production potential.

A second permanent crop which has already proved itself and has adapted well to the climatic conditions is pecan nuts. A total of 23 313 trees have already been planted. The establishment costs up to and including one year total approximately R1 120 per hectare. My request in this connection is, as I said at the outset, that we must be helped to help ourselves. For that reason I am asking that some or other form of financial assistance, possibly in the form of a long-term loan, should be considered as bridging capital and as establishment costs. I believe that in this way farmers will be enabled to be an asset to the country again.

I have referred in passing to the problems and possible solutions. Some hon members may think that I have wasted this House’s time today by talking about and making an appeal for only 1% of our farmers. However, this 1% provides employment opportunities to approximately 60 000 Blacks, as well as a livelihood to approximately 5 000 Whites. It is consequently clear that between 300 000 and 400 000 people have food because of the activities of this group of farmers.

Today I am therefore saying thank you for the past assistance. We want to and will be independent and self-sufficient again. We are asking for the necessary support because at the moment our financial legs are still a bit too weak to carry the financial burden.

Mr Chairman, we on these benches would certainly congratulate the farmers on the scheme itself on the production that they do achieve. I think they are a shining example for those in the rest of the country of what can be done under trying circumstances. I think the temporary setbacks they are experiencing at the moment are just that—temporary.

I wish to continue with an issue raised by the hon member, Mr Redinger, namely that of hormonal herbicides. I was not able to be here earlier when he spoke, but he has had some words with some of my colleagues and me on the ground he had covered and I do not intend to cover exactly the same ground, which was a chronological analysis of the present situation. I merely want to raise certain questions further to the questions I posed in the debate on the general affairs Agriculture Vote, when I raised this matter. The hon the Minister then indicated in his response, which was fairly lengthy, the possibility of a temporary extension on the ban on herbicides, news of which was carried in Agricultural News of 1 May.

I think we have a problem here in that the broader community, not just the farming community, has a misunderstanding of the word “temporary”. It is a problem that I think must be allayed. The question which has to be answered is whether the hon the Minister, when he uses the word “temporary”, means six months or a longer period, because it is a question that has been raised in the broader community.

I think one of the problems that is vested in this country at the moment, and extends from this Department as well, is the question of secrecy. It is a peculiar problem and I am aware that the area of hormonal herbicides does have economic considerations far beyond the direct community which they affect, and these are some of the things I am going to talk about today. If there is anything at the present moment in agriculture that has an emotional content beyond its effect on the farmers it is pollution and something like herbicides. Viewing the matter from that aspect, I think the Department has to take into consideration the importance of good public relations in that regard. I think the Department itself should seriously consider putting into operation some well-conceived longer term plan to alleviate the kind of emotional distress that newspapers sometimes make use of but which is certainly being experienced by individuals on the ground. I would like to cite a press report in the Sunday Tribune of 16 April 1989 in this regard, and I am quoting Dr Alex Heyns:

Asked about how the industry sources would react to the intended ban, Dr Heyns said:

The press report then goes on to play off the hormonal herbicide companies against the Department. For example, a company spokesman for Bayer says: “We can say nothing until we see the full text of the ban.” The Sugar Association was reportedly not in a position to comment. A spokesman for the Agricultural Veterinary Association said it was the first time he had heard about it. One can see how all these things are in fact building a picture in the mind of the average, non-technical reader. Even in semi-technical publications, like the Farmers’ Weekly of 10 February, one finds headings like “Claims on Tala herbicide damage are confirmed”. One has a problem in this regard, Mr Chairman, because it is quite clear that the facts are known and the question now is why the hon the Minister does not address the matter. What I am suggesting is that apart from the necessity of examining the issue of herbicides and getting rid of them, to my mind and in the minds of many other people there is a necessity for the Department to review the entire public relations issue aroused by issues such as these. “Blanket of secrecy on hormonal herbicides”, proclaims the November 1988 issue of the Farmers’ Weekly. We need to consider these issues.

The main issue I want to discuss today, however, is the kind of thing we are going to be susceptible to if overseas publications continue the kind of vendetta they have in fact been adopting against South Africa, particularly against the South African agriculture. This publication, Every Woman, is a British publication that is vitriolic against South Africa. One must accept that. The February 1989 issue carries articles calling for boycotts of products for various reasons—because of the starving South African children one should boycott South African products so that they can be used to feed the starving South African children, etc. This is very peculiar reasoning, Mr Chairman; I must be quite frank about that. In this issue there is also an article headed “South Africa: food and chemicals. South Africa has become an environmental horror story”. I think the hon the Minister is aware of this article, its implications and its dangers.

Yes, I am.

I do not intend pursuing this matter, but it is an important matter as far as agriculture is concerned, and I speak here as a non-farmer. I speak here as somebody who was closely connected with farming for most of his early life—my father worked for the Langeberg Koöperasie for many years—and as somebody who knows the importance of agriculture and the broadleaf industry, particularly the canning industry and the export of deciduous fruit. If there is anything this Department has to do and has to very soon, it is to become pro-active in a public relations campaign to ensure not only South Africans but also the rest of the world that we are not an environmental horror story. I think all of us are aware of that and I think all of us will go and eat a bunch of grapes or take a pear or an apricot off the tree and eat them quite happily. We do in fact eat them—that is fine—but that pro-activity has to be sold by interviews which this hon Minister grants to the Sunday press. He may not wish to do so; he may not wish to endure searching questions but it has to happen. We have to sell ourselves as a clean country, as a chemical free country. Obviously the research and all the other things that the hon the Minister has aimed at have to happen—hopefully 2,4-D will be banned and hopefully the hon the Minister will not use the word “temporary” when he talks about a ban—but this pro-active public relations campaign is of very great importance to South Africa.

Mr Chairman, at the outset let me tell the hon member for Pinetown at once that I agree with him that sound relations and publications in regard to this problem could possibly be of great assistance in combating the unnecessary emotional campaigns that have been launched in South Africa in regard to hormone herbicides. Those publications from which he quoted have come to our attention, and I immediately want to tell the hon member that those publications also have other objectives they wish to achieve.

Yes, I agree.

There is no doubt about that. I see the hon member agrees with me, and I am glad he does. I take note of the hon member’s suggestion about investigating the possibility of shortly introducing a better system of disseminating information about the problem. My colleague the hon the Deputy Minister and the hon member Mr Redinger will shortly be visiting the area at his invitation in order to make personal contact with the farmers. If I get the chance, I shall also pay a visit to that area.

Mr Chairman, you will understand that at this stage it is not possible for me to reply to all the individual speeches, but I do want to refer to a few overall facets. Before I come to that, however, I want to extend my sincere thanks for the kind words my colleagues on this side of the House, and also hon members on that side, addressed to me. I merely want to tell the hon member for Bethal that I shall still have reasonably good contacts when I retire as Minister; if he perhaps has a problem, he is free to consult me. [Interjections.]

It is indeed true that I have been through a very difficult phase. I think it was a singular phase in the history of agriculture in South Africa. Providence dictated that I assume responsibility for that task at that juncture. I quickly found, however, that one could only tackle this difficult task if one had a measure of co-operation and teamwork in this campaign. In this regard I firstly want to mention the two departments that fall under my control. In the years in which I have worked with them it has been clear that they not only understand a griculture, but also the cultural background of the South African agriculturist, and that is very important indeed. It allows one to communicate with him on his terms so that he can understand what one is saying, and that is tremendously important.

Secondly it has always been my view—it was also the view adopted by my colleagues with whom I worked; I am thinking, for example, of the hon the Minister of Environment Affairs and of Water Affairs who was my Deputy Minister for almost five years and with whom I had a wonderful working relationship—that organised agriculture should be consulted whenever such campaigns are to be launched, then to design and implement schemes, thereafter analysing the problems involved in the implementation of those schemes and taking certain corrective steps. In this regard let me also extend my very sincere thanks to organised agriculture for its wonderful co-operation. I also want to express a special word of thanks to Dr Jacobs, the chairman of the working committee, who also did a great deal of fine work in this regard.

One frequently found oneself not knowing which way to turn. I remember one morning when the former president of the SA Agricultural Union paid a visit to my office and told me he did not know which way to turn either. I told him: “Jaap, if you and I do not know which way to turn, how must the poor farmers know?” During these times one therefore learned to seek help where one would not normally seek help, and even that proved a great source of strength during this period in which I had to do this work.

I now want to tell my opposite number in the Official Opposition, the hon member for Lichtenburg, that I would quite probably have taken the same steps that he took when we were opponents and debated agricultural issues with each other. I think an agricultural budget is one of the nicest to criticise from the opposition benches, specifically because of the fact that an agricultural budget, like agriculture itself, is subject to fluctuations. One must adapt one’s budget in accordance with the disasters and the concomitant aid schemes, but I have always tried to analyse my agricultural budget by separating the emergency aid schemes—the majority of them are, in fact, emergency aid schemes—from the department’s operational functions. With regard to the operational programmes of the department I have here figures extending from 1985 to 1989. When one looks at these figures, one sees a consistent increase in the amount budgeted for these campaigns. For the 1985-86 financial year the amount was R182,2 million, the next year R212,2 million, for the 1987-88 financial year R266 million and for the 1988-89 financial year R296,1 million, and in the present budget an amount of R312 million has been allocated. One therefore sees a consistent increase of approximately 16,5%, 25,3%, 11,3% and 5,5% during these periods. When one examines the financial assistance, however, one sees decreases, and then again an increase of 121% for the 1987-88 financial year. The particular circumstances involved in each budget are obvious, but it is the hon member’s right and privilege to criticise.

I should like to negotiate more funds for agriculture if that were possible, but when one attends a round-table conference in the Cabinet and one has to negotiate funds, one finds that there are many more priorities than one imagined. There are many more priorities, and it has not always been possible to motivate why one’s own priorities should be given preference over those of someone else.

Mr Chairman, I want to make a few general statements about agricultural assistance. The first is that in South Africa we should be careful that we do not make agriculture a slave to Government assistance. Throughout the years it has been the policy—before my time too—to help agriculture to help itself, because enslavement to Government assistance would not give one a sound agricultural industry in South Africa.

We conducted several investigations into this matter. There was the Jacobs Committee, and hon members will remember that at one stage we had a special restructuring committee to give specific attention to these various agricultural aid schemes. We came to the conclusion that all the schemes we designed in these difficult times did not always have the desired results. I want to acknowledge at once, however, that when one is dealing with a short-term solution—one designs a scheme with a view to some improvement in the following year, and then things are worse—certain situations develop which lead to some degree of irrationality as far as the schemes are concerned. Let me mention a few examples. We did not expect the R400 million scheme to give rise to what it actually gave rise to. We did not expect that there would be such scant demand for that aid scheme, but progressively we built the available R400 million into other schemes, and the figure I have here is that with the R400 million scheme we have helped approximately 5 810 farmers with production credit, the consolidation of debt, etc. It is no use referring constantly to the R400 million scheme. If the hon member takes pleasure in…

We did not raise it again; you are still fighting about that!

I am just mentioning, Sir, that one does not always know precisely how to implement these schemes one designs, because circumstances are continually changing.

In the interim the Government has developed a specific standpoint about its aid schemes, ie that we should not merely think along the lines of granting assistance to the industry, but rather along the lines of granting assistance to individuals. I issued a Press statement in this regard—I cannot find it at the moment—in which we make it very clear that in South Africa we must gradually move away from solely granting assistance to the industry. In this regard we have analysed the situation and found that by way of certain interest subsidies and carry-over debt one can only help a small number of farmers in any one year to the tune of R21 million. If I remember correctly, I think the figure was 22 or 23 farmers. Hence the view that one should be very careful, in granting assistance to the industry, overall assistance, not to help people who, under specific circumstances, do not need that help. We have therefore imposed limits on the assistance we grant. In the case of agricultural credit it is approximately R250 000, and I think the Land Bank goes as far as helping farmers financially up to a limit of R750 000.

Mr Chairman, I merely want to ask the hon the Minister please to explain this to us carefully, because I cannot understand how it is possible for 21 farmers to receive R21 million. I think there is something wrong somewhere.

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon member for the question. The structure of agriculture in South Africa is one of our problems. If one looks at capital-investment distribution in South African agriculture, one finds that 20% of the farmers furnish 80% of the agricultural production. One therefore has a group of farmers with tremendously large investments—multimillionaires—and as soon as one comes along with a scheme designed for the industry, with assistance to the industry for the production of maize or wheat, or whatever, it means that these farmers can participate, and in that way they are recipients of those subsidies because there is a larger concentration of them. That is what is involved. We just felt that we should impose a limit on this, and that instead of thinking along the lines of granting assistance to the industry, one should think in terms of granting assistance to individuals. In other words, we must move towards a farm-orientation system in terms of which we adopt various measures to reduce the risk factor. Fundamental assistance is based on the fact—many hon members made this statement—that agriculture, like any other business undertaking, has a built-in risk factor. What one must analyse when one is talking about risks is whether the risk can be determined or calculated. In the case of disasters involving floods and droughts the risks cannot be calculated. Individual farmers cannot make provision for that. I agree, however, that normal risks are, in fact, a business matter for which farmers should make provision. The idea involved in the farm-orientation system and the land conversion scheme is to incorporate greater diversity into our production systems so that farmers can have a greater built-in capacity to combat risks in their farming systems.

If one looks at individual cases—we recently found this to be the case with the Burger investigation in the Western and Southern Cape, where we examined the structural composition of farming—one finds that there are investments in excess of R1 000 per hectare in regard to machinery. Here I am not merely talking about the farmer’s fields, but about every hectare of his farm. That is an indication that these specific units—and there are many of them in the summer-grain areas—have been completely over-capitalised as far as machinery is concerned, something which makes those farmers very vulnerable to inflationary conditions. It is a well-known fact that we have now come to a point in South African agriculture at which we shall have to replace our machinery. The normal tractor that a South African farmer needs costs between R75 000 and R80 000.

Who can manage that?

It becomes an absolutely impossible situation. We are examining such situations. We are trying to convince farmers to move away from such investments on their farms which are too risky and which make them vulnerable to inflationary conditions. Tomorrow I shall speak at greater length about this when I come to individual issues.

At this stage I want to touch upon an important matter to which the hon members for Wellington and Groote Schuur referred. I am referring to the agricultural research council. For the sake of the record I should like to report on the progress we have thus far made since I spoke about this matter last year. Hon members will remember that my predecessors established the “Komitee van Ondersoek oor Landboubediening” the well-known Kolb Committee. This committee made certain recommendations about services to agriculture. One of the models presented by the committee was that of an agricultural development board. Another model involved an agricultural research council. We examined this matter, and on 18 May 1988 the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly decided that the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply would appoint a departmental committee of inquiry whose terms of reference would be to investigate and report on:

1. (a) die stigting van ’n landbounavorsingsraad wat alle bevolkingsgroepe sal bedien en wat die navorsingstruktuur en funksie van die Departement van Landbou en Watervoorsiening sal kan oorneem en die implikasies wat dit sal meebring ten opsigte van die volgende aspekte, naamlik die doelstellings waarna gestreef moet word, die funksies wat vervul moet word, die organisatoriese behoeftes, die finansiering, die infrastruktuur en fasiliteite, die aanwending van mannekrag, en koördineringsbehoeftes.

On 11 August 1988 the committee presented me with its report, and this was followed up by a memorandum to the Ministers’ Council on 1 December 1988. The Ministers’ Council accepted the recommendations, as submitted, and decided to ratify the following aspects in principle, ie the creation of an agricultural research council, the administration of the council as a general affair and the proposed model for the restructuring of the council.

With regard to the remaining recommendations in the memorandum, and with a view to finalising the proposed ratifications in principle, it was decided that further negotiations and discussions should be conducted between the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, the Minister for Administration and Privatisation, the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, the Ministerial Committee on Privatisation and Deregulation, the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply and the Commission for Administration in order to determine practical methods of operation.

After the negotiations were concluded, the matter was again to be submitted to the Ministers’ Council. The Ministers’ Council was also of the opinion that further in-depth consultation and co-ordination of ideas was necessary to establish a firm, well-considered overall approach to the matter before particulars were submitted to the Cabinet for consideration. Discussions with my colleague, the hon the Minister for Administration and Privatisation, were conducted on 8 March 1989. From the discussions it became apparent that my colleague and the Office of the Commission for Administration supported the establishment of an agricultural research council in principle and agreed that the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council should present a memorandum to the Cabinet with a view to obtaining a decision from the Cabinet. Both the Minister for Administration and Privatisation and the Commission asked to be consulted about the matter again, something which has been done.

About the following aspects there was unanimity, ie that the agricultural research council should be seen as an agent of the State which is authorised, by way of legislation, to undertake agricultural research and with which the respective own affairs administrations should enter into contracts with a view to identifying bottlenecks or problems.

As a result of this standpoint, the specific research function entrusted to own affairs administrations, in terms of item 7 of Schedule 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1983, need not necessarily be reclassified as a general affair. It will still be possible for these administrations to request funds for research purposes and to make them available to the agricultural research council for the purposes of undertaking special agricultural research projects which require urgent attention.

Since this reclassification of functions does not need to take place, an amendment to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1983, is unnecessary. The implementation procedures must be submitted to the Cabinet, including the steps that have to be taken for further consultation with the agricultural sector and to determine who will be responsible for drawing up the draft legislation. The responsibilities and functions of the agricultural research council must also be submitted to the Cabinet. Discussions with the Commission for Administration commenced as early as 21 March, and during these discussions an agreement was reached. Ultimately we shall appoint the Heyns Committee, with the present Superintendent-General as chairman, Dr Van der Merwe, the Executive Director of the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, as deputy chairman, while Mr Van Zyl will be the secretary.

We shall then designate members from the South African Agricultural Union, the Co-ordinating Committee of Control Boards, the agricultural faculties of the various universities, the Scientific Planning Branch of the Department of National Education, the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, the Commission for Administration and the Department of Finance. An official of the legal division of the Department of Justice will also have to be co-opted. They will be instructed to draw up a draft Bill which will be published before we refer the matter to the Cabinet for final legislation. We hope to complete this campaign by July 1989.

Having said that, let me immediately add that if one develops a research campaign which is very important and which will be much less dependent—not totally dependent—on Government funds, regardless of how good this may be, if there is not a sound system of two-way traffic between implementation and research, the campaign as a whole is not worth having. That is why we are simultaneously giving attention to the agricultural advisory centres. The idea is to establish agricultural advisory centres in seven regions to promote development packages for specific farming areas that have homogeneous or similar resources.

At present we are devoting attention to this aspect, and it is very important to note that in these agricultural advisory centres a careful examination will be made of the extent to which economic facets will be incorporated in these packages that are going to be presented. In other words, I am saying that the agricultural advisory centres must ensure that there is two-way traffic between what is done in practice and the research that is carried out so that we can continue with applied research. There are, of course, certain research activities—basic research—which are the responsibility of the community, and I think that in that context the State will certainly meet its obligations.

Since the hon member for Bryanston is staring so fixedly at me, let me say that he referred to research in the field of soil conservation. I think that is research which is the responsibility of the community, because soil research and conservation are part of a community campaign—I do not think it is only the duty of South African farmers to look after that aspect.

The establishment of such a more autonomous research body also has the potential, in its course of development, to do research and development work, in the field of agriculture, even outside the RSA’s borders. In Southern African, in particular, projects can also be tackled on behalf of neighbouring states. Hon members will be surprised at the demand, at the requests we receive these days from neighbouring states, not only in Southern Africa, but also further into the hinterland of Africa. We could tackle these projects on behalf of these neighbouring states.

This is specifically important because these neighbouring states can make use of all the results of our research, because our research is based on South African climatic conditions and resources unique to our region. Think, for example, of the development of cultivars. A potato cultivated in Holland is not necessarily the right kind of potato for South Africa. One has to develop a cultivar here which is suited to local conditions. One cannot plant the American wheat cultivars in South Africa. One must develop one’s own cultivars, in other words, products adapted to South African conditions. In this regard we can play a tremendous role in Southern Africa.

South African agricultural scientists have gained international recognition in several spheres. That is why we have exchange agreements with several countries throughout the world. I had the honour of joining Dr Heyns on a visit to quite a few countries, and on this occasion I want to say something for the record: I was amazed when I came into contact with scientists in other countries—Taiwan amongst others—and discovered that they knew Dr Heyns. In certain scientific spheres in the international, modern-day agricultural world, he is a well-known figure, and I think we can be proud to have someone like Dr Heyns in our employ, as part of the agricultural set-up.

Hear, hear!

I am just thinking of our knowledge of animal health. Onderstepoort is well-known, not only in Africa, but also in European countries. I am reminded of the fact that two years ago horses in Europe began dying of equine distemper. We received one emergency call after another asking for assistance. Eventually we sent Dr Erasmus. What did they discover, Sir? They had imported a lot of zebras from Africa which were infected with horsedistemper. Horse-distemper—I have known about horse-distemper since I was a child—such simple things, Sir. We therefore have the potential to play a role in the field of animal health. We have the potential to play a role and to give Africa something unique, and that is why this agricultural research council could undertake several campaigns aimed at developing agriculture in the neighbouring states too. In this way we could, by way of agriculture, definitely extend our sphere of influence in Southern Africa, about which we talk such a lot. Agriculture is definitely a vehicle with which to do so, because agriculture works with the most basic of human elements. It works with the most basic of underdeveloped countries, and by means of agriculture we could play a tremendous role in striking a diplomatic blow for the RSA in Southern Africa.

Debate interrupted.

The Committee adjourned at 18h21.

Mr Chairman, in the first place I should like to congratulate Mr Gene Louw, the Administrator of the Cape Province, on his appointment as the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning and wish him every success. He no doubt requires the good wishes more than the congratulations because we on this side of the House will watch closely how he deals with that portfolio in the endeavour to manage South Africa in justice and equity.

Mr Chairman, this is the first year that I have been in charge of the Agriculture Vote as the portfolio falls under my ministry now. I consider it a great honour as Eksteenskuil and Mier are situated in my constituency and rural areas and their attendant development are very dear to my heart. I endorse the objectives of the Subdirectorate: Agriculture fully, where we work for the promotion of a totally integrated, people-orientated development strategy in which agriculture plays a significant part in the support and development of independent socio-economic and stable rural areas.

The great problem which we experience in our rural areas is the lack of management skills. The higher the development of the area, the greater the demands on local authorities regarding management. There is willingness, but the necessary training is lacking. In some areas this lack in turn gives rise to poor administration and even maladministration which is totally unacceptable. The Administration therefore bears a great responsibility concerning the training of management boards and their staff.

On the other hand, management boards also have an obligation toward this Administration to ensure that taxes and service fees, for which they are responsible, are collected. This aspect cannot be overemphasised.

It is alarming to hear that most rural areas are saddled with thousands of rands in accumulated outstanding taxes and service fees which cannot be collected while sources of income are especially limited. A solution which is adopted to overcome shortfalls is to take up loans from the State which are not repaid. Debts therefore become greater and greater. Taking up loans or advance payments in a temporary attempt to solve financial problems is definitely not sound practice.

A disciplined and sound administration with strict financial control is absolutely essential to remain within the framework of disposable funds. That is why annual realistic adjustments of tax levies are a requirement in order to keep pace with ever-increasing expenditure. It will not help a management board at all to seek popularity by keeping taxes unrealistically low while proper furnishing of services to the community suffers.

The department is currently investigating the feasibility of possible solutions for the upgrading of the quality of administrations and financial control in rural areas. This could range from the training of members of a board to furnishing comprehensive services on an agency basis by a large neighbouring local authority with expertise. It is pleasing to see, however, that there are management boards which are already doing their share and applying sound administration.

The results of the past elections are also a sign that our people want to become increasingly involved in local government. An average percentage vote of approximately 52% was attained in the 24 rural areas against a previous percentage vote of only 17%. This is a further sign that the department’s involvement is eliciting great interest among communities and that the necessary co-operation is being obtained.

This is also a sign that clandestine visits to rural areas by interlopers—they work by night and cannot be traced by day—are a complete failure.

One of the most important tasks of the Subdirectorate: Agriculture and Rural Areas is to promote property rights and I am pleased to say that great successes are being achieved. The inhabitants are increasingly realising the advantages of private landownership with the result that the department is inundated with applications in this regard. Nevertheless there are still a few communities here and there where matters do not proceed as smoothly as this, but the matter is receiving attention.

A further positive aspect is that financial institutions are also more prepared to assist our people and in so doing to invest in rural areas. Independence among the inhabitants is promoted in this way and the burden on the State eased.

The development of infrastructure of rural areas will receive greater attention this year. Here we are thinking especially of the 31 towns and settlements and hon members will understand now why such a large slice of the budget is set aside for this development. It costs a great deal of money to provide basic facilities like water, sanitation and streets.

An essential requirement which should possibly receive more attention in the near future, and which is no longer regarded as a luxury nowadays, is the provision of electricity to our communities. Firewood, paraffin, gas and other sources of energy are becoming increasingly scarce and expensive in view of the remote situation of our communities and towns. Costbenefit analyses—with regard to the provision of electricity in comparison with the alternative sources mentioned above—have to be carried out to enable one to take the right decisions.

Funds requested for the 1989-90 financial year are composed as follows: Development works 58,3%, personnel expenditure 19%, administration 9,6%, financial assistance to farmers 7,2%, training 4,3% and job creation 1,7%. I am grateful to point out that the agriculture budget has grown by 8,25% as against that of the 1988-89 financial year. Expectations are that the amount to be spent on carrying out development works in rural areas will run to more than R17 million this year.

As the hon the Minister of Local Government and Housing commented last year, we cannot permit money to disappear into a bottomless pit, and we have to ensure that management boards look after and maintain these development works properly. To provide for those cases in which management boards do not give their co-operation in maintaining these development works properly, guidelines will be laid down this year according to which Government contributions to these management boards will be curtailed if previous development works have to be supported by the department too.

Over the past financial year various projects have been embarked upon to establish farmers on agricultural land which is already available. Because land for farming purposes is in short supply and expensive and its acquisition is made even more difficult by the permit system, we are forced to emphasise intensive farming in which farmers may be placed on smaller sites and are still able to make a decent living.

In this connection we have become involved in an irrigation development with water which will be obtained from the Sarel Hayward Canal which was built over Oppermansgronde. A water allocation has been obtained to place 500 hectares under irrigation. Investigations in close co-operation with other Government departments and with the University of the Orange Free State have already been launched to find ways by which Oppermansgronde farmers may be trained in a meaningful way, and developed and established as independent farmers.

The same type of development is envisaged for the rural area of Enon where water has been made available from the Orange-Fish River Development for 320 hectares of land.

In the same way there are plans to establish farmers on the 500 hectares of irrigation land near Kakamas which has been allocated to this Administration. This land is situated outside a rural area. I want to point out that, according to previous calculations, this land provides for only 20 farmers and that we have many more farmers in that vicinity and shall have to provide for very many more.

Aside from these projects which are envisaged, we are also involved in agricultural investigations in various rural areas to determine the agricultural potential of these areas. Funds will also have to be found to exploit this potential. It has been established, for example, that Genadendal rural areas have approximately 2 000 hectares of high-potential irrigation land available which could be placed under production provided waste water in the area could be stored in dams. Large amounts are also spent in the planning and development of farms purchased by the Administration to provide the necessary infrastructure. The idea is to use these farms as training centres for young and prospective farmers, to create job opportunities and to use any profits which may be made to provide essential facilities for local communities.

These farms have not yet been fully developed to achieve their maximum potential. Nevertheless a great deal has already been done so that communities are already benefiting from the purchase of these farms. It is a recognised fact, however, that the State cannot operate and/or manage a farming enterprise profitably. Situations keep cropping up which make the fulfilment of normal Tender Board and Treasury requirements problematic.

As a result of these problems and other development backlogs and needs, together with great staff, financing, implementation and day-to-day operating problems in the 24 less developed rural areas and also in other areas under the control of this Administration, it has become very obvious that a development body outside State structures should be formed.

The purpose will be to undertake projects in these areas on behalf of the Administration on a well-evaluated priority basis. This is the reason that dialogue was conducted with and enquiries directed to the South African Development Trust Corporation at official level at the end of 1986. This liaison was followed up more formally during September and October of 1987 with visits by the Director-General and senior officials as well as the Ministers’ Council to various development projects launched by the STC.

It was established by means of these visits that the STC already had the necessary expertise, experience and personnel structure at their disposal and that their development approach, which is also strongly people-orientated, is very similar to the philosophy and policy of the Ministers’ Council. The Ministers’ Council has already approved in principle the establishment of a company, Lanok, in co-operation with the STC.

The object of the company will be to plan community development in development areas as well as to assist inhabitants of the areas who become involved in the development with the financing of agriculture, agro-industries, housing, water supply, industrial development, commercial development, mining, transport and other matters as they may be identified from time to time. We are merely awaiting the consent of the hon the Minister of Finance to establish this extremely important organisation.

Although farming conditions have improved in most agricultural areas over the past year, farmers along the Lower Orange River were hard hit by recent floods when standing harvests were totally destroyed and high-production land inundated. In spite of generous provision of assistance from the National Disaster Fund, claims could be paid only after the damage had been repaired and the land again prepared for planting.

In order to limit this period during which the farmer was without any income as far as possible, loans were made to 32 Eksteenskuil farmers to buy tractors and to prepare their land themselves. Costs attached to this ran to approximately R500 000. Staff were also made available to carry out investigations into damage as rapidly as possible and farmers were assisted in lodging their claims. Through energetic action our investigating team not only succeeded in expediting the payment of claims greatly but could also assist the other Departments of Agriculture. In this regard I want to praise and congratulate my officials on the wonderful work which they did.

The demand for short-term production loans continues to increase. An effort is being made to assist as many applicants as possible and in this way to place possible farmers in a higher production class where they can look after themselves. Individual farmers were also furnished with assistance to redeem bonds on freehold land, to consolidate separate units and to purchase rented land.

It is pleasing to see how eager people are to acquire farms and to contribute to the national economy. Here I am thinking in particular of our sugar farmers, but on the other hand there are also applicants who make unrealistic demands and expect loans to be increased more and more, regardless of the security and ability to redeem them.

The misconception that Government debt can be written off willy-nilly as soon as the debtor no longer can or wants to make repayments should also be put right. Assistance will always be available to those who want to make use of good farming propositions by putting their shoulders to the wheel.

In instituting, promoting and developing individual farming units in our rural areas and the acquisition of property rights to them by registered occupants of such an area concerned, the department experienced a setback through the Leliefontein court case in which judgment was given against us on procedure and technical grounds.

It should be very clearly spelt out here, however, that neither my nor the department’s legal competence to initiate and implement individual farming units and the granting of property rights to them was not nor is affected or declared null and void by the judgment of the court. The Ministers’ Council, as decided previously, remains committed to the promotion and provision of individual farming units with property rights to them in our rural areas as well as the protection of the land against complete devastation through uncontrolled communal grazing. This task will be carried out with the necessary compassion and justice toward all.

In an effort to promote the development of rural areas of the North-Western Cape in particular, a development consultant was appointed with effect from 1 April 1988 with instructions to launch investigations into possible viable development projects based on the exploitation of mineral deposits, the creation of job opportunities and the broadening of economic bases in rural areas. Evaluation and decision-making regarding certain identified projects took place at the end of October 1988. A work group has been constituted now to carry out more detailed feasibility studies regarding certain evaluated and identified projects.

The policy regarding agricultural training at Kromme Rhee has not changed since the previous year under review and the primary directive to train farm workers and agricultural diploma students is pursued meticulously.

The maximum number attending courses and diploma students for whom facilities exist are currently being trained. This means that about 1 400 farm workers are trained annually in 26 production techniques which are used in agriculture. The courses are not all equally popular but, on the whole, more applications are received for these courses than can be coped with using existing facilities and personnel. It is worthy of note that Kromme Rhee embarked upon this training 25 years ago and continues to receive positive feedback on the standard of training which is provided.

The two-year diploma course is becoming better known as students who have passed enter the agriculture industry. At present there are facilities available to accommodate a total of 30 students annually and 41 applications have been received for the 19 vacancies which existed for 1989.

The HSRC report on agricultural training which they published after an investigation which they conducted on the instructions of the Ministers’ Council has just been received. It will be studied in detail before the necessary recommendations can be formulated. It should be possible after this to take meaningful decisions on the direction which agricultural training should take.

In conclusion, I want to summarise by saying that this Administration is playing its part in the promotion of agriculture and the development of the 24 rural areas, but that full co-operation is not obtained from management boards.

As I said at the beginning, Agriculture is a new portfolio for which I am responsible. They say that new brooms sweep clean and I can assure hon members that we intend to obtain the co-operation of everybody to carry out this great task which is for the benefit of our own people. [Interjections.]

I cannot omit, however, to say that there is one aspect related to this portfolio which really upsets me. If one looks at the extent and unique variety of integrated people-orientated development campaigns and tasks which are united in this portfolio, we see that they include the following matters inter alia:

I am really alarmed that these activities have to be disposed of at a subdirectorate level, and that while we are in the midst of great and increasing development campaigns and negotiations. 1 in no way question my officials’ loyalty or abilities.

Unfortunately this state of affairs comes down inter alia to the fact that, when the head of the subdirectorate for instance has to negotiate with the heads of similar agricultural and other development components in other departments or institutions, he has to act from an inferior position because of his lower rank. This must and does involuntarily have an adverse and hampering effect on our effective functioning to the disadvantage of the communities and individuals involved.

Hon members will appreciate the position better if I tell them that the total budget for agriculture amounted to approximately only R5 million five or six years ago whereas the activities during that time were dealt with by a full directorate with senior officials. At present the officials of my department function at a subdirectorate level, but the budget has grown by 500%, functions and activities—including new developments—have increased and expanded to the same degree at all levels of agriculture and the expectations of our agriculture and the communities in rural areas have increased accordingly.

I have been informed that the recently completed function rationalisation programme has already shown that a full investigation of structure should be launched. The Ministers’ Council and I are very serious about this matter. I shall do everything in my power to expedite this matter so that agriculture and rural area development can come into their own and so that we may negotiate fairly and on an equal footing for our communities. [Interjections.]

My sincere thanks to the chief director, Mr Du Preez, the deputy director, Mr Boshoff, and all regional directors, officials and clerks in my department for the way in which they have accepted me and for the absolute co-operation which they immediately accorded me. The same enthusiasm which I show is shown by all of them. As I have said during visits to rural areas over the past week, I do not have splendid promises to offer, just hard work, blood and sweat.

In spite of the designation “own affairs”, I regard agriculture as a general, national affair because we are not going to cultivate brown pumpkins, but flat whites (boerpampoene). [Interjections.] Neither are we going to produce only white figs, but figs of the Adam variety which are brown in colour and also have a better taste.

The farmer must be able to supply South Africa with food. The Department of Agriculture of this House will do its share and assist the bona fide farmer to farm as he likes and where he likes.

Mr Chairman, I want to associate myself this morning with the words of Lord Ravensworth when he said that there was nothing as grateful as the good earth. One can never do too much for it because it will reward one’s sweat and labour tenfold.

In recent years agriculture has become a noteworthy industry among Coloured farmers whereas the number of White farmers in our country is dwindling. Previously Coloured farmers carried out a type of subsistence farming, but in the interim it has become a commercial industry for many of them. A development strategy will have to be applied because many of our people in the 24 rural areas live in total poverty and the situation is deteriorating. Something will really have to be done to stop this impoverished way of life, especially in these rural areas.

We have a great problem in that large-scale unemployment still exists in these rural areas and that long-term job opportunities cannot be created, chiefly because agriculture has not yet been developed to its full potential. The Department of Agriculture has purchased further farms surrounding some of these rural areas, but they have always been managed by departmental people. In this way job opportunities have been provided, but farmers capable of farming on their own have not been developed in the process.

The former Minister of Agriculture, Mr D M G Curry, said in a speech on a farmers’ day at Oppermansgronde on 30 May 1987:

He also emphasised that man’s survival was supported and ensured by a sound agricultural industry. Only in those parts of the world where agriculture was in harmony with nature could man succeed in providing all his needs in the long term.

Agriculture is therefore very highly regarded within the Department of the Budget, Auxiliary Services and Agriculture. In spite of a shortage of funds, the department has purchased farms for our people in order to regain land which was out of our people’s hands for many years. It has become necessary now, however, that these farms be developed not only for our people but by our people. We must instil a love of the land in people again. We must encourage them to move back to rural areas again because there are many dormitory towns in country districts.

In his budget speech during the 1988 session, the previous hon Minister responsible for Agriculture said that the Ministers’ Council had already approved in principle that a development corporation or similar organisation be established. This corporation would accept responsibility for the creation of a base for integrated development, especially in those rural areas. This was reaffirmed by the current hon Minister of the Budget, Auxiliary Services and Agriculture this morning. The hon the Minister also mentioned that preference would have to be given to that development process as well as development projects which created opportunities in the spheres of agriculture, mining, industry and tourism.

If we want our people to return to these rural areas, however, we have to ensure that the necessary infrastructure is created there and that the necessary long-term job opportunities exist there. A need should be created in people to want to move back to these less developed areas to help popularise and develop them. Agriculture in these areas, no matter on how small a scale, should be an attraction to young people, qualified people and to people with or without money. Agricultural development should be carried out in such a way that it may also stimulate further industries to develop in these areas.

How can this development take place? Firstly, I want to spend some time on the farmer. In general the Coloured farmer is still undeveloped to a great degree. He does not have the knowledge or the money to develop himself toward economic progress.

At a recent farmers’ day in the constituency which I represent we assembled most of the farmers in the Dysselsdorp vicinity. Of all the farmers who attended that farmers’ day, the largest farmer had two cattle, seven goats, 12 sheep, 47 pigs, 42 fowls, six turkeys, two geese, six Muscovy ducks and four donkeys. This man is industrious, but he has to work elsewhere every day to earn enough money to feed his family. Surely this farmer will never be able to develop in this way to a level where he is able to farm full time and feed his family on funds obtained from his farming. He will never experience the joy which so many farmers have already experienced in this country and that is to say that he is successful and farms independently.

Ronald Reagan said inter alia that farmers were involved in an industry which made a gaming table in Las Vegas look like a guaranteed annual income. Another farmer in the same neighbourhood, in an effort to acquire his own piece of land, paid R25 000 for a single hectare. This is land without a house or any water. How will this farmer ever be able to extract a profit from this land by farming?

There is an old man on one of the departmental farms who has been working with ostriches for 25 years. This man knows an ostrich from beak to tail-feathers but he will never have the money to buy a few breeding pairs to start farming on his own.

In other areas again there are farmers who have had a greater degree of success and at present are reasonably successful farmers. Hendrik Schoeman said that agriculture was not a dying industry like mining in which one merely extracted and put nothing back, but a growing industry in which one put back and built and continually produced more.

A large part of the Coloured population is currently employed on farms in one part of our country or another. The time has come for us to fetch these people and assist them to acquire a piece of land to start farming for themselves. These farm workers are already involved in agriculture to a lesser or greater degree and already have an agricultural background of some kind or other. Together with people who have had formal agricultural training, they can form the core of a sound agricultural industry.

At present we already own quite a number of farms. In addition the greatest part of the rural areas is suitable for successful farming if the land is subdivided in a scientific way. We have already launched investigations regarding these rural areas. These farms should form bases for practical training in farming. There should be places where farmers may obtain a piece of land and learn to farm under supervision and master the total spectrum of farm management over a period.

We are not appealing in this regard for an uneconomical division of land or for a subsidised farming system. Nevertheless a system must be developed by which the land is divided into viable portions which the farmer can work and develop without having to supply the entire infrastructure. This is where entrepreneurship and privatisation, on which I shall elaborate later, play a part.

Furthermore, there is land in every rural area which is used for agriculture to a lesser or greater extent at present. This takes place chiefly on a small scale and is generally uneconomic.

This morning hon members listened to the hon the Minister of Agriculture again when he said that 2 000 ha high-potential agricultural land was unutilised in Genadendal. Parts of the land in rural areas could be zoned for agriculture and this land could be subdivided in a scientific way and allocated to potential farmers for farming purposes. In this way the rural areas could be put to more productive use and they would become more sought after over the years.

