House of Assembly: Vol13 - TUESDAY 23 MAY 1989
The sign * indicates a translation. The sign †, used subsequently in the same interpellation, indicates the original language.
General Affairs:
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:
(a) When did he first become aware of possible irregularities in the Department of Education and Training with regard to the procurement or development of the IVIS interactive video system and (b) what action did he take as a result thereof?
B1093E.INT
Mr Chairman …
Mr Chairman, I rise on a point of order: On three occasions I have requested an interpellation to be placed on the Order Paper—an interpellation relating to the local metering of telephone calls—and on three occasions I have been told that the hon the Minister of Communications was not available to reply to my interpellation. I noticed the hon the Minister of Communications was available this morning. He was actually sitting in this House. I should like to know why my interpellation which should have been on the Order Paper today is not being answered by the relevant hon Minister when he is in the House and available today.
Order! I believe that is a valid point of order. I refer the hon member to Rule 178(1), which states that notice shall be given of each interpellation selected for reply by the Whips’ Committee in a House. I suggest the hon member refer his complaint to the Whips’ Committee in the House.
Thank you, Sir. I shall do that.
Order! I again call upon the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid to speak.
Mr Chairman, the IVIS purchase is a professional and technical educational matter, every aspect of which was dealt with departmentally on the initiative and under the auspices of the Director-General. In the course of 1985 he informed me about the negotiations from time to time, about the progress being made with the development of the course and the department’s positive expectations in regard to that aspect. With respect to the interpellant’s question, the following is relevant.
Firstly, the Director-General informed me in October 1985 that approval apparently had to be obtained from the Tender Board for the fact that the department had not, by way of tender, selected the firm Learn Tech for the purposes of conducting negotiations. I ascertained that the rectification of this matter was being given thorough consideration by the competent authority. The Director-General gave me the assurance that the envisaged contract could not be finalised without the aforementioned approval of the Tender Board. Subsequently he informed me from time to time that the matter was taking up time because the Central Mechanisation Committee of the Commission for Administration and the Tender Board had made penetrating enquiries to which the department had had to furnish replies. Ultimately he informed me, in April 1986, that all the necessary approval had been obtained, that the contract had been concluded, that the system had been delivered and that it had been installed and was in operation at the College for Further Education, Soshanguve.
Secondly, on 22 October 1985 I referred a letter from the managing director of the firm B & D Education Systems, in which he expressed criticism about the IVIS system, MDFR to the Director-General for urgent comment. From a discussion with the Director-General it appeared that the letter was the culmination of sustained efforts on the part of the correspondent to promote the large-scale purchase, by the department, of his firm’s product, the TOAM system. On the one hand he cast suspicion on the specific IVIS system and the technology involved in that system and, on the other, strongly praised his own product. The Director-General pointed out to me that the department’s proposals in regard to the purchase of both the TOAM and IVIS were, at that stage, still being considered by the Central Mechanisation Committee and the Tender Board. He suggested that a reply to the letter be postponed until the Tender Board had decided about the department’s proposals. Ultimately the requested comments were not received and, because of the time that had elapsed, the letter was not answered.
Thirdly, during an interview with me on 19 February 1987 in Cape Town, Mr Kurt von Keyserlingk of the journal Finansies en Tegniek made serious allegations about alleged irregularities, and also about the interests and involvement of the son of the Director-General, Dr Fourie, in Learn Tech. In response to my request for information to support the allegations, Mr Von Keyserlingk wrote me a letter on 6 March 1987. On 9 March I informed him that I had decided to submit all allegations and documents to the Advocate-General for investigation. On 12 March I also notified the Advocate-General of Mr Willem Fourie’s visit and of the information he conveyed to me on 10 March. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, let me respectfully say that despite the great verbosity we have had to listen to, the hon the Minister has not really answered the fundamentally important question, and that is when he first became aware of the irregularities.
In the course of the discussion of his Vote we referred to a letter from Barlow and Degem 1985. Amongst other things we asked for a copy of that letter. We requested a copy from the commission which is still sitting. The chairman of the commission indicated that we could obtain copies if the judge granted permission, but suggested that we should obtain copies by applying to the Department of Education and Training. That was on 16 May. Today, a week later, I have not yet received a written reply to that letter. [Interjections.]
The question is what the particulars are that are contained in that letter, and why the hon the Minister is not prepared to provide us with copies.
The hon the Minister does not only have one letter to reply to.
Or is this an effort to lock away the problem in the archives? This problem will not disappear. It will not go away. There are fundamentally important questions that have to be answered.
If the findings of the Van den Heever Commission, according to its first report, are correct in the sense that as far back as 1985 Barlow and Degem had written a disturbing letter to the hon the Minister, then the reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that they focussed the hon the Minister’s attention on the fact that the relationship between Learn Tech and the department was not what it should be. Why did the hon the Minister not take the necessary steps at that early stage? The hon the Minister has given no indication of what his reaction to that important letter in 1985 was.
The hon the Minister referred to his interview with Von Keyserlingk. With all due respect, I think there could possibly be a mistake in the Van den Heever report which refers to Von Keyserlingk’s 1986 letters. I think the date should have been 1987. Whatever the case may be, on page 85 of the Van den Heever Report— we referred to this during the discussion of the Vote—the commission refers to a letter, signed by the hon the Minister, in which reference is made to the development by the department, with local expertise, of an interactive video system. The hon the Minister signed that letter, yet does not indicate to us why, at that early stage, he was prepared to make such an allegation in a letter which he sent to a representative of the media, namely Von Keyserlingk. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, the hon member for Potgietersrus has asked certain questions and I think they need to be replied to but I am not going to repeat those questions.
In this whole matter we have had two fundamental criticisms: The lack of adequate control in the department which has shown itself in other respects as well, and the hon the Minister’s behaviour in particular in an apparent reluctance, sometimes even a filibuster, to get this matter dealt with.
Assuming that the first time that the hon the Minister became aware of the facts was in February or March 1987, I believe he did the correct thing in referring the matter to the Advocate-General. However, when the report of the Advocate-General came out the hon the Minister issued a long statement in which he said, inter alia’.
One did not have to be all that smart reading that report to see that it actually raised more questions than it answered. The hon the Minister must also surely be aware that the Advocate-General’s powers are circumscribed as to what he can inquire into.
The hon member for Stellenbosch said in a debate in this House on this subject that the hon the Minister did not read the report properly. That was an astonishing thing for the hon member to have suggested as a reason why the hon the Minister felt that no further steps were necessary.
However, the fact remains that when that report came out the hon the Minister did not pursue it further. On 4 May 1988 when I raised the matter in the House again and drew attention to this fact, the hon the Minister said the Public Accounts Committee was looking at it. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, the hon member for Potgietersrus says I did not reply to the question about when I first became aware of possible irregularities.
