House of Assembly: Vol13 - TUESDAY 11 APRIL 1989
The sign * indicates a translation. The sign † used subsequently in the same speech, indicates the original language.
General Affairs:
to ask the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning:
Whether, in the light of the Acting State President’s Opening Address on 3 February 1989, the Government intends declaring a moratorium on investigations and prosecutions in terms of the Group Areas Act; if so, when; if not, why not?
B584E.INT
Mr Speaker, let me say at the outset that there is nothing, either implied or explicit, in my speech of 3 February which could justify a conclusion of the nature implied in the question by the hon member for Johannesburg North.
Neither did I indicate nor did I imply that the Government intended to place a moratorium on investigations and prosecutions in terms of the Group Areas Act. In my speech of 3 February this year I stated that the Free Settlement Areas Bill was enacted after it had been referred to the President’s Council and that this Act gave recognition to those who wished to associate freely in specified residential areas, but that it would not do away with the basic pattern of own residential areas.
The Group Areas Amending Bill was also referred to the President’s Council, which made specific recommendations in relation to possible amendments to this proposed legislation. The Government had understanding, so I said, for the viewpoints and recommendations of the President’s Council, but decided to withdraw the Amendment Bill.
In withdrawing this amending Bill it was clearly stated that the Group Areas Act would remain on the Statute Book. I also stated that other ways and means of achieving the objective of a guaranteed own community life would be examined and that part of the solution might well lie in the provision of adequate housing and suitable areas for housing.
The principle of own residential areas for various population groups as provided for in the Group Areas Act, 1966 remains Government policy and forms the basis for the protection of group rights. Group forming is a way of life in our country but it is also true that there are people of different population groups who by choice want to live in the same residential areas. The Free Settlement Areas Act, 1988 will therefore not affect the concept of own residential areas for those people who wish to live amongst members of their own population group but will protect the right of those members of different population groups who choose to live together in free settlement areas.
*This approach is in line with the approach which I mentioned in the debate on the Opening Address. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, the hon the Minister is quite correct in that he did not mention any question of a moratorium in his speech at the opening of Parliament. He did say the Government had decided to withdraw the referral of the Group Areas Amendment Bill to the President’s Council and that the Government wanted to leave room for those who wish to exercise their individual rights in a community context.
However, I want to take it further by referring to the speech that the hon the Minister made on 9 February 1989 in the debate on the hon the Acting State President’s Opening Speech when he said that the Group Areas Act was a stumbling block in the negotiation process. He went on to say, and I quote from Hansard, 9 February 1989:
I want to know why the Group Areas Act is not scrapped if it causes hurt? [Interjections.] If it is not scrapped, why is a moratorium not introduced? I am asking why a moratorium should not be introduced until the Free Settlement Areas Act is implemented.
I believe the hon the Minister should call a halt to prosecutions under the Group Areas Act until the uncertainty surrounding the Free Settlement Areas Act has been cleared up and specific areas have been established. It is unfair to people who are now established in areas and waiting for establishment of the Free Settlement Areas Act. [Interjections.]
There is a precedent. In April 1986 when the pass laws were abandoned, the hon the Minister of Home Affairs announced a moratorium on contraventions of the pass laws. I want to know why he does not follow the example of the hon the Minister of Law and Order? Police headquarters have issued a circular stating that local authorities enforcing the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act are in conflict with Government policy and that this is detrimental to race relations. A report in The Argus of 23 February is headlined: “Police are told not to make Amenities Act arrests”. Yet in Johannesburg eight people are to appear in court on 21 and 26 April because they are alleged to have contravened the Group Areas Act. This is a fatuous exercise because of the Govender precedent and there is no alternative accommodation available.
The Government cannot have it both ways. They cannot make fine sounding statements as do the hon the Minister and the hon Leader of the NP and then still talk about stumbling blocks and other fine sounding phrases and still maintain prosecutions in terms of the Group Areas Act. They cannot talk “verlig” and satisfy the CP at the same time. [Interjections.] We cannot have the hon the Minister, Mr Heunis, saying he understands the great hurt that the Group Areas Act causes and then continue prosecuting in terms of the Act.
Mr Speaker, with all due respect to the hon interpellator, the question which he asked was really naive, because it implied that this Government would be stupid enough to openly admit that it was not going to enforce the Group Areas Act for a while. This Government is doing exactly that! This Act is not being enforced, but the Government will never admit it officially, because it is still hiding conveniently behind the well-known Govender Case at the moment, and that is a wonderful and useful excuse.
Last year, this Government admitted that it had a problem with the enforcement of this legislation when it proposed the amendment of the Group Areas Act. The problem arose as a result of the lack of sanctions in the particular situation.
It identified the problem and then introduced this legislation to solve it. What happened then? The Bill itself then became a problem and was conveniently wiped off the table.
In fact, what is tragic about the situation is that large sums of the taxpayer’s money were used in an attempt to place a law on the Statute Book. The result of that was exactly a round zero. We are in a total vacuum, because there is no real way - the Government admits this itself—in which the Group Areas Act can be properly enforced. [Interjections.]
For that reason, we are saying that the Government is chasing its own tail. This is what is happening and for that reason we are saying that it should rather tell us what its exact plan is and how long it wants this situation, which it created, to continue. It is a chaotic state of affairs and it is leading to this total concept of lawlessness which exists in our country. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, it is really surprising to listen to the hon member for Ermelo. [Interjections.] That hon member omitted to say that his party opposed the proposed amendments which, as we saw it, would have solved the problem. On those grounds, the hon member now argues that we withdrew that Bill which was referred to the President’s Council. The fact is that that hon member and his party did not want to help the Government place legislation on the Statute Book in order to make the enforcement of the legislation more effective. [Interjections.]
If I may come to the hon member for Johannesburg-North, it was very clear to me that in his original question or interpellation the hon member had in mind the speech that I made on 9 February, and not the speech that I made at the opening of Parliament, because in that speech, he must admit that there was no implication or statement in this particular regard.
What are the facts? The fact is that this hon member’s party also opposed the Free Settlement Areas Bill. [Interjections.] By doing so they also opposed the fundamental approach that there should be a group choice with regard to where people want to live and whom they want to associate with. They opposed that.
We believe in individual choice!
Secondly, my hon Deputy Minister and I made it very clear that we accepted the report of the President’s Council which said that with regard to the basic settlement pattern of people in our country, they wanted this to take place in a community context. Furthermore, I said that the community could make such a choice and that once it had made the choice, the State had to act protectively with regard to that choice.
On the other hand, we also said that where people made a different choice, namely to associate with other people outside of the group context, the State should also respect that choice and protect it in terms of the laws of the country. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, at the beginning of the year the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning very clearly suggested that the Government’s ideas were moving in the direction of a new form of group definition. In turn, the hon the Minister of National Education gave the country the assurance that the Government was not obsessed with group protection, apartheid and so on.
We also said that it was a reality!
Yes, also that it was a reality.
The fact is that the group areas dispensation is irreconcilable with the standpoint to the effect that they are not obsessed with that, not only in principle, but also as it is enforced. Do the hon Ministers have any idea how many people out there have been subjected to misery, pressure and problems as a result of that? Five minutes before I entered this House, I received a telephone call from a medical doctor at Groote Schuur Hospital. He is an Indian South African who is trying to find accommodation in the Cape Peninsula. The man is at his wits’ end. He would qualify for a State subsidy if he were to buy a house, but he cannot use it, because there is nowhere for him to buy and the Government does not want to give him a permit. With regard to permit control as well as police investigations, there can be no question of the Government having adopted a new approach. These are just words and, in fact, they are receiving more credit than they deserve. As long as this dispensation exists, no hon Minister should claim that they have adopted a new, more humane and more accessible approach to the concepts of race and groups in South Africa.
In practice there is no evidence of this. Not long ago, the hon the Deputy Minister suddenly made an exception in one case by recommending to the Administrator of the Transvaal that permits should be granted to people in Windmill Park. Why did that have to happen? The reason is that a CP town council was involved and they wanted to score a political point. What is to become of all the thousands of other people … [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, there are two points. The one is that there is no point in prosecuting people in terms of the Group Areas Act as there is no alternative accommodation available. The hon the Minister has made this point himself. In fact, in answer to a question last year to the hon member for Roodepoort it was reported that 98 people had been prosecuted in 1988 and only four had been given eviction orders. It is a fatuous exercise to prosecute people when there is no alternative accommodation.
