asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:

Mr Chairman, in replying to this question I assume that under diplomatic staff the hon member for Pietersburg includes consular staff. I also assume that the hon member is referring to the Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and the Ciskei, because there are more than four independent states in Africa that have representation in South Africa. The hon member has indicated that that is what he means. Consequently I shall reply to the question I amended for him.

The answer is as follows. All four of these countries that I have mentioned have embassies in South Africa’s capital cities, and consequently have embassy staff who are resident—for the purposes of the question—in those capital cities, viz Pretoria and Cape Town.

With reference to consular staff, the Transkei has consulates in Bloemfontein, Durban, Johannesburg, East London and Port Elizabeth. Bophuthatswana has consulates in Johannesburg, Bloemfontein, Kimberley, Potchefstroom, Vryburg and Welkom. Venda has consulates in Johannesburg and Pietersburg, and the Ciskei has consulates in Bloemfontein, Durban, Johannesburg, Cape Town, Newcastle and Port Elizabeth.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister was much calmer in replying to the question about these things today than he was six years ago when I asked him a similar question in March 1983. That was also during Question Time. At the time I wanted to know whether he intended to grant permission for Venda’s consular staff to live in Pietersburg. On that occasion the hon the Minister let rip with what one can almost call verbal diarrhoea of six and a half columns in Hansard. It was the longest reply I have ever heard in this House, and he accused me …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: On a prior occasion it was ruled that “verbal diarrhoea” could not be used because it was unparliamentary.

I withdraw it, Mr Chairman.

The hon member may proceed.

On that occasion the hon the Minister accused me of a statement I had made in a letter I had addressed to him. I quote:

I address that very same accusation to that hon Minister and his Government today. They do not care a rap about the established and traditional pattern of living in our own residential areas. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister must not insinuate as he did at that stage that we are acting in an insulting way towards a neighbouring country and its government. On the contrary, the then consular representative of Vendaland, the late Mr Netsituka, made a courtesy visit to me at my office. He was a friendly man, and we had understanding for one another’s points of view. What is more, there was a fixed understanding between him and the Pietersburg Town Council and the then ambassador of the RSA in Vendaland that the town council would develop an exclusive diplomatic quarter for this purpose, just as there are identifiable diplomatic residential areas in Western cities such as The Hague and Washington, to mention only two. [Interjections.]

Let me make it very clear. The CP supports trade relations, diplomatic contact and co-operation with neighbouring countries, but I have reason to suspect that this hon Minister influenced that government so that ultimately they did not accept the town council’s proposals. I say this with reference to the gentleman’s agreement that existed. I do not know whether or not the hon the Minister was aware of it. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, this question of the hon member for Pietersburg ends up as a competition between the Government and the CP as to who is the most ridiculous in terms of racial attitudes and patterns in 1989. [Interjections.]

The hon member said that one should have separate enclaves. He does not mind Blacks living in servants’ quarters, he does not mind Blacks living in high-rise flats serving people, but as soon as they stand there with dignity, he has an objection.

I want to put the following to the hon the Minister: Surely the right that the Government gives to Blacks, provided they are foreign diplomats, to live in White areas undermines the concept of White separateness in residential areas. If Blacks from other countries in Africa can live in White suburbs, why in blazes cannot Black South Africans live in White suburbs? [Interjections.] Why should there be a differentiation made between Blacks who have diplomatic passports and Blacks who may be representatives or people of equal status and dignity? Why cannot they too have these rights?

We want to say to the hon the Minister we hope that in the new mood of free association he will remember his speech of November 1974:

That was fifteen years ago! I want to ask the hon the Minister if he is going to use his influence and power with his new leader to move away from the archaic situation of race discrimination when it comes to residential suburbs and move into a genuinely new South Africa, “a totally new South Africa”, to use the words of the hon new leader of the NP, where people on the basis of free association can live where they want to live and associate with whom they wish to. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, there is no such thing as a formalised enclave or a demarcated place for diplomats anywhere in the free world. In Pretoria we also have a so-called diplomatic residential area, but this is not enforceable. They are not told that they must stay there.

None other than Dr Malan said in 1951, when he piloted the Diplomatic Privileges Act through this House, that diplomatic representatives had the freedom to live wherever they pleased anywhere in the country. At that stage Mr J F T Naudé was the MP for Pietersburg. He was part of the Government and he supported that.

Dr Malan is too left-wing for the CP!

Now, 38 years later, I have to discuss that in this House. On 9 September 1969 Mr Vorster said …

What do you say?

… that there was no such thing as a code for White diplomats and a code for non-White diplomats. There was only one code for all diplomats. The dialogue between our previous ambassador in Venda and the Pietersburg Town Council was initiated by me, not by him. I spoke to our ambassador and told him this was a sensitive matter and that he should tread cautiously in dealing with all the interested parties in this regard, because we were eager to get the agreement of the Pietersburg Town Council. I asked him to explain the position with regard to international law and the Diplomatic Privileges Act, to prevent feelings from being hurt and to prevent an international incident with banner headlines in newspapers in other parts of the world saying that Pietersburg was taking the same direction as Boksburg had. It was to prevent something of this kind from damaging our country’s interests that we tried to resolve the matter behind the scenes. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is typical of the rhetoric on that side of the House to compare Boksburg and Pietersburg with one another. [Interjections.] As far as diplomatic staff are concerned, they have nothing to do with one another. We are specifically asking the hon the Minister whether it is his or his department’s standpoint to make specific residential areas available to diplomats, a practice that exists in numerous other states in the Western World.

