Mr Speaker, the greatest circumspection must be displayed in taking any steps on the basis of evidence given before the commission of enquiry on which the commission has not yet made a statement or a finding. I did give instructions, however, that the costeffectiveness of printing work and posters which, according to evidence, were purchased for community communication campaigns, be evaluated by outside experts. This is already being done.

In view of the findings in the commission’s first report, further action is taking place with reference to the position of the former Deputy Director-General, Dr D H Meiring. I formally requested that the Commission for Administration make a recommendation about transferring Dr Meiring to a position of appropriate grading elsewhere in the Public Service. As soon as a recommendation is received, further steps will be taken. In the meantime Dr Meiring is on compulsory leave—provisionally until 28 April 1989.

In addition I instructed the new Director-General of Education and Training to give urgent attention in terms of the Public Service Act to the formulation of a formal charge against Dr Meiring in view of the first report and the findings of the commission of enquiry. This instruction is being implemented urgently in close consultation with the office of the Attorney-General.

The commission’s findings point to certain deficiencies in the existing tender procedures, especially with regard to so-called intellectual products. As I said in my statement last Monday, these matters are receiving attention. I also gave instructions that it be ensured that the department have the best upgraded hardware and courseware at its disposal in respect of the Ivis system, which was purchased, and that this be done without any additional expense for the department. Attention must also be given to gaining clarity on the implications of the department’s copyright, in terms of the contract, on the relevant courseware.

Furthermore, because of the increasing demand for its services, the Department of Education and Training is one of the most rapidly growing departments in the Public Service. The extension of the department’s top structure did not keep up with this at all. It was only in April last year that a new and extended top structure came into operation. In this process the additional posts of a third Deputy Director-General, three chief directors and six directors were introduced. At the same time the post of regional head was upgraded to that of chief director. These new posts have almost all been filled and a comprehensive new organisation structure has been worked out for the department and implemented. The final details are being rounded off at present.

I am confident that the considerably strengthened management team which is at the helm now will effectively deal with the variety of involved and delicate tasks in connection with the provision of education to Blacks.

Mr Speaker, I hope in my second opportunity to come back to the position of Dr Meiring and to exactly what is going to happen in his case. Let me say at the outset there is no allegation from the PFP of dishonesty or corruption on the part of the hon the Minister. The question, however, which we need to ask is the following: What has to go wrong in his department before he would feel obliged to resign?

Section 88 of the Constitution states that parliamentary conventions of the past will continue to exist under the new Constitution. Sir Ivor Jennings, in his authoritative work Cabinet Government makes the following comment:

The hon the Minister is responsible for his department. In the Department of Education and Training, during the last nine months, we have had a Director-General taking early retirement, an acting Director-General being transferred and now being investigated, while the other Deputy Director-General has asked to go on early retirement. Incompetence, irregularities, dishonesty and nepotism have devastated the Department of Education and Training, but this hon Minister stays on. A fundamental principle is involved. Who is responsible to Parliament for the performance of a department? Surely, it must be the Minister in question. On page 118 of his book Sir Ivor Jennings says the following:

The hon the Minister must take responsibility; otherwise public servants would be frequently under attack, would not have the reasonable right of reply and would inevitably be drawn publicly into party-political battles. It would become an untenable situation.

The third question we need to ask is the following: Did the hon the Minister of his own volition ensure a proper investigation? The answer, I believe, is no. The powers of the Advocate-General, to whom he correctly referred matters, to start with, are circumscribed. The Advocate-General’s report raised more questions than it answered. On 29 March 1988, in a full statement, the hon the Minister concluded by saying: “In view of the above-mentioned I do not regard further steps as necessary.”

On 4 May 1988, during the debate on the hon the Minister’s Vote, I drew his attention to unanswered questions and called for a full inquiry. Again the hon the Minister referred to the then Standing Committee on Public Accounts— another body with limited powers for investigating the matter—and said: “I do not think it is necessary to take any further steps such as appointing a select committee.”

On 13 June 1988 the hon the Minister refused to accept the unanimous recommendation of the Joint Committee on Public Accounts. He refused to have a full inquiry, as requested by the PFP. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, what was absolutely predictable this afternoon, of course, was that the hon the Minister would not reply to the question about what further action he intends taking. [Interjections.] If there was one answer that he should have given this afternoon, it was that he intended to follow the example of his former Director-General, Dr Fourie, by going on early pension. [Interjections.]

This hon Minister is not impressing anyone, except perhaps the credulous people in his own party, with the already boring announcements of investigation upon investigation, referrals for further investigations and painfully hesitant action, first against one official and later against a subsequent one. He is trying to conceal his own inability to clamp down on corruption in his department behind a series of unceasing investigations—from the Auditor-General to the Advocate-General, to a retired Director-General, to the Commission for Administration, to a judicial commission and then back to the Commission for Administration; from there to the State Tender Board, back to the HSRC, and then to the Committee of Education Ministers.

All of this in fact confirms the damning charge against the hon the Minister with regard to his own incompetence, ineptness, irresolution and incredible naivety in his dealings with people whom he alone trusts, whereas a competent Minister would have realised instinctively that he was being misled by those very people. [Interjections.] This was the case to such an extent that when Dr Fourie eventually retired on early pension, the hon the Minister put none other than Dr Meiring, the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, in charge of the arrant sheep. Nothing else could have illustrated this hon Minister’s co-responsibility for the cloud of corruption that is enveloping his department more clearly. [Interjections.]

Not only is effective education for the respective Black peoples in South Africa of cardinal importance, the Department of Education and Training is also one of the most sensitive departments in the national economy. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I should like to reply to the accusation made by the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, viz that the Minister did not order a proper enquiry of his own free will. That is a gross untruth. [Interjections.] After all, I was the one who took the initiative to listen to the journalist who drew these things to my attention. [Interjections.] I then immediately referred the matter to the Advocate-General. When the report of the Advocate-General appeared to justify a further investigation, after I had had an opportunity to consider the evidence and had realised that there were further problems that required investigation, I was the one who took the initiative of referring the matter for further investigation. This referral was to the Commission for Administration.

There was justified criticism against this particular referral because the staff of the Commission for Administration were involved. The matter was then referred to a judicial commission of enquiry by the hon the State President. Just as in the case of other irregularities, this matter was referred for investigation as soon as it came to light. There was never any question as to whether or not it should be referred, although there was a difference of opinion with regard to who should take charge of the investigation and in which way this should be done. Consequently this hon member is totally misrepresenting the facts. [Interjections.]