The second point that I made and the hon the Minister has not responded to, is that the Governement cannot have it both ways. They cannot talk about reform and have all the high-sounding phrases that both the hon the Minister and his leader have given us in the past couple of weeks, and still play the game of the CP. They have got to come down on one side of the fence or the other, and they have to do it before September when we go to the people to ask them for their votes.
Mr Speaker, the hon member surprises me. The hon member is a member of a party which came into being yesterday, but which decided on its policy the day before yesterday and will have a different policy tomorrow.
The hon member now talks about the standpoint of my party. [Interjections.] The argument of the hon member for Green Point had nothing to do with the question put by the hon member for Johannesburg North. Of course, I said—I am repeating this today—that we in this country should adopt an approach of non-rigid classification. However, where communities or individuals decided to identify themselves within a particular community context, we had to have the right and accept the obligation to protect that choice. That includes the choice of people who choose a different way of life. The Government has accepted that as well. The standpoint of the hon member for Green Point and the party to which he now belongs—I assume he belongs to the new one—is that we should not force choices on people and that we do not want to allow people to make there own choices. This Government is not prepared to reject the basic standpoint that we should protect the choices of people who wish to live in a group where they feel safe. [Time expired.]
Debate concluded.
to ask the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether the conditions for the implementation of Resolution 435 had been complied with on 1 April 1989;
- (2) whether these conditions have been adhered to since then?
B628E.INT
Mr Speaker, on 1 April not all the conditions for the implemenation of Resolution 435 were complied with—I think this is common knowledge— but since then steps have been taken by the governments of South Africa, Cuba and Angola to ensure, as far as is practicable, that the conditions will in fact be complied with.
In regard to a question of this nature we must just remember that Resolution 435 does not stand on its own. It is one of the agreements entered into more than 10 years ago. Since that time further agreements have been entered into and all of them are interwoven into Resolution 435. For example, there is a schedule for Cuban withdrawal, and I can inform this House today that the Cubans are ahead of schedule. In other words, we have information that they have already withdrawn more troops than they were obliged to do.
In addition one cannot in a case of this nature say whether a government is going to honour its obligations until it fails to do so. I know of no way on earth that one can do so but one can create the machinery to deal with such a failure to comply. One can create the structures to ensure that, if an obligation is not honoured, one can deal with the situation. I am grateful to be able to inform this House today that, when it happened that Swapo failed to honour its obligations, the structure which South Africa, Cuba and Angola had wisely created, namely the joint commission, was immediately convened and dealt with the matter.
This brought South Africa great praise, great honour and positive publicity from all over the world, namely that South Africa has a government which does not act precipitately and which remains calm. We are the leading regional power of Southern Africa, that acts in a level-headed way, that created structures in time and, when the kind of thing that Swapo did happens, has the ability to put that structure into operation to ensure that the obligations which parties have committed themselves to are actually carried out.
In fact, the joint commission was so effective that we were able to pre-empt the Security Council of the UN. Since the Security Council was unable to discharge its duty, we did, and in that way activated the Security Council into accepting that the work which the three governments had done … [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker … [Interjections.]
First say thank you to Pik!
I think he can thank me for having created the opportunity for him to say what he said here. [Interjections.] I shall leave it at that.
I cannot agree with the hon the Minister about the effectiveness of his structures. It is very clear that the UN, Swapo and Angola not only failed to comply with the conditions but also that the forces of South Africa and South West Africa were caught off their guard in this situation. [Interjections.] The Weekend Argus of 8 April said, on page 15 … [Interjections.]
You people are nervous, aren’t you!
They are very nervous.
The Weekend Argus said: “The warnings came from both sides of the fence”. If one reads the explanation there, the approach of Swapo reminds one of Pearl Harbour and the warnings that were issued in that incident. [Interjections.] Those warnings were ignored.
Those warnings were not only put in writing in that newspaper but the situation of the patrol that happened to come across Swapo members that Saturday morning does not indicate that it had received any warning. The machine guns on the armoured vehicles of that patrol had been disassembled. They had to offload armoured vehicles from the trains. A police officer said on television the other night: “We shall not be caught off our guard again”. I want to emphasise the word “again”. To my mind this is not indicative of effective structures.
The hon the Minister knew that Swapo was advancing. He told Mr Ahtisaari so but what did he do with that information? How did he react to it? Did he pass it on? Did he do his work properly? Those are the questions he must answer, because the price that was paid was a very high one. On our side between 20 and 30 were killed and between 70 and 80 seriously disabled. In that case one does not walk around like a baboon with his tail cocked and say: “My structures worked and things went very well.” [Interjections.] That is the price of incredible naivety and gullibility on the part of South Africa and the UN and negligence on both their parts as well as indifference to the proper transfer of responsibilities.
South Africa and South West Africa began to transfer responsibility and demobilise. They were eager to do only one thing, and that was to comply with the conditions, but Untag was not there yet in practical terms. [Interjections.] As we ought to have known, and as the hon the State President foresaw, Swapo streamed in because we trusted the communists in a gullible way. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, while we in these benches will be raising some questions, we approach this matter from a completely different point of view from that of the hon members on my right. We back the Government in its implementation of Resolution 435. We are pleased that Resolution 435 is back on track.
That’s the kiss of death!
Well, whether it is or not, I am not here to play party politics with the lives of young people or the future of South Africa.
I believe that the hon the Minister’s efforts together with those of his colleagues and advisers to bring this back on track over the past few days will go down as one of the major achievements of the hon the Minister in his long political career.
Getting it back on track is in the interests of both South West Africa and South Africa and, strangely enough, because it will put some backbone into the UN, it will be good for them as well. That is our view.
The question, however, is whether everything was done to prevent it from happening and prevent those 300 people from being killed. I want to put it to the hon the Minister that at the time when he became aware that, because of the sqabbling in the UN, the cutting-back and the saving of money, they were not going to be deployed in the correct position on 1 April, should South Africa at that stage not have taken a tougher line towards the implementation of the other conditions of Resolution 435? In retrospect, was the line as tough as it should have been when we were aware that Untag would not be deployed and that this was a risk?
Secondly, in this whole peace negotiating process in retrospect, should Swapo at that stage not have been locked directly into the peace negotiation process? It was done but it was done second, third or fourth hand. Would it not have been better to get them there, get them to sign in front of our people and to get a very firm commitment across the table that there be no violation of this kind? [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, I wish to express my appreciation to the hon member for Sea Point for his complimentary remarks. My impression is that that is the reaction of all responsible South Africans throughout our country.
Yes, with hindsight one can ask the question whether Untag should not have been in place. We did what we could. It was because of the quibbling in the Security Council with the non-aligned States who wanted more troops and the five permanent members who wanted fewer troops that they lost two to three weeks. From the South African point of view, however, it was essential that 1 April should be a fixed date since the time schedule for Cuban withdrawal was inextricably tied to 1 April 1989. We did not want to do anything that would have interfered with that important time schedule. One of our major achievements was to achieve a time schedule for Cuban withdrawal and we did not want to give any reason that would have interrupted that very important element of the whole network.
Let us face it, Untag was never designed to deal with such a massive, large-scale violation of an obligation. The problem of binding Swapo into it is that there are some 20 parties in Namibia. The moment one starts negotiating with one one has to negotiate with 20. I can assure the hon member that we would still be negotiating today and even next year if we were obliged to achieve the agreement of all parties. Swapo was not a Government. [Interjections.] In a letter to the
Secretary General, Swapo undertook to fulfil its obligation and I do not think one can put it more strongly than that. It broke its written undertaking to the Secretary General. If one breaks one’s undertaking to the Secretary General one breaks one’s undertaking towards South Africa or any other party. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, the hon former member of the PFP made a point which we also made. We do not want to engage in cheap party politics in respect of those who died. [Interjections.] One cannot ignore the situation, their death and their open graves and then want to shout down a person who wants to discuss it. [Interjections.] That is what is involved here. That blood flowed and those graves are there as a result of the naivety and the gullibility of the hon the Minister and the fact that he closed his eyes to the “Pearl Harbour” on the northern border of South West Africa.
The hon the Minister quite simply wanted to begin on 1 April. That is the problem. We must now look ahead. Almost 2 000 armed Swapo soldiers crossed the border. Three hundred of them were killed. How are we going to be certain that the 1 700 are back by 15 April? If they are not back, what then? Is the hon the Minister once again going to believe blindly?
How are they going to know whether those who report and ask to be sent back are the same ones who came across? These are the kinds of problems we have to deal with as a result of the fact that they infiltrated. [Interjections.] How is one going to find their weapons? Today’s newspaper reported that South West Africa was going to be scoured for weapons but that, like the example someone mentioned, is the same as looking for a fish in the sea. [Interjections.]