Where?

I can refer to Bonn, The Hague and numerous other places.

My second question is whether the hon the Minister can deny that this practice exists in other states.

In the third place I want to ask the hon the Minister whether the Department of Foreign Affairs complies with section 7 of the Diplomatic Privileges Act, in terms of which they have to ensure that the Government provides compensation for the loss in income suffered by a local authority as a result of the tax exemptions due to diplomatic officials. If the answer to that is a positive one, we should like the hon the Minister to mention a few specific examples in which town councils were compensated for the loss in tax revenue.

Mr Chairman, I should like to ask the hon the Minister whether, since he agreed to the purchase for this purpose of a residential erf and a house in a residential area that is predominantly CP, he will give us the address. I know that if they make it known today, the neighbour will telephone me tomorrow morning to object. If he is a Nationalist, he will tell me he rejects that standpoint of the NP. I can guarantee hon members that. [Interjections.] That is why I should like the hon the Minister to tell us exactly where in Pietersburg the person is going to live.

He might move in next to a De Klerk!

Mr Chairman, I would like to start by replying to the hon member for Sea Point. It is not true that I am in competition with the CP about this matter. I have stated the position of the Government quite clearly and I am sure that the hon member agrees with me.

The supplementary question that he asked about the right of Black South Africans to live amongst White South Africans has nothing to do with the Diplomatic Privileges Act. Nothing! That is a different matter which this Government is trying to face up to, namely the whole question of group areas and discrimination. My hon leader has made his position quite clear as far as discrimination is concerned and since I made that statement in the United Nations way back in 1974, dramatic steps have been taken in South Africa to remove discrimination. The hon member knows that. More steps will be taken to remove more discrimination.

*Once again, with regard to the question about the diplomatic residential areas, we have a diplomatic residential area in Pretoria, but it is unoccupied to a great extent. The law says one cannot compel a diplomat to go and live there. They have a free choice in the matter. This is not my law. It is an Act of Parliament that was passed in 1951. There is no way in which to compel them to live there; otherwise they can do the same thing to us abroad, because it is in conflict with international law.

I am not the one who approved the purchase of the specific piece of land. The Act grants other governments the right to purchase properties where they please. The Act grants that right. I cannot reject it. That is how the hon member should see it. I did my best, through our ambassador in Venda who can confirm this, to arrange this matter behind the scenes in the best possible way. If the hon member does not accept my word on that, he need not, but ultimately I have to contend with a legal provision—it was instituted by Dr Malan and followed by all civilised countries in the world—which we have to honour.

Instead of encouraging people to object, we should encourage our people to have discussions with all South Africans and to understand that it is in the interests of this country to have diplomatic relations with the largest number of states in the world for the sake of our trade and our prestige and to treat one another with mutual respect and esteem. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

asked the Minister of Justice:

1. (1) Whether criminal charges laid against a certain person, whose name has been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, have been withdrawn; if so, what are the relevant details;
2. (2) what steps have been taken to ensure that this person and his assets do not leave the Republic?

Mr Chairman, the person whose name has been furnished to me is Mr Wessel Albertus Vermaas. Certain criminal charges against Mr Vermaas have temporarily been withdrawn on the instructions of the Attorney-General of the Transvaal. Adv Brunette, the Attorney-General of the Transvaal, has informed me that the charges were withdrawn, inter alia, against the background of approximately six civil actions in the Transvaal, including amongst others sequestration and liquidation proceedings and also an application by Mr Vermaas to prevent his being questioned by the provisional trustee/liquidator. These civil cases are sub judice at present, and their relevance as criminal cases cannot be debated now. A note from Adv Brunette which I received on 27 February reads:

I announced earlier that Adv Brunette had requested me to appoint a special team to deal with possible prosecutions in his area of jurisdiction which may result from the investigation of the Harms Commission. The attorneys-general of all the other divisions and Adv Brunette have, in consultation with one another, decided to recommend the following team to me: Adv M T van der Merwe SC, Deputy Attorney-General in the Transvaal, Adv Jan Swanepoel SC, Deputy Attorney-General in Johannesburg and Adv Francois de Beer, Senior State Advocate. I confirm that this will be the team. I also emphasise that in view of his position as Attorney-General, as in all other cases, Adv Brunette will shoulder the responsibility. Obviously the team will be augmented, as the need arises, and with a view to generally alleviating the burden of the attorneys-general, in collaboration with my colleague, the hon Minister sitting here next to me, amongst others, it is envisaged that the attorneys-general division will, in broad terms, be augmented.

That is not saying much.

Apart from the consequences of the provisional sequestration and liquidation proceedings, it should be pointed out that the Reserve Bank has already seized the assets of the Verco group, including the aircraft of that group. The Reserve Bank has already seized shareholdings and loan accounts of four companies in which Mr Vermaas is alleged to have been involved. These measures are operative in conjunction with the Supreme Court order obtained by the Reserve Bank during November 1988 to freeze the assets of Mr Vermaas and his group of companies.

The hon the Minister of Home Affairs has meanwhile, on the basis of information made available to him by Adv Brunette, also withdrawn the passports of Messrs Vermaas and Berg.