Furthermore I want to point out that it would be absurd to cling to the theory that a Minister should be held accountable for all irregularities perpetrated by officials. As certain newspapers said in their leading articles, this could in fact result in such action being covered up, because the relevant Minister would then be taking responsibility and the officials involved would be getting away scot-free. [Interjections.]

In a report in yesterday’s Star, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens himself said it was undesirable and unfair for a political investigation to be instituted with regard to officials. That was also one of the considerations raised by certain hon members at the time when, instead of the proposal for an investigation by a parliamentary joint committee, there were arguments in favour of a different form of investigation. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, we have no doubt that it was because of the tenacity of the hon member for Cape Town Gardens that the Van den Heever Commission was appointed. [Interjections.] Hon members can laugh as much as they like, but the hon the Minister refused to have an investigation. It was only after the hon member for Cape Town Gardens tenaciously dealt with this matter that that commission was appointed.

The hon the Minister was just covering up!

I want to go back to December last year when two senior officials of the Department of Development Aid, the chief engineer Mr Chris Bothma and his assistant Mr Keppies Koen, were suspended following the exposure of an amazing fiddle involving the supply of lavatories to the Department of Development Aid. It meant a contract of millions of rand.

Apart from this event reported by the Advocate-General, he also said he was investigating the following: Firstly, that the Department of Development Aid had changed its radio network three times in five years without approval; secondly, allegations that a communications company allegedly charged R100 per month for the maintenance of each of the masts—hundreds of repeater masts were involved right around South Africa, most of them on State property; and thirdly, that many of the masts do not meet the requirements of all the specifications.

In February of this year the hon the Minister announced that he had suspended nine of his officials because of irregularities. This was described by one newspaper as “the tip of the iceberg.” Maj Kidson of the commercial branch in Pretoria said:

The implication is that there were many irregularities. The impression is given that irregularities occur in the hon the Minister’s two departments with frightening regularity. [Interjections.] What we want to know is whether everything that can be done is being done to get to the bottom of this problem. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, the hon the Minister talks about being responsible for all officials. We are talking about the Director-General and both the Deputy Directors-General.

On 14 March the Advocate-General presented his report. Two weeks later he issued a statement saying that no further action would be taken. It was another two and a half months from the date that that report came out before he went to the Commission for Administration.

On 13 June 1988, the hon the Minister refused to accept the unanimous recommendation of the Joint Committee on Public Accounts. The next day he was finally forced to back down, as the hon the State President was appointing a judicial commission which has now fully vindicated the PFP’s position in this matter.

We believe the hon the Minister is responsible to Parliament for the performance of his department. He did not institute a full enquiry even after the Advocate-General’s report pointed to the necessity for such an enquiry. In the light of what has happened in his department, he should do the honourable thing and resign.

I would also like him to tell us whether in respect of Dr Meiring … [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, once again I want to emphasise that in view of what I said, it was unfair of the hon member for Cape Town Gardens to repeat the statement that I had neglected to institute a full enquiry. On the contrary, that is precisely what I did.

With reference to what the hon member for Johannesburg North said concerning the irregularities in the case of the Department of Development Aid, I want to say that as part of the regular inspection that is carried out by that department’s inspection service—in reality they have to work with a very small staff complement—in co-operation with the staff of the Auditor-General, irregularities were identified last year and this year. This was exposed and the people involved, who were guilty prima facie of a criminal offence, were suspended. The police are prosecuting them on the basis of criminal action. That is the consequence of constant control in the department. It is not reactive action. We were the ones who took the initiative to identify these cases—admittedly with the assistance of the Auditor-General.

I therefore want to emphasise in very strong terms that both these departments are constantly involved in proactive action. The Department of Education and Training received a report about the Auditor-General’s new so-called performance auditing system in August 1987 for the first time. During the subsequent 15 months, intensive work was done under my leadership by the then Director-General, and later by Dr Meiring, with reference to those investigations, to effect intensive restructuring of certain unsatisfactory management and control aspects in the department. Apart from that, drastic restructuring and replanning was also done with regard to matters such as the purchase of text books and stationery. These are matters which cause serious problems in other education departments. Once the new system was in operation, in fact, a consultant was appointed to assist in controlling the effectivity of this action. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

2. Mr S S VAN DER MERWE — Defence. [Withdrawn.]

Order! I put the following interpellation which, in terms of Rule 179(2), replaces Interpellation No 2 on the Question Paper tor today.

Mr Speaker, the township of Windmill Park is 82 ha in size and was proclaimed as a residential township in 1982. It is fully serviced and comprises 263 residential erven. Windmill Park is situated some 6,5 km as the crow flies, from the central business area of Boksburg and is approximately 1,7 km from the nearest other developed white residential township, namely Dawn Park. It is situated approximately 2 km from the proclaimed Indian group area of Villa Liza and some 5 km from the Coloured township of Reiger Park.

The fact that there has been so little interest in the development of this town as a White residential area, is reflected in the fact that only approximately 40 dwellings have been erected there since 1986. In its present arrangement, it forms an island of serviced stands and does not border on any existing development.

It was investigated during 1987-88 as a possible Indian group area. The Group Areas Board recommended that its status be maintained as a controlled area, that is to say that it should not be declared an Indian group area. This recommendation was accepted by me in June 1988 and I ruled that the status quo would be maintained with regard to it.

The housing shortage, particularly among the Indian community on the East Rand, as well as the availability of service stands, led to a great deal of interest from this community in obtaining stands in this township. According to my information ten Indian families are at present living in Windmill Park.

For a long time now there has been an overoccupation of dwellings in the existing Indian township of Actonville. There is also a lack of room for expansion for this township. An earlier attempt to make another area available to Indians, viz Kingsway, failed due to mining considerations. The development of the recently proclaimed area for Indians at Villa Liza will still take quite a long time.

Likewise, there is a great housing shortage in the Coloured community of Reiger Park, which is situated in the municipal area of Boksburg. In that instance, too, there is little room for expansion in order to provide for the needs of the community.

The Free Settlement Areas Act came into operation on 1 March 1989 and for this reason consideration could be given after that date to the possibility of referring this area to the Free Settlement Board for investigation. In view of the aforementioned facts, it has been decided that the area will indeed be referred to the Free Settlement Board for investigation.

In view of these circumstances I have recommended to the Administrator of the Transvaal that he grant consideration to issuing permits to the ten Indian families presently living in the area, pending the results of the investigation by the Free Settlement Board. [Interjections.]