It is very clear that the hon the Minister, with his structures and all, was not informed, because in the one letter he wrote to the Secretary General of the UN … [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, the question which arises, if the conditions for the implementation of Resolution 435 were not complied with on 1 April, is why South Africa went ahead and why South Africa did not delay it until Untag was in position? Only nine of the 500 Untag policemen were in position.
In the Geneva Protocol there is no question of Swapo having to be in bases north of the sixteenth parallel where they can be monitored. I have the agreement in my possession. I shall show the hon the Minister that there is no obligation for them to be in their bases.
This omission and this real deficiency in the Geneva Protocol, for which the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs has to bear the responsibility, is only now being rectified, after the time, with the so-called Mount Etjo Declaration—only now, after we have had many killed and many wounded on our side. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, I shall make the documents available to the hon member; then he will see that in a letter to the Secretary General Mr Nujoma did in fact accept the Geneva Protocol, exactly as I also had to do, and therefore committed himself to being north of the sixteenth parallel. [Interjections.]
The whole world accepts this. It is accepted in all legal studies. No less a person than Mrs Thatcher accepted it. There is not a single newspaper that did not accept it. Only the CP and Swapo do not want to accept it. [Interjections.] I cannot go along with a party that refuses … [Interjections.] … and wants to derive a bit of propaganda from this for political objectives. That is why I am not prepared to discuss this matter with them any further. That is why I just want to emphasise that if we had wanted to act the way they do—in the Boksburg style—I would no doubt have suspended the entire peace negotiating process when Mr Papenfus was not handed over on time. [Interjections.] Then he would never have been handed over. Strictly speaking Mr Papenfus should have been handed over far earlier. If we had been such sticklers for perfection, that man would not have been back home. [Interjections.] Because Cuba and Angola pointed out certan problems to us, we proceeded in an atmosphere of level-headedness and the man was handed over on 31 March. [Interjections.]
Order!
Now they are angry and ashamed. Once again they are out of step and have chosen the wrong course. It is a thorn in their flesh that our structures worked, and they know that they worked. Today there is one thing I want to make very clear. I do not know whether Swapo will cheat again. If they know it, they must tell me. I do not know. If Swapo cheats again, I say once again, the structures will be there to deal with them. [Interjections.] We are extremely sorry about what happened but I say that not only did South Africa come out clean from this bitter experience; it came out of it constructively and level-headedly and with honour and dignity! [Interjections.]
Order! We are dealing with interpellations; not with the election. The time for the second interpellation has expired now and we shall therefore proceed with the questions on the Question Paper.
Debate concluded.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
General Affairs:
State President:
asked the State President:
- (1) Whether the Chief Minister of KwaZulu or any members of his government have requested him to appoint a commission of inquiry into alleged corrupt land deals involving members of the KwaZulu Legislative Assembly and/or councillors serving on KwaZulu town councils; if so,
- (2) whether any officials seconded by the South African Government were involved in these land deals; if so, (a) which officials and (b) from which Government Departments had they been seconded?
B574E
- (1) No.
- (2) Fall away.
Mr Speaker, arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, may I ask him, in view of the fact that this type of corruption is common knowledge throughout Natal, whether the hon the State President is going to take the bull by the horns himself and appoint a commission to investigate this corruption?
Mr Speaker, fact is that if a commission has to be appointed in KwaZulu the KwaZulu Government in terms of the Act is supposed to do it.
Ministers:
asked the Minister of Law and Order:†
Whether, since his reply to Question No 3 on 7 March 1989, any progress has been made in the investigation into the disappearance of Mr Stanza Bopape from police custody on 12 June 1988; if so, what progress?
B448E
The investigation into the matter is still continuing unabatedly. It is receiving the highest priority and any progress will be made known, when it is convenient.
Mr Speaker, arising out of the reply of the hon the Deputy Minister, may I ask him whether it is not a fact that the person has been missing for 10 months since his so-called escape on 10 June last year and whether there is any reason that he can think of why the family must not reach the conclusion that in fact he died while in detention?
Mr Speaker, the hon member has now introduced an additional element to the question that he posed. The reply to the question was clear, namely that the investigation continues. If the hon member wishes to conduct a debate on it, ample opportunity for this will be provided later. [Interjections].
Mr Speaker, further arising out of the reply of the hon the Deputy Minister, may I ask him whether he will be prepared to furnish the attorneys who are acting on behalf of the disappeared person, with the names of the three policemen who were in the vehicle at the time of the escape, so that they can be questioned?
Mr Speaker, the hon member must have his question included in the Question Paper.
asked the Minister of Law and Order:
- (1) Whether the Attorney-General referred the matter of alleged irregularities in the Ibayi Town Council to him; if so,
- (2) whether this matter is being investigated by the South African Police; if so, (a) what progress has been made in this regard and (b) when is it anticipated that the matter will be finalized?
B450E
- (1) No, the Advocate-General brought the matter to the attention of the South African Police.
- (2) Yes.
- (a) and (b) Although the investigation has already progressed far, it is at present not possible to give an indication when it will be completed.
asked the Minister of Law and Order:
- (1) Whether he or the South African Police have received any representations regarding the number or use of municipal police in Lebohang Township; if so, (a) from whom, (b) when and (c) what was the (i) purport of and (ii) response to each such representation;
- (2) whether any complaints regarding the actions or conduct of municipal police in this township have been brought to his notice; if so, what action has been taken as a result of these complaints?
B451E
- (1) Yes
- (a) The Transvaal Provincial Administration, the Mayor and Town Council of Lebohang.
- (b) 28 April 1988
20 February 1989 and
11 March 1989. - (c) (i) and (ii) The representations mainly dealt with the increase of the numerical strength, remuneration and housing of municipal police as well as the provision of vehicles, a public address system and better office accommodation. These representations were considered thoroughly and during discussions between the South African Police and the parties concerned, resolved to the satisfaction of all the parties.
- (2) Yes, the complaints are being investigated, but could up until now, not be confirmed on the basis of available evidence. The investigation is continuing.
asked the Minister of Law and Order:
- (1) Whether, with reference to his reply to Question No 19 on 19 April 1988, further meetings of the community liaison forum between the private sector and the Joint Management System have been held in Cape Town; if so, when; if not, why not;
- (2) whether such forums have been established in any other areas; if not, why not; if so, (a) where and (b) when;
- (3) whether similar meetings have been held in other areas; if so, (a) when and (b) where; if not, why not?
B454E
- (1) Yes. It is part of the normal liaison on a local level between the NMS and the private sector and takes place if and when it is regarded necessary by those concerned.
- (2) Yes
- (a) and (b) It is the practice country-wide and takes place according to the local needs for liaison between the NMS and the private sector.
- (3) Yes
- (a) and (b) As already mentioned, it is the practice country-wide. The meetings are locally arranged and the frequency thereof vary from place to place according to the need for liaison.
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:†
Whether, in view of the findings of the Van den Heever Commission on a certain senior official of the Department of Education and Training (whose name has been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply), any action in terms of the Public Service Act, No 111 of 1984, has been taken or is contemplated in respect of the official concerned; if not, why not; if so, (a) what action, (b) when and (c) what is the name of this official?
B477E
Yes
- (a) A formal charge of misconduct in terms of section 20(1) of the Public Service Act, No 111 of 1984, was served on the official.
- (b) On 10 April 1989.
- (c) Dr D H Meiring.
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:†
- (1) Whether a certain senior official, whose name has been furnished to the Department of Education and Training for the purpose of the Minister’s reply, has been transferred from that Department; if so, with effect from what date;
- (2) whether this official has been appointed to another post in the Public Service; if so, (a) with effect from what date and (b) (i) to what post and (ii) what is the grading of this post?
B479E
- (1) No.
In view of my reply to question 5 the transfer of the official is being delayed until the investigation of the charge of misconduct is finalised. In the meantime the official is on compulsory leave. - (2) Falls away.
asked the Minister of Defence:†
Whether groups of national servicemen stationed in the vicinity of Pretoria were shown (a) video films and/or (b) photographs this year in which a certain person, whose name has been furnished to the South African Defence Force for the purpose of the Minister’s reply, as well as other persons who visited the residential area of Mamelodi appeared; if so, (i) (aa) how many national servicemen were shown this film material and (bb) what are the names of the persons who appear in it, (ii) what was the purpose of showing this material to the national servicemen and (iii) what attitude to the persons appearing in the videos and/or photographs concerned did the persons who showed the material convey to the national servicemen concerned?