Mr Chairman, I think the hon the Minister as a legal man will agree with me that the reasons given by Mr Brunette for withdrawing the charges are not only completely unwarranted, but also not in the interests of justice. They are also, I might add, patently stupid.

Every single reason reported in the Press as having been given by Mr Brunette is directly contradicted by the specific provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act and the Commissions Act. He says that he could not render a charge sheet and that he could not gain access to the evidence given before the Harms Commission. That is absolute nonsense. By yesterday, one week after making these statements, he had read the 800 page transcript of evidence given to the commission—it has always been available to him—and formulated charges in regard to which Vermaas is now arraigned on 22 counts of fraud involving R300 million. This all happened within one week.

What really motivated Brunette to withdraw the original charges and why did he then return the passports of Vermaas and Berg? If ever two men wanted to skip the country and disappear in some South American state, I suggest Vermaas and Berg did. [Interjections.]

Of course it could be that Vermaas’s disappearance would allow a few of his friends in high places to sleep more comfortably. [Interjections.] Did this influence Brunette’s decision? We must remember that Vermaas is no ordinary criminal. His underworld appears to be very much intertwined with the corridors of power, and I would like to know why the hon the Ministers of Finance, of Defence, of Foreign Affairs and of Economic Affairs and Technology, as well as a number of top public servants, were embroiled in the affairs of this master of round-tripping and foreign exchange fraud.

For over 20 years Vermaas was operating an illegal deposit-taking business involving over R150 million. He was stealing from charities and public institutions as well as many private investors. He displayed a pattern of intrigue, registering companies in dubious places such as Panama and Ciskei. In September 1985 he bought a property for R1,4 million and then sold it overseas for R22 million. In March 1987 he again bought property for R1 million which he sold 17 months later for R25 million. He transformed a R700 000 property deal into a R6 million deal.

All of these had Reserve Bank approval. Despite the Registrar of Banking Institutions knowing about Vermaas’s illegal banking activities at the beginning of 1987 and the Reserve Bank’s being advised, no investigations were conducted and his R100 million-odd foreign exchange control transactions continued to receive not only clearance, but also special treatment from the Reserve Bank. [Time expired.)

Mr Chairman, if I have understood the hon the Minister correctly—I could not hear what he was saying, but I would like him to correct me if I have understood him incorrectly—the question is still whether he has held official discussions with Adv Don Brunette in regard to the Vermaas affair. If his answer is in the affirmative, I should then respectfully like to remind him of a debate in this Chamber in 1987 in which he said that it was quite out of keeping with the tradition of the administration of justice in South Africa for a Minister of Justice to give instructions to, or enter into discussions with, an attorney-general in regard to instituting prosecutions.

Secondly I should like to invite the hon the Minister to comment on the following standpoint which is held in legal circles, ie that Mr Vermaas, since he has been charged and is in the process of being charged, can use as an excuse the fact that because he is being charged, he cannot be compelled to give evidence before the Harms Commission, because that would mean that questions he answered before the Harms Commission could be self-incriminating in regard to a charge pending against him. This fits into the picture that these “corridors of power” would specifically want Mr Vermaas to be charged so that he could use this as a pretext for not giving evidence before the Harms Commission. I should like the hon the Minister to give us a specific answer to that question.

Mr Chairman, let me hasten to reply to the last point first. It seems to the hon member for Losberg, who is so insistent about prosecutions in terms of the Group Areas Act, who wants to institute a court case against the Attorney-General and the Minister to force him to do this kind of thing, and who repeatedly calls upon the Minister and the attorneys-general to take such action, now accepts the situation that the Minister does not adopt a prescriptive role towards the Attorney-General. That is precisely what the situation is. It remains unchanged, and is precisely what my situation is. In a moment I shall state my policy on this.

In regard to the hon members reference to that case which supposedly has a bearing on giving evidence or not giving evidence before the Harms Commission and/or the liquidators and/or the trustees, the fact remains that I have gone out of my way to warn the hon member that that case is sub judice. It is sub judice together with the other cases relating to the Vermaas affair, and the hearing commences today. I think it would be totally out of place for both the hon member for Losberg and the hon member for Groote Schuur to hold a trial here when this matter is sub judice. That would be totally out of place. Because he has again been charged, the hon member is suggesting that all the parties are now in cahoots, or at least are collaborating to prevent Mr Vermaas from testifying. I reject that suggestion with absolute contempt.

Let me tell the hon member what the standpoint is. The standpoint was made very clear in yesterday’s Cape Times, and I cannot improve on that. In its editorial the Cape Times stated that the public wanted to see justice done as speedily as possible. The public does not understand the finer nuances, the finer technicalities, but they want justice to be done as quickly as possible. Since criminal proceedings were instituted, and after the Attorney-General has, for whatever reason, had an opportunity to look into the matter and has decided to prosecute, one must respect the fact that he has, in effect, decided to do so because the implication is … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, what really concerns us on this side of the House is that if one looks at the evidence of the Harms Commission, it reads like a Who’s Who of top Government officials and of Cabinet Ministers, and one really wonders why these people were involved when the man was so patently dishonest for a considerable period of time.

