I would like to ask for the privilege of the half-hour. Sir, this Department of Tourism has now been in existence since May, 1963. In past years we have been lenient with it; we have said that it was still trying to find its feet and that we must give it a chance. I believe that it has now had its chance, and that the time has come for the Department and for the Minister, as Minister of Tourism, to justify themselves. I believe that there is a great need for them to justify themselves and that the Department of Tourism, under the Minister, is indeed a very sad spectacle to-day.

Tourism, after all, is the fifth largest industry in the whole world. We read about industries such as the motor industry and the manufacturing industries, but we do not realize that tourism is the fifth largest industry in the world. Against that background South Africa’s contribution to tourism is indeed a very puny one, as I shall point out later. Sir, in this Vote mainly three bodies are involved: one is the South African Tourist Corporation; the second one is the Hotel Board and the third one is the Department itself. I wish to confine myself to-day to the Department of Tourism itself and to the Minister. I will only say a few words about the other two bodies. Firstly, the S.A. Tourist Corporation has been giving Parliament regular reports which we have been reading with great interest, and we have been impressed with a great deal of the work it has been doing under the most difficult circumstances and with the very limited funds at its disposal. Satour (the S.A. Tourist Corporation) has only six officers abroad and I think four agencies, a puny number compared with what is really needed.

However, it is limited to-day by the amount of money that it can get. It has very little funds to advertise; it has very little funds for publicity and for films but with its limited funds it is doing an adequate, and more than adequate, job. As far as the Hotel Board is concerned I shall not be saying much. My hon. friend, the hon. member for Durban (Point) will deal with that. I trust, however, that the hon. the Minister has all the particulars at his finger tips because he should to-day be receiving the annual report of the Hotel Board, containing its balance sheet, and questions will be put to him in that regard. I hope therefore that he will have all the facts at his finger tips. Talking about reports, Sir, the Department of Tourism has now been in existence for three years and yet we have so far not had a single report from it.

I do not know whether the reason is that there is nothing to report. Surely Parliament cannot be satisfied only with the report of the S.A. Tourist Corporation. I trust that there will be a report from this Department next year.

Let us look at the Department of Tourism. Of all the Departments in South Africa, it is the smallest, the puniest, the most anaemic of them all. It was born in May, 1963, and it is certainly not going strong. Do you know, Sir, that it has only half the staff that the Department of Sport has, and the Department of Sport was started only two months ago? The Department of Tourism has a staff of 15 only —15 people in a Department which should be one of the most important Government Departments, a Department which represents the fifth largest industry in the whole world. I know that we have Satour; I am not asking the Minister to justify the S.A. Tourist Corporation, I am asking him to justify his own tourist Department which at the present moment employs 15 people. A year ago it had a staff of 13 and the year before that it also had a staff of 13. Every year we have had an optimistic sub-item on this Vote—R3,300 in one case and R4,000 in another case—for “Expansion of the Establishment”. Sir, an increase from 13 to 15 over a period of two years shows very little expansion. I want to know why this is the case, and what justification there is at the present moment for what is being done.

You see, Sir, I have been studying some of the ways in which the Department of Tourism has been spending its money. We in Parliament vote a regular amount every year and we expect that money to be spent in the way indicated in the Budget. According to the latest figures I have available, the Department has been doing so little that a vast amount of that money, over 7 per cent, that has been allocated to it has not been spent. I have been looking at some of the excuses given as to why they could not spend that money. On salaries it was due to vacant posts. On postal facilities only half the money we voted was spent in 1964-5, which is the last year for which we have figures available. The monthly telephone bill is only £30 a month for the Department of Tourism. We spent that amount in a single month in our election campaign. The Department of Information, as far as I know, has a telephone bill of R1,600 a month, indicating the activities of that Department. On that basis it appears that there can be very little activity in the Department of Tourism.

Of the money we voted for transport and travel, only a quarter was spent. The reason given is, firstly, that a certain overseas journey could not be undertaken, and that unavoidable delays prevented foreign editors from being invited. What overseas journey could not be undertaken? Was the Department of Tourism going to organize a tour for the hon. the Minister, its first tour of all, and was that the journey which could not be undertaken, or was it another tour? And what unavoidable delays were there? Here is the Department of Tourism, at the head of tourism in Smith Africa, and yet there were unavoidable delays. It could not even properly organize a group of travel agents and travel writers coming to South Africa. It has tried and has failed to do what is one of the most important things it should do.

I looked at another sub-head, trying to find out what the Department has been doing. I discovered that it had one main task, apparently, and that was to organize or to assist with the tours of travel agents and travel writers coming to South Africa every year. I think in one year 130 of them came out to this country, but I say this is a very expensive travel agency, this Department of Tourism, if they spend R120,000 on bringing a few writers out to this country. I believe it is a good idea that they should come, but really, for the Department of Tourism to spend all that money on bringing them out, something which I am sure ordinary travel agencies could do as Well, cannot easily be justified. Only half the money we gave the Department for advertising and publicity was spent that year, and the reason given is that it was “due to the pressure of work and other circumstances” that the pointing programme could not be executed in full. I want to ask what the pressure of work Was. The Department did not do its most important job. It did not print those advertisements and it could not issue the pamphlets or make the films. Half the money was not spent. What circumstances were there which for. three years now have prevented the Department from doing its job properly?

Again I ask what the Minister at the head of that Department is doing to justify himself? It is an important Department, but it should be doing much more than it does. Otherwise, the S.A. Tourist Corporation might just as well have stayed under the S.A. Railways, as it was in the past, and the Hotel Board might just as well have been placed under the Department of Economic Affairs. The result and partly I blame the hon. the Minister of Tourism—is that last year, which is the last year for which figures are available, for the first time in many years there was a decrease in the number of tourists coming to South Africa. Throughout the rest of the world tourism was bursting at the seams, but in South Africa there was a decrease, probably the only country in the world where there was a decrease in the number of tourists. I know that the number of tourists from Rhodesia decreased by about 7,000 from 104,000 to about 97,000, but the number of tourists coming from Europe did not even compensate for the fewer tourists we got from Rhodesia in that year. To take one example, Italy has 15.000,000 tourists a year. For every 100 people who go to Italy not even one comes to South Africa, and of that one half comes from Rhodesia, if one can split a person in half. Why is there this sad spectacle of this puny the anaemic Department under the Minister?I believe that the Department has failed in Its basic duty, and that duty was stated in the Government Notice announcing the establishment of the Department on 17th May, 1963, as follows—

That is the most important of the tasks of the Department of Tourism, namely the co-ordination of tourism in South Africa, and really, it does not do much co-ordinating if we look at all the other Departments which have a finger in the pie of tourism. The major one is the S.A. Railways, under the Department of Transport. A very large part of the Minister’s funds, about R400,000 a year, comes from the S.A. Railways for the Tourist Corporation. I cannot discuss that here, but that is the position. The Minister has six or seven officers overseas to promote tourism. The S.A. Railways have officers overseas to promote tourism and to encourage people to come to South Africa by S.A. Airways and to travel here on our railways. The advertisements placed by the S.A. Railways are tourist advertisements. The Railways, according to the Minister of Transport, spent R850,000 on the promotion of tourism. Surely that should have been spent by the Tourist Corporation, or by the Minister’s Department. Think of all the other Departments which have a finger in the pie of tourism. The Minister of Information has attachés overseas making films about our wonderful country. There is the Minister of Justice, who has to deal partly with the grading of hotels, and the Minister of Immigration. Many immigrants come here as “tourists”. There is the Minister of Economic Affairs, who has his attachés overseas and whose officers abroad are also approached by intending tourists. There is the Minister of Foreign Affairs whose embassies are approached by tourists. There is the Minister of the Interior who has to see to it that many of the difficulties in regard to passports are taken out of the way, and who has to supply certain travel documents for tourists. All these different Departments have a finger in the pie of tourism, and it is the task of the Minister of Tourism to co-ordinate their work. I want to know from him what he has done in that respect. Sometimes the way this Department works is so funny that it is almost tragic. I am thinking of the groups of writers who are brought out every year, travel writers and agents, etc., to have a look at South Africa. I say primarily that is the task of the Department of Tourism alone, or else it is the task of Satour and of Satour alone, but we know what happens. Apparently there are two lists of visitors, one kept by Satour and the other kept by the Department of Tourism. Some people come as the guests of the Department of Tourism and others come as the guests of Satour. Why there is this difference I do not know. Perhaps the Minister can tell us. Those who come as the guests of the Department of Tourism are actually under three different departments. The travel tickets are paid for by the Department of Tourism. The railway tickets and the airway tickets in South Africa are paid by the S.A. Railways, and the accommodation on the tour is organized by the S.A. Tourist Corporation. So there are three separate bodies organizing a single tour, each paying out thousands of rand. I see no reason why, for instance, Miss Silvie Nicolls of the Tatler, the British periodical, should come out as the guest of the Department of Tourism, while Mr. Richard Joseph of Esquire, the American magazine, should come out as the guest of Satour. It is a good thing that these people should be here. Eighteen people came out as the guests of the Department of Tourism in 1964-5, and 86 as the guests of Satour, but why do they not come as the guests of one single body?

Internally, the position is as bad. Satour and the Minister also have their duties to perform in regard to tourism in South Africa itself in order to make it easier not only for Rhodesians and people from overseas to travel here, but also for South Africans. I want to mention an example of how muddled the control of tourism is in South Africa. Here we not only have the Department of Tourism, the S.A. Tourist Corporation and the S.A. Railways and the S.A. Airways, but we also have four Provincial Administrations. Sir, do you know what the hon. the Minister did? Some time ago he transferred the power to set up and to organize regional tourist committees or regional boards, to the four Provincial Administrations. I have particular knowledge in regard to the Transvaal. The Minister asked the Transvaal Provincial Administration to establish a regional board. I asked him a question on 18th August. I asked whether he had done that and he said yes, he had; he had told the Transvaal Provincial Administration that they could establish a regional board. Then I asked him whether he had taken away that power from the Transvaal Provincial Administration and he replied no, definitely not, only the whole question of tourism was being reviewed. Do you know, Sir, that a week before that, in the Transvaal Provincial Council, Mr. Rob Ferreira, a member of the Executive Council, had told the Provincial Council that the Minister had asked him to give back those powers over the regional board? I have the Hansard of his speech here. He said—

On 8th August Mr. Ferreira says he had been asked by the Minister to give back the delegated authority, but a week later the Minister tells me he knows nothing about it. I have never yet seen a state of affairs like this. I have never yet seen such aimless wandering. What has happened in this case? I would like to know. The Minister is supposed to be at the rudder of the ship of tourism, and to use nautical language, the hon. the Minister does not know his port from his starboard, and he does not know his poop from his prow. We have really a wonderful country to sell. We have wild life second to none. We have grand scenery and Native life. Tourism can be one of our greatest earners of foreign exchange. Why are we dragging behind? There are many things which are essential to the development of tourism and in which the Minister and his Department can play a leading part. What is being done by these 15 people? There can be more publicity abroad and there can be more co-ordination between the different Departments catering for tourists abroad, the Railways in particular. He should try to encourage lower air passages to this country. At the present moment there is a meeting of the International Air Travel Association being held in Honolulu, and at that meeting they are discussing the possibility of instituting a cheap excursion fare from Europe to South Africa. The S.A. Airways, I believe, are applying for it. I trust that the Minister knows about it and that he has received some good news in regard to it, because this is one of the things which should be done. One of our greatest problems is to get tourists to South Africa cheaply and not at the present high rates. The Minister of Tourism can also take the initiative in regard to packaged tours, or he can ask Satour to do it. It is done by the E.N.I.T. in Italy and by many similar organizations. What has been done about that? He can start encouraging guide books. I have seen one or two of the books. They are well written and well translated, too, but they are not always the type of guide books that the ordinary tourist needs or wants in this country. Something is being done about hotel accommodation. I am not criticizing the Hotel Board. It has only had a few months in which to justify itself and I trust that it will do good work in future. A very important task, also, under this duty of the Minister to co-ordinate tourism, is to see whether he cannot persuade his colleagues to change these antiquated transport laws which make it virtually impossible for ordinary private enterprise to establish a bus tour service in South Africa. There have been complaints before the Transport Commission, which is sitting at the moment, by independent tourist bus operators, asking whether something cannot be done, the Minister has a representative on that Commission. I trust that this point will be taken up by him and that something will be done. I believe it was stated in evidence that if the transport laws we have in South Africa governing rail and bus transport had existed in Europe, there would have been no tourism in Europe. I sometimes wonder how much interest this Government really takes in tourism and whether the phobia they very often have in regard to anything foreign does not also extend to tourists coming to South Africa. I have here a copy of an interesting speech made by a person not unknown to the Minister, Mr. Piet Meiring, who was Secretary for Information for many years. It comes from what the hon. the Minister is sure to regard as an impeccable source, namely a broadcast over the S.A.B.C. Mr. Meiring said this—

Mr. Meiring asks whether it is not shortsighted and selfish that the authorities regard the whole business of foreign visitors and tourism as something which is not actually of great importance. If one sees what is being done and what is not being done by the Department, we are entitled to ask again what the Minister is doing to carry out the duties imposed on him by the Government regulations establishing his Department. The challenge is there. Why does he not get out and meet that challenge, the challenge to bring thousands of visitors to this country, to bring us the foreign capital we so dearly need, and to sell our country and its beauties? What has the Department of Tourism being doing? Is the reply:

Nothing? We will wait to hear the answer.