B523E
- (a) and (b) No.
Mr Speaker, arising out of the hon the Deputy Minister’s reply, I want to ask him if he is aware of a statement issued to a Transvaal newspaper on 17 March which reads:
A Defence Force spokesman said videos and briefings are routine and aimed at orientating new troops into the area in which they are to operate. As far as this specific case is concerned, at no stage did the briefing officer refer to the people mentioned by Mr Van Eck as the enemy.
This is an admission that there was, in fact, such a video and I am asking the hon the Minister on what grounds this statement was made and why he is replying negatively today.
Mr Speaker, it is mainly about what was written in the newspapers. Technically, I replied correctly to the question as put by the hon member. [Interjections.] If the hon member wishes to rephrase his question, he must please place it on the Question Paper.
Mr Speaker, further arising out of the hon the Deputy Minister’s reply, is he suggesting that this statement issued by the Defence Force to the newspapers, was not issued by the Defence Force, or is it the truth?
Mr Speaker, I am not referring to statements; I am referring to the reply to the question placed on the question paper by the hon member. [Interjections.]
Mr Speaker, further arising out of the hon the Deputy Minister’s reply, is he not aware of the fact that the Defence Force, in fact, issued a statement relevant to that matter in the Transvaal?
Mr Speaker, I shall reply a third time. I am aware of that statement, but the hon member must just put his question correctly, then I shall reply to it.
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether, with reference to his reply to Question No 21 on 7 March 1989 and in the light of recent incidents allegedly involving South African citizens and members of the Police Force and Defence Force of Ciskei, particulars of which have been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, he has made further representations to the Government of Ciskei regarding the protection of South African citizens living in Nkqonkqweni, East Peelton; if not, why not; if so, (a) (i) when and (ii) with what result and (b) what are the particulars of the above incidents;
- (2) whether he now intends taking any further action regarding the protection of South African citizens living in this area; if not, why not; if so, (a) what action and (b) when?
B524E
- (1) No.
Regarding the incident on 2 January 1989 about which representations were made to the Ciskei Government as indicated in my reply to Qustion No 21, senior Ciskei Ministers visited East Peelton on 12 February 1989 and, through dialogue, succeeded in establishing harmony in the area.
As regards the other two incidents furnished to my Department, the South African Government was informed by the Ciskei authorities that a group of people had been detained after attempting to coerce unwilling residents of East Peelton to attend a meeting. They have subsequently been released. - (2) As and when the need arises the South African Government is always ready to take action to protect its citizens.
asked the Minister of Home Affairs:
- (1) Whether his Department has commissioned the Human Sciences Research Council to undertake a study of the Portuguese community in the Republic; if so, what are the relevant details;
- (2) whether the Portuguese community’s perceptions of the South African Government and its policies are amongst the aspects being investigated; if so, (a) why, (b) who decided that these perceptions should be investigated and (c) to whom is the report to be made available?
B525E
(1) and (2) The Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) was commissioned by the Department of Home Affairs to undertake a study of the Portuguese community in the Republic of South Africa. The Council has completed its task and I have received a copy of the report during the past week. I am still studying the report but I am prepared to make it available to interested persons.
Mr Speaker, arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply — if the answer to this is in the reply the hon the Minister is tabling I will be happy — may I ask what the cost of the study was to the Government?
Mr Speaker, I cannot give the hon member that information offhand but I will notify him in due course of what the cost was.
Mr Speaker, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, in the second part of the question it is asked whether the viewpoint of the Government and its policies are some of the aspects brought to the attention of the respondents. I should like to know whether the views of the other political parties were also brought to their knowledge.
Mr Speaker, I think the hon member will find the particulars in the reply that is tabled and if the hon member would like to be further informed on this matter, he can get the report itself with pleasure.
(Rest of reply laid upon the Table with leave of House):
It is commonly accepted that there is a large Portuguese community in the Republic — some estimates put their numbers as high as 600 000. Next to the Afrikaans and English speaking communities and groupings the Portuguese community constitutes a substantial group in the South Africa community life, originating largely from immigrant stock. The stage had been reached where the Department of Home Affairs and the Immigrants Selection Board required some specific and particularly recent information relating to this community. As is generally known, the Department is responsible for the admission of immigrants to the RSA, the promotion of immigration especially professional and highly-skilled manpower in certain categories, the granting of temporary work permits and the issue of naturalisation certificates.
After consultation with the HSRC, and with proper cognizance being taken of the cultural and economic impact of the Portuguese community in many spheres of activity in the Republic, it was clear that there was a real need for a fairly wide-ranging exploratory study of that community. The following aspects were included in the terms of reference to the Council:
- — Factors which promote adaptation.
- — Factors which delay/inhibit adaptation.
- — Perceptions of the South African government.
- — The general welfare of the Portuguese community, in the economic, social and political field.
- — Sentiments in respect of Portugal and other Portuguese areas.
- — Factors which can promote re-immigration to Portugal and other Portuguese areas.
- — Factors which might influence decisions on re-immigration.
- — Re-immigration: choice of host country (apart from Portugal and Madeira, there are large communities in Brazil and Venezuela).
The HSRC being the specialist research institution was allowed the necessary professional and scientific scope to develop a proper questionnaire which would satisfy the requirements of the Department, while, at the same time, addressing some questions generally which could provide entrepreneurs, developers, service institutions and other bodies in the Republic with useful information on the potential of the Portuguese community.
The Portuguese community’s perceptions of the South African Government and its policies were considered relevant as there exists a need, for the purposes of successful immigration, promotional actions and the assurance of the continued sojourn of immigrants in the Republic, to become aware of all the aspects and factors of the South African way of life which are beneficial to immigration promotion.
The decision that these perceptions should be investigated followed on the HSRC’s scientifically constructed and proposed questionnaire which, in common with most professionally constructed questionnaires contains in-built checks and balances, as well as questions specifically aimed at eliciting clear-cut standpoints on the part of the respondents. The final decision on the acceptability of the HSRC’s proposed questionnaire was taken by the Department of Home Affairs at top management level.
asked the Minister of Agriculture:
- (1) Whether the use of benzine hexachloride has been banned in South Africa; if not, why not; if so, why;
- (2) whether there has been any relaxation of this banning in recent years; if so, why;
- (3) whether his Department is still in possession of any surplus stocks of this substance; if so, what quantity;
- (4) whether his Department disposed of any surplus stocks in the last two years; if so, (a) how and (b) to whom?
B526E
- (1) Yes, because of the build-up of certain isomers of benzine hexachloride in the adipose tissue of animals which may lead to unacceptable residue levels in meat and wool;
- (2) yes, as an emergency measure specifically for the combating of locusts by the State during 1985/86;
- (3) no;
- (4) yes, (a) as a grant, (b) to South-West Africa/Namibia Administration specifically for the combating of locusts.
Mr Speaker, arising out of the reply of the hon the Minister, is he aware of the studies which indicate the use of this chemical as being highly dangerous even as an emergency measure against locusts and that the damage to the environment thus done is something that will harm that part of the environment for a very long time indeed?
Can’t we use it against the Nats?
I should like to tell the hon member that arious tests were done on sheep slaughtered in this area. The residue levels of benzinehexachloride found, were below the maximum level; on other words, it is not dangerous for human consumption.
Mr Speaker, further arising from the reply of the hon the Minister, it is not just damage to possibly the meat that is being raised in that area but damage to the general environment in terms of other fauna and flora that inhabit the areas?
Mr Speaker, we only use benzinehexachloride in an emegency situation when we deal with locusts and not for other purposes.
asked the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning:
With reference to his reply to Question No 5 on 14 March 1989, (a) for how long have the residents of Fechter, Flenter, Witlokasie and Joodsekamp lived in these squatter areas, (b) how many persons are currently residing in these camps and (c) who owns the land on which they are currently residing?
B527E
This matter vests in the Administrator of the Cape Province and he has furnished the following information:
- (a) Approximately 20 years
- (b) Fechter (Witlokasie): 1 114 persons
Flenter: 1 290 persons
Joodsekamp: 793 persons - (c) The Municipality of Knysna.
asked the Minister of Home Affairs:
- (1) Whether a certain person, whose name has been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, has been repatriated; if so, (a) on whose instructions and (b) why was this person refused permission to remain in the Republic;
- (2) whether any representations or applications regarding temporary residence for this person have been received by his Department; if so, (a) when, (b) from whom, and (c) with what result, in each case?