I think that the three examples I gave are three different forms of information about varying degrees of reasonable suspicion that could have arisen concerning irregularities. The one concerned the question of the procedure involving tenders, the other about the letter to which he referred and the third about the interview with Mr Von Keyserlingk. In all three cases I clearly stated what my reaction was.
In regard to the copies of the letter he requested, let me just say that I received no letter from that hon member containing such a request. I can therefore not reply to that.
In regard to my reaction to what he called the disturbing letter, which I received from the firm B&D, let me repeat what I said in my initial reply. My assessment of that letter should be seen against the background of the fact that over a long period of time the writer of that letter had been exerting very severe pressure on us to make large-scale purchases of his product only, and not to look at other products. The argument in the letter was based on a “hard-sell” approach. That is the first aspect one should bear in mind in one’s assessment. Secondly, at that stage the Tender Board was specifically considering departmental proposals about the product of that firm, ie TOAM. In other words, a reaction to that firm whilst its product was being considered by the Tender Board, in accordance with the proposal made by the department, would definitely have been improper.
In regard to the letter which I supposedly signed and in which the remark was made that this system was being developed by the department, this must be seen in the light of the kind of inexact terminology one uses when one says one is building oneself a house or landscaping one’s garden, when what one is actually doing is having one’s house built by someone one hires to do the job or having the garden landscaped by a gardener that one hires. That is the sense in which that was used, and in no other sense. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, here it is a question of clean administration. Two documents are at issue, namely the disturbing letter from Barlow and Degem to the hon the Minister and documentary evidence in terms of which the hon the Minister alleged that software had been developed with local expertise. We also refer to communications between the hon the Minister and Von Keyserlingk.
We are now asking the hon the Minister where this documentary evidence and these letters are. Is he prepared to hand these letters to us or is he not prepared to do so? His department says the letters are en route to the hon the Minister of National Education on the basis of the authority he has in terms of the Archives Act of 1962. We are asking the hon the Minister a simple, straightforward question. Is he prepared to hand over these documents to us? If he is not prepared to do, we are asking the hon the leader-in-chief of the NP, who recently committed himself to clean administration, whether he will use his powers in terms of the Archives Act to have these documents handed over to us. These are simple questions and we should like to know whether he is prepared to give us those documents or not.
Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister says he received no letter from me. With all due respect, I have difficulty finding a description which is parliamentary for the hon the Minister’s contention. [Interjections.] The last sentence of the letter I received from the commission’s secretary reads as follows:
In other words, that was on the instructions of the judge. Is the hon the Minister denying that I sent a letter to the director-general of his department? Is the hon the Minister not aware of that, or are the matters discussed telephonically with the director-general yesterday and today being kept from the hon the Minister? Is that perhaps just an extension of the golden thread that has run through this whole affair, namely that the hon the Minister is washing his hands of the matter in an effort to shift all the responsibility onto the officials of his department?
The fact that the hon the Minister is dodging important questions, and the trouble we are having in obtaining copies of documents which served as documentary evidence before the commission, strengthens our suspicion that something is being hidden. We are not being trusted with the full facts. Something is being hidden. Whether these facts are being assigned to the archives, or whether it is simply being made very difficult for us to obtain the full facts and the underlying reason, South Africa is being forced to speculate, because we are not being presented with the full facts.
Mr Chairman, I cannot understand how this hon member can speak about something being hidden. These matters to which he referred have been presented to the commission of inquiry, consisting of three eminent and distinguished commissioners, in a comprehensive and fully documented form. They considered the documentation and issued their report. As I have said in a previous debate, if there was anything improper in my conduct, surely they would have said so very clearly in that report. It is therefore quite ridiculous, and a misrepresentation on the part of the hon member for Potgietersrus, to speak about something being hidden.
If I remember correctly, it was in a letter to Mr Von Keyserlingk in which reference to local expertise was made. As far as that letter is concerned, I am quite prepared to make a copy of a portion of that letter available to the hon member so that he can read the exact wording, because it is a letter written by one of us to the other.
The letter we received from the firm B&D was addressed to me, and was expressly marked strictly confidential and private. I can well understand that too, because in it remarks are made extolling the virtues of their own product and making very crass and negative remarks about the product of their competitor. Against the background to my assessment of this matter, and against the background of what I explained a moment ago, one must very clearly see that here we have someone who was being fiercely and strongly competitive and who was expressing himself in crass terms.
I do not think it would be proper simply to make such a letter generally available, a letter which was expressly marked as strictly private and confidential. The letter was, in fact, submitted to the commission, and if the commission were of the opinion that the letter should be made available, I would naturally go along with that.
I again want to come back to the allegation the hon member made. He said that a letter was addressed to me in which they asked for a copy. I am in possession of a letter which was sent to the commission, a copy of which was sent to me by the commission for my information. If I do not know what the commission’s arrangements are, and there is no accompanying request from the commission, I do not regard it as an instruction to make a specific piece of correspondence available to that hon member. That is a complete misrepresentation. [Time expired.]
Debate concluded.
asked the Minister of Finance:
Whether the Government is considering allowing all donations to bona fide educational institutions to be tax-deductible; if not, why not; if so, when?
B1099E.INT
Mr Chairman, when I was director of a business school I tried very hard to get scholarships to Black students to be accepted as donations. [Interjections.] I remember the years of trouble I had because a programme to train Black businessmen was not accepted as a university programme. So I have a lot of sympathy with the hon member for Cape Town Gardens. I would like now to read the answer of my department.
No, the Government is not considering allowing all donations to bona fide educational institutions to be tax-deductible. In terms of section 18A of the Income Tax Act donations to any university or college—tertiary institution—or educational fund established for schools providing education beyond standard six, are deductible for tax purposes up to the amount of R500 or 2% of taxable income in the case of individuals and 5% in the case of companies.
In paragraph 18.51 of its report the Margo Commission recommended not only that section 18A be retained but also that it should be extended to cover donations to primary schools subject, however, to tightening up control to eliminate avoidance, abuse and evasion.
The Government’s response is to be found in paragraph 9.1.3 of the White Paper on the report and reads as follows:
The question as to how this particular form of tax relief is to be extended to taxpayers in respect of donations to primary schools is receiving the attention of the Department of National Education.
I am sorry for the hon member for Cape Town Gardens but this answer is actually very close to the answer which the hon member for Pinetown received some time ago.
Mr Chairman, the hon the Deputy Minister has not actually answered the question in respect of why. The “no” is the answer to part of the question. He has not answered the other part.
It is common cause that more and better education is critical to the economic, political and social well-being of South Africa. Major obstacles to this include the segregated education system and a multiplicity of Ministers and departments resulting, inter alia, in wasteful duplication and under-utilised facilities, for example, the R1,5 billion worth of empty classroom spaces in White schools and one third of the teacher training spaces in White teacher training colleges being empty.