I have listened very attentively to the hon. member for Orange Grove and I do not intend to go into administrative matters, to which the hon. the Minister must certainly be yearning to reply. There are a few things that I want to say, however, and then I want to put forward a few constructive ideas in regard to things which I think should be done. First I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove this: Is South Africa in a position to-day to accommodate large numbers of tourists? To my mind the Minister and the Department have done the correct thing in seeing to it, before we can accommodate those tourists in South Africa, that the facilities are provided and that the necessary attractive places are developed so that those people may be accommodated. The hon. member said that during the past year fewer tourists came to South Africa than in the past. Now I want to ask the hon. member what the real reason for that is. Firstly, as far as the American tourists are concerned, is it not a fact that the fiscal policy followed by America in recent years simply made it difficult for people to travel overseas on so large a scale as they did in the past? That is one reason, and another reason, as far as people from Europe are concerned, is that it is also a fact that the financial policy of those governments has also made it more difficult for people to travel as they did in the past. Another factor is the policy followed by the United Party and the liberalists in this country in the past. Did that not in all probability discourage tourists from coming to South Africa? There perpetual allegations about a police state received great prominence in the foreign Press, and in that regard the hon. member for Orange Grove certainly cannot absolve himself from all blame. His allegations, particularly during the past election, that South Africa was a backward country because we did not even have television, may to a large extent have prompted people to ask themselves why they should come to South Africa if it was such a backward country. But I think the Minister is quite capable of defending himself, and he is probably yearning to reply to the hon. member on the other points made by him.

Our time is limited, but I wish to plead that more attention should be given to making our roads more attractive for the tourist travelling through the country. In speaking of tourists I do not want to confine myself exclusively to overseas tourists who come to this country. I think we have a great responsibility and an obligation to the tourist from within the country itself, and there are hundreds of thousands of them. Our people have become travel-conscious; we like to travel. But when I travel through our country with its beautiful natural scenery, it grieves me that one still sometimes sees unsightly structures along the roads. I am thinking particularly of Native huts standing there and the siting of Native residential areas which are in a poor condition. We know that steps are being taken to clear them up. but as far as this matter is concerned I should like the Minister to exert influence on the authorities concerned to see to it that those unsightly structures are removed. We know that a great deal is being done as far as our towns and cities are concerned. In the Transvaal in particular a great deal is being done to beautify the entrances to our towns. Even streets which are used as through-ways for important tourist roads in the rural towns should be made attractive, and the Minister should exert his influence on the local authorities to do that. Here I am thinking particularly of a few small towns through which I passed recently and which I want to congratulate on what they have done to make things attractive for the traveller. I am thinking of a few small Free State towns like Tromps-burg and Philippolis through which we pass on the route from the Transvaal to the Cape. We do not always realize what a tremendous asset we have in these small rural towns with their architecture. We still find an architecture there which it would be a pity to lose. Many of those houses have been beautifully renovated and restored and are really a delight to the eye. We want to plead that what is being done there should serve as an example.

Then we also want to plead with the Minister that he should give attention to, or should take the necessary initiative in, providing proper national guide-maps for tourists. We know that the provinces have collected a great deal of information in connection with historical places in the various regions. That information is obtainable from the provinces, and seeing that the Department has taken over this task, we want to plead that that information should be obtained by the Department of Tourism, and that active steps be taken to prepare such a guide-map. It is very important that we should have it. One finds it a pity to travel through one’s country without having the necessary information about all the historic places along the roads. We know that it is a difficult matter to-day to put op notice boards along the roads. Various restrictions have been imposed by the Department of Transport, but I want to plead that in this regard the Minister should obtain permission, from the bodies concerned, to erect signs at historical places. I wonder whether we could not have uniform signs erected throughout the country, so that when one saw such a sign one would know at once that one was near a place of historical interest. Take the route from Johannesburg to Durban. How many of us know where all the places of historical interest are situated and where the historical events took place along the road that passes over Majuba and leads down to Natal? I think the time has arrived for us to erect proper structures at strategic places—such as where one passes over the mountain at Majuba— where the tourist can stop, and to provide a small cinema there at which one can insert a coin in a machine and learn the whole history of the place in a few moments by means of visual images projected on a screen. One often sees that overseas. I am thinking of the erection of dioramas. If I may mention an example, take the beautiful diorama which has been erected at Waterloo in Belgium and which depicts the whole of the battle that took place there. One immediately gets a visual image of what happened there. I think if one could install something like that at Majuba which could give a visual presentation of all the battles that took place in that area, it would not only be a tourist attraction, but could also serve to depict the history of our country to our own citizens. These are a few suggestions which I felt I should like to bring to the Minister’s notice and I hope and trust that they will be put into effect.

Another matter which I feel should receive active attention is the harnessing of our farming activities in our tourist industry. We have a beautiful country with lovely farms. If one sees what a tremendous attraction that is in overseas countries, to the extent that the farmers even make an industry of it and provide tourist facilities on their farms which can be hired out to tourists, then I think this matter should be given serious attention in our country. Just think of our farming activities. Just think how much one would like to go and stay on a farm, on a wine farm or a sheep farm or whatever, for a week or a fortnight and to see all the activities there. That would also afford an opportunity of establishing closer contact between country-folk and urban dwellers. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, first of all I should like to ask the hon. the Minister just how far the administrative arrangements are being taken between himself as head of his department and the Administrators. In this case I am referring particularly to the Administrator of Natal, who is the head of the special organization established in Natal as a result of, I understand, discussions with the Minister. Because, Sir, the Administrator as an individual has taken under his wing the various regional bodies that have been established there. I think that there has been a feeling in recent months that something is going wrong with the very close tie-up that should exist—financial as well as administrative—between the provincial organization which has all the regional committees under its aegis, and the Minister. I should like to hear from the Minister when he replies if he will tell us whether that tie-up with the Administrator is in fact weakening, whether it is his intention to let it weaken, whether he wants to strengthen it, and just to what extent the Province can rely upon the Minister to back it in its attempts to build up the tourist industry.

I think that we have to realize at once that tourists in the main do not come to see our buildings and our streets, our towns and villages. In my own experience, which goes back a very long way, your oversea tourists particularly come to see your wild-life or else they come to see the Bantu. Those are the things they are interested in. There are difficulties involved in allowing the tourists to see the Bantu. There used to be a time when in Natal we had specially organized tours for tourists to certain Native reserves there. But incidents of an unfortunate character took place from time to time and eventually there was a general tightening-up. I have not seen any reports of organized tours for quite a long time. [Interjection.] I am given to understand that they still have organized tours in the Transkei, though. They still have organized tours in Natal, but not of that character where the tourists are really allowed to see exactly what the life of a Native kraal is, in the manner that they used to do some years ago. I can understand why, and I have no complaint on that score.

But when it comes to wild life, Sir, the position is totally different. Here we have our nature reserves and our game reserves, we have so much to offer. In my experience, even talking to tourists who come from overseas and land here in Cape Town and who are going to travel by road up to the northern provinces, what they are concerning themselves with is what they are going to see when they get to the Kruger Park and the Natal game reserves and so forth. Those are the big attractions.

I am a member of the Natal Parks Board, and we are continually being pressed to make more and more facilities available for tourists But I want to point out that the parks boards are conservation bodies, and that their job is not really to promote tourism. We do it because we cannot help it. We have something there that the tourists want to see. We arranged ourselves in Natal for example for roads to be made because the provincial roads department could not handle it. We purchased our own equipment and plant, we made our own roads, we maintain and keep them in repair.

Then there is the point made by the hon. member for Benoni. Mr. Chairman, we should like to know that we have the Minister and his department standing behind our Administrator and that the whole of the tourist potential in Natal can get the fillip which we believe it can obtain from those official quarters. There is so much more to it than merely the question of the game reserves and that sort of thing. There are what one might call fringe benefits for the tourists. Let us for example take the question of the training of proper tourist guides. Tourists come to South Africa, they go to the game reserves and they go around. Who is showing them about? Very often it is the driver of a motor car. You get people who land here in Cape Town, they engage a taxi service, and that man takes them up there. I have seen some of the most frightened men in Africa driving tourists around in a car in the game reserve. If they come across a rhino standing in the road they do not know what to do. They literally quake and quiver. They have not the foggiest idea of what to do. Those are not the sort of guides we want to show tourists around. We should have trained people to show tourists around. They should know what they are talking about, particularly when they come to places of interest. As the hon. member for Benoni said, they should be able to give a thumb-nail sketch of historical events associated with that particular place.

We have in Natal as a sub-committee of the Natal Parks Board a special historical places committee dealing with places like Isandlwana and the various places where battles took place during the Zulu wars, and so forth. They are all being marked, brochures are being prepared, and some very fine coloured brochures have been issued recently by the tourist body under the aegis of the Administrator. But, as I say, we should have these people properly trained.

Let us take another angle of fringe benefits. You take the people who come to this country from foreign countries. They do not want to spend more than is necessary when they are here in South Africa. They come here and they are willing to spend, but they do not like to think that they are being robbed. I am not suggesting that they are. But let us not be negative in our approach. Why not be positive and say to people who come here, “We will give you special facilities in connection with foreign exchange. We will give you the highest possible rates of exchange to make it possible for you to get a cheap holiday in South Africa”. In other words, we do not look upon this as a means whereby we can extract every penny from these people and give them an expensive holiday. We should rather see whether it is not possible to give them a cheap holiday. There are so many of these fringe benefits. I think of cheaper petrol. There may be many things that we can cheapen for them, so that they have a cheap holiday. You know, Sir, the finest advertisement that we can get for our tourist industry overseas is not what you publish in the papers but it is a satisfied tourist who goes back again to his own home country and who says, “I have been to South Africa, I saw this and I saw that”, and then he produces his photographs, if he is a photographer as so many of them are these days—and he can add “You know, they went out of their way to make my trip a cheap one; there were people there who knew what they were talking about, they showed us round, they made my holiday as cheap as they possibly could, they gave me special rates of exchange so that I did not have to pay through the nose for everything.”

When you talk to tourists from overseas who have been to other countries, how often is it said that they had to pay through the nose for everything that they got when they went here, there, or the other place. Let us do the reverse. Let us make tourists welcome to South Africa, not only by word of mouth but let us make it quite clear by deeds that we welcome them here. There are so many of these fringe benefits which I think we could so easily apply.

One of the things which I think we have never really exploited in South Africa is the Drakensberg. There we have ski clubs, as are also found down in the Cape here, at Matroosberg. We have them up in the Drakensberg. The latest tourist brochures show the tremendous development in skiing in Natal. There could be ski lifts and that sort of thing, all subsidized by the Department. They are spending a tremendous amount of money. We should show the world that in South Africa, which people quite wrongly seem to think is a very hot country and where you are going to be sunburnt and scorched to death and all that kind of thing, we have as good areas for skiing as they have in Switzerland probably. We have none of the difficulties that they have to contend with there. You can go up in the Drakensberg where you can have a splendid skiing holiday, and from some of those big snow fields up there you can go way down to the Kruger Park, to tropical conditions there with its wild life, or to the game reserves of Zululand and Pondoland.

These tremendous contrasts are what we have to offer and which will appeal to the tourists to come to this country. These can all be investigated and subsidized, built up and developed by the lively interest of the Minister and his department. But I do not think that this is a matter for centralization at all. I hope that the Minister is going to tell us that he wants to see the development take place at a provincial level with the local committees who are under the control of the various administrations. In that way we are going to build up something that is really worth having and it is going to be of inestimable value because of the money that it brings in. It is to-day one of our thriving industries, and it can be made one of our premier industries as far as South Africa is concerned.

Mr. Chairman, in pursuance of what the previous speaker, the hon. member for South Coast, has said, I want to say that I am very glad he mentioned the Natal Parks Board, a board of which he himself is a member, that exclusive association in Natal which is so conservation conscious that it is almost antagonistically disposed towards private initiative where it comes to the furnishing of facilities for tourists. They monopolize the facilities in their parks and camps to such an extent that there is almost no question of the “fringe benefits” to which the hon. member referred. I mention as one example of those “fringe benefits” which they could have used the 40c which they charge for shrimps with which, inter alia, they really— and this is the general pattern up there—tend to chase away more tourists than they attract. But I shall return later in my argument and say something further about the Parks Board.

I want to say that the tourist industry is responsible for the largest single item in the world trade account. The hon. member for Orange Grove can go and check the particulars again. It is the largest single item, namely R108,400,000,000. That is the 1964 figure and it represents an increase of 11.7 per cent on the figures for the previous year. It is high time South Africa also examined its tourist trade balance in order to find out what our position is in respect of what we have to surrender annually as a result of South African tourists visiting other countries as against the benefit we derive from overseas tourists visiting our country. The more South Africans travelling beyond our borders, the more unfavourable our tourist trade balance will become, unless—and herein lies the pressing aspect of the matter—active attempts are made to bring our tourist attractions and facilities in South Africa onto an internationally acceptable and adequate level. Upon examination it becomes clear that in terms of what we can offer in South Africa, South Africa is not receiving its fair share of the potential tourist stream. The figures for 1964 and 1965 of 229,278 and 226,899, respectively, for visitors to the Republic indicate a decrease of 2,379, while—and this is very important—the figure for South African tourists who travelled to other countries in the same year indicate an increase of 23,154. Now, I want to attribute this unsatisfactory state of affairs to the same causes as those which have been affecting our education in South Africa for so many years, namely the question of divided control.