B528E
- (1) and (2) I refer the hon member to the press release which was issued on this matter by the Director-General of Home Affairs on 3 February 1989, a copy of which I lay upon the Table.
Representations on the matter were received from various persons, inter alia the hon member himself. The representations were, however, not successful due to the considerations mentioned in the press release.
Mr Stefan left the country on board a ship of a Rumanian shipping line on Tuesday, 14 March 1989.
PRESS RELEASE BY MR G B S VAN ZYL, DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF HOME AFFAIRS: STEFAN CASE
On 20 January 1989 it came to the notice of the Department of Home Affairs that Mr Ionel Cristian Stefan, aged 25 and presumably a citizen of Rumania, deserted from a fishing vessel, the “Razelm”. He has been sojourning illegally in the RSA since then and in terms of the provisions of the Admission of Persons to the Republic Regulation Act, 1972 he is a prohibited person.
During the course of the investigation of the case it was established that Mr Stefan married a South African citizen from Cape Town, Mrs Nanette Sharon Miller (neè Joss), aged 39, on 7 January 1989. At the time of the marriage Mrs Miller was a divorcee and mother of four children, two of whom were from her previous marriage. She was unemployed at the time of the investigation and her four children were by order in the care of a children’s institution.
Mr Stefan was arrested by an immigration officer of the Department of Home Affairs on 23 January 1989 and was detained in the police cells, Cape Town, in terms of a warrant issued by the immigration officer pending repatriation. Arrangements were made at the same time for him to leave the RSA on 27 January 1989. Before this could take place, he, however, slashed his wrists and his departure had to be postponed. He was examined by two doctors on 31 January 1989, and admitted to the Valkenberg Hospital as a certified patient. Ship jumpers present a vexing problem world-wide for the countries concerned and drastic measures are taken against them virtually without exception. The case of Mr Stefan is further complicated by the fact that repatriation of persons to countries with which the Republic has no diplomatic ties is a difficult and slow process.
The Department of Home Affairs is also not in possession of any background information pertaining to Mr Stefan in order to enable the Department to properly evaluate his continued sojourn in the Republic. For this reason such persons must apply for residence permits from abroad to enable the Department to establish as far as possible, their acceptability beyond reasonable doubt, thus obviating a possible situation where repatriation cannot be effected.
Mr Stefan has no authority to sojourn in the RSA and his marriage to a South African citizen does not entitle him to any right of residence in the country. Arrangements have been made for him to leave the country as soon as possible after he has been found medically fit to travel. Mr Stefan is at liberty, after he has left the country, to apply for a residence permit from abroad.
ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, PRETORIA 3 FEBRUARY 1989.
asked the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning:
Whether he has taken any steps to provide the residents of Kwazakhele with alternative accommodation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
B529E
This matter vests in the Administrator of the Cape Province and he has furnished the following information:
The Executive Committee of the Ibhayi City Council at a meeting held on 29 March 1989 resolved to erect approximately 350 emergency housing units on a site identified for that purpose. The size of a unit is 6 m X 3 m and has a door and two windows. The erection cost is R2 300 per unit and it will be erected at the rate of 30 per day. The project will be financed from internal funds and the cost will be recovered at the rate of R25,50 per month per unit.
Rudimentary services will be provided to the emergency housing area.
asked the Minister of Environment Affairs:
- (1) Whether his Department allocates any sum of money to environmental education; if not, why not; if so, (a) approximately how much per year and (b) how is this sum (i) determined and (ii) monitored;
- (2) whether it is anticipated that this sum will be increased in the near future; if not, why not; if so, (a) when and (b) by how much?
B530E
- (1)
- (a) The Department allocates approximately R900 000 per annum for environmental education and related projects.
- (b)
- (i) The amount allocated for this purpose is determined by the Department’s continual financial commitments to environmental education organisations and annual estimates are otherwise being based on normal budgetry procedures. An additional amount is allocated from the Strategic Reserve by Treasury.
- (ii) Monitoring of the allocated amount is carried out by means of project submissions and financial statements of beneficiaries, and money which is spent internally is monitored through normal procedures and regulations.
- (2) (a) & (b) The amount could possibly be increased in future depending on the needs in the environmental education and related field — in other words depending on the merits of future identified needs of the Department and other organisations.
Business interrupted in accordance with Rule 180C (3) of the Standing Rules of Parliament.
asked the Minister of Water Affairs:
- (1) Whether all effluent from all pipelines extending into the sea is monitored; if not, why not; if so,
- (2) whether the results of such monitoring are freely available to the public; if not, why not; if so, where?
B531E
- (1) Yes, all discharges from all pipelines extending into the sea, which are subject to exemptions issued in terms of the Water Act, 1956 (Act 54 of 1956) are monitored. All exemptions have an additional compulsory requirement to monitor the marine environment to determine whether the discharges have any detrimental effect.
- (2) No, the results of effluent monitoring are not normally released generally, because some expert knowledge is needed in the interpretation thereof. The results may, however, be obtained through the offices of the Department of Water Affairs in Cape Town, Durban and Port Elizabeth, but this information will only be released with the permission of the effluent producer as confidential information on industrial processes can be disclosed by effluent properties. Section 166A of the Water Act, 1956 prohibits such disclosure. The Department undertakes its investigation and negotiations with the industries concerned on the basis that information obtained is confidential and will therefore not breach this position of trust. The monitoring results of the marine environment are, however, not seen as being confidential and reviews and survey results are published by the South African National Scientific Programmes of the CSIR. Results of the Richards Bay effluent pipeline environmental surveys are also issued as press releases by the Mhlatuze Water Board.
asked the Minister of Agriculture:
What is the estimated area that was lost for agricultural purposes as a result of urban development in the 1987-88 financial year?
B532E
7 710 ha.
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:
- (1) whether the salaries of any teachers employed by the Department of Education and Training have been outstanding for more than one month; if so, (a) how many teachers are involved and (b) for what reasons are these salaries outstanding;
- (2) whether he will make a statement on the matter?
B534E
- (1) Yes.
- (a) 533
- (b) Many of the Department’s schools are situated in remote rural areas. It sometimes takes a relatively long time before the appointment documents of newly-appointed teachers reach the offices where the appointments are made. The Department is doing everything possible to ensure that salaries are paid timeously. The submission of complete documentation regarding new teachers, however, also depends on the effective co-operation of the teachers involved and their principals. Thereafter there are several important steps, which have to be taken before payment of salaries can be effected.
- (2) No.
asked the Minister of Home Affairs:
- (1) Whether representatives of his Department visited a certain person, whose name has been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, on or about 1 March 1989; if so, (a) which representatives, (b) why and (c) what is the name of this person;
- (2) whether these representatives paid further visits to the person concerned; if so, why;
- (3) whether he or any official of his Department has received any complaints regarding the conduct of any of these representatives during any such visit; if so, what action has been taken as a result?
B535E
(1), (2) and (3) The regional Representative, Cape Town, obtained sworn affidavits from officials who had contact with Mrs Stefan and I have requested the Director-General of Home Affairs to investigate the matter in order to ascertain whether any irregularities have occurred in the handling of this case. Should the hon member have any information which might assist the Director-General in his investigation, I would appreciate it if he would furnish the Director-General with that information.
I undertake to inform the hon member fully on the matter as soon as the investigation is finalised.
asked the Minister of Defence:†
Whether, with reference to his reply to Question No 6 on 21 February 1989, members of Parliament other than members of the majority party in the House of Assembly were invited to visit Mozambique in December 1988; if so, who; if not, why not?
B572E
The SA Defence Force did not arrange the visit and I, therefore, am not in a position to supply the information.
INTERPELLATION
The sign * indicates a translation. The sign † used subsequently in the same speech, indicates the original language.
Own Affairs:
to ask the Minister of Education and Culture:†
Whether it is the view of his Department that management board elections at schools should take place on a party-political basis?
B582E.INT
Mr Speaker, the hon member for Brits has asked me whether it is the view of my department that management board elections at schools should take place on a party-political basis. Of course the answer is no. It is not my department’s standpoint that management board elections at schools should take place on a party-political basis. [Interjections.] The fact that this does sometimes happen must, however, be blamed on the CP. [Interjections.]
Initially, the CP claimed this as its policy by manipulating management board elections with a certain degree of success.
What about roads boards and hospital boards? [Interjections.]
And what about Tattersail’s? [Interjections.]
Order!