Mr Speaker, this is a very simple question and the hon the Deputy Minister really did not have any problem in answering it shortly before last year’s election. What is the government’s standpoint with regard to Windmill Park? Now we are being given a great circumlocution and a lengthy reply. Last time the very simple answer to this question was that Windmill Park was a White area and that it would remain that way. That was shortly before the municipal elections last year.

That was said, not only by the hon the Minister, but also by the local NP candidate in the municipal election. It is on record and I have the documents of the NP here in my hand.

They said that this area would remain White. The hon the Minister of National Education said that permits would not be issued in that area. [Interjections.] The hon member for Germiston District said that no permits whatsoever would be issued in that area and that it would remain White. The hon the Minister of National Education said that they had investigated that area and they were satisfied that there were sufficient facilities for the accommodation of Indians in another area. For this reason permits would not be granted. [Interjections.] This was stated categorically in writing by all these gentlemen and I have here the documentary proof of this.

[Interjections.]

The hon the Minister of National Education said that after a thorough investigation permits would not be approved. He said that the infighting in that area had to be stopped. It had to be accepted that this was a White area and that it would remain one.

The hon member for Germiston District said at that stage that the Police were already investigating these infringements of the Act and that the position would remain unchanged. He said that the NP could be trusted with the White interests in the town council. [Interjections.]

The hon the Deputy Minister said there was no question of this area being reconsidered. That same hon Deputy Minister is standing up here today and doing a complete about-face. He says that we are now going to have it investigated as a Free Settlement Area. [Interjections.] This is directly contrary to his specific written undertaking.

Who is going to investigate it? In my view there is only one group that can investigate it, and it comes from the Ministers’ Council. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, the actions of the CP-controlled town council in Boksburg towards the residents of Windmill Park were racist, inhumane and callous, and they ought to horrify any right-minded person.

It is also true that those actions were in line with the NP-government policy with regard to squatter communities whose shacks were demolished in order to force them to move to other places where the NP believed the people ought to go and live. [Interjections.]

The solution of this problem, rather than the making of a political football of it, is the responsibility of the Government and they must depart from their sanctimonious and ambivalent approach in this regard.

What the hon the Deputy Minister has just told us boils down to the fact that Windmill Park was reserved for Whites until it became apparent that the Whites did not want it. In other words, if a residential area proves to be rejected by the Whites, it is good enough for other races. [Interjections.] That is scandalous.

That ambivalence is also apparent from the standpoint that was expressed with regard to this matter by a town councillor of the NP, who said that he did not like to do so, but that he had to subscribe to the standpoint of the CP town council in Boksburg in this regard.

The hon members must move away from that situation. It is pathetic that a government should have to deal at national level with a problem that was created at the local level, by way of recommendations to the provincial level. Where is the standpoint of the Government? Where is the power that they are supposed to have? Do they not have the backbone to face this issue squarely?

The only sensible solution to this problem is to move away from racism and to abolish the Group Areas Act and the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act. That is the only honest and sensible solution which the public and the voters outside this House will understand in the final analysis.

Mr Speaker, the hon member for Ermelo said that after June last year we had adopted the standpoint that permits would not be issued. I should like to deal with this aspect.

Firstly, I myself made the decision that that recommendation of the Group Areas Board, and consequently the status quo with regard to the area, was to be maintained. What is the status quo? It is a controlled area. It is not a White group area. [Interjections.] The hon member has not done his homework. [Interjections.] If the hon member had done his homework, he would have established that it has never been a White group area. It is a controlled area which is inhabited as a White residential area. Those are the facts.

That is why it was not necessary, either, to submit this matter to the Ministers’ Council. In terms of the Free Settlement Areas Act, the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning has the power to take decisions with regard to controlled areas.

Secondly, insofar as the permit position is concerned, the hon the Minister of National Education said in a written statement regarding the application for 200 permits to that area that he was not in favour of permits being granted because this would mean that the group character of that area would be completely altered by those permits. That would be intolerable.

After the Group Areas Board had conducted an investigation into whether the area should become an Indian area and had recommended that this should not happen, and we had decided to uphold that recommendation of the Group Areas Board, that decision would be totally negated if we were now suddenly to decide to grant 200 permits and to say that in this way it was now becoming an Indian area. [Interjections.]

These are the facts. Since the status quo insofar as that area is concerned was maintained in June last year as a result of that decision, not a single further White family has moved in there. In other words, no need has arisen for further occupation of that area. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, it appears to me that people like the hon the Deputy Minister and the hon the Minister themselves have not done their homework, because in his letter dated 29 August 1988, the hon the Minister of National Education, now also the chief leader of the NP, went on to say the following with regard to the recommendation of the Group Areas Board:

He then gives a number of reasons and says, inter alia, that owing to Villa Liza there are enough residential areas for the Indians in the foreseeable future and that for this reason permits will not be granted. [Interjections.] He is not coming forward with anything different now. No, he is now telling us that these are humanitarian measures. This is typical, like the child who has murdered his parents and who now pleads for mercy because he is an orphan. [Interjections.] The hon the Deputy Minister does not look at the basic offence that has been committed, and that is that there are indisputably law breakers and challengers of the will of the Government. Despite this they are being reprieved and a jubilee, in which Nationalists are taking part, is being held to celebrate the illegal occupation of Indians in this area. They are confederates of offenders in this crime that has been committed because they are living there without a permit having been issued to them by the Group Areas Board.

Secondly, his allegation that by way of his request to the Administrator he is not … [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I just want to tell the hon the Minister that of course we know precisely what is going on. What that hon Minister does not know, is what he said in his own words, because this is what he confirmed to the hon member for Germiston District:

No question of any reconsideration, but that is precisely what he is coming to do here today. This is directly contrary to his own word. If the NP and their leaders deal with the truth in this manner, then I say it is scandalous and it is no wonder that corruption is thriving in our country as it is doing at the moment. [Interjections.] This is corruption in the wide sense of the word. We are going to tell the White voters outside this House that they are being misled in a deceitful manner by the NP. [Interjections.]

And their leader.

The word of that party is no longer acceptable.

Order! They are being misled in a deceitful manner by the NP and their leader. Is that what the hon member for Overvaal said?

Mr Speaker, I merely said “and their leader”.

Order! The hon member must withdraw it.

I withdraw it, Sir.

Order! The hon member for Ermelo may continue.