In order to cope with tourism in South Africa we have the Department of Tourism I with powers delegated to four provincial regional offices. We have Satour which is doing I much to recruit tourists abroad. We have four provincial parks boards. We have one national parks board. Finally, we also have the various municipal publicity and tourist associations.

The hon. the Minister is deserving of high praise for what he has recently achieved with his relatively small Department. I in no way want to detract from the good work which is also being done by the other bodies. However, the question arises whether it is not time that an administrative re-arrangement of the Department be made in order to obtain a possibly greater degree of co-ordination and uniformity of policy from above downwards, possibly a more centralized, direct control with subservient local or regional offices serving a specific region. The presently constituted regional Tourism Promotion Committees exist in an advisory capacity but they suffer from lack of funds. In most cases local authority and public bodies have to make voluntary contributions. The need is being felt for a permanent full-time staff in each regional office, but the funds are often lacking. In this regard I want to say that the sub-committee on tourism in Zululand is grateful for the support and co-operation which they are receiving in regard to assistance and representative officials from Government Departments. However, it is very important that in Zululand the Department of Bantu Administration and Development should also be present on that committee. I want to make an appeal here to the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development to give his very friendly consideration to the matter.

Once the tourist machine begins to function smoothly, however, the work increases. Tours, accommodation and publicity must be undertaken and staff and funds become urgently necessary. The hon. the Minister of Tourism is kindly requested to consider the possibility of financial assistance to regional offices, particularly where the country as a whole is going to derive benefits there from.

But, Mr. Chairman, organizational adjustments are not enough. In terms of Government Notice No. 732 of 1963 which established this Department, we read in Section 1 (b)—

Now, the first aspect of promotion I want to mention is a detailed survey and study of the subjective qualities and requirements of the overseas tourists in particular—what he expects, how he wants to be treated, what he wants to see, how he wants to relax—because tourism is an economic article which has to be sold and the salesman must know his client.

Secondly, as far as the promotion of facilities is concerned, I mention the example of the project at the St. Lucia Lake estuary which has been mentioned so much recently. It is a facility which is coming to grief on account of a lack of systematic action by the responsible provincial authorities. I mention further the lack of first-rate hotels in Zululand. Now, I realize that this is a matter for private initiative but I want to state the point of view that if tourism is an industry, why cannot promotive bodies similar to the I.D.C. act as promoters of these facilities, promotive bodies which provide capital at low rates of interest so that private initiative can proceed to create these very important facilities for the tourist industry?

Lastly I want to refer to that much-discussed body, i.e. the Natal Parks Board. At present there are already 26 game parks and nature reserves in Natal under the control of the Parks Board, with an alarming surface area of more than 500,000 acres. At the same time it is now being said in jest that as soon as the public discovers a peaceful little resort the Parks Board pounces, declares it to be a nature reserve and keeps the public out. Now it is a fact that, in spite of what the hon. member for South Coast may have to say about it, the only accommodation in the game parks and in the reserves in Natal is being supplied by the Parks Board. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, by way of introduction I should like to air a few thoughts in regard to inland tourism. It is calculated that the inland tourist, the South African in his own country, spends approximately R400,000,000 annually, and that amount is almost exclusively spent on a few specific popular tourist and vacation resorts. In my opinion this amount can, during the course of years, be increased. In the first case, of course, because our population is increasing, but in the second case because there inland tourists can be encouraged to a greater extent, our own people can be encouraged to get to know our own country better, to see more of it and to appreciate it better.

We know that overseas trips and tours have almost become a kind of status symbol to many of our people. We readily undertake trips to Europe, to our countries of origin and to the major civilized countries. Our people readily undertake trips to the U.S.A., to South America, to the East and to Japan. Many of those people who have perhaps travelled overseas two, three or even four times have not yet even seen the most interesting sights in our own country. I want to mention one example. I think for example of the wealth of flowers in Namaqualand, I think of the Aughrabies Waterfalls where the Orange River plunges down from a dizzy height. How many of our people who have often toured overseas have seen these sights? It is a pity that countries abroad always have such a wonderful power of attraction for many people and that our own country has less appeal. I also think it is essential that our tourist expenditure, particularly on inland tourism in South Africa, should be spread more evenly and that more vacation and tourist resorts should be developed so that our tourists can be drawn away from the few extremely popular resorts. I think that even more can be done to make facilities available at various lesser-known resorts. Of course this can also be done by improving our roads, as some hon. members have already said.

Our inland tourist must be taught, he must actually be trained to know that when he wants to undertake a long journey his thoughts should not always turn to beaches in our country with their crowded hotels, with their crowded boarding houses, with their crowded camping places and with their crowded places of entertainment. Very often it is just a habit. On the other hand people do so just because other people also do so. It is very essential that our people discover a greater variety of tourist fields. I think we should introduce this catch phrase for tourism: “Get to know your own first before you explore the unknown.”

That, of course, also entails that we shall keep more currency in our country which our people will have at their disposal. We appreciate the enthusiasm displayed by the Department of Tourism in having begun its major inland programme by classifying the provinces into tourist regions. We believe that this will have many good results in the future.

Pursuant to this matter, I should like to ask the Department and the relevant hon. Minister that the Department should use its influence or should otherwise, directly or indirectly, enter the fray against the atrocious pollution of our country’s natural beauty along the roads by irresponsible travellers, campers and even picnickers. The hon. member for Benoni spoke about unsightly structures next to our roads. I want to refer to the unsightliness and the repulsiveness caused by so many papers, newspapers, beer cans, bottles, peels and the imperishable plastic bags left lying around, even next to our railway lines. It is really a disfiguration of our beautiful scenery. Even at the parking places where trees have been planted and where bins have been supplied we still find that people leave without throwing their peels and other rubbish into those bins. There are other places where more bins can be introduced, and it is essential that this be done. One does not expect anything like that of a well-educated person with a love for the beauty of our countryside and with respect for another person’s property. We know what the background to this negligence is. We know what the background to this kind of untidiness is. It is because we have Black labour and because there is always somebody to come after us and clean up.

I know that the situation in the Kruger National Park has improved considerably after appeals were made to tourists to keep the game reserve clean and since paperbags were, for example, supplied to them at the gates in which to throw peels, etc. That appeal has had quite a positive effect. You, Sir, and the Department will say that we should begin with training the children. That is all good and well. The schools are doing much in that regard. But I want to tell you, Sir, that many parents actually need training more than the children do. We know that in some parts of the world there are heavy penalties for people who throw rubbish onto and alongside the road. In some American States I think there are even fines for persons doing that.

The primary purpose of overseas tourism is, of course, to obtain revenue from the tourist industry and earn currency, and in that regard we know that there are very few countries in the world which are a patch on South Africa when it comes to offering sights for tourists to see. In the second place I should like to see as the secondary purpose of tourism the stimulation of goodwill. Overseas tourism can contribute towards a better understanding and greater goodwill towards the Republic, its people and its problems.

In conclusion I want to say that in this regard I should also like to associate myself with what the hon. member for South Coast said a moment ago, namely that there should be trained guides to accompany the people so that when the tourists return they will also have a knowledge not only of our country and its sights but also of its history, its geography and its problems. They can in this capacity act in a subtle way as ambassadors for our case. I think the training of these people should take place at technical colleges or even at universities. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether his Department is thinking in that direction. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, I must agree with the hon. member for Koedoespoort that we should not disregard the importance of our local population as potential tourists within our own country. I think it is a field which we have not exploited nearly enough.

Before going further I want to turn to the speech by the hon. member for Zululand and say that I was deeply disappointed to hear the bitter and I believe completely unreasonable attack made by the hon. member on the Natal Parks Board.

You have not heard half of what will be said against it.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister as the Minister responsible for tourism—I do not want to waste my time on the dark recesses of this House—to repudiate the condemnation of a body dedicated to the preservation of the flora and fauna of South Africa, and to making them available to the people not only of this country but of the whole world. The exact thing for which the hon. member for Koedoespoort so rightly pleaded is being done in Natal. In these many small resorts there are delightful facilities unspoiled by the mass inflow of people who spoil the whole object and intention of a nature reserve. If you try to book in any Natal park, you have to book months ahead. Such is its popularity. To say, therefore, that the Natal Parks Board is chasing people away is ridiculous. As a matter of fact, it cannot handle the people wanting to go there. And they want to go there because of the magnificent settings and the natural atmosphere which are being preserved. I believe that the Natal Parks Board has set an example for the whole of South Africa.

For its exclusiveness.

This is the small pettiness of a person who has not got to where he wanted to get, and who cannot help poking his little nose into something which is too big to be involved in petty party politics. The hon. member is accusing the Natal Parks Board of exclusiveness. But it is not exclusiveness; it is attention to the real interests of South Africa and to the tourist industry as a whole.

There is another aspect of tourism with which I should like to deal, namely matters in connection with the Hotels Board. Firstly, I should like to say that I believe the Minister made an excellent choice in the appointment of Dr. Wiehahn as chairman of that board. Dr. Wiehahn is a person who is dedicated to the task which he has accepted. I believe the board has picked an able young man as their director. This board has been functioning now for some time and therefore I should like the hon. the Minister to give us a progress report in respect of this field of his control. As the hon. member for Orange Grove stated, the Minister should by to-day have received the annual report of that body and ought therefore to be in a position to give us further information.

I should now like to deal with two matters of policy upon which the board has made recommendations to the Minister. The first of these matters is the question of dual control of the hotel industry. The Minister is aware of the fact that the Hotels Board feels and has expressed the view very strongly that this dual control is unhealthy, undesirable and that it should be eliminated. I have here a speech recently made by the chairman of the Hotels Board in which he said—

He concludes by saying that be hones that there will be unified control in future. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that I think the time has come for him to indicate clearly to the industry that he is prepared to take steps at Government level to get all hotel affairs, including licensing and particularly inspectors, brought under the control of one body.

The other matter is a matter of far greater urgency and of equal seriousness. This relates to the assistance, out of funds voted by this Parliament, to hotels in order to enable them to classify. In May the chairman of the Hotels Board said the following—

Tough words, Mr. Chairman, from a Minister:

“That is how it is and that is how it is going to stay”. This Parliament voted funds for the purpose of assisting hotels and I want to put it to the Minister that the intention of Parliament was to assist existing as well as future hotels. Yet the Minister is now hiding behind a technicality by saying that an hotel which is not yet classified is not in terms of the Hotels Act an hotel and as such cannot be helped. It cannot be assisted because it has not yet been registered by a body which has not yet started registrations. I put it to the Ministe" that that is a breach of faith with this House. On 11th June last year (see Hansard, col. 7902) the Minister was asked by Mr. Durrant, the then hon. member for Turffontein—

It was then that we discussed the advance of R1,000,000 to the Hotels Board. To that the Minister replied (col. 7903)—

More than a year ago the Minister asked this House to vote R1,000,000 and as a Minister of the State he told this House that he wanted that money in order to give immediate assistance to hotels. But now he has found a loophole in the Act and now he is hiding behind that loophole. Therefore I charge him with having committed a breach of faith with this House and with the hotel industry. It is quite by accident that the legal advisers discovered that until an hotel had been registered by the board technically it was not an hotel. Immediately the board discovered this they came to the Minister, pointed out that it was a mistake and asked for it to be put right. The Minister, however, has dug his heels in and is stubbornly refusing to do so. I say that is in conflict with the spirit in which and the intention with which this House voted R1,000,000 last year …

And a further R1,000,000 this year.

That is correct, but I am now referring specifically to the R1,000,000 voted last year, money which has been lying idle now for a year. Why, Mr. Chairman? Is it so that the Minister can help certain selected new hotels who are opening up in competition with the existing hotels? I welcome them, of course, but I do not welcome the fact that he withholds money voted by this Parliament, moneys voted with the intention of helping the South African hotel industry. I do not welcome the fact that he withholds this money from the existing hotelier, the hotelier who has for years given service to the public. I believe that if we have to improve the standards of our hotels in South Africa then those hotels that have the first claim on that money are those who require it to raise their standards as they, in fact, wish to do.

Mr. Chairman, one thing has become very clear to me in this House and that is that the hon. Opposition wants to appropriate to itself the right to criticize indiscriminately, but when they themselves are criticized they are very allergic to that and their hair stands on end. If I have to take any notice of what the hon. member for Durban (Point) has said here, then I must reply to it. Here I should like to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Zululand who put forward a well thought-out scheme here and who also expressed criticism of the Natal Parks Board. I should like to associate myself with that. I am one of those Transvalers who have since 1941 already been going to the North Coast of Natal to spend my holidays there. In fact, hundreds of other people also go there. But do you know, Mr. Chairman, that we have, since that time already, been complaining to the local superintendent about the conditions prevailing there. We have asked him to get in touch with the Natal Parks Board and to bring the conditions under which people have to camp out there to their attention. The arrangements obtaining there are amongst the most primitive which I have ever come across in the area of any parks board.

It is a nature reserve and not an hotel.

It is my turn to speak now, Mr. Chairman. I do not know whether the hon. member for Durban (Point) thinks that we who are on holiday there do not need to bath. But now people have to make use of an ordinary little zinc bath when they want to wash themselves. In fact, ablution facilities for the people there have not even been introduced. If it had not been brought to the attention of the Natal Parks Board one would still be able to say that they were not aware of it. The hon. member for Durban (Point) spoke about the R1,000,000 which was requested by the Department of Tourism and which had not been used. But I want to ask him how many millions of rand have been wasted on the St. Lucia Bay estuary without anything having been accomplished there. It is a beautiful nature reserve and, as such, is probably unique in the world. Yet its existence is being threatened because the Parks Board of Natal does not have proper planning for the area there. For example, they do not make any use of science in the full sense of the word. I know that the C.S.I.R. has already instituted an investigation there and suggested a plan for solving the problems there. Yet the Natal Parks Board is doing absolutely nothing about that.