It goes without saying that there was a reaction which further politicised those elections, and I regret that. Owing to the Government’s policy of the devolution of power, management boards acquired certain legal powers. “Political” management boards—therefore management boards elected on the basis of party-politics—can obviously, in practise, carry out this function in accordance with partypolitical objectives, but this would be in conflict with the spirit of the relevant legislation. This could also result in parents and children feeling unwelcome and frustrated in their own schools.
It is therefore clear that it is the task of the members of democratically elected management boards only to lay down that policy for the school which would be best for the child, the school, the community, the parents and the country, and not to pursue party-political interests. Although it will be difficult in the present climate to depoliticise management boards, it is important for only the most competent people in the community, irrespective of their political convictions or other ties, to take decisions on behalf of the parents.
I consequently want to appeal to all parents to participate in the elections in large numbers in order to see to it that the most suitable representatives are elected. The Government expects the management boards to act in accordance with the spirit of the country’s policy and the laws of the land. If this is done, the Government does not interfere. However, if a management board, as the representative of a local community, takes ill-advised decisions, which are not in accordance with the wishes of the majority of the parents, the community will deal with it itself. This cannot be blamed on the Government.
I have replied to the hon member for Brits. I am asking him in a friendly manner across the floor of the House to give his party’s reply to the same question clearly and unequivocally.
Mr Speaker, it has become clear to us recently that the hon the Minister is adopting two standpoints regarding the politicisation of management board elections. [Interjections.] The one standpoint is the official standpoint of his department, as he has explained it here today.
However, the hon the Minister also has another standpoint on this, namely the standpoint of the NP. [Interjections.] This standpoint is that management boards must be taken over in order to use mixed sport and cultural activities at schools to promote the integration process in education. [Interjections.] Of course this standpoint was never admitted in public until the hon the Minister, in a moment of excitement, gave the show away on 21 February of this year and boasted that the NP—take note, Sir, the NP— had won the management board election in Pietersburg. [Interjections.] Then it became clear that the NP, which had sanctimoniously accused the CP of politicising management board elections, had a covert standpoint in this regard. [Interjections.]
After the hon the Minister had announced his new sports and cultural policy here in the House last year, I issued a warning that this would give rise to serious polarisation in the parent communities, and that this would bring party politics into our schools on an unprecedented scale. This did in fact happen. [Interjections.]
This afternoon I want to tell the hon the Minister that as the responsible Minister the depoliticisation of management board elections is entirely in his hands. He must get rid of the politics he has placed on the agenda of management boards so that they need not take political decisions but can concentrate on education, which is as it should be. He must have the courage to take his own political decisions, and not hope that liberally orientated communities of parents will do this for him. He must choose between the educational principle of education in an ethnic and cultural context and the politically motivated principle of an open community, and therefore of mixed education.
As long as he forces that choice on parent communities, he and his party will have to take responsibility for the education of our children being harmed and the parent communities being polarised. [Interjections.] The CP’s standpoint is clear! We are choosing the educationally well-founded principle of education and training within an ethnic and cultural context. [Interjections.] This is a tried and trusted principle. We reject the politically motivated principle of mixed education. [Interjections.]
Mr Speaker, quite clearly the answer to the question posed by the hon member for Brits is that it should not be on a party political basis. I trust that today’s debate will clearly indicate that it is the last time that the NP and the CP stand up in this House and boast about party political victories on school committees … [Interjections] … because both of them are trying to paint the other as blacker than black and himself as whiter than white! [Interjections.]
It is inevitable that people selected on school committees or management boards will have a political position. Whether it is a political position vis-á-vis school sport and the policy of the NP or whether it is a political position vis-á-vis the CP they will have a political position! I think we have to accept the fact that departmental policy, as enunciated by the hon the Minister today, is the most desirable one. Members should be selected on the basis of their educational ability and on that alone. It is quite clearly the height of hypocrisy to believe that one can stand up and say there should be depoliticisation of school committees and at the same time boast that one’s party has achieved a victory or has lost out. I believe the clear enunciation to the parents should be: Choose the best, yes, go out and vote but choose the best on their educational principles and those alone.
Mr Speaker, I have no problems with the fundamental standpoint of the hon member for Pinetown; as a matter of fact, he confirmed what I have already said and we are in agreement. Of course I can understand that the hon member for Pinetown is a bit sensitive when it is mentioned across the floor of the House which specific management board has been elected by a specific political party, because his party very seldom has the opportunity to boast about this. [Interjections.]
I should like to come back to the hon member for Brits. I find it astounding that the CP’s chief spokesman on education can rise to his feet here and sanctimoniously put this question to this side of the House, the Government, and then refuse to state his own political party’s standpoint. [Interjections.] What are the facts of the matter? The facts of the matter are—I referred to this at the outset—that the CP informed the country that they were going to politicise the management boards. The former member for Koedoespoort Dr Frans van Staden said this at the Natal Congress in Newcastle. I am quoting what he said:
He went on to say:
This was said! [Interjections.] What happened then? When my hon colleague the Minister of National Education reprimanded the former member for Koedoespoort at that stage, the hon member boasted at the Transvaal Congress of the CP in August 1984 that he would not allow himself to be dictated to by Dr Gerrit Viljoen. I am quoting him:
[Time expired.]
Mr Speaker, the hon the Minister should go and read last year’s Hansard of the debate on his Vote. There he will see that we stated our standpoint in this regard in great detail. [Interjections.]
What I want to tell the hon the Minister this afternoon, however, is that he and his party are not clever enough to catch conservative parents napping when it comes to the implementation of stealthy integration in education. Conservative parents—and I am including many NP supporters in this description—can see what the Government is doing. They see that management boards ostensibly have a choice whether to participate in mixed school sport, but if they decide against it, they are intimidated and prejudiced so much that they eventually yield to that pressure.
The CP is not ashamed to admit that we call on parents to become involved in management board elections. Nor are we ashamed to say that we ask parents to exercise a specific choice at such an election. However, we do not ask them to vote for a political party. [Interjections.] We ask them to vote for the principle of education within an ethnic and cultural context. [Interjections.] We ask them to vote for people who support that principle and therefore reject mixed school sport and mixed cultural activities. The hon the Minister cannot complain if we do that. After all, he has said himself that parent communities must decide on this. If he complains about this now, he is merely emphasising that he was never serious when he made that promise to them. [Interjections.]
In conclusion I want to tell the hon the Minister that parent communities are opting for the principle of separate education in increasing numbers. NP supporters who must vote in management board elections say they prefer to vote for supporters of the CP, because they can trust those people with their children’s future.
This afternoon I want to give hon members a few examples of parent communities which have recently taken a clear stand in favour of separate education for their children. I promise the hon member for Pinetown that I will not do this again. [Interjections.] The Helderkruin Primary School in the constituency of the hon the Minister of Information, Broadcasting Services and the Film Industry; the Gerrit Maritz Primary School in Westonaria; the Pietersburg Commercial School; the Piet Hugo Primary School, Pietersburg; the Tom Naude Technical High School, Pietersburg; the John Vorster High School, Nigel; the Vaalkop Primary School; the Bzeestekraal Primary School; the Skeerpoort Primary School; the Cullinan Primary School; the Rapportryers Primary School, Randfontein; the Ermelo Primary School; the Riebeeck High School, Randfontein; the Ben Vorster High School, Tzaneen; the Merensky High School, Tzaneen; the Tzaneen Primary School; the Vischkuil Primary School; the Westonaria High School; the Lichtenburg High School; the Piet Joubert Special School, Pietersburg; the Kuschke Agricultural School, Pietersburg; the Hofmeyer Primary School; the Pietersburg Primary School …[Interjections.]
Order! I am sorry, but the hon member’s list is too long for him to continue reading it out. Unfortunately his time has expired.
Mr Speaker, I should like to carry on from where I left off a while ago. The former member for Koedoespoort then said that if I called on people to participate in school boards he would, referring to the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid, not stop me. [Interjections.]
Let us go a little further. I read in Die Patriot of 31 March 1989 that the chief secretary of the CP, Mr Beyers, was reported as follows:
He went on to say:
What farce do we have here this afternoon? The hon member is putting a question to the Government regarding its standpoint and policy. I want to state categorically, as I have done many times before, that I am appealing for education not to be politicised. That hon member comes here and sanctimoniously accuses the Government in his question and says we are engaged in politics. Then he makes a complete about-face and now he is doing it. [Interjections.] He admits this and boasts about the fact that they are totally politicising the management boards.
Mr Speaker, may I put a question to the hon the Minister; a very easy one?