Secondly, there is the shortage of finance. This is repeatedly mentioned by hon Ministers and others involved in education. The hon the Minister of National Education mentioned a few weeks back that the numbers of students and pupils were going to go up by 4,1% per annum and that finance would go up by only 1% per annum. The implication is that by the next financial year, education will be an additional R420 million worse off, in one year, than it is this year.
The hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Representatives said that they were short of at least R252 million. Our White hon Minister of Education and Culture mentioned that White schools were squeezed for funds. He has also mentioned that R500 million will be needed to provide equal pay for women teachers.
The hon the Deputy Minister of Education has said that there are 4 512 classrooms short, which are worth something of the order of R800 million.
Subsidies calculated against formulae for universities have been cut, some by as much as 25%. This could amount to something like R250 million or more in total.
We are asking that all donations for bona fida educational purposes be tax-deductible. The Margo Commission accepted the profound importance of education. It accepted that the cost to the State of tax-deductible donations is only 50% of the benefit to education. It further accepts that the private financial support for education is greatly increased if the donations are tax-deductible. It is essential that we mobilise all possible financial support for education and tax-deductibility will do just that.
Eroding the tax base is given as a reason for not doing it. In the short term it is true that it will have some effect but I suggest that, in the medium term, we will have a better educated, more productive population which will be earning more, paying more tax and contributing to a faster growing economy yielding more tax.
The hon the Deputy Minister owes it to the House to actually reply to some of these arguments and not simply read out the status quo position, namely about section 18A and the fact that there is an investigation. I hope the hon the Deputy Minister will not come … [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, the CP has taken cognisance of the report of the Margo Commission in connection with donations for education. Numerous valid reasons were given in this report as to why such donations should be tax-deductible. The most important reason is that certain educational institutions have become largely dependent upon donations and bequests and that the Government does not have sufficient funds to replace those contributions. If one of the main reasons for making donations to educational institutions were taken away, viz the advantage that they are tax-deductible, we must accept that this would have extremely detrimental consequences for education in South Africa at present. Consequently the CP is prepared, under certain conditions, to accept that donations to bona fide educational institutions by both individuals and the business sector will be taxdeductible.
We also agree that it would not be fair if this concession did not also apply to primary schools. Primary school education is essential. That is where foundations are laid, and primary school education deserves just as much support as secondary and tertiary education. The CP would like these tax concessions to comply with certain conditions, however.
In the first place, as recommended by the Margo Commission, proper control should be exercised in order to prevent avoidance, abuse and evasion.
Secondly attention should be given to the definition of bona fide educational institutions so that one cannot abuse education because of incorrect motives.
Thirdly this concession may not lead to its abuse by the business sector in an attempt to influence educational policy. Unfortunately this has been the case particularly with tertiary educational institutions during the past few years, because we did not have a government strong enough to prevent that from happening. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, I do not know why this question was put, because we all agree. We on this side accepted in the White Paper that we wanted to assist both primary schools and high schools. That is not a problem, but one must also be realistic. We have the problem that such a decision has to be implemented administratively. †I think we have over 100 000 primary schools, and we would have to issue a certificate to every parent coming along with a R5 donation. A certificate has to be issued to give a person this tax allowance. Getting this system going is not as easy as switching on a light.
I want to point out, from the Government’s point of view, that we support this system by way of allowing these sums to be subtracted for tax purposes, if it can be done.
*We have an administrative problem, however. I do not know how much administrative knowledge the hon member has, but I think he must know that when one has that many schools, one really has a problem when it comes to implementation. We are working hard. We have had numerous meetings with the Department of National Education to see how we can implement this decision in the White Paper in primary schools as well.
I must be honest. I do not know why this question was put, because we agree. If we can get the private sector and individuals to make a greater contribution to the training of our children, who could be opposed to that? [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, accepting the spirit of what the hon the Deputy Minister is saying, I am at a loss for words as to why action has not been taken more rapidly. The hon the Deputy Minister should be well aware that I have asked the same question for four years now, that is two years before Margo and subsequently last year and this year, and still no action has been taken. Not only has no action been taken, but the amount on which donations are made taxdeductible has not been increased from R500 for the high schools.
We must be aware that these are not fees that we are talking about. We are talking about donations to an established educational fund, not just the school itself. We must see, in the light of the remark of the hon the Minister of National Education in which he praised parents for their contribution of R1 600 million to education in this country and hoped that he would get more, that it is in fact incumbent upon the Departments of Finance and of National Education to reconsider this matter very urgently indeed.
That hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister should be aware from the statements of the hon the Minister of Education and Culture that there are parents today who are paying for teachers in schools. They are each putting in R50 or R100 a month to pay for additional teachers. That is happening, and those amounts should be tax-deductible. They should know that there are parents who are paying by way of donations for buildings and for equipment at primary and in particular at preprimary schools, which the hon the Deputy Minister has not even mentioned.
I am afraid that we are simply seeing another delay. As we said with reference to equalising salaries, delay is merely going to make the position worse. My plea is that the problem be solved and that it be tackled most urgently.
Mr Chairman, the hon the Deputy Minister says he supports subtracting things for tax purposes, but then he talks only in terms of section 18A. As my hon colleague has just asked, what about the Emits of R500 and 2%? The whole point is to get as much money into education as possible, and this method enables one to finance education at half-price rates, because the State pays only half of what goes into education that way.
Controls are obviously needed, but I am thinking more and more about the big sums that could be going into education from all sorts of sources. We know that people hate to pay tax. Nobody likes paying tax. People tend to have a soft spot in their hearts for education anyway, so it will be that much sweeter to donate to education if one can make it tax-deductible.
I want the hon the Deputy Minister to address the issue of the R500 and the 2%, as well as the other restrictions about which he has talked, because donations to primary schools are not the only problem.
One of the ways I suggest of dealing with the administrative problems is, to start with, to have lower levels or a certain minimum level below which a donation is not tax-deductible. This will cut down the administrative workload, and one will not end up with the whole system blocked by those relatively small donations of R5 and R10 that he mentioned.
I hope that the hon the Deputy Minister will address the broader issue of the thousands if not millions of rand that could go into education at half price to the Government if those other restrictions were lifted as well.
Mr Chairman, I have absolute sympathy with the hon members … [Interjections.] … but we realise the following.
†The moment one has tax expenditure or a tax allowance one must be extremely careful not to open a door everybody can go through, not for the purpose of assisting the children, but to avoid tax. That is the case. We also tried to assist exports. I am just taking the example of films. We lost R750 million in a matter of one or two years. We cannot introduce a system of tax allowances while we do not have any control over it.