The Natal Parks Board has nothing to do with this matter.

Never mind, I know a great deal about the Natal Parks Board. In any case. I do not want to say anything further about this topic except to associate myself once more with what was said by the hon. member for Zululand, namely that we are entitled to request the hon. the Minister to intervene there and to give his attention to matters there because we are of the opinion— and it is a sound opinion—that the Natal Parks Board is not capable of doing justice to that beautiful holiday resort of our country.

Much has already been said about tourism and all the sights in our country, and all the possibilities of our country in this respect have already been emphasized. Nevertheless, there are a few words which I want to say in this regard. I have here before me the report of the Tourist Corporation, to which other hon. speakers have already referred. All that I want to say in this connection is that I think that tourism will become one of the major sources of revenue in the Republic. In addition it is going to be one of the cheapest forms of investment in our country. That is why we are asking the hon. the Minister to do everything in his power to promote tourism. Mention was made here of the various boards there are and we realize the problems with which the hon. the Minister has to deal. As Minister he cannot interfere with the powers of the provinces just like that, or break down what they have built up over the years. What we are asking him to do is to bring into being a co-ordinating body so that the activities of all these various boards can be co-ordinated and so that everything possible can be done for tourism in our country. Our people are beginning to tire of going to Europe and to other old historic countries in order to go and look at old ruins or high church towers there. We in South Africa have equally beautiful church towers and we not only have ruins, we also have the most beautiful natural scenes, scenes which are unique of their kind in the world. Let me start with the mother city of our Republic, Cape Town. Where is one going to find a more beautiful harbour city than Cape Town? So I can travel the length and breadth of our country with its beautiful plains, its heath, its flowers and its scenic beauty. In the Transvaal we have the Blyde River Poort Scheme, one of the most beautiful in our country. Recently I had people there from America, people who knew the Grand Canyon in America. They told me, however, that this Blyde River Poort Scheme compared very favourably with the Grand Canyon, although it is on a slightly smaller scale. They told me that it was worth the trouble of riding thousands of miles to be able to see it.

We can see wonderful things in South Africa. We can see for example prehistoric plants which are still growing, such as those at Mudjadje, something which is to be found nowhere else in the world. And, do you know what, Sir, you can even see a prehistoric party. In the Free State, for example, the United Party members of the Free State have, under the Wild Life Ordinance of the province, been declared royal game because there are not really very many of them left to see. Now we are able to tell the tourist to come and have a look and see what the remains of a political party looks like.

But I want to conclude by once more making an appeal to the hon. the Minister to do everything in his power, with everybody’s support, to promote tourism in our country.

Mr. Chairman, I thought we should in this debate do something to promote the tourist industry. However, it seems to me that this debate has offered to certain hon. members the opportunity for political reasons to attack the Natal Parks Board and the administration of that board in my province, i.e. Natal. Mr. Chairman, it is a poor bird that fouls its own nest and hon. members coming from Natal should remember this when attacking it in that unfair manner. They should, at least, show some regard for it. But I want to get rid of the hon. member for Zululand. I know all about his neurosis and it is a great pity that he should display it here in Parliament. At that I think we should leave it. He will go on, I suppose, as long as he is in Parliament, with his whining complaints which he is used to here and elsewhere. If he has any complaints, the proper way to rectify them is to bring them to the appropriate authority. But he has never yet voiced any complaints with the appropriate authority. He need not worry about going to the Administrator, because the Administrator belongs to his party. He can go and talk to him as an individual and he can go and make his complaints to him as the Administrator. He is the head of the province and in his hands lies the whole future of the Natal Parks Board because it was established by a provincial ordinance.

The Chairman of the Parks Board has never yet carried out a promise.

I was saying that the hon. member for Zululand could go to the Administrator as a person. What does the hon. member for Umhlatuzana think is the comeback to that? What he did was to accuse a member of the executive committee of Natal for never having kept a promise. But what has that got to do with the right of the hon. member for Zululand to go to the Administrator personally?

EXCO will veto it.

I want to ask the hon. member for Umhlatuzana whether it is not so that the hon. member for Zululand can go to the Administrator with his complaints?

What does it help if it is vetoed by EXCO?

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member wants to know of what help it will be to go to a Nationalist Administrator. Here you have a Nationalist Member of Parliament whom I have advised to go to see the Nationalist Administrator and the hon. member for Umhlatuzana says it will not help.

Because it is a United Party EXCO.

Let me now come to the hon. member for Lydenburg. This hon. member was full of pre-history, ex parte again. He did not say of which nature or game reserve he had the unfortunate experience to which he referred.

False Bay.

But the hon. member must know that there is only a camping site. As such there are no other facilities than water and firewood. What is more, we get there more than 1,000 campers per season, and they want nothing except that low charge for a camping site. The hon. member must know that. Why then is he complaining in Parliament about there being no baths there, leaving people to think that this is an area where there are camps similar to those in the Kruger National Park? The hon. member goes to an ordinary camping site to which only campers go but then he comes here and presents a picture of there being something missing there. He then went on to complain about the reclamation committee and about the amount which has been spent at St. Lucia Bay. But if the hon. member does not know it, he ought to know that this has nothing to do with the Natal Parks Board. It has nothing whatever to do with the Parks Board. The reclamation committee has nothing to do with the Parks Board. The funds are voted by the Provincial Council for a specific purpose on behalf of another body with which the Natal Parks Board has nothing at all to do. It is not even represented on it. It merely happens that for the sake of the conservation of national resources the Parks Board is interested in St. Lucia. But the reclamation work at St. Lucia is a totally different thing altogether. But the hon. member comes along and in flat defiance of the fact presents a picture of the Parks Board year after year spending money fruitlessly. If the hon. member has any suggestions to make, I suggest he go and see the Administrator who is the head of the organization dealing with these matters.

Here may I say to both these hon. gentlemen who have been complaining that in the case of Natal the Administrator in person took over the portfolio of tourism. For the first time ever in the history of Natal the Administrator has taken up a portfolio of his own. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether there was any weakening or strengthening of the organization and their ties in so far as tourism is concerned between him as Minister and the Administrator. Because the Administrator in person took over that portfolio. It is obvious that the hon. member for Umhlatuzana does not know his brief because this is a matter which, therefore, has nothing to do with the executive committee. Tourism as a portfolio has been taken over by the Administrator in person.

A member of EXCO is chairman of the Parks Board.

The Administrator, and not a member of the executive committee, has taken over the portfolio of tourism. That is why I pointed out that the Parks Board in Natal is a conservation body. It is there to conserve the fauna and flora of South Africa. That is our job.

Is it a policy of the Natal Parks Board to welcome tourists in their game and natural reserves?

Yes, of course. Whether they come as visitors from some part of the Republic, or whether from other territories in Africa or whether they come from overseas, they are welcome.

Are facilities provided for them?

Facilities are provided and, naturally, we expect tourists and visitors to abide by those simple rules set up to prevent them defiling and destroying but to ensure that they maintain and preserve. I want to say this with the greatest emphasis because we find that some people coming there, people who think that because they are in a game reserve in a camp under those circumstances, they can completely run wild and amuck, all civilized considerations being thrown out through the window. That is why we have got to say to them that they should not behave like that, that they should behave like civilized beings. Because they are in a game reserve it does not mean that they can simply run wild. There have been cases where we had to deal with some of these people very strongly. And, what is more, they were not people coming from overseas. You see, Sir, there is a standard of behaviour even in game and nature reserves.

The Parks Board as I have said is primarily a conservation body and where it can serve wild life by conserving it in our nature and game reserves we welcome everybody who wants to come and have a look at that which is being conserved. But we are not a tourist body. We spend a tremendous amount of money on tourism and on providing for tourists. That is why I have asked the hon. the Minister what the ties are between him as an individual and the Administrator as an individual? If these ties are strong and if they are being built up then in so far as tourism in Natal is concerned we are going to be on the best of terms with our Administrator and we are going to find tourism built up under the aegis of the Administrator. That is how we want things. We do not want to be a tourist corporation. We do not want any tourist functions in the Parks Board. We should like to see the Department of Tourism under the Administrator being strengthened for the benefit of everybody, so that the people can come and have a look at that part of the fauna and flora of South Africa which we are protecting in Natal in the interests of our own country and in the interests of posterity.

I do not want to react to what the hon. member for South Coast has said, except to say that I also go to the Natal coast for my holiday every year, and what is more I do so at Margate, which is in his constituency. Well, I must say that recently I have been enjoying it tremendously because the majority of the holiday-makers there are Nationalists. I want to congratulate the United Party on the fact that they are also, albeit slowly, beginning to see something good and something fine in our country. We can only forgive them the criticism which they level here. Rome was not built in a day and I do not believe that the United Party will be reformed in a day either. However, there are good and promising signs that they are still going to become good South Africans.

The fact that South Africa enjoys an average of six to eight hours sunshine per day entails that its greatest power of attraction lies in its natural beauty. To be able to see and enjoy it makes a lasting impression on the tourist, whether it is somebody from abroad or whether it is one of our own people. However, I want to plead here for certain little matters to be rectified. In the first place I want to plead for the putting up of signposts, or as we usually call them in Afrikaans, “predikante”, boards which clearly indicate to the tourist the place which every road will lead them to. In this regard I want to congratulate the Provincial Administration of the Cape on what they have already achieved in this connection. It is really a pleasure for the stranger to travel about in the Cape Peninsula because he can easily find his way with the aid of the clear indications which have been put up everywhere. May it serve as example for our other provinces. One ought to be warned in time of side-roads. Signposts in South Africa are particularly important because our towns are situated so far apart. The hon. member for Benoni pleaded here for signposts or an indication of some kind in respect of places of historical interest. I think that that is something which ought also to be done at certain scenic attractions. Driving through the Cape here we find in the Paarl area the Drakenstein Mountains, and there is no indication whatsoever for the stranger as to what mountain range it is. There are many other scenic attractions where the same thing applies. One drives past in ignorance. In this respect, apart from the few Nationalist M.P.s, something good has in fact come out of Natal. I think Natal has set us a fine example by indicating the names of their rivers and streams on signposts, even if there is one with the name of Onderbroekspruit.

Another matter which I should like to raise a plea for is one in regard to the entrances to our towns. The first impression one gets of a town is usually a lasting one, and unfortunately I have to admit that the entrances to our towns are usually indicated these days by a pile of wrecked cars. Just think what a contribution the planting of a few trees there would be towards making the entrance to the town attractive.

Then I just want to raise another little matter. Can local authorities not establish at some or other central place a tourist bureau, even if the people working there are not employed on a full-time basis? Can they not open offices where one can at least obtain a guide indicating the sights which are to be seen? I think that every town, from the largest to the smallest, has some scenic attraction or other of which the inhabitants of the town are proud and would like to show to tourists.

Then there is another little matter which I should just like to touch upon briefly. I have often seen it happen that when trains pull up at stations people thrust their heads out of the windows and one then hears an old lady or gentleman asking: “Where are we now?” There are not enough name-boards on stations which indicate the name of the place. There are in fact name-boards at the entrance to the station, but there are no name-boards where the train itself stops. It would perhaps be a good thing to introduce name-boards where travellers can immediately see what the name of the place is. Mr. Chairman, it puts me in mind of the tourist who came here from Holland and who began his tour of the country here in Cape Town. When he arrived up in the Transvaal and was asked what he thought of the country his reply was: “I think it is a beautiful country, but I do have one thing against South Africa and that is that all the stations have the same name.” He was then asked what he meant and his reply was: “All stations are Amadota and Abafazi.”

Mr. Chairman, it is a great task but I nevertheless think that we ought to show tourists how beautiful South Africa is and that we ought to make things as comfortable as possible for the tourist.

I want to try to deal with some of the main features which have been raised in the discussion in Committee. I would like to start with the hon. member for South Coast and his reference to provincial authority. He wants, to know whether there is any loosening of the bonds between the Department of Tourism and the provinces as far as tourism is concerned and what stimulus the Department is giving. The hon. member will appreciate, possibly unlike the hon. member for Orange Grove, that I explained to the House right from the beginning that the whole idea of this Department was to decentralize, to decentralize through the provinces, and to endeavour in that way to make use of the assistance of the provinces in all tourist directions. Sir, this Department was to be a co-ordinating Department. I do not want to go right through the terms of reference of the Department, but the whole idea was to endeavour to work through the already established bodies like Satour, the local authorities and the provincial authorities. Therefore when the hon. member for Orange Grove sneers at the fact that this Department is so small I would say to him that he should speak to the hon. member for South Coast who will appreciate why it was never the intention to build this Department into an empire. I have heard a great deal in this House about Parkinson’s law, and now the hon. member for Orange Grove makes a big song and dance about this aimless Minister who does not allow his Department to grow into an empire. I know that the hon. member for South Coast is very interested in tourism, and I want to explain to him one of the difficulties that the Department of Tourism experienced when it delegated certain powers to the provinces. I was quite happy with the idea that they should establish regional committees and that they should adopt whatever system they wanted in order to develop tourism to the maximum. One of the powers that we delegated to them was the power to promote tourism through brochures. I said to them that we would be quite happy to subsidize them to the extent of 50 per cent in respect of brochures issued by their regional committees. I then came up against the fiscal problem, which the hon. member for South Coast, as a former Administrator, will appreciate. I found that we were not in a position to give the provinces a subsidy of 50 per cent on brochures because they already received a subsidy of approximately 50 per cent from the Central Government. The hon. member for Orange Grove has tried to suggest that in my aimlessness I give the provinces authority one minute and then take it away again the next minute.