No, Sir. My information also is that as recently as two or three weeks ago at a specific meeting in Carletonville the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition asked CP parents to join the management boards. What I therefore want to state categorically today is that the Government’s standpoint is that education must not be politicised. [Interjections.] The standpoint of the CP, as expressed by its hon leader, is that education must be politicised. [Time expired.]
Debate concluded.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
Own Affairs:
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:†
Whether any persons in the service of his Department have requested principals in a formal and/or an informal manner not to discuss problems in education with their local members of Parliament; if so, what are the relevant details?
B573E
No, not by direction or according to my knowledge.
For written reply:
General Affairs:
asked the Minister of Law and Order:
Whether he is considering increasing the police complement at the (a) Cape Town, (b) Sea Point and (c) Woodstock police stations; if so, (i) when, and (ii) by how many, in each case; if not, why not?
B214E
No. The situation is, however, being carefully monitored. At present the manpower situation at the three police stations mentioned, compares favourably with that in the rest of the country. In view of this fact, it is not intended to increase the numerical strength before the completion of the re-evaluation of the duties of all stations and offices in the Republic by the De Witt Committee of Investigation.
asked the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning:
Whether he is considering declaring any land available for (a) informal housing, (b) formal housing, (c) commercial development and (d) industrial development for Blacks in the Western Cape in 1989; if so, (i) where, and (ii) when, in each case?
B348E
No. However, should any applications be submitted to me during 1989 in terms of section 33 of the Black Communities Development Act, 1984 for the provision of more land for Black development in the Western Cape, I will consider the merits thereof.
asked the Minister of Law and Order:
- (1) Whether any members of the South African Police Force were involved in an operation at the Dora Falcke Sunrise Memorial Camp in Muizenberg on or about 23 Feburary 1989; if so, (a) what was the purpose of the operation, (b) how many (i) units and (ii) members were involved, (c) how long did the operation last and (d) what was the rank of the person in charge of the operation;
- (2) whether all the members involved in the operation wore standard uniform; if not, (a) why not and (b) what were they wearing;
- (3) whether any members involved in the operation were armed; if so, (a) why and (b) what arms were they carrying;
- (4) whether any persons were detained or arrested during or after the operation; if so, (a) who and (b) why;
- (5) whether any shots were fired during or after the operation; if so, (a) by whom, (b) at whom, (c) why and (d) when?
B372E
On 23 February 1989 a number of units of the South African Police under the command of a captain took part in a police operation. During this action a search was conducted to trace two foreign trained ANC terrorists who, according to information, were armed.
The police units were made up of members of the uniform branch, security branch and detective branch, consequently the policemen were dressed in standard uniform or in civilian clothes and armed with handguns, shotguns or rifles.
The operation lasted approximately 2 hours and a densely bushed coastal strip was searched. The camp to which the honourable member refers, is situated in this area.
Nobody was arrested during the police action and no firearms were fired. However, a flare was discharged on the instruction of the officer in command, because it was dark and the area is not lit up.
asked the Minister of Law and Order:
- (1) Whether members of the South African Police were present at or near Fezeka High School on the morning of 3 March 1989; if so, (a) why, (b) to which police station or unit were they attached, (c) how many policemen were there, (d) under whose command were they and (e) who called them there;
- (2) whether these policemen took any action; if so, (a) what action, (b) why and (c) in terms of what statutory provisions or regulations was such action taken;
- (3) whether any laws were broken; if so, (a) which laws, (b) by whom and (c) how many persons were arrested?
B537E
- (1) Yes
- (a) to (c) A number of members of the divisional riot unit under the command of a captain went to the school.
A senior official of the Department of Education and Training requested the police action in order to prevent an illegal gathering from being held.
- (a) to (c) A number of members of the divisional riot unit under the command of a captain went to the school.
- (2) Yes
- (a) to (c) The police instructed pupils to return to their classes as the holding of such a gathering would have constituted a contranvetion of the Security Emergency Regulations.
- (3) No, the police action effectively prevented the contravention of any laws.
- (a) to (c) Fall away.
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:
What, as at 31 December 1988, was the total (a) number of (i) manufacturing concerns and (ii) persons employed and (b) amount invested by development corporations in each of the self-governing territories where decentralisation concessions or incentives are applicable?
B557E
All the figures up to 31 December 1988 are at this stage not available but in the list hereunder it is given up to the latest available date:
(a)(i) |
(a)(ii) |
(b) |
||
Gazankulu |
31/12/88 |
155 |
6 718 |
R35 367 925 |
KaNgwane |
30/9/88 |
49 |
1 759 |
R17 859 000 |
KwaNdebele |
30/9/88 |
223 |
9 250 |
R93 035 000 |
KwaZulu |
30/9/88 |
227 |
36 881 |
R260 012 000 |
Lebowa |
31/12/88 |
188 |
11 814 |
R78 923 000 |
QwaQwa |
30/9/88 |
206 |
25 000 |
R73 358 000 |
Total |
1 048 |
91 422 |
R558 554 925 |
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:
(a) What amounts were invested by (i) the State and (ii) foreign agencies in the industrial sector, and (b) what was the total amount invested by (i) the development corporation concerned, (ii) South African companies and (iii) foreign companies, in each of the self-governing territories in the 1987-88 and 1988-89 financial years, respectively?
B558E
1987/88 |
|||||
Investment in industrial sector |
Total amount invested |
||||
(a)(i) |
(a)(ii) |
(b)(i) |
(b)(ii) |
(b)(iii) |
|
Gazankulu |
Nil |
R118 000 |
R36 929 000 |
R21 940 000 |
R118 000 |
KaNgwane |
Nil |
Nil |
R7 145 525 |
R2 906 000 |
Nil |
KwaNdebele |
Nil |
R4 400 000 |
R65 987 900 |
R95 302 000 |
R4 400 000 |
KwaZulu |
Nil |
R3 844 000 |
R112 038 000 |
R139 905 000 |
R3 844 000 |
Lebowa |
Nil |
Nil |
R50 596 000 |
R21 805 000 |
Nil |
QwaQwa |
Nil |
Nil |
R33 233 000 |
R3 587 000 |
Nil |
As the figures for the 1988/89 financial year are not available as yet, figures as at 30 September 1988 are provided.
1/4/1988 - 30/9/1988 |
|||||
Invest ment in industrial sector |
Total amount invested |
||||
(a)(i) |
(a)(ii) |
(b)(i) |
(b)(ii) |
(b)(iii) |
|
Gazankulu |
Nil |
Nil |
R19 579 000 |
R10 615 000 |
Nil |
KaNgwane |
Nil |
Nil |
R4 531 000 |
R3 556 000 |
Nil |
KwaNdebele |
Nil |
R7 300 000 |
R33 500 000 |
R72 680 000 |
R7 300 000 |
KwaZulu |
Nil |
R13 959 000 |
R61 174 000 |
(1) |
R13 959 000 |
Lebowa |
Nil |
R3 708 000 |
R19 529 000 |
R4 794 000 |
R3 708 000 |
QwaQwa |
Nil |
Nil |
R18 079 000 |
R15 471 000 |
Nil |
(1) Figures not available.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
Own Affairs:
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:
Whether schools falling under his Department were advised of specific changes in the financial assistance that they would receive in respect of (a) 1988 and (b) 1989; if so, (i) when, and (ii) what was the nature of the change, in each case?
C49E
Mr Chairman, before I reply to the question let me just say that I view with contempt the fact that this particular hon member keeps on asking questions on education but is never present to hear the answers. [Interjections.]
It is not clear to the Department which type of financial assistance is being referred to.
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:
- (a) How many bursaries were granted by his Department to student teachers in 1989 and
- (b) what was the total amount granted in that year?
C50E
The figures apply for the period 1 January 1989 to 10 April 1989.
- (a) 4 354
- (b) R6 147 333,40.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
Own Affairs:
asked the Minister of the Budget:
- (1) Whether any specific duties have been assigned to the Ministerial Representatives of the Administration: House of Delegates; if not, why not; if so, (a) who assigned these duties and (b) what are they;
- (2) whether he will furnish the House with the total amount spent by the said Administration in connection with these Ministerial Representatives; if not, why not; if so, (a) what is this amount and (b) in respect of what specified period is this information furnished?
D45E
- (1) Yes, they are requested by Ministers to investigate or liaise on specific problems.
- (a) any Minister
- (b) various at community level.
- (2) 1987;88: R365 002,36
1988/89 up to 28/2/89: R422 672,94.
Mr Chairman, arising out of the reply of the hon the Minister, could he please explain to this House why there has been such a tremendous increase in the most recent figures?