There can … [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, the hon member is correct in saying that I said this, and I stand by the fact that I was not prepared to reconsider the decision I had made in June, and neither am I prepared to reconsider it now. [Interjections.] The hon member for Overvaal must keep quiet. This is a de novo consideration which I could only take into account once the Free Settlement Areas Act had come into operation. This is an entirely de novo consideration of the legal position.

I just want to tell the hon member for Green Point something. He says that it is ridiculous that I should now be referring the matter to the Administrator as if I were passing the ball to him to take over. After all, that is the legal position. In terms of the delegated power, it is the Administrator who has the authority to issue permits, and not I or the hon the Minister. I am therefore bound by the legal situation to do it in this manner. I can give the assurance now that had I had the authority, I would have issued those permits myself and then I would not have referred them to the Administrator. [Interjections.] I just want to tell the hon member for Ermelo that it would appear to me that he, too, is not aware of certain further facts in his own party. According to information which I have obtained, the CP town council of Boksburg is holding a meeting this evening, and according to certain documents that have been circulated by the CP-controlled management committee of the Boksburg town council, they will be recommending this evening that permits be issued to the Indians of Windmill Park. [Interjections.] They say … [Interjections.] They say that they are issuing them … [Time expired.]

Order! It is certainly not necessary for hon members to assist an hon member to leave the Chamber. He can help himself. [Interjections.]

Debate concluded.

Mr Speaker, during the period 1 March 1988 to 28 February 1989, six new private hospitals and new operating theatre units were registered with the department. During the same period, 61 applications were received of which 40 were for the creation of new facilities. Of these, 28 applications were received from private hospitals, of which nine applications have already been approved. Twelve are still being considered, five have been rejected and two developers have cancelled their applications. Twelve applications for the creation of new freestanding operating theatre units were received. Three were approved, seven were rejected and two applications are still being considered. At the moment 23 private hospitals and 62 free-standing operating units are registered with the department in the Republic. The costs of private hospitalization and medical services are determined by the supplier, and not by the State. The Medical Association of South Africa does provide doctors with a guideline of average fees for medical services.

The scale of benefits—that is the tariff of fees— for medical schemes is determined by the Representative Association of Medical Schemes, for implementation by the medical schemes.

All complaints about tariffs are investigated by the Department of Health Services and Welfare in co-operation with the Representative Association of Medical Schemes.

During July 1988 a Bill was published by the hon the Minister of National Health and Population Development with a view to making provision for the appointment of a board for private hospitals. This board will consist of 15 members, who will be appointed by the Minister, and who will represent the four health departments, the South African Co-ordinating Consumer Council, the Medical Association of South Africa, the Representative Association of Medical Schemes, private hospitals, the South African Nursing Association and the Pharmaceutical Society and will include a legal practitioner and a person who is qualified in the field of mental health.

The duties of this board will be to advise the Minister on matters in which private hospitals are affected by statutory provisions, the promotion of a cost-effective service by private hospitals and on measures which are necessary to ensure the quality of service and the application of standards in private hospitals. Any submissions, recommendations or complaints with regard to the service provided by private hospitals will be investigated and considered. The head of the department who is responsible for the registration of the establishment, will be advised. In order to curtail the cost of hospitalization in private hospitals and institutions, it is now being considered, with regard to new applications … [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, it is very clear from the reply of the hon the Minister that there is much activity with regard to private hospitalization. In Schedule 1 of the Constitution, the registration and control of private hospitals—one of the subjects in section 14 of the Constitution— is regarded as a so-called own affair. We now find that in practice, apart from the fact that these private hospitals are anything but own affairs hospitals, they must, nevertheless, fill a vacuum because insufficient funds are being granted for provincial hospital services.

Firstly, this results inter alia in provincial hospitals being closed down as a result of a shortage of nursing personnel or general operating capital, and secondly, that nowadays certain expensive and highly sophisticated equipment is only available at private hospitals. We can therefore justifiably say that the standard of hospital services in the provinces is deteriorating, and this essentially affects our academic hospitals as well.

We recently received a report from an association at Tygerberg Hospital according to which it was found that the quality and the standard of training could suffer because of this. The academic hospital is more of a service hospital which has to provide certain services, and in reality it is actually suffering due to a lack of the correct equipment which it needs to achieve the necessary academic qualifications. We cannot escape from the fact that the standards in the private hospitals will also depend on the quality of the academic training which will be available.

The hon the Minister will now tell me that this part of the service does not fall under his department. That is true enough, but without the knowledge which is obtained from the academic institutions, the service in the private sector will also deteriorate at private institutions.

As a result of the vacuum which exists, we find on the other hand, as the hon the Minister mentioned in his reply, that there is a burgeoning of private hospitals, accompanied by consequent increases in costs with regard to hospitalization insofar as the public is concerned, a situation which has become totally unacceptable in the present economic situation in South Africa. The Association of Medical Schemes recently granted a general increase of 12% to private hospitals and an increase of 29% with regard to operating theatres and intensive care units. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the hon the Minister the following questions. Firstly, what actually is his policy in regard to the privatisation of hospital services and is it his policy to encourage the establishment of more private hospitals? Secondly, I would like to know from him why the private hospitals are regarded as a White own affair when I still have to see a private hospital which is not multi-racially staffed, and if it was not multi-racially staffed, it could not function. In addition to that very many private hospitals are open to all races. The logic therefore as to why this should be a White own affair absolutely escapes me.

Thirdly, I would like to ask if he realises what is happening to the middle classes in South Africa who are being squeezed in the sense that those who are entitled to get free or low cost hospitalization, can obtain it; those who are rich and well-off can afford to pay the tariffs, or their medical schemes can pay them; but middle-class people who do not have the benefit of medical aid schemes, or have to pay substantially in excess of what the charges are to be at certain hospitals, find it impossible to see that they get adequate medical and hospital services in South Africa.

Lastly, Sir, may I ask the hon the Minister if we are actually a caring society, because the measure of a civilised society is whether one cares for the aged, the incapacitated and for the sick. Does this administration show that it is a caring society? I think there is a very serious question mark over this administration as to whether it really cares for the people of South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I want to reply very frankly to the hon member for Yeoville by saying that this administration is very definitely responsible, that it carries out its responsibility towards the aged and less privileged people in South Africa to the full, and that with the funds at our disposal we do everything in our power to help everyone.

†Privatisation is one way of helping the State to possibly spend less. It is also a way of ensuring that the State does not have to subsidise those who are already covered by medical aid. Two thirds of our population are dependent on the State for basic health services and one third is self-supporting and belongs to some or other medical aid scheme.