[Inaudible.]

Let the hon. member keep quiet; I am addressing the Committee. Sir, that hon. member and hon. members on the other side consider that they have every right to criticize and to say what they like. We on this side sit here quietly and take it, but as soon as one speaks to them they object. Sir, I know that hon. member. He says to me that he has given me a trial period of three years and that for three years he has been lenient, I want to say to him that I do not want his leniency. He knows what to do with his leniency. That is how I feel about the hon. member. However, let me come back to the hon. member for South Coast. We came up against this problem which I have already mentioned. It is quite wrong for the hon. member to say that I answered a question of his unfairly when I had already arranged to take away the authority which the provinces had had previously. In point of fact I could have answered his question with a complete negative at that stage; I think he mentioned the date as the 8th of August. But instead I wanted to indicate to him that there were discussions going on. I gave him that information although the correct reply to his question could have been in the negative. I want to read out to the hon. member for South Coast the contents of a letter which I sent a few days ago to the Administrators of the provinces. This will show the hon. member exactly how I intend to work with the provinces. I have always maintained that decentralization of tourism is essential. I even say to the provinces that they must also decentralize, and they are doing this through these regional committees. Because of this problem that I have mentioned earlier, we as a Department had in fact had to go out into the regional field but we co-operation fully with the provincial administrations in all cases. Sir, I do not want to read the whole letter, but this is what I wanted to convey—

Take Natal, for instance. We are going to open a regional office in Durban; we are also going to open one in Eshowe. For what purpose, For the very purpose of promoting and developing tourism in South Africa as a whole, and surely that is what we want to do in this country. I quite agree with hon. members when they say that tourism is a big factor in the economy of a country. I would say that in South Africa its value is approximately R70,000,000 to R80,000,000 a year. Of course, that is not the net profit. Basically the principle is that this Department must help to promote tourism, but what I do not want to do is to build up a centralized Department with a large staff of people spending money that cannot be justified by the returns from Tourism that one gets in South Africa. Sir, that is my reply on that point to the hon. member for South Coast. I think we were on less satisfactory grounds from my point of view when the hon. member talked about giving special financial facilities to tourists from overseas. I do not regard it as a healthy state of affairs to give special exchange facilities to tourists from overseas. I think it would lead to an undesirable state of affairs. I also do not believe that petrol should be made available to tourists at lower prices than those paid by the general public. I do not think that one should cater for tourists by giving them discounts on exchange or by reducing the price of petrol to them. I want to encourage tourists to come to this country and I will do everything I can in that direction, but I do not want to encourage tourism along those unsound lines.

I do not want to take up too much of the Committee’s time but I would like to deal with another matter raised by the hon. member for Durban (Point). However robust the hon. member for Durban (Point) is in levelling criticism, I can assure him that I do not mind it in the least when it comes from him. It is a different matter when it comes from the hon. member for Orange Grove. I feel that the hon. member for Durban (Point) put forward his criticism with a sense of fairness. His arguments may be wrong, but he does not make the sort of unpleasant remarks which come from the hon. member for Orange Grove. The hon. member for Durban (Point) said that I was hiding behind a technicality in the Hotel Act. He said that I had been guilty of a breach of faith. I want to give the Committee the whole position.

The Hotel Board has funds at its disposal which it can use for the purpose of improving the standards not only of new hotels—the hon. member seemed to indicate that that was what I wanted to do—but to improve the standards of existing hotels. The National Liquor Board lay down certain conditions under which it will give liquor licences to hotels as from a certain date in 1968. It said that unless the hotel concerned was up to this particular standard, it could not get what amounted to a full liquor licence. It classifies the licences into different groups. I was then approached by the liquor hotels which are licensed to-day. They pointed out to me that under the conditions laid down by the National Liquor Board they will now have to make certain alterations to their hotels otherwise their liquor licences—the privilege of a liquor licence—may be endangered.

Their hotel liquor licence.

Yes, I am talking only about hotels, because the Hotel Board only handles hotels; it does not handle bottle stores. The point is that they came to me and said: “Will you lend money to these hotels so that they can make improvements so as to qualify for a liquor licence?” My reply was that that sort of loan was never the intention of the Hotel Commission or of this House or my own attitude. When the hon. member says that I have been guilty of a breach of faith, that is absolute nonsense. A hotel liquor licence has always been regarded as a privilege, and therefore it is the responsibility of the hotel, if it wants to get a particular liquor licence, to build up its standards so as to qualify for classification by the National Liquor Board. Under the Hotel Act I automatically have to register any hotel which is classified by the National Liquor Board. Once I have registered and graded a hotel, that hotel can definitely go to the Hotel Board and say: “I have been graded as a one-star hotel; I want to borrow R20.000 to improve my hotel so that it can qualify for a two-or three-star grading.” But the money allocated to the Hotel Board was never intended to allow a liquor hotel to qualify for a liquor licence.

What is the difference between assisting an existing hotel to qualify for classification and assisting a classified hotel to get higher privileges which automatically bring about better liquor privileges, longer hours, women’s bars and so on? Surely the principle is precisely the same.

I disagree; I say that the principle is not the same. In the one case the Hotel Board is concerned and I am concerned with improving the standards of hotels whether they are liquor or non-liquor hotels. The National Liquor Board lays down a set of rules in terms of which hotels can qualify for a liquor licence. That is a responsibility which a hotelier must meet if he wants a particular hotel liquor licence.

If it wants to be a hotel at all.

To me the position is perfectly clear.

But please deal with my point.

I do not get the hon. member’s point. The hon. member can put it to me again in a minute. What I want to know is whether the State must allow the money of the Hotel Board to be used for the purpose of granting loans to hotels, which are not registered, in order that they may qualify for a liquor licence. The whole emphasis in the report of the Hotel Commission was on the question of improving the standard of hotels, on the question of catering and the question of service. The liquor side of it was not the main feature of the Hotel Commission’s inquiry. That was the line I took, and the hon. member now seems to think that I am hiding behind a technical point. Perhaps the hon. member would like to put his question now.

My point is that unless a hotel can qualify for classification it ceases to be a hotel. The requirements for classification are in respect of bedroom sizes, bathrooms and public rooms, not the bar or the liquor facilities. Those are the requirements in respect of accommodation. The liquor licence is incidental. Surely it is a justifiable objective to assist them to improve their standard of accommodation.

The incentive for a hotel to be classified by the Liquor Board is the privilege of getting a liquor licence. The incentive I am prepared to give is to improve the standard of the hotel once the hotel is registered with me.

That is not what you said; I quoted your words.

The hon. member is now trying to regard an answer to a question as a statement of policy. I was quite definite on this matter with the Hotel Board itself and with the hoteliers. If the money of the Hotel Board is to be used to enable people to qualify to get liquor licences, where are you going to get funds to improve the standard of hotels in South Africa? That is the basis on which I accepted this situation. The hon. member says that this is a technical point which was left out of the Act. I did not regard it as such. This is the basis on which I worked and it is up to the Committee to decide whether this policy that I and my Department have adopted is the right one or whether the policy suggested by the hon. member for Durban Point is the one which we should adopt as far as the Hotel Board is concerned. I have no doubts about my own particular view.

Do the Transkeian hotels fall under the Hotel Board?

I think the Transkeian hotels fall under the Transkeian Proclamation as far as liquor is concerned.

I am talking about the Hotel Board; I am not talking about the issuing of liquor licences.

The Hotel Board does not have control over hotels in the Transkei itself.

It is not a tourist centre.

No, it has nothing to do with that. Similarly the Hotel Board has no control over hotels in Basutoland, for example. The Transkei has its own Proclamation and hotels in the Transkei, as far as I can gather, fall under the Transkei Proclamation. The hon. member has asked me a question to which I cannot give him a reply off-hand. I am prepared to go into the position and give him a full answer, but as far as I know there are certain areas which fall outside the Transkei. Port St. John’s, for example, is outside the Transkei, but in terms of the liquor proclamation it was allowed to choose whether it wanted to fall under the liquor laws proclaimed in the Transkei or under the South African liquor laws, and it chose to fall under the Transkei laws. The Hotel Act does not apply to the Transkei. Hotels in Umtata do not fall under the Hotel Act of South Africa. I want to say to the hon. member that if he has a legal point of that nature to put to me and he approaches me either personally in the Lobby or by letter I will let him know the whole position in regard to the particular problem that he is trying to investigate, but I do not think I can do it across the floor of the House by way of question and answer; I do not think that is very satisfactory.

How right you are! [Laughter.]

I do not know why hon. members opposite seem to think that they can always get a laugh out of that sort of thing.

You are always a good bet for a laugh.

Sir, after what the hon. member for North Rand said about South Africa, I think he is the man who is good for a laugh. I have known him for many years and I was surprised when I heard what he had said about outside force being used against South Africa.

Sir, that is my reply to the hon. members as far as the National Liquor Board is concerned and the question of the classification of hotels.

What about the question of dual control?

As far as the question of dual control is concerned, the hon. member asked me to indicate whether I would take this matter to the Cabinet and advocate that there should be central control. I am not prepared to do so. I am prepared to accept the situation as it is, that is to say, that liquor licences should fall under the Liquor Act and under the National Liquor Board and that the question of grading of hotels should fall under the Hotel Board and thus indirectly under the Department of Tourism. I am satisfied that that situation is the best. I want to see an improvement in the standard of hotels in this country and I do not want to be smothered completely by all the liquor problems with which I would be saddled if the control was exercised entirely by the Department of Tourism and the Hotel Board.

The hon. member was good enough to say that he felt that it was an excellent choice to appoint Dr. Wiehahn as chairman of the Hotel Board. I appreciate his remarks. I am satisfied that the Hotel Board is a very able body. I think it consists of people who are fully qualified to deal with this matter. I would say that what the hon. member said about Dr. Wiehahn also applies to the various members of the Hotel Board. As the hon. member knows, there are hotel representatives on the board; there is a liquor hotel man, there is a non-liquor hotel man, there is the chairman of the National Liquor Board and the chairman of the Board of Trade.

It is a pity that you have no women on it.

The hon. member for Wynberg says that it is a pity there are no women on it. I have been approached by many women’s organizations to appoint a woman to the board, but on what basis? The women recommended was either a travel agent or a person who had no knowledge whatsoever of the hotel industry. I am quite satisfied that the people who have been appointed are the people best qualified to serve the industry. If, for instance, the Federated Hotel Association included a woman in the panel of names submitted to me, I would be prepared to consider the matter on its merits, but no woman must think that she is going on to the Hotel Board just because she is a woman.

I did not ask for that.

If they are so good why don’t you listen to them?

Sir, I always understood that a woman must not lie so good …

No, I am talking about the board.

The fact that it is a good board does not mean that I have to give effect to everything that the Board suggests. In actual fact as far as the point raised by the hon. member is concerned, the Board did not submit a unanimous recommendation to me. There were certain members of the Board who agreed with my point of view.

One of them.

Well, then the hon. member knows more than I do.

I certainly hope he does.

Whatever the number was, the point is that I asked the Board whether their recommendation was a unanimous one and they told me that it was not a unanimous recommendation.

May I ask whether the dissenting members were Government employees or not?

No, they were not. As far as I was given to understand there was also a person who served on the Board but not as an official of any Government department. [Interjections.] I wanted to refer to the hon. member for Orange Grove, and as I have said I am not really impressed by all this talk of leniency for three years that he has granted me. It makes no impression on me. The hon. member just carries on, as we all know only he is able to carry on and of which the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs has had so much experience. Sir, I would say this to the hon. member. He talked about the figures of tourism and the manner in which they have gone down during the year. I know that there has been a number of difficulties. A large number of tourists to South Africa come from Rhodesia. At one stage the curve started going down. We expected that. But I should like to point out to the hon. member that the curve, as far as overseas tourists are concerned, has always gone up. The matter as it affects Rhodesia was purely temporary. And that is the difference. Let me give figures to hon. members, the latest figures I have for the period 1st January to July, 1966, compared with the period January to July 1965. Even in so far as Rhodesia is concerned that figure has gone up by nearly 4,000. In the whole of the African area which includes, Zambia, Malawi, Kenya, etc., the total figure has gone up in respect of those months by 1,500. The increase in tourists from Europe is more than 5,000. That is only in respect of the months from January to July. The overall increase is something like 8,000. Compared with countries like Italy and Spain I do not want to pretend that our figures are momentous.

Four per cent.

But the hon. member was complaining that everything was going backwards. Now he admits that it represents a 4 per cent increase. I am very happy with this increase. As a matter of fact the overseas increase is probably more in the region of 10 to 15 per cent. That is the curve that we want to see. We want to see that as far as we in South Africa are concerned, that we can attract more and more people from overseas. Now, I would say that one of the big factors that prevented this is their particularly high fares. The time factor with jet flights is over. But these high fares are even now being handled. It was—I will not say through the prodding of the Department of Tourism only—but through the efforts of all concerned that IATA was approached to reduce the fares from Europe to South Africa.