*We have examples of certain schools in which the principal gets up and says: “The following parents have contributed,” and then reads the names, and Johnny’s parents’ may not have contributed. [Interjections.] No, we have examples of that. [Interjections.] We have examples of life assurance policies which are issued to combinations given by school funds.
We must be very realistic, and I am prepared to go and sit down with the Department of National Education and the hon member for Cape Town Gardens—should we both come back to this House—so that we can solve his problem, because I do not think we differ. We want our young people to be trained, and we want the business world to contribute, but surely we cannot develop a system in which there are tax concessions that ultimately benefit a number of people, whereas it is not their objective in any way to assist the children of South Africa. [Time expired.]
Debate concluded.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
General Affairs:
asked the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology:
- (1) Whether a certain corporation, the name of which has been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, or any subsidiary of or any person acting on behalf of this corporation imported equipment for oil-drilling and/or any other purposes during the past three years; if so, what is the name of the corporation in question;
- (2) whether permission was necessary for the importation of such equipment; if so, (a) what permission and (b) from whom;
- (3) what was the value of the permits granted for such importations?
B1017E
- (1) Yes. An import permit was granted to Energy Resources and Mining Coporation Ltd in 1987 to import a second-hand oil drill.
- (2) Yes.
- (a) An import permit in terms of the Import and Export Control Act, 1963 (Act 45 of 1963).
- (b) Department of Trade and Industry.
- (3) No exchange import permit was issued as the oil drill is leased from a foreign source and will be re-exported again on completion of the contract.
asked the Minister of Environment Affairs:
- (1) Whether there are any State-owned wilderness areas in the Cedarberg; if so, (a) what areas and (b) what is the status of each such area;
- (2) whether permission was granted to any persons to graze stock in any of these areas during the past five years; if so, (a) (i) to which persons, and (ii) for what reasons, in each case and (b) in terms of what statutory provisions was such permission granted?
B1018E
- (1) Yes.
- (a) Only one, namely the Cedarberg Wilderness Area.
- (b) The area was set aside as a wilderness area in terms of section 7A of the repealed Forest Act 1968 (Act 72 of 1968) by Government Notices 1256 of 27 July 1973 and 476 of 26 March 1976.
- (2) No, not within the declared wilderness area.
- (a) (i), (ii) and (b) fall away.
asked the Minister of National Health and Population Development:
- (1) Whether with reference to his reply to Question No 248 on 27 April 1989, he has as yet received the actuarial report on the Government Service Pension Fund; if so,
- (2) whether he intends tabling this report in Parliament; if so, when; if not, why not?
B1020E
- (1) Yes,
- (2) no, in terms of the existing statutory requirements it is not compulsory to table the report in Parliament. The report will be available on request towards the end of the month.
asked the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning:
Whether he will make available to members of Parliament the majority and minority reports of the committee appointed by the Administrator of the Cape to inquire into the establishment of a township at Wavecrest; if so, (a) when and (b) in what manner; if not, why not?
B1022E
This matter vests in the Administrator of the Cape Province and he has furnished the following information:
Copies of the majority report as well as the recommendations contained in the minority report, were tabled in the Provincial Council 15 years ago.
asked the Minister of National Health and Population Development:
- (1) Whether he has received an actuarial report on the (a) Public Service Pension Fund and (b) Pension Fund for Associated Services; if not, when is it anticipated that he will receive these reports; if so, when;
- (2) whether he will table these reports in Parliament; if not, (a) why not and (b) what were the main findings of these reports; if so, when?
B1021E
- (1)
- (a) Yes,
- (b) no, it is not possible to furnish a date at this stage;
- (2) no,
- (a) in terms of the existing statutory requirements it is not compulsory to table the reports in Parliament. The report on the Government Service Pension Fund will be available on request towards the end of the month,
- (b) the main findings contained in the report will be available after it has been released.
asked the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology:
- (1) Whether his Department recently purchased or caused to be purchased any land in or around the area in which the second nuclear power station is to be established; if so, (a) how much land, (b) from who and (c) when;
- (2) whether any option on any land in this area has been taken by or on behalf of his Department; if so, (a) on how much land and (b) who currently owns this land?
B1023E
- (1) No
- (a), (b) and (c) fall away.
- (2) No.
- (a) and (b) fall away.
However, Eskom is at present buying land for a possible future nuclear power station. The properties constituting these sites are being purchased to ensure that they are available in the future when there is a need for nuclear power stations to be built. These sites are situated between Oyster Bay and Cape St Francis and Eskom emphasized in its statement on 15 March 1989 that the purchase is not an indication that a nuclear power station will be erected on any of these sites in the foreseeable future.
The Council for Nuclear Safety, an independent statutory body established to ensure public safety and to exercise regulatory control over inter aha the construction and use of nuclear installations, has been advised of Eskom’s intention to purchase these sites and will assess them independently and will also solicit public comment.
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
Whether he or any official of his Department has held any discussions since 1 January 1988 with the Government of Ciskei regarding the future of the Potsdam area; if so, (a) when, (b) what are the names of the persons involved and (c) what was the (i) purport and (ii) outcome of these discussions?
B1025E
A comprehensive development for the whole of the Potsdam area is at present being conducted by the Ciskei Government in conjunction with the South African Department of Foreign Affairs and the Development Bank of Southern Africa. Meetings take place on a regular basis with a view to establishing bulk infrastructure, health services, schools, social infrastructure, etc. Personnel of the South African Embassy in Bisho attend these meetings where progress and technical aspects as well as problem areas are discussed.
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:
- (1) (a) On what basis are bursaries made available to students at the Good Hope Teacher Training College in Khayelitsha, (b) which categories of students at this college are eligible for such bursaries and (c) at what time of the year are they advised of the outcome of their bursary applications;
- (2) what are the current fees for students at this college?
B1026E
- (1)
- (a) and (b) A limited number of contract bursaries are allocated to first year students. This is based on the basis of academic achievement in the first semester.
Contract bursaries are allocated to all second and third year students who were Departmental contract bursary holders the previous year and passed their courses, provided their conduct was satisfactory. - (c) First year students: At the beginning of the second semester.
Second and third year students: At the beginning of the first semester.
- (a) and (b) A limited number of contract bursaries are allocated to first year students. This is based on the basis of academic achievement in the first semester.
(2) |
Registration |
R100,00 |
Indemnity fund |
30,00 |
|
SRC fund |
5,00 |
|
Stationery |
25,00 |
|
Educational tours |
30,00 |
|
Subject fund |
25,00 |
|
Diverse |
15,00 |
|
R230,00 |
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
Whether his Department was consulted in connection with recent visits to the Potsdam area by officials of two Government Departments, the names of which have been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply; if so, (a) which Departments were involved, (b) what was the object of these visits and (c) (i) when and (ii) on whose instructions did each take place?