One of the main arguments in support of the privatisation policy is that it will eventually be cheaper as a result of a smaller public sector, lower taxes and a higher employment rate. A lot can be achieved if privatisation can help to contain the cost of hospital and health services. It is imperative that privatisation of the present facilities can only be considered if the private sector is willing to provide the full spectrum of health services and maintain the standard of care at an affordable cost. If this is not achieved, the public interest is not protected and privatisation cannot be considered.

*I believe that the fact which the private sector will have to confront, is that they will have to charge realistic tariffs which will be acceptable to the State. If private hospital entrepreneurs do not charge realistic tariffs, the State will not be able to afford to consider the subsidisation of State patients in private hospitals. I want to give the assurance once again that the State will not ignore its responsibility towards patients who need help. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, private hospitals recently announced that they were going to increase their tariffs substantially despite the fact that the RAMS had granted an increase of 12%. This will mean that from now on patients will have to pay the difference between the scale of benefits and the new scale which private hospitals are demanding.

In practice, this means that an estimated cost of an operating procedure is going to be demanded in the form of a deposit, for example, at the time that the patient is admitted, and that in many cases the full account will have to be settled by the patient, who will then be able to claim the portion of the scale of benefits from the fund at a later date. The medical aid funds have been compelled to notify their members that they themselves are responsible for the portion of the account which exceeds the scale of benefits.

This development could result in private hospitalization eventually becoming totally out of reach of the man in the street. I really want to ask the hon the Minister, seeing that he has now announced that a board of private hospitals is to be appointed, whether apart from advice, quality and standards, there is going to be a degree of control over exorbitant tariffs. Let me give hon members one example.

A patient was admitted to a private institution. After seven weeks his account came to R47 000, and the portion of that account which was in respect of medicines, came to approximately R19 000. This particular patient was terminally ill, and after his death, his entire estate was wiped out by this account, and his dependants were apparently left destitute. This is a serious matter and I think that it is up to the Government to look into this matter, in the interests of the public sector.

Mr Chairman, I should very much like to tell the hon member for Pietersburg and all hon members, as well as the public of South Africa, that in order to curtail the costs of hospitalization in private institutions, we are considering giving preference when processing all new applications, to the approval of those applicants who undertake in writing to limit their fees to the tariff of fees stated by medical schemes. When we come to this board on private hospitals—the hon member for Pietersburg enquired about this—the board must have the power to deal with all complaints which are received from the public.

The board will have to deal with any matter or complaint which it receives, whether administratively, executively or in terms of the powers which the board will have. The board will consider any matter which is submitted to it by the public, for example, with regard to the account to which the hon member referred, and with regard to tariffs which are charged for services rendered in the relevant institutions in terms of the Medical Schemes Act, 1976, and the relevant regulations which are issued in terms of the Act. The only matters which this board for private hospitals cannot deal with, are matters concerning the powers of the South African Medical and Dental Council, the South African Nursing Council, the South African Pharmacy Council and the professional councils of the ancillary health professions in terms of the relevant legislation.

I want to give the assurance this afternoon that we would like to provide everyone with the best health and hospital services. The State simply does not have the necessary funds to do everything. For that reason we welcome private hospitals, but there will and must be control, particularly over tariffs and exorbitant accounts.

Debate concluded.

Mr Chairman, the answer to the question is yes, self-help housing is an approach to the urgent provision of affordable housing for our community. It is also aimed at promoting home-ownership.

Our housing programme is imaginative and flexible and is carried out in co-operation with the community, management committees and local authorities.

The Housing Board has already approved applications for about 6 000 units throughout the country and many of the houses have already been erected. The department receives new applications every day for this highly successful programme.

In the Western Cape alone there are 60 local authorities involved in self-help projects. There are also projects in the Northern Cape, the Transvaal, the Orange Free State and Natal.

Mr Chairman, I should like to ask the Minister to tell us whether he is going to concentrate in the future solely on self-help housing as his department interprets it, or whether he still intends continuing with the provision of conventional houses. The reason I am asking this is because self-help housing in the small towns in the rural areas is perhaps not as successful as in the Cape. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member’s time is now being wasted. He only has two minutes.

Mr Chairman, I did not say it was not working. I am talking about different towns. In some towns it can work, but in others it will not work. Artisans are scarce in some towns.

I should like to know from the hon the Minister what has happened to the funds appropriated for housing—such as the conventional housing in Graaff-Reinet—because the officials say that there are no more funds for this type of housing, but only for self-help building schemes. If funds for self-help building schemes are in fact being made available, why can funds for conventional housing not be made available too? Could there not be a division and couldn’t the Government be asked to assign a certain number of plots for the one type of scheme and a further number for the other type of housing scheme?

The waiting lists would get much longer, because it would probably take the owner two years to build a house himself if he did not have assistance. In such a situation the waiting lists will get even longer. I therefore want to ask the hon the Minister to ensure that the conventional type of housing will continue to be built and that he will not think only in terms of self-help building schemes. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, there is some confusion with regard to the erection of self-help housing. Some local authorities ask those who are interested in the self-help building schemes to first purchase land from the local authority. The land is therefore not included in the contract entered into initially between a self-builder and the local authority. I would very much like the hon the Minister to clear this matter up. Is the price of land included in the original purchase price, or is it an additional amount to be paid?

Secondly I want to refer to the deposits. Is it obligatory for a person who belongs to the selfhelp building scheme to pay a deposit?

Mr Chairman, I should like to know from the hon the Minister if it is not possible for the person who wants a house to exercise an option. He must have an option if he wants to have a self-help house. This should not be a hard and fast rule. People in the platteland find it difficult to operate a self-help scheme. They find it impossible to do.

I should like the hon the Minister of Local Government and Housing to ask his officials to approach the matter from a different angle when they market these self-help schemes. What happens now, is that the officials are saying they are not building conventional homes and that we must build self-help homes. This is a tragedy. We are going to waste the department’s money, because one has to look at the topography of the land, the clay formations have to be inspected and the soil has to be tested. If there is any suspicion … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, does the hon the Minister agree that building costs are so expensive these days that the majority of homeseekers cannot afford to purchase building material in order to erect their self-help homes? Is the hon the Minister of the opinion, after a homeseeker has waited for more than 10 years for a home and is now told that the only home he can get is a self-help one, was the wait worth it?

Does the hon the Minister agree that self-help is finding favour with the larger majority of the people?