You do not know the result yet?

No, the results are not out. The argument was that there was no justification for making fares more attractive for people to go overseas than for overseas people to come to South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to reply more fully to the hon. members for Benoni and Koedoespoort. The hon. member for Koedoespoort raised the matter of South Africans remaining in South Africa instead of going overseas. I can assure the hon. member that whereas we may gain to the extent of R70,000,000 to R80,000,000 per year from overseas tourists, our people going overseas spend much more than that. And obviously this is something which we could tackle immediately to save foreign exchange. I think generally as far as the overseas tourists are concerned, that one of our big problems has been a certain bottlenecking in accommodation. In the Cape during the season all the accommodation is taken up. In fact cancellations had to be made because of the fact that accommodation was not available. And then during the winter period there is plenty of accommodation available. When we have winter in South Africa overseas people do not want to travel because they have summer over there. These are the sort of problems that tourism has to contend with. To the hon. member for Benoni I should like to say that I have noted what he said and that the Department will take up the matter of guide books. Also we shall see to it that places are more attractively signposted in so far as tourists are concerned. In so far as the hon. member for Zululand is concerned I did not want to involve myself in what apparently was a provincial difference of opinion, other than to say to the hon. member for South Coast that I thought he chose the wrong word when he said “my” province. The hon. members over there are entitled to say our province and it is not just “my” province. [Interjections.] And therefore I would say to him that there are points of view that cannot just be dismissed and I hope that he will regard the Natal province in the light that it belongs to a lot of people.

I talked about “my” province because I come from Natal. I do not come from the Transvaal. I talked about “my” country. The Minister must grow up.

The hon. member for Boksburg talked about the pleasure of driving on the roads here in the Cape and I quite agree with him. I realize of course that the matter of road signs is in the hands of the Provincial Council whereas that of the national roads is controlled by the Transport Commission. Undoubtedly as we make progress from year to year South Africa is becoming more tourist attractive, is becoming more tourist conscious and I have no doubt that this development in tourism is not something that just takes place overnight. No man can build a business overnight. It is a matter of plodding away and improving the situation from year to year. And that is where I must say that as far as our provinces are concerned I have always felt that they themselves could play a big part in making this country more attractive to the tourists who come here. And finally, Mr. Chairman, I should like to say that I appreciate and I am very happy to listen to criticism at all times. I am very anxious to find out where one could improve the position, where there is a possibility that the Department and particularly myself may be going wrong in approaching certain problems. I would say that at the present time we are gradually moving ahead and with the Hotel Board, I am sure, the particular bottleneck of accommodation will be improved. But that is not going to take place tomorrow. Many hotels are making improvements all over the country under the present liquor boards requirements I would say that these improvements in years to come will bring great progress to the country as a whole.

Mr. Chairman, I feel that in some regards the reply of the hon. the Minister is disappointing. And I refer particularly to the question of assistance, financial assistance, to hotels.

Hear, hear!

I believe that when the Hotels Act came before the House, in fact nobody realized at the time that it excluded the hotels that could not become registered under the Liquor Board. I do not think that it was realized at the time that that was the position.

Business suspended at 12.45 p.m. and resumed at 2.20 p.m.

Afternoon Sitting

Just before the adjournment I was expressing disappointment at the Minister’s policy in regard to the financial assistance to the hotels which could not qualify for registration. The position is that the Government as such has shown a great deal of interest in the prestige hotels and is willing to finance them to a great extent and to encourage them to establish themselves, and quite rightly, as long as it is not overdone, because I believe the demand for accommodation of that standard is limited. From the point of view of the tourists, the real demand is from the middle-class people who travel. They form the bulk of the tourists in any country. In regard to these hotels that have been excluded, it is just possible that some of them may be so situated that they are really necessary to encourage tourism and if there was no hotel there obviously the Minister would take some steps to see that a new establishment came into existence. I do not know whether any survey has been taken in order to ascertain the necessity for many of these places which are being excluded. I think at least that should be done and I believe it may be in the interest of tourism, because that is the function of the Minister. He is not interested in the hotel as an hotel; he is interested in hotels in relation to tourism in this country. I think at least some sort of survey should be taken to see whether some of these hotels cannot be assisted. It may be that such hotels warrant assistance and should continue to exist. The Department of Tourism, as I see it—the Minister has quite rightly called it a co-ordinating department—is a catalyst that causes others to do things in the interest of tourism. I wonder whether sufficient has been done in that direction. As far as I can see, nothing has been done to ascertain why we are not increasing tourism in this country. Have surveys been made overseas to discover why the tourists are not coming here? The position in this country to-day, according to the last available figures, is that we got 227,000 tourists here in a year, the year ended June, 1965. If you examine the figures you find that nearly 95,000 came from Rhodesia, nearly 31,000 came from Zambia and 31,000 from Mozambique. In other words, the mainstream of tourism to this country in the past has come from our neighbours in Africa, and only about 45,000 came from overseas countries. The real economic value, on which tourism will have to depend basically in the future, is not entirely on the neighbouring territories and people coming from there. In my opinion it is going to depend more and more on people coming from outside, because these figures I have quoted, for various and obvious reasons, are going to diminish. They must of necessity diminish. Some of the people who have come from Zambia and areas further north will to a large extent as the years go by tend to be reduced. Rhodesia will always be a good source of tourism, but we have to increase the number of visitors coming from overseas. I wonder whether we are really doing enough in the way of surveys and inquiries to find out how tourism can be promoted. Is there personal contact with the people who do the tourist business? They are the people who can turn the stream to this country. Probably the larger majority of people who travel are dependent on somebody else for where they go. They go to the travel agents. Are we in touch with those people to find out what their thinking is in relation to tourism in this country?

I was also disappointed when the Minister referred to the fact that he totally discourages any suggestion of tourist facilities. In some of the countries where tourism has become a major industry, that is one of the ways in which they have created their industry. Concessions are made to the tourists. For instance, it is well known to all of us who have travelled on the Continent that because petrol is expensive there you can get a coupon to purchase petrol at a lower rate, which is an attraction to the tourist. In Italy, a few years ago at least, if a couple recently married went there on their honeymoon, all sorts of concessions were made to them, and for a very good reason, because if the marriage of these two people continues happily they are very likely to go again to the country where they spent their honeymoon when anniversaries come around, and that country benefits very materially. I only mention these simple things because they do attract tourists; they are an inducement to the tourist. I regret that the Minister has just turned down providing any travel facilities such as cheaper train fares. I do not know whether it is possible to make air fares cheaper for tourists. It may not be, and there may be difficulties in doing that sort of thing, but bus fares for tourists may be made cheaper and you may be able to attract many more people. It does appear to me that we are missing the tremendous upsurge in tourism that is taking place in the rest of the world. Our rate of increase is not nearly as high as that in regard to tourism in other parts of the world. Some of the countries which have been relatively unknown as tourist countries until recently now attract many tourists, like Spain. I remember going to Spain just a few years ago, when tourism was just beginning to start there, but to-day tourism has become one of the major industries there. In Greece tourism ceased at the end of the war, but they took very positive and definite steps to recreate tourism because it was of such definite value to the country. [Time limit.]

We cannot allow the horn the Minister to get away with the statement he made just before lunch, that it had never been his intention to give financial assistance to existing hotels which were not yet classified. I charged the Minister with a breach of faith, and he said in reply that it was never his intention to help these hotels. It is therefore necessary to place on record that the Minister last year misled this House when he made the clear and unequivocal statement that the R1,000,000 which this House had voted for the hotel industry was to be used immediately to assist existing hotels. I say that the Minister misled the House because the Minister knew at the time he made that statement that no hotel could be registered in the immediate future. He in fact went on to say that the Board was still to be established and would take some time to get working. Therefore the Minister knew, when he said that this money was for the use of existing hotels—and I quote —“So that there will be no delay in the operation of the Board, his money is made available … so it can carry out immediately the very function to which the hon. member has referred”. Then the Minister was not satisfied and went on to define what the function was, “namely, of making certain arrangements with some hotel or other and to advance it money for certain improvements”. Now, the Minister knew perfectly well, or should have known, if he knew anything about his job, that once an hotel was classified it had then effected its improvements and would not need money after that. It wanted the money in order to effect improvements. Once it had gone before the Board and had become classified, and therefore qualified for assistance, what did it want the money for? Therefore the Minister must now tell the House whether he has changed his mind, so that the hotel industry can know that the man who controls their destiny as Minister of Tourism, and therefore as Minister of Hotels, is not prepared to assist existing hotels to classify. Either this is a change of policy, or he must admit that he misled us when he stated in June, 1965, a year ago, that he was going to use this money for immediate assistance to hotels. One or other of those statements is false. Now, which is false? Is it the statement a year ago? Has the Minister now changed his mind, or is it the statement to-day that it was never his intention to assist hotels which were not yet classifièd? The implication of this is that the Minister now admits it to be the deliberate policy of the Government to discriminate against existing hoteliers in favour of people who have already raised money or who have in other ways effected what changes were necessary for classification. It is again discrimination in favour of the rich and against the poor. It is discrimination in favour of the have’s against the have not’s. It is a refusal to assist those who need assistance most and an offer of help to those who have shown that they do not need the help because they became classified without it. And this idea of hiding behind the so-called liquor licence is absolute tripe, and the Minister knows it is tripe.

Order! That word is not parliamentary.

Well, it is nonsense. I was thinking of a stronger word which would really have been unparliamentary. But if the word “tripe” is unparliamentary I will withdraw it and I will leave it to the Minister’s own imagination to think out a word which really suits the argument he used. I am sure the Minister’s imagination will be agile enough to think out that word. An hotel gets an hotel liquor licence to function as an hotel, and not the ordinary liquor licence. It is a liquor licence, but it is also an hotel liquor licence. The conditions for that licence are a police inspection, but the conditions for classification are the size of the bedrooms, the crockery, the cutlery, the kitchens, the lounges—all things which have nothing to do with a liquor licence at all; they have to do with the provision of accommodation. The Minister can assist people to provide accommodation where, as an incidental service, they can get a liquor licence. But the Minister is now using the fallacious argument that he is not going to spend money to assist people to get liquor licences. It is not that. They have their licences. What they want the money for is to raise their standards of accommodation to the minimum standard laid down by the National Liquor Board. This is typical of the problem that flows from dual control, which the Minister says he is not prepared to abolish, dual control which places a ridiculous burden on the hotelier; and in many cases it is triple control, because the local police and the local liquor licensing boards come into the picture also. Therefore I want it to be absolutely clear and on record that a year ago the Minister made his intentions quite clear and it was understood by everyone. It was the bait which was dangled in front of the hotelier to win his support for the Hotels Act. The Minister cannot deny that. Two little bits of bait were dangled. One was tax remission and the other was financial assistance. Now the Minister has taken away the one inducement which won him the wholehearted co-operation and backing of the hotel industry. The hotel industry, in its objections to the additional burdens placed upon it, was pacified by the knowledge that their difficulty in raising finance could be overcome by the assistance of the Board. The Hotel Commission referred to the problem of finance. The Commission made it quite clear that normal channels of finance were not available to hoteliers and that it was very difficult to raise funds and that one of the essentials was to be able to assist them out of Government funds. The whole spirit of the debate centred on the assistance which would be necessary in order to raise the standards of our hotels. The Minister cannot now come and with a holier-than-thou shrug of his shoulders say he will not help people to get liquor licences. What he is really saying is that he is going to destroy half the hotels in South Africa. There are some 700 hotels unable to be classified, and the Minister responsible for those hotels is deliberately withholding from them the assistance which is necessary for them to continue to survive. The Minister, instead of being the builder of hotels, is becoming the destroyer and the underminer of hotels. This is a bitter disappointment to those who accepted in good faith the assurances which were made, that the object of introducing the Hotels Act and of voting R1,000,000 last year and more money this year was to enable the existing hotelier to improve his standards, instead of which we find that there is some other motive behind it which we cannot clearly understand. I ask the Minister to tell us who will get the benefit if this money is going to be there just as a nest-egg to help people who want to open luxury hotels. If that is not so, he must give us better reasons for refusing to assist the people for whose welfare he is responsible. The Minister must do even more than that. He must play his part in the other fields in which the hotels need his help.

I suggest that the Prime Minister should arrange for classes of instruction on constitutional developments in Africa and the geographical situations of countries for the benefit of some of the more backward Ministers. I was surprised to hear the reply given by this Minister earlier on, this Minister who has been Minister of Information, the one man whom we would have thought would have been able to tell us the exact position with regard to the different parts of the country and especially in regard to the development of the Transkei. I asked the Minister whether the Hotel Board had control over the Transkeian hotels, and he said no. When he was asked this question two years ago he said he did not know. Now he says the Hotels Act does not apply to the Transkei and he is not responsible for tourism in the Transkei, in the same way that he is not responsible for tourism in Basutoland. This is very interesting. Basutoland is about to celebrate its independence. Must I ask whether this is about to happen in the Transkei, too, and whether that is why the Minister is not responsible for tourism in the Transkei? I would like to point out to the Minister that although the Liquor Act and the Hotels Act do not apply to the Transkei, the Liquor Proclamation is applied to the hotels in the Transkei, not by the Transkeian Government but by the Government of the Republic. If the Government of the Republic is not responsible for the hotels in the Transkei, and the Transkeian Government is not responsible, who is responsible? We know that certain towns in the Transkei have been zoned for Black occupation and in certain of those areas which have been reserved for Black occupation there are certain hotels. They are the smaller hotels in the small villages. But even so, those hotels do not yet fall under the Transkeian Government and they will not fall under that Government until the area is proclaimed as falling under the jurisdiction of the Transkeian Government.