When farming has been established and developed in these areas over a number of years, people will be enticed back there again as a rural infrastructure will develop there. Agriculture sciences already have models which have been developed by agriculture companies to determine the optimum size of viable units. In rural areas and on farms they should not talk about economic units as a farmer who is being established does not have money for sophisticated agricultural aids in any case. How are we going to provide these aids?

In the division of land and the establishment of farmers it is necessary to look at the community as a whole and not only at the establishment of a few farmers. Consequently there must be a broader basis of planning and analysis in order to involve a greater proportion of the community on every farm or in every rural area. Provision must be made for the development of agroindustries. Then a farmer would not necessarily have to own implements, but a person who has mechanical training, for instance, or already has experience of farming implements, should own them. Another person could be the wholesaler in seed, fertilizer and toxic substances. A person who has experience or is trained in this regard could purchase and market the products of the farmer on the farm. In this way the greatest possible number of people would become involved in these rural areas and participate in the economic process. The reason why this method of development is proposed is to allow as many people as possible within the rural areas and connected with the farms adjacent to the rural areas to participate in the development process.

The financial structure could also take place on a specific basis. Firstly, a feasibility analysis should be done to determine the size of the farm which a farmer should have to be able to make a living. An analysis could subsequently be done to determine the size of every farm and how many small farms could be established on every farm or in every rural area. The quantity of crops and number of animals as well as the number of hectares necessary for this development should also be determined.

I want the hon the Minister to listen very carefully and closely this morning because abuses occur on many of these farms. There are White farmers at Waaikraal, for example, who farm more enthusiastically for themselves. [Interjections.] That is the truth. The land could then also be sold or leased to farmers selected for the project at an amount repayable annually and deducted from the proceeds of their harvests. The farmer could then also obtain a crop loan to purchase agricultural aids, to have his lands ploughed and gather his harvest. At the start the farmer would only be expected to do his farm planning, to look after his crops and undergo training to become a qualified farmer.

At present the large farmhouse at Waaikraal is leased to another farmer. We could use that large house as a training centre for our own people. [Interjections.] In exchange for the agricultural loan which the farmer received from the department, there should be an undertaking from the farmer that he will undergo formal training in his area at least three times a week to extend his farming knowledge. This farming knowledge should not be based on theoretical training but on practical farming skills. It should be centred on the farmer’s knowledge which he should acquire to be able to manage and maintain his own farm.

The same rule should apply to every person participating in the various projects, in other words the people in cropping industries and related trade. Everyone participating in such a project would be compelled to learn to develop himself. If we could show the outside world that we were able to establish our farmers in this way, I am sure that we would not have to do our own financing for long. If this establishment were successful, many organisations, including foreign companies, would be prepared to invest or grant loans to our farmers. At that stage the development could be accelerated and expanded more rapidly and more farmers could be helped to develop at a time. At the same time a system could be developed by which farms of various sizes, range of farming and economic independence could be created so that a farmer who had performed well economically and in his training could be promoted to a larger farm. Then he could farm more independently.

The Agricultural Study Committee has already contacted a private company, which has conducted an investigation free of charge into certain of our rural areas and farms there and found them all suitable for development. That was the case at Jakkalskraal as well. There are certainly security guards but simply nothing is going on at the farm. [Interjections.]

We also conducted in-depth discussions with various people in those rural areas, such as members of management committees, farmers, workers and retired people, and found that potential farmers could be taken from the neighbourhood and trained. Our people have the talent.

They were also of the opinion that their own company could be responsible for management on a privatised basis and that only the company’s central infrastructure would be used in establishing the programme. The largest part of the staff would come from our own people to give them the opportunity of developing together with the farmers. In our discussions with this company it became clear that the only money which would really be spent would be that necessary to do the initial analyses in every area. After these initial feasibility studies had been done, the implementation of the project would be vested in the farmer in the form of a loan—-whether from the department or at a later stage from the private sector.

In conclusion, I appeal today that we should give such a system the chance for which our people have been waiting for so long. Last week during a public meeting in my constituency it was clear that the people were waiting for this chance to go farming on their own, to be part of the development possibility which such a system holds so that our farmers may learn to farm independently in an economically viable manner and to uplift themselves. Then they will also be able to say in a few years: We have shown you; we can play an independent part in the development of the country and our own areas. What is more—then our people no longer need be labourers on such a large scale but may also become independent farmers and businessmen.

I should like to quote from the poem by Jan F E Cilliers “Saaier, Saai!”:

[Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is always a privilege to speak after the hon member for Dysselsdorp. [Interjections.] It really is good to see the enthusiasm with which he promotes the cause of agriculture. Agriculture is very dear to his heart.

I listened very attentively to what the hon member for Dysselsdorp said about our agriculture and the development thereof. We have a long way to go before we shall really be able to say that we are involved in agriculture.

We are not involved in agriculture if we have a number of farms, a large Department of Agriculture and a number of people working on the farms. We are not involved in agriculture if we establish only four to eight farmers a year. We are not involved in agriculture if we sit with thousands of hectares of land which are deteriorating and becoming more depopulated by the year. Neither can we be involved in agriculture if most of our people are in the cities, where we are not helping to produce food for the country with which to feed our people.

The time has come for us actively to enter the field of agriculture. We must develop our own people as farmers. Our people must own and manage their own farms. They must be able to take their own decisions on these farms and at a later stage they must develop their farms themselves so that we may play a part in feeding the nation and in the agricultural development of our country.

Once we have a share in developing agriculture, we can stake our claim and say that we need more land for agriculture. At that stage our farmers will be able to purchase and develop their own farms.

It cannot be expected of this House to give people farms, but we would be guilty of a gross neglect of our duty if we did not develop the resources at our disposal—about which the hon member for Dysselsdorp spoke—to their full potential.

We would be guilty of a gross neglect of our duty if we did not develop the available resources about which the hon member for Dysselsdorp spoke, to their full potential. We would be guilty of a gross neglect of our duty if we did not make use of every possible opportunity to develop our farmers and to establish them. I use the word “establish”, because at present we cannot really speak about an established farming community. We shall have a farming community when our farmers also have an agricultural union. We shall have a farming community when our farmers also have a land bank. We shall have a farming community when our agriculture also has an advisory body which the farmers may approach for advice and assistance.

The time has come to take action and to give potential farmers an opportunity to establish and to prove themselves. The time has come for us rather to spend our appropriation on practical development so that we may reach a point at which we may obtain money from outside, because we in the House of Representatives will never be able to obtain enough for the tremendous needs that exist outside this House.

The hon member for Dysselsdorp said quite rightly that the time had arrived for us to draw our people back to the rural areas so that we could once again popularise the platteland. However, we cannot do this with unqualified people. We must send our people back there either qualified or with the express instruction and objective of going to qualify themselves there. They must go and become farmers or business people there. They must go and establish themselves and carry on their lives there. However, they must not go and do this as paupers, but as proud people who want to realise themselves in agriculture and related industries and who want to grow into an independent community in an area in which they, in turn, can contribute to the development of others.

I, too, was involved in the investigation which was launched into the company about which the hon member for Dysselsdorp spoke. My opinion on this matter is that this is the quickest and most effective way of establishing our farmers and allowing them to develop. The people in the private sector may do this on a privatised basis and if, in addition, this could largely be done with our own people, this would complement our task and our mission, which is the development and establishment of our people.

I ask myself whether we should not use the Department of Agriculture to administer agriculture in the broader sense of the word, whilst allowing the farmers to be trained by business people who are familiar with the business principles of economic farming. Has the time not come for at least a portion of our rural areas and farms to be developed in such a way that we can take a few rapid steps forward, so that within two years’ time we should be able to speak about the many farmers who are in training and who are already established?

The farm Waaikraal has been bought back for our people for a large amount, as has the farm Amalienstein. When we took over of these farms we said that they would be used for the training of aspirant farmers and that we were going to establish between 100 and 150 families there. The families we established there were established as workers, and not as independent farmers. Meanwhile all these farms are being managed on an economic basis.

On 28 January 1988 the neighbour of Waaikraal sent a letter to the Director-General, and I have it here with me. In this letter Saag Jonker writes that he has kept a close watch on the development on the farm Waaikraal and that he has gained the impression that the farming activity is not getting under way. He mentions that if he could take over Waaikraal the farm could largely supply his feed requirements. He also mentions that he could actively create job opportunities for the people there and that he doubts whether this individual farming operation is within the province of the department.

He suggests in his letter that we could start up a handicraft centre and a trade centre out of the money obtained from the rental of the farm, at which we could teach our people to do welding and all sorts of repairs.

My comment on this letter must not be viewed as criticism of the Department of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture, but rather as criticism of the view which neighbours on surrounding farms have of our people. We are still viewed from outside as people who must be developed as workers, labourers and helpers. [Interjections.] It is openly stated in the letter that this type of farming is not within our province. What, then, is our province? Must our people simply work on farms for the rest of their lives? The man about whom the hon member for Dysselsdorp spoke is presently a labourer at Waaikraal. Must that man remain a labourer on the farm? Must he, in future, go and learn how to become a labourer for the neighbour who is planting fodder for his large farming operation? Are we going to give this man the chance of his lifetime by enabling him to farm for himself in order to plant his own fodder for his own ostriches?

We cannot allow ourselves to be criticised with regard to the manner in which we are managing the farms. What I mean by this, is that we do not wish to manage farms; we wish to train and establish farmers. We want to have our own people back on the farms as farmers in their own right. How dare anyone say that farming is not within our province—when all his farm labourers are possibly our own people? I want to make an appeal that we should now discontinue the management of farms and that we should take urgent action. Let people with sufficient knowledge come in and make an urgent analysis of our farms and rural areas and make recommendations so that we can now once and for all begin with a decisive programme to have our farmers established. Let us approach this task in such a way that businesses will be prepared to invest money in our agriculture and in our rural areas and that development may ultimately be expedited and improved. Then we, too, will be able to speak with pride about our own economically independent farmers.

Mr Chairman, this is the hon the Minister’s first budget with regard to this Vote. As hon members of the Agricultural Committee of this House, we want to wish the hon the Minister a very hearty welcome to his new portfolio.

As the saying goes, a new broom sweeps clean. We expect the new broom not only to sweep clean, but also to make a fresh start as a new broom. The hon the Minister now has an opportunity to investigate a new policy with regard to agriculture, and to implement it.

Our great problem lies in our rural areas. Our great task is that of establishing farmers in those areas. For this we require a department of agriculture, but we cannot say that we have a department of agriculture at any level. Although an amount of R29,5 million has been appropriated for agriculture this year, I do not know how the hon the Minister is going to assist agriculture in the rural areas.

I want to know what we are going to do with that R29,5 million. If we are going to divide it among the 23 rural areas, the allocation for each area will be only R1,2 million. Are we going to use this money to administer those farms which are already in our possession, as well as the rural areas, or are we going to use it to purchase new land?

I should like to ask the hon the Minister what sense there is in purchasing more land if we have not yet developed the land in our possession and established farmers on it. Can we afford such a thing in a budget if we have not yet taken any decisive action to develop our farmers, if we can call them farmers?

The time has come for us to look first and foremost at the level of development of our potential farmers or those people who are presently employed by other farmers. We must look after their interests and we must ensure that those outstanding farmers in the employ of the White farmers obtain their own land so that they can develop and grow on that land; so that they can realise that we want to take care of them and help them to become farmers in their own right.

As hon members know, the newspapers were full to overflowing two or three years ago with reports about how many farmers we could establish at Waaikraal, and how many farmers we were going to train there. As matters stand at present, we have most certainly achieved nothing; we have established and developed virtually no farmers there.

The time has now come for us to spend the money on analysing the land in our possession—those farms that have been purchased by this administration—and the rural areas in order to see how many viable units we can divide such a farm into. The hon member for Dysselsdorp spelt this out. We must take a look at what type of farms we can establish so that we may train and instruct our farming community in various disciplines. In conjunction with consultants, and with book in hand, our farmers must go and learn how to farm. Other farming communities have a tremendous head start on us, and therefore we do not have time on our side. We must achieve within a very short space of time what the other communities have achieved over a number of years. For this reason we must start now and we must not permit our farms or rural areas to deteriorate one jot further.

We do not have the time now to wait for the establishment of a fully fledged Department of Agriculture. We must approach private consultants such as those about whom the hon member for Dysselsdorp spoke. If we were to appropriate an amount of money for this purpose, an investigation could take place into the land and the farms at our disposal. If we do not do this, our descendants will probably not forgive us, and the rural areas and the farms will deteriorate further until we reach a stage at which other people will laugh at us.

Another matter that I should like to raise, one which was also mentioned by the hon the Minister and about which I feel very unhappy and disappointed, is the report on the Lower Orange River Development Project, the Kakamas Extension. I read on page 14 of that report that 500 ha of land in the project has been reserved for the exclusive use of Coloured farmers. The hon the Minister knows that approximately 21 700 ha of irrigable land will be made available. If we consider the 500 ha that is to be set aside for our people, we find that this is less than 0,05% of the land. I do not know how much say the hon the Minister has in the allocation of that land, but I want to ask him to do everything in his power to enable us to make more land in those areas available to the Coloured farmers, or to declare an open farming area there.

According to the report there will be 1 050 permanent job opportunities and some 750 seasonal job opportunities. This is to be welcomed, but once again the Coloureds will be the water-bearers and the woodcutters. With regard to this development I want to ask the hon the Minister to do everything in his power and to take another look at the allocation of the irrigation land in that area. I can assure the hon the Minister that there is a great deal of interest among the Coloureds.

I want to address the hon the Minister further on this matter. I note that it has been calculated that the size of the stands will be approximately 65 ha to provide for an irrigation potential of 40 ha per stand. I want to ask the hon the Minister how many Coloureds it will be possible to establish there if 500 ha are to be made available to Coloureds. I have done some calculations. According to my calculations there are 20 ha short if one calculates that eight Coloureds are to be established on 65 ha. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it was with close attention that I sat listening to what previous speakers had to say about this very important subject, namely agriculture. Since the major part of my constituency is a rural area, I support everything that has been said and consider it my bounden duty to make a positive contribution.

In the first place I should like to join my clergyman colleague here next to me in congratulating the hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister on this Vote in his new portfolio.

The LP is the strongest and most powerful party in this House. The responsibility for the upliftment of the Coloured community in our country, in as far as this can be achieved by political means, rests on the shoulders of this party. The LP is striving to achieve a better future for our people in this country, and this naturally includes the opposition parties. In meeting here today, we are making an appointment with the future of our community. Therefore today we want to advocate a concerted effort, so that we can be present at this appointment with the future.

To come back to the discussion of the Vote: For the financial year that ended on 31 March 1990, an amount of R29 500 000 was allocated under Vote no 7: Agriculture for rural development and training. This indicates an increase of R2 249 000 on the 1988-89 appropriation but, when this amount has to be equally divided up amongst the development projects for the 23 rural areas, as the previous speaker said—and here we exclude agricultural training—hon members will notice that only a meagre amount of R1 227 826 remains for each rural area.

This is for the following projects: Town and regional development, Agricultural Development, financial assistance to farmers and job creation and administration. Hon members will ask how 23 rural areas with an average allocation of R1,2 million per annum can be properly developed. It is no wonder that some of these rural areas, particularly the most underdeveloped areas, are neglected. What happens then? The MP in that constituency is blamed for this, and he in turn blames the relevant Minister and his department. This is all attributable to a lack of funds.

There are files full of applications, memorandums and reports in the offices of this department. These are reports that have been requested by the department, and the compilation of these reports alone cost thousands of rand. These reports were necessary to determine the needs in rural areas. However, none of these efforts met with any success worth mentioning. This again emphasises the fact that the necessary funds are not available.

Why are there so many problems in the rural areas, particularly in the remote areas such as Leliesfontein, Komaggas, the Richtersveld and Pella? Why all those court cases and interdicts? Do hon members know why? Our people need more land for agricultural purposes. Our people want to own their own farms. Our people want to be independent. More agricultural land should be made available to the Coloured farmers in the rural areas.

Hear, hear!

We must keep our people in the rural areas and preferably get others to return to the rural areas. However, I know that this can never happen owing to the meagre funds that are voted for agriculture. It appears as if we shall never obtain adequate funds for the development of rural areas from the present Government.

We shall certainly have to try to obtain funds from outside sources in order to meet these serious needs.

As far back as the early part of 1986 I gave the then hon Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture the names of 13 farms bordering on the rural areas of Leliesfontein and Komaggas. It was very dry in that area and farms could be purchased very cheaply. The need for more land in these rural areas could thus be met and, in addition to the purchase of these farms, the large-scale upliftment of our community was possible as a result of these efforts. We are talking here today about agriculture, while many people in our Coloured community still live in the rural areas around the farms and are still becoming impoverished. Again this is a question of funds, and I want to ask for funds.

There was R460 million that can simply be written off as bad debt in the case of the maize farmers. However, there are watches worth millions of rands that can be handed out for good service, with the addition of a pension. It is easy to obtain enough funds for that kind of thing. However, when it comes to funds for the development of the Coloured agricultural sector in Coloured areas, one gets R29,5 million to develop 23 rural areas. In my opinion this is truly a disgrace, and one day somebody will have to answer to the Almighty for this.

Another matter I am most concerned and worried about is that this department cannot give a decision about what is to happen to or what the plans are for the irrigation lands along the banks of the Lower Orange River. During the 1987-88 financial year consulting engineers were appointed to carry out surveys so that this fertile land could be developed. Perhaps the hon the Minister could tell me today what the final decision was and what resulted from the survey. We have heard nothing since that time.

At present it already looks like a fully developed region. Because things are moving so slowly, Coloured farmers were forced to move in there illegally. Temporary permission was obtained from the regional office at Springbok and farmers are now farming very successfully on that fertile land. These farmers are prepared to buy the land on a repayment basis, because they cannot risk everything if they are merely there on a temporary basis. Since there is such a great need for agricultural land, I want to lodge a plea with the hon the Minister here today. Let us forget whatever the report proposed, because there will never be enough funds made available under this Government. I suggest—if I may—that the department survey the land and sell each bonafide irrigation farmer a viable piece of land. I invite the hon the Minister and his officials to go and see what those farmers, on their own initiative and at their own expense, have already done on that no man’s land. Those farmers, who have already done so much field-work, must definitely get preference if such a step is taken. This is a very urgent request. It must be given priority by the hon the Minister. This is what I am asking the hon the Minister.

My time is rapidly running out, but I want to deal with the 1986 report by Prof D A Kotzé on the Leliesfontein rural area. Many guidelines, hints, recommendations and obstacles are mentioned in this report. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, first I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on his appointment as Minister of the Budget, Auxiliary Services and Agriculture. I want to thank him very sincerely for his co-operation in the past and I hope that it will continue in the future. I also thank Messrs Du Preez, Boshoff, Bailey, Smit and Koopman for their co-operation.

Since I was unexpectedly asked to deliver a speech and did not have time to prepare myself, I should merely like to quote a few things from the hon the Minister’s speech. He said:

This statement is true. At a place such as Genadendal, the largest rural area, one cannot take someone off the street to run the town. One would have to get a retired town clerk to give the necessary training or we would have to be subsidised so that we could appoint a town clerk.

We experienced many problems in the past. The LP won the election of management board members, however, and now this party is involved. If we are not going to get a town clerk to run the town, one of these days the bell will toll for those management board members, and this would jeopardise our party’s good name. The hon the Minister will have to give attention to granting a subsidy for a town clerk.

I quote further:

I should like to tell the hon the Minister that what he says is true, but he must understand that members of the community are not happy about paying tax, because they believe the land belongs to them. At this very moment surveys are being carried out. I want to ask him how he is going to deal with this problem in respect of the surveying and transfer of land to the community. Is he going to give the land to the people free of charge? Must they make a payment? Must they pay for the surveys? What will the position be?

The hon the Minister talks about financial assistance to farmers. This money is far too little, judging by the situation at Genadendal. We established an agricultural co-operative there. Now the people want to start developing, working and cleaning up, but 7,2% is far too little, particularly if I think of my farmers at Elim. Last year an amount was paid to the drought-aid scheme for the farmers at Elim. If one looks at the amount of money that the department had to pay there, and if one takes into consideration that this year’s payment has not even been made yet, one wonders what the position of the farmers is going to be now. As I have said, Genadendal needs a lot of money if we intend developing those 22 000 hectares.

I want to talk about problems with water in Genadendal. I have three outlying posts: Bereaville, Voorstekraal en Bosmanskloof. I have only 500 registered Labour Party branch members there. These people earn their living from the agricultural land. My question to the hon the Minister relates to problems with water in that area. They have three dams there. The dams are as large as swimming pools. I have had the Director-General there. I have even had the hon the Minister there. I have had all the officials from the department there. I even approached the provincial authorities about this problem, but without success. Therefore it is with a great sense of expectation that I now look to the hon the Minister. I should like to take him there. He must just let me know when it would be convenient for him, because I want him to have a look at the problem we have with water at Bereaville, Voorstekraal and Bosmanskloof.

Some of these dams are the size of swimming pools. I would very much like them to be enlarged. There is a lot of water in that area, but all the water runs into the sea. I want to ask the hon the Minister please to allocate funds so that proper dams can be built there. That would make all the inhabitants of that area LP supporters. The Official Opposition would lose their deposits if they tried to take me on there! That is certain.

Brother, you are imagining things.

Well, they say empty vessels make the most noise. Now I understand why that hon member makes such a racket.

The largest drum makes the most noise!

I now come to the question of water operators. The hon the Minister appointed water operators at Saron and Mamre. Genadendal has four different places from which drinking water must be brought. Genadendal is a large rural area and we definitely need a water operator. The hon the Minister recently spent millions of rands on solving a problem involving drinking water, but a while ago there was a rock-fall which blocked the water-pipes, leaving the town with no water for almost a week—and that on the eve of an election! I want to ask the hon the Minister please to examine the question of a water operator. My management council members personally repaired the water-pipes and this solved the water problem. However, if we had an operator working there, we would not have these problems in the future.

I now come to board members. I want to ask the hon the Minister please to ensure that all members of the management boards receive training. I just want to ask the hon the Minister to see to it that this takes place. I am not talking about the training provided by the province. The province provides training for management boards in local areas. I am referring specifically to rural areas, because rural areas have to make decisions on their own. They are autonomous bodies. They are not like management committees, which have a consultative function. It is in this context that I want to ask the hon the Minister please to help me.

Mr Chairman, firstly I want to thank hon members who participated in this debate. I want to thank them for the fact that so many of them showed such conviction in their speeches. We know the hon member for Dysselsdorp to be someone who behaves with a great deal of enthusiasm. He said inter alia that development strategies should be applied. I want to thank him for agreeing with what I have already said in my speech. We constantly talk about these development strategies which we are going to apply and which we are applying.

A further point which he mentioned, was that farms are being departmentally managed. I want to make it very clear to the whole House that we are still in an initial transition stage with regard to these farms. The policy of the LP is that our people must become land owners.

I want to give the hon member the assurance that where there are shortcomings in this regard, we will definitely consider the potential of our farmers seriously. I agree with him, because we belong to the same party with the same policy, and he was effectively stating the policy of the LP.

He also referred to the 2 000 hectares at Genadendal. That is only one of the discoveries which have been made. There will be many more in the various rural areas. Those places are going to enjoy the full attention of our department and our Ministry.

The hon member also referred to a White farmer in Waaikraal and mentioned that that house could be used as a training centre. We must really guard against eventually having more training centres than farmers. I receive phone calls all day long from farmers who want sell their farms. What do they say? The farm will be an ideal training centre for Coloured farmers.

In this regard I now want to link up with what the hon member for Riversdal said. He said that there were people who thought that these training centres had to be places where good farm labourers would be supplied to them at all times. That is not our aim. The aim is to train farmers and to settle them somewhere. I wholeheartedly agree with the hon member’s statement that more attention should be given to the practical knowledge of these farm labourers than to their theoretical knowledge. After all, the LP says year in and year out that the same people to whom we want to give the farms, farmed for the Whites when they were here in the cities. They were the people who carried on the farming on the farms. We therefore agree that these people have the practical knowledge and experience and that many of them need only a little more guidance in order to do the work.

The hon member said that absolutely nothing was happening in Jakkalsdraai. We must at least be sure of our facts. A dam to the value of over R3,5 million is being built at Jakkalsdraai, and that is a lot of money. Therefore, it is not quite true to say that nothing is happening there.

The hon member spoke about a separate company. He has the same idea with regard to the training centres of which I have just spoken. Other hon members also touched on the question of these companies and farmers’ associations. Surely this is once again a question of apartheid, own affairs, separate companies and separate corporations and the LP is not in favour of that. The country has far too many corporations and companies. We simply want the right to be able to join those corporations and companies, to become a part of them and to help them develop.

I want to thank the hon member for Riversdal—it seems he is not here now—for the conviction with which he put his case. I agree with him that agriculture among our people still has a long way to go. In the past, the majority of our Coloured farmers were interested in smallholdings. They were interested in small farms. We must now lead them in the direction of large farms which they must consider for the future. These farms must not only place them in a position to make a living, but must also enable them to become big farmers who are financially strong.

We would very much like to do away completely with this idea of buying our own farms for our own people. We want to remove the words “own farms” from our vocabulary, because they bring us back to own affairs. A farm must simply be a farm. Coloured people must also be able to buy the farms which the Whites can buy. That is what the LP is striving for, and that will remain its goal. We shall not rest before the laws on the Statute Book which prevent our people from buying what they want where they want it, have been scrapped. Separate farming associations and corporations are nothing other than the hated apartheid which we are fighting against. We want full participation and full say in existing bodies.

The hon member spoke about training. In the same way many other hon members spoke about the training which our people must receive. I mentioned in my speech that the Ministers’ Council had been concerned with the training of our people for a long time. There is also the complaint which the hon member quoted from a letter from a neighbour of Waaikraal. Hon members know that people are very fond of criticising. People are very fond of discouraging one when they see that one wants to make progress in life. Surely we know what we want. There is an old tune which we sang as children, which states: “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” Let us tell the people who think that they can discourage us with this destructive criticism that they should watch us, because the Labour Party has devised a plan and we are purposefully heading towards our final goal.

One can see that there is still an element of the Minister in the hon member for Hantam, because the hon member becomes so charismatic. I thank the hon member for his words of welcome. The hon member asked what we could possibly do with R29,5 million. If we think that five or six years ago the sum was R6 million, I think we can do something better with this than we could do then.

When I speak in this way, I do not want to create the idea that we are satisfied and that we are no longer going to negotiate. If hon members had listened carefully, they would have heard me saying we were still working as a subdirectorate. We want to expand the Department of Agriculture to a full directorate. It is going to cost money, because we will need more officials and more clerks, as well as far more training than we can afford at the moment. I want to give the assurance that we are going to strive to more than double this R29,5 million by next year. [Interjections.]

The hon member also said that we should pay serious attention to the development level of our own farm labourers. I want to say again that we are fully aware, and we are telling hon members this as well, that we are still in the transition stage. We do not want the same thing to happen to our farmers that is happening today in the schools, where certain people are telling our children and our students that they should have freedom before education. We also want our farm labourers to reach that stage of development which will prepare them to be the farmers that we want them to be and only then will we be able to get ahead with them.

I want to reassure hon members with regard to the 500 hectares in Kakamas. I have already taken up this matter with the relevant departments.

As a matter of fact, I am meeting a few of the White Ministers on Monday to talk about certain matters. However, these 500 hectares are only a part of what is going to be allocated to the Coloured farmers. This is not all of it. Also for the information of the House I want to indicate that these are irrigation farms and a study has shown that between 25 en 30 hectares of land under irrigation is a strong economic unit. The farms are therefore not too small. However, thought is also being given to the distant future.

I also want to thank the hon member for Springbok for his contribution and for welcoming me to this post. He complained that there was too little money, but I have already mentioned that our budget has increased by 500% in comparison with what it was five years ago. I therefore do not think we should complain too much and should rather be grateful for the progress which has been made.

He said that he had already made a request to the previous hon Minister to buy farms. However, some of the hon members also criticised the buying of farms. We in the LP say, and our hon leader has also said this so often, that we should not always simply give a person a fish. We must give him a fishing line and a hook and teach him to catch fish. I do not believe that the Administration: House of Representatives should buy more farms. We must get rid of the Group Areas Act, because it is preventing our people from buying farms and obtaining loans like the White man is doing at the moment.

This is the intention of the LP and one can be sure that I, as the Minister of Agriculture, am not thinking of buying more farms. Instead we are thinking of helping people to acquire farms so that they can become fully fledged farmers.

Hon members know that it is quite true that large amounts of money were written off—R400 million for the maize farmers.

R416 million!

R416 million. I do not want us to cry over spilt milk. We must just try to obtain R416 million as well. That must be our objective.

Hon members know that the budget of this financial year has been disposed of. We can do nothing about that, but I assure hon members that we in the Ministers’ Council and our officials are asking for more and more. Let us also help to strengthen and build up the economy of our country and fight elements which are destroying it. The quicker we help the economy, the quicker we will be able to demand a larger budget. I am sorry that I did not quite hear what the hon member for Springbok said with regard to illegal farmers, but I ask him to contact me privately and then we will be able to attend to the matter.

I want to thank the hon member for Genadendal—I see that he is still here—for welcoming me to this portfolio. The hon member referred to management skills and said that Genadendal needed a town clerk. He is therefore asking for money again. It is quite right that the House of Representatives is trying to assist our people and uplift them financially in all respects. However, we must also learn that one has to crawl before one can run. It seems to me that the town clerk will have to wait until the people in Genadendal can walk.

The hon member spoke about taxation which was in arrears and asked who was going to pay for the surveying. Regardless of where towns are surveyed, those who buy the land pay for the surveying. We are fortunate that the costs involved in the surveying of new towns are very low at the moment.

The hon member complained that the financial assistance of 7,2% was too little. I do not know whether the hon member worked out how much that 7,2% really was. It is R2,1 million. We agree with him that it is not a fantastic amount, but it can contribute towards getting people going.

The hon member said that the dams in certain areas were too small. I want to give the hon member the assurance that there are many things that are too small. People’s ideals in the past were also too small in a certain sense. That is why we are here. That is why we accepted the responsibility of leading people to greater things. We are grateful that the hon member realises that planning in the past was perhaps insufficient and that he is going to help improve the situation.

He then spoke about a water operator. He created the impression that a great deal of money was wasted because the elements caused a rock-fall as a result of which a pipe collapsed. However, people must not accuse the House of Representatives of bad planning or their officials of bad work if God allows something to happen. That is wrong. We cannot say that the election of the LP will be influenced if lightning kills a few people here in Bishop Lavis tomorrow or somewhere else. In my opinion this incident has nothing to do with the election, despite the fact that it occurred on the eve of the election.

The hon member asked whether training could be given to board members. In my speech I referred repeatedly to that. Last week I paid a visit to the Richtersveld where we made promises. We see where there are shortcomings and the officials who accompanied me and I have already spoken about them. I assure the hon member that we intend to serve our people as we promised, to provide the necessary training where there is a shortage and to criticise along with him where it is necessary.

Hon members must please come to my office if there are problems so that we can solve them together. I assure hon members that we will always listen and help to make a success of this.

Debate concluded.

Debate on Vote No 4—“Health Services and Welfare”:

Mr Chairman, I am privileged today to present to the House my fifth budget speech of the Department of Health Services and Welfare.

Let me say right at the beginning that I am sorry that we only have two members of the opposition in the House. A number of them will have to take part in this debate, but they are not present at the moment.

The bunch is rather sparse.

I feel especially privileged to be given the opportunity by my esteemed hon leader, the Rev Allan Hendrickse, to serve the LP and our community these past few years. Our hon leader has always emphasised that he and the hon members of the LP stand in humble service of the community and this is why I have adopted as the creed for my department and myself that we should be service-orientated and not power-hungry empire-builders. [Interjections.] I am service-crazy, not power-crazy! [Interjections.]

From the very beginning, therefore, I have viewed the portfolio of Health Services and Welfare as a unique challenge.

All around us we are overwhelmed with poverty and the misery of despair. All around us we see the symptoms of deprivation and denigration: Alcohol and drug abuse, overcrowding and the violence of anger and frustration with all its attendant social ills of family destruction, teenage pregnancies and the like.

In order to serve this poor community as my leader expects me to, I could not simply follow the tracks of those who shouldered the responsibility before me. I believe that all people can rise above all that is bad. I believe, especially in respect of our underprivileged communities, that they care and will rise above what is bad. I believe that they can improve their quality of life if only they are given the opportunity to do so. Hon members will recall how I have often in the past four years and more emphasised the need to improve the quality of life of the needy.

I personally have made it my life’s work to serve my community at grassroots level and I can therefore say with some confidence that the man down there at the pitface only wants a chance. He needs encouragement, inspiration, motivation and hope. My job and that of the Department of Health Services and Welfare is to ensure that everyone gets that chance and is given that encouragement and motivation, as well as hope.

This ideal has demanded extremely innovative measures from the department. This, I believe, has ruffled quite a few feathers, but we have the obligation to serve, and I will not apologise for initiating changes that could precipitate faster improvement in the quality of life of people.

It should always be remembered that the South African situation is unique in the world because of socio-economic stratification on the basis of racially enforced legislation and historical discrimination. Every country in the world has poor and ill people, but in our country we are disadvantaged and have been deprived simply on the basis of pigmentation of our skin and that makes our poverty even more unacceptable.

The much publicised Carnegie Report on Poverty in South Africa did not tell us anything we did not already know, but it did confirm that my party’s decision to be part of the present dispensation as an initial step towards political change and socio-economic upliftment was indeed a correct decision under the circumstances. Poverty cannot be resolved without political justice.

What then has the Department of Health Services and Welfare done to achieve these ideals? The single most important step was to get the department to realign itself towards a service and community-orientated approach to people. Each client is a total person and not simply an isolated problem. Who has not had a headache without also feeling miserable and who has not been miserable without also having a headache or some other physical pain? Who has not felt physically ill and emotionally distressed at the poverty-stricken and overcrowded conditions we so often see among underprivileged communities? Take for instance Hellenvale near Port Elizabeth, The Crags near Plettenberg Bay, Gong Gong, Campbell and many, many more. When one visits these areas they make one sick.

Is it any wonder, then, that underprivileged communities display antisocial behaviour? Who can be normal in an abnormal society? Who can be productive in a discriminatory environment?

*Against this background my hon leader and our party decided to try to take positive steps, knowing full well that we were trying to create a normal society under abnormal conditions. The prevailing constitutional dispensation has never been accepted as the correct way to tackle this country’s problems. We are merely using the present system in a desperate attempt to eliminate the backlogs in the field of health and welfare.

During the Alma Ata Conference in Russia in 1978 the World Health Organisation confirmed that no society could be a healthy society unless one looked after the environmental, the physical, the social and the spiritual health of its people.

The Department of Health Services and Welfare fully endorses this watchword, particularly if one notes the tragic examples of factors that contribute to the cycle of poverty amongst the underprivileged.

It is not necessary for me to quote examples, because I am convinced that every hon member in this House is fully aware of the situation. I have visited every constituency in the country, and everywhere I have, amongst other things, encountered chronic poverty which has deeply shocked me. I have frequently encountered repeated surges of dejection and despondency.

Mr Chairman, allow me to quote from the book ’n Politieke Idiotikon vir Suid-Afrika by Marinus Wiechers. On page 129 he says:

Only then did the large-scale upliftment of the approximately 300 000 poor Whites really gain momentum. When they gained political power they benefited and promoted the cause of the Whites. For example, they established the Department of Social Welfare—hon members must remember it was “social welfare”—and preference was given to “civilised jobs for Whites”. Those jobs were reserved for Whites.

Can we venture to say that South Africa—and more specifically the Afrikaners—pre-empted the World Health Organisation’s strategy in regard to primary health care? This country has the solutions to our problems. All that is necessary is the courage to implement these solutions, not only in regard to White people, but in regard to all the citizens of the country.

†The Department of Health Services and Welfare has in its community development programme tried to give substance to the well-worn phrase of community participation. For us it is not just another play on words. The Community Welfare Act, Act 104 of 1987, makes specific provision for John Citizen, with absolute channels of communication to the Minister right down from voluntary workers’ groups in the community to welfare committees, regional welfare boards and the newly established Community Welfare Advisory Council. This kind of access has never been available before, and displays once more the innovative vision of the department.

We have endured much criticism for our actions, but something tangible has been done in reaching out to the community. The great English social reformer, Samuel Smiles (1812-1904), wrote in Self Help:

The Department of Health Services and Welfare has also embodied the multi-disciplinary approach in its dealings with the community. Clients and their problems have to be viewed in their total perspective, and thus a service field concept was born.

Four major service fields have been identified, and they are: The care of the aged; the care of the child and the family; the care of the handicapped and the care of sodo-pathological disorders.

While the various specialised disciplines within the department will continue with their function responsibilities, clients and problems will no longer be seen in isolation. The service field concept embodies both health and welfare issues and, as can be seen, it addresses the major groups of problems within society.

I shall be referring to these service fields in detail later in my address, as has been my practice in the past.

Thirdly, it is necessary at this stage to draw the attention of the House to a revised strategic policy within the department. It is a policy which I announced here in Parliament on 21 February 1989.

This policy shift is going to have far-reaching implications for the future functioning of the department, and I must here once again congratulate our hon leader Rev Allan Hendrickse for his dynamic vision and understanding of the realities of the South African situation and for endorsing this innovative approach. It underlines the vision we have for the future South Africa, a future built on a spirit of goodwill and a willingness to work together. The LP has never and will never endorse apartheid. The party can thus never endorse fragmentation especially of health services.

It is thus relevant to note that the Ministers’ Council has decided that the department will accept financial responsibility for the rendering of health and welfare services but will devolve as far as is practically possible the physical rendering of services to either provincial authorities, local authorities and/or private institutions. I must, however, emphasise that the full responsibility will always remain vested in the department. Whichever agent is appointed to render the service will be bound by the department’s policy and will be subject to inspection and evaluation by the department as well.

At the beginning of my address I emphasised that my department was service orientated. With the revised strategic policy a concerted attempt is being made not only to render a one-stop health and welfare service but also to get a service to as many communities as possible. My learned colleagues are painfully aware of the severe lack of service points in the community as well as the terrible inconvenience of having to report to various places for various aspects of health and welfare needs.

The Department of Health Services and Welfare is not abdicating its responsibilities. It is not privatising its duties; on the contrary, the department wants to provide service to all.

Those critics who have taken the trouble to read the Community Welfare Act (House of Representatives) No 104 of 1987, will see that the department wants to be enabling, thus making it possible where required to subsidise organisations to up to 100% of their costs in rendering a service.

Before I return to the four service fields, I would briefly like to refer to the five-year programme which I initiated shortly after assuming office. In essence the programme consists of five phases which began with contact. During this phase I made contact and communicated with beneficiaries of social pensions. The second phase involved planning, which becomes evident in this budget, as well as the third and fourth phases of programmes and evaluation. The final phase is the one which we are in and which incorporates everything that went before, culminating in this budget which I regard as a result-oriented budget.

*Let me now first focus my attention on the service field concerning the care of the aged. The prosperity of the aged has always been very dear to my heart, and I make no apology for that fact. I believe very strongly that we in South Africa owe a great deal to our aged. These aged have, by their own blood and sweat, tilled the fields. They have kept the factories going and have worked in the homes of members of the White population as “chars” and “nannies”. [Interjections.] The frequently illiterate “non-Whites” had to be satisfied with meagre wages and little or no job security. For the most part no provision was made for pensions when they retired. Their contributions to the prosperity of this country were nevertheless of inestimable value. Can hon members blame me for promising at the time, in 1984 on behalf of the LP, to do everything in my power to eliminate the inequalities in social pensions? Do this country and its people not owe it to their aged, who have done so much for South Africa? [Interjections.] It is just a pity that we have been hamstrung by, amongst others, those who advocate sanctions. That has also had a detrimental effect on social pensioners.