Mr Chairman, the increase in the last figures, that is to say, for the year up to 28 February 1989, is largely due to additional expenditure incurred by the ministerial representatives.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of that answer, would the hon gentleman concede that between 1988 and 20 February 1989, R900 000 of taxpayers’ money has been absolutely and wantonly wasted? That money should be saved for the taxpayer, even if it means giving it to the old-age pensioners.
Agreed!
Mr Chairman, I agree with what the hon member for Reservoir Hills has said. The expenditure incurred by the ministerial representatives, particularly in view of the service that they render — which has not come up to expectations — was futile.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the reply given by the hon the Minister of the Budget, I would like to ask whether, since he confirms that the services rendered do not live up to expectations, the Administration of the House of Delegates is contemplating an evaluation process whereby the functions would be reviewed?
Yes, Mr Chairman. There is presently an evaluation being done and the Minister’s Council should have the report soon.
Mr Chairman, I would just like to know what the position of these ministerial representatives will be when Parliament dissolves at the end of May?
At this stage I cannot foretell what will happen to the ministerial representatives.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, he has admitted that R900 000 has been wasted. Is there any justification for any further such wastage?
Mr Chairman, I should have qualified the expenditure for the years 1987-1988 and 1988-1989. The first year of expenditure was for nine months and the present expenditure as at 28 February 1989 is for 12 months.
That is no justification!
No, I am qualifying my earlier reply to the oral question put to me.
Is the hon the Minister still on his feet?
Yes, Mr Chairman. It will depend largely on the decision of the Minister’s Council whether we are going to continue with this expenditure.
is the Ministers’ Council competent to continue wasting money? [Interjections.]
asked the Minister of Housing:
Whether his Department intends to dispose of the Odeon Cinema in Chatsworth; if so, (a) when and (b) at what price?
D49E
Yes.
- (a) Depending on the finalisation of the upset price, “Conditions of Tender” and the necessary advertisements, tenders are likely to be called for within the next two months.
- (b) The selling price will not be known until a tender has been accepted.
Mr Chairman, arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, I would like to ask him whether the department at any time received any offers for the possible sale of that particular cinema in excess of the acquisition costs?
Mr Chairman, I am personally not aware of it but I could certainly provide the hon member for Stanger with an answer after ascertaining the facts from the department.
You must put it in writing!
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, it is a well-known fact that the best way to establish the market price of any property is by public auction. Will the hon the Minister then agree that that procedure should be followed here instead of tender in view of the fact that a public auction will attract the widest possible opportunity, and the psychological aspect of bidding at an auction will raise the price?
The hon member for Reservoir Hills suggested that the property could be put up for public auction as another way of selling it. I will certainly refer that to my hon colleague. After all, we want the highest price.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, I would like to ask him whether I understand correctly that part of this complex is being let. If it is going to be sold, what will be the position regarding the tenants who are occupying that building? What is the present income, if known?
That is the question of live and let live. Those are matters to which I have no answers but if the hon member will put them forward as a question, I am sure I will be able to get the answers from our administration.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, I would like to know from him whether, by virtue of the fact that this complex was for a specific purpose, and now that the project is perhaps to be sold, any arrangements have been made to cater for the specific purpose for which this project was intended? [Interjections.]
Order!
Mr Chairman, if the hon member for Northern Natal will put his questions in writing, I will be able to give him a considered reply.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, in order to assist him and in response to the question put by the hon member for Lenasia Central, will he accept that whoever buys that property, in whatever way, has to take over the tenants as they are?
Mr Chairman, I concede that point. In any sale that takes place, I think we have to be reasonable people. That will have to be so.
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:
Whether a post for a superintendent of physical education was advertised recently; if so, (a) how many candidates applied for the post, (b) who (i) interviewed the prospective candidates and (ii) made the final assessments in this regard and (c) when will the name of the successful candidate be announced?
D61E
Yes
- (a) 25
- (b)
- (i) Not interviewed as yet.
- (ii) Falls away.
- (c) As soon as the candidate has been selected.
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:
- (1) Whether the Acting Director of Education (Control), Chief Director of Education (Planning) and the Chief Superintendent of Education (Academic), whose names have been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, were excluded from the evaluation committee of his Department; if so,
- (2) whether any allegations in regard to these persons were investigated internally by his Department; if so, what were the findings; if not, why not;
- (3) whether he will furnish the reasons for the exclusion of these persons from the evaluation committee; if not, why not; if so, what are they;
- (4) whether it is the intention to take any steps in respect of the ratings given to candidates who were evaluated prior to the exclusion of the above three persons; if not, why not; if so, (a) what steps and (b) when?
D62E
- (1) There is no such post as Director of Education (Control). It follows therefore that there can be neither an incumbent nor an acting incumbent. The Chief Director of Education (Planning) is not involved in evaluation of educators. There is also no evaluation committee in the Department. However, the Chief Director of Education (Control) and the Chief Superintendent of Eudcation (Academic) were relieved of duties in respect of evaluation of educators. They were also not permitted to attend meetings at which evaluations were moderated.
- (2) Yes. But the internal investigations concerning the Chief Superintendent of Education (Academic) have been affected by a Supreme Court action which is sub judice and over which I cannot, therefore, comment. In regard to other staff, however, prescribed procedures relating to retirement and misconduct are at present being followed by the Administration.
- (3) It was considered prudent in the light of the sensitivities surrounding the evidence led before the James Commission of Enquiry in respect of the evaluation of educators and with a view to regaining the confidence of the Teachers’ Association of South Africa, other staff in the Department and of Management in the system used, to exclude the two officials from the performande of such duties.
- (4) It was not considered necessary, nor is it the intention to reassess the 2 343 or so candidates who applied for promotion and whose evaluations had been undertaken prior to the exclusion of the officers mentioned above. Where, however, specific cases in which irregularities were alleged, were brought to the notice of the Department (36 cases were identified by T.A.S.A. and two by Mr Justice James) these were thoroughly reviewed. In all but one of these cases, no grounds for relief could be found.
In two other cases mentioned in the Report of the James Commission of Enquiry concerning promotions it is likely that the candidates were impropery favoured. There is, however, no evidence that the educators concerned were themselves in any way culpable in this regard nor is there any provision whereby these promotions can be withdrawn.
Mr Chairman, arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, with regard to the Superintendent of Education: Academic, I would like to ask the hon the Minister a supplementary question. Is that person still in the department’s employ: If so, is that person carrying on with the normal functions of the department, despite the case being sub judice in the Supreme Court?
Mr Chairman, from the answers given to the House, I think it is amply clear that the person is still in the employ of the department. However, certain duties have been reallocated and precautions have been taken so that no further damage can be done in that respect.
Mr Chairman, further arising from the hon the Minister’s reply, may I ask him if he will concede that it would appear unfair to exclude those people from the Evaluations Committee from the findings at large? Would it not have been proper for an investigation to have taken place prior to litigation?
Mr Chairman, I certainly do not concede to that. No-one could have foreseen that there were misgivings. It was only when it was found out that investigations began.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, may I ask him another question? Is it not the case that a man, Mr B Panday, and a woman, Mrs C Shah, both employed by the department, connived with each other to undertake evaluations to bring down scores of candidates whom they wanted to fail in promotion, and to raise the scores of those whom they favoured for ulterior and malefactory reasons? What has the hon the Minister done to rectify the injustices done in those cases?
Mr Chairman, I have outlined that in my answer, with the exception of the second name. The one person has been removed from his position. I have mentioned that the case is sub judice and I do not want to answer that question any further. In the case of the other person, he has been given the option to retire. The indications are that he will retire.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, may I ask him if he is considering an investigation into promotions, especially in view of the fact that he mentioned that some 3 000-odd cases have been evaluated and that it is not feasible for the department as such to verify this, in which case a full-scale investigation is necessary?
Mr Chairman, at this stage I do not think that this is absolutely necessary. Mention was made that with the assistance of the Teachers’ Association of South Africa 36 cases were identified. However, after the investigation it was found that there was no substance to this, except in the case of one candidate whose position was rectified.
Mr Chairman, further arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, may I ask him another question? The hon the Minister has mentioned just now that no further damage will be done. He also stated that the case is sub judice. I cannot reconcile both issues. If he says that the case is sub judice and that no further damage can be done, which is which?
Mr Chairman, being a former teacher, the hon member should know what I meant. May I just explain then for the sake of elucidation that the member is not in a position to evaluate teachers since she has been shifted from that position. She has of necessity taken this matter to court. Until the matter is cleared up, I am unable to say more than that.