There are other hotels, in the larger centres, which wish to be considered for financial assistance if they are to improve their standards, especially for the benefit of tourists. Although this Minister might say he is not responsible for tourism in the Transkei, I would like to tell him that the Minister of Transport is spending more and more time and money in developing tourism in the Transkei. He is putting more and more buses into the Transkei every year, and the buses now do not just pass through the Transkei but spend days and nights there. Tours are arranged into the country districts, where dances are arranged for these overseas tourists to see. It is the most popular place for overseas tourists to-day. The hon. member for South Coast mentioned earlier that in Natal tours are not being arranged into the Bantu areas any more, but in the Transkei they are arranged for overseas visitors, and that is why the tours are so popular and they are becoming more and more popular. But now we must hear from this Minister that he is not responsible for tourism in the Transkei. That is a shocking statement to make. The Transkei is the big attraction in South Africa for tourists to-day. I would like to ask this Minister what his Government do when they bring important visitors to South Africa, and the S.A. Foundation brings important visitors? Where do they take them? What is the show place in South Africa? It is the Transkei. It is the show place of the Government to-day, but this Minister says he is not responsible for tourism there.

He does not know his job.

He did show a little knowledge when he said that we all know that Port St. Johns does not fall in the Transkei. He certainly knows that Port St. Johns has been excluded from the jurisdiction of the Transkei. It is not like other White towns in the Transkei in that it will not go Black but will always remain White. But he did say this, and I want to ask the Minister where he got his information, because I do not know anything about it, nor do the people in Port St. Johns. He says they were asked whether they wanted to remain under the Liquor Proclamation or to come under the Republic’s Liquor Act, and they chose to stay under the Proclamation. I would like to know when this choice was given to them. I would like to point out that Port St. Johns is not the only White area in the Transkei at present falling under the Liquor Proclamation. What about Kokstad and Matatiele? Were they given that choice, too? Those are White areas which will not become Black. They have been told that they will not fall under the jurisdiction of the Transkeian Government, but they fall under the jurisdiction of the Liquor Proclamation; and because those hotels get their licences through the Liquor Proclamation they are now going to be denied any financial assistance from the Hotels Board. I want to ask the Minister whether he will give special consideration to the hotels in the Transkei. If they cannot get assistance from the Hotels Board will he, as Minister of Tourism, try to assist them in some other way? Will he try to arrange for them to get financial assistance, those who need it to improve their hotels, from some other source through the Government; and especially I want to know about Port St. Johns, because that is a White area isolated from the rest of the Republic and surrounded purely by Native areas. Will the Minister take some steps to see that the people of Port St. Johns are assisted to build up a tourist Mecca there, because it is only through tourism that Port St. Johns can exist. I ask the Minister to give much more consideration than he apparently has to the tourist prospects in the Transkei, and to assist the White people who are still there.

I realize why the hon. members opposite are so sour and so personal. After all, I suppose I have done them a few good turns in the old days, and we know the result of that. [Interjections.] The atmosphere that those hon. members are trying to create is an atmosphere that they have tried to create ever since I as an English-speaking person joined the Nationalist Party. [Interjections.] It is the usual old thing that they throw up—incompetence and appeals to the Prime Minister, but it leaves me completely cold. It is just repetition.

If it were not unparliamentary I would also say that the hon. member for Point was talking “tripe”, but as it is unparliamentary I will say that he is talking nonsense. The hon. member raised this matter of the hotels. The Hotel Commission went into the hotel industry for the simple reason that many licensed hotels in South Africa worried more about their liquor sales, out of which they made big profits, and never worried about accommodation. I tried to find it in the Commission’s Report to read it out, to show hon. members to what conclusions these people came. But of course the hon. member for Point has always been the voice of liquor interests of that sort, and therefore clashes with my viewpoint on the subject. I want to read what the Act says. It says in Section 14 that any person who conducts an accommodation establishment in respect of which an hotel liquor licence and a certificate of classification is held under the Liquor Act should be registered. I want to ask the hon. members this. Supposing there was no Hotels Board, what would have been the position? The National Liquor Board falls under the Department of Justice and it lays down certain conditions for the classification or qualification of hotels to get a liquor licence. A liquor licence is recognized in South Africa as a privilege, and to get this privilege, in which there is a lot of money, the National Liquor Board lays down certain conditions.

The conditions that were laid down were that these places should no longer just be liquor establishments. I think in the Hotels Commission report they were named just retail outlets for liquor. They were not hotels. They called themselves hotels but they were just retail outlets for liquor. And so the National Liquor Board laid down certain regulations and conditions. They said, “If you want to get the privilege of a liquor licence and get classified by us, you have to maintain certain conditions”. The hon. member seems to object to the fact that they laid down certain conditions regarding the size of bedrooms and the kitchen and that sort of thing. I am very happy that they did it. If an hotel now wants to get classification it has to comply with certain conditions. If there had been no hotel board in existence, they would have had to find the money themselves to improve their hotels in order to get the liquor licence. It was their responsibility. It is not the Hotels Board’s responsibility to get a liquor licence for them. It is their responsibility.

The hon. member tried to make a big feature of this R1,000.000 made available. The idea is that the Hotels Board should have R20.000,000 available to improve hotels in the country. Does the hon. member really believe that the R1,000,000 could ever satisfy the requirements of the liquor hotels in the country? That this amount would be sufficient to pay for the improvements so that their premises would qualify? Of course it would not. This was just an interim amount of money available to meet the immediate position.

All this robust ralk regarding discrimination against hoteliers and this Minister looking after the rich and not the poor hotelier is all nonsense and has nothing to do with the case whatever. The hon. member said “this Minister is destroying half the hotels in this country”. What absolute nonsense! And the hon. member knows it. The National Liquor Board has laid down certain conditions, and those hotels which want to be classified will have to comply with those conditions. The National Liquor Board has laid down the conditions, but the hon. member said “this Minister is destroying half the hotels in the country”.

How many have classified?

I think the date is up to 31st December, 1968. So not many have become classified now. Obviously people are now altering their hotels to meet the conditions laid down. I have seen hotels do it all over the country, and quite rightly but it is their own financial responsibility. I think the hotel industry and the hotel section that the hon. member referred to have no right to think that they can borrow money from a Government body for the purpose of then obtaining the privilege of a liquor licence. That does not happen in any other sectors of industry. But what the Government has said is that as far as hotels are concerned, an hotel which is classified as a liquor hotel, and even a non-liquor hotel, when they are registered then the facilities and the finances offered by the Hotels Board can be made available to them to improve their standards or their grades. That is the situation, and that is what the hon. member does not want to appreciate and does not want to understand. The whole object of the Hotels Commission, the whole object of the Hotels Board is to improve the grade and standards of hotels from the date of registration.

So you did not mean what you said last year?

The hon. member can interrupt as much as he likes. But if he wants to read something into it that did not exist, then he can wear that cap if it fits him.

I want to talk to the hon. member for Transkei, now, who was very caustic about my taking classes dealing with the constitution of the country and the Transkei. I remember that the hon. Leader of the United Party, Sir De Villiers Graaff, maintained that their policy was such that people did not even understand it, and it was the hon. member for Mooi River who suggested that they should have a summer school for M.P.C.s so that they could understand the United Party’s policy. I am telling exactly what happened.

You do not even understand your own policy.

The Leader of the Opposition said the trouble was that the people in the country did not know what the United Party policy was. And the hon. member for Mooi River said that the M.P.C.s should go to classes so that they could get to know what the policy of the United Party really was. So I know what all this business of classes and information is about. The hon. member said that two years ago I said I did not know whether the Hotels Board would have jurisdiction over the Transkei. Two years ago the Hotels Act was not in operation. The Hotels Act has now been gazetted and the Hotels Act does not allow the Hotels Board to operate in the Transkei.

Last year you said you did not know.

The Act had not been gazetted, the Act had not even been before the House.

Why did you say you did not know then.

Because I did not know. I had not even received the Commission’s report yet. I had not received the Hotels Commission’s report yet. The hon. member talks about the hotel at Port St. Johns. He says I should know the exact details of this hotel at Port St. Johns. I told him that if he gave me the facts I would go into the legal aspect of it. Basically what I remember of the case is this. The hotel at Port St. Johns obtained its liquor licence under the proclamation for the Transkei. If it wants to it can go to the National Liquor Board and ask to be classified. If it is classified, the Hotels Board registers it. If it is registered with the Hotels Board then it can be assisted to improve its condition.

But you said it did not apply to the Transkei.

I am talking about Port St. Johns.

Port St. Johns is part of the Transkei.

The hotel at Port St. Johns was given the right to get its liquor licence under the proclamation.

When?

That is the information I have.

It is the same as any other hotel in the Transkei.

Let me put this to the hon. member. If the hotel at Port St. Johns is classified by the National Liquor Board I am bound automatically to register it with the Hotels Board. That is the position. Once it is registered with the Hotels Board it falls into the category of those hotels who can apply for loan money.

May I ask the hon. the Minister about the position of the hotels in Kokstad and Umtata?

Those are also White areas where, I think, the same conditions as obtaining in Port St. Johns apply. At least, not in Umtata, but in Kokstad. The hon. member mentioned Matatiele earlier. My Department tells me—and as far as I know—certain White areas in the Republic can come under the liquor proclamation for the Transkei, or, if they want to, they can request to be classified by the National Liquor Board. If they are classified by the National Liquor Board then they are undoubtedly under the jurisdiction of the Hotels Board and they enjoy all the advantages applicable.

Can they change their registration if they want to? Can they come back to the Hotels Board?

I have not got jurisdiction over the Liquor Act. If the National Liquor Board classifies them under the South African Liquor Act then the Hotels Board must register them. If they are registered by the Hotels Board they enjoy the advantages that apply to any hotel that is registered by the Hotels Board.

The classification by the Liquor Board is done under the Liquor Act. The Liquor Act does not apply to the Transkei, which includes Port St. Johns and Kokstad. Will the hon. the Minister tell me. if the Liquor Act does not apply to the Transkei, to Port St. Johns or to Kokstad and Matatiele, how can those hotels become classified?

On the simple basis, as I understand, that if they ask the National Liquor Board to classify them and the National Liquor Board actually classifies them then they must be registered under the Hotels Board.

But the Liquor Act does not apply.

No. The National Liquor Board is a body which conducts the classification of hotels in South Africa. If they apply to the National Liquor Board for classification and they are classified then they come under the Hotels Board. But I would say to the hon. member, as I said before, if he wants the legal position completely clarified then I am only too happy to do it. But if he wants to make it purely a debating point it is another matter.

Now, Sir, I want to refer to the speech of the hon. member for Von Brandis. As far as these tourist concessions are concerned, the ones that were mentioned by the hon. member for South Coast were certain exchange facilities and reductions in the price of petrol to tourists. I indicated immediately that I was against using a different exchange rate for tourists because I thought it was wrong. I also said that in South Africa I did not consider that there should be a special coupon for tourists from overseas with which to get petrol at a special lower rate. Like the hon. member I, too, have been overseas, and I would say that the price of petrol overseas compared to the internal price in South Africa—you cannot compare the two. I have been in various parts where I have seen petrol sold round about 55c, 60c and 65c a gallon. In South Africa the general price is round about 35c a gallon. I say therefore that there is no justification for any special concession when it comes to petrol.

The hon. member mentioned honeymoons, train fares, bus fares, and a few other things. These are matters whose merits I am quite prepared to go into if a case is made out. But the two points which were raised with me I definitely do not accept.

The hon. member also talked about surveys and the travel agents overseas. In actual fact the people invited by Satour to South Africa are mostly travel agents. It actually brings the travel agents from overseas to this country at its expense to see what is going on and to hear their comments. The Department also brings out writers to this country, and in conjunction with Satour it sees to it that South Africa gets tourist publicity overseas. The whole basis has been an attempt to co-ordinate the efforts which were previously done by various bodies.

I do not think there is very much more I have to answer on this subject. I would say again that if there is any suggestion which constructively will help tourism in this country, I am prepared to listen to it. But the principles I have laid down, whether the liquor hotels like it or not, represent the viewpoint I take. This is the way the Hotels Act reads, and I have accepted the position to be that a liquor licence is a privilege which a man himself must obtain and the financial responsibility for complying with the conditions laid down is his. As far as the Hotels Board is concerned —it is definitely concerned with the hotels that are registered and the funds available are there to improve their grading and their standard.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote 44,—“Sport and Recreation,” R150,000:

Mr. Chairman, the Vote we are considering now is an innovation in our Government; it is a new departure. Actually, that being the case, we cannot discuss the work of last year because the Department has been in existence only since the beginning of July, that is for three months. I presume the hon. the Minister will enter the discussions at an early stage to give us some idea of what he has in mind in conducting the affairs of this Sport portfolio. He will, for example, have to tell us what he plans for the future, what his plans, his aims, his aspirations are, the difficulties he will encounter, and where we can cooperate. Sir, we are naturally anxious to cooperate, as we were on the previous Vote. I hope the Minister will come in at an early stage—I presume that. Therefore there are certain points I should like him to make a note of so that he can assist us.