My hon colleagues in the opposition benches will find it easy to emphasise that I could not bring about parity, as I promised initially. Let us look back for a moment, however. I now come to the results, and hon members must listen carefully. During September 1984 the aged received a monthly pension of R93,00, in comparison with the present R200,00. Unfortunately it is still R51,00 per month less than that of the Whites. War veterans, however, are now receiving the same pension as their White counterparts, ie R266,00 per month, as against the R150,50 in September 1984. In other words, this represents an increase of almost 130%. [Interjections.]

I want to tell the hon member for Riversdal that we are now giving preferential consideration to equal pensions for the blind.

I spoke about that first.

The hon member for Bishop Lavis also spoke about that, but the hon member for Riversdal spoke about it first.

I was the very first one to speak about that.

The hon member does not know what he is talking about. [Interjections.]

There is no longer any inequality in the increases in social pensions. All sections of the population receive the same increase in monetary terms. During 1987 and at the beginning of 1989, for example, the increases were R20 and R33 per month respectively. Whether one was Black, White, Coloured or Asian, it was the LP that negotiated with the hon the Minister of Finance and managed to obtain equal increases for everyone in South Africa. [Interjections.]

The same also applies to bonuses. In the past it was R14 for Whites, R10 for Coloured people and R8 for Blacks. That is no longer the case, however. Last year each of our senior citizens received an equal increase of R60.

Since September 1984 old age pensions, in numerical terms, increased by 14,5% as against the monetary increase—I want hon members to listen carefully—of more than 144%, and the following figures attest to this. In 1984 the expenditure for our 97 953 pensioners was R9 163 945. Today, however, our 112 195 pensioners get R22 381 844—an increase of 144%! [Interjections.]

I have reason to be proud of the result achieved over so short a period. To me it is an incentive to accept the challenge of granting further relief to our aged.

On my nation-wide visits to our aged, involving 50 290 people, I found it striking how conscientious and religious they are, notwithstanding the difficult and often terrible conditions in which they find themselves.

How many of our middle-aged hon members of this House—I include myself in this group—feel at all different to what they felt 20 or 30 years ago? Has our need for self-respect, privacy, fellowship and even expressions of endearment in any way changed? So why must our aged feel any differently? Experts such as Maslow have proved that human beings have different levels of needs, but there is no reference to age.

I mention this because I want to bring home to the community how important it is to respect the human dignity and needs of the aged. We cannot allow our senior citizens to be regarded as burdensome individuals who have served their purpose. [Interjections.] Remember, our feelings never grow old. Against this background specific objectives have been set to promote the quality of life of the aged.

During the 1984-85 financial year an amount of R2 547 000,00 was voted in respect of homes for the aged. Hon members must now listen carefully. In contrast to that, during the 1989-90 financial year an amount of R11 009 000,00 was voted, an amount which made provision for the care of 2 985 residents in 40 homes, as against the 29 registered homes for the aged during 1985.

On the basis of the fact that during 1988 there was a total of 198 315 aged, it is nevertheless striking, on the basis of historically discriminatory practices, that only 3% of the aged are cared for in homes, in comparison with 8% in the case of Whites. The department, however, is devoting urgent attention to the establishment or more homes for the aged, particularly frail aged and chronically frail aged.

This brings me to the service centres for the aged. The Department of Health Services and Welfare tries to keep the aged in the community for as long as possible and, in particular, within the family context. At the same time attempts are made to provide the aged with social and health care.

Service centres must therefore be established to provide for the needs of the aged. During 1985 only eight service centres were in operation. At present there are 16, and a further eight new projects are in the final stages of completion. When we began we spent only R157 000 on service centres. This year R1 156 000 will be allocated for that purpose—a further result.

The subsidy on the approved current expenditure for service centres—this is important—has been increased, since 1984-85, from R200 per aged person per annum to the present maximum amount of R543,73 per aged person per annum, which is in line with that of the Administration: House of Assembly. In this respect we have therefore also achieved parity.

During 1984-85 the department was authorised to approve only three service centres per annum for subsidies. Approval has been obtained, however, to have this restriction lifted with effect from 1 April 1989. We can therefore now build many more centres than a mere three per annum.

During 1984 there was only one nurse who cared for the aged and only one subsidised post for a social worker attached to the Society for the Care of the Aged.

In 1988 the nursing establishment was extended from one to 24, and 12 social work posts are now subsidised instead of one. Nurses, dentists, social workers and dieticians pay regular visits to homes for the aged, service centres and to private homes, wherever possible, to offer guidance and care. During 1988 the nurses alone furnished services to 31 105 aged by way of home visits and information campaigns.

†The House will remember my remarks about our revised policy strategy. Whilst the number of geriatric nurses in the department’s employ has increased to 24, it is ridiculous to imagine that an effective service to the aged could ever be delivered. It is also necessary to refer to the demographic distribution of our aged with 97 179 people concentrated in the Western Cape, 57 947 in the Eastern Cape, and only 13 273 in the entire Transvaal, whilst the entire Orange Free State has only 2 484 registered aged people.

Even if sufficient posts were available, very few towns in the greater part of the country could justify full-time posts for themselves alone. It is significant therefore that the creed of the department is to provide a service. Negotiations are therefore presently taking place in all the provinces with all the relevant authorities with the view to providing a service to our aged wherever they may be, that is, a comprehensive service based on an agency basis as previously outlined in my introduction. I am confident that the situation will be even better next year.

*I have not succeeded in establishing parity in old age pensions, but I am asking hon members whether the many other results thus far achieved do not compensate for the fact that I have failed to bring about that parity. Do hon members agree that I am well on the way—as the hon member for Robertson said—to becoming one of the first Ministers who will shortly no longer have a job?

†Let us now concentrate on the second service field. There can never be any doubt that a healthy family unit is the very cornerstone of society. No country can survive if the social fabric of the family unit has been destroyed or impaired. We need to go no further than our local newspapers to see the evidence of child abuse, teenage pregnancies and divorce. Need I go on?

The department feels so strongly about the value of the healthy family unit that a series of projects have been planned to create greater public awareness of the problem. As hon members know, I personally launched the country-wide campaign, “Give your child a chance” and I can vouch for the enthusiastic response of parents and children to such programmes.

The “Give your child a chance” programme was launched during the second phase of a five-year plan. I may add that it was generally very successful. I had the opportunity and privilege to address 70 215 people in 178 towns and cities throughout the Republic. We are moving very fast towards the 200 mark.

Before I deal with the various categories of child care and development, I think it is necessary for me to address the subject of foster parents and maintenance grants in which children are my major concern. In September 1984 there were 10 535 foster parent grantees. By 31 March 1989 this figure increased to 11 275, representing a growth rate of 7%. The expenditure for the same periods stood at R1 265 144 and R2 172 040 respectively, representing a growth rate of 71,7%.

Regarding maintenance grants in which case the children are just as important, figures were as follows: In September 1984, 44 140 grants were in payment which increased to 49 854 representing a growth of 12,9%.

Expenditure in this regard during 1984 stood at R6 052 784 in comparison to R12 733 938 at the end of March 1989, representing a phenomenal growth of 110,4%.

Since the development of children is of cardinal concern to the department, it has gone out of its way to ensure that the children being supported by means of foster and maintenance grants are allowed to continue their schooling for as long as possible. With this in mind, provision has been made for children to be assisted in reaching matric by continuing the payment of a grant until the age of 21 instead of 18, on condition that the progress being made is satisfactory.

Here again a multi-disciplinary team approach is used and whilst I do not refer to specific disciplines, hon members will bear in mind that all disciplines in the department are involved at some time or other in these projects.

*We now come to services for pre-school children. The establishment of crèches—kinderbewaarhuise—is an extremely important aspect in a child’s development, particularly when the parents are obliged to work. The hon the Minister of Education and Culture, our leader, emphasised this once more in his speech.

During 1985 there were 137 crèches registered with the department and they could accommodate a total of 11 183 children per day. The aforementioned number of registered crèches increased by 76% in 1989 to 242 crèches, making provision for the daily care, not of 11 000, but of 19 137 children. At present there are a further 20 crèches in the final stages of registration. [Interjections.]

The set objectives in regard to pre-school children, ie of providing one crèche or crèche-cum-nursery school for the children of every 100 working mothers by the year 2010 are, however, being hampered by a multiplicity of factors. In spite of that, other methods have been found for meeting the growing need for facilities for preschool children.

The provision of funds for crèches has grown considerably over the years. The following figures are an indication of that. In the 1984-85 financial year the amount was a mere R840 000. In the 1989-90 financial year this increased to R1,8 million. [Interjections.]

The draft manual, drawn up by the interdepartmental consultative committee’s subcommittee for use as a guideline for the establishment and registration of crèches will, if approved, result in the communities in poorer areas being in a better position to erect such facilities.

Let us examine the results achieved as far as baby-sitting services are concerned. The registration and subsidisation of baby-sitting services are being investigated at present and will present new avenues in the field of child care. This type of service chiefly embodies the day care of no more than six children by a woman in her own home. Some of these services are linked to an existing crèche, whilst others are linked to a welfare organisation.

The department gives recognition to this service, because provision will have to be made, on a more rapid basis, for services relating to the care of the pre-school children of working mothers.

Another advantage is that the costs involved in establishing this type of service are considerably less than in the case of the erection and subsidisation of crèches. In this regard our Administration is again in the forefront. No other Administration has thought of this baby-sitting service. We are at the forefront. [Interjections.]

The Department of Health Services and Welfare is the first department to have established a social service for schools and is thus far the only department that has done so since the service was introduced at the beginning of 1984. The Administration: House of Assembly, and specifically the Administration: House of Delegates, are at present carrying out an investigation into the establishment of this service in their departments.

Initially only six posts were approved, but by the end of 1988, 27 social workers at 53 schools throughout the country were furnishing the service. Of the 27 posts, there are 21 posts in primary schools and six in special schools and schools created in terms of the Children’s Act. Since the inception of the service, 39 791 pupils have received the benefit of the services of a social worker. Regular liaison with the staff of the Department of Education and Culture takes place at grassroots level by way of half-yearly school monitoring meetings.

The objective of increasing the school attendance amongst children under 16 years of age to 90% has already been achieved at schools at which social services are furnished. As a result of the fact that the department places a high premium on the service, and as a result of the great demand, plans to extend the service to a further 32 posts have already reached an advanced stage.

In regard to medical services to school-going children, hon members know that school nurses furnish an important service when it comes to combating diseases and promoting health.

During 1984 there were 68 school nurses on our establishment. Hon members must now listen carefully. In 1988 the number increased to 157 nurses who were expected to furnish services to approximately 780 000 pupils. I can proudly announce that the school nurses have furnished services to 239 049 children at schools, school hostels, special schools, homes for the disabled and places of safety. This means that a mere 80 nurses have, in point of fact, visited 30,8% of the total school population.

In consultation with the Department of Health Services and Welfare and the Department of National Health and Population Development, the Department of Education and Culture implemented a programme of sex education in terms of which selected teachers at 60 schools are receiving training in sex education which will then, sensitively and on an on-going basis, be given in the relevant schools. It is also envisaged that the programme will be extended to involve more schools, and the Department of Health Services and Welfare has made great strides with negotiations aimed at making funds available to achieve this objective.

Preventive programmes have also been implemented at schools by the Subdirectorate: Dental Services. During 1988, 1 532 schools were visited by oral hygienists. A total of 157 888 schoolchildren were provided with guidance, 61 054 were placed on a daily toothbrushing programme and 25 888 children participated in fluoride programmes.

The Nutritional Services Division is proud of an important addition to the school health services. In co-operation with the Department of Education and Culture, a nutritional education programme was launched for the first time in primary schools in the Western Cape in 1988. Under the auspices of nutritionists, teachers offer nutritional guidance on an on-going basis, and 2 800 children have already been involved in this.

It is a fact that fixed eating patterns are difficult to inculcate in children because they are more susceptible to outside influences. The benefits inherent in the involvement of teachers lie in the fact that because teachers have very close contact with the children, they can positively influence the children to lay the foundations for sound eating habits in our future adults.

†I would now like to turn to the question of early school leavers. The problem of school dropouts is a source of great concern. During 1988, 33 400 pupils country-wide left school before completing Standard 8. Most of these youngsters will find it impossible to find suitable employment and will end up as delinquents. Many will eventually turn to crime, which is one of the distinct phases of the vicious cycle of poverty. Lack of education perpetuates the cycle of poverty. If one looks at this cycle it has poverty on top followed by poor qualifications and a poor job opportunity which, coupled with a recession, results in greater unemployment, which brings us back to poverty.

One of our senior officials has been commissioned to do research on the problem of juvenile deliquency as a thesis for a master’s degree and the findings of this research project will be soon be made available. I can promise hon members that they will find it most illuminating.

I would now like to get on to the subject of children’s homes. During 1985-86 the department accepted the recommendations of the De Meyer Committee as guidelines to evaluate its residential child-care policy. It is taking a closer look at the following aspects: Admission criteria, types of services and programmes offered and custodial versus therapeutic care. It has been established that only five of the 19 registered children’s homes do not meet the required norm of 100 children per children’s home. Negotiations in this regard will be undertaken with the management of such children’s homes. Financial provision in respect of children’s homes has also undergone noticeable expansion and growth over the period under discussion as revealed by the following.

That is why I am so welcome in the constituency of the hon member for Wentworth. They like to invite me to visit their homes and they receive me with open arms, and it is because of this.

In 1985-86 we budgeted for R3 400 000. This has grown to R13 725 000 in 1989-90 which is an increase of 400%. [Interjections.] Hon members must take note of this because they are fighting an election. [Interjections.]

As far as places of safety are concerned, the department at present operates seven places of safety of which the newest is situated in Elsies River and which has been in operation since 1 October 1988. It is envisaged that a second place of safety in Port Elizabeth should be functioning in the current financial year. Furthermore, seven additional places of safety will be established by 1992 in Worcester, George, Upington, Johannesburg, Bloemfontein, Atlantis and Mitchells Plain. [Interjections.]

A contract was concluded on 17 October 1988 for the renovation of the Bonnytown place of safety. The cost of the renovation will amount to R4,5 million. Similar renovations to the Faure place of safety are being planned.

In order to prevent delinquent behaviour, places of safety will in future not only be utilised for the purpose of detaining youths but also as assessment and treatment centres. We are doing our best to change these places of safety into “a home away from home”. An inter-departmental committee consisting of representatives of the Department of Education and Culture and the Department of Health Services and Welfare has been formed to attain the aforementioned goal.

I would like to remind hon members that we are working together as a team. All our various departments in our Administration are working together as a team to improve the quality of life of our people. The Acting Assistant Director of the Division Child and Family Care represented the department at the International Child and Youth Care Conference in Washington DC during the period 22 to 23 March 1988.

Thereafter visits were made to various institutions where programmes on institutional care in respect of the juvenile offender were observed and evaluated for implementation here in our country.

*What precisely does family care entail? I should like to dwell on that for a moment. The Department of Health Services and Welfare’s idea of family care is in line with the World Health Organisation’s definition of health which includes physical, socio-spiritual and environmental health and which is manifested in our service field approach. How can this philosophy be realised by the department? Here the answer lies in the establishment of community health centres.

During April 1988, 37 day hospitals in the Cape Province were transferred to this Administration, and also Heidedal Clinic in the Free State and three clinics in the Transvaal, ie Reigerpark, Nancefield and Noordgesig.

I merely want to emphasise that this Administration is not interested in taking over hospitals. We are, however, interested in taking over clinics for a certain period of time, because we would like to give children of quality to the South African nation. In producing such children of quality, we want to see whether we cannot give the nation people with a high quality of life.

Clarification is being obtained for planning units for Ennerdale, Eldorado Park, Eersterus, Moorreesburg, Bellville South, Bontheuwel, Heidelberg, Caledon, Austerville, Dysselsdorp and Heilbron, and construction work will begin in the course of this year. The department is fully aware of the urgent needs existing in certain areas and is giving priority attention to planning aspects such as the acquisition of sites, ratification and co-ordination campaigns in the case of Uitenhage, Joubertina, Macassar, Klerksdorp, Daniëlskuil, Cradock and Blue Downs.

During my introduction to this budget speech I referred to the department’s strategic policy in regard to the provision of services. This is nowhere more relevant than in the case of community health centres. At all times the department is endeavouring to establish all health services at a few service points in order to eliminate the duplication and fragmentation of services.

My plea to hon members is to be patient. The department has changed direction, but this can only benefit our country and all its people. I fully understand the frustration and confusion caused by delays, but I believe that my colleagues will understand.

†We come now to the next service field, the service field for the care of the handicapped.

Since the 1984-85 financial year, there has been a dramatic expansion and growth in the provision of funds regarding the activities of the service field: care of the handicapped.

For the provision of workshops and hostels for the handicapped the amount—hon members must once again take note of this—of R350 000 budgeted for 1984-85 has risen to R1 720 000 in 1989-90, in other words, an increase of 500%. [Interjections.]

The subsidy that the department paid in respect of each handicapped worker during the 1984-85 financial year stood at R300 per person per year. During the period since then this total has been increased by almost 400% to an amount of R1 124,65 per person per year. It is important that it has thus been brought on a par with that of the House of Assembly’s department, effectively removing previous discriminatory payments.

The previous inhibiting practice of only approving one workshop or hostel per year was also suspended as from 1 April 1988, making it possible for more private initiators to approach the department for financial assistance during a particular year regarding the establishment of a hostel or workshop. However, one can never lose sight of the factor of the availability of funds and the priorities the department has to take into account when it comes to approving applications for assistance. I may mention that six new projects are receiving attention at present.

Concerning the subject of subsidisation of homes for handicapped persons, over the years the growth in financial provision has taken place as follows: In the 1984-85 financial year the subsidy was R122 000 and in the 1989-90 financial year R611 000 has been allocated for that purpose. [Interjections.]

I want to mention another very important point. Regarding the subsidisation of associations for the blind, the increase over the years has been even more dramatic with the figure budgeted for this purpose rising from R83 000 for the 1984-85 financial year to R11 690 000 for the 1989-90 financial year.

*The department’s policy in regard to the handicapped remains unchanged, ie to enhance the quality of life of those who are handicapped. The handicapped—whether the handicap is physical, mental or both—are as much in need of respect and human dignity as those who are not handicapped. It must therefore specifically be mentioned that the department is investigating the possibility of encouraging the handicapped who are recipients of disability allowances to supplement their allowances by doing suitable remunerative work. The present means test cannot, in our view, achieve this objective because the limits placed on income are such that those receiving benefits are not encouraged to work.

†During my visit to the Orion workshop for physically handicapped persons I met a man who was in a wheelchair. He was in receipt of a disability grant at the time, but he appealed to me to do something about the situation, saying that he would rather work than receive a grant. This is what we need to encourage. [Interjections.]

*We now come to Lentegeur Hospital. Let me repeat what I said previously: We must be innovative yet practical. In this regard I now want to dwell for a moment on Lentegeur Hospital which is this Administration’s only psychiatric hospital. It is, by the way, the largest hospital in the southern hemisphere. [Interjections.]

It is with great pride that I present this hospital as an example of innovative vision and a striking example of community orientation and involvement.

This hospital really does serve the community, and not only the patients. I should like to extend an invitation to hon members to visit Lentegeur Hospital to actually see what can be done.

Allow me to quote a few examples of community orientation and involvement. Let me firstly mention to hon members the “Rose Parents” foster care project.

Here the social division is to be commended for its outstanding efforts at having mentally ill children placed with selected foster parents.

During 1988, 36 patients were placed in foster care as against seven patients in 1987. Even the secretary of the foster care committee is a voluntary worker.

I am very grateful to this committee for the amount of trouble being taken to ensure that every patient is placed with the most suitable parents. In South Africa one does not often find people so closely involved in the activities of a psychiatric hospital, because people regard a psychiatric hospital as a madhouse.

All you can do is place advertisements.

Secondly I want to refer to the friends of Lentegeur.

The main function of the friends is to provide assistance to patients on a voluntary basis to cover extra needs not budgeted for by the State and mainly to be friends to the patients. [Interjections.]

The members are all volunteers with no special training and are mainly housewives who are prepared to sacrifice their time and effort to be of help to others. To these members I can only say: For what you have done for the least of my brethren, you have done for God. [Interjections.]

Thirdly, I want to come to the use of patient facilities and services by the community.

Lentegeur Hospital deserves to be commended for making available the use of their recreational facilities to organised groups and clubs in the community. [Interjections.]

Mental illness has come out of the closet and, with the community involvement so strongly evident at Lentegeur Hospital, can only lead to greater understanding of the emotional and human needs of the handicapped and mentally ill, as well as engender a greater awareness of the problem. This in itself will lead to earlier diagnosis and better control as well as a greater commitment to preventative measures.

It is also important to mention that we are succeeding in removing that old “Valkenberg stigma”. [Interjections ]

In conclusion of the subject of this service field I am pleased to mention that the Avalon Rehabilitation Centre in Athlone will be transferred to this administration shortly.

*The last service field I want to discuss is that of socio-pathological phenomena. The activities in this service field revolve around all those wellknown phenomena to which I referred earlier when I spoke about poverty, for example alcohol and drug abuse.

The extent and consequences of drug dependence are well-known to everyone and I therefore do not need to elaborate on that aspect. Needless to say, like the Aids virus, this does incalculable damage to our society. One can say without any hesitation that alcohol and drug abuse plays a significant role in the manifestation of virtually all social problems.

We are continuing to ensure that services aimed at preventing or combating alcohol and drug dependence are furnished, bearing in mind the guidelines contained in the National Plan for the Prevention and Combating of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in South Africa. Hon members must listen to this result. The overall amount of R1,409 million which was allocated in the 1984-85 financial year to furnish services in this context increased to R25 million in the 1988-89 financial year. Hon members can work out for themselves what percentage increase that represents. These funds are employed in respect of registered rehabilitation centres at Worcester and Observatory in the Cape and at De Novo, and also for the South African National Council for Alcoholism and Drug Addiction, and at Lentegeur Hospital.

By September 1989 the department plans to be running a second rehabilitation centre in Kraaifontein too, and for this an amount of R1 million is needed. Whilst the plan emphasises a balance between treatment and preventive services, the unfortunate truth is that in South Africa too much emphasis is still placed on treatment services.

Since my appointment as Minister, the question I have been grappling with is whether the department has got to the root of the problem. I thought about this question for a long time and came to the conclusion that in order to achieve any degree of tangible success in regard to the department’s objectives, there must be a clear shift in emphasis from treatment to preventive services. The indication is that the treatment-prevention ratio is 3:1 at present. In my view the ratio ought to be 1:1, and that is the objective.

It goes without saying that the successful implementation of a comprehensive preventive and development strategy should chiefly concentrate on young people. The modern-day child is exposed to numerous negative factors which threaten or adversely affect his happy and healthy future life. Since apart from the parents, it is the Department of Education and Culture that plays such a vital role in the education of the child, it is with gratitude that we take note of the department’s willingness—where the need exists—to allow experts such as Sanca, for example, to give lectures, in consultation with school principals, on alcohol and drug abuse, for instance. I should like to commend Sanca, which is doing a wonderful job in this regard. With the wonderfully positive attitude of the aforementioned organisation, I cherish the hope that the department, in conjunction with the WHO’s objective of reducing alcohol and drug abuse by 25% throughout the world by the year 2000, will succeed in improving the quality of life of people to such an extent that alcohol and drugs will no longer have a hold over them.

I am of the opinion that it is necessary to present hon members with a few statistics to underline why I am so concerned about the education of our children. When I recently inquired about those who came for help to the drug rehabilitation centre in Observatory, I was informed that the centre, which opened its doors in 1985 and has since treated 2 224 individuals, largely treats the Coloured segment of the population—58% of the people were Coloured people. What is tragic is that of this number, 0,06% were under the age of 10 years, 23% were in their teens and 51% were in their twenties. Dagga abuse represented 41% of the cases, whilst the use of dagga in conjunction with Mandrax represented 47% of the cases.

What I found gratifying, however, was the fact that Lentegeur Hospital was coming strongly to the fore in the treatment of this unfortunate group of people. Of those who need to be hospitalised, 82% are referred to the hospital, and as far as we are concerned, colour plays no role, because anyone needing the service is given assistance. [Interjections.] For the purposes of informing hon members let me just say that in the recent past 37 Whites have been treated at Lentegeur Hospital. [Interjections.]

Then we come to another subject in regard to the pathological services, and that is vagrancy or “leeglêery”. Hon members are all aware of the vagrancy problem amongst both children and adults, a problem with which we are grappling specifically in Cape Town and its immediate environs.

I want hon members to take note of the fact that for a long time now we have not merely been dealing with vagrancy amongst adults. Vagrancy among children and juveniles is the order of the day and is still showing an alarming increase. In Cape Town alone there are about 300 twilight children who aimlessly roam the streets day and night. The fact that this is so indicates a crisis in their family life. They prefer the streets to their homes. Hon members will now have a better understanding of why I place such tremendous emphasis on preventive services and why a great deal more funds will have to be made available for this purpose.

We cannot do otherwise. We must get to the route of the problem. We can simply no longer afford to treat the mere symptoms. That is no use to us. We have no sooner rehabilitated one person than we discover that society has given birth to more who are in need of attention.

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon sitting

Mr Chairman, I am still talking about vagrancy.

When I talk about adult vagrancy, I am not talking about those people who cannot find jobs as a result of the poor economy. [Interjections.] I am talking about those people who make a habit of making a living by begging as a result of all kinds of factors, such as, for example, alcohol and drugs. Just like the children and youths who are vagrants, they roam around endlessly and without refuge in the large cities.

The situation with regard to this kind of vagrancy has reached such proportions that the municipality of Cape Town saw fit in 1988 to establish a committee to address the problem. The Department of Health Services also serves on this committee. One of the conclusions that was drawn was that in the past the department had not addressed the problem of vagrancy sufficiently. Consequently private initiative established a variety of shelters to accommodate these people—children as well as adults.

In the light of representations from various quarters, the department accepted in principle that subsidy schemes should be designed to assist private initiative in operating such shelters. However, the department links its willingness to grant financial assistance to the point of departure that shelters for adults must make a fundamental contribution to the rehabilitation of the inhabitants. Employment creation or training must receive the highest priority, for example, and shelters must liaise closely with other protective and sheltered places of work and even the open labour market.

I must admit that shelters for children are a problem for the department in that people ask why these children are not admitted to the department’s places of safety. Is that not where they belong? The fact is, however, that these shelters are rapidly increasing and they function on the basis of places of safety.

It appears to me that the department will have to consider amending the Child Care Act of 1983 so that private initiative will be allowed to erect and operate places of safety. At present only the Government may erect places of safety.

Hon members see therefore, that the department cannot remain detached when it comes to the problem of vagrancy. A subsidy scheme will have to be developed in order to support private initiative in their attempts to address this socio-pathological condition. At present all the department gets is criticism, because no financial assistance is granted in this connection.

The last topic that I want to broach is that of probation services. Mr Chairman, I am as concerned as you are about the high daily prison population. In this connection there is constant reflection on ways in which transgressors of the law can be treated and rehabilitated within the family and community context. Methods that have gained acceptance in our courts to some extent include injunctions with reference to the attendance of alcohol and dagga safety schools, as well as injunctions with reference to community service as an alternative to imprisonment. [Interjections.] These methods have reference in particular to prisoners who are serving sentences of 2 years and less, and make up approximately 25% of the total prison population.

At present the department has 315 social workers in the field who render services mainly to adult and juvenile offenders in co-operation with the National Institute for Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation of Offenders (Nicro). At present the department subsidizes 25 social workers at Nicro in order to promote an effective contribution in this connection. That expenditure amounts to R697 436,04 during the present financial year.

†In conclusion, with reference to the service fields which reflect the full spectrum of the department’s function, it is appropriate at this time to mention the overall budget figures, comparing two specific totals, namely those for the 1985-86 financial year, when I first became involved as Minister, and the latest figures for the 1989-90 financial year. The total provision for the 1985-86 financial year was R403 946 000 and the total figure for the 1989-90 financial year was R885 001 000. This represents a growth percentage of not less than 119,09%. [Interjections.]

*The hon leaders of the UDP and the DRP, who are conspicuous by their absence this afternoon, said my department and I were in a dilemma and demanded my resignation. I must ask whether they should not rather resign, because they did not supply the results that were supplied by an LP Minister, his department and the LP. [Interjections.]

You must do it because you are the Minister.

We know how to negotiate. We know how to bargain, something that hon member and his party does not know. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon the Minister must make his speech. The hon the Minister may proceed.

That hon member cannot even speak English. [Interjections.]

Order! We are hon members of this House. The hon member for Bishop Lavis must contain himself.

I have endeavoured to paint a picture for hon members of what is happening in the Department of Health Services and Welfare.

A fine picture.

I have tried to add some flashes of colour by referring to the positive achievements since 1984. [Interjections.] However, every picture has shadows, for we are dealing with life and not just a black and white print. The shadows tend to obscure what lies in the future, but I refuse to be blinded by what appears to be vague. The LP is painting a definite picture. It is a painting so vivid and vibrant with life that it can only bring joy to whoever has the courage to look.

*I want to emphasize that health and welfare, or “health” in the broad context as defined by the WHO, cannot be seen as an own affair. Consequently I regard myself as only a temporary Minister. [Interjections.] It is and will always be a matter of general interest. A contagious disease knows no racial separation, and in the same way the pain of starvation and unemployment knows no colour. In the meantime, however, the party accepts the financial responsibility for certain aspects of health services and welfare, but it cannot identify itself with a separation when it comes to the rendering of service. We believe that one Department of Health and Welfare can serve this fine country with its large variety of people, and that is the ideal of the LP. [Interjections.] In this regard we, the department, have a golden opportunity to prove that different population groups can co-operate and live with one another in harmony.

The Department of Health Services and Welfare employs people from all population groups—I repeat, all population groups—whether they are White, Coloured, Black, Asian, Christian or Jewish, Moslem or Hindu. All these different people render service in our department.

The Ministers’ Council decided to implement the LP policy which provides that all institutions must be open to all people.

†We need to build on what we have. The Department of Health Services and Welfare also refuses to continue treating symptoms. The root causes have to be addressed if the symptoms are to be reduced.

We who formulate and implement policy—that is the ruling party in the House of Representatives and the officials of the Department of Health Services and Welfare—must rid ourselves of the root causes of South Africa’s problems. Without a doubt, the root causes is a society which has functioned for too long on colour and racial discrimination.

The Department of Health Services and Welfare has a primary task to perform and that task is to eradicate poverty. The initial step is to strive towards a new constitutional dispensation. In the interim, every endeavour must be made to equip and promote every facet of health. This is what the Department of Health Services and Welfare is doing in co-operation with the other departments in the administration, and we are making progress.

*In conclusion I should like to address a word of sincere thanks and appreciation to—I almost said the late—Dr Hans Steyn who has been called to a different service, the Acting Chief Director, Dr Jarodien, and the staff of head office, the regional offices, as well as the suboffices and branch offices. I want to thank them, because we co-operate as a formidable team in the true sense of the word to combat poverty. I also want to address a special word of thanks to my ministerial staff, especially to my poor Parliamentary officer, Mr John Majavie. During the past four years and eight months he has had to help me to keep 588 appointments to make speeches on behalf of the department, not to mention all the political speeches I had to make in order to help the party. We are grateful that we have such people who assist us in this great struggle, this great war against poverty.

I also want to convey my thanks to the media and SABC-TV who are very well disposed to me and my department. Hon members will see that they give us a great deal of support. Radio in particular assists us in conveying the message to our people. I am looking forward to the debate and I sincerely hope that the positive contributions of everyone—I repeat, everyone—will help us to serve the cause of our less privileged people in South Africa.

Mr Chairman, right at the outset I want to tackle the hon the Minister about something. He said I could not speak English, but I speak on behalf of a constituency. I did not get into this Parliament with a lousy R2. [Interjections.] I did not come here because someone nominated me and I had one vote. I had to work to get here. I have a constituency that I serve. That hon Minister has no constituency to serve. He speaks on behalf of himself.

He serves the whole of South Africa! [Interjections.]

He speaks on behalf of himself. I hope he accepts that this time, if the opportunity… [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Bishop Lavis must please address the Chair.

Mr Chairman, from year to year there has been one appeal after another for one means test. Throughout his speech, however, the hon the Minister did not address this one means test. It is all very well to narrow the gap and to say that we are only R51 behind the Whites, but what is most important is that means test. The means test immediately places a working person who has an income in a very much better position. Many of our people receive a pension, but a person who has an income cannot make use of that pension as a result of the means test. [Interjections.]

We must strive for one means test and I ask the hon the Minister to ensure that this is ultimately done. Our people pay the same price for bread and sugar. Our people lead a miserable existence and they suffer, but the moment they get a little extra, they lose their pension in accordance with the means test. [Interjections.]

I want to take this matter further with reference to the blind. In 19851 took the first deputation of the blind from Civilian Blind to the hon the Minister.

You are bragging!

Yes, Sir, I am bragging. It is feeble to say something like that. What happened then…

I spoke about that in 1984.

Yes, but the hon the Minister got to this point only in 1989. I want to thank the hon the Minister for that. I am pleased, because there has been a change and they have received an allowance. I want to go a little further than only the blind, however.

I want to ask the hon the Minister how many registered blind people there are. In 1978 there were only as many as 1 463 registered blind people. That number is small, and I think the time has come to give the registered blind an equal pension. This can be done, because it will cost less than a million rands. They are addressed in vague terms in the report, however. The report does not say clearly that the blind are going to receive equal pensions. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister must tell me now whether the registered blind…

Order! The hon the Minister must come to order. Will the hon member for Bishop Lavis resume his seat. The hon the Minister will have an opportunity to reply. He is taking out all his ammunition in advance, however.

He is not present when I speak!

Order! The hon the Minister is conducting a dialogue with the hon member for Bishop Lavis, and surely that is not debating. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I shall continue to discuss the matter of the blind. If the wife of a blind person is sighted and she works, he does not qualify for a pension. In the first place that affects his human dignity and secondly his position in his home is inferior to that of his wife and children because he then has to live on their income. Therefore I feel that if one means test is applied in this case, that person will retain his human dignity.

I now come to my second point with reference to the blind. I think the time has come for more job opportunities to be created for the blind. I want to tell a short tale in this connection. At the League of the Friends of the Blind in Grassy Park, the blind work with electrical cord which they put together. There are 17 components. The blind do piece-work and use screwdrivers to put all those components together. Those blind people are so proud of their work that they do not even bother to go out to drink some water. I want to appeal to our industries today to make use of our blind workers.

Subsequently I want to ask whether the Government cannot give the industries something like a tax rebate if they employ blind people. If the people have work to do, they will feel that their lives are worthwhile. The labour is there. In them one will immediately have a very stable work force, because the blind have no thought of striking. They go to work. They want to be at work. It is high time industry was roped in here.

I now come to our schools and I want to appeal to the hon the Minister for something to be done at our schools in order to prevent blindness. In his report the hon the Minister mentioned a high dropout rate. Many of those children may have eye problems. A friend told me that his child was already in Std 5 when they found out that he had double vision. It then cost him a few thousand rands in treatment for the child. Consequently I should like to know whether anything can be done in this connection. Perhaps this is also one of the reasons for the high dropout rate. [Interjections.]

My time is limited. I see the hon the Minister also referred to vagrancy. In my opinion, however, one should not talk about vagrants. The English report refers very nicely to the “plight of the street children”. [Interjections.] One cannot simply say that they are vagrants. I think there are reasons for their doing this. [Interjections.] This also applies to adults. Tramps have problems and should not always simply be denigrated.

You did not hear what I said. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister spoke about MPs and money. There is a member in the LP… [Interjections.] I think it is disgraceful when a member pays off people using his constituency funds and does not inform the department to that effect. That is an ugly business. The person went to him afterwards. He has not been in his service for some time now. I reported this matter to Mr Rossouw…

[Inaudible.]

As a result of this member’s weakness, he had to take some of the taxpayers’ money without informing the department that he was doing so. [Interjections.] It was even uglier; I do not want to make what happened public. There will be a further investigation of the matter, however. It is disgraceful for an hon member to take the taxpayers’ money. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Matroosfontein has said that other people are vagrants. Does the hon member know what “vagrant” means? To whom was he referring?

Mr Chairman, they were talking about people who were drunk.

Order! I did not hear the word “drunk”. [Interjections.] The hon member must listen to me now. If an hon member uses the word “drunk”, the hon member must draw my attention to that. [Interjections.] I heard the hon member talking about vagrants, and he must withdraw that word.

Mr Chairman, very well, I withdraw it. I want to know, however, whom I heard saying “drunk”. [Interjections.]

Order! That is over and done with. The hon member must attract my attention to something of that nature as soon as it happens. The hon member heard me reprimanding the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare. I appeal to hon members to assist me.

Mr Chairman, it is a great pleasure to speak in support of this Vote. It is a pity that the Official Opposition wants to make a circus of this Vote that is so important to us, because what we have to contend with here are our less privileged and indigent people among the people at large who are really suffering.

I want to state this afternoon that it is a fact that our people at large have never been treated as fairly and that no one has ever cared for them as much as this Administration does under the leadership of the LP. We can consider every facet of our welfare services and health services, and we shall see that there has been rapid progress. Nor have we reached the end of the road. The English would say the sky is the limit, and we want to take our people with us. We want to do so much for them that they will no longer be known as indigent or struggling.

I support this Vote and I want to begin by thanking the hon the Minister for his enthusiasm, his zeal and for the commitment with which he takes responsibility for the duties of this important department. I want to tell the officials of this department, from the most junior clerk to the Chief Director, and all the staff in the field, that we appreciate their dedication and the unselfish service they render.

I want to place the spotlight on a matter that has attracted a great deal of attention in the Press recently, viz child abuse. I do so because, in addition to other duties, I had the privilege of being the head of the children’s home in Pofadder. It is nauseating to have to see the condition in which some of our children come to this kind of institution. Child abuse or the deliberate injuring of children as well as child battering are terms which most people unfortunately recognise as the final products of tension or stress within the family. What makes this so difficult to deal with is the fact that the most private of all social institutions, viz the family, is involved.

The expression “battered child syndrome” was chosen purposely to rouse emotions and in this way to lead to an awareness, not only in the medical and social services, but also when it comes to the layman. Emotion got in the way of proper handling of the situation, however, and consequently more euphemistic expressions such as “physically abused child” were used. It is clear that this must be prevented so that there will be less of a need for the treatment of the already injured child. Acknowledging the problem is the first step and since this is not difficult in most cases, this is where the services of the State and specifically of the hon the Minister’s department have an important part to play.

Child abuse can take place with premeditation or spontaneously and impulsively. The former characterises a split personality or schizophrenic. Well-known examples of schizophrenia are hitting the child, burning the child with fire or boiling water, withholding food, throwing the child around and stabbing the child with objects such as knives. This physical torture can usually be identified in that the child has bruises and injuries.

The other side of physical torture constitutes sexual abuse. This can be one of the most dangerous forms of abuse since most children are conditioned to believe that sex must remain a secret. This is associated with feelings of guilt which lead to the continuation of sexual abuse for long periods without perceptible proof. Consequently it is tragic that there have been so many networks recently in which children are sexually abused. We all took cognisance recently of the case involving children in which an Aids sufferer died. Fortunately all 11 of the children involved in this network were traced, and they can now be treated.

A further dimension of child abuse is spiritual or emotional torture. This is present in all the abovementioned examples, especially with regard to the threats associated with this. Examples of this are confinement, neglect and the simple withholding of love and care which is not a child’s privilege, but his right.

One third of the cases are regarded as untreatable unless the child is taken from the family. Numerous experts have admitted that diagnosis and therapy are important. They follow a very clear procedure. First of all a firm diagnosis must be made that serious abuse has taken place. Subsequently a diagnosis of other illnesses arising from the diagnosis must be made, and also a diagnosis of the parents, history and family relations. In this way one begins to assist not only present victims, but also future victims. Further steps then have to be taken.