Mr Chairman, I think some hon members do not understand the situation. We have different opinions about what we should do. The needs of our people differ. The hon the Minister should view this in a very serious light. In order to meet the need for housing immediately, large contractors must be obtained who can build a large number of houses immediately in order to eliminate the housing backlog. All I am asking the hon the Minister is that conventional houses should also be built. He should appoint contractors to do this. I can take hon members to two towns in my constituency today … [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, hon members amaze me. They have the Belhar selfhelp building scheme right next to them. They should go to Brandvlei in the Karoo. Hon members amaze me because Belhar is next door to where hon members of Parliament live.

We will discuss these things in my Budget Vote, but we can build conventional houses in Port Elizabeth. The hon member for Haarlem should tell me why the houses in Port Elizabeth are not conventional when funds have been available all these years. Do hon members want to tell me that no conventional houses are available in Blue Downs? There are projects underway. Do hon members know their own budget and what is going on in their own constituencies?

Houses are being built. There are houses available. I want to invite hon members to my office so that they can talk to the officials. There are hon members who have entered into an agreement with the department for the erection of ordinary houses by means of contracts in the usual manner and there are contracts relating to self-help housing. Take Pietersburg in the Northern Transvaal as an example. This weekend I am going to open two self-help building schemes in Natal, namely in Ladysmith and Pietermaritzburg.

Order! Hon members are wasting the hon the Minister’s time. He has only two minutes to deliver his speech.

Sir, self-help building schemes are one of the various options with regard to housing.

†If hon members want to argue the point we can argue it out next week publicly in this Chamber. What is the policy of the department? Everybody knows that self-help building schemes is an option. It is not the only option. I am astounded at what hon members are now saying, namely that we do not have leaders in our own community.

*We do not have artisans in Graaff-Reinet. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

Mr Chairman, the answer is as follows. Yes, the Ministry and the Department of Local Government, Housing and Agriculture have noted certain allegations which have been made with regard to the resale of residential plots in Eldorado Park. The fact is that neither the Ministry nor the department has given any authorisation to any individual to purchase the plots which belong to the development board.

Mr Chairman, I asked that question as a result of two reports which appeared in Rapport Ekstra on 7 November 1988 and 26 February 1989. However, the hon the Minister did not answer the last part of the question. They say where there is smoke there is fire. I thought the hon the Minister was going to say that there was neither smoke nor fire. What he has just said, heightens the suspicion of corruption, as stipulated in the newspaper.

In the first report in Rapport under the headline LP se seun dringend gesoek. Bedrog beweer met droomhuise” it is alleged that erf 6381 and others were sold to more than one person, that the persons never obtained a house, and also that they never recovered the money they paid for the erven. Mr Garth Sweetland paid his deposit, but he never got it back. Subsequently the town council said the erf belonged to Mr Neville de Vries, and then the department said the erf belonged to Mr W N Petersen.

It is also alleged that Time Housing was allocated erven which had already been sold. I want to know from the hon the Minister exactly what is going on in respect of erven which belong to the department.

The second report is under the headline: “Die storie van die erwe met die verkeerde eienaars”. According to the report erf 4061 was erroneously sold to M & M Motors. One of the directors said they had purchased it for speculation. This was how, for example, the education trust was able to purchase 4 000 square metres of the land for the purpose of the building they want to erect, having been offered the land by this particular director. The hon the Minister has not responded to this in detail. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, with regard to these allegations I want to ask whether it is possible for the hon the Minister to inform this House if there are any safeguards in the tender process that would prevent the middle men, whose bona fides are questionable and who perhaps are not the genuine developers, to make use of the successful tenders.

Furthermore, if safeguards are created, will the hon the Minister be able to eliminate and close up any loopholes in the whole process of tendering whereby the confidence tricksters, who can so easily exploit the situation, are prevented from doing so? What safeguards can be established to prevent a repetition of what is now taking place? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to ask the hon the Minister exactly what his department’s policy is with regard to the buying of erven which belong to the Development Board or which were developed with State funds. As far as I know, the correct way is to sell the erven directly to the prospective buyer and not to a particular developer. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he thinks that there might not perhaps have been a blunder in this regard on the part of the local authority as well.

Mr Chairman, I want to ask the hon the Minister whether a certain Mr Blignault, who is employed in his department, still works there and whether Mr Blignault, as reported in Rapport, proposed a certain Mr Mateman as the developer. If this is true, it is in my opinion a breach of the department’s policy for an officer of the department to link himself with a developer. I want to know whether any steps are being taken with regard to Mr Blignault.

Lastly I want to ask whether the firm Donovan, Mateman and Associates was registered with the department as the bona fide developers.

Mr Chairman, since the hon the Minister is aware that this anomaly has taken place, I want to know what steps have been taken to correct it. Furthermore, since this smacks of corruption, I want to know whether he has submitted it to the Advocate-General for a comprehensive investigation and report to Parliament, because, when all is said and done, the properties which are being disposed of in this way belong to the State. I am thinking specifically of people who paid money and never recovered their money.

Mr Chairman, I forgot to answer the second part of the question.

The Development and Housing Board, following the recommendation by the Committee, comprising of the department’s representative from the Johannesburg region, the Chairman of the Coloured Management Committee, a nominee of the City Council of Johannesburg, a town and regional planner of the department’s head office and the Vice Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Development Board, approved of business site 4061 being sold to a certain Mr J C Pretorius to accommodate such activity as the City Council in consultation with the town planners may determine.

The hon members asked several other questions which were not part of the original question. I cannot reply to them. We will take up from Hansard the questions they asked and, in the debate on my Vote next week, answers will be given.

I just want to repeat what was said. Factually neither the Ministry nor the department concerned at any stage issued authority to a person to sell residential sites belonging to the Development Board. If the people went to a person and they gave him money, they must take that person to court. That person was involved in the transaction. The regional office, according to information I have received, issued no authority to sell any plots in that particular area to any person. These are private transactions and the people concerned must take the persons to court who sold those plots fictitiously to them. It has nothing to do with this department.

Order! A moment ago I mistakenly referred to the hon member for Matroosfontein as the hon member for Elsies River. I am sorry; it is the hon member for Matroosfontein who made the mistake.

It is the Chair that made the mistake.

Order! I did not make a mistake; I looked at the hon member for Matroosfontein and made a slip of the tongue, since the hon member makes so much noise. [Interjections.] Order! I did not, therefore, call the hon member for Elsies River to order, but the hon member for Matroosfontein. That concludes the questions.