Dr de Kock of the Reserve Bank actually conducted an official opening of one of Vermaas’s game farms on which he lavished favours on his important and no doubt useful friends including our Ministers. Both the departments of Defence and of Foreign Affairs have used Mr Vermaas’ businesses, hiring an aircraft at, I believe, considerably well above the going commercial rates. Our Minister of Foreign Affairs has admitted that he and Mr Vermaas are close friends of many years standing and that they were involved in joint strategies to circumvent what he refers to as international sanctions. Did our Ministers really not see through this man? Were his criminal and other shady dealings not so patently obvious to at least demand caution?

Have they woken up?

It would appear not. On Sunday, 20 November 1988, the very day before the commission was due to commence its investigations into Vermaas, his close friend the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs arranged through the hon the Minister of Finance for Vermaas to receive the help and advice of Mr Van Greunen, a top Reserve Bank official—on that very same night, Sunday night, as a matter of urgency—presumably in connection with his fraudulent foreign exchange dealings. Why else would Vermaas run for help the night before the commission is due to start its hearing? Why did it have to be conducted on a Sunday night? Was it that urgent?

Even after failing to submit tax returns for 10 years, there was no investigation let alone a prosecution. This meant a potential R44 million loss in tax to the Receiver of Revenue, let alone all the money this country is going to lose through his foreign exchange dealing. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I believe that whatever is said about this matter, the intervention by the hon the Minister in the decisions of this Attorney-General is an unprecedented one. I believe that a precedent has been created in this. I want to say immediately that I think that the hon the Minister acted correctly in intervening as he did. Previously, when the hon the Minister has been questioned about what an attorney-general has decided, said, done or what he should do, he has always pleaded that an attorney-general is independent; that the Minister has no power to intervene; that the decisions made are those of that Attorney-General and not of the Minister. The question I have to ask has a bearing on his administration of justice and that is, is an attorney-general independent or is he not; and, if he intervened, under what powers did he so intervene? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, there really is a peculiar relationship between the hon member for Sandton and myself because he asks the right question at the right time which enables me to make a policy statement. I can assure hon members that I have not arranged this with him beforehand. However, let me first say, he is so predictable. That is the point.

If the hon member for Groote Schuur had held forth outside Parliament as he has been holding forth in this House, he would have rendered himself liable to prosecution under the Commissions Act because he has now sat as a commissioner. He has evaluated the evidence. He has come to a conclusion—a finding. [Interjections.] He has levelled a charge. He is the commissioner, he gave evidence again and he interpreted the evidence. It is patently not applicable to this case. He does not have the power and it is most inappropriate.

According to the Criminal Procedure Act, an attorney-general exercises his authority and performs his functions under the Act, subject to the control and directions of the Minister of Justice. This is what section 3 says.

Successive governments and Ministers of Justice have interpreted this provision to mean and applied it in such a way that attorneys-general are recognized and respected as fearlessly independent and must be seen to be so. In my experience, attorneys-general exercise their discretion to prosecute or not in a professional and objective manner and they should be allowed to continue to do so without being subjected to undue pressure from whatever source.

The relationship between attorneys-general and the Minister of Justice is indicative of the whole approach to criminal justice in our country. Our courts and our judicial functionaries dispense justice fairly between man and man and they do so independently of executive control or pressure. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

asked the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council:

1. (1) What total amount was spent by the Administration: House of Assembly on the Huguenot, Diaz and Great Trek anniversary celebrations;
2. (2) whether he will make a statement on the matter?

Mr Chairman, before I begin my reply, may I just inform the House that in terms of a decision made by the Whips, all interpellations on own affairs are to be addressed to the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council. He will then refer them to a specific Minister of the Ministers’ Council. I am dealing with this matter today.

With the official opening of the new museum complex in Mossel Bay on 3 February 1989, in which the replica of the Diaz caravel was given a place of honour, the last phase of the festival year of 1988 was completed. It was the privilege of my department to deal with the financing of the three national festivals for 1988 at the behest of the Cabinet. The point of departure of the State was that quality festivals should be arranged. For that reason the State’s contribution had to be large enough to ensure this quality, with the help of willing individuals and bodies.

Hon members will agree with me that the quality of these festivals, the response to them and the enthusiasm for our illustrious past, were indications of the quality attained, and that we can indeed be proud of 1988 as a festival year. [Interjections.] It was a year in which thousands of people from all over our country came together to commemorate the highlights of our past. [Interjections.]

Final audited financial statements have not yet been received, but the total amount which my department paid to the various festival committees is R3 603 000.

The sum of R950 000 was contributed to the National Huguenot Festival Committee 300 for the costs of the Huguenot Festival. A total of 32 144 people participated in the 28 local festivals in which our regional offices for cultural affairs were involved. A total of 32 000 people were involved in the national festival in April 1988 in Table Bay and Franschhoek.

An amount of R1,963 million was paid to the National Diaz Festival Committee, of which R1,3 million was used for the building of the replica of the Diaz caravel.

We are making provision for the supplementing of the expected shortfall of approximately R500 000 on a rand-for-rand basis when the final audited statements are received. In my department’s additional appropriation for 1988-89, the amount of R300 000 is being made available for this purpose and a further amount of R200 000 for the 1989-90 financial year if necessary.