It is necessary that all the branches of the media make our entire population aware of this, because everyone deals with children at some stage or other and everyone is a potential parent, if not a parent already.

This leads to another factor which in most cases is the key to the effectiveness of the aid system, viz money. Larger amounts of money must be spent on aid centres. Larger amounts of money must be spent on training staff in the most modern techniques and on appointing additional professional people such as psychologists, psychiatrists and the Police, especially in the case of assaults.

There must be more visits by health officers. There must be detailed pre-natal and post-natal supervision for parents. This emphasises the necessity of people who can provide parents with support at home. Unless we take immediate positive action, we are in danger of our children and young people degenerating to an increasing extent.

The hon the Minister dealt with most of the things I have mentioned in this connection. He spoke about family planning facilities. They must be expanded. This must be emphasised countrywide. If the size of a family is controlled, the parents have more with which they can supply the needs of the smaller number of children. This means that parents are better able to keep an eye on their children. This comprises not only family planning facilities, but also the correcting of attitudes in respect of topics which were previously regarded as taboo. Our young people and children must receive guidance in connection with sex both inside and outside marriage, and also subjects such as the use of intoxicating liquor, for example. Counselling centres where these matters can be discussed are important. Media coverage and especially counselling lectures at our schools are of the utmost importance in preventing child abuse. I am grateful to know that in the discussion of his Vote the day before yesterday, the hon the Minister of Education and Culture mentioned that there must be more and more of this counselling at schools. All of this makes up part of better preparation for parenthood as well as for bringing up children. State financing is also an important factor, and one must ensure that it is never said that there is not enough money to address these problems.

Communication between parents and children of all ages must be emphasised. Communication between parents, children and the various appointed officials cannot be over-emphasised. There must be liaison, even with hospitals, churches, the courts and other assistance organisations. We in the department must not be afraid to lay more matters before the courts, because in this way the drama becomes clearer to the public and a greater awareness is created of the cruelty that maims these children for the rest of their lives. Mention must also be made of the fact that punishments upon conviction in these cases are far too light and must be increased.

More and more of today’s young parents are on drugs, which makes their behaviour unpredictable. In this regard the aid centres, which provide information about the detrimental consequences, as well as counselling, are of the utmost importance. The placement of children after abuse must be handled most circumspectly to ensure that the child does not continue the vicious circle by eventually abusing his or her own child. Most of the children can be returned to their parents later, although there are cases in which they have to be taken away permanently.

In conclusion, more recreation facilities must be made available to parents as well as children, and day-care centres must be established to assist the mother in coping with her dual burden of working and being a home-maker. These steps can have great advantage and can also provide unemployed people with jobs. Knowledge of this syndrome is increasing every day, but all the theoretical aspects that have been mentioned will be futile unless corresponding practical steps are taken.

Mr Chairman, please allow me a few minutes before I continue with my speech to thank the hon members who assisted me on Thursday evening during the discomfort I suffered here in the House owing to the unpleasant smell. I can assure you I am not better yet. It really affected me. For that reason I want to say thank you very much to the hon members who assisted me to get home, particularly the hon the Deputy Minister of the Budget who made his motor car available to take me home.

This afternoon I listened briefly to what was being said by our people, and I am feeling queasy. I have a nervous stomach.

[Inaudible.]

If that hon member wants to laugh, he must go and laugh outside. I am here because I have work to do. He must not waste my time. Mr Chairman, we have…

[Inaudible.]

Mr Chairman, please chase that man out so that I can make my speech. [Interjections.]

We came here to work in this Parliament for our people who pay for us. [Interjections.] The Government does not pay for us. It is the people outside, the taxpayers, whose money is being wasted. The people still do not understand that the White man is still engaging in “divide and rule”. That is why we are at sixes and sevens here. Today we should be only one party here and should speak with one voice. [Interjections.] Yes, only the LP. [Interjections.] We must speak with one voice for our people. [Interjections.]

Our people are too inclined to talk behind other people’s backs. Today I am an Independent, but I do not ask for advice from anyone. I ask God for advice; that is why I am so successful. That is the only place I can ask for advice. [Interjections.] It does not matter. I am not out of Parliament. I shall come back here. No one can tell me I shall not come back. If God wants me to come, I will come, and no one can keep me out. [Interjections.]

I come to my work. I am glad about this report. If other people view it differently, I want to say that I do not judge things by their outward appearance, and I call a spade a spade. When I was on that side I did not criticise the LP; why must I do so now? And the same applies to those hon members of the Opposition. [interjections.] No, I do not want anyone’s help. I got in here on my own and with my own money, and not with the LP’s money. I worked for it on my own. [Interjections.] Leave me alone! [Interjections.]

I am so glad about this report which has been compiled. I want to thank the officials and the hon the Minister for this, and not only for the report, but also for the things we have achieved. When I say we, I include myself. [Interjections.] I will not exclude myself.

When we came here, the Whites quarrelled amongst themselves about Blacks and Coloureds. That is all they did, and they are still doing so. The real work we have to do to uplift the people outside and so on, are matters they never discussed. I said one day that I read in the newspapers how they quarrelled here during the day, and then they went and had a drink together and spoke about how successfully they had misled the “Hotnots”. [Interjections.] In the newspapers! The newspapers wrote this. Nowadays the newspapers do not write much about what we do.

What we have achieved here is valuable to our people outside. [Interjections.] Today they are already getting a good pension, which, although it does not really help them, is better than it was, because the Whites cannot solve our problems, because they do not know what they are. Those of us who have suffered, like I have, because I am also a poor man, know what it is to battle. I know what it is to live on salted fish, bread and sweet potatoes. People who do not know this because they have lived in luxury after having robbed us blind do not know how we battle.

That is why I say that the hon Ministers and the LP must go ahead. I am going ahead with them. They can rest assured of that. They can get rid of the man they have appointed as a candidate there. [Interjections.] They are haunting the place at night. [Interjections.] He was haunting the place yesterday evening, and the people telephoned me. Mr Billie Ross telephoned me. Just ask; I will mention the names.

I want to draw the hon the Minister’s attention to something. He can see for himself what pensions our people get. There are still elderly people who are battling. Accommodation is expensive nowadays, particularly for elderly people living in flats. I am referring particularly to my constituency where we do not have any land left on which we can build houses for poor people.

Now we want to build an old age home, but I want to ask the hon the Minister something. We have already written so many letters to them simply asking them to meet us. Do the hon members of the LP, who are fighting so hard for our people, want to leave these old age homes and crèches in the hands of people who get money from abroad and who criticise them every day?

Let us consider our meetings. I could not even remain sitting there; I had to walk out, because I had to listen to stories about the puppets sitting here in Parliament. The City Council of Parow wanted to build an old age home, but those Afrikaners cannot sit there, because they have also been sold out. These are good people with whom I built up a good relationship. They are serious.

We have now asked the DR Church and the AFM Church to help us to build the old age home ourselves. We are only waiting for their reply. The hon the Minister must know how dangerous those people are and what lies they tell when they come to one’s office. When they come to see us, they tell us they do not work through a Minister.

An official from the department of the hon the Minister of Local Government and Housing told those people that they should work through their MPs. It is that crowd of UDFs with their snotty nosed children—I call them that, because that is what they are; they are still wet behind the ears—who pick them up everywhere and who tell them how bad the Ministers are and what puppets they are, those people who are fighting so hard for what we are getting today. [Interjections.]

I also want to refer to the misuse of the disability grants our people get. This is very important, and before my time expires, I want to refer to a letter from a certain Mr David Martin. The reference number of the letter is DGC 5486467/1. This man gets a disability grant, but he is in prison at the moment. I had him locked up, because he was ill-mannered, and expected to be paid for it. When I am in the housing office, he snatches the receiver away from me when I telephone his pastor. He tells me I must confine myself to my own church. He then pushes me around, but God will deal with him.

Mr Pietersen and Mr Joseph Mabola canvassed against me in the election. Both of them get a disability grant. Hon members must just hear what is wrong with them. Mr Pietersen is permanently disabled owing to epileptic fits and brain damage. I am a sickly man, but I work to earn my daily bread! If these people can do canvassing for parties and can walk the length and breadth of the township, why are they getting disability grants?

The hon the Minister will recall that Mr Mabola addressed a letter to him through me. The doctors were insulted by that man. They said he was not disabled. His brother and I had him admitted to hospital. The hospital staff in Lentegeur also say that there is nothing the matter with him, but he is getting a disability grant anyway.

[Inaudible.]

Mr Chairman, when the hon member for Matroosfontein has a turn to speak, I am going to pester him just as much. I can guarantee him that. [Interjections.]

There are people I know of who are really in bad health. Some of them are disabled, but they still go to work at the hospitals. I take my hat off to such people. There are too many dagga smokers wandering around in Ravensmead who get grants. Pietersen is one of those dagga smokers. The hon the Minister must look into this matter. We are going to report it.

I work well with the officials of the hon the Minister’s department in Bellville. If the doctors do not examine those people properly, they cannot do anything. It is not my fault or that of the hon the Minister or the officials. It is the fault of the doctors. The doctors must examine such cases more thoroughly. There are people who have big houses for these handicapped people. However, those poor people wander about begging. They do not get food from those people, but they are nevertheless subsidised and get grants from the hon the Minister’s department. These matters must be looked into.

[Inaudible.]

I am grateful… The hon member for Matroosfontein is confusing me. He does not belong here! [Interjections.]

It is my job to confuse you.

Yes, the hon member did not get an education, that is the problem. [Interjections.] My parents educated me.

I thank the hon the Minister for the fact that he is going to look after children who are 21 years old and still at school, whose parents are sickly and cannot afford to keep them there. I thank the hon the Minister for this in advance.

Order! I am sorry to interrupt, but the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I am going to pester the hon member for Matroosfontein when he makes his speech. I will then be just as ill-mannered. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare on the speech he made this morning. There was a dignity and an atmosphere in this House which really made the debating on this Vote worth listening to. When it comes to health services and welfare, we speak from the bottom of our hearts about that community which we represent here. However, it is a pity that matters deteriorated somewhat this afternoon. I am appealing to hon members, through the hon the Chairman of the House, for us to maintain the dignity which this Vote merits.

Because the Vote is divided into and treated as two aspects, I am merely going to bring this briefly to the hon the Minister’s attention again. I want to speak first about pensions. We are now experiencing a time when certain members of our community, owing to the poverty in which they are plunged and the age they have reached—they cannot work as they did 20 or 30 years ago—must receive a meagre pension. I am appealing to the hon the Minister, and this has been done before, to look into this matter seriously and to see whether a scheme cannot be introduced in terms of which every worker, just like the professional people, must make a compulsory contribution to a pension fund.

We are rapidly nearing the end of this century, and I cannot imagine that the people’s dignity can be retained at this age with such a pension and the inflation we are faced with. When one thinks of the R200 pension for example, one simply cannot work out how anyone can survive on this for 30 or 31 days a month. For that reason I want to suggest that workers under the age of 40 be looked at, because many of them are practising a trade through which they earn a good salary. However, when they have become feeble with age they approach this department for a pension. If they had made a contribution to the pension, they would be better off.

A previous speaker referred to the means test. I am not going to elaborate on this, but I merely want to say that this test really merits attention. The stigma of discrimination which is still attached to it must be summarily removed. This will bring relief to many of these senior citizens.

Uncle Johnny, tell us about the advertisement! [Interjections ]

I am not going to react to that remark, because I feel we cannot sit here telling lobster stories this afternoon. We must discuss dignified things here.

I now come to the department’s health services. A population explosion has occurred in the community. A critical housing situation has developed. As a result—I do not like the word, but I must use it—a scheme person has developed who is physically ill at an early age. I feel the time has come—we cannot summarily deny this—for us to supplement this by establishing day hospitals in our community.

I know this hon Minister was criticised at one stage because he did something about hospital services in his department. This afternoon he mentioned an interim stage here. I want to underline this by saying that to a great extent day hospitals are a solution to bridge this interim stage. I want to substantiate here what I advocated for the Eben Dönges Hospital at Worcester. Hon members must listen to the numbers they gave. In 1989 Coloured and Asian outpatients at the general clinic—these are patients who could easily have been treated at a day hospital—totalled 30 204. The same applies to Upington, De Aar and all the big rural towns.

What does this result in? A man must give up a day’s work to go and sit at a hospital. When one has these day hospitals, people can be treated within an hour or two and this can reduce the unemployement figure. I also want to prove to the hon the Minister that in 1988 there were months in which 3 066, 2 879 and 2 619 patients attended the clinics. This is how the figure of 30 204 was arrived at.

We are building all kinds of things. We are also making appeals for those things. This is all very well, but I and every hon member present here know what I am talking about, namely the necessity for these day hospitals in our residential areas. No matter what happens one day in our country, this kind of hospital is always going to have its rightful place in the community. These are things facing this department and I feel that this House must establish this kind of thing itself, and in this connection I am appealing to the Ministers’ Council to support the hon the Minister in this.

Let us remove the stigma attached to other things. This afternoon this department remains an own affair to me because my own people are yearning for these services. At a later stage, when that community has been lifted out of that morass of poverty and misery, we are going to talk about these fine things which others generally have.

Let us forget about what other population groups have. Let us jettison and start at home by putting these own affairs health services and welfare in the correct light.

Mr Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to participate in this debate. In the first place I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on his inspiring speech he made here this morning and the way in which he convincingly conveyed that message from his department. This can only be expected of a man who has made a thorough study and is convinced of what he wants for his community.

The way in which this hon Minister made his speech this morning proves that he is worried about the state of the community in whose service he is. For that reason it is important for us to realise that this hon Minister also conveyed the policy of the LP, of which he is a Minister, to this department.

It is a great privilege to participate in this very important debate on the eve of an election. I consider this debate so important because this is a department which deals with people. It is a department which is people-orientated. It is involved with a person long before he sees the light of day. It is involved with him throughout his life until the day he dies.

I have decided to concentrate in this debate mainly on our young people, both inside and outside the school context. I should like to make a serious appeal for the hon the Minister to try to solve the shortage of social workers at our schools in the near future. I am aware that the social workers working at our schools at present have an extremely difficult task to perform. However, I want to thank them for the tremendous task they have performed thus far.

What the hon the Minister said this morning in his speech is so important that one cannot overlook it, and I consequently want to quote him as follow:

If it had not been for the concern of this hon Minister with regard to what was going on at our schools, he would not have employed school social workers. The fact that at present this is the only department which has such services proves the seriousness with which he treats this matter. Let us consider the nature and scope of the problems that they have to deal with. I should like to quote a few of the very important points, namely truancy, behavioural problems, emotional problems, sexual abuse, physically abused children, drug addition of parents and many others. These are the kinds of problems school social workers have to deal with.

The entire set-up is a community set-up. The entire problem is a community problem. There is a pattern to this problem of children leaving school early. Hon members heard what the hon the Minister said this morning. If one looks at the problem of children who leave school early, one finds in the first place that there are marriage problems. In the second place there is the problem of liquor abuse at home or by the children. In the third place poor housing is a contributing fact. Illegitimate relations and poor health are further causes. Another problem is healthy use of leisure. However, the most important factor is the poverty in which our people are trapped.

That poverty syndrome and situation in which our people are trapped is a major factor contributing to children leaving school early. As a result of this we have these problems. It is also a fact that 29 registered children’s homes already fall under the department. The department is also involved in rendering a service to young people awaiting trial.

The best known of these places of safety is Bonnytown in Wynberg and the school at Faure in the Cape Peninsula. During a visit to Bonnytown last year I was pleasantly surprised by what I saw there. I saw that children who had been rejected by the community were being rehabilitated there and were treated with great love and compassion so that they could take their rightful place in the community again.

Whereas in the past these places of safety were seen as reformatories for naughty children, this image has changed and today those institutions have become proud institutions in which children who land up there because they came into contact with the law and crime at an early age are rehabilitated into good citizens. It has also been decided that in future these places of safety will no longer simply be places of detention for young people, but will also be used as assessment and treatment centres for the prevention of deviant behaviour among young people.

I now want to refer to another field of service in this department, namely services to our young people outside the school context. It is known that the Child and Family Care Committee has taken up the challenge to reach young people outside the school context and to uplift those unfortunate young people who, owing to various circumstances, are in trouble and turn them into respected members of the community. When one considers the reasons for juvenile delinquency in our community, we find that we must start with the homes of those young people. Normally we find that drug abuse by the father or mother or both parents is the cause. The abuse of drugs like dagga or Mandrax by the father or mother leads to a broken home and the children become juvenile delinquents.

On this occasion I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on the fact that this very important part of our community is now receiving great attention from his department; so much so that one of his members of staff was given time off to make a study of the way of life of this group of young people. I want to associate myself with the recommendations of that official and I should like to quote the recommendations here for the record:

In conclusion I want to say that it was a great privilege for me to be able to serve on this hon Minister’s ministerial committee for the past few years. The experience we gained there of how this department works is of the utmost importance. For that reason I should like to thank the officials of that department for what they meant to us at every meeting of the hon the Minister’s committee. There is a particularly good relationship between the officials and me, particularly those in my constituency. I want to take this opportunity also to express my thanks to them.

Mr Chairman, the LP is of the people, for the people and stands for peaceful change which will lead to the improvement of every individual and his or her community making progress.

Between 13 and 15 million people in South Africa live in abject poverty and the situation is deteriorating. The NP’s policy of apartheid contributed greatly to the impoverishment of millions of South Africans. According to the second Carnegie report on poverty in South Africa, the NP made a six-pronged attack on the underprivileged for the sake of the retention of apartheid in order to entrench themselves as rulers and to control the wealth.

As far as apartheid’s attack on the underprivileged is concerned, the poor were not involved in the economy as partners. Instead, they were deprived of their privileges.

Secondly, the urbanisation of Black people was opposed. Thirdly, there was impoverishment owing to group removals in cities as well as in the rural areas. It is an undeniable fact that the Group Areas Act played a great part in the impoverishment of our community.

Fourthly, the poor quality of Black education was an important cause of the poverty-culture. Factors such as the oppression of certain organisations and destabilisation led to greater poverty in this country of milk and honey. I quote from Proverbs 14:31:

Today I wish to convey my sincere appreciation and thanks to the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare, who almost works himself to death, for the outstanding service which he renders to promote the social welfare of our community. As a result of his purposeful endeavours, war veterans’ pensions have already been equalised.

On behalf of the residents of Dysselsdorp, I wish to thank him for the fact that the community health centre is becoming a reality. The LP is striving for and will continue to fight until all social pensions and grants have been equalised. It is the right of every South African citizen, irrespective of race, colour or religion, to be treated equally. Therefore we shall fight ceaselessly until all social pensions and grants have been equalised. If the hon the Minister of Finance is an obstacle in the path of fulfilling this ideal, he should rather follow the example of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, and resign. The maize farmers were given R460 million to vote NP instead of allocating more funds to our hon Minister of Health Services and Welfare to promote the welfare of our community. The allocating of social pensions and grants is subject to a means test and I wish to make an earnest appeal today that that means test be equalised. Furthermore I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare that he immediately abolish the racial classification which presently appears on all letters of authorisation sent to receivers of social pensions and grants. On the letters of authority we read: OAC and the C indicates population groups eg MGC, DGC and FAC.

The establishment of a sub-office of the Department of Health Services and Welfare in Oudtshoorn is absolutely essential. During the presentation of the programme “Give the Child a Chance” in the Civic Centre in Oudtshoorn on 1 December 1986, the hon the Minister announced that a sub-office of his department would be opened in Oudtshoorn. I have already addressed various representations to his department and held personal interviews in this regard, but without success. We regard a sub-office for Oudtshoorn and the surrounding areas as a priority and that is why I am demanding today that, in order to render more effective health and welfare services to the community, it be established as soon as possible. We no longer accept the excuse that there are no funds. The Bible says in Proverbs 14:31 that a person who has compassion for someone else, benefits by it himself.

Owing to the fact that people are not treated decently at magistrate’s offices where they have to apply for social pensions and grants, the behaviour of the pension officer at that magistrate’s office is regretted. Furthermore, the office at the magistrate’s office where people have to apply for social grants and make enquiries is only a little larger than a toilet. This results in many of our people having to wait outside this building in cold weather conditions. Since I have been in Parliament I have had hundreds of enquiries in connection with social pensions. I have brought the hon the Minister proof of this. These documents prove that we need an office and I hereby present the hon the Minister with the proof. [Interjections.]

At the moment I am fighting poverty in our community, and I often work night and day. As an interim measure the management committee of Bridgeton will provide an office free of charge if the hon the Minister can make a pension officer available to us on a permanent basis in Oudtshoorn.

Today I wish to express my appreciation for the outstanding service which I receive from the pension department of the regional office in George. A special word of thanks to Mr Van der Westhuizen, his senior official, Mr Bok, as well as Mr Coerecius, who in many cases went out of their way to be of assistance even after office hours.

At present there are enormous delays with the paying out of foster-parent grants. That is why I should like to quote from a letter dated 25 April 1989, which I received from the regional office of the Department of Health Services and Welfare in George, in regard to the foster-parent grant of Mrs Meiring. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I wish firstly to thank the hon the Minister on behalf of the pensioners of Riverlea for attending the occasion that was held at the community centre during the festive season. The information given to them concerning their pensions was an eye opener. The increases were also heartily welcomed by them.

In his speech the hon the Minister spoke about the misuse and abuse of the pensions, and I, as a member of Parliament for the areas of Riverlea, appreciated this information. In the vast area of Johannesburg, at all the pension payouts we have these abusers who cause quite a lot of irregularities. I refer specifically to people such as shebeen queens, various house-shop owners, meat-sellers, money-lenders and clothes-sellers.

In the area that I represent I have debarred these individuals from the payout premises. They intimidate the pensioners by robbing and threatening them. Certain individuals, whose names I shall furnish the hon the Minister with, have allies employed at Coloured Affairs in Johannesburg who have pension grants confiscated when the pensioners do not co-operate with them. In a recent instance I assisted a pensioner in obtaining a grant, but he had to wait approximately three months for this application to be approved. This individual also handled an application for a pensioner and he received his book within one week.

The problem arises when people who are entitled to a grant have their applications refused, while people who are capable of supporting themselves by way of employment do receive grants. My plea to the hon the Minister is to have the receivers of maintenance and the disability grants reviewed.

My second plea is that the pensioners of Riverlea in Extension 1 and 2 be relieved of all these high rentals. The majority of these pensioners have to support their grandchildren as well as themselves on those grants. As things stand at the moment, they cannot cope with the very high rentals. The city council of Johannesburg, however, ignores this request to lower the rental.

The clinic for Riverlea and Riverlea Extension 1 is not fully utilised. In my opinion this clinic could be developed into a day hospital. In implementing this, it would alleviate the problem of travelling such a long distance to obtain medical treatment at the Coronationville Hospital. My request for this day hospital is purely to the advantage of the residents of Riverlea Extension 1, as the majority of these residents are surviving on grants.

In previous debates I requested that social workers be appointed at all schools in my area and it is my wish to see that this is implemented. In this instance the scholar should have someone in attendance at school to confide in because these children have problems and as there is nobody to confide in they drop out of school at an early stage. The various problems that the schoolchildren have to cope with usually originates at home and affects the child mentally.

In the vast area of Johannesburg we also require a rehabilitation centre where our youth as well as adults could be rehabilitated in order to rejoin the community in the various projects with the aim of the upliftment of our people. It is pathetic to see how people are going to waste, especially our youth who indulge in alcohol and drugs. We must bear in mind that these very people are the fathers and mothers as well as the leaders of tomorrow. To avoid the further retardation of our community of Johannesburg, we regard a rehabilitation centre as being of the utmost importance. However, I must stress that we, the people of Bosmont constituency, are very grateful for having a Minister like the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare and for his dedication towards our aged. In his budget speech I heartily welcomed the envisaging of a place of safety for Johannesburg, which will be established by the year 1992. This will really be a feather in our cap. I would also like to congratulate the hon the Minister and his department on all the issues that were mentioned. We support the hon the Minister heartily in his endeavours for the upliftment of our people.

Mr Chairman, I wish to thank the hon the Minister and his department sincerely on behalf of the recipients of old age pensions, disability grants, war veteran’s and ex-servicemen’s pensions, as well as the crèches and the old age homes in my constituency for the service they render. We are glad that we could participate today in the last debate on Health Services and Welfare this year.

Much has been achieved, sacrificed and done for the welfare of our people. The LP campaigns for the upliftment of the community in our fatherland. The party is committed to this by its constitution. We are grateful for the improvement of the old age pensions, war veteran’s and ex-servicemen’s pensions, disability grants and child grants. We are rather disappointed with the child grants, because when a boy and a girl reach the age of 18 and are still at school—good pupils—we have heard that the grant has been withdrawn. [Interjections.] The grants are withdrawn and if there is more than one child who receives a grant, the grant of the children on that specific book is summarily discontinued. It is not only discontinued in the case of the boy or girl who has turned 18, but the rest of the children also suffer because the grant is discontinued for all. We should like the hon the Minister to investigate the matter. It occurs precisely as I have mentioned.

We find that much has still to be done in the sphere of welfare in our community. We are grateful for what we have been able to get. It is admittedly a privilege which we did not have previously. Once again our plea is that the question of the means test will be investigated. Sanel, a firm in my neighbouring constituency of Berg River, whose MP is Mr Carelse, manufactures concrete products. This firm employs a number of young men and women who suffer from epileptic fits. We are grateful that there are firms who have compassion for such people and provide them with an opportunity to do something. This means that they are not idle. However, we were bitterly disappointed at the treatment which our people receive from Sanel. When a person applies for a subsistence allowance, Sanel is the administrator of that grant. We are opposed to the administrator of the farmer on the farm, the shopkeeper and the hawker. We recommend administrators in our community, and there are many. Why must Sanel administer our people’s grants?

There have been cases, when the money arrives, of a large new suitcase or a large quantity of clothes being bought without approaching the mother, foster-parent or the family. I feel that when a person applies for a grant and it takes a considerable time before the grant is paid out, that family has incurred expenses. I cannot see why Sanel can go to Pep Stores without the consent of the foster-parent or the parents, and purchase R300 to R500 worth of clothes. It is contemptuous treatment of that mother and father. I am speaking from experience; I am speaking about matters which I have seen and investigated. The voters want to know where the MP is and what can be done.

It is Mr Carelse.

It is not only Mr Carelse; it is me as well. We speak to Sanel, but they do not care. They just continue with those refractory negotiations which they undertake on their own. A commission of inquiry should be instituted into Sanel. Representations have already been made in connection with our unmarried mothers’ payment. Our mothers stand in long queues to wait for their payment. It is unfortunate that they have fallen prey to that situation. They have to stand in the rain, sun and wind and wait for their payment. I approached the chief magistrate in an attempt to find an office inside the building where the payments could be made. However, the reply was that it was a matter for the Department of Welfare.

The magistrate was told that once that branch office in Paarl was ready, space would be found for our people. At this moment there are offices which are standing empty on the ground floor of the Paarl branch. Why can our people not be paid out in those offices? It is not acceptable that our women have to stand along the roadside and endure the insults of those who pass. My plea is that while there are rooms standing empty, those mothers can be assisted so that they can be under cover.

I wish to enquire about the matter of pensioners and grant recipients who are waiting for their payment. There is no income. The one case is that of a widowed mother in hospital. If one sends them to the Department of Welfare to find out whether they cannot be helped, they are told by the clerks that the department has nothing to do with it. That is what our clerks do. They say that they have nothing to do with it. We have not heard whether they can be helped in that case. I address a request to the hon the Minister to see whether a solution cannot be provided for such people.

With regard to care of the aged and the service centres, we are grateful to have read in the hon the Minister’s report that more than two or three service centres have been erected. I know that our care of the aged branch in Paarl were already making representations and acquiring land for a service centre last year. The necessary correspondence about plans—I speak under correction—is receiving attention from our offices. So far I do not know whether anything has come of it. I do not know whether it has been shelved.

With regard to health services, I am concerned and disappointed. It is true, after all. We must face the fact that the incidence of TB is increasing in Paarl. Our local newpaper says: “TBleiers—’n kopseer vir Paarl”. Approximately 600 cases have been registered.

The clinics in Paarl are involved in it. We, as community workers, have made renewed efforts to assist Santa and other organisations in Paarl to combat TB among our people.

Poor housing is a further cause of TB. The houses are damp. They are overcrowded and one finds as many as 12 to 16 persons in a two-roomed house. We, as MPs, can do nothing if the local authorities do not ensure that the houses which are so damp are repaired. We can do nothing about it if 16 to 18 people live in a two-roomed house. We can and we do make representations. We also go round to see whether smaller families cannot house the members of families with 16 to 18 people. We do something We try to improve the situation. We do not, however, have the authority to give the people another house.

I am also concerned about the patients who abscond. A TB case who does not attend a clinic for treatment on a regular basis absconds and is a danger to other people. It can happen that such a patient infects another person. That is why it is our argument that even the employer assists us by ensuring that an employee, who receives treatment, attends the clinic on a regular basis. Otherwise the employer can get the tablets from the clinics and give it to the employee himself.

Our principals can also assist us in this regard. If a child has TB, the principal can ensure that such a child receives his tablets during school hours. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I served on the Standing Select Committee on Health and Welfare for quite a few years and I must admit that I have learnt a great deal. I wish to thank the officers of the hon the Minister’s department who work in Wynberg and Athlone for their goodwill towards me and their willingness to help me.

Furthermore I want to make a correction. The hon member for Rawsonville said that grants cease once a child is over 18. One must apply all over again three months before a child has a birthday. One must not wait until the child is over 18 and then apply. Then the grant expires naturally.

I wish to focus my attention on welfare. It is the right of every member of the community to receive an income which is sufficient to provide for his basic needs. It is the responsibility of the authorities to compel employers to assure employees of the minimum wage scales as well as a pension scheme. It is the responsibility of the authorities to assure every individual of a standard of life which satisfies the demands of human dignity and which corresponds to the standard which is maintained by other members of the community.

Need and the degree of need is the primary criterion which is applied by the authorities when the extent of assistance has to be determined. The auxiliary measures must be comprehensive. We know that, when the welfare structure has to be built up from grass-roots level, the local welfare committee is the first part of the structure which has to be considered.

In the democratic system a person is primarily responsible for meeting his own needs and fulfilling his social roles in such a way as to be sanctioned by the community. However, there are those who cannot satisfy the demands of self-sufficiency and whose social functioning suffers from some handicap or other. In developed communities collective action is therefore taken to care for such people so that they can fit in with the community, and to direct the community in such a way that a stable way of life and subsistence level is possible for everyone. I remember that the hon the Minister once said that those who are strong must help those who are weak.

Now I should like to say something about disability grants. This aspect creates the most problems. Applications for disability grants take from five to six months before the person receives anything—if he is lucky. At present medical certificates of applicants for disability grants are referred to the DPO in Bellville by doctors in hospitals where treatment is received, who has to classify the person’s state of health. Therefore it follows that in about 80% of the cases the said officer finds them fit for work and declares them so in the form. He does not examine or see the person and therefore rejects the qualification of the doctor who treats the person daily. Often various reports such as welfare and psychological reports are requested by the DPO before he gives the final classification.

To me the fact that the poor people do not always have enough money for bus and train fares is deplorable and a waste of money. The truly indigent person has to visit the offices and hospitals often. Those people are referred back and forth—and do not have a great deal of money—to obtain the requested report. I know what I am talking about because I had such a case in 1985. Personally, I now have the problem of a mother of 58 years of age in Heideveld, whose son is unemployed and who has no income. She owes R225 for her rent. I want to admit today that I paid her rent, because what else could I do? We who have must help those who do not. The mother cannot find work because she suffers from high blood pressure and other ailments. She has been struggling for nearly three months to receive a grant. During the week she had to fetch another doctor’s report. So it continues and I want to know how these poor people must survive. Since the finalisation lasts from five to six months, is it not possible that the person can be assisted by providing him or her with coupons while he or she is unemployed? The poor officials have to wait for medical certificates from the DPO and are often accused of being responsible for the delay while the fault actually lies with the DPO.

In view of what I have just said, I suggest that the hon the Minister immediately investigates the system of applications for disability grants in order to facilitate the provision of State aid to the needy through the DPO.

I should also like to ask the hon the Minister about the promotion of clerical officials. I know that social workers and of course medical officers are promoted to the rank of directors. What then is the situation with regard to clerical officers? Are chief clerks also promoted to directors? The people who are promoted to directors are social workers and the medical personnel.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasant privilege for me to speak in support of this Vote this afternoon. Further, I should like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to the hon the Minister for the exceptional way in which he managed this ministry, not only during the past financial year, but for the past five years. This Department of Health Services and Welfare has grown measurably and with leaps and bounds. This is as a result of the fact that we have a dynamic Minister at the helm.

On behalf of the thousands of needy, the pensioners and recipients of social grants across the length and breadth of South Africa, especially of areas such as the Cold Bokkeveld, Prince Alfred Hamlet, Bella Vista, Ceres and Touws River in my constituency, I wish to thank him sincerely for the wonderful assistance rendered by him and his department. Of the hon the Minister’s officials with whom I was closely associated, and whom I wish to thank specially, are Mr Hess at head office, Messrs Horne and Daniels and Mrs Niemand at the regional office in Worcester.

It is an everyday phenomenon that children are abused, maltreated and even deserted by their parents. Very often a father denies paternity, and that mother is not able to care for that child or children. A child does not ask to come into this world. For that reason it is imperative that we take care of our children.

That is why I appreciate the initiatives of the hon the Minister’s department of placing such children in foster care with a foster-grant to the foster-parents. The hon the Minister’s project “Give the child a chance” is an especially innovative initiative to compensate to a large extent for the trauma which such children have had to experience.

It is and remains a very long process to place children, especially the needy children who have to be cared for by a grandmother or who are already in the care of others. In many cases people care for such children for long periods without receiving a foster-care grant owing to the fact that the Juvenile Court first has to place children in foster care. I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister to consider that a foster-care grant be given to these children in need of care immediately, or as soon as possible when application is made to place them in foster care.

It was with appreciation that I noted that the hon the Minister had already appointed 27 social workers at 53 schools with the possibility of 32 more such posts being created. I should like to praise the hon the Minister for these initiatives.

This new step, which places the hon the Minister’s department in the front line in the sphere of school and social work, is an imperative service and the hon the Minister must never even think of doing away with such a service. He should rather expand it progressively so that all 2 200 schools of the Department of Education and Culture can eventually be included. I should like to give a brief analysis of the success of these school social work services. During the period from January to June 1988 these 27 school social workers dealt with 1 175 cases at 47 schools, which addressed a variety of approximately 14 cases of anti-social behaviour and behavioural problems. This means that, had it been practically feasible to expand this service to all the 2 200 schools, approximately 110 500 cases could be treated annually at our schools. However, this implies that every year approximately 109 000 cases of anti-social behaviour and other behavioural problems occur at our schools countrywide and still have to be dealt with. The fact that this extensive need for school social work services has been identified and tackled by our hon Minister is an indication that we have a dynamic and extremely competent hon Minister of Health Services and Welfare.

In my constituency the principal of St Marks Primary School in Prince Alfred Hamlet took the initiative of investigating the high drop-out figure and poor achievements at his school. He found that malnutrition and poverty, which the hon the Minister referred to previously, resulted in the anti-social forms of behaviour which occur in rural schools countrywide, are manifesting themselves here. These behavioural problems are curable and preventable if the department can introduce a school social worker as well as a day-hospital for this area. Therefore I wish to use this opportunity to appeal to the hon the Minister to investigate the possibility of introducing these services in the Ceres-Prince Alfred Hamlet area as well.

It was with appreciation that I noted that there are 16 service centres at present, for which an amount of R1 156 000 has been allocated for 1989-90. Furthermore, it is also appreciated that there are a further eight new projects in their final phase of completion. However, I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister to assist so that financing can be obtained and also so that a welfare centre for Ceres can be approved. An application for such a centre was submitted on the initiative of Rev Straus, the minister of the local DR mission church. Such a service centre will serve approximately 139 000 residents who will serve all denominations in and around Ceres. Such a service centre for Ceres will certainly be an asset to all inhabitants in my constituency as provision has already been made for housing for the aged who can still care for themselves.

I also took appreciative note of the fact that the gap in social pensions and grants between Whites and the so-called non-Whites has, on the initiative of the hon the Minister, been narrowed to such an extent during the past five years that the difference is only R51. We also noted with regret that the hon the Minister of Finance did not want to give approval for the hon the Minister to narrow this gap even further by increasing pensions and grants with approximately R20.

With reference to this I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister this afternoon to investigate the possibility of effecting an increase in another way, namely by trying to adjust the means test. The situation at present is that if the spouse of a prospective applicant for a pension has an income of approximately R350 per month and more, the spouse of such a person will not qualify for a pension. Inflation has decreased the buying power of the pensioners’ pension, and I wish to appeal to the hon the Minister to investigate this possibility.

I wish to welcome the hon the Minister’s announcement of this morning, namely that the Avalon Rehabilitation Centre will soon fall under the Department of Health Services and Welfare. In this respect I wish to make a further appeal to the hon the Minister. When this happens would he also concentrate on the causes of the alcohol problem when dealing with the rehabilitation of the alcoholic rather than concentrating mainly on the symptoms of alcohol addiction. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon the Minister and the Department of Health Services and Welfare on their fine service and the way in which they satisfy the health needs of our people. The contagious diligence of the hon the Minister and the interest in the welfare of our people is contributing to the successes of the department.

Unfortunately a few problems are still cropping up here and there which we as MPs must bring to the attention of the hon the Minister. When those of us on this side of the House do so, it is not our intention to detract from the hon the Minister. I want to indicate a few points in this connection.

A community health centre is going to be built at Heidelberg. I have heard that the necessary funds are available to start with the project at once. A site has also been identified and an application has been made for its rezoning. This site is an open space which is at present being used as a playground for our young children, but there are objections in respect of this site. Unfortunately the objections were not accommodated.

The local MP was never consulted in any negotiations or at meetings in this connection either. There is dissatisfaction in connection with the way in which the project has been launched since last year. Neither the town clerk, nor the management committee was consulted right at the outset.

From what I have heard, this project originated in a relations committee in the town. According to the town clerk he looked in on a meeting of the relations committee out of curiosity, but he was not aware that the committee was going to hold a discussion on a community health centre for the town.

The management committee was not fully consulted on the matter at the outset either. The consultation began with two members of the committee. Only in February of this year did the local management committee, with the exception of the chairman, give its approval to this.

I want to ask the hon the Minister to give urgent attention to this matter, in order to eliminate the dissatisfaction and the friction which now exists. I can mention to the hon the Minister that a finger is being pointed at the relevant MP and it is being said that he is putting a spoke in the wheel with the purpose of delaying the project. However, that is not the case.

There is another matter I want to bring to the attention of the hon the Minister. An elderly couple in Swellendam had an unpleasant experience. The woman applied for an old age pension. Her application was approved, and she received a letter in which it was stated that she would receive the sum of R882 in arrears allowances on 18 March 1987. When she arrived at the local post office on that day, she received only R147. She was told that she would receive the balance of R735 at a later date. However, she did not get it. What did happen was that detectives visited her and her husband at their home, and that her husband was accused of theft. It was alleged that her husband had signed for her money. Her 69 year old husband appeared in court on a charge of theft on 16 January of this year. The post office alleged that her husband had signed for the receipt of her pension. However, the magistrate found that the accused had not received the money; someone else had. The accused was therefore acquitted on the charge. I shall give the hon the Minister the necessary particulars so that steps can be taken. I also want to ask the hon the Minister to refer that matter to the Minister of Law and Order for further investigation.

Mr Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on the massive effort he has made thus far to free our community from the state of oppression in which it at present finds itself. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister is a man who is known as a hard worker. [Interjections.] He has achieved a great deal. There are certain reporters in opposition newspapers who will disagree with me as regards these truths.