Mr Chairman, the answer is yes. The Committee of Ministers of Housing has appointed a subcommittee under the chairmanship of a senior official of the Department of Public Works and Land Affairs to investigate the matter and submit recommendations to the Committee of Housing Ministers.

This administration is represented on this subcommittee. The sub-committee has already looked at the matter in depth and found that the new rental formula was in no way responsible for the increase in rentals. The actual reason was found to be the levies charged by the local authorities in respect of assessment rates and the provision of water and electricity, refuse removal and so forth.

The sub-committee is presently occupied with the preparation of a memorandum to the Committee of Ministers of Housing.

Mr Chairman, with respect, if that committee has found that water and electricity are causing this problem, I would like to refer to the circular which was sent out to local authorities on 12 August 1987. From then until now the problems which arose out of this new formula have not been addressed.

I will point out one or two of these instructions. On page two of this circular section 3.2.3 reads as follows:

That is one instruction. Let us look at page three, section 3.2.16. Here it says very clearly that—

To emphasise the point, if a person is earning R450 and he lives in a house which is costing him R18 000, he pays R59,50 which is 14% of his income. If the same person, earning the same amount, lives in a house which is costing him R30 000, he pays R193,75 which is 42,8% of his income. I agree that water, electricity and other contributions are separate from the rental, but this has got to be addressed as it has been fleecing our people for far too long. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to commend the hon member for Southern Natal for bringing this serious problem in our community to the attention of the hon the Minister. The hon the Minister must bear in mind that this problem largely affects the sub-economic group. These people are constantly being harassed by all kinds of problems.

This problem, as the hon member for Southern Natal pointed out, does not end here. One has got to take into consideration the ever-increasing cost of electricity. Added to that is the cost of refuse and other levies which the hon the Minister also mentioned. I would like to know what the hon the Minister of Housing is doing about these costs which the municipalities are seemingly increasing unreasonably. We as MPs are being inundated with complaints about this in our constituencies. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I note that the hon member for Southern Natal has been attacking the hon the Acting Minister of Housing which I think is unfair. The hon the Acting Minister has too much on his hands. [Interjections.] I think, therefore, that the Acting Chairman of the Ministers’ Council should recommend to the hon the State President that the hon member for Red Hill, who did excellent work as Minister of Housing and who made great sacrifices, should be reinstated in that position.

There is only one man in this House who should be made Minister of Housing and that is the hon member for Red Hill. Instead of getting into the greengrocer business selling carrots, offering chairmanships and so on in return for political support, it is time that the majority party in this House did things properly in the interests of the community.

The interests of the community require that we have a proper full-time Minister of Housing who will be able to attend to the needs of the community in that respect. I repeat that there is only one man who has the integrity for this job and that is the hon member for Red Hill.

Mr Chairman, I am grateful for the positive remarks of the hon member for Reservoir Hills and for the fact that he acknowledges that we have some very good people on this side.

I want to say that I am pleased that the hon the Acting Minister of Housing has reported that something is being done. I believe that this particular formula was ill-conceived and did not address the problem as it ought to have done, namely at the lower socio-economic levels of our community.

Furthermore I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister to see to it that dealing with this particular problem should not merely be confined to departmental officials and heads. I believe that we should have more input from a larger section of the community. Whether they belong to parliamentary groups or extra-parliamentary groups is immaterial. I think if we want a solution to the housing problem, it must be depoliticised and we must have an input from a cross-section of the community.

Order! I want to make an appeal to hon members. Whilst the hon member for Stanger was on his feet, the extent of the noise here was excessive. Hon members must please respect the rights of hon members to be heard. I want to appeal to hon members please to lower their voices.

Mr Chairman, I have taken note of all the contributions made in connection with this interpellation. I am very mindful of the fact that there are difficulties as far as rentals are concerned. I do want to mention that these problems are being attended to by the sub-committee which will include in its memorandum any necessary recommendations regarding the formula.

There is not much we can do as far as the municipality is concerned, although I would like to ask my colleague, the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, to see what he can do about local government. However, I do want to say that Ministers of Housing are still very concerned about the matter and the whole rental formula will have to be properly addressed after a thorough investigation of all the factors contributing to this rise.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: When the hon member for Reservoir Hills addressed the House, he stated that the only hon member with integrity to hold the position of Minister of Housing … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member is on his feet and he must continue.

Mr Chairman, he said that the only hon member who has the integrity to hold the position of Minister of Housing was the hon member for Red Hill. I believe this is a slur on this House.

Order! Can the hon member for Reservoir Hills explain what he implied?

Mr Chairman, what I meant was that the only person with the necessary integrity and ability on the Solidarity side who was capable of performing the functions of Minister of Housing was the hon member for Red Hill, who has made sacrifices to defend his department in the past, under infamous attack from other people. Integrity means an integration of all attributes …

Order! I accept the explanation of the hon member for Reservoir Hills that he did not mean to cast a slur on anybody.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Reservoir Hills said that as far as integrity was concerned, the hon member for Red Hill was the only hon member with integrity. That is a slur on hon members on this side.

Order! Did the hon member for Reservoir Hills try to imply that other hon members have no integrity?

Mr Chairman, I trust that the hon the Minister of Education will understand the meaning of the word integrity.

He is lying!

It is a very good word. In the English language it means a lot of things. It means ability …

Order! Can the hon member for Reservoir Hills please indicate whether he tried to imply that other hon members did not have integrity.

Sir, I did not intend to imply that the other hon members are dishonest. I did not intend to imply that at all. Of course, some of them are selling carrots.

Order!

Mr Chairman, with the greatest respect, I think that we are skirting the issue, that the hon member’s comment did by implication suggest that others do not have the necessary integrity.

Order! I think the hon member for Reservoir Hills will satisfy us all by withdrawing the word integrity as a slur on any other hon member.

Mr Chairman, with respect, I withdraw the word only. Therefore my sentence will read: He is an hon member with the necessary integrity to be the Minister of Housing.

Order! That is acceptable.

Mr Chairman, during the altercation the hon member Mr Thaver said the hon member for Reservoir Hills was lying. That is unparliamentary language.

Order! Did the hon member Mr Thaver say that? The hon member must immediately withdraw it.