A total of 49 883 people attended the festivities at the 44 local festival functions in which the regional offices for cultural affairs were involved. The national festival in Mossel Bay was attended by 120 000 people. The FAK, which acted as the secretariat for the steering committee of the Great Trek commemoration festival, received R690 000 for the presentation of the festival. It is interesting to note that when the Government decided to make funds available for the Great Trek commemoration festival, members of the steering committee of the FAK also represented right-wing groups. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, let me make this very clear: The CP has no objection to the Government subsidising festivals of this nature; in fact, we appreciate it and also expect it of the Government. However, what we do object to is that the Government—I am now referring specifically to their contributions to the FAK’s Great Trek festival—financed a sectional festival, with the exclusion of the festival of the Afrikaner-Volkswag. In the end, that festival did not enjoy the support of the majority of Afrikaners in this country. [Interjections.]

That festival turned into a huge embarrassment for the hon the State President, who delivered the festival address on 16 December 1988 at the Voortrekker Monument because, apart from the organisers and national servicemen in civilian clothes, only a handful of members of the public were present. [Interjections.]

That is not true! That is simply not true! [Interjections.]

This blatant failure is emphasised when one takes into account the background against which it happened. The Government did everything in its power, through the FAK, to try to inject life into that festival. It used the taxpayer’s money for that. We heard this afternoon that this amounted to the sum of R690 000. The Government tried to draw children and young people with a bubblegum and Coca-Cola culture, in true American style. [Interjections.] On the Thursday evening before 16 December, the Government presented a massive evening of entertainment. The Sunday Times reported that this must have cost almost R1 million. A total of 100 000 people were expected on that occasion but only a few made their appearance in the end. [Interjections.]

Furthermore, the Government also placed its old faithful, the television service, at the disposal of the FAK. It even exercised its control over White schools in order to include them in this so-called official festival. [Interjections.] The school principals were threatened in a subtle way to support the FAK’s festival in that they were told that it was expected of them. [Interjections.]

Yet, sir, despite all the money that the FAK had at its disposal—from the side of the Government as well—and despite all the television coverage that it enjoyed, the festival was ultimately a complete failure. [Interjections.] The Government put its money, as well as the money of the taxpayers in this country, on a losing horse. [Interjections.] The newspaper Beeld which is, after all, well disposed towards those people on the opposite side of the House, tried to convey the idea that the festival of the Afrikaner-Volkswag was a dead letter, even after it had taken place. Nevertheless, Beeld had to admit eventually that the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition in this House addressed a crowd of 60 000 people at Donkerhoek, whilst the hon the State President had to be satisfied with between 10 000 and 15 000 people at the festival at the Voortrekker Monument. [Interjections.] On top of that they still … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the events last year of which we are talking today are events which were commemorated because they are of significance to this country. The fact that festivals were held to commemorate them is something to which, I believe, no one can object.

I do think—I am merely saying this in passing— that having listened to the hon member for Brits this afternoon, one should mention the fact that one of the events commemorated last year had been very divisive in this country at the time it took place—divisive between and within communities. Clearly, Sir, 150 years later it has still remained very divisive, even within the Afrikaner community itself.

The real question that arises here is that of the scope of those festivals, and the necessity for the amount of money spent. The hon the Minister has mentioned to us an amount of R3,6 million from the House of Assembly Administration Budget. If one goes through—I have a list— department by department the amount spent in total was in excess of R5 million—something of the order of R2,7 million on the Diaz Festival, R1,3 million on the Huguenot Festival and some R600 000 or R700 000 on the Great Trek Festival.

The question we should be asking is: Was all that money necessary? The hon the Minister mentioned outsiders being involved and that is an element with which one can judge the public desire for these festivals. I would like to ask him please to advise the House in his reply on how much was financially contributed by outsiders. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, may I immediately refer to the hon member for Cape Town Gardens and thank him for having had the insight to see that these festivals had particular significance for this country and all its people.

I do not think that the figures that he mentioned were entirely correct. If he has another look at the figures that I mentioned, he will see that the total was closer to R4 million than to R5 million, but we will discuss that with the hon member again later as our time is very limited now.

Furthermore, I want to refer to the hon member for Brits, who began by indulging in petty politics with regard to this festival, just as those gentlemen have unfortunately done in this House right from the beginning. If the hon member now wishes to accuse us of this being a sectional festival, I want to retaliate by asking him why he and his party did not negotiate with the Volkswag in order to prevent it from becoming a sectional festival. [Interjections.] I have already referred to the fact that representatives of the right-wing groups served on the Steering Committee. When we initially approved the amount for payment, supporters of the Volkswag were still serving on the committee.

With regard to the fact that there were ostensibly so few visitors at these festivals, particularly with regard the festival of 16 December, I want to say the following to the hon member. With regard to the 124 local festival functions—I am now referring to the Great Trek festival in which our regional offices were involved, and our regional offices were not involved in all of them—a total of 198 535 people participated in them. There were more than 100 0000 people at the Voortrekker Monument from 10 to 16 December 1988. [Interjections.] [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, seeing that the hon the Minister enjoys making announcements of that nature, I wonder whether he would not like to spend his time in telling us what the result was of the management board election in Ermelo. [Interjections.] When I look at the amount of money that was spent on 7 000 people at the Voortrekker Monument for the 150-year commemoration of the Great Trek, it appears to me to come to approximately R100 per head.

Were you there?

No, sir, I was not there. That is why I am asking. [Interjections.]