After all, certain newspapers alleged recently that this party had not achieved anything. However, everyone knows that we have not yet achieved everything. We have a big task; there is a tremendous backlog we must eliminate. If people cannot appreciate this, they are closing their eyes to reality. However, the fact is that we have done something.

Newspapers must not try to blame the causes of our backlogs on us. Newspapers must not try to blame us for what is wrong. They must appreciate that we have a difficult task. Nor must they create illusions among our voters that the problems we are facing could have been solved within a period of five years.

I challenge newspapers like Rapport-Ekstra and its reporters, who now want to be our opposition, to state the case the way the LP has, to prove it the way the LP has proved it. I do not like making enemies of newspapers, but, when they start showing, through their reporting that they are our opponents as regards the massive task we have, I am going to reprimand them. It seems to me as if certain newspaper reporters want to become the opposition of the LP themselves. It seems to me they have a kind of fear or awareness that the present opposition is too weak to oppose us. [Interjections.] This is not giving a poor impression of the LP; it is giving a poor impression of the opposition. It is also giving a poor impression of the newspapers. If the newspapers want to dabble in one-sided reporting, they must go ahead.

This brings me to my actual speech. At the end of last year the LP’s national congress adopted a strong standpoint in regard to the position and the poor socio-economic and cultural conditions of the farm workers. Three motions were introduced at the national congress and agreed to unanimously. I want to mention to hon members what the different motions dealt with. The first motion dealt with the employment benefits of farm workers. Unemployment insurance, accident insurance, minimum wages and medical and pension schemes affect the socio-economic conditions of the farm worker.

The second motion dealt with the party’s concern about the way in which retired farm workers and medically disabled farm workers frequently had to leave farms without having anywhere to go. The third motion dealt with the housing problem our farm workers are experiencing when they must leave farms because they are elderly or disabled. By adopting these three motions the LP again unhesitatingly proved and emphasised what is stated in its objectives. I must quote a few of the LP’s objectives to hon members.

The first objective of the LP is promoting and advancing the dignity, rights, socio-economic and cultural well-being of all South Africans. The second objective of the party is furthering the economic, social and cultural advancement of all South Africans, and to assist wherever possible in stimulating and developing their capacities in the widest manner possible. Another objective is opposing forced labour and the exploitation of cheap labour. Yet another objective is seeking the introduction, maintenance and extension of social security for all, with special provision for the aged and infirm, regardless of income status.

These are the objectives of the LP. Now reporters must not tell us we have other objectives. We know what we want to do. We are heading in a certain direction. They must look at our successes. They must not come with slogans and brush aside what we are striving to achieve. They can state a point if they really want to make a contribution.

The social welfare of our farm workers has an extensive influence on the general development of our community. I am only looking at the farm workers in our community. If we are not going to take our farm workers with us through this development through which we are now going, we are going to make a very big mistake, because then we will be shooting ourselves in the foot. That is why this party will leave no stone unturned to lift our farm labourers out of that morass of oppression. We are going to uplift them, irrespective of threats or whatever.

Our people who work on farms are frequently at the mercy of the unscrupulousness of oppressors. Now I do not want to blame all owners of farms for what is wrong. There are farmers who do their best and who can really be praised for what they are doing for our farm workers. I need only think of the Kroonruses of Tulbagh which is in my constituency. They are really doing something for the socio-economic upliftment of our people. That is what our people need.

A farm worker is a simple person. He is frequently a person who will keep quiet if he is berated, and a person who will do his job in silence—willing and diligent. However, this does not give certain persons the right to oppress them. We dare not allow that oppression and unscrupulousness. We cannot allow it.

I want to hazard one prediction, namely that if the NP does not do something soon about the position of the farm worker by improving legislation, this matter is going to come to a head, and then it will be this matter which will sour relations between the NP and the LP.

I want to tell hon members… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I feel guilty about taking part in this debate today for a simple reason, and that is that the hon the Minister travelled through my entire constituency to launch the “Give your child a chance” programme. During this launch, the hon the Minister appealed to people to eat healthily. As the hon the Minister can see, I did not take his advice. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, permit me to avail myself of this opportunity to express my thanks and appreciation to the hon the Minister and his officials for their sacrifices and the time they spent in my constituency. My voters and my family appreciate this.

With reference to the announcement that welfare offices would be opened at Aliwal North, I should like to ask how much progress has been made in this regard. I should also like to ask when Cradock’s community health centre will be established. From what I heard, Cradock’s CHC was second on the list.

In addition I want to congratulate the hon the Minister and his department on the kind of child care centres they have established. I want to refer in particular to the one in Elsies River. I attended the inauguration ceremony, and I must admit that this centre is different from what one is used to. The children are living in a real house. In addition they no longer wear the traditional khaki clothing. I want to thank the hon the Minister sincerely for this.

The hon the Minister covered a very broad spectrum in his speech. I want to congratulate him on a super speech. He spoke about the vision of a future new South Africa. It was also mentioned that the hon the Minister was working himself out of a job. In my opinion, however, he is working himself into a bigger job.

The time is ripe. The reason for my saying this is that I want to appeal today for child and family care, of which I am a great supporter. If hon members listen carefully, they will hear that the LP also supports this. It is also their policy. After receiving a letter from the South African National Council for Child and Family Welfare, I decided to use the special edition of the organisation’s newsletter in this speech and to deviate somewhat from our usual appeal. If we can do something today about what is contained here, we shall be able to resolve all the problems that have come to the hon the Minister’s attention today and answer all the requests that were made, including the means test, parity, etc. I should like to read a few excerpts from this newsletter to hon members, although I should have liked to read the whole newsletter. These excerpts come from a special edition of Child Welfare, dated April 1989, and the heading reads: “Nuwe Welsynsbeleid vir Nuwe Suid-Afrika”. It reads:

I am positive that this is precisely what our hon Minister and the LP advocate. They go on to say there are too many Government structures. I quote:

They go on to say:

With regard to finance, they say:

That is the big crisis our department is experiencing.

With reference to “The Road Ahead”, they then say their mission, and this is also advocated by our hon Minister, is—

I now come to the section headed “Bill of Rights Welcomed”:

Then there is something about “Fundamentele Regte soos uiteengesit deur die Suid-Afrikaanse Regskommissie” which the hon the Minister also supports. They say this comprises:

I then come to something that our congress dealt with last year and about which much was said, also in the Press. It is supported by the LP and I think that when we have resolved this problem there will be no stopping the LP, and the NP will have to be careful. It deals with the “Call for Repeal of Group Areas Act”. It says:

We are not the only ones who say that, therefore. It is also the feeling of other groups. The management of this organization consists of Whites. Consequently the Whites, and not only we people of colour, also feel this way. The document carries on:

In his speech the hon the Minister said he thought he would soon be working himself out of a job. When this appeal of the Child Welfare Association becomes a reality one day, and that is also the objective of the LP, the hon the Minister will not be without a job, as I know him, but will have a much better position.

Mr Chairman, it is with pleasure that I follow on the hon member for North Eastern Cape who is a very knowledgeable person when it comes to matters dealing with health and welfare services.

I would like to commence by referring to the hon the Minister’s excellent address. At this stage I would like to compliment him on a rather comprehensive document, one which I would well advise the hon opposition members to take home and study, and perhaps read out to whatever following they might have.

The hon the Minister says that the single most important step was to get the department to realign itself towards a service and community-orientated approach to people. Each client is a total person and not simply an isolated problem or, as they were treated in the past, just a case. As a person who not only deals with national issues, but as someone who also deals with people’s day-to-day affairs, I know that our community out there is very sensitive about the whole matter of being treated as cases rather than as persons. If anyone wishes to criticize this hon Minister and his department, at least that is one criticism which cannot be levelled against both the hon Minister and his department, because there has been a tremendous improvement in relations between those who serve in the department and the community at large. [Interjections.] Why does the hon member not ask for a turn to speak?

Mr Chairman, there is one other thing I would like to compliment the hon the Minister on. I know people do not like me complimenting them when they are doing well. They want me to compliment them when they are doing badly, as I did in my first speech on Friday! In his address the hon Minister said he had visited every single constituency in the country. Now, I know for a fact that he has visited my constituency time after time. Besides his visits—the ones he initiated—he has never been loath to arrive when I called him to come and see to a particular need I had in the area.

I refer in particular to his immediate response when I received a telegram from Tafta in connection with the running of John Ross House, which is a category C type home for the aged. I am not talking about years ago, I am talking about a few weeks ago. They had financial problems and within days the hon the Minister was able to solve their problem. We are talking about a few hundreds of thousands of rands. That is what one calls clout!

The category C type home is not only being used by people from Wentworth, it is a facility which was always desperately required in the whole of Natal and it just happened to end up in Wentworth. Therefore, on behalf of the people of Wentworth and further afield in Natal, I would not like to apologise, but rather thank the hon the Minister for his involvement in the establishment and maintenance of John Ross House.

It is the John Dunn House!

The hon the Deputy Minister is right, it is the John Dunn House.

I notice that the hon the Minister has overspent his Budget and I would like to address this point. Last Friday we discovered in the case of education and culture that that hon Minister anticipates that this year his Budget will be overspent by a quarter of a billion rands. In my humble opinion I would suggest if our hon Minister for Health Services and Welfare can match the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in overspending, I believe all hon members here would be proud of him. [Interjections.] We know that we have a rather competent Deputy Minister of the Budget who will be able to cope with this situation and who will realise and remember that this is not really overspending; this is underprovision, as the hon the Minister of Education and Culture said. I would therefore suggest to spend it and damn the consequences. [Interjections.]

It is for a good cause!

It is for a good cause.

I am pleased to note in the hon the Minister’s address that provision is being made for the establishment of a community health centre at Austerville in Wentworth. I am pleased to note this, because anyone who knows this area will know that those people require this kind of service rather desperately. I am not only referring to the people of Austerville, but also to the surrounding area. I might mention that Austerville is tucked in between Merebank on the one side and Wentworth on the other side—the White Wentworth as we call it. We believe that this particular facility could easily be used for all three of those communities and therefore we believe that this will not lapse into becoming a Coloured facility only.

We are proud of the fact that this hon Minister does not even try to gain full authority over hospitals in this country. We are happy that he is not interested in becoming an own affairs Minister in charge of hospital services. That must and should always remain a general affair, much as every other field of endeavour in this country should remain a general affair. We are not interested in the entrenchment of own affairs in any respect. We hope that we may shortly witness the end of the hon the Minister’s portfolio as well as his department. We hope that we may one day see a totally integrated effort in this direction. This is what the hon the Minister himself has said and the hon member for Robertson also has said on a previous occasion.

With a very able man like this hon Minister in charge!

There we go! This hon Minister—as the deputy leader of our party has just mentioned—should really be the person to run such an integrated department and maintain such a portfolio.

Much has been said about the multi-disciplinary approach which is being applied. I would like to touch on this aspect as well. It is a known fact that wherever one finds an oppressed community one will find upon analysing the conditions of life of that community that no single aspect can be cured in isolation. One has to look at the total problem to try to bring total upliftment to such people. For this we must thank the department and the hon the Minister because they are making tremendous attempts to improve the quality of life of the total person. [Interjections.]

Yes, we agree that that over which the hon the Minister does not have total control, and which I must say the hon the Minister does recognise, can be ascribed to the fact that matters like the Group Areas Act will have to be scrapped. Any discriminatory measures and any segregationist structures must eventually be scrapped in order to bring about a total upliftment of the people. It does not help to look at gangsterism or the sale of Mandrax among Coloureds only, or among Indians or Blacks only. The sale and the use of Mandrax in communities is a universal problem which needs a multi-facetted effort to eliminate.

We are happy with the tremendous efforts which our hon the Minister and his department have made towards the attainment of parity, especially as far as war veterans are concerned where it has already been achieved. We are happy that pensions are very close to parity. We are happy that increases are not calculated as percentages any more and that they are now flat sums, which are in fact equal. However—this is not criticism of the hon the Minister only—we must look at the lot of the war veteran and the aged in general who are in need of State support. Even when, and if, parity is achieved, the aged and the war veteran are still in such a state of penury that they find life almost unbearable. Rentals and service costs of municipalities have increased preposterously in the past few years, so that even parity will not be sufficient to meet their requirements. Besides aiming at parity, I believe we should look a little further afield and perhaps consider even greater increases towards grants and allowances for people in such need.

It would be remiss of me if I did not mention the Merlewood Welfare Society Crèche Committee of Port Shepstone. This is a group of people who collected funds over years. They collected up to R40 000. They tried to establish their building on a cash basis, but if they carried on saving towards their building, by the time they one day would have enough cash, they would not be able to build the actual structure. On my recommendation they applied for a loan. After experiencing some difficulty and after I had mediated with the hon the Minister on their behalf, he was good enough to look into the matter. I received the most wonderful letter from the Rev Oosthuizen thanking both the hon the Minister and me for our intervention. The loan has now been granted to them. That is the kind of thing which helps people understand that we are busy with negotiation politics and not confrontation politics.

The matter of a home for the senior citizens of Austerville and the greater Wentworth has been considered before, and I believe some progress has been made. I should like to ask the hon the Minister not to be concerned about the fact that only 3% of our aged are in State-run homes, in contrast to the 8% of the White aged in such homes. It is a natural tendency among our community to keep our aged with us. The advent of retirement villages has not even reached our community yet.

I know that in the replanning of Austerville, in our redrafting of the plans for certain parts of the area, it is possible for us to adapt the old buildings which were built by our White predecessors and which were found totally unsuitable for normal housing. It is possible to adapt these buildings to become something like retirement villages.

This I believe is something we should look to in the future. The aged do not really want to remain dependent on their children. They feel that they are in the way. They want a certain measure of independence, but they cannot be totally independent. It is too cold a thing to throw them into a home. I believe that they must be absorbed into the community but cared for in a retirement village area. That is the kind of thing that I would appeal for the hon the Minister and his department to look at a little more closely.

The hon the Minister places a lot of emphasis on the direct approach when it comes to the handicapped. We are fortunate in having a special establishment, again in Austerville, which serves the physically handicapped in the whole of Natal. Efforts have been made by the association running this establishment to acquire a hostel because obviously with our sparse community, which is dispersed over the length and breadth of Natal, it is not possible to create this kind of facility in more than one area. We have this facility in Austerville and there is land adjacent to it. Some people have their eyes on this land for business purposes, yet this establishment is trying to acquire the land and the building, which are being used at the moment for police training, for the establishment of hostels. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, It is a particular privilege for me to take part in this budget debate. In my opinion the hon the Minister very clearly spelt out to hon members in his closing speech the policy of the LP with regard to own affairs. I hope hon members of the Official Opposition, who are conspicuous by their absence, received the message loud and clear.

There are a number of matters which the hon the Minister raised in his speech which I should like to deal with in the course of my own speech. The hon member for Bishop Lavis once again raised the question of the means test. I want to tell him once again that the LP is striving to eradicate all discriminatory aspects which still exist in the application of the means test. Hon members must never lose sight of the fact that the LP’s objective is total parity. In a society like ours, in which the age profile is changing and there is an increasing proportion of older people, a more compassionate look must be taken at the means test. I am sure that the hon the Minister is correct in saying that his department is now paying particular attention to the equality of all social pensions. We welcome the hon the Minister’s statement that no further increases in social pensions will take place on an unequal basis. It was heartening to learn from the hon the Minister’s speech that all the population components will receive the same increase in money value. The same applies to the bonuses.

Hon members of the LP are looking forward to the day when all population components will receive the same allowance and discrimination on the basis of race and colour will be something of the past. I have a problem with the interpretation by certain regional offices of directives as set out in the manual, relating to instances of unlawful extra-marital cohabitation. I should like to have a clear explanation from the hon the Minister as to what is meant by an extra-marital relationship and extra-marital cohabitation. When a woman enters into a relationship with a man who is not a recipient of any social allowance, and her friend is not dependent on her allowance and she in no way misuses the allowance, can such a female recipient be penalised owing to an extra-marital relationship? If so, why?

I share the hon the Minister’s sentiments that it is farcical and scandalous to talk about health services as own affairs. The case of the J G Strijdom Hospital has exposed the farce of health services as own affairs. No responsible doctor or nurse can justify or support statutory, racially discriminatory health services on ethnic grounds. For this reason we welcome the fact that the hon the Minister has spelt out the LP’s policy so clearly, namely that we are striving to plan services which will contribute to the improvement of the quality of life of all the population components of the South African community. How anyone in society can be committed only to looking after the health of certain ethnic groups on a racial basis, simply amazes me. Germs, diseases and hygiene do not know the racially discriminatory laws of South Africa. This approach is giving rise to a scandalous waste of resources. The health services in South Africa should be geared to providing a First World health service, not a Second or Third World service.

I want to thank the hon the Minister and his department sincerely for the visits which we as the ministerial committee were able to pay to institutions falling under his department. I also want to thank the hon the Minister and his officials sincerely for the arrangements which they made for our tour and visits there. We found the information that was placed at our disposal to be very enlightening and important.

I also want to congratulate the hon the Minister on the extremely competent manner in which he has managed his portfolio over the past four years and eight months. I do not doubt that the hon the Minister, as political head of this Department of Health Services and Welfare, has developed this department charged with own affairs to its maximum in the interests of our community. At the same time I want to welcome the appointment of Mr Bantom in our regional office in the Free State sincerely. We are really in need of his services there.

I want to conclude by saying that if a people is spiritually and physically healthy, if there is prosperity in the economic sphere and in the field of welfare, all the problems of our nation may be tackled vigorously, and our country will be able to continue in peace. I want to thank the department sincerely for what it means to our people, including those in the rural areas. I want to thank the hon the Minister for the health centres, clinics and services that are being rendered to our developing communities in the rural areas. I also thank him for the support we are receiving in the social field. I want to thank him for the efficient manner in which the officials of the regional offices are performing their duties. Let us continue to work in this way towards uplifting our people. I believe South Africa will be a better country when everyone’s attitude is constructive and uplifting, and not destructive.

Mr Chairman, the past year was a very important period in the formation of this department. The demand for welfare institutions and medical services, which developed as a result of the high population growth rate and associated urbanisation processes, made heavy demands on this Ministry and its staff. Criticism was expressed particularly with regard to the rendering of certain services in small rural towns, but this Ministry has performed its functions to the full.

Apart from this, the shortage of funds is making it difficult for this Ministry, with its wide field of activities, to render services of an acceptable standard. This Ministry and its department are pooling all their energies in order to continue to render services of an acceptable standard in the rural townships, despite the criticism and problems. Welfare problems, procedures and methods are continuously being adapted in order to increase the efficiency and the effectiveness of welfare. Naturally this Ministry and its department cannot achieve all these objectives on their own, and an appeal is being made for the involvement of all welfare organisations. Recognition is also being given, with great appreciation, to the role which these bodies are playing. The role of the private sector, particularly in the appropriation of funds to this department, is appreciated, and we ask for a greater role in fulfilling our requirements.

I should also like to draw the department’s attention to a few problems. The Aged Persons Act, No 81 of 1967, provides that if no documentary evidence is submitted, ages may be estimated by the district pension officer concerned. In this regard the pension officer makes this process of estimation so difficult that the applicant elects rather to throw in the towel.

Attendants’ allowances are only paid when a doctor confirms them. Would it not be possible for the local welfare organisations to make a recommendation in this regard as well?

I now come to the disability grants paid in terms of Act No 27 of 1968. In small rural towns the district surgeon refuses to declare people medically disabled as a result of their complaints. Many times the doctor has refused to do so and after a while the same doctor has had to issue a death certificate to this person.

Those are CP doctors.

I shall now refer to maintenance allowances that are paid in terms of the Act. The Act provides that whenever a husband has left his wife for a period of at least three months, during which time his address and circumstances are unknown to her, she may apply for a maintenance grant. In this instance people do, in fact, lodge a complaint of non-maintenance, but experience tremendous difficulty in obtaining a certificate from the SAP to the effect that the husband is untraceable.

In our community we have great problems with alcoholism. Alcoholism or liquor abuse is a state of disease.

Sick ’em, Hansie! [Interjections.]

This gives rise to the dysfunction of families and to personality changes. The person does not display any sense of responsibility, drinks continuously for certain periods without regard to his family, to his friends at work, to food or to shelter. He steals money and pawns his furniture in order to obtain money for liquor. Such a person is an alcoholic at this stage. He experiences deep, unspeakable anxiety and emotional and spiritual bankruptcy. What follows this? General ruin. Could the department not launch a campaign to implement a programme in which all these people could become involved?

I want to thank the hon the Minister sincerely for everything he means to us and for the fact that he has created a special division in the Kimberley region for us which deals with our enquiries.

Mr Chairman, it is a special privilege and honour to participate in the Vote of the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare. I should like to congratulate him on all the good wishes expressed here today.

However, this afternoon it is an even greater privilege to talk about a woman whom I dearly love, who means a lot to me and with whom I am sharing a township. Today it is also the birthday of Granny Manuel. Today she is 124 years old. There is not a more loved person on God’s earth. She is an example of what a good person should be like and how a good person should conduct herself in the community.

I am glad I could see the programme “Good Morning South Africa” on TV this morning. Nearly 15 minutes of this programme were devoted to this wonderful old woman. It is a pity that this programme was presented so early in the morning and that the majority of South Africans could not hear Granny Manuel’s message to South Africa.

Granny Manuel’s message was simply: Believe in God and love your neighbour. To Granny Manual the colour of your skin is of no importance. To her it does not matter either to which group you belong. Granny Manuel regards the world as something which God created for the people on earth. The message for us as South Africans is that we also stand a chance of becoming 124 years old and still be in our right mind if we love our neighbour. She and her parents moved from Cape Town to Johannesburg by ox-wagon. There she did honest labour in order to raise her children. The love she had for her children she still has for the people of South Africa. I hope the message of Granny Manuel will reach the people.

†So much has been said in regard to the J G Strijdom Hospital. This hospital is exactly three kilometres from my home. I am also the chairman of the Coronation Hospital Board. This hospital is exactly two kilometres from the J G Strijdom Hospital. Until two weeks ago they were sister hospitals in the sense that both hospitals were training hospitals attached to the University of the Witwatersrand. I blame the Government for misrepresenting people by changing the status of that hospital. The Government is so protective towards the Afrikaner that it is doing the Afrikaner the greatest injustice. What has it done to the Afrikaner? It denied him the technical know-how of the University of the Witwatersrand. We are living in a highly specialised world. When one takes away the specialists from a hospital, it will not be in a position to render specialist services to those people who need it. And who needs specialist services more than the poor? The rich can afford them. They belong to medical aids and can pay for specialist services. However, the poor cannot afford them.

*Those poor Afrikaners in Westdene, Brixton and in Newlands cannot afford them. Now they are denied the right because of ideology.

*When will we sober up? The Government is trying to keep people of colour out of this hospital. However, they can never do that because in its short history that hospital has developed a reputation for being one of the foremost renal clinics in the country. Because of its attachment to a university it has developed specialist knowledge in the treatment of heart diseases to a high degree. Now they have severed that relationship and old people—forgive me if I am not talking about Coloured old people in this debate because I want to refer to all old people—are being denied the right to be treated according to their needs. I am only asking with tears in my eyes that the authorities come to their senses and restore the status of that hospital so that people can get the treatment that they are entitled to.

Since I am busy congratulating people, I should also like to convey my congratulations to Mr Gene Louw, the newly appointed Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. However, I should like to sound a warning. He is accepting a dangerous portfolio because constitutional development in this country means reform and if that hon Minister does not take full control of the reform programme he is also going to end up on the ash heap. He is at present the Administrator of this beautiful province. His track-record suggests that he has gone backward if one looks, for example, at what happened to the beaches of the province. His handling of the issue particularly at Mossel Bay does not give me much confidence in him as a person who would be able to handle this highly sensitive position as the person responsible for constitutional reform in this country.

For the record I want to show how my party and my leader feel about his appointment. I quote:

*Naturally with a background like that we are concerned. It will make the work of the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare so much more problematic.

†The hon the Minister said clearly in his address that he sees only one minister in this portfolio in the future South Africa. The duplication is totally unnecessary. We welcome the reform processes that have taken place within his department owing to effort he has put into transforming the department. I am not pleading for South Africa to become a welfare state. We must move away from this welfare thinking but until we have healed the pain inflicted in the past we are going to live with the illnesses.

One can only express the fervent hope that those in authority today will be touched by the message which the hon the Minister put across this morning, viz that South Africa can ill afford to go on on this separatist road any longer.

Mr Chairman, I want to thank all 17 hon members, including our hon Deputy Minister, for their participation in this debate on this Vote. I shall now try to reply to them very briefly.

I want to begin with our hon Deputy Minister and tell him that it has been said that no academic hospital will become an own affairs hospital. That is why Coronationville Hospital and Livingston Hospital do not fall under me. We said that academic hospitals, of which J G Strijdom is one, will fall under the general department where it belongs. That is why it came as a shock to me as well to hear that J G Strijdom Hospital is also an own affairs hospital, because it was, as the hon member said, an academic hospital.

I want to proceed by referring briefly to the hon member for Bishop Lavis. Unfortunately he is not here. That just goes to show with what contempt certain hon members regard the department, its activities and this debate. I shall not give much attention to him because he is not here. I just want to mention a few things. The hon member heard what I said in my speech. There was virtually no reaction to it from him. But what did he do? He said the hon the Minister did not have a constituency. I am in this Parliament legally. How could I have become Minister if I had not been a nominated member who was nominated by the hon the State President in terms of the Constitution? I am here legally but he, on the other hand, came into Parliament under the banner of the LP. He did not tell us or the people outside that he was going to join a new party—the Democratic Whatsitsname Party.

While I was listening to him he reminded me a great deal of some of the CPs. The hatred and bitterness which glittered from that hon member’s eyes and was clearly discernible on all his features is something to be worried about. If that man carries on like that, I shall have to take him to Lentegeur. [Interjections.]

I also want to tell hon members that he need not offer me a constituency. That is not how we do things in the Labour Party. We have branches and our branches make recommendations to our main committee…

We are not advertising for branches!

As the hon the Deputy Minister has said, we are not spending thousands of rands on an advertisement. Oh no, we work in a democratic way; we go to the people.

†This party is a people’s party—we come from the people, we serve the people and we have to report back to the people. The people are important and not the hon member for Bishop Lavis.

*Mr Chairman, I am sorry the hon member is not here. I have to reply to quite a number of points he raised in regard to blind persons, workshops and other problems. However, I am not going to reply to him; I am going to treat him with the same contempt with which he treats me.

I come now to the second speaker, the hon member for Hantam. He apologised for not being able to be present here. He is not as discourteous and rude as the hon member for Bishop Lavis. He sent me a note to apologise for his absence. I appreciate his words of thanks and the interesting information on child abuse. I agree with him that the crux of the matter is prevention, as I spelt out in my speech. In this connection I should like to repeat what I said in my speech, namely that the department is a community-oriented department, and that contact and communication are our watchwords. These are extremely important aspects of prevention. The department is geared to prevention rather than cure, and home visits by nursing personnel in particular are of cardinal importance. The hon member must bear in mind that we want to render a comprehensive service which pertains to the person in his entirety.

The hon member for Esselen Park did not tender his apology to me either, nor will I therefore reply to him. I now turn to the hon member for Vredendal who is present here. I want to thank him for the recommendations such as those he put forward in the House this afternoon relating to the youth out of the school context. I hope that hon members took cognisance of this and will make it their task as soon as possible to establish what kind of response his recommendations will meet with in our community. I realise that there is a need for more school social workers, and as I said in my speech, we are at present creating more posts all the time.

The hon member for Ravensmead did not tender his apologies either, but I shall reply to him nevertheless because he spoke very well and he was very, very courteous. In his absence I want to thank him for his words of appreciation. I shall continue to strive to be of assistance to needy people. He referred to the situation of certain irregularities in regard to pensions and grants in his constituency. I want to ask him please to provide me with the names of those people. My department endeavours to ensure that no irregularities occur in regard to pensions and grants. My department carries out test inspections and home investigations when complaints come to our attention. It is the responsibility of every responsible member of the public, and in particular the hon members of Parliament, to identify the cases and bring them to my attention immediately when such irregularities occur. This will contribute to taxpayers’ money being applied effectively. As regards the objection he made in connection with the procedure that is adopted to approve disability and other grants, I just want to mention that the department is in the process of establishing an assessment committee that will be responsible for evaluating such applications. I would also appreciate it if the hon member would provide me with full particulars of the problems being experienced in regard to the proposed old age home in his constituency.

I also want to thank the hon member for Dysselsdorp for his congratulations. As he put it, I give attention to the poor, the war veterans and ex-servicemen, as well as all the other pensioners. We are striving for the equalisation of their pensions and grants. In regard to the sub-office in Oudtshoorn—and the same applies to the one in Aliwal North in the constituency of the hon Chairman—I can tell hon members that the work that had to be done by us in connection with the sub-offices has been disposed of as far as my department is concerned. The Department of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services and the Commission for Administration must now dispose of their work. It is out of my hands and therefore I want to tell the hon member for Dysselsdorp, as well as you, Mr Chairman, that it is the other people who now have to dispose of their work.

†I thank the hon member for Bosmont for once again bringing to our attention the abuse of pensions and grants. We are giving all our attention to see to it that people no longer abuse pensions and grants. Members of Parliament and other community leaders must come to our aid by giving us the names of beneficiaries that do abuse pensions or grants. We are giving attention to all the other matters which the hon member raised.

*I want the hon member for Rawsonville to listen to me when I thank him for his congratulations and for once again mentioning the war veterans and ex-servicemen in his constituency as well as the improvement in pensions and grants in his constituency. However, I want to ask him to put in writing the facts he recounted in connection with the grants that had been stopped, and the way our people are being treated by Sanel, as well as the information about unmarried mothers. I now expect to receive a letter from the hon member in which he describes all these things so that our department can investigate them. I want to tell him that we will do everything in our power to help our people. I mentioned this very specifically this morning.

If a child is about to turn 18 I want to ask the parents to apply or to report to my office two months before the actual date. They must also bring a letter from the school principal to say that that child is still at school and is making progress. The hon member will understand that we cannot support children who fail year after year. If that child has passed every year, I want to give the hon member the assurance that that maintenance grant will not be stopped.

†I give the hon member the assurance that we will not cancel the maintenance grant of such children.

*I also want to tell hon members that unfortunately we cannot give attention to the tuberculosis cases which the hon member mentioned because the matter falls under my colleague, the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development. The hon member must please go and discuss the matter with him. If it is possible for us to help, however, we shall do so. I thank the hon member very sincerely for his contribution. I just want to ask him, too, to write us a letter in this connection, before he raises a matter here, so that we can help him to get his problems in his constituency solved.

I also want to thank the hon member for Heideveld for his contribution. He was a member of my ministerial committee and unfortunately… [Interjections.] No, I cannot say that he absconded. He left us for greener pastures, but I must compliment him on the contribution he made this afternoon. I want to thank him for pointing out to us once again that those who have arrived must plough back some of what they have received. We cannot expect the State alone to make a contribution; no, we must all make a contribution to support our poor people in their need.

In connection with the promotion of officials I want to point out to him that not all of us can become directors, but I can inform the hon member that some of the administrative staff, such as Mr Hess and Mr Steffens, if I may mention their names, are all men who have already been promoted. Mr Booysen has also been promoted now. Consequently we do not promote only those who practise a profession, but also members of the administrative staff.

I want to thank the hon member for Bokkeveld for the compliment he paid my officials in particular. I also want to tell him that the approach adopted by our officials is one of trying to render a service to our people. We are inspired. We are, as the hon member for Wentworth said, not working with cases any more. I said at the outset that I did not like the word “case”. [Interjections.] We have done everything in our power to get away from that kind of attitude, and we are now treating people as individuals. We want to thank the hon member for having noticed this and for having complimented us on it. It is a feather in the cap for my officials who are really doing their duty and trying to display the right attitude to our people in their need.

I also took cognisance of that point he mentioned in connection with children who are placed in foster care. If the hon member can remember, I said that we were looking for homes for our children. We even tried to make the places of safety a home away from home. We took cognisance of what the hon member said in this connection, and we hope that we shall be able to provide the necessary foster care for those needy children. However, we also ask the community to co-operate. We ask members of the community to offer their services, like the Rose parents of Lentegeur Hospital, and that group of volunteers I mentioned in my speech. We want more people to come forward and offer to help our children. Those children are not only the children of those parents; they are the children of the community and the children of South Africa. If they suffer and are not treated properly a finger is not only pointed at the parents, but also at the community and the country, and that of course includes the Department of Health Services and Welfare. I want to thank hon members for having brought these things to our attention.

We shall give attention to the means test. The ceiling of the means test is raised as the pension increases. Unfortunately I do not have precise figures at my disposal, but if hon members compare the means test of 1984 with the present means test, they will see that there is a big difference between the two. I want to ask hon members to support us further. We must persuade the hon the Minister of Finance to help us. If we can narrow that gap and achieve parity, as in the case of the war veterans’ pension, we can also raise that ceiling of the means test dramatically, until it is equal to that of the Whites. Hon members must please support us and exert further pressure on the Minister of Finance. The amount we budgeted for is much higher than the one allocated to us. Unfortunately I do not have the precise figure, but I can get it for the hon member, and if he comes to my office, I shall show him what we budgeted for and what was eventually granted. In other words, for the past five years we have been budgeting with a view to narrowing the gap. By now we should have come to the end of the road. If we had not demanded that one increase, the figure would still have been R63 instead of R51. Provision is made for narrowing the gap in my estimates every year. Each time, however, the Department of Finance has rejected it. As soon as we remedy the matter we will be able to raise the platform and in that way achieve parity. Perhaps we can succeed in doing this next year or the year after. Hon members must simply give me their support and not lose hope.

I want to thank the hon member for Berg River sincerely for his contribution. I will not take journalists to task this afternoon, as he did. However, I hope they will make notes of all the results that were mentioned here today. It is being said that the LP does nothing. That is a blatant lie.

I agree. [Interjections.]

The proof is there that the Department of Health Services and Welfare has produced results. Hon members must remember that a LP Minister was head of that department. Consequently this is success that has in fact been achieved by the LP. [Interjections.] It is the truth. Hon members can ask my officials in front of me here, and behind me. The programmes that have been launched in my department did not come from the officials in the first place. I told them that we should make contact. I proposed the five-year plan. I said: “Come, let us give the child a chance.” They took over the idea from me and took it further. Actually it was I who initiated this programme. It developed out of the principles of the LP, which the hon member for Berg River spelt out so clearly here.

†We are fighting for the rights of people and we are fighting for the socio-economic development of people. The work we are doing is actually the result of the principles of this party—principle 1 and principle 2.

*Consequently I can do nothing else. Even if I had wanted to take things easy for a while, I cannot do so because the principles of my party compel me to work as hard as possible. I can tell hon members though that I will not work myself to death—see what a fine figure of a man I am. [Interjections.] Hard work never killed anyone. Particularly when one is working for one’s own people. Then one cannot but thrive and flourish. [Interjections.]

I want to go further. I want to concentrate on a point which the hon member for Berg River made. The other day the hon the Deputy Minister of Population Development pleaded for better remuneration, a minimum wage for the farm labourer, as provided for in our constitution. Our farm labourers have been exploited far too long. The other day I was in Upington and Groblershoop.

Where is Gysie?

The hon member for Upington only got 40 people. The hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and I got 1 400 people. [Interjections.] I learnt one thing there along the Orange River. There is plenty of water, because people pump it out of the river. So they never have a drought there.

Someone came to me and said that he received R18 per week from his employer. [Interjections.] I am very worried about the conditions up there along the Orange River. I want the NP and the newspapers who criticise us to pay a little visit to the people along the Orange River to see how the farmers are exploiting my people. I want to ask the new MP for Upington in this House to do everything possible to investigate the kind of things the farmers along the Orange River get up to. I can tell hon members things now which I cannot yet prove. There are certain hon members in the House of Assembly who also pay our people very little. [Interjections.] We must find out from our farmers what hon members here in Parliament are guilty of this. I can also say that many farmers pay far less than the Department of Health Services and Welfare pay their pensioners.

†We will have to see to these things, because this party states very clearly that we are totally against the exploitation of the workers.

*We shall devote our attention to ensuring that the farm worker of South Africa receives what he is entitled to, as is the case in the constituency of the hon member for Bokkeveld. I wish the hon member could go and see how those farmers treat their people; and how the Paarl and Stellenbosch farmers, and certain farmers in the Vredendal area treat their people. We are very pleased to see what is being done on those specific farms.

I come now to the North Eastern Cape. The department will do everything in its power to help the hon member for North Eastern Cape to get the office he wants.

I told him it was out of our hands and that we would inform him when the other department and the Commission for Administration had done their work. We took cognisance of the policy of the National Council for Child and Family Care. I can assure hon members that what we are doing in our department is in accordance with that policy.

†I would like to thank the hon member for Wentworth for all the compliments. These days I just get compliments from Natal. I do not know what is wrong. Bouquets are given to me at all times. I have made a note of everything that he has mentioned and I thank him most sincerely for all the compliments.

*I have replied to the question of the means test to which the hon member for Southern Free State referred. I want to thank him once again for having given attention to parity, and the increases in bonuses, and so on. I want to tell him, however, that we must encourage people not to live together. We do not want them to have such relationships. This situation reminds me of a person I visited when I was still a clergyman. I then asked that person, who had been living with a woman for 7 and a half years and who had two children: “Brother, but when are you going to get married?” He replied: “No, dominee, my wife is still on trial.” [Interjections.] I want to tell hon members that we cannot allow it. We must call a halt somewhere.

The other day I had a case in The Crags. I want to make it very clear to hon members that these people who live together have children. When the husband dies—as happened the other day, in this case in The Crags—that woman was left with four illegitimate children, and only one illegitimate child was able to receive assistance from the State. I want to ask hon members to encourage those people to get married.

I want to thank the hon member for Northern Cape for his contribution and his congratulations. We shall study the problems he raised, namely the pensions laws, attendants’ allowances and disability grants and alcoholism, and we shall see whether we can accommodate him. Perhaps we shall come back to him with news.

Once again I want to thank everyone who participated in the debate on this Vote. It was very enjoyable to participate in it. I thank hon members for making it possible to dispose of it.

This is the end of my five-year period. We are now going to fight an election. I just want to tell the hon member for Heideveld that this time I am going to fight an election. This time I am going to get a constituency from the executive committee. I will not return here as a nominated member of the hon the State President.

Where is that going to be?

No, it will be determined. I can stand anywhere…

Even in Heideveld!

… even in Heideveld, but I am definitely going to get a constituency. The hon the Deputy Minister on my right hand side will see to that. I shall participate in the election campaign and I shall also help my hon colleagues who supported me so wonderfully and paid me so many compliments.

Order! During his reply the hon the Minister used the words “unmannerly” and “rude”. They are unparliamentary. The hon the Minister must withdraw them.

Sir, I withdraw them unconditionally.

Debate concluded.

Mr Chairman, I move:

Agreed to.

Mr Chairman, I wish to make a statement on the subsidisation of service centres for the aged. It is normal for elderly persons to wish to maintain an independent way of life as long as possible and to remain ordinary members of the community. However, aging is associated in these modern times with specific circumstances and needs.

The role and importance of service centres providing a variety of services on a regular daily basis to the aged person still resident within the normal community, cannot be over-emphasised. The object of service centres is to create opportunities for elderly people to have meaningful social intercourse and to take part in social activities and to provide all sorts of social and relief services to supply their primary needs.

The subsidies payable to these service centres, especially in recent times, have not kept pace with the increasing consumer price index. In order to make subsidy payments to service centres more realistic in the present economic climate, and in keeping with Treasury approval for the uniform subsidisation of service centres, I have approved that the present amount of R447 per person per annum be increased to R543,73 per person per annum with effect from 1 January 1989 for all service centres being subsidised by my department.

Mr Chairman, on Friday, 12 May 1989, when the debate on housing started in this Chamber, the hon member Mr Abram and the hon member for Reservoir Hills raised the question of certain township developments in the area of Southern Natal, which is my constituency. I do not say that they made any allegations or accusations. I have read their speeches in the unrevised Hansard. They merely wanted information about this matter which they believe has not been resolved.