I did say he was lying. I withdraw it, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, the reply to Interpellation 2(1) is that during December 1987 my department negotiated with the Christian Brothers College in Bloemfontein to provide schooling for our Indian pupils. The Christian Brothers College, which is a multi-racial private school run by the Catholic church, agreed to accommodate our pupils from pre-primary classes to standard 10 on condition that the department provided financial assistance. This department agreed to subsidise the tuition fees paid by parents to a maximum of R250 per pupil per annum, and 34 pupils were enrolled at the college on this basis in January 1988. During the course of 1988 a number of parents decided to remove their children from the Christian Brothers College and form their own private school. This school is known as B M J College and operates in three rented offices situated in the old market building. The school has an enrolment of 30 pupils in classes ranging from pre-primary to standard six. There are a further 10 pupils in classes ranging from standards seven to 10 who receive their education through Damelin Correspondence College with assistance from the teachers at B M J College. The B M J College has intimated that it intends to apply to the department for subsidisation and registration as a private school. In the meantime the enrolment of Indian pupils at Christian Brothers College has dropped to 16. As the Minister responsible for education, I discussed the problem with my colleague, the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Assembly, to seek his assistance. He recently made certain proposals concerning the provision of or renting of accommodation and the feasibility of these proposals is being investigated by my department.

As far as the second part of the interpellation is concerned, the possibility of accommodating pupils living in Bloemfontein at the boarding school in Rustenburg was put to the parents by the department. This option, however, did not appeal to the parents.

Mr Chairman, we are dealing with the lives of children and this is something very important. Our children need education and it is the responsibility of this administration to see to it that our children get their education. It does not matter whether it is one child or 10 children. I was very much surprised when the hon the Minister of the Budget told me the other day that schools in little “dorpies” were not State schools. They were subsidised by the local community and the Government. He also said that a school for 40 children in Bloemfontein would not be a viable unit.

Here I have a list of seven schools in the Transvaal. At four schools there are only 22 children, at another there are only 24 children, at another there are only 20 children and at another there are only 27 children. There is also a nursery school which is run by the State. It is not State-aided. It is not subsidised by the State or the local community. It is run by the State.

If this administration has undertaken to look after our children, then they should see to it that our children get an education. It is no use saying that we should subsidise private schools. Why should we subsidise private schools? It is our duty to see that our children get an education. Those children who attend the Christian schools have all been removed. At the moment there are no children attending that school.

In December 1988 we, together with the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Delegates, held a meeting with the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Assembly. In December 1988 he told us that he was looking for premises which he would then hire to the House of Delegates so that we could run those schools. A term has gone by. We are now in March and April is coming up, but nothing has been done.

For the whole of last year our children did not get State education in Bloemfontein. The first term of this year has gone by. We are in the first half of this year. Are our children still going to roam the streets? Are they not going to receive an education? Are we not going to look after our children? Why did the hon the Minister take the responsibility for our childrens’ education upon himself if he is not going to look after them? [Time expired.]

Order! I am a little concerned about the hon member for Actonville’s health. I think he should calm down a little.

Mr Chairman, I am surprised at the hon member for Actonville’s outburst. Any educationalist will testify that it is not feasible to run a school consisting of 10 different classrooms for 40 children. It is not just the building that is involved. It is not just the funds that are involved. One cannot afford to have a teacher for four or five children. If there are 40 children and there are 10 different classrooms, this will not be a feasible proposition.

Mr Chairman …

Order! The hon member for Camperdown is on his feet. The hon member for Actonville still has time to speak later and he may reply then. The hon member for Camperdown may proceed.

We should help the Administration: House of Delegates. If the hon member for Actonville was sincere in his appeal, he should have given hon members a breakdown of how many children are in each class. To say that there are 40 children in a school is not enough. How many children are in the preprimary school? How many children are in standard 1? How many children are in standard 10? That is what the hon member has failed to answer. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, first of all I want to say that is untenable to have a Ministry which is supposed to provide education for our children and which is, in fact, unable to do so. I understand that one has to have economic units, but we have a particular problem in Bloemfontein. It is not a problem that has been created by this administration, but I would think that the hon the Minister should have done everything in his power to get the Catholic school to continue giving tuition to these 40-odd pupils. I am not so sure about the B M J College that has been mentioned. I am not sure what standard of education they are providing. I think not enough has been done in this particular instance. I must endorse what the hon member for Actonville has said, namely that it is the responsibility of the department to provide education for our children. Let us not forget that this is what we promised the community. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it surprises me that the hon the Minister replied that the children from the Orange Free State should be boarded at the Indian school at Rustenburg which has boarding facilities.

I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he is aware of the fact that the boarding facility at Rustenburg is full. There is a waiting list for children that have to be admitted to that school. I want to know whether the department is considering speeding up the building of boarding facilities at other schools on the Transvaal platteland.

Mr Chairman, I have just heard that if children are in various other classes the school cannot be built. In the schools in the Transvaal that I mentioned there are between 20 and 27 children in each class. In most classes there are 22 pupils. All of them are in different classes. The schools are run by the State and they have teachers for those children. Why can we not have teachers for our children?

For how much longer are our children going to roam the streets and go without schooling? Why must they go to boarding schools 400 kilometres away? Why does our Administration make a suggestion of that nature? Of course the parents will not accept it.

Why must the community register a private school? Why must they ask for a subsidy from the Government when this Administration is responsible for the education of our children? Why can our Administration not pay the salaries of the teachers? Why can they not provide premises or pay for the stationery? Why can they not provide the schooling which is a necessity that is required by our community? Is this not callous and cruel negligence on the part of the Administration? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is very nice to shout and become emotional, but when one has to grapple with the situation one knows the difficulties.

Firstly, I want to make it absolutely clear that it is only a certain group of parents that withdrew their children from that Catholic school.

Everybody did it.

The rest are continuing.

Nobody is continuing. I have last night’s report.

Mr Chairman, will you please allow me to answer this? I said that 60 children are still continuing as they were doing in the past.

Order! Hon members must allow the hon the Minister to reply.

My consultation with my colleague in the House of Assembly has revealed that he has done his very best. Unfortunately he has not yet changed his policy relating to admitting Indian pupils to his schools, but he has made attempts to meet the situation as best he can. He suggested a number of options which were given to us, but these options were not acceptable to us. He has also made available temporary classrooms at Vanderbijlpark and it is up to us to accept them. He said the following:

We conveyed these options to the parents and to our hon member but they were not acceptable. I must say that in the circumstances it is still not viable to put up a school at the cost of a couple of million rands to accommodate those children, but temporary arrangements have been made. If it is a private school and they apply for registration, it will be recognised and subsidies will be paid.