B1028E
No, but the Department of Foreign Affairs is acquainted with the problem which is in the process of being resolved.
(a), (b) and (c) fall away.
asked the Minister of Education and Development Aid:
- (1) Whether, in respect of the 1989 or 1990 academic years, any changes are being effected in the procedures or basis of awarding bursaries or the number of bursaries to be awarded to students at the Good Hope Teacher Training College in Khayelitsha; if so, what changes;
- (2) whether any current students will lose their bursaries this year or next year even though they passed or will have passed their examinations; if so, (a) which categories of students, (b) when and (c) what criteria will be applied in this regard?
B1027E
- (1) Yes.
A quota system has been introduced as from 1989 in respect of the allocation of contract bursaries to first-year students. There is no change in respect of the procedures or basis of awarding of contract bursaries to second- and third-year students. - (2) Yes.
- (a) Students who are found guilty of misconduct.
- (b) On a date determined by the Director-General at the recommendation of the college council.
- (c) Regulations issued by Government Notice R673 of 31 March 1983.
Mr Chairman, arising from the reply of the hon the Deputy Minister may I ask him what the quota for 1989 is of the number of first-year students who will be eligible for bursaries, and what proportion that is of the number of students? [Interjections.]
Mr Chairman, if my memory serves, there are approximately 245 first-year students at this college and there are indications that approximately 98 of them will be given bursaries. [Interjections.]
Mr Chairman, further arising from the reply of the hon the Deputy Minister may I ask, in the light of the fact that there has been a change in respect of first-year students in 1989 as compared to 1988, which he indicated in his answer, at what stage it was made known to this year’s first-year students that they would not all be eligible to qualify for bursaries?
Mr Chairman, the information furnished to me by the Department indicates that these students were told about this arrangement when they registered at the beginning of the year.
asked the Minister of Environment Affairs:
- (1) Whether he or his Department has been negotiating with any person or organization regarding the erection of a toxic waste treatment plant in South Africa for the purpose of treating toxic waste coming from non-South African sources; if so, with whom has he had such negotiations;
- (2) whether it is the intention to allow such a plant to be erected in South Africa; if so, where is it to be situated;
- (3) whether he will make a statement on the matter?
B1029E
- (1) No.
- (2) No.
- (3) No, but in reply to a similar question in the House of Assembly on 23 February it was stated that the RSA may have to consider a plant to cater for its own requirements in future. At that stage, however, it could be considered to accommodate other countries to render such an undertaking viable but then only with the greatest caution. As far as the mere dumping of toxic waste in the RSA is concerned, the answer is a definite no.
Mr Chairman, arising out of the hon the Minister’s reply, he will be aware of the press cutting that I sent through in connection with this particular question in which a certain individual indicated that he had been in the process of negotiating with the hon the Minister’s department over the erection of a waste treatment plant. I take it that the hon the Minister categorically denies that such negotiations have been taking place?
Mr Chairman, there have been no negotiations whatsoever.
asked the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning:
Whether his Department has authorized or approved the write-off of any rent arrears accumulating from rent boycotts by Blacks in Soweto or in any other areas of South Africa; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, (a) (i) what total amount is owed by Blacks in respect of rent arrears and (ii) in respect of what date is this information furnished and (b) what steps are being taken to recover these arrears?
B1035E
This matter vests in the Administrators of the different provinces and they have furnished the following information:
No.
NATAL
- (a)
- (i) R3 105 017,74
- (ii) 31 March 1989
- (b) Town committees are constantly encouraged to take active steps to recover outstanding rentals and where justified legal action is taken against offenders.
ORANGE FREE STATE
- (a)
- (i) R27 045 867,47
- (ii) 31 March 1989
- (b) The various Black Local Authorities are collecting rent arrears according to their own approved By-laws.
TRANSVAAL
- (a)
- (i) R451 903 278 (Mainly Soweto and Lekoa)
- (ii) 28 February 1989
- (b) Steps taken to improve recovery of rent and services charges:
By Local Authorities:
- (a) An action has been launched in which teams of officials go from house to house to collect arrear moneys, and this has proved reasonably successful.
- (b) In certain instances, mobile offices are used to collect rent and service charges before or after normal office hours.
- (c) Defaulters are evicted by court order, and the electricity supply is disconnected.
- (d) Personal interviews are conducted with tenants.
- (e) Councillors arrange ward meetings with tenants to motivate them to pay.
By the Transvaal Provincial Government: - (f) Meetings are being held between the Administrator and members of the Executive Committee of Transvaal and the Mayors and Executive Committee Members of local authorities to address this issue, e.g. Soweto, Lekoa, Dobsonville, Jouberton and Ratanda.
- (g) In cases where nothing is done to bring the council’s financial position in order, councillors are discharged and an administrator is appointed, e.g. Diepmeadow, Embalenhle and Tokoza.
In order to address the financial problem of local authorities in the Transvaal, working groups, such as the Dr Simon Brand and Dr Deon Brand working groups, have been appointed.
CAPE PROVINCE:
- (a)
- (i) R73 081 332
- (ii) 31 December 1988
- (b) The regional offices of the Community Services Branch are making active attempts on a continuing basis to collect the said accumulated amount in the three regions, in the following manner, namely the—
- (a) intensive training of councillors and chief executive officers of local authorities to bring home to them the responsibilities attached to their functions;
- (b) taking of stringent steps against defaulting debtors by the institution of legal proceedings;
- (c) intensive follow-up of unpaid/outstanding accounts of lessors and home-owners and by personal contact with them;
- (d) education of Black residents by way of information brochures, circulars, etc. in which the importance of the regular payment of rental and service charges is explained to the residents.
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
Whether, over the past 12 months, permission was requested by or on behalf of the government of the Soviet Union to fly over any part of South Africa; if so, (a) who requested such permission, (b) what parts of South Africa were involved, (c) where did these flights start from, (d) to whom did the aircraft concerned belong and (e) what was the purpose of these flights?
B1036E
No
(a), (b), (c) (d) and (e) fall away.
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether he has been notified by the representatives of UNTAG in South West Africa/Namibia of any deaths or injuries of UNTAG personnel since the arrival of the UNTAG forces in that country; if so, what are the relevant details;
- (2) whether any persons so injured are being treated in South West African or South African hospitals; if so, what are the relevant details?
B1038E
- (1) The Administrator-General has not been notified in writing, but has been orally notified of the following incidents:
- (a) 1 Military officer from Bangladesh was involved in an accident near the UNTAG bas at Suiderhof. He received treatment at the local hospital before he died.
- (b) 2 British corporals were involved in a car accident in Otjiwarongo. One was killed instantly and the other died one week later in the Otjiwarongo hospital.