The facts are as follows. Some time in 1971 two brothers, Mr K G Naidoo and Mr V K Naidoo, initiated township development on their farm, on which they were growing bananas. They made an application and it was approved. During 1972, when the approval was given, the lower South Coast, Marburg, Port Shepstone and all these areas did not have any sewer reticulation whatsoever. The conditions were that if a township of this size was going to be established, the developers should establish a purification plant. At that time an estimate of about R40 000 was arrived at to establish this purification plant to service that township, which consisted of about 76 lots. There was an undertaking by the Naidoo brothers that they would pay this amount, provided that the local authority, which was the Marburg Town Board, would provide the service.

In the event of some people confusing the Marburg Town Board of the present time with the Marburg Town Board of that time, I want to place on record that the Marburg Town Board at that time was a White town board. It was subsequently dissolved and a White local authority called Oslo Beak was established. In August 1976 the present Marburg Town Board was established in terms of statutes.

At some time in 1974 the Naidoo brothers decided to sell the company which owned this land. They came to the conclusion that they were prepared to sell the township as is to whomever would be interested in purchasing it. Some of us got together—there is a list of the shareholders of that company—and purchased this township. Accordingly, there was an undertaking by the Naidoo brothers that they would pay the R40 000, provided the local authority—the old Marburg Town Board—would provide the service of erecting this purification plant.

Then the Community Development Board, through its National Housing Commission, entered the scene. They wanted to develop Melwood, a Coloured township, as well as provide for housing needs in the Marburg area. They entered with a macro-plan to provide sewer reticulation services for the whole of the Marburg and Port Shepstone area.

When this came about the question of erecting a purification plant fell away. Before that happened I concede that we had signed an undertaking with the old Marburg Town Board that if they erected that plant, then we would pay. It was an arrangement by the Naidoo brothers.

After the question of the erection of a purification plant fell away, the whole of Marburg and Port Shepstone came under the agreement by the Port Shepstone borough council and the new Marburg Town Board to enter into this macrosewerage undertaking. Therefore neither the old nor the new Marburg Town Board spent any money to erect that purification plant. Since no money was spent, no repayment was to be made. There are two other townships that fell under the same category. They are still there, for the information of those who want to investigate. All the boroughs in Port Shepstone and Marburg entered into this sewerage scheme some time in 1974 or 1975.

When the new Marburg Town Board, of which I was one of the first members, came into being, there was a division of the assets. In that division of the assets all the assets that were in the Indian sector came to the new Marburg Town Board. Of course, all the files etc had to be included in this arrangement. Nobody bothered about this amount, because it was not a collectable amount. We did not even bother about it for quite some time.

The town clerk at the time was a Mr Hussein. He found this undertaking in the files and raised the question. The matter was referred to Mr Colin Hiles, who advised them at that time that this money was not collectable, because it did not refer to any services that were rendered. The matter was brought up quite often by an hon member—if I may refer to him as an hon member—Mr Peter Govender, who took halfbaked information and started making publicity out of the fact that my company did not pay this amount. I told him that it was out of the question that my company had to pay that amount and asked him why he could not understand that.

He subsequently stood for election to the Marburg Town Board. I was pleased that he was elected to the board. Now I can deal with him in an official capacity. He then raised the question at every one of my meetings. This is a gentleman who has lived in the same township for 14 years. He is now chairman of the Marburg Town Board and he is the man who has been spreading half-baked information. He went so far as to stand for election to the Marburg Town Board and eventually became the chairman of the Marburg Town Board. Now, week after week, this is the kind of news one reads in the local newspaper. For the benefit of those who cannot see it, this article is entitled: “No confidence in Marburg Town Board chairman”. The report reads as follows:

This is what is reported every week. There is a lot more in this vein. This is the man who has raised this matter in every forum.

I want to put on record here that my services to the Marburg Town Board, from the local affairs days, which entailed about six years’ duty, and then about nine years on the town board itself, of which I was not a member for one year only, were such that when everything went smoothly I stayed out of it. I was called back by a public outcry because things were going wrong. They are appealing for my return now, but I cannot go back. Eight members out of a nine-member board cast a vote of no confidence in this man.

This is history. It is not on record that anything of this nature has ever happened anywhere in South Africa. At least one sometimes has somebody to hold one’s hand, saying “I support you”. Here is a man in which nobody had any confidence, and yet he would not step down. Mr Greyvenstein went to him and said, “Please, step down gracefully”, but he would not do it. I can say much more about that man, because I know what his links are. However, I do not want to go into all of that right now.

This is an important debate on housing. The hon member for Reservoir Hills chose to raise this matter here. He was right when he mentioned those directors. One of those directors happens to be a very close friend of the hon member for Reservoir Hills. He eats with him, drinks with him and travels with him. He is very closely associated with that person who is a director of this company. The hon member mentioned him in a speech in this House. Why does the hon member not ask him to explain this? Why did he not come to me? I would have explained the matter. However, he now wants to put it on record in Hansard, so that he can indulge in…

Character assassination!

Yes, character assassination. That will not happen. I want to put it on record that I am where I am today because of very hard work and very little sleep. I have worked 18 hours per day for that which I own. I sometimes worked 24 hours a day, because the business side of my life demanded such sacrifices. I do not owe anybody an apology. I do not owe anybody any money. I therefore want it on record that if anybody wants to take this matter any further, they have two choices: They can either go to court, or else they can go to hell! [Interjections.]

I see that I have a few more minutes at my disposal. I would therefore like to talk about housing. Housing is desperately needed in the Indian community—and virtually all communities, but we are discussing housing for the Indian community in this debate. In Marburg there is a waiting list for 5 000 houses, and the list is growing every day. In Richmond we have the money, but the local authority just digs in its heels and does not want to identify any land. We have some problems over there in that Rhodesians who come to South Africa suddenly become town clerks and then hold up the whole works. We also have problems in Ixopo. There we have 23 railway houses that are standing vacant. This was discussed with the authorities of the SATS only this morning and I am hoping that we will find a solution to this problem. There are 23 houses that are standing vacant while our people are sleeping under trees and in old buses.

The debate on housing will go on and on. Maybe hon members will not be able to solve all problems, but we must try and find some solution to this problem. There are various inhibiting factors like the shortage of land and the time it takes to proclaim land once one gets it. That is another stumbling block. This procedure can drag on for years before it is possible to proclaim a township. The cost of the land and services is not so high. However, what about the structures that are going to be built on those plots? The cost of a single three-bedroomed unit is approximately R25 000 to R30 000. Imagine if that cost escalates by 20% per year. Hon members can work that out. If a house costs R30 000 and the cost goes up by 20% a year, it can cause a delay which stretches over a number of years.

There is not a township where development does not get delayed by six or seven years on average. The proclamation of a township can be delayed just because a simple, stupid certificate is not forthcoming. One such example would be that provision has to be made for burial. If the necessary certificate is not forthcoming, the development of that township will never appear for discussion on the agenda.

We have to deal with local authorities, provincial authorities and Parliamentary authorities. They must find a solution to these delays, because they are costing us too much. I am hoping that we will be able to find some solutions to the crises in Richmond, Marburg, Ixopo and Harding.

Earlier we were discussing somebody who owned land and who got some financial backing from Johannesburg. Before that got off the ground, suspicion started in this House. Hon members wanted to know if I was involved in that development. I guess that suspicious people will always find something to be suspicious of. They believe that suspicion is their domain, because that is the level on which they conduct their business. They think that if somebody else comes in, they will be facing competition. I can assure these people that I do not intend entering their domain. That is their prerogative. They can carry on with those kind of dealings.

My time is about to expire. However, I want to assure hon members that when Solidarity really gets going we will try our best to wipe out the backlog and that we will assist our people to the best of our abilities.

Mr Chairman, before I proceed with the discussion of the report of the hon the Minister of Housing I think it is only fair that tribute be paid to the hon the Deputy Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture for ably steering the Ministry of Housing through the transitional period until the time when the present hon Minister of Housing was appointed. I want to thank him sincerely for the kind of work he has done in the Transvaal. I think it needs to be on record that we appreciate the good work that has been done by the hon the Deputy Minister.

Secondly, I know that the hon the Minister of Housing has just taken over this hot-potato portfolio and it would not be proper for me to criticise him. From what I read, he is trying to do a good job and I want to compliment him on that. I shall not criticise him, neither as an individual nor as a Minister, or his Ministry.

I just want to respond to the hon member for Bayview’s statement that in the past he found that no replies were forthcoming from the officials of the Ministry of Housing. My colleagues and I have always found the Ministry to be courteous and the officials to be very efficient in the manner in which they responded to our queries. I want to have that placed on record.

I want to talk about the provision of housing in the Transvaal. The myth has always existed that the Indian community lives as far as Ladysmith and not beyond that.

No, only Pietermaritzburg!

The hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare has raised this matter and I want to emphasise that there are Indian people living in other provinces too.

With regard to Lenasia Extension 13 we know that certain announcements have been made but when we look at plans and see what kind of houses are going to be provided—we have heard that low-cost housing is being provided—I think that that extension has primarily come about because of the natural growth and expansion in Lenasia itself.

Another thorny issue is proclamation. During the sitting of the Extended Public Committee on Provincial Affairs that was held in Pretoria recently I said that it would appear that the proclamation issue is a game of musical chairs between the House of Delegates and the Transvaal Provincial Administration. When somebody makes a noise, in accordance with the rules of the game, they move around the chairs and then people sit on them.

The official reply given to me with regard to the proclamation of Extensions 9 and 10 in Lenasia was that the Transvaal Provincial Administration did not cause the delay. The delay lay with the House of Delegates. I have the full report here and the hon the Minister can go through it.

Another thorny issue is the issue of squatters in the Lenasia area. The hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare has been there and has seen the problem. The former Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, as well the Deputy Minister, have also been there. They are aware of the squatter problem. I think it is about time that this administration made a bold statement as to what we are going to do about the squatter problem in Lenasia. We are not asking that those people be evicted but we are asking that a definite policy be adopted and that we be informed as to what is going to be done about those squatters.

Provide them with homes.

The hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare is on record as having said in regard to Thomsville that “Thomsville is not a place fit for living”. If we are going to move the people of Thomsville and renovate that place, we want to be given the assurance that the people that are living there will be able to afford the rentals that they will have to pay. Those people come from the lowest income group. My colleague, the hon member for Lenasia West, has specifically asked me to raise this issue and I would like the hon the Minister to look into it.

In the hon the Minister’s unedited speech mention is made of the great sale. The hon the Minister of Housing, the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, the hon member for Reservoir Hills and several other hon members are aware of the problems in the areas called Finetown and Unival in the Grasmere area. The houses in this area have been occupied by Indian tenants for the past 12 years. When will this be finalised? When will the occupants be given the option to purchase these houses? Year after year we have been asking for this. I think the hon the Minister must give us an answer now. Please sell these houses to the people who are living there.

What about the agricultural lots?

Yes, the agricultural holdings in those areas too.

Extensions 8, 9, 10 and 11 in Lenasia have absolutely no recreational facilities. I think it is perhaps the only area in the country that has no recreational facilities at all. I can mention for example that there is not a single soccer field for a community in excess of 30 000 people. I am not even talking about a hall or a library—I am only talking about a soccer field. There is not a single soccer field. A great injustice is done there. We have tremendous tracts of land there which are not suitable for housing because of the dolomite conditions. Why can the land not be transferred to the local authorities and some recreational facilities be provided?

For years we have been asking how much money there is in the community facilities fund for the Lenasia area. There has been no answer forthcoming as to how much money there is.

You will never hear!

A percentage of the rates and taxes goes into the community facilities fund for the provision of services for these areas. However, nobody has been able to give us the figures. The regional office has not been able to supply us with enough answers and we do not know what has happened in that regard.

In the hon the Minister’s unedited speech he mentions the MEC Mr Peter Miller by name. I just want to say to him that the MEC in the Transvaal, Mr Olaus van Zyl, has also played a leading role and I think he needs to be complimented as well.

They are both Nats and they are equally bad!

In the unedited speech reference is made to Lenasia Extension 2. That is not correct—it should be Lenasia South Extension 2. Here a proclamation has just come through.

An interesting feature is that hon the Minister concedes that certain local authorities have expressed their reservations with regard to the implementation of the new formula. We have the same problem in the Transvaal that some of these local authorities, especially those that are controlled by the CP, do not want to implement it. I think some kind of action must be taken to ensure that these local authorities implement it.

I want to concur with the hon member for Reservoir Hills where he says that the limit for the subsidy ought to be looked at, revised and perhaps increased from R65 000 because, if one keeps the cost of land and building in mind, R65 000 does not really give one much value for money.

I want to suggest to the hon the Minister of Housing that we must move away from the concept of conventional housing, which is a construction of brick and mortar. We must try to look at the concept of mobile homes which is fast catching on in Europe and especially the USA where homes are built out of timber and asbestos.

Yes!

In some cases these houses are far better than the conventional houses of brick and mortar. The hon member for Springfield concurs and he has seen those houses. We must look at the possibility of erecting such homes.

Except the costs!

Yes, except the costs.

Brick and mortar houses stand for thousands of years.

These homes are not conventional homes. They are built from timber and they are very good homes. We must explore that avenue; perhaps it will be the answer to our housing problem.

But they are so expensive, my friend!

I admit that they are expensive but we should investigate that concept as well. [Interjections.]

No, but who wants to have a house built of matches?

With regard to the attitude of officials of the Ministry and the regional offices, we have had some problems with the Johannesburg office—I am not specifically saying it is the fault of the regional representative. We have no problem with him. However, very serious allegations have been made against certain officials, whom I do not wish to name. I would like the hon the Minister to go into that matter, because he and the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare are both aware of this.

It should have been done a long time ago!

I want to know what kind of action has been taken and whether a report has been submitted. I am not saying it ought to be brought to this House; perhaps it can be done administratively, but it will certainly assist us.

Mr Chairman, I want to make a short announcement to inform hon members that the Director-General of the Administration: House of Delegates has been promoted to the post of Auditor-General with effect from September.

Hear, hear!

On behalf of all of us present here, I want to congratulate him, wish him well and thank him for the services rendered to this administration. I also want to express the feeling that during his term of office he has contributed extensively to the progress of our administration and, secondly, was very much involved in all investigations that took place.

It is indeed with a sad heart that I have to wish him well in his new office, because we would have liked him to have stayed on longer in our administration. However, nobody can stand in the way of progress and therefore I want to thank Mr Wronsley for the kind of service that he rendered to this administration. We wish him well in his new task in the knowledge that whenever we call upon him for advice or assistance I am certain that that would be readily forthcoming.

Mr Chairman, I wish to associate myself with the remarks made by the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council with regard to the announcement of the appointment of the Director-General of this administration to the post of Auditor-General.

There is an old saying that one cannot keep a good man down. Obviously it applies in this particular instance. There is no doubt that although this is a loss for the House of Delegates it is most certainly a gain for the country, in the sense that I believe the position of Auditor-General at the moment will be playing a very important role in ensuring the clean administration of the affairs of this country. That is what the voter and the taxpayer are entitled to.

I would also like to take this opportunity of wishing Mr Wronsley everything of the best in this regard and to assure him that he will have the full co-operation of this House and individual hon members in his new portfolio.

Whilst I am on my feet, may I also take the opportunity of expressing my party’s appreciation to the officials of the Department of Housing for the fact that they have been very easily accessible whenever we have required their services. They have also always been very willing to co-operate. This, of course, applies from the Director-General downward. We have, of course, had some problems with the underlings, but this is what happens in every administration.

I also want to take the point made by the hon the Minister of Housing, namely that each of these officials from the Director-General downwards in fact displayed a great deal of courage in exposing without fear the activities of the previous Minister and Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in regard to the commission of inquiry which was instituted. For that, too, I think that we would like to express our appreciation on behalf of the Indian community.

In his introductory remarks the hon the Minister called for sincere and objective views on his portfolio. I think that all hon members of this House will concede that despite the many and various attacks that have been forthcoming from my side, I have always avoided attacking personalities; we have always attacked issues. I think the hon the Minister of the Budget alluded to this when he spoke the other day in this House. We have done this, unlike other people, not for personal benefit but because we felt that this needed to be done in the interests of the wider community, whom all of us in this House purport to serve. Accordingly I shall again be objective in the comments I wish to make.

The first point I should like to make is that I must place on record that the present hon Minister is not really responsible for the budget that was presented to this House. The Vote was planned months in advance, and therefore he cannot be held responsible for whatever deficiencies we may find therein. On the other hand, and by the same token, we cannot expect that hon Minister to claim all the credit that this particular Ministry would like to lay claim to. I think that would be a fair remark. All hon members know that his predecessor was forced out of that particular position in disgrace, not only to himself but to the larger Indian community as well. It is on record that the hon the Minister, as Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, has in fact promised this House a clean administration, and I was pleased to hear the hon member for Southern Natal reply to some of the issues that were raised by my benchmate, the hon member for Reservoir Hills. However, I shall return to that shortly.

I would once again like to make the point—I do not hold this against the present hon Minister—that we are very concerned that there have been reductions in the amount provided for housing; there is no question about it. The duty of the hon the Minister—there are two hon Ministers involved—is to ensure that the money that has been allocated is in fact spent by all the local authorities concerned. This is the only way the housing backlog will be eradicated. We all know that there is a backlog, and we all know that we need this backlog to be eradicated as quickly and efficiently as possible.

There is only one way of doing this if the local authorities are in default, and that is to get out of our offices and get out there and make sure that the programmes that have been initiated and for which funds have been voted, are in fact put through. If there are any bottlenecks or problems in that regard, I believe it is the duty of this Ministry to highlight those problems and, if necessary, to kick a couple of butts in that regard. That, after all, is the function of the hon the Minister concerned.

I wish to pass on now to an issue that was raised several sessions ago and to which the hon the Minister referred in his reply. I refer to the Copes Folly—somebody called it Dookie’s Folly—and Dunveria programme.

As all hon members recall, this was a controversial expropriation. It was controversial because the value of this particular piece of land was increased from R3,76 million to R8,92 million in that regard. As all hon members are aware, I raised this issue in this House and I was told that the reason why the value has increased was because in a previous valuation a very substantial portion of land had not been taken into account.

The question I would now like to ask is simply this. Is housing being planned on that particular piece of ground which was never valued in the first place? The contention at that time was that there was no valuation placed on that land because it was so-called monkey land. When I look at the figures, I am persuaded that this is the position. If we look at the figures, the hon the Minister tells us that it consists of 448,48 hectares, that something like 3 000 units are being planned for this entire area and that this area will now be divided into six phases.

If one looks at phase one and phase two, 1 900 units are already being planned for these two phases, which leaves something like 1 100 units to be allocated over the four remaining phases. I do not seem to be able to reconcile this because I understand that a lot more units could be got from this entire acreage.

The question I would now like to ask the hon the Minister—and it is a very simple question to which I would like a very direct reply because it has a very direct bearing on the controversial issue that was raised here—is simply this. Is housing being planned on the portion of land which was never evaluated in the first place and which led to the increase in the valuation from R3,76 million to R8,92 million? That is the crisp question to which I would like an answer because if that land is not being used to provide housing, then I say that the claims that that was monkey land on which no value could be placed, are in fact true. I would then like to ask several questions in that regard.

Do you want to know if we have paid for land that we cannot use?

That is the point, yes.

I wish to make some comments on the replies given by the hon member for Southern Natal. However, I see that he is not here and I shall wait until he returns to the Chamber. I would, therefore, now like to address the question of the Rents Board and I trust that the hon the Minister will listen to the comments I wish to make.

It is quite clear from his speech that the hon the Minister is not aware of what is happening. If the hon the Minister will please lend me an ear, I would like to tell him that despite what he says in his speech, there is at present no rent board which looks after the interests of the Indian community. It is quite clear that the hon the Minister is not aware of that factual position and I am surprised that he is not aware of it.

My information is that from 1 May 1989 the House of Assembly agency which looked after and adjudicated applications made to the Rent Board on behalf of Indian tenants and landlords, had in fact fallen into disuse. The position is that rent boards are at present no longer in effect. I think the hon the Minister should be made aware of that fact and I would like to ask him what he intends doing about it. I for one would like to declare my interest in this regard.

I would like to say that quite obviously we are not, as a matter of principle, in agreement that one should have the constraints that have been enforced by rent boards in general. However, that is another issue, because if we are to provide the kind of housing that we need for the Indian community, or for any community for that matter, we have to allow for the free market mechanism to take effect. That is not to say that landlords should have open gain, because after all the Rents Act makes provision for reasonable rental. That is something that we could apply as well.

I would now like to come back to what the hon member for Southern Natal had to say. He has not returned, but I shall proceed. I am not entirely convinced by the reply given by the hon member. I was not present in this debate, but I did take the trouble of looking at the Hansard of my benchmate, the hon member for Reservoir Hills, and I have taken the trouble to look at his file as well.

The hon member for Southern Natal indicated that an undertaking was given by the Naidoo brothers in 1974 and that that is the reason why no payment was made. According to the information we have, that hon gentleman was in fact at all relevant times the chairman of the Marburg Town Board. That needs to be recorded.

The second point is that I have here before me a letter of undertaking, dated 12 December 1975, which has been signed on behalf of KGVK Properties by Mr V S Rajah and Mr Kisten Moodley as directors of this company, in terms of which it was in fact agreed that a sum of R40 000 would be paid to the Marburg Town Board, or its successors in title, within one year of the proposed township being declared and on transfer of 50% of the lots, whichever was the earlier. In other words, I have here before me a firm letter of undertaking which in fact, as far as I am concerned, is lawfully binding.

More than that, I also have here before me an extract from the balance sheet of KGVK Properties, which is obviously for the year ending in 1985. It shows very clearly that in 1984 an amount of R40 000 was acknowledged in the books of the company, to be set aside for the provision of sewerage. For some mysterious reason in 1985 that amount is not reflected any more, so obviously there was a book entry to withdraw that allocation, but we all know that that amount was never paid to the Marburg Town Board.

It is also interesting to note that to secure the overdraft of this company with the Standard Bank, a guarantee was signed by Mr K Moodley, Mr D M Naidoo, Mr V S Rajah, Mr R S Naidoo and Mr J N Reddy.

More importantly, I have before me a letter from a very reputable firm of attorneys, Shepstone and Wylie, dated 14 December 1988, addressed to the chairman of the Marburg Town Board, in which it is clearly said—and I would like hon members to listen to this very carefully—and I quote:

I have just referred to that acknowledgement. I continue—

As I understand the situation, Mr Chairman, the hon gentleman concerned was in fact at all relevant times the chairman of the board. The question arises: When was that decision taken? I continue:

This firm of attorneys goes on to say, and I quote:

We are all public representatives and I do not think we should hide behind legal defenses. I would state, despite whatever has happened, to the hon the Minister—as he is closely associated with the affairs of the company—that there was certainly a moral right involved. It is no use looking for defenses and trying to rationalise what has happened. I am persuaded that there was a duty, a legal right, which prescribed—under very mysterious circumstances to say the least—payment of the amount. A moral right in this regard remains. The people of Marburg should now be repaid the amount of R40 000. To my mind the moral right remains and I think it should be left to the consciences of all concerned as public representatives, if they do believe in clean administration, because this is a call that we hear constantly. If they believe in clean administration, then this is an issue that has to be addressed immediately. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to start on this very clean note. I think we all had the opportunity of cleaning up the issues that troubled us. I think the taxpayer of this country spent a substantial amount of money by way of the James Commission, which was intended to investigate any kind of maladministration related to any member of Parliament. I am getting a bit tired and annoyed about the fact that hon members use this forum merely to engage in this kind of innuendo and suggestions which are totally unfounded.

I have personally spoken to certain hon members—I do not want to mention their names—about issues regarding Copevalli and Marburg, etc and told them to submit their complaints to the James Commission. I am glad that the hon member referred to the date in question.

Mr Chairman, will the hon member take a question?

I am not taking any questions. The date given is 1981. I think it is a relevant date.

[Inaudible.]

I am coming to that. I am very happy that the hon member referred to the date, because this issue has become an election issue. This is not only the case now. This was an election issue in 1984, and in 1984 that hon member was a secretary of Solidarity. He knew very well what the situation was. I do not want to waste my time with debate on this kind of argument. All I can say to hon members is that if they do not understand basic procedures or how to go about conducting themselves, the next time they have the opportunity of doing something to clean matters up they should do their thing. They must go and blow their hot air elsewhere. This is exactly what is happening.

I think the people of the country are crying out for housing. We should be occupying our time addressing this particular issue—the provision of housing for people who do not have roofs over their heads. The attitude of “I’m all right, Jack” and playing these games must come to an end.

I do not have to defend any hon member on this side of the House. I invite hon members, if something is wrong, to do something about it. I will help hon members to clean up the administration, but do not make wild allegations. Obviously Marburg had its legal right to do what was necessary in this particular regard. If that does not materialize, the hon member cannot blame others. So much for this.

I now come to the issues that are before us. I believe that the greatest challenge before this House, both at the pre-election and the post-election stage, is the question of the provision of housing and how we are going to address the need for housing. I want to take the liberty, which I normally do not do, to appraise hon members of a rather interesting article. It is a lengthy article which some hon members may have skipped. It appeared in The Daily News of Saturday, 15 April 1989, and the headline reads, “Revision of subsidies essential”. With regard to housing the article says, and I quote:

I quote further:

I will deal with that in a few minutes. The article goes on to say:

This merely highlights what the Government is doing. The Government is providing housing subsidies to the White sector, but they neglect that section of the community where the need is greater. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister that when he meets his colleagues from the other two Chambers, he should take the opportunity to discuss this. The question of housing subsidies for public servants will have to be re-examined. A large chunk of money is going towards subsidies for public servants. These public servants who enjoy subsidies are in a position to buy land and provide housing for themselves at a higher cost. They can afford more costly housing than the average wage earner. Consequently the value of land shoots up.

Rather than granting housing subsidies to public servants, I believe that they ought to have “subsidies” in the form of an immediate salary increase. Subsidation should be stopped. I am not saying that subsidies should be taken away from those who already have them. That should stay as it is, but subsidisation has to be phased out. The way in which to phase it out would be to give public servants an increase in salary. Let there be a salary increase and then they can pay towards the cost of housing from that salary, like any other average citizen has to do.

In my opinion subsidisation must be aimed at the lower income group. With all due respect to the hon the Minister, we cannot talk about marketrelated rentals for lower income groups. I think the hon the Minister agrees with me. The lower income group needs to be subsidised. I have a few suggestions to make. I suggest we start off with a one-off subsidy. What Dr De Vos talks about is in my opinion rather interesting. I think it will help to solve many problems.

I would rather see every single family that is in need of housing but cannot afford housing given a one-off subsidy. That is giving them a piece of land baksheesh, or free, if hon members like. Let they themselves then develop that particular property through their own sweat. I believe that, given the opportunity, they will use their spare time, initiative and the donations which they receive from organisations such as the Rotary Club and the Lions Club. They will be able to use their own labour when they are provided with their own homes.

Ask any builder and he will tell you that almost 50% of the cost in the construction of a home goes towards labour. If a home-owner is prepared to use his own initiative and his own labour, he will eliminate a large portion of that particular cost.

While I am referring to serviced sites I want to say that the challenge facing us is that money is becoming scarce, people want reasonable accommodation and the cost of servicing land is escalating dramatically. Right now I am involved in an exercise in Stanger. We are looking at this aspect. It costs R15 000 for a serviced site alone. That leaves the developers, the planners and so on R15 000 with which to provide a home to the value of just R30 000. One therefore has R15 000 with which to build a house. The houses are shrinking and becoming increasingly smaller. The cost of land is becoming increasingly higher and the houses are shrinking all the time.

In my opinion we should allow the families to provide their own homes. Another way of providing homes when one is obliged to provide brick and mortar for the very poor is to provide them with a core. The core I am referring to is not merely providing a toilet, one little poky bedroom and perhaps a little kitchenette. I am talking about the innovation which took place a few years ago just prior to the time when the present hon Minister of Local Government and Agriculture became the Minister of Housing. He showed me a plan with which I was very impressed.

What was intended with this plan was to provide a large shell with a roof over it within which a kitchen, one bedroom and a wet area for a toilet would be provided. The rest of the shell would be left open without ceilings and gutters. The object was to reduce the cost while still giving the family a large enough outer-wall space. Within that space the family would have a larger area and as their position improved they would be able to divide that space by either using furniture or dry walling as partitioning to create more rooms.

This way one would be achieving two objectives by providing reasonably sized accommodation at a reasonable cost. One would then allow the family to do their own ceilings and put on their own gutters. These are some of the ideas that we shall have to examine fully if we are to provide the type of units that our people desire.

Whilst I am on the subject of housing, I want to take this opportunity to say that I am pleased to note that the hon the Minister of Housing has not yet built any houses on television since he took over the housing portfolio. I am pleased about that because I speak from experience. Our experience in Stanger was that we had plans for housing to the value of R15 million. That figure was spoken of in various forums. Just prior to my departure for Hajj last year I heard that figure confirmed in this House.

However, just two weeks ago we had to meet with the hon the Minister of Housing and regrettably, nothing had got off the ground as we had expected it to do. Nothing had been done. I am hopeful that the initiative we have taken during the past two weeks will come to fruition so that housing will be provided in the Stanger area. This housing will not only cater for the people of Stanger, as I believe it will satisfy the needs of the region as a whole. Pursuant to the meeting that we had, I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister, along with his officials, to expedite the provision of housing in that particular area. The acceleration of the provision of housing in that area will bring much relief to the people.

I want to highlight once again that the people who are working in the mills in the Stanger area, namely Gledhow and Darnall, are only provided with accommodation whilst they are employees of the mill. As soon as they move off the mill due to early retirement or any other reason they become homeless. It is rather important for them to have security of tenure. One way to establish security of tenure would be to ensure that housing and land for housing is available in the Stanger region.

I also found from experience that there are times when the hon the Minister has to expropriate property for the purposes of providing housing. He uses the local authority as an agency. In the process property owners are affected. Some of the affected people do get compensated handsomely but there are others who do not enjoy any relief because they might have been tenants on these properties.

I would like to suggest that when an expropriation exercise is undertaken, the department procures 25% to 30% of the sites of the proposed development for the purpose of providing homes for those who are affected and who otherwise may not have the benefit of any sympathy from the local authority itself.

I would furthermore like to suggest—also for the purpose of negotiation with the affected property owners—that one could use this as a quid pro quo to lessen the blow of expropriation for these owners. I would like to suggest that if an owner has to give up his land for purposes of expropriation and the development of housing, that such an owner should be given the opportunity of the acquisition of building sites at a cost price for the rehousing of his immediate and extended families which might have been his intention when he owned the entire land. I would like to suggest to the hon the Minister that when he uses his authority for the purposes of expropriation, that should be done.

With those words I look forward to the opportunity of paying greater tribute to the hon the Minister as soon as all the housing needs in my area are satisfied.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Stanger referred to the past Minister of Housing and his appearance on television but the hon the Deputy Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture went to Pietermaritzburg by helicopter. [Interjections.] What did we read in the media about this? I want to quote from a newspaper report as follows:

It is now called Copesville—

However, they say that up to today he has not even acknowledged anything and they have received nothing in regard to the promises made by him. [Interjections.] This is a bad thing not giving us credibility in the light of the approaching election.

When was that?

That was in March and we are now in May.

Do you want me to perform miracles? [Interjections.]

Local authorities have been urged to drop their unrealistically high housing standards and to open selected areas to Third World type structures in an attempt to clear the country’s massive backlog. The city councils and town boards have set their targets too high, expecting First World type housing suitable for long-term financing. For Third World type deregulated houses we do not have to comply with the usual local authority regulations. For instance, a 45 square meter four-roomed house could be built with concrete blocks and a tiled roof for R12 000, provided that some of the most stringent regulations were not enforced.

There is a need for the Government to find new ways of subsidising the bonds of the lower-level regularly employed worker. We feel that the State boards involved are reluctant to extend loans lower down the social scale. Research into low-cost housing has indicated clearly that houses were invariably upgraded in time by their occupants, provided that they were given full ownership of the ground. In support of this a claim was made by the country’s largest multidisciplinary research group business and marketing intelligence that in 1988 South Africans spent more on extensions to their homes than on new houses.

The tenants of the Northdale housing scheme are already overburdened with the recent price increase in basic commodities and are now faced with another rent increase. This seems to continue unabated. The members of the Ilac in Pietermaritzburg have visited homes to prevent eviction and have found the circumstances in which the tenants live to be shocking, to say the least. Requests have been made to us in the House of Delegates for relief for these tenants and also to stop rent increases. The reply is that these people do not qualify for State assistance and that the matter of rent increases will be looked into, but to date nothing has been done.

We feel that the research into local authorities is essential. There are a few lots in Pietermaritzburg which are owned by the State. I think there are about 80 such plots in pockets within the borough. I am sure that these can be made use of for building houses.

With regard to the houses that will be developed by the Administration: House of Delegates in Mountain Rise, people from the lower income group will not be allowed to occupy these houses. I think the ceiling that has been fixed in this case should be raised to more than R1 000. Only then will the people be able to qualify for these houses. I see that the hon the Deputy Minister is staring at me. I do not know what he has up his sleeve. [Interjections.]

I have made it known to the hon the Minister of Housing that he is needed by the people of Pietermaritzburg because housing is urgently needed. Since the formation of the tricameral Parliament this administration has not put up one house in Pietermaritzburg. How can we get credibility for the House of Delegates? How do we stand for elections in such circumstances?

According to the TV there are many houses. [Interjections.]

I want to ask the hon the Minister of Housing whether he can meet with me and we can make arrangements for him to meet the local affairs committee as well as the Pietermaritzburg municipality in order to find some solution.

Mr Chairman, it is probably no exaggeration to say that the lack of development in rural areas in South Africa and the associated poverty, social instability and mass migration of uneducated, unskilled people to the major metropolitan areas are the most important problems facing this country today.

Paradoxically, the key to development in these rural areas is urbanisation. It is only through a process of orderly urbanisation that the pressure from a burgeoning population in the rural areas can be released. Various forms of rural development and agrarian reforms can be made possible.

I must point out that the hon the State President had acknowledged the need for urbanisation and development of the rural areas way back in 1986. In his opening address of the third session of the eighth Parliament of the RSA he said:

These were not empty words and within a matter of three months the Act relating to influx control was abolished.

On the question of less developed areas, this is what the hon the State President had to say:

Mr Chairman, on this issue I must point out that the Government has failed hopelessly, and it is also sad to note that our own administration has not paid any heed to development or alleviating the suffering of the people in the rural areas.

On 5 April 1989 we had the Parliamentary debate in Pietermaritzburg. I raised the issue of the rural communities in the vicinity of Shakaskraal at that meeting. In reply, the hon MEC Mr Peter Miller had this to say (Hansard, 1989: col 4651):

There will be another three and there will still be no reply.

I quote further:

Mr Chairman, the question arises: Who was the hon Minister? The answer is that it was none other than the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, the hon member for Arena Park. I know that it has been said that the hon members of the House of Delegates are not making representations, but here is a man who has nothing to do with the House of Delegates. He is a man who stands outside this administration, and this is his statement. This bears testimony to the type of amateurism we have had. I would like to say that the former hon Chairman was an empty vessel who made a lot of noise, and empty vessels do make the most noise.

At the moment we have a new administration, and I know—I am fully aware of this—that we have an administration that is working to put right all those previous wrongs. They are not making a noise or going to the newspapers or appearing on television, but I know for sure that action has been taken to rectify errors of the past.

At the same time there is something I should like to ask the hon the Minister of Housing. On 21 April a meeting was held at Malgate House, and I know that Shakaskraal was on the agenda. During his reply I should like the hon the Minister or the hon the Deputy Minister to touch on that issue and tell us what the set-up is with regard to housing in Shakaskraal.

Another issue I would like to raise here regarding Shakaskraal, is the agricultural school. The first agricultural school was established at Shakaskraal, but it is sad that up to this day there is no land on which they can do practical farming. Let me tell hon members that one cannot farm in theory. I am a farmer myself and I know that one cannot do theoretical farming. Things work out very well on paper, but in practice it is a different story altogether. Priority will have to be given to the land for Shakaskraal.

In conclusion I would like to touch on the proposal put forward by the hon member for Stanger. I think a self-help scheme would actually solve a lot of problems. We have a limited budget and if one had to provide housing for everybody within this limited budget, one could not do it. The best thing is to service sites and sell them to the people. That way one will accommodate far more people.

The idea is to get the people actively involved and they will not only prove themselves but they will also benefit from it. They will make an effort and they will make it more beneficial. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, at the outset I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Mr Wronsley, the Director-General of the House of Delegates, on his well-earned promotion. Having worked with him I have found him a person of exceptional qualities and exceptional ability. It is regrettable that he is leaving the House of Delegates. However, as the hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council mentioned, one cannot stand in the way of progress and we wish him well.

Coming back to the debate, I concede that the present hon Minister of Housing has just taken over his portfolio and naturally it is not possible for him to answer to all the requirements and all the criticism, but perhaps that which requires attention should go on record.

Having heard all the speakers here this afternoon—and not only today but over the last five years—if there was any debate in the House of Delegates which touched the inner core of the people, then it has been the debate on housing.

The hon the Minister’s report states opposition political parties’ views, but I want to make it very clear that I would like to see any hon member in this House whose thoughts vary with regard to the needs of the Indian community. What are their goals? The goals are the same and those goals must be none other than achieving them for those silent people whom hon members represent. Therefore we have to take the various factors into consideration.

The hon the Minister speaks about the availability of land and of market-related prices. This has been a long-playing record. Let us forget about the Group Areas Act. The Group Areas Act has been overplayed in these three Houses. However, we must be able to face reality.

Can hon members go and explain the Group Areas Act to the silent masses in this country? They are not interested. They are interested in a roof over their heads. Therefore I want to appeal to the hon the Minister that while we appreciate the Group Areas Act as a legal piece of machinery of the State, let us look at land beyond the Indian group area. There are areas contiguous to Indian areas and we must be able to go beyond the Indian group area to identify land for Indian housing.

Every time I look at the hon member for Isipingo, there is something that strikes me. I have mentioned it previously. I hope every hon member in this House will visit Malakazi one day to see in what appalling conditions the people are living. How on earth can one go and visit there and come back and sleep well at night? Yet we are proud to be parliamentarians and representatives in the highest legislative body of the country.

The hon the Minister also speaks about agricultural land. We are connecting the concepts of housing land and agricultural land. This is absolutely nonsensical as far as the Group Areas Act is concerned. Without any further ado, we simply have to identify additional land. Let us not interfere with agricultural land. In some instances housing projects are earmarked on Indian agricultural land. That should never have happened, because not an inch of Indian agricultural land should be negotiated for housing. Additional land must be identified. Notwithstanding the Group Areas Act, additional land must be identified for Indian housing.

The hon the Deputy Minister was assigned to look at agricultural land in the Transvaal. I would like the hon the Minister of Housing to know, whilst he is responsible for land, that there are thousands of hectares of land belonging to the House of Delegates in the Transvaal. Do hon members know that on one of our inspections we found approximately 300 hectares of mealies growing on House of Delegates land? No one knew who was responsible for allowing that production on our land. Therefore I appeal to the hon the Minister of Housing to identify every inch of land belonging to the House of Delegates in the Transvaal. In my view there is ample land, both for housing and agriculture. Let us utilise that land in the best interests of a community that has been deprived. I do hope that the hon the Deputy Minister has done some further work on the assignment he was given. Probably he will report on it.

The hon member for Lenasia Central spoke about the registration of townships. Here again we find ourselves caught in a situation. One fights tooth and nail to identify an area and to proclaim it, but to register the township takes anything up to ten years. Previously we have heard in this House that there is a possibility of legalising the situation by selling the land and giving the prospective buyers the opportunity to borrow money and build. However, unfortunately these things did not materialise. I humbly appeal to the hon the Minister of Housing: Every day costs the poor man more and more. If he, with his financial expertise, can find a way out to legalise the situation, we would appreciate it very much, because the registration of a township is quite a complicated issue and therefore it must be expedited.