It seems to me to be approximately R100 per head, and I would like to know from the hon the Minister, precisely because I was not there, if an expensive dinner was provided for the people. [Interjections.] What exactly was the nature of the activities, because R100 per head is a lot of money and the taxpayer could do a lot with it.

It is not just a question of the sums of money which are being discussed here. It is very interesting to note that various NP controlled municipalities also pumped enormous amounts of money into this State festival in an effort to save it. The city council of Johannesburg, a NP controlled city council, spent almost half its budget on its own city and sent the other half to Pretoria in an effort to give life to the festival. [Interjections.]

When the Government’s flock of Afrikaans newspapers, such as Beeld, to mention one, find it convenient to renounce the truth and to speak of 30 000 Afrikaners at the Voortrekker Monument, while according to the same Beeld only 15 000 to 20 000 were at the festival of the Afrikaner Volkswag, and when they then have to hang their heads in shame the following day, and admit that in fact, according to their figures, between 10 000 and 15 000 people were at the Voortrekker Monument and 60 000 at the festival of the Volkswag, while the harsh reality was that there were only 7 000 people at the Voortrekker Monument and 70 000 at Donkerhoek …

Order!

… then one understands …

Order!

… that the Government …

Order!

… cannot hear the heartbeat of its people. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member will simply be taking up the time of the other speakers in his party if he does not listen to me. The hon member’s time has expired. I am giving the hon member for Brits the floor.

Mr Chairman, the little picture that the hon Minister drew for us of the money that was paid out by the Administration: House of Assembly to the FAK, namely R690 000, does not tell us the whole story. According to the report of the Auditor-General, a great deal of money was spent by other Government departments and also by three provincial administrations which made contributions in this regard.

It is also being alleged that various other Government departments assisted the Great Trek festival of the FAK. For example, free … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it was tragic to have to listen to the hon member for Potgietersrus play with a lot of figures and waste the House’s time with such nonsense. The fact of the matter is that that party is guilty of having played a divisive role in a festival in which all Afrikaners should have participated. [Interjections.] That is the long and short of it. Let me tell hon members that the festival was an enormous success. That is why hon members of the CP are making such a fuss.

The tail want wants to wag the dog!

I want to tell hon members that it is difficult to place a monetary value on the advantages, such as the closer ties that were forged between the various cultural groups of South Africa; the promoting of better relations with overseas countries, for example, countries such as Portugal and France; the marketing of our country and the many visitors to South Africa who returned to their own countries full of enthusiasm about what they saw and experienced. I could go on. Many South Africans felt a renewed interest in our country’s proud history. The positive news coverage by all the media fired everyone’s interest.

My department lent assistance with regard to 208 local and regional festivals, which involved 296 997 people from all over the country and from all population groups. Our eight regional offices for cultural affairs, schools and youth movements, such as the Voortrekkers and the Land Service, participated in the local festivals throughout the country and often contributed to the united participation of the community.

My department is proud of the festival year of 1988 as any other right-thinking person in this country ought to be, provided they were not involved in petty politics. [Interjections.] I should like to express the Government’s sincere thanks to every South African and every friend of South Africa … [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

asked the Minister of the Budget:

Mr Chairman, when representations for the establishment of a transport scheme are received from the principal who identifies the need or the local community, the Department of Education and Culture will investigate whether there is a real need for the establishment of the service and whether the establishment of such a service is economically justifiable.

If the Department of Education and Culture is convinced and satisfied that the establishment of a service is justifiable, it requests the Department of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services, which is responsible for the administration of the transport schemes, to call for tenders for this service. Invitations for tenders are advertised in newspapers and any prospective tenderer is free to tender. All tenders are considered and approved strictly according to the regulations and delegations of the State Tender Board. The abovementioned instructions provide that the department may accept only the lowest tender. In the case of only one tender, the department may accept it only if the price is reasonable.

Should the lowest tender not be acceptable because of a lack of vehicles or earlier poor service, the next acceptable lowest tender is recommended. Such lowest tender may be accepted only with the approval of the State Tender Board.

Once a tender has been granted to a contractor, a formal contract is concluded with the contractor in question. This contract contains certain requirements and conditions that have to be complied with by the contractor. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, we accept that the school-bus system is an upliftment service for our education, and I want to put the following questions to the hon the Acting Minister.

In the first place, must someone who tenders be a bona fide member of a transport concern? Secondly, may a tenderer tender only for the number of vehicles in his possession, or may he tender for more vehicles? Thirdly, is the tenderer expected to take out insurance on a vehicle additional to his third party insurance? Since this is an own affair, I also want to know from the hon the Acting Minister whether people from large companies in particular have the right to tender? In this connection I am thinking of City Tramways in the Boland area, for example. The company is subsidised and can summarily ruin the small businessman.

Mr Chairman, I want to reply to the questions of the hon member for Esselen Park as follows. I want to refer him to the agreement that is concluded with a transport contractor. That will give the hon member answers to his questions. If I cannot read everything in the two minutes at my disposal, the hon member may come to my office where I shall provide him with a copy of this agreement.