- (c) A British officer was involved in a fight in which his jaw was seriously injured. He received initial treatment in the Grootfontein hospital but was later sent back to Britain for the necessary surgical treatment.
- (d) A few minor cases have also been treated in the local SWA/Namibian hospitals.
- (2) No member of the UNTAG personnel has been treated in South African hospitals.
The sign * indicates a translation. The sign † used subsequently in the same interpellation, indicates the original language.
Own Affairs:
asked the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council:
Whether he still intends having legislation drafted, and introducing it, to give greater and wider effect to the concept of own affairs as defined in section 14(1) of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, No 110 of 1983; if not, why not?
B1095E.INT
Mr Chairman, sections 14 and 15 of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act are entrenched and may consequently be amended only with the majority support of all three Houses of Parliament. The same applies to Schedule 1 to the Constitution Act, which defines specific own affairs.
Any amendment of these sections will therefore have to be preceded by negotiation and consensus. The diversity of peoples and population groups comprising our overall population necessitates the recognition of the existence of particular own and distinctive interests alongside common interests. That is why the NP believes that provision must be made for own powerbases, within which own control can be exercised over such interests. We shall promote this standpoint in the negotiating process that lies ahead, because we believe that there is scope for the broadening of the concept of own affairs.
As regards legislation from the House of Assembly to realise this standpoint, 15 Acts on own affairs have already been passed by this House since the commencement of the new constitutional dispensation. A few of the most important of these are the Social Aid Act (House of Assembly), which governs all measures in connection with the granting of social aid to Whites; the Education Services Act (House of Assembly), which controls the provision and control of White education in schools for Whites; and the Local Councils Act (House of Assembly), which makes provision for providing governmental bodies in the sphere of the local authorities of specific communities, and in this way many other pieces of legislation were passed.
In addition a diversity of functions relating to Whites have already been transferred, including the entire educational function, social welfare services, agriculture in relation to the activities of farmers on a day-to-day basis, as well as certain local government functions and important health functions.
In addition the transfer of further functions, including museum and library services, as well as works functions in respect of those functions, such as education, that have already been entrusted to the Ministers’ Council are already in the process of being disposed of.
Within the framework of section 14(1) and subject to section 16 of the Constitution Act, it would be possible to introduce legislation in the House of Assembly dealing with White interests which fall outside the express wording of Schedule 1 to the Constitution Act if they can necessarily or reasonably be included. No such specific legislation is at present under consideration, but the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly will certainly use its powers, if such a need should arise in any sphere.
Mr Chairman, at the beginning of the reply given by the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council he indicated very clearly once again how the right to self-determination of the Whites has been enslaved by the entrenched provisions of the Constitution Act. The tune which the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council is now singing is quite different to the one he sang in 1985. For example on 20 September 1985 he declared very enthusiastically—
In December 1987, at the Free State congress, he became even more enthusiastic about this and inter alia adopted the strong standpoint that local governments were a cornerstone of the principle of self-determination.
On 30 December 1987 the LP congress took place. The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in the House of Representatives—
The congress then made an appeal to the hon the State President to broaden the basis of general affairs. With that the expectations which followers of the NP could still have cherished on the development of own affairs disintegrated. What happened next?
As long ago as September 1985 a multiracial South African Council for Education was established to advise the hon the Minister of National Education on the four areas—all general affairs—to which own education was subject. This is irreconcilable with the development of own affairs.
On 8 March 1988—the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has now spoken about agriculture—the hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture in the House of Representatives said:
He repeated it in Hansard, col 13130. Is this the development of own affairs? What is more, on 28 March 1988, Hansard, col 5170, reference was made to an announcement by the hon the Deputy Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning that it was the object of the Government eventually and systematically to transfer all 22 functions of local authorities to regional services councils.
Last but not least, on 8 February 1989 the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council himself announced that groups were no longer an obsession with the Government. Hansard, col 201, reads as follows:
In this session of Parliament alone we debated for 95% of the time in joint meetings. We want to know what has become of our people’s right to self-determination. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, my parliamentary leader, Dr De Beer a little while ago asked: Will the real Mr De Klerk please stand up?
Our problem is that once again the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council has not said which is the real Mr De Klerk. What is the reality? Is it the smiling face on television that talks of sharing? Is it the smiling face that—when the hon the State President was ill—said that the NP was not ideologically obsessed with the group concept? Or is it the other De Klerk face that talks about self-determination and the extension of the concept of own affairs? The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council must come clean. Which De Klerk are we dealing with? We want to know.
He talks of sharing. He talks of equal rights. Equally, however, he says this:
We want to know from the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council whether he is in favour of sharing or whether he is in favour of separating. [Interjections.] Is he in favour of sharing or is he in favour of apartheid? [Interjections.] I want to ask him with which De Klerk we are dealing across the floor of the House and with which in the election? [Interjections.] I want to put it to the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council that if he is in favour of self-determination—and if he is, as he says he is, in favour of extending the concept of own affairs—what then is the difference between the new concept of own affairs in education, in housing, in hospitals and in local government and the old concept of verkrampte apartheid, which has brought this country to its knees? We want to know from the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council who he is. He must tell us who he is. Does he believe in sharing or does he believe in self-determination? If he believes in self-determination and in own affairs, what is the difference between that and old-fashioned apartheid? [Interjections.]
Mr Chairman, the real F W de Klerk, just like all hon members on this side of the House, is a realist who lives in the real South Africa, and not in the cloud cuckoo world of a three-headed DP. [Interjections.]
May I ask for injury time, Mr Chairman? [Interjections.] Will the real DP please stand up? Are they in favour of official negotiations with the ANC? Yes or no? When the hon member for Randburg speaks the answer to this is yes. When Dr Worrall speaks the answer is no. When the hon member for Randburg is soft on security, Dr Worrall is hard on security. No, we live in the real South Africa, and the real South Africa demands that there must be power-sharing with regard to matters of common interest. The real South Africa, however, also demands that because of the diversity of this country there must be accommodation of the needs arising from that diversity, and part of that accommodation is self-determination with regard to those matters which are, inter alia, defined in the Constitution as matters of particular interest to that group.
You developed that argument yourself!
Therefore, Sir, the realism of our situation demands that we accommodate two realities: On the one hand the reality that we need to stand together, to work together and to take decisions together in relation to matters affecting all our interests while there are, on the other hand, also diverse interests which need to be decided on within an own power base by each and every community and component of the total population in South Africa.
On the pillar of giving such security to each community can we build successfully a system of co-operation and joint decision making. [Time expired.]
Mr Chairman, I gladly follow upon the hon member for Naboomspruit. [Interjections.] I should like to tell him that with his empty words today he has given no proof at all of any development of own affairs, but has merely reconfirmed the evidence of its abolition, in that we now have 95% general affairs.