The hon the Minister spoke of the lower income group. This is a burning question in the Indian community of South Africa, in relation to the escalation of costs. I would like to know, together with all hon members here, whether a person can honestly build a house today when he earns R1 000. It is practically impossible. Many years ago, the figure used to be R150. Today this figure is comical. What purpose does it serve to raise the figure to R1 000? Can a person even build a house today if he earns R1 500? He cannot do it. It is impossible. I appeal to the hon the Minister: To look at R1 000 is out of the question. Let us seriously apply our minds to this.

At the moment we have hundreds of applications from borderline cases. A person earning R1 002 is deprived. He cannot even occupy a house. What does he do? On top of that a person earning R1 001 becomes subject to the Treasury rules and he is not eligible for subsidised rental. What justice are we doing to this community? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I am happy to follow on the hon member for Northern Natal. His concern for housing amongst the Indians is common to all hon members of Parliament.

I should like to speak about the shortage of land. There certainly is a shortage of land. Land does not grow, but people do. Our population is growing so fast that we find ourselves in a position where we cannot accommodate them owing to the limitations imposed on us. However, what do we do in these circumstances? We have to find alternative means of providing housing. We cannot push our people working in the Durban area right into the farmland and expect them to travel to Durban to earn a living.

In this respect I would like to call on the hon the Minister of Housing to give his serious consideration to the restrictive conditions that prevail at present with regard to dwellings and commercial properties that have been built in Indian areas. The Durban City Council and the town planning department have imposed restrictive conditions. Buildings of only up to two floor levels are allowed in areas like Chatsworth, Merebank, Umhlatuzana and other areas. There are several areas in Umhlatuzana township that are restricted to just two-storey buildings. Several owners have laid foundations for ten-storey buildings, and if these high-rise buildings could be used, we would be able to accommodate many of the estimated 40 000 applicants who are on the waiting list for accommodation. Not all those who are on the waiting list are looking forward to buying a home. Many are looking forward to just having accommodation, because they are living in overcrowded conditions. Some live with their families under the joint family system and the families are increasing in size. I would like the hon the Minister to consider asking the Durban City Council to lift their restrictive conditions so that these existing buildings can be used for purposes of high-rise accommodation.

The other issue involves R2,5 million which is at the moment in arrears in respect of traders. I would like to know from the hon the Minister how this came about. Is it because of poor custom on the part of these traders that this amount of arrears rentals has come about? If that is so, then I cannot reconcile myself with the attitude of the department to impose a further increase in rental, which is to be spread over a period of three years. This will certainly not be fair in respect of these traders. I would like the hon the Minister to investigate this seriously to find out what the reason is for their getting in arrears. I know there are several businesses in Chatsworth and other areas that are showing poor custom. If it is in respect of that, then we must treat them in a much more respectful manner.

I am rather disappointed to note the slow progress that is being made with regard to buildings owned by the department. In the hon the Minister’s report there is a note in which the hon the Minister mentions that urgent attention is being given to finding ways and means of selling shops and commercial property. This has been said over the years, and I know from the time I served in the Indian Council that there was a tremendous amount of pressure from the Indian Council to sell these sites. The then Department of Community Development was investigating ways and means of disposing of these buildings which are at present deteriorating. Repairs to them will be an added expense to the department concerned. I make particular reference to the shopping complex in Mobeni Heights.

There has been a call from those traders—and this goes back 10 years—for the purchase of those shops. Nothing has been done! What is written on this piece of paper is just wishful thinking. It will be forgotten the moment hon members leave this Chamber. I think one should treat this in all seriousness, because we have to maintain those buildings and carry those traders. At the end of the day it will become an added cost and we will just find ourselves running out of funds.

I want to bring the present plight of the traders in Westcliff to the notice of the hon the Minister. This shopping centre is in a very poor state. The complex surrounding the shopping centre is in a disgraceful state. There is no proper parking. The parking area has never been tarred. Those shopkeepers and traders have to go through hell. Shoppers go through dust, mud and dirt before they can get to any tearoom or shop. This is a shame from a health point of view.

I am also sad to say that the hon the Minister has an office in this very same constituency. I would like him to drive around the complex. He will see that I am telling the truth. He can take his officials to inspect that area. All other areas have been provided with macadamised parking, but this complex is in such a poor state. The area has become a fleamarket over weekends. People from all over go there to sell their wares on verandahs. No sanitary provisions are made for those people who come there. If one goes there over a weekend, one will see the refuse in the streets, because no provision is made for refuse removal. This is a matter of serious concern. I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister to give this matter his urgent attention. There has been an outcry from the side of the traders and we cannot allow this state of affairs to continue indefinitely.

I would also like to raise an issue that has already been raised by other hon members. It concerns the question of land that is available to the Indian community at the present time and what we are doing about the development of that land which we claim to own. There have been some technical problems with the development of the Arena Park and Savannah Park area. However, we do not want to hear about technical problems any more, because building costs are escalating daily. We are the ones who will be paying that premium.

If there is any dispute between the Durban City Council and the Administration: House of Delegates, I think that that matter should be resolved as soon as possible so that we can carry on with the provision of housing. At the moment this is a burning issue in the Indian community in particular, because we are limited as far as land around Durban is concerned. The hon member for Reservoir Hills very clearly indicated that there is an abundance of land available in and around Durban. Provision for housing is made for the White group out in the Durban North area, at Virginia States where sugar farming land is being used for development. What is wrong with the piece of land which is just on the opposite side of Virginia States, towards Phoenix and Mount Edgecombe? Can that land not be used for Indian housing? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is always a pleasure to follow upon the contribution by the hon member for Havenside. He made a very valid point when he said that the need for land is ever-expanding, but that the supply is diminishing. Added to this problem which he spoke about, is the ever-rising costs that we are being faced with.

I, too, want to join hon members in congratulating our Director-General on his promotion to the position of Auditor-General. I want to wish him well in his new position. We got to know him during our early days in Parliament. He attended the meetings of our Joint Committee on Finance. That is where we got to know his qualities of dedication. We in the House of Delegates will sorely miss him, but as other hon members have said, it would be selfish on our part to deny him his deserved promotion. I therefore want to wish him well.

Whilst I am in the mood of wishing him well, I ako want to express my appreciation to all the officials of our department. I know of the stresses and strains with which they have to put up. It is not a bed of roses that they lie on. I know that their task is not an easy one.

In wishing the Director-General well, I want to address one last appeal to him. He is at the present moment involved in attempting to obtain additional personnel for our department, because whilst hon members have been critical of the sometimes slow pace of the development that is being done by our department and their slow pace of work, it must be remembered that it is not always possible for them to produce the volume of work that is required of them because of certain staff limitations. I want to address an appeal to the Director-General if he is watching on the monitor, as I believe he is, to complete that one unfinished task before he leaves us.

I want to express my appreciation to the hon member for Lenasia Central. Bouquets are not always thrown at us, but when it is done it is appreciated. The hon member is not here, but I would like to tell him that it is the intention of the administration that the development of Extension 13 will not go the same way as development in Lenasia went in the past when parcels of land were dished out to individual so-called utility companies. There will be a concerted effort to make up the housing backlog in Lenasia.

We are mindful of the fact that housing in Lenasia has not been provided by the State for the past six or so years. It is regrettable that whilst serviced sites have been made available to the upper income group, the poor people who are living in the backyards and in the garages have not been catered for.

I want to make it very clear that it is the intention of the administration—another hon member also raised this issue—to work in conjunction and in consultation with hon MPs and members of the management committees of that area when planning housing there.

Before I proceed, I want to express my appreciation—I know the hon the Minister is also going to do so—to all hon members who entered into this debate before me. In my opinion this is the forum where hon members must highlight the problems in their constituencies. There are many problems, but if we all apply our minds to resolving the problems, I believe that sometime, somewhere, somehow these problems will be overcome. The important thing is to try our best to tackle these problems. If, after having tried, we have not delivered all that we ought to have delivered, it will still be better than not having tried at all.

The hon member for Newholme quite dramatically indicated that I had landed there with a helicopter, but I do not think he knows what was behind the helicopter flight. It was the Housing Board tour of the problem areas in Natal from Durban to Ladysmith. It was arranged for us to have a look at those areas and it is the intention of the board to do it in that manner in future. They toured the Transvaal some time ago and this was a tour of Northern Natal. I think it is a very good idea and I am very supportive of this new—I actually do not know if it is new—method of the board.

I think that if one goes and has a look at the problems where they exist, they are better understood than when one looks at them on paper. I accompanied them to Ladysmith, Howick and Pietermaritzburg. The hon member did not indicate this, but I followed up that tour by visiting the area and meeting with the members of the local affairs committee. The meeting arose from that tour and it was to express my concern and solidarity with the people of Pietermaritzburg that I went there.

The hon member was present at that meeting and he knows that I indicated to the members present that I was going to invite the hon the Minister to go to Pietermaritzburg and look at the prevalent problems there. There are certain issues that need to be resolved. If I have the time, I will come back to these issues.

For six long years not a single house has been built in Pietermaritzburg, just as in Lenasia. I have been making notes here of what the hon members have said—I cannot refer to all these notes—and over and over again hon members have said in their speeches last Friday and today that since the advent of the tricameral Parliament not a single home has been built in many towns. This is a recurring complaint of hon members. To me personally this is really a sad state of affairs.

Hon members mentioned the issue of building homes on TV. I have expressed my view in the past that if we had kept pace with the number of homes that were built on TV, if we had even built only a fraction of the homes that were announced on TV—make it as low as 10%—we would have been much further today. Unfortunately, what is announced on TV and what happens in reality are two different things.

Knowing the hon the Minister as I do, I believe that this administration will not make false promises now.

You are going to fly around in helicopters!

I have accompanied the hon member for Northern Natal, who was the former Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, on many helicopter trips when we went on inspection tours. It is an acceptable mode of travel today in the modern age—it is not something that cannot be undertaken. Let us therefore not talk about that. The trip had a purpose and it served its purpose. It was not money wasted. [Interjections.]

I was saying that promises to our people should not be made without keeping them. I believe that that is unfair. If we visit areas and we tell the people that we will do this, that and the other, then it must be done. We raise people’s hopes and we get hoorahs and applause, but then we go away and nothing is done. As far as I am concerned and for as long as I can help it, that will not happen.

The hon member for Northern Natal spoke about the task that was allocated to me in so far as the identification of agricultural land is concerned. That is quite right and I thank him for raising the matter. However, this is not the right debate for that. I will report to him personally when the Vote on Agriculture is discussed tomorrow.

He was the previous boss!

Yes, he was a good boss. [Interjections.] It was not a master-servant relationship; it was a relationship of two colleagues and we had a good understanding.

Who took that mealie crop?

The mealie crop? I must ask about that but the good thing about that crop was that it was prime mealies.

It was for the birds.

Yes, it was for the birds. Amazing things happen, but that is how it goes. [Interjections.]

The provision of housing is done through teamwork. It is not our administration only that is involved in housing. Hon members know that we are largely dependent on local authorities who act as our agents. If one has to work with local authorities with such recalcitrant and do-notcare attitudes and who work at a snail’s pace, one finds it very difficult to be able to provide much needed housing.

I can quote instances until the cows come home, but it will not help us. However, a few towns and local authorities should be mentioned. I have a letter here from the Ladysmith Town Council, dated 26 August 1987. In this letter they say that they will make land available, but the housing must be provided by the administration. They said that they would not undertake to provide housing. This attitude of councils has delayed housing for a long time.

I then appealed to the hon the former Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, who was also the Minister of Housing, that we should in fact do what the local authority proposed in its letter, because it was through the avenue of having houses built departmentally that we were able to succeed in Howick. There was a similar attitude in Howick West where for two years the local authority had R1,6 million on the estimates for providing a trunk sewer-line and they found all kinds of excuses. However, the former hon Minister of Housing, the hon member for Red Hill, then gave us the green light to go ahead departmentally.

We have also encountered such attitudes as in the case of Shakaskraal, which was mentioned by an hon member. Shakaskraal has a sad history. I do not want to be critical of other administrations but I want to say that it is sad that, as far as Shakaskraal is concerned, we are going back to square one. In Shakaskraal we are now going to start where we were in 1984. The same applies to Winterton and these areas are supposed to be administered…

What about Cool Air?

We have had an application from Cool Air. However, what we are concerned about in the case of Cool Air is the provision of those religious sites. It has taken eight long years to find the costing of religious sites. These are areas which we must save out of concern.

Sometimes the people in our own communities—I want to refrain from mentioning the town, because it will identify the people—do not want poor people to live alongside them. They have mansions and I do not deny them the homes they have, but when an application is made to provide low-cost homes on sites adjacent to their homes… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, housing is the portfolio that has suffered the greatest setback in the House of Delegates. The most important factor of providing roofs over the heads of people who have been suffering great hardship was not given the due attention it required and called for.

Compared to what has been done by the House of Representatives in making homes available to its people, they have achieved so much that the difference between the two cases is like between chalk and cheese and heaven and earth. [Interjections.] Of course one can appreciate the fact that the housing Ministry in the House of Delegates has changed Ministers at the rate that one changes shirts.

One wonders why all the Ministers are so very eager to acquire the Ministership of the housing portfolio. Speaking of clean administration, of which there is an ironic boasting from all sides, it makes one wonder why a Minister does not want to forego the housing portfolio. I think, perhaps the hon the Minister of the Budget—the “Lord of the Exchequer” who always singles me out for ridicule—can shed light on this subject.

I say this because to belittle an innocent individual unduly, results in unexpected catastrophe by stealth. God has made this very apparent by depriving his lordship of the Exchequer of the Housing Ministry which he so anxiously anticipated acquiring.

Order! Is the hon member for Actonville casting a slur on the hon the Minister of the Budget?

Mr Chairman, I am speaking about housing, and I am not casting any slur. I am speaking objectively.

Order! I call upon the hon member for Actonville to withdraw that slur.

Which slur, Sir?

Order! The slur on the hon the Minister of the Budget.

I have not cast any slur, Mr Chairman.

Order! The hon member did cast a slur, and he will withdraw it.

Mr Chairman, if there is any slur, I withdraw it, but as far as I know I cast no slur.

Order! The hon member has withdrawn his remarks and he may now proceed.

Thank you, Sir.

May I just mention that it is not merely a matter of the loss of the Housing Ministry and an important secretary of the department; it would have gone much further. Had the election not been in sight a person akin to Hitler was in the wings to take over the Ministry of the Budget.

It is not my intention to cast a slur on anyone, but of course I have to defend myself when I am exposed in an undignified manner. In this House I have witnessed two spectacular incidents of utterances in a very frenzied manner; the Urdu word is “Haal”. One was when the former hon Minister of Housing went on and on, saying: “Villa Lisa, Villa Lisa, Villa Lisa!” Last week the hon the Minister of the Budget went something like this: “Cover-up, cover-up, cover-up!” He said he could not understand what “coverup” meant. In simple terms it means the swallowing of one’s own disgorge; that is what cover-up means.

On 10 February of this year the words emanating from the angered lips of his lordship, whilst the right index finger was engaged in pointing at the target, were that the James Commission was not the end of everything, but that the Attorney-General would investigate an hon member who was not of his party at that stage. In the next breath, however, when that target who had despised dangling carrots over the television screens…

What does that have to do with housing?

… saw fit to gulp down the carrot—stem, root and all…

Order! This House is not considering any carrots. The hon member must refrain from using the term “carrot”. He may now proceed. [Interjections.] This is a housing debate.

Mr Chairman, the word “carrot” has been used millions of times in this House. [Interjections.]

Order! If the hon member is going to proceed along those lines I will call upon him to resume his seat.

You must do so, Mr Chairman; I will then have to ask for a ruling from the appropriate…

Order!

I advise the hon member that I am addressing him from the Chair. He is not to use the word “carrot”.

Mr Chairman, the word has been used millions of times previously.

On a point of order, Sir: I wish to find out whether the term “carrot”…

Order! There is no point of order. The hon member will resume his seat. [Interjections.] The hon member for Actonville may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I rise to address you on a point of order: The usage of the word “carrot” is not unparliamentary, and with great respect to you, Sir…

Order! Will the hon member for Springfield resume his seat. That is my ruling, and it must be carried out. [Interjections.]

It is a biased ruling, Sir.

Dictatorship! [Interjections.]

Order! What did the hon member Mr Abram say?

I said it was a dictatorship, Sir.

Order! Will the hon member withdraw that term?

Very well, Sir, it is not a dictatorship, but it is imposing one’s prejudiced will.

It is a biased ruling.

A biased will.

You are denying the right of individual members. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, regardless of what ruling you have given—I do not want to comment on that—I would suggest that hon members should refrain from reflecting on the Chair by saying “biased ruling”, etc.

But the hon Chairman is biased!

Order!

Will the hon member for Lenasia Central rise and withdraw that term.

No, Sir, I refuse to do that.

Order! In that case the hon member, having disregarded the authority of the Chair, will withdraw from the Chamber for the remainder of the day’s sitting.

With pleasure, Sir.

[Whereupon the hon member withdrew.]

Mr Chairman, I want to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to the report which he has submitted on Pelican Park. I think the hon the Minister is aware that since 1984 when he was the hon Leader of the Official Opposition, this has been our request year after year on this issue. For the purposes of the record I want to stress again that whilst the hon the Minister recognises the difficulties we are facing in Pelican Park, that there are approximately 784 erven serviced and ready for sale in Pelican Park. I realise that the hon the Minister has come to an arrangement to sell about 180 erven but the hon the Minister acknowledges it here and says:

It is not the community’s fault that the prices have increased. The hon the Minister recognises that somewhere along the line someone or something went wrong. The hon the Minister himself, while the hon leader of the Official Opposition, acknowledged the fact and at that time used strong words to say that if the prices were not affordable, then we should throw away Pelican Park.

Our community is not prepared to pay prices that they cannot afford. Those prices should be affordable and not prices which are far above what the community could pay. I want to stress that a three-bedroomed home over Zeekoevlei owned by members of the White community costs R80 000 with a swimming pool. If we are going to sell erven in our area for about R40 000 to R50 000, the House of Delegates will be committing political suicide.

Secondly, around 1984-1985, 27 homes were built by the previous Department of Community Development during the time of the former hon Minister of Housing, the hon member for Red Hill. He took over and from then until now those people who were allocated those 27 homes have not yet been given transfer.

We are sick and tired of listening to excuses about township registration. I am not a legal man but I am given to understand that one can still state, within brackets in the offer to purchase, that one will receive transfer subject to the township being registered. The Cape Town Municipality does that daily when they sell the other houses. All the other houses in Rylands Extension 3, Extension 4 and Extension 5 were sold on that basis. Why have these 27 houses not yet been sold?

One of the reasons given is that the department has not yet made up its mind about the cost of those houses. In the meantime those tenants are being charged rent. I am not saying they must live for free, but it is said that from the time when the Administration: House of Delegates took over, instead of having forward mobility, we went backwards.

This is a disgrace. I am using strong words. We cannot seem to make up our minds about what we are doing. We are always making excuses, making excuses, making excuses. I say every year that as far as Pelikan Park is concerned, we have enough land. We must spend the money and build houses. However, here we keep hearing “land has to be identified”. We have enough land in the Cape Peninsula and yet we do not start building houses.

I again want to repeat that when we go to the city council, they say that the delay is with the House of Delegates. When we go to the House of Delegates, they say the delay is with the surveyor-general. When we go to the surveyor-general, they say the delay is with the provincial administration. Where the dickens is the delay?

Order! The hon member’s time has expired.

Well, time expires everywhere, Mr Chairman, even in the House of Delegates.

Mr Chairman, I would like to place on record—and I do so with great respect—that I disagree completely with the ruling that was made some minutes ago by the hon Chairman of Committees. I would like—out of respect to you, Sir—to inform you that I intend to take remedial measures.

Order! I will give a ruling on that after studying the ruling that was given by the hon the Chairman of Committees.

I thank you for that, Sir, but out of respect to you, I would like to place on record I intend to take remedial measures in this regard, so as to ensure the rights of individual members of this House as far as debating is concerned.

I replied to the comments made by the hon member for Southern Natal regarding the whole issue of Marburg. I specifically, at this point in time, would like to record that I am completely surprised at the hon member for Stanger, which shows me that he is quite prepared to bend principles and to condone what is clearly an unsavoury issue in terms of which the ratepayers of Marburg, I believe, have been defrauded of R40 000.

It is not an argument to say, as the hon member for Stanger did, that this occurred in 1981 and that we should therefore have raised this issue at that time. The fact of the matter is that this only came to our notice some two months ago and we have now raised it in this particular Chamber, as we are entitled to do. To now raise the red herring of the James Commission is beside the point.

I am not surprised that that hon member is prepared to bend principles.

You should not be surprised. It is part of his style.

I am not surprised at all, Sir. We merely have to look at Hansard to see how many times that hon member has bent his principles.

The hon the Minister—and I respect him for that—has committed himself to clean administration and I ask him formally to institute a full-scale enquiry into this matter. If our submissions are found to be invalid, I am prepared to apologise to the hon member for Southern Natal. We must not duck this issue and the hon the Minister must not duck this issue either. There must be no cover-up, because the hon the Minister is also involved in this issue, because he happens to be a shareholder of that particular company.

In the few minutes left to me, I wish to raise another issue, which relates to my constituency. In the hon the Minister’s speech he calls for all members of Parliament to play an active role in the promotion of housing in their constituencies. I respect him for that. I would like to bring to the attention of the hon the Minister that I in fact did just that. I wrote a letter to him on 12 April.

I referred to the question of 19 additional residential sites which would become available in Arena Road, Springfield, which is now under the control of the Durban City Council. The hon the Minister is aware of the fact that there is a tremendous shortage of housing in that particular area. The shortage exists not only because there is a shortage per se in the community, but also because the original families that settled there have grown. Naturally more housing is required in that area.

The Durban City Council has control over these 19 sites and I urge the hon the Minister to intercede on behalf of the people of Springfield, the House of Delegates and myself to ensure that control over these particular sites are taken over by this administration so that we, the House of Delegates, can make these sites available to the people of Springfield in lieu of the provision of housing. I wish to commend this matter to the hon the Minister again. I would say—with great respect—this is a very small issue. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I dislike tremendously the fact that this issue keeps coming up in this debate. We are wasting our time instead of making valuable contributions to this debate.

I wish to say for the record that the hon member for Springfield says he does not agree with me. That is his right. I have no problem with that. However, I said in this debate that the Naidoo brothers had an undertaking with the previous Marburg Town Board, which was a White local authority, to pay R40 000 provided the Marburg Town Board erected a purification plant. Subsequently no purification plant was erected…

Did you sign the undertaking?

Just hold on. No purification plant was erected. The whole sewer scheme was brought to Marburg by the then Department of Community Development. That local authority did not erect the purification plant. At the time when we bought this township we were supposed to pay that R40 000, because we bought the company. Since that local authority did not provide this service, there was no need to pay for it. If that purification plant had been erected for that township, the people residing there would not have had to pay rates. Now the Marburg Town Board rates all those properties because they render a service. If the hon member for Springfield does not understand local government he must study it. He must not just make accusations here.

I understand the law and I understand morality.

The hon member and his morality!

Tell me!

There is morality and morality. They come here to uphold morality. They are Harry’s angels.

Tell us!

I will come out with it, but not yet. I still have a lot of time to deal with the hon member.

In the balance sheet a provision for R40 000 is indicated. That company’s balance sheet and books are audited by A S O Bason and company. That provision was made when we bought the company, and it remained on the balance sheet. This company had other land to develop. However, in November 1984 Wimpey Homes bought that other piece of land and in 1985 that provision was removed. What is wrong with that? If the hon member does not understand a balance sheet it is because he looks at it the way he wants to.

Finally, and this is most important, for the information of that hon member, every local authority’s books are audited once a year by provincial auditors, who are professionals. Does the hon member mean to say that R40 000 can be swept under the carpet irrespective of who does the books? Does the hon member think that it will just be overlooked by the provincial auditors and that it will not be mentioned to the public of Marburg in the auditors’ report? This is all due to the vindictiveness and twisted minds of people who want to score points for elections. If nothing can be found, the hon member will dig up something. I will give the hon member the whole history, from 1971 to today. I have plenty of time, but not here. I accepted right from the beginning that we had an agreement, which we signed.

Do you accept an enquiry?

An enquiry for the hon member? Why have an enquiry? Let us go to court. Why must we have an investigation and an enquiry just because the hon member wants it?

It is prescribed!

It is not prescribed, my friend.

It is prescribed!

It is not prescribed. How can an amount be prescribed? Why does the hon member not make an investigation of the provincial authorities?

Yes, you would say that it is not prescribed.

I am not saying that it is prescribed. It never existed. When a delivery is not met, payment is not met. [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon member really should know better than that! [Interjections.]

Order!

If the hon member is a lawyer who knows so much, he would not have been here!

Mr Chairman, I would like to ask the hon member a perfectly reasonable question. Will the hon member concede that I did not make the allegation as he has put it? Would he be prepared to concede that if he is right, it would be in order to submit it to an enquiry? What is he afraid of? Is he afraid of an enquiry?

No, I am not afraid. It is not a question of being afraid of any enquiry.

If I am wrong, I apologise.

If all the facts are present, why does the hon member want an enquiry? Why does the hon member not keep quiet now?

That is what Rajbansi said, and what happened?

Do not be so… [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I believe that from the documents which one has seen, there might perhaps be some case for an enquiry. If nobody has anything to hide, I think an enquiry will probably clear the matter up.

I just want to refer to a statement by the hon the Minister of Housing, namely that the Department of Housing would submit proposals for increases in existing rentals to full marketrelated rates, staggered over three years. I want to make it very clear that we who are seated on this side of the House are totally opposed to market-related rentals being charged with relation to housing schemes, because these housing schemes were not created because of economic reasons for the housing of people. They were created as a result of the vicious application of the Group Areas Act.

If the hon the Minister wishes to do the work of the White NP Government in further persecuting our people, he is welcome to do so. We on this side of the House will oppose to the hilt any question of bringing rentals in line with so-called market-related rentals. One can only do that in a normal society and not in an abnormal situation like the one in which we find ourselves. The Government is totally unsympathetic towards the rights of the individual, human rights and human dignity. This Government places people in racial compartments, based not on general consideration, but purely on the basis of race.

That is why we on this side also believe that housing should be administered by a single Ministry, which should control housing for every sector of the population, irrespective of race, colour or creed. Housing should become absolutely colour-blind. Unfortunately we are perpetuating a system which has caused much hardship already. We are now carrying it further.

There are one or two other issues that I want to tackle. The one is the payment of an amount of R300 000 by the Housing Development Board with regard to a interdict which was taken by several people with respect to erven in Claudius, Pretoria. I believe that the Housing Development Board and the Ministers’ Council were prepared to forego an amount of R300 000 which was placed in their trust which they were supposed to have looked after, as a result of the misdemeanours of certain individuals.

I believe that it is absolutely wrong that the Housing Development Board should fund that type of amount, irrespective of the other considerations that the hon the Minister of the Budget mentioned in his response to that particular question on 25 April 1989. We still believe that as custodians of the funds which they have to expend on behalf of this particular racial group, they have failed miserably to rectify the issue at another level. This amount of money should not have been disbursed. We object to that.

Furthermore, there was another question that I asked the hon the Minister of Housing on 2 May 1989. It was the second question on the question paper of that date. It had to do with the allocation of portion 7 of erf 551 of the Asiatic Bazaar in Pretoria. I do not know what information was given to the hon the Minister of Housing but I want to allege that in the reply that he gave us on that day, the hon the Minister, by omission or commission, misled this House.

I want to tell the hon the Minister what the real facts are. The real facts are that a business was conducted at 1305 Hector Street, Lady Selvbourne, in Pretoria. This business was an Achar factory and disposal depot. In 1983 the Community Development Board decided to offer that particular site as a resettlement site for the purpose of resettling that particular business. In short, a statement made by the hon the Minister in his reply that the site was not allocated for resettlement purposes is therefore not absolutely true. I hope that the hon the Minister will go back and try and get the facts.

What are the facts? The particular firm to which the site was allocated, conducted the business. That firm then wrote to the department and requested them not to transfer the property into that firm’s name, but to transfer that property into the name of another company. That company currently owns the property. The hon the Minister may not have known that, but in 1985 the firm to which the site was allocated for resettlement had financial problems. It was almost liquidated but I understand that a compromise was reached with the creditors and that they came to some settlement. However, that firm does not exist any more. This site which was allocated for resettlement purposes has not been developed. We believe that it was allocated for a sum of R110 725 and that since that time it has not been utilised for the purposes for which it was intended, namely to resettle a business. We believe that this site should be repossessed by the department and put up for public auction.

I understand that the rooms in the houses in some of the housing schemes that have been planned by the hon the Minister’s department are so small that one cannot even change one’s mind in them! I want to ask the hon the Minister to pay attention to that matter, because knowing our people, he will be aware of the fact that those rooms are not only bedrooms to us but living rooms. One should try and give people something better in a housing scheme.

Whilst there are thousands of people on waiting lists, I have been given to understand that 24 former employees of some sugar estate in Natal—I readily concede that they are our people and also have to be accommodated—jumped the queue over thousands of other people. I believe it is important that people who are on the waiting list and who are awaiting their turn should be looked after. The queue should only be jumped when some natural disaster forces the department to provide immediate housing for the people who have lost their homes in that disaster.

Then, nearer to my domain in the Transvaal, I want to point out to the hon the Minister that there are some fourteen or eighteen agricultural lots in Villa Lisa. Those lots have not been bought by the hon the Minister’s department and I know that the CP-controlled town council in Boksburg is trying to get the department to buy them out. However, when somebody want R17 per square metre for raw land whilst we have paid R1, 60 per square metre for raw land in the other parts of Villa Lisa, then there is something amiss.

I want to request the hon the Minister not to allow the purchase of those lots at those prices. Those very same people were prepared to sell those lots for far less in 1985. As a result of things dragging on and what have you, their options have increased and now they want more money. I believe that we should look after the interests of our people and not allow that kind of money to be paid.

I want to remind the hon the Minister that our attitude on this side of the House is that we must watch situations throughout the country with hawk’s eyes. That is what we are here for as the Opposition. Our job is to look after the interests of the community at large.

What do you think our job is?

Your job is to run the Ministry. Your job is to entrench own affairs. [Interjections.] Your job is to help apartheid work—that is your job.

That is all in your mind.

It is not in my mind. That is precisely what your department is doing. It is carrying out an apartheid exercise. It has been given a job by the Government to see to it that apartheid works and it is making apartheid work in the whole process.

In Lenasia we have agricultural land—perhaps I should have raised it in the other debate but I want to make it quite clear—which is very close to the residential areas. It was actually purchased for the purpose of creating residential areas. There are many people who have been allocated agricultural land and who are not using it at the moment. If it is not being used in that way, I believe it should be utilised for the purpose for which it was intended, which is to create more housing for our people in that part of the country.

I want to remind the hon the Minister that when it comes to visits to all these areas—it is a pity that the hon the Deputy Minister is not here—we know of visits that are made by hon Ministers ostensibly to address problems such as these, but the visits turn out to be for other purposes. The local authorities, the local management committees as well as the local MPs are not consulted in the matter.

I want to ask the hon the Minister to please see to it that when visits are made to any of these localities in the Transvaal and anywhere else in the country, the local Members of Parliament and the local authority committees in those areas should at least be taken into the confidence of the people that are making those visits. If that does not happen, hon Ministers will encounter a great number of problems from members of our community. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a pity that the hon member for Actonville is not in the House. I want to say that, as is customary, he has again demonstrated his inadequacies and his inability to apply himself to the Vote of my colleague the hon the Minister of Housing. He spoke of carrots, but he is the first one who wants carrots.

As the Minister of the Budget and a member of the Ministers’ Council, I have been repeatedly approached by the hon member for Actonville, asking me to approach the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs in regard to an appointment for him in the South African diplomatic corps. [Interjections.] Not only does he want to be in the diplomatic corps, but he wants to be an ambassador. [Interjections.] With the kind of ability displayed by the hon member for Actonville, it would be an embarrassment to this country if a person of that calibre was appointed to the diplomatic or the foreign corps.

The hon member for Actonville is not only an embarrassment to this House, but he is an embarrassment when he goes to cocktail parties and banquets. [Interjections.] He is an absolute embarrassment!

Order! I want the hon the Minister to withdraw the words “he is an embarrassment when he goes to cocktail parties” because it is not relevant to the Vote.

I humbly withdraw it, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May I make it quite clear that the hon member for Actonville does not partake in drinking at cocktail parties…

One does not have to drink, one can also do other things at cocktail parties.

… so he cannot be an embarrassment. Do not attack the poor man for no reason.

I want to refer to the contributions made by hon members in this House. I am ad idem that rentals should be applied not only to residential properties, but also to commercial properties, which have been built by the former Department of Community Development and which have now become the property of the Administration: House of Delegates.

I agree that our people who had moved to the peripheries and boundaries of the towns, not of their own volition or choice, were in the first instance traders in central towns and cities. Therefore, at great cost to themselves and loss of property values, business and trade, they were resettled under very adverse circumstances. I am sure that my colleague the hon the Minister of Housing will take full cognisance so that when he approaches the Housing Development Board he will make it quite clear that the rentals should not be market-related, but it should be taken into consideration that these people should not suffer any more as a result of high rentals.

This not only applies to residential and commercial sites, but also to our religious sites. The religious sites in new townships should be made available at a nominal price and not at a price in accordance with the township development costs.

It should be mahala:R2!

At a time when the former secretary of the Department of Community Development, Mr Fouché, and the former hon Minister of Community Development, Minister Steyn…

“Bulldozer” Fouché!

We made representations at the time and it was agreed that religious sites and sites of worship would be given to the community at a nominal cost. It was even suggested that it be given at R2 per site.

It happened in Chatsworth.

It happened, but what has happened now? In Marlboro two religious organisations made applications to purchase religious sites. I am sad to say that although the former hon Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture realised that according to the case presented by these two religious groups they should have been given the religious sites at a nominal price, the former hon Minister—perhaps under compulsion—sent out a circular to the regional offices and elsewhere stating that that should not be so. The circular stated that the sites should be given out according to the development costs of the township.

I am not blaming my colleague, but he had to circulate such a statement as a result of which the religious sites in Marlboro were valued at R25m2. That brought the cost up to more than R300 000 per site. Because the attention of the present Ministers’ Council was drawn to the fact, we then made an appeal to the Housing Development Board that the price should be reduced by 50%. I am happy to say that the board has agreed that the price should be reduced by 50%.

No, that is too much! [Interjections.]

Unhappily the cost of… [Interjections.] This is it! [Interjections.]

It is better to have a 50% discount than to have paid the full price. [Interjections.] Thank you, we will try. We will try for another 50%, and then it will go for nothing! [Interjections.] We shall look at this.

[Inaudible.]

I want to address those hon members who said that that money which has not been expended goes back to the Government. In my budget speech I repeatedly said that whatever funds in the Housing Development Board…

Mr Chairman, will the hon the Minister tell this House who formulates the policy as far as the registration of sites and townships is concerned? [Interjections.]

The policy is a matter governed by the Housing Development Act and the relevant code.

Throw that Act away!

It has been repeated in this House before, and today as well, that moneys not expended go back to the Government. This is not so; I explained it in my budget speech. The money does not go back to the Government but is reclaimed as funds for the Housing Development Board.

However, what causes the delay in the expenditure of moneys that have been voted for accumulated funds? It is not the fault of the House of Delegates or its administration; the local authorities are largely responsible because they come in at the end of the financial year with their plans and projects, and those plans and projects should, in the first instance, have met the requirements of our administration, but they are then revised at the instance of our administration. Therefore the funds are carried forward to the ensuing year.

It is all very well to say that agricultural land should be bought for the purposes of housing development; in certain cases it should be. However, there are many instances where the agricultural land is so expensive as to put it beyond the cost structures of housing development. A case in point is Phoenix. Phoenix is bursting at the seams, and we are looking for new ground. It is all agricultural ground. Do hon members know that Huletts Corporation have a beautiful piece of ground called Phoenix East, and we have our eye on it. However, what do the owners say? They want practically R50 000 per ha and in addition, one would have to buy the sugar mill to go with it.

The group areas caused that.

Yes, I agree; the group areas caused this, but because the group areas caused it, we must adopt a practical and realistic attitude. We cannot simply go and buy this expensive land for housing; we have to take affordability into account. Our difficulty is the Group Areas Act; one cannot run away from that. We have therefore repeatedly been making representations to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning to allow us to identify, within the confines of the Group Areas Act, additional land for Indian housing.

My colleague, the hon the Minister of Housing, has not been sitting back since taking over that portfolio; he has been moving around. He has called utility companies and others in the housing development field to come and tell the hon the Minister what they could provide by way of housing. This matter is therefore receiving the attention of my colleague.

I now wish to deal with the position of squatters who have come onto land belonging to the House of Delegates in Lenasia and elsewhere. In the main debate of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning—unhappily most of the hon members were absent—I made the point that the Government has brought out a White Paper on Urbanisation.

If the requirements set in the White Paper were implemented, then we would not have been experiencing this situation concerning squatters. People have got to have land and homes and they go to whichever is an open area. Mr Olaus van Zyl, MEC in charge of local government in the Transvaal came to the House of Delegates Ministers’ Council and told us that it already existed. The responsibility for squatters is a “general affair” and therefore the provincial authorities of the Transvaal had to take that responsibility.

It was then suggested that instead of having a health hazard developing in that area, would we not tell the provincial council that they could go ahead and provide the necessary sanitary services. We cry out that we must serve everybody and therefore the Ministers’ Council had to take a decision that as humans and as fellow human beings in the field of human endeavour we had to say yes so that they could go ahead and provide water and the necessary sanitary facilities. However, the Indian community is going to lose out in the process because once the squatters have settled, the temporary nature becomes a permanent nature. So what are we going to do?

It is all very well that we are shouting and I share in these demands that we have got to meet the requirements to help our people—our Black brethren, our Coloured brethren and even our White brethren who need help in the Indian areas. These are practicalities, these are realities and these are problems. We need to do whatever we possibly can in this regard.

It was suggested that we should have mobile homes. If anybody has made a study of mobile homes then it is I.I particularly applied my mind to it when I spent some time in Canada. It is not so much so in the United States, but in Canada this is vogue, this is fashion. However, it is a very expensive exercise.

Firstly one will have to provide all the necessary infrastructure on large stretches of land and having done that, one has to move the mobile home from one area to another which can sometimes be up to 400 or 500 kilometres away. All that costs a lot.

One then goes into the new area and, as with a caravan, one sets up one’s home. Once they have set up their homes there are levies and charges which have to be paid by the occupants. It is therefore very costly. These wooden homes are susceptible to fires. This is what happens despite the precautions taken.

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure to be able to speak after the hon the Minister. He touched on something very near and dear to everyone’s hearts and that is the price of religious sites. I know that when Chatsworth was developed, religious sites were just thrown around as a matter of principle.

However, I am surprised to learn that religious sites are being sold at the same price as that of ordinary dwelling erven. One of the conditions of housing development is the provision of the basic necessities, and religion is one of them. I wonder if the Government is buying land to be utilised for building schools at market-related prices. I would like to look into that. I urge the hon the Minister that if the Act provides that religious sites must be sold at market-related prices, that section of the Act ought to be amended immediately.

Three religious sites were set aside in Cool Air and Dalton when they developed the townships some ten years ago. What surprises me is that the House of Delegates has, from 1985 to date, not been able to determine what the cost price of that land is. As a result the people are up in arms about it and I fully support them. It takes five more years for a department to establish what the raw land cost is and what the development cost is. I wonder what development took place, besides a road which runs across the parameters of the religious site. This is nothing but a lethargic performance by the Department of Housing. Five years is far for too long. People could have built a place of worship there five years ago at 40% of today’s price.