According to the agreement the contractor accepts all legal accountability for the safe transport of the pupils. Secondly the contractor is aware that the vehicle that may be used for the transport service, and the driver of such vehicle, must comply with the requirements of the ordinance. Thirdly the contractor must ensure that his vehicle is roadworthy. In the fourth place the contractor must undertake to supply at least one exit for pupils on the left-hand side of the vehicle. The contractor must undertake to maintain the transport service every day on which the school in question is in progress, and to perform the service in such a way that it fits in with the school hours and school sessions and gives pupils a reasonable amount of time to get in and out of the vehicle before and after school. If he does not meet his obligations, and if he is late, he is immediately fined R1 for every half-hour. The amount that has to be paid if he does not turn up is also considered. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I should like to know more about the system—the hon the Acting Minister mentioned this—in cases in which the price is not acceptable and they have a system which they call the ad hoc system. The hon the Acting Minister must please tell me for how long a period the ad hoc tender is valid, and when another advertisement for tenders has to be placed?

Secondly I should like to agree with the hon the Acting Minister. The other question concerns the following: One finds that a person submits ten tenders, for example, and obtains the ten tenders, but has only a certain number of vehicles. He then sells some of those tenders in a way which cannot be proven and gives the tenders to another contractor with so-called up-front money, because he does not have the necessary vehicles to render this service.

Order! There is an hon member who wants to put a question. [Interjections.] The hon the Acting Minister will get an opportunity to speak.

Mr Chairman, …

Order! I am trying to help the hon the Acting Minister, but he does not want to give me an opportunity to do so. He is going to get the last turn to speak, but there is another hon member who wants to ask something. I want to give him an opportunity to do so, and then the hon the Acting Minister can reply to all the questions at the same time.

Mr Chairman, hon members must not make vague statements. If they know of a person who is involved in a certain matter, they must mention his name so that the matter can be investigated.

Mr Chairman, I want to refer to the hon member for Border who replied to my one question. If we know about such cases, we as the representatives of the people—they are the ones who help to identify that need and help us to transport their children to the nearest school—must draw attention to those matters. I can give hon members the assurance that we shall work to this end. If the hon member has not received assistance, he must tell the relevant Minister. He must come to me and tell me that these are the cases, that he is drawing them to my attention and that I must do something about them.

I can tell the hon member for Macassar that we had similar cases in the Outeniqua constituency, and the problem was resolved immediately. We drew it to the attention of the relevant Minister, and it was sorted out.

I also want to tell the hon member that the ad hoc cases are only for the interim period. We try to advertise as quickly as possible. I cannot tell him offhand what period of time is involved, but we try to advertise the existing ad hoc cases as soon as possible. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

Mr Speaker, the reply is: Yes. Two qualifications were offered by this university in the field of library science. These were the B Bibliography, a four-year Bachelor’s degree, and a one year diploma in library science usually following a BA degree. Both are being phased out and the last students should graduate at the end of 1990 at the latest.

In order for these qualifications to be recognised by SAILIS, that is the South African Institute of Library and Information Science, it is necessary to employ the equivalent of at least four full-time qualified staff. In spite of repeated advertising the university was not able to attract this staff and, in fact, has only one full-time lecturer. The options before the university were therefore either to offer qualifications which would not be recognised, or to stop offering the courses altogether.

Secondly, the Committee of University Principals is busy rationalising the offering of library science. There are too many universities offering the subject and not enough staff to fill the posts. As library science is offered by both the University of Natal in Pietermaritzburg and by Unisa, the University of Durban-Westville reluctantly decided to phase it out. SAILIS has agreed to recognise the qualifications of these students who are registered at present but who will graduate this year or next year.

Mr Speaker, it is quite clear that the hon the Minister has not seen the press release relating to this issue. It was very clearly indicated in that release—which was published in Evening Post—that the reason for the phasing out of that department was a lack of support from students. I should like to ask the hon the Minister whether he has, in fact, seen that press release or not.

Secondly, I would like to ask the hon the Minister whether he agrees that a facility like that ought to be curtailed due to lack of support. If this is so, I would like to remind the hon the Minister that at that same university, the University of Durban-Westville, there is for instance a Department of Theology which has only a few students. The question is simply how one can justify a department with only a few students on the one hand and yet deny the continuation of another department for which there is support.

I am not sure whether the hon the Minister is aware of the fact that last year for the first time there were sixteen individuals who completed the course at that institution. I am not sure whether the hon the Minister is aware that in 1984 SAILIS, the professional body, laid down certain criteria to which the university was required to adhere. These related to the employment of full-time personnel in that department.

Hitherto—I am sure that the hon the Minister is aware of this—the academic staff who work in the university’s library have also lectured part-time in that department. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, the simple question that I would like to ask the hon the Minister is whether there is a demand for this subject at that university. If the demand is there, I think the staff should be found. To me the excuse that staff is not available seems to be a somewhat lame excuse.

Furthermore I would like to know what the possibilities are for the reopening of the library at the university.

Mr Speaker, I ask the hon the Minister respectfully to concede that it is because of a duplication of the faculties of two universities within a few kilometers of each other and because of these two universities competing for staff that the staff were not available.

Secondly, the duplication was wasteful of public funds. Thirdly, having two universities within a few kilometers of each other makes absolute nonsense of proper university education.

The hon the Minister should in fairness to the public and for the proper pursuit of university education ask the University of Durban-Westville to merge with the University of Natal so that we have one university in one town.

Mr Speaker, if I may, I would like first of all to answer the hon member who spoke last. I do agree with him that it may be a wasteful effort and I also agree that such a merger is possible. However, I want to inform him that Pietermaritzburg and Durban are not too far. The University of Natal …

They are 54 miles apart!