The NP has abandoned full-fledged self-determination for the Whites. That is how simple it is. In order to conceal the fact that they have done this from the voters, they now have a concept of own affairs. Nevertheless it has been demonstrated in practice that own affairs are a farce, and to try to equate own affairs with self-determination is plain intellectual dishonesty.
The Whites must take cognisance of the fact that the own affairs concept is a foretaste of what White rights are going to be in the proposed single Parliament which awaits us. In that body White self-determination will only be scaled down even further and will ultimately disappear completely. In that body the Whites will play an inferior role in what is ultimately a predominantly Black Parliament, and in a Black Cabinet under a Black State President. [Interjections.] This is the logical outcome of the pathetic concept of own affairs.
For that reason the NP will be defeated on 6 September. [Interjections.] It will be defeated because it tried to murder the right of the Whites to self-determination.
Mr Chairman, it was quite painful to have to witness today how the usually loquacious hon Chairman of the Ministers’ Council seemed to have lockjaw. [Interjections.] The governing party is constantly arguing that we are becoming conditioned to joint meetings and are accepting them with resignation.
Let us place it on record once again here that the CP are fed up to the teeth with the totalitarian way in which collectivity is being forced upon us, and the way our people’s right to self-determination is being trampled underfoot. [Interjections.] Our tolerance has its limits. The people whose pride the Government is now destroying, will wreak vengeance on the NP! [Interjections.]
Mr Chairman, the hon member for Brakpan is but a poor shadow of Mr Eugéne Terre’Blanche when he tries to sound forceful. [Interjections.]
The hon members of the CP pretend that one only has self-determination when one is alone. In the joint decision-making process, with the special in-built checks and balances precisely in order to prevent group domination, the Whites also act with self-determination when they participate in joint decision-making on matters of common concern. [Interjections.] That is the simple truth. They cannot quote a single example of where our system in South Africa provides that a decision can be forced upon the majority of the Whites against their will. [Interjections.] Consequently their argument falls flat.
They imply that we are neglecting own affairs. During the past two to three years a dramatic addition of functions has taken place. We are building up a fine administration, which renders meaningful service, and does not in any way do so to the detriment of any other population group.
What is the difference?
No, it is not apartheid to admit that there are different groups in this country. Is the “Black caucus” apartheid? [Interjections.]
I say that own affairs is not disintegrating and the examples which the hon member for Brakpan quoted were pathetic.
It is 95% disintegrating.
Surely the hon member knows that Saru is an advisory body that has no decisionmaking powers over the own affairs education departments. They cannot act prescriptively at all. Yet that is the kind of misrepresentation they make here.
The hon member also referred to local government. A number of important local government functions have just been transferred to the Ministers of Local Government in their respective Ministers’ Councils, and that is why what the hon member for Brakpan said was simply not true.
We thank the hon member for Overvaal for the preview of their distorted propaganda. It holds no surprises for us. We know precisely what they are going to say in their smear pamphlets during the election.
Order!
We want to tell them that they are not going to deter us.
Order!
The Chairman is saying “order”, man. Open your ears. [Interjections.]
Order! The interpellation has now been disposed of. We shall now proceed to deal with oral questions. Debate concluded.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
Own Affairs:
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:
- (1) Whether he or his Department recently held discussions with persons or organizations representing a group of religiously connected private schools seeking registration with his Department; if so, what was the (a) purpose and (b) outcome of these discussions;
- (2) whether his Department experienced any problems in regard to registering these schools; if so,
- (3) whether these problems have been eliminated; if not, why not;
- (4) whether he will make a statement on the matter?
B1030E
- (1) Yes,
- (a) to discuss specific aspects regarding the registration of these private schools,
- (b) consensus was reached with regard to the matters discussed;
- (2) yes;
- (3) no, but individual schools which do not comply with the legal requirements for registration have been granted until 22 May 1989 to address the problems;
- (4) no, but the hon member is referred to my media statement of 1989-04-19.
Mr Chairman, arising from the reply of the hon the Minister, may I ask whether the hon the Minister intends to close those schools which had until yesterday to comply with the conditions that were set and did not do so.
Mr Chairman, in the statement of 19 April that I referred to, it was clearly laid down that if schools did not comply with the minimum requirements on 22 May, we would close such schools.
Mr Chairman, further arising from the reply of the hon the Minister, may I ask whether he can give us an indication of the number of schools, as of yesterday, that have not complied with the conditions?
Mr Chairman, unfortunately I am not able to say at this stage, as I have not yet had any feedback on that. On 21 March there were 6 schools that had previously not complied with the conditions, that did comply with registration requirements then. At that stage there were 45 schools that did not comply with the requirements.
At that juncture we granted an extension until 22 May on the clear understanding — this is supported by Pastor McCauley and Pastor Yoko — that we would give each individual school that had not complied with the requirements to date, the opportunity to visit the Director of Education, at which meeting it would be pointed out to each school on what grounds they could not register. Consequently, they had until yesterday to comply with these requirements. If they do not succeed in doing so, we shall have no alternative but to put an end to the continued existence of those shools, because they have had four months to comply with the minimum requirements. However I do not have the reply at this stage.
For written reply:
General Affairs:
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether his Department was involved in placing advertisements promoting the settlement plan for South West Africa/ Namibia; if so, (a) at what total cost and (b) in respect of what specified period is this figure given;
- (2) whether these advertisements were placed in publications distributed in South West Africa/Namibia; if so, (a) in which publications and (b) on what dates; if not, why not?
B722E
- (1) No. A publication is, however, being prepared which will contain the various agreements and UN Security Council decisions.
- (2) This publication will be distributed in South West Africa/Namibia, South Africa and abroad.
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether any (a) loans, (b) lines of credit and (c) other specified financial advances were granted directly or indirectly by the Government or any Department or agency of the Government to (i) the Government of, (ii) any Government Department of, (iii) a development corporation in and (iv) any other specified person or organization in Bophuthatswana in the 1988-89 financial year; if so,
- (2) (a) what amounts were involved in each case and (b) what was the total amount outstanding as at the latest specified date for which information is available?
B768E
- (1)
- (a) Yes
- (b) No
- (c) No
- (a)
- (i) Yes
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (b)
- (i) No
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (c)
- (i) No
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (2)
- (a) Loans R3 240 000
Lines of Credit: None - (b) amount in respect of loans outstanding as at 31 March 1989: R47 844 526 The information furnished above is only in respect of the activities of the Department of Foreign Affairs and therefore does not include any possible assistance by other RSA Departments or agencies.