The Government and the officials of the House of Delegates should bear that in mind. I would like to ask the House of Delegates to subsidise that place of worship, because it is not the fault of those people. It is because of the foot-dragging, lethargic performance of the Ministry of Housing that those people today have to build a place of worship which they could have had for R4 000. Today they have to pay R20 000.

Having said that, I come to a very sore point regarding housing in my constituency, namely the areas of Welbedacht and Gillitts. The present hon Minister of Housing knows Gillitts very well. The greater part of it consists of wood-and-iron shacks. The first Minister of Housing did indicate to me that he negotiated with the Pinetown Municipality to do a feasibility study, but there it stopped. Somebody threw a blanket over that project and it is fast asleep.

Welbedacht is the most squalid area in the entire Durban/Pietermaritzburg region. I am ashamed of the state of affairs there. I did the department’s work last year. After repeatedly taking the matter to the successive Ministers, I did a socio-economic survey on foot. I walked the length and breadth of that squalid area. I was shocked. I felt sorry that in this modern age, females of 40 or 50 years of age have to carry water on their heads in 25-litre cans. That is an utter shame. Why?

I am not taking the present hon Minister to task. The previous Minister who held the reins of housing did not worry about the poor. He was worried about the rich. He was worried about garage sites. He was worried about trading sites. I do not know why. My urgent plea to the present hon Minister is: Please, we are here to serve the poor, who cannot afford to help themselves. We must look after them. Leave the élite alone.

And do not put up the rent.

And do not put up the rent. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I crave your indulgence to make a statement of correction.

I referred to the Marlboro religious sites as being R25 per square metre. It was not R25. It was R12 per square metre and we reduced it. We asked the Housing Development Board to reduce it by 50%.

Mr Chairman, there is no doubt that housing is one of the most sensitive matters that the own affairs Administration of the House of Delegates has had to deal with since its inception, and it was so in the days of its forerunner, the South African Indian Council, too. I need not belabour the sustained criticism by the homeless about the compelling shortage of accommodation. That has become a clarion call which I would urge this House to heed with conviction. Nor do I want to repeat the hardships the deprived people of this country have encountered under the Government’s programme of racially segregated residential areas. That has been with us ever since the colour bar question has been on the agenda of the freedom struggle in this country.

What perturbs me most is what we are doing to address this problem, which really is a plague. I want to emphasize that we must get to grips with the compelling need for shelter for our people, whether they are Black, White or Brown. I want to warn the hon the Minister that this problem cannot stay on the back burner. It must be tackled boldly now. There should be no resorting to politicking and reference to what the former Minister of Housing did or did not do. That is history. It is time that we buried the past and prepared the ground for the future.

With regard to housing I would like to suggest that a start be made where it is always done when a house is to be built—on the drawing board. In our case the programme will have to be drawn on a much bigger board with a much wider canvass.

Earlier in the year, during the joint debate on the Vote of the Minister of Finance, I suggested that there should be closer ties between the Ministry of Trade and Industry and the Ministry of National Education to strengthen the chairs for industrial design at the various universities in order to ensure a fuller use of our resources. This should be done in collaboration with the creation of markets for the finished goods.

Today I want to emphasize the need to get academic research on the need for housing off the ground. I believe there is ample justification for chairs to be established at the University of Durban-Westville and the University of Natal. These campuses can work together in dealing with research projects on homelessness and housing management, which are issues central to the Government’s plans to make this country a property-owning democracy.

This afternoon a number of hon members suggested various ways of achieving this. The hon the Minister mentioned mobile homes. An hon member also talked about doing away with subsidies and increasing salaries. This is what these chairs could bring to the fore. They can find out what the needs of our community in the country really are.

We are sick and tired of the political rhetoric that has come to characterise the often justified public perception of this Chamber as being a failure. Do not blame it on administration. All the hon Ministers are equally culpable because their policy decisions on administrative matters are taken collectively.

Let us pump more money into the establishment of a chair such as I mentioned at the University of Durban-Westville. The own affairs administration of this House could then use the findings of the research teams as a possible basis for a White Paper. We can do with this initiative, not only to deflect public criticism, but as a genuine effort to address this nagging problem. Alternatively, as a short-term measure until such a chair is established, we could tender for research projects on public housing studies for areas on a regional basis. I believe such a Government-sponsored research project could be an important source of funding for academic institutions instead of suffering the bureaucratic bungling that is often the case.

I want to deal with a few matters relating to Tongaat itself. I am also one of the victims who has had no response from the Department of Housing. I have written various letters in which I queried certain of the properties that were identified for residential areas. To this day I have had no positive response. There is a misconception amongst the people in Tongaat. A rumour is doing the rounds that I have promised on behalf of the House of Delegates that the homes belonging to the Tongaat group would be given to them. I want to make it absolutely clear that we do not own those properties. I indicated to the people that we will make attempts to get the Tongaat group to sell these properties to the people. If there is any misconception on the part of anyone, I want to put on record that I made no such promise.

On the other hand there were problems with regard to housing in the Greylands area. I think some of the farmers are not willing to give up their land. Subsequently the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture came to Tongaat. The land of some of the farmers had been declared residential land and the farmers were paying rates on this land. They have the right to sell that land to whoever they wish. However, I am of the opinion that the private company that has taken an option on these properties will build homes for the higher income group only. Therefore, if the House of Delegates is considering using that land for sub-economic and economic homes, then I will not go along with the idea, because it will create more hardship for the poorer people as this land is a couple of kilometres away from the hub of activity in Tongaat. However, even if that land is used for housing, the land that was set aside for housing south of Tongaat is still needed. The land which was identified in Greylands is not going to suffice.

The hon member for Umzinto mentioned something about the railways. I attended a meeting this morning, and I was shocked to find that there are three options as far as the accommodation which is provided by the railways are concerned. They can either sell those properties, lease them or demolish them. I was shocked to find that homes were being demolished. While we in the Indian and other non-White communities are crying out for homes, these people are demolishing homes. I am not too sure how many homes have been demolished, but I believe that we should look into this matter with regard to railway homes.

There is a case in question in Tongaat where Indians wanted to buy railway homes that belonged to the railways. However, they were unable to do so. The Tongaat Group then bought all these homes under the White banner and today Indians are living in those houses which belong to the Tongaat Group. This matter has to be addressed. I feel that when homes are not being used any more, it is easier for us to subdivide and sell them to the Indian community, rather than demolish them and identify new land.

Mr Chairman, I shall certainly be very brief, since much has been said as far as housing is concerned. I am sure that the hon the Minister is taking note of all these matters.

Before I highlight one or two matters which I want to underscore, I also want to take this opportunity of aligning myself with my colleagues in congratulating our Director-General who has been elevated to a higher position. I wish him everything of the best. I know that he is man of integrity and ability, and a person who carries himself with a great amount of dignity. While his ability has earned him this position, we in the House of Delegates will be the poorer for his going. However, we want to wish him everything of the best, because he deserves this promotion.

Mention was made earlier of squatters, and there was also talk of housing in Thomsville. I have seen these buildings on the spot in Lenasia. I can assure the hon the Minister of Housing that these buildings definitely require either upgrading or demolishing altogether. Of course my colleague, the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare will bear me out. Since they are dull, drab and squalid, they are not conducive to good health conditions. The sooner they are upgraded, the better it will be for the people who are living there.

Of course, the fact remains that they are overcrowded. There are so many people living there that when they are upgraded, I am not sure whether the same people will be able to occupy those buildings within their financial means. This is a matter which must be taken into account before any action is taken with regard to those buildings.

As far as squatters are concerned, I have also seen that on the spot. It is a matter of great concern to us, but I am sure that our colleague will be taking cognisance of this fact when he tries to find a solution to this problem. All hon members are aware of the fact that the hon the Minister of Housing has just taken over this responsibility. However, I can assure them that he is a man of great ability as far as housing is concerned. He makes himself available to find the solutions to difficult matters.

He has been very active from the time that he has taken over. I admire that quality. He has been to many areas, looking at things on the spot in an effort to find out what is best for our community. He has looked at various areas and various types of houses, the self-help schemes and other structures which are of interest to the lower income group, so that they would benefit from State subsidies. It is a person of this calibre who is handling housing now.

I am sure that given the time, he will definitely make a good job of it. We can see the makings of a man who is interested in the welfare of his community. It is not that there are no difficulties. There are many difficulties that he will be confronted with, but the fact that he is prepared to wrestle with these difficulties and overcome them and find solutions, is very heartening indeed.

Of course we are not unmindful of the immediate and long-term difficulties confronting housing development. Mention has been made of the long delays and I want to underscore long delays in the proclamation and registration of land can be frustrating. However, I think there are ways and means of cutting down on these times so that erven can by made available to our people at reduced costs. The longer it takes for these erven to be proclaimed and registered, the higher the costs will be escalating. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to respond to some of the things that have been said here and I want to make it absolutely clear what I said in my address—I repeat it—that some people cannot pay rents because of economic circumstances like unemployment. Those cases will be treated humanely, but I want to make it very clear here—I am not seeking votes—that we will very sympathetically consider the cases of those storekeepers who have been located in areas where business for some reason or other suffers.

However, I am not going to allow—I want all hon members to listen very carefully—R2,5 million of the taxpayers’ money to be lost, because that money can be used to provide homes or land to those poor people about whom hon members are talking. I take it that they are not talking from the tips of their tongues but from the bottom of their hearts. [Interjections.] This is public money and not charity funds.

I want to give the assurance that if there are some storekeepers who are suffering for whatever reason because of their location, we must look at that humanely, but nobody can allow R2,5 million of the taxpayers’ money to be taken for a ride. I am not going to allow that. [Interjections.] I am not interested in the elections and the outcome thereof. This is a fact and I shall deal with it immediately. [Interjections.]

The hon member Mr Abram referred to 1305 Hector Street. The purchaser is, in fact, a resettlement case and has been granted an extension of time to complete those buildings. I provided that answer on the basis of information given by my officials and until they are proved to be incorrect with some substantial evidence I must dismiss the submission made by the hon member Mr Abram.

I want to refer to the question of the need for research. There is no need for research on housing. Voluminous documents have been produced. What we need to do is to get out and see what is happening in Phoenix. We must have the courage to walk amongst our people and tell them that if they want homes at reasonable prices they will have to roll up their sleeves and use the Government’s money and their ability in partnership to build homes at reasonable costs. The Urban Foundation has demonstrated beyond any doubt at Phoenix that a partnership between a potential home-owner and the State can deliver a home at a reasonable price. There is no other way in which to do it. The cost of materials and labour and land and the servicing thereof is rising. If we want to face all those challenges, we shall have to find some other method whereby we can help our people to reduce costs.

Mr Chairman, is the hon the Minister prepared to answer a question?

No, I am busy with my reply. The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and the South African Bureau of Standards have made contributions in regard to, for instance, building material. It is the duty of the leadership to make use of this information and to sell the potential that is available so that our people will accept and utilise the findings. That is our responsibility.

Core houses have been spoken of, but we have not made much progress in that regard.

The other day on TV we saw a metal frame house being built. The frames go up first, the foundation next, and then the cladding is done. Those houses are being produced at a reasonable cost. It is our duty to make representations and to get those homes built. I do not only want to listen to speeches here; I want to hear of the experiences of hon members which they can pass on to us and our officials so that we can do something more positive.

Give them serviced land and let them build their homes.

I would go so far as to say that it may be cheaper to give a serviced plot to people for nothing and let them build on their own.

Hear, hear!

Let them start by building a habitable home. It does not matter whether it is built of blocks, bricks or even corrugated iron, as long as it complies with the minimum health requirements and as long as there are sanitation facilities, water, electricity, and schools and sports fields in the area. Many of us were born in such humble homes. People can evolve and improve their lot. [Interjections.] This is the order of tomorrow.

At the rate at which building costs are going up, we have to be addressing new challenges and finding new answers. We must not come with the same old groan year after year—it will not help.

That is why we ask for a research council to come forward with ideas.

No, the research council has done its work already.

Then it must be implemented.

That is what I am saying. If we want to implement it, we must get off our backs. Standing up for five minutes to talk about it will not help. We have to go and persuade our people to accept new methods. We have to talk to our management committees and our local affairs committees and sell these ideas to them so that they can try them out. They will succeed, as the Urban Foundation is succeeding.

With regard to Gillitts, consultants have recommended that the area be incorporated into Pinetown because the land is very steep. A portion of that land will always remain agricultural because of its nature. Pinetown is agreeable to taking this land under its wing but the Gillitts Town Board is not prepared to co-operate, so there one has a problem.

When we went out on the inspection last Saturday, I invited as many hon members of Parliament as possible to come along. Those who came would have profited. Those who did not, missed a wonderful opportunity of seeing what is going on in and around Durban.

Why were we not asked?

I believe your colleague was notified. In any case, the hon members did have an opportunity to join the tour.

Insofar as the Copes Folly-Dunveria issue is concerned, the files were submitted to the James Commission and the James Commission accepted the information that was given. That is the answer to it. What is more, the land prices in terms of cost per hectare compare favourably with Villa Lisa. There is no difference in the prices paid in Villa Lisa and Copes Folly. [Interjections.] Consultants are examining the border strip. There is a sizable border strip and if that could be utilised for housing, then I take it that we would be able to get far more building plots for housing in that area.

I now come to sporting facilities in Lenasia Extensions 8, 9, 10 and 11. The Witwatersrand Regional Services Council has made available an amount of R1,25 million for the provision of sporting facilities in the area. The money must be paid over to a local authority but no local authority exists at the moment. The matter is presently under discussion and as soon as the responsibility is handed over to a local authority, some positive developments should take place. I understand the predicament in which my hon colleague from that area finds himself.

As far as the North Coast is concerned, I got together with the Development Services Board—this was soon after taking over the office as Minister—to discuss their problems and our problems. It has been agreed that there will be ongoing discussions on a regular basis between the Development Services Board and our Administration with a view to resolving problems falling under the jurisdiction of the Development Services Board.

With regard to the North Coast, the cost of providing sewer reticulation was so high that it made it virtually impossible to think in terms of a housing scheme. However, certain positive recommendations were advanced at that meeting and a further study is going to be made. Hopefully from that study we may be able to give the House good news and in fact commence with a housing programme for that area.

One must also understand that steep land requires a high standard of servicing, or else there would be damage to homes. Somebody said that if certain areas on the North Coast had not been serviced as well as they had been and at that level, the December rains would have washed many of those houses into the sea.

What is more, local authorities are now insisting that the level of services must provide for population expansion over a number of years, so that the local authority itself does not assume financial responsibility for maintaining services. All of this is a burden which ultimately has to be paid for by the person to whom the house is allotted. These are some of the factors that must be taken into account when considering why the cost of buildings is escalating.

Insofar as the rent boards are concerned, the rent boards are still working as an agency of the House of Assembly. [Interjections.] Yes, this is the answer I received from my officials. We appoint people on the recommendation of hon members of Parliament. This is the position, but I will confirm it in writing to hon members.

We often receive complaints about increases in rentals. The rent charge for a house represents one of the many charges on a consolidated billing, which include electricity, water costs, rates and other charges. Unfortunately we carry the can. We must explain to our people that we are not the only ones collecting money on that bill. Many other authorities are involved as well and their charges also go up. Electricity charges are virtually going up on an annual basis. Water rates have been going up. Rates also go up and therefore one has these problems.

As I said the other day, the whole question of a rental formula and the method of arriving at the rental charges is under review. As soon as we have a final report on this matter, I believe explanations must be given in the simplest possible manner and these must be made available for distribution to householders so that there will be a proper understanding of the whole question. People should not be misled and should not misunderstand the position. They should not attribute or apportion blame to authorities who are not entirely responsible for the increases.

With regard to the question of Rylands and the cost of erven in Pelikan Park, I think we are all concerned and saddened by the fact that for more than five years every one of us has seen serviced stands with tarred roads, kerbing, channeling and even the lights burning at night—I know who pays for that—in these townships.

And the population!

The answer is simply that whether one likes it or not this serious problem has to be addressed by the authorities. This cannot be done by the Administration: House of Delegates and it cannot be done by me as a Minister. There are many requirements that have to be complied with before the surveyor-general of a province will register a township and then allow for the individual deeds for each of those plots to be released.

They have been trying to resolve these matters and I am told that some of the problems go back to the time when the township development was in the hands of the Department of Community Development. We have also inherited the legacy of the past, but there are certain meetings taking place and we have already canvassed this matter with our colleagues in the other Ministries.

Hopefully some kind of arrangement can be made whereby, when land bought from different people is consolidated and a township is developed under the auspices of one of the three Ministries, it will be possible to allow for transfers to take place and mortgage bonds to be registered by some legislative measure being introduced to remove the restrictions that impede us from doing what most of the people here require us to do.

We talked about the sale of land, and I think I said that something like 72,2% of the homes available for sale have been taken up. I have just been going through these statistics, and one area where movement in this direction has been somewhat disappointing is the Transvaal. The number of homes available in Johannesburg is 5 056, while total sales were 1 017. This is 20,11%. I cannot understand this, because many people who purchased their homes have sold them and moved on to buy better homes. Others have made reasonable profits out of these sales.

I think it is our duty, through the management committee and members of Parliament, to encourage our people to take transfer of their properties. When one considers that the cost of servicing certain sites—we saw them in Newlands West—is as much as R15 000 to R19 000, it would be unfair to expect the administration to hold prices at the original levels. I would like to appeal to all hon members from the Transvaal to see to it that the message goes round to management committees that they must institute inquiries to establish why erven or homes which have been made available to people have not been bought by people on an instalment basis, to examine what the reasons are. If necessary they should then actively encourage these people to purchase these homes.

Sooner or later there will be a change, because if the cost of building homes and servicing land is out of all proportion to what it was just five years ago the price of these old homes built prior to 1983 will be upgraded to make a contribution towards the cost of homes that are being built today, for people who have been on the waiting list for a long time.

Mention was also made of the fact that certain people were given notice by a sugar company; they were housed. What is wrong with that? There must be instances when people have to be helped; one has to make exceptions to the rules. However, the situation in that area in Phoenix is that the land on which we have been building our housing estates was bought from the sugar company, and the company parted with valuable land for housing. If, then, some of their workers, on retirement, have to make way for others then surely it is our duty to help them, because there has been some association with the company, in that we bought land from them.

Secondly, if they are pensioners, where do they go? Do we throw them out on the streets? What we did there was to act promptly to ensure that certain organisations that would find wonderful material in this kind of development, did not have a field day. If any hon member brought a case of that nature to me, irrespective of his constituency or party, if I thought it merited some consideration or assistance, I would certainly go out of my way to provide it.

Hear, hear!

This is not a political game that we are playing.

I want to say, as has been acknowledged by other hon members here, that I have just taken over this Ministry. However, what I did do was immediately to have a meeting with the Development and Services Board to establish the necessary liaison. I have the assurance of Mr Peter Miller that there will be as many meetings as necessary with our officials in order to ensure that the development of housing and infrastructure takes place as speedily as possible, and to iron out any problems that may arise from time to time.

Secondly, as a result of representations from the members of Parliament for Verulam and Stanger, I called a meeting in Durban on a Saturday morning with consultants and with the local authority to see whether we could iron out some of the problems. In fact I believe that that meeting has demonstrated our concern, and secondly it has also made it possible for some measures to be instituted which will resolve these problems sooner than would otherwise have been possible.

There is something else to which I want to respond. I am not going to go around the country with an entourage of garland carriers—members of Parliament and LACs—unless it is absolutely necessary. If one has to go somewhere to do some work and it can be done without having a stage coach movement around one, then one does it because it saves time and it is cheaper. However, where we want to get the comments of our colleagues in Parliament or the guidance of the local affairs committee or management committees, it is a must and we must by all means do it.

This overdramatisation of the housing problem is of no good to anybody lest we give the wrong message; lest we give people the impression that we will start a 1 000 plot housing scheme overnight. I do not want to be found guilty of that. I say that I will try to do my best and that is what I am going to do. I will try with the sincere desire of delivering the goods. We must first deliver the goods and insofar as Pelikan Park is concerned, I have had discussions with the hon member for Rylands.

I know that it is going to be impossible to demand the kind of prices that they would have arrived at on calculation. Those plots which have been lying idle for five years would have doubled in price at today’s market-related interest rates. Somebody is therefore going to suffer a loss but the important thing is to identify all our problems in order to clear them from the slate and make the land available to the people who want it. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, this is of course an important occasion—I am not going to say a historical one—and coming back to this House as a Minister I must thank all hon members of Parliament who stood together and assisted me during the difficult times I have had.

Today I return to Parliament as a Minister to manage the affairs of Local Government and Agriculture and I also want to pay my respects to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council—the hon leader of our party—and my hon colleagues for their confidence.

Returning to this House as a Minister coincides with the moves which are being made afresh to find a constitutional model for South Africa which will be acceptable to all its people. This may be approached either at local government or central government level.

We are all aware of the Natal Indaba proposals and the proposal for a “Great Indaba” in South Africa. These proposals have surfaced as little rays of light in an otherwise dark constitutional landscape. It is an accepted fact that the tricameral system of own affairs administration of which we form part, could never be the answer for providing lasting solutions for a peaceful and unified South Africa.

I dare say that the present constitution could not have been intended to be more than an interim phase. The principle of consensus was introduced—even though to a limited extent—for the first time and based on the experience of the last four years, we are now entering a phase where a new constitution acceptable to all South Africans has to be devised and implemented.

Hon members will agree with me that we already have too many laws and a multiplicity of administrations to administer. Not only do they pose political problems, but their viability will place a heavy burden on the fiscal resources as well as the manpower resources of this country.

This system has of late also been questioned in various quarters. Having said this it is now opportune for us to state how we on this side of the House consider various Government structures should be constituted.

We are firstly committed to the policy that the tricameral principle of own affairs is outdated and must be done away with. Parliament as presently constituted excludes the vast majority of South Africans who must now be included in the Parliamentary structures. We also reject the concept of Parliament being divided into separate Houses on the basis of race.

Secondly, it follows that any local government system at the third tier must be constituted by agreement reached with various population groups in South Africa. This will have the effect that the local affairs and management committee system must also be done away with since it was imposed unilaterally by the Government.

These structures have served their purpose and have no place or role in any future constitutional model. They are totally unacceptable and a timetable must be drawn up to phase out this system as soon as possible.

Thirdly, the extension of the second tier of government needs to be seriously re-examined. It is considered that sound and acceptable government at regional level could provide many, if not the majority, of the answers in the search for solutions for South Africa’s unique problems. This avenue should really be explored at all costs.

Hon members may rightly ask how we see matters in the meantime. I have already mentioned the fact that government at regional level should be explored. Needless to say the regional services councils established in terms of the Regional Services Councils Act, 1985, have now become a reality. We are accordingly prepared to look afresh at this concept, provided that certain criteria are met in this regard. Regional services councils should be established with direct representation and legislative powers. They should form the basis of government at local and regional level.

I am convinced that regional form of government for second and third tiers, structured for bringing people of colour into the decision-making process, has the possibilities of success in this country, provided the mechanics of the structures are negotiated with, and approved by, the participants.

It is clear in terms of participation politics that no opportunity, how insignificant it may appear to be, must be lost in negotiating for a democratically acceptable form of government at all levels. Protest politics for the sake of boycott only serves to retard progress and prolongs the stalemate.

Coming back now to local affairs and management committees, the majority view is strongly in favour of doing away with these systems. The transfer of powers and functions, as proposed by legislation, to local affairs and management committees is therefore a matter that must be approached with extreme caution. Any request for transfer of powers and functions by local affairs and management committees will be examined, taking into account the long-term implications of such delegation against this House’s decision to seek direct representation…

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: There is no quorum in the House.

Order! No quorum is needed as no vote has to be taken.

Mr Chairman, any request for transfer of powers and functions by local affairs and management committees will be examined, taking into account the long-term implications of such delegation against this House’s decision to seek direct representation on local authorities. As regards devolution of power, no such transfer will be made, as we are at present negotiating a new constitution for South Africa.

Powers, functions and duties without the backing of the necessary financial resources and the separation of authority in one municipal area or boundary do not make for sound government and inevitably lead to the kind of problems and frustrations being experienced today. We cannot get away from the fact that the legal status of an individual ratepayer or taxpayer is diminished by the system and his civic rights that flow from his citizenship of the town or city in which he lives are adversely affected.

Experience has proved that one’s frustrations will not be overcome by accepting authority when one cannot deliver the goods for the people one hopes to serve. One’s areas belong to that sovereign part of one’s town’s jurisdiction. Please do not separate them. The experience in Natal of the local authorities that have taken total authority and which amount in effect to a complete delegation of power, is one of frustration and serves to highlight that more powers do not mean greater rights or lesser limitations. One simply becomes an unwanted child with no one to shoulder the responsibility for the wrongs and inadequacies in one’s areas.

The search for solutions to these problems must now be found in other directions. The frustrations brought about by the policy of racial segregation can only be reversed if we begin to look for answers outside the outdated apartheid concepts.

I will now deal with specific development matters that fall under my portfolio and which are being dealt with by the Council for the Co-ordinating of Local Government Affairs.

The first is a uniform municipal rates valuation system. The question of the artificially high valuations of properties in Indian areas due to the demand exceeding the supply has also been addressed and this matter is still being investigated.

The second is new uniform electoral Bill which will incorporate the defects and deficiencies experienced during the 1988 municipal elections. This will enable local government bodies to make preparations timeously for the implementation of a new uniform procedure.

Thirdly, there is the formulation of building standards for local authorities to curtail the erection of buildings at great expense whilst no funds are available for essential services to its communities.

The fourth matter is an investigation into the high levies for services, especially on the supply of electricity, by some local authorities.

Hon members will recall that on the subject of allowances payable to members of local government bodies, the House of Delegates as well as the House of Representatives made strong representations for the payment of equal allowances to all representatives within the area of jurisdiction of a parent local authority irrespective of any other factor and for legislation to be passed to legalise this. This matter is still being investigated by the Commission for Administration with a view to determining a scientific basis for the payment of these allowances.

The Director-General: Commission for Administration has tabled a report on this matter for the action committee of the Co-ordinating Council in which, inter alia, certain proposals were made as far as members of local affairs and management committees are concerned. Following this he attended a meeting of the ad hoc Committee on Local Government on 21 February 1989, where this matter was discussed in depth.

I want to assure hon members that the Director-General: Commission for Administration now has first-hand knowledge of the circumstances under which members of local affairs and management committees are conducting their day-to-day tasks to further the interests of the communities they serve. This will no doubt assist him in further dealing with this matter and to report further to the Co-ordinating Council.

Another matter of interest is the investigation on uniform legislation for local government in the Republic. Hon members will agree that this is a comprehensive task and various working groups have been established to attend to specific aspects of local government such as politics, finance, legal advice and ordinary administration. The House of Delegates is also represented by its officials on two of these working groups. This investigation is also being undertaken by the Co-ordinating Council and is still progressing.

As hon members are aware, the establishment of regional services councils in the provinces of the Transvaal, the Orange Free State and the Cape is progressing rapidly. Natal has just become actively engaged in the establishment of its regional services councils. Although last, but in no way least, it may be a blessing in disguise since it may very well be that Natal will be in the favourable position that it may gain from the experiences of the other provinces in this field.

The Administrator of Natal has, as provided for in the Promotion of Local Government Affairs Act, 1983, requested the Demarcation Board for local areas to investigate and to advise him on the demarcation of four proposed regional services councils. The Demarcation Board acted swiftly and four hearings took place during November 1988. The board’s report, with recommendations, is at present being considered by the Natal Executive Committee. Subsequently it has been agreed that there will be five regional services councils in Natal.

It can be said of those regional services councils that have already been established in the other provinces that they have exceeded all expectations. Representatives of all population groups get together and discuss and decide on the matters concerning the particular area. The funds generated by means of the respective levies are utilised to the benefit of those areas where the greatest need exists.

In order to enable persons in regions outside the area of jurisdiction of local authorities to be represented on the regional services council, the Regional Services Act, 1985, was suitably amended to permit the institution of rural councils. Draft regulations have already been approved by the Co-ordinating Council in this respect. The establishment of this council rests with the Minister of Local Government and this matter will no doubt come to the fore as and when the regional services councils are extended to Natal.

As far as the continued functioning of the Development and Services Board in Natal is concerned, the Ministers’ Council took a firm stand on proposals that it should be abolished. In this respect cognizance was taken of the important role played by this board in urbanised areas not enjoying local authority status, especially in the field of housing and development in these areas. The Ministers’ Council accordingly resolved that this board should not be phased out until its continued existence has been discussed with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

It may be of interest to hon members to learn that negotiations for the incorporation of Lenasia Extensions 9, 10 and 11 and Lenasia South into the municipal area of Johannesburg, have reached an advanced stage. Parties in this matter are the Johannesburg City Council, the Transvaal Provincial Administration and the Administration: House of Delegates. Similarly, the incorporation of Pelikan Park into the Cape Town municipality area and Cravenby into a municipality are also actively being followed up, and negotiations should be finalised in the near future. At present the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates is acting as the local authority in respect of Cravenby in the absence of a local authority.

In keeping with the views of future local government, I wish to state that we find ourselves in the invidious position of acting as a local authority in an own affairs function, which should really be carried out at third-tier government level. It is therefore important that these matters be resolved at an early date. Hon members can rest assured that these issues will receive my attention.

I now want to continue with the other aspect of my portfolio, namely agriculture. In addressing my other responsibility, that of agriculture, we are faced with the same predicament in that agriculture is an own affair in accordance with the Constitution. However, for the benefit of the farming community and in order to assist and develop Indian agriculture, we are obliged to participate in the present system which should not be taken as a sign of accepting an own affairs agricultural form.

The production of food should be the collective responsibility of all communities in order that this country does not find itself in the same predicament as the rest of Africa where a shortage of food is causing extreme hardship, famine and all its consequences. The Group Areas Act must go. Agricultural land should be free of any restriction, to be used and developed. All the communities should be free to participate in a free market system.

However, I now wish to report on agricultural events of the past year. The single greatest setback suffered by our community in Natal, was the devastation caused by the floods of September 1987. In pursuance of a Cabinet decision to render assistance to the farmers, my department, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply (Administration: House of Assembly) considered 832 applications which were processed and finalised in terms of the financial assistance scheme. A total of R2 048 000 was paid out in this respect. On 1 July 1988 this scheme was extended by the Cabinet to include compensation to farmers for the reestablishment of annual crops and for the loss of machinery. All applications in terms of this scheme have also been processed and finalised.

In addition, applications from farmers to the Disaster Relief Fund administered by the Department of National Health and Population Development were referred to my department for processing. It is anticipated that all claims will be finalised during the current financial year. To assist with the processing of flood claim applications, the extension technicians of my department were seconded to the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply for the period of October 1987 to December 1988.

We have learned several lessons from these floods, and one of the most important is the absolute need for our farmers to introduce and maintain adequate soil conservation structures. In this regard the Cliffdale farming community has to be complimented for its efforts in constructing soil conservation structures as a result of which farms in Cliffdale suffered minimal loss and damage to land and crops during the September 1987 floods.

In an effort to identify additional agricultural land for Indians, a Ministerial committee appointed by the hon the State President has already had six meetings. This committee, in turn, appointed a working committee comprising officials with the necessary technical expertise from my department, the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, the Natal Provincial Administration, the Department of Development Planning and the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs. The working committee under the chairmanship of an official from my department has had several meetings to date. Priority is being given to resettling farmers in the upper North Coast areas affected by the floods.

The working committee formulated various recommendations with far-reaching implications and these were considered and accepted with minor amendments by the ministerial committee. In order to assist these farmers with the purchase of farmland for resettlement purposes, arrangements have been made for the unused portion of the funds allocated for flood assistance to be transferred to the account of the Agricultural Credit Board.

On the basis of providing economic units for the resettlement of flood-affected farmers, it is estimated that an amount of R11,6 million will be required for the acquisition of 1 620 hectares of land. The expenditure on such acquisitions, as well as the interest subsidy on loans to be advanced will be incurred over a period of five financial years up to 1993-94, whilst interest subsidy payments will continue for a further six financial years with subsidy payments of R350 000 for the penultimate and R180 000 for the final years.

To alleviate the predicament of the Indian farmers in the Transvaal, who are precluded from acquiring and owning land for agricultural purposes in that province, my colleague the Deputy Minister of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture was charged with the task of identifying land in that province allocated for housing purposes for the Indian population group but not required for that purpose in the immediate future, to be used on a short-term basis for agriculture. Areas at Lenasia and Palmridge have already been identified as suitable for this purpose and he will report to the Ministers’ Council in due course.

After a meeting of the Jacobs Committee for the Reconstruction of Agriculture on 29 April 1988, various recommendations regarding financial assistance to sugar cane and vegetable growers were formulated and submitted for consideration. Details of these schemes, together with the financial implications involved, will be announced by me shortly. This will be another injection which will serve to assist the fanners further in relieving the financial burden inflicted upon them through disasters.

Hon members will recall that, as reported in the previous policy speech, various problems were encountered by our farmers that patronise the Clairwood Temporary Farmers’ Market. With the assistance of the hon the Minister of Agriculture arrangements were made for Mr P W Venter of the Commission for Fresh Produce Markets to be appointed to investigate the matter. After negotiations had been concluded, the Durban City Council agreed to roof the temporary farmers’ market with the financial assistance of the Department of Agriculture. This is a real breakthrough for our farmers who sell their produce at this market. It is gratifying to report that the roof over the temporary market is actually now under construction and is scheduled for completion on 1 July 1989.

For the benefit of the farmers who will make use of the market, certain administrative procedures were discussed at a meeting with the management of the market. This entails, amongst other matters, the issue of permits to users and entry times. A formal liaison committee which inter alia includes two officials of the Natal Farmers’ Union has been formed to ensure the proper functioning of the system.

Hon members are no doubt aware of all the efforts to obtain land at Louis Botha Airport. I can now report that my department, in collaboration with the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs prepared a lay-out plan for the 110 hectares of land allocated to this administration for Indian agricultural purposes. I visited the land with the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and the hon member for Merebank and we met some of the farmers.

So far 38 plots have been allocated to 21 farmers, which includes four people displaced from Shallcross and 17 affected by the September 1987 floods. Five plots have been reserved by my department as demonstration plots for the purpose of stimulating and maintaining a high level of enthusiasm amongst the growers. Some of the farmers have already cleared the plots of lantana and this problem, together with the drainage problem of low-lying areas, will have to be addressed as soon as the Agricultural Credit Act (House of Delegates), has been passed. The existing roads are in a fair condition and almost all the plots are easily accessible.

The acquisition of land at La Mercy Airport was pursued further during the year. I can report that subsequent to a meeting with the former hon Minister of Transport Affairs during February 1987, an in loco inspection of the La Mercy area took place. It was found that an area of about 600 hectares could be regarded as suitable for cash cropping. This soil is of a good quality, there is ease of access and a stream flows through it.

A further in loco inspection of the La Mercy airport area was undertaken on 27 January 1989 by my predecessor and the hon the Deputy Minister of Land Affairs, together with senior officials of our respective departments. From discussions with the hon the Deputy Minister of Land Affairs it is evident that he will support an application by this administration for land in the La Mercy airport area to be made available on a lease basis for the purpose of accommodating our farmers.

I have, however, just learned with regret that the Department of Transport, for which this land was originally required, cannot support the proposals in view of existing leaseholds. I am at present making arrangements to meet representatives of the department and the lessee in an endeavour to resolve the issue.

On 11 November 1988 the hon the Minister of Agriculture, Mr Greyling Wentzel, conducted a very successful tour of various farming areas in Natal. He fully appreciated the difficult circumstances under which many of our farmers operate and was impressed with the standards of the various fanning enterprises he inspected.

Subsequent to this visit, economists from this hon Minister’s department, together with extension technicians from my department, conducted surveys in various farming areas with a view to determining an economic farming unit for vegetables and also the net income to be generated from such a unit.

As far as the Hammarsdale Dam is concerned, the Department of Water Affairs has reported that the quality of the water in the dam is such that it renders it unsuitable for irrigation purposes. In addition the capacity of this dam is not adequate to provide the required water as severe siltation has occurred after the September 1987 floods.

From these findings it is clear, unfortunately, that it is not a viable or economic proposition to give further consideration to the utilisation of this dam to provide irrigation water to growers in Cliffdale. The question of alternative methods to procure water for this area is at present receiving my attention.

At present my department does not have legislative authority to acquire land for agricultural purposes and up to now the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs has provided an agency service to my department in making land available for Indian agricultural purposes. However, I wish to inform hon members that legislation has been prepared for consideration during the present session of Parliament, which if approved will enable my department to undertake this function.

In order to acquaint myself with matters at ground level in the areas where problems do exist, I visited farms in the Sawoti area, especially Chowtee’s Farm as well as Greylands in the Tongaat area. I once again want to assure those farmers concerned that every endeavour will be made on my part to resolve outstanding matters.

The Agricultural Credit Board has had six meetings since the last policy speech and considered 30 applications for assistance of which 16 were approved. A total amount of R762 000 was awarded to our farmers.

With a view to providing an efficient extension service to our farmers, the farming areas in Natal have been divided into four regions as follows: Firstly, between the Umhlali and Umgeni rivers and inland; secondly, between the Umhlali and Tugela rivers and inland; thirdly, between the Umlaas canal and Port Shepstone and inland; fourthly, the outskirts of Durban including the Umlaas canal and Louis Botha Airport land and inland, including Natal Midlands, Northern Natal and the Transvaal.

One of our principal extension technicians has been granted study leave to study full-time for the Bachelor of Science degree in agriculture for four years with effect from 1 February 1989. All the technicians receive regular in-service training at Cedara Agricultural College to bring them up to date on the latest trends in extension work.

The extension technicians rendered advice to our farmers on a variety of subjects whenever the priority work they were requested to do in connection with the flood assistance programmes permitted thereof. However, with the assessment of flood claims almost complete, the technicians have embarked on a full-scale intensive programme of extension work mainly on the subject of soil conservation.

Furthermore, our technicians are experimenting with the growing of crops other than sugar cane and vegetables in order to diversify the farming enterprises. This is being done in consultation with experts from Cedara Agricultural College to determine areas that are suitable for production of new crops such as sunflowers and ground nuts, as well as for livestock and poultry.

It has come to my knowledge that even Indian farmers are now becoming involved in cattle farming. Exact figures of the extent of this involvement are unfortunately not available at this stage, but once established and if considered necessary, an investigation to ascertain additional land required for this purpose will be undertaken in the near future.

It will be of interest to hon members to learn that in respect of the 1987-88 season a total of 19 864 400 tons of cane sugar was produced in the RSA, of which Indian farmers contributed 837 000 tons. In monetary terms this means a total of R40 100 000, out of a total of R951 550 000, in the pockets of the Indian farmers. Furthermore, out of a total of 2 370 Indian farmers in Natal and Transvaal, 1 769 produced cane sugar during 1987.

It is evident that progress is noted despite shortcomings and that the Indian farmers are increasing the production of cane sugar and vegetables. With better planning and equipment Indian agriculture could take its rightful place in South Africa to provide for the future needs of its people.

I have now covered all the highlights, but must mention in passing the fact that in my department the post of Assistant-Director entrusted with Agricultural Extension Services has become vacant. However, as a result of discussions with the hon the Minister of Agriculture, arrangements were made for officials of the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply to be seconded to my department to assist in structuring agriculture. May I just say that two officials were seconded and they have already commenced with their work. This gesture on the part of the hon the Minister and his Director-General is very much appreciated. The post has been advertised and we hope to make an appointment shortly.

It is my view that with the progress we have made so far the need for a new post, that of Director of Agriculture, has become extremely urgent and it is being attended to by the Director-General of this administration.

I now wish to present the Budget for the 1989-90 financial year: Agricultural Education and Guidance, R203 000; Aid to Indian farmers, R5 184 000; Agricultural Credit Board, R6 000; Agricultural Credit Committees, R6 000; Administration, R123 000; and Disaster/Flood Relief, R871 000. That makes a total budget of R6 393 000.

Debate interrupted.