Even so, if a person is really interested in progressing with his or her education, such a person will travel far to obtain that education, even if it is not available at the university nearby.

Secondly, I want to tell the hon member for Springfield that I am aware of what appeared in the Press. I am also aware that I mentioned very clearly the reasons for the phasing-out process.

If I may answer the hon member as well as the hon member for Cavendish I want to say that it is possible that in the future this opportunity may be opened up again, provided that the necessary staff is available. We are of course looking at other universities as well for assistance. If the necessary staff is available, this department will be opened up again.

Mr Speaker, in answer to interpellation 2(1) of the hon member for Springfield, my reply is no. In answer to 2(2) my reply is: Not that I am aware of.

Mr Speaker, I am very pleased to hear this afternoon that it is not the intention of the hon the Minister to privatise this institution which, as the hon the Minister knows, lay unoccupied and unused for some two years and cost the taxpayers some R9 million.

However, I am a little taken aback by the admission of the hon the Minister that he is not aware that individuals and one individual in particular was refused treatment at that institution. That, in my opinion, is a tremendous shortcoming on the part of the hon the Minister.

I would like to give the hon the Minister the name of the gentleman concerned. His name is Abdul Suleiman and he is a teacher. He was refused admission to that hospital precisely because he earned too much to qualify for treatment at that institution. It was widely reported that because he earned R1 200 a month he did not qualify for treatment at that hospital. The requirement, I am told, to be treated at that hospital is that one must earn less than R1 000 a month.

This raises a very fundamental question. Should not that institution be open to anybody who needs the services of that institution? I would like to ask the hon the Minister here this afternoon what he is doing about ensuring that that institution is available to any person who wishes to use it or has the desire or need of the services that are provided by the institution.

Mr Speaker, I want to ask the hon the Minister why there is not a 24-hour emergency service available at Lenasia Hospital. If the hon the Minister’s reply is that statistics do not warrant it, how can we achieve the statistics if the services are not in existence? It is for the hon the Minister to ensure the provision of a 24-hour service at this hospital.

Mr Speaker, it is outrageous that a person who wanted medical treatment was refused medical treatment at a hospital under the control or direction of the hon the Minister of Health Services and Welfare. An hon member of this House took ill and was admitted to Groote Schuur Hospital. I went there with the hon member. As a matter of fact, I asked the ambulance to take him to Groote Schuur. That hospital did not refuse him attention, they gave him the attention that he needed. Whether they sent him an account or not I am not sure, but they would have been entitled to send him an account although his income is more than R1 200 a month. It is ridiculous that the Lenasia Hospital should refuse a person admission simply because he was not indigent. They could have sent him an account. King Edward VIII Hospital, Northdale, Wentworth and Durban Hospital, which are large hospitals, will admit persons who need assistance and if they discover the person can afford it, they charge that person. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, can the hon the Minister tell us whether the House of Delegates has this hospital under its own wing and whether we have provided any funds to run this hospital with, and if so, what is the amount? Can the hon the Minister tell us whether this hospital will still function under the provincial authorities in the Transvaal? Can the hon the Minister also tell us whether he has plans to budget for the operating costs of this hospital for the next fiscal year in spite of statistics showing a very low occupancy rate?

Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the hon the Minister what progress has been made to recruit staff to make the Lenasia Hospital fully operational. With regard to the statement made by the hon member for Springfield, I want to say that at that particular time when Mr Suleiman was present, the hospital was commissioned that day—it was 11 January 1989—and he was personally asked to wait by a number of MPs who were present. He was told he would be attended to later. After a while this gentleman disappeared and he was nowhere to be found when some of my hon colleagues went to assist him. What has been reported in the Press is not a true and clear picture of what—as has already transpired—were the actual facts. I would like the hon the Minister to give us an undertaking that, although at present the hospital will not be privatised, it will not be privatised in future.

Mr Speaker, in reply to the questions, I am pleased that the hon member for Lenasia Central has clarified what is an absolute fact. I want to make a statement as far as that particular Mr Suleiman is concerned. That was a case purely to try and get some political mileage. I do not think that at any stage, had Mr Suleiman waited, he would not have received the necessary attention.

As far as the other question is concerned, I want to give my hon colleague the figures regarding the occupancy rate at this stage for out-patients and casualties. In January the out-patients totalled 113 Asians, 48 Blacks and 42 Coloureds and there was only one Coloured in-patient. One baby was delivered in January. The figures to date for February reveal that the out-patients/casualties totalled 147 Asians, 72 Blacks and 35 Coloureds, while the in-patients comprised seven Asians, six Blacks and one Coloured. Five babies were born in February.

While the figures do not really warrant additional staff, we are somewhat concerned about the staffing of this hospital. However, I am aware that the question of getting staff on a sessional basis is being investigated by the Transvaal Provincial Administration. Hopefully that will improve these figures, because the facilities are there.

I believe hon members should also be aware of the fact that the hospital is run by the Transvaal Provincial Administration purely on an agency basis. My colleague, the hon member for Laudium, will be aware that the TPA has suspended an amount of R1,1 million. We intend to provide that amount of R1,1 million, but this will in fact be paid to the TPA so that they can administer the hospital on that basis. As far as budgeting for the future is concerned, we will certainly make provision for funds. I think that answers most of the questions. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.