- (a) Loans R3 240 000
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether any (a) loans, (b) lines of credit and (c) other specified financial advances were granted directly or indirectly by the Government or any Department or agency of the Government to (i) the Government of, (ii) any Government Department of, (iii) a development corporation in and (iv) any other specified person or organization in Ciskei in the 1988-89 financial year; if so
- (2) (a) what amounts were involved in each case and (b) what was the total amount outstanding as at the latest specified date for which information is available?
B769E
- (1)
- (a) Yes
- (b) Yes, guarantees for the repayment of overdraft facilities.
- (c) No.
- (a)
- (i) Yes
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (b)
- (i) Yes
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (c)
- (i) No
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (2)
- (a) Loans R46 652 000
Lines of credit: Guaranteed overdraft facilities R172 000 000 - (b) amount in respect of loans outstanding as at 31 March 1989: R24 932 110 The information furnished above is only in respect of the activities of the Department of Foreign Affairs and therefore does not include any possible assistance by other RSA Departments or agencies.
- (a) Loans R46 652 000
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether any (a) loans, (b) lines of credit and (c) other specified financial advances were granted directly or indirectly by the Government or any Department or agency of the Government to (i) the Government of, (ii) any Government Department of, (iii) a development corporation in and (iv) any other specified person or organization in Transkei in the 1988-89 financial year; if so
- (2) (a) what amounts were involved in each case and (b) what was the total amount outstanding as at the latest specified date for which information is available?
B770E
- (1)
- (a) No
- (b) Yes, guarantees for the repayment of overdraft facilities
- (c) No.
- (a)
- (i) No
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (b)
- (i) Yes
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (c)
- (i) No
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (2)
- (a) Loans None
Lines of credit: Guaranteed overdraft facilities R80 000 000 - (b) amount in respect of loans outstanding as at 31 March 1989: R102 911 157.
The information furnished above is only in respect of the activities of the Department of Foreign Affairs and therefore does not include any possible assistance by other RSA Departments or agencies.
- (a) Loans None
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether any (a) loans, (b) lines of credit and (c) other specified financial advances were granted directly or indirectly by the Government or any Department or agency of the Government to (i) the Government of, (ii) any Government Department of, (iii) a development corporation in and (iv) any other specified person or organization in Venda in the 1988-89 financial year; if so,
- (2) (a) what amounts were involved in each case and (b) what was the total amount outstanding as at the latest specified date for which information is available?
B786E
- (1)
- (a) Yes
- (b) Yes, guarantees for the repayment of overdraft facilities.
- (c) No.
- (a)
- (i) Yes
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (b)
- (i) Yes
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (c)
- (i) No
- (ii) No
- (iii) No
- (iv) No
- (2)
- (a) Loans R26 774 544
Lines of credit: Guaranteed overdraft facilities R45 000 000 - (b) amount in respect of loans outstanding as at 31 March 1989: R30 032 335 The information furnished above is only in respect of the activities of the Department of Foreign Affairs and therefore does not include any possible assistance by other RSA Departments or agencies.
- (a) Loans R26 774 544
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) Whether a certain publication, the name of which has been furnished to the Minister’s Department for the purpose of his reply, is being distributed abroad by his Department; if not, why not; if so, (a) in which countries, (b) in what quantities and (c) at what cost;
- (2) what is the name of this publication?
B727E
- (1) No.
The results of a worldwide survey showed that this publication did not reach opinion-forming target groups and that from a communications viewpoint it was ineffective. These results together with the high costs involved in disseminating it abroad forced the Department to discontinue distribution of this publication and to replace it with a more cost-effective and purposeful image-building instrument. - (2) “South African Digest.”
asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:
- (1) (a) When were formal links between the Soviet Union and South Africa severed and (b) what were the reasons for the severing of these links;
- (2) whether these reasons are still valid; if not, to what extent have they changed?
B734E
- (1)
- (a) The Soviet consular representative in Pretoria was requested on 1 February 1956 to close the Soviet consular missions in Pretoria and Cape Town and to withdraw their personnel by 1 March 1956.
- (b) This decision was taken because Soviet consular representation in South Africa at that time was not considered to be in the interests of South Africa.
- (2) The Honourable Member is referred to my comments on this subject in the Extended Public Committee on 3 May 1989.
asked the Minister of Manpower:
- (1) (a) How many industrial accidents occurred in 1988 and (b) what was the total cost of these accidents to (i) the State, (ii) the Accident Fund and (iii) insurance companies;
- (2) (a) how many persons (i) applied for and (ii) received compensation in terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, No 30 of 1941, and (b) what was the total amount paid out in compensation, in that year;
- (3) what was the total period for which the persons injured in such accidents were absent from work?
B844E
(1), (2) and (3) Figures for 1988 are not as yet available.
asked the Minister of Manpower:
- (1) How many workmen in each race group (a) suffered permanent disablement and (b) died as a result of injuries sustained at work in 1988;
- (2) (a) how many industrial accidents occurred in the Republic during the latest specified period of 12 months for which figures are available, (b) what amount was paid out by the Accident Fund in respect of such accidents and (c) what was the total period for which the persons injured in such accidents were absent from work?
B845E
- (1) Figures for 1988 are not as yet available.
- (2) The most recent figures available are for 1985.
- (a) 241 820 as contemplated in the Workmen’s Compensation Act, Act no 30 of 1941.
- (b) R90 117 742
- (c) 2 588 404 man-days.
asked the Minister of Manpower:
(a) How many cases were referred to the Industrial Court, (b) how many of these cases were settled before evidence was called, and (c) how many status quo orders were (i) granted and (ii) refused, in 1988?
B846E
- (a) 3 838
- (b) Statistics are not kept on this basis. However, 1 251 cases were settled before or after the hearings, and 613 during the hearings.
- (c)
- (i) 179
- (ii) 274
asked the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology:
What was the cost of operating the National Liquor Board in 1988?
B965E
R894 756 during the financial year 1987/88 (latest available data). The amount includes the expenditure in respect of the Directorate: Liquor Affairs in the Department of Trade and Industry.
Own Affairs:
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:†
What was the teacher/pupil ratio in schools under the control of his Department in 1986, 1987 and 1988, respectively?
B951E
1986 |
1987 |
1988 |
1 : 17,80 |
1 : 17,79 |
1 : 17,80 |
This information is for ordinary public schools.
†Indicates translated version.
For oral reply:
Own Affairs:
Question standing over from Tuesday, 16 May 1989:
asked the Minister of Education and Culture:
Whether private school subsidies for 1989 have been decided upon; if not, (a) why not and (b) when is it anticipated that they will be decided upon; if so, how many private schools falling under his Department have been granted subsidies of (i) 45 and (ii) 15 per cent?
C100E
No
- (a) No applications for subsidization were received to date for consideration as the annual closing date is 31 July.
- (b) As soon as the applications are received.