The first point I want to discuss is sub-head A, which refers to salaries wages and allowances. I see there are several liaison officers. I should like to know what the duties of these liaison officers will be. Quite a considerable sum will be spent on liaison officers. There is a Chief Liaison Officer, five Senior Liaison Officers and seven ordinary Liaison Officers. They receive a considerable amount in salaries. I should like to know what their duties will be and how they will carry out those duties. That is my first point.

The next point refers to sub-head F of the Vote. Under sub-head F provision is made for grants-in-aid to or on behalf of voluntary associations, snorts clubs and so on. The actual amount involved there is about R64.000. I should like to have details of that, how the Minister intends to spend this money. There is an amount for the S.A. Federation for Youth and Sport. I presume there are several associations of that nature and I should like him to give some details. There is also an amount for “Ober Sporting and Recreational Bodies”. The Minister has possibly not yet allocated the money—I do not know. I am just raising this point because I am anxious to have some certainty about this.

Now, I have come into this debate to speak on behalf of this side of the House, because we regard this portfolio as coming under the Department of Education or as education in South Africa, because, education, physical training and recreation is really what it is for. Therefore I should like to make a comparison with what is being done by the Education Department. I cannot expect the Minister to give details of this, but under the Education Vote, that is the Vote Education, Arts and Science—Vote No. 14—provision is made there as well for physical education, educational institutions, camps, and for other societies. And then there is finally youth services. I should like the Minister to tell me why physical education, the educational side, should come under one department and these other activities that I have referred to under F should come under his Department. I should like some information on that.

Having said that, my next point is that this department, the Snort Department, comes under a Minister. We have in South Africa under the policy of the Government a four-stream policy. I should like to know whether his department will be concerned with snort activities for Coloureds. Indians and especially Africans. I say especially Africans because I know something of what is being done for Africans in Johannesburg. The Native Affairs Department of Johannesburg Municipality— a forward-looking municipality—has an excellent councillor in charge and they have made great strides in providing sport for Africans in Soweto. I was told on a recent visit to Johannesburg that there are in Johannesburg 600 African football teams. I should like to know whether the Minister and this portfolio are concerned with those people.

I tried to find out whether the Bantu Education Department makes any provision for that, but they do not. One can see the reason for that. The Bantu Education Department has not sufficient money voted. They are always short of money. They have not got sufficient money for their own students or school children. They have even had to choose between having school feeding or education. They are the poorest section of our community. Therefore I should like to know whether anything will be done for them.

I was going to refer to the Coloured people, but people more able than I will deal with the Coloured people. I should just like to mention one thing, that while I was overseas this year I found that people in Britain were very proud of the fact that I came from the same country as D’Oliveira, a cricketer who has distinguished himself over there. I thought that perhaps our Coloured representatives could pay some tribute to him. They are very proud of him because of his conduct over there. He behaved himself as a South African gentleman and British cricketers are very proud of him.

But I am not going to pursue the matter further. What I should like the Minister to do is to give us an outline of what his intentions will be, the scope of the work of this Department, and how it will be divided up.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Kensington was good enough to advise me that he would open the debate for the Opposition. I appreciated his letting me know. I had intended giving him what he has really asked for now. I wanted to give a statement concerning this new Department. It is very short, but he will appreciate that I do not want to be too long-winded about it. I think if I read this statement out it will be of use to hon. members to gather what the functions of the Department will really be, some of the very questions that the hon. member asked. I might say that the functions of the Department of Sport and Recreation are laid down in the Gazette and it is introduced by the following—

1. 1. The promotion of sport and recreation in the Republic of South Africa in order to ensure the development of a sound and healthy people by means of—
2. (a) co-operating with an assisting sporting bodies and associations whose objects are the encouragement and development of discipline and character as well as physical fitness by participants in their particular sporting or recreational activity;
3. (b) the encouragement of coaching and training projects and competitive sport to ensure that the highest standards of individual performances are maintained;
4. (c) co-operating with sporting associations in their arrangement of overseas tours for their leading competitors who are of international standard and also in their arrangements to bring to the Republic world sportsmen and sportswomen to compete here in order to develop and maintain our own international standards;
5. (d) developing, in co-operation with the Departments concerned, sporting and recreational facilities for each of the race groups; and
6. (e) encouraging all forms of sport and recreational activity to help develop the character and stamina of South Africa’s young people.

I think that the hon. member for Kensington will appreciate that, unlike some of the remarks that were made by certain other members of his party, there is no mention whatsoever or thought of taking over or controlling or directing. The whole basis is to co-operate with the associations and the bodies that are at present operating in the sporting field. The establishment of the Department of Sport and Recreation followed the well-nigh general feeling and demand of the sportsmen and sportswomen as well as recreational organizations that a Department of this nature should be created. The subsequent enthusiastic approval of the majority of sporting organizations in the country confirmed this demand. The South African Federation for Youth and Sport with its 42 affiliated national governing bodies of amateur sport, comprising approximately 750,000 active participants as well as its three affiliated national youth organizations unanimously welcomed the Department of Sport and Recreation at its last annual general meeting on the 29th May, 1966. The South African Olympic and National Games Association likewise expressed its approval of the new Department.

There can, therefore, be no doubt at all that the sportsmen and sportswomen of the country who comprise a considerable segment of the public of South Africa support the formation of a Department of Sport and Recreation. These views are shared by the country’s experts of physical education and recreation. At its Silver Jubilee Congress held during October, 1965, the South African Association for Physical Education and Recreation unanimously adopted a resolution urging the Government to establish a Department of this nature.

There are, however, a number of valid considerations, apart from the support of the country’s sporting and recreational bodies, for the establishment of a Department of Sport and Recreation. Practically all developed countries where urbanization and mechanization have made rapid strides have found it necessary to establish some or other form of centralized national organization for the promotion of sport and recreation. In some countries this has taken the form of State Departments, in other countries, of central organizations which are financed either directly by means of State Funds or with funds obtained by means of State-sponsored schemes.

The consensus of informed opinion is that the artificial modern way of life in any industrialized society requires the counterbalance of physical activity or physical recreation. This applies not only to pupils in schools but to the younger and older adults who have already left school as well. In fact, all the indications are that they especially require it. In passing, I should perhaps mention that available statistics indicate that South African European males of middle age, experience a high incidence of coronary thrombosis rate, and that there is evidence which may not be ignored that lack of regular physical activity is a contributory factor in coronary thrombosis.

The need of sport and recreation in our modern society is, however, as much a social as a biological one. It is a responsibility of society to provide opportunities for participation in worth-while leisure time activities and in this respect the Government feels that the State can assist. I have taken cognizance of the accusations which were levelled at the Government when the formation of the Department of Sport and Recreation was announced. It has repeatedly been said that the Government wishes to control sport and use it as an instrument of indoctrination. These accusations I can categorically reject. The Government has no such intention. In all official announcements concerning the Department of Sport and Recreation it has specifically been stated that sporting and recreational organizations will be assisted, not controlled. I consider it essential that sporting and recreational organizations should maintain their autonomy and independence, in the running of their sporting activities and affairs. It is in fact the policy of the Department to do whatever it can to promote the independent functioning of voluntary associations which receive its support. The Department will, therefore, not attempt to control sport, but will, on the contrary, consult the independent sporting and recreational associations and give due weight to their advice when considering the ways and means of how assistance can be given.

Needless to say, since State Funds will be directed towards sport and recreation, all the customary measures for ensuring that grants made are judiciously directed will be applied. Bodies which request assistance from the Department will have to present a sound case and comply with conditions such as the rendering of proper accounts, etc.

The next matter mentioned by the hon. member was that of subsidization. Now, the main categories to be considered for subsidy purposes are coaching and training courses, recreational projects, administrative costs of national sports or recreational bodies and participation at international level. Two types of courses are envisaged, namely those for the training of coaches and participants and those for the training of umpires, referees, judges and administrators. Favourable consideration will be given to such recreational projects as camps, adventure trips, underwater expeditions and similar projects which require physical effort and which aim at developing an appreciation of nature and an interest in informal outdoor recreation, and which offer a challenge which will build character and develop courage.

Financial assistance to voluntary bodies for general administrative costs will be considered as well as expenses incurred in participation abroad at international level by selected groups of individuals or by those invited from abroad to participate in the Republic. In all cases the onus will rest with the applying body to submit evidence that the purpose for which financial aid is sought, merits such aid. The criteria which will be borne in mind when considering merit will be based mainly on the following:

The need for the project submitted; the extent or the potential extent of participation in the sport in general or the potential achievements of the representatives selected; the international rating of the sport and the influence that that participation in the specific sport or recreational activity will exercise on the general health and fitness of the nation; the financial contribution which the applying body is prepared to make towards the project concerned will be an important consideration. Inasmuch as most sport in South Africa is controlled by its own national bodies it will be understood that applications submitted or approved by them will weigh very heavily. Other sports groups will nevertheless not be debarred from making application. For the present financial year and for projects to be completed before the 31st March. 1967, the closing date for applications is the 31st December, 1966, and thereafter annually before the 30th November. Applications for the financial year 1st April, 1967. to the 31st March. 1968, must therefore reach the Department of Sport and Recreation not later than the 30th November, 1966.

Mr. Chairman, I have read this out purely to give the background to enable hon. members. if they wish to do so, to ask questions as to the function and the intention of the Department. I hope the hon. member for Kensington will appreciate that at this stage I do not necessarily want to reply to his question, but I thought that this statement might be helpful as a background. I had really intended reading this out to the Committee before the hon. member spoke but unfortunately I was not quick enough; he was too fast for me and side-stepped me very effectively.

I am indebted to the hon. member for Kensington for raising the question of the Coloured sportsmen of South Africa. I was hoping that the hon. the Minister would make some statement about the Coloured sportsmen of South Africa. When he talked about the sportsmen of the South African nation it seemed to me that he was talking only for the White people of South Africa.

You were not listening.

The hon. the Minister spoke about the South African nation. Sir, since this is a new portfolio I feel that the hon. the Minister is still finding his way. He may have the ball in his hands but he is looking for the gap to try to score a try in this new field of activity. I think we ought to try to encourage the hon. the Minister, but obviously the Minister will appreciate that we who represent the Coloured people in this House want to know just where the Coloured people stand in regard to this new portfolio which has been created. I am afraid that the hon. the Minister cannot expect me to read anything into that statement as referring to the Coloured people. But if it does, I will be thankful if the hon. the Minister will get up and say to me that that document that he read out, refers also to the Coloured sportsmen of South Africa; I would be very thankful, but does it? South Africa had produced very fine Coloured sportsmen. For instance, there is this great cricketer that we have produced in this country, D’Oliveira. I think the hon. member for Kensington was quite right in paying tribute to this fine sportsman who plays for England. But what happens when he comes back to South Africa? He has to go and play somewhere else. We ought to be proud that we have produced a man of such calibre in the sporting field. I would like to say to the hon. the Minister that for every White sports organization that he can mention in South Africa, I can mention a Coloured one. There are Coloured sports organizations for rugby, soccer, weight-lifting, cricket, etc.

What about Papwa?

I am coming to Papwa. Sir, there is a sense of frustration amongst the Coloured people as far as sporting activities are concerned. Is the Minister going to help these people? The hon. the Minister talks about subsidies. Can Coloured organizations go to the hon. the Minister for subsidies or must they go to the Coloured Affairs Department? If they have to go to the Coloured Affairs Department, will the Minister’s Department subsidize the Coloured Affairs Department? In regard to anything in the field of sport, must we come to the hon. the Minister or do we first have to cross the almost insuperable bridges of Planning and Community Development? I think that the Coloured sportsmen of this country deserve every encouragement that we can give them. We should try to remove apartheid in sport. I am not prepared to say that the Coloured people want to play with the White men. I do not want to say that there must be mixed sport because traditionally there never has been mixed sport, but we must understand that the Coloured man is a South African citizen; he is a sportsman, and the world has punished South Africa because of the fact that we refuse to give recognition, fairly and honestly, to Coloured sportsmen on the basis of their capabilities. I am very proud to be able to say that two Coloured men went over to England recently to represent South Africa as weight-lifters. We do send them but they have to go separately. If they win gold medals there, hon. members opposite will be the first to say “Suid-Afrika het weer ’n goue medalje verower”. Whether that gold medal is won by a Coloured or a White man they would be proud of it.

How did you vote yesterday?

In their hearts they must feel proud when a South African wins a gold medal.

Hunting with the hounds and running with the hare.

I hunt with the hounds and I run with the hare when it suits the Coloured people. When it suits them I am prepared to do anything.

When it suits you.

Oh, no! The hon. member must not start talking like a Progressive. Sir, then I come to the case of Papwa, a man who has gone overseas and played in one of the biggest golf tournaments in the world. Despite the fact that he could not qualify to play in this country, they thought so much of him that they gave him special dispensation to go and play overseas. That man went there as a South African, whether we admit it or not. Had he won we would have acclaimed him; in fact he did some years ago win the Dutch Open Championship, and he was hailed by South Africa. We were proud of the fact that an Indian South African had won the open golf championship of Holland. Sir, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider to what extent his Department can give the assistance to which he has referred here to Coloured organizations. I am not prepared to knock my head against a brick wall and say that there must be a wilful mixture, but I want to ask the hon. the Minister to tell me whether the assistance that is given to White sporting bodies will also be given to Coloured sporting bodies or whether they will have to go to the Coloured Affairs Department. I think my friend, Mr. Le Roux, will have something to say about the Coloured aspect. I merely want to conclude by referring to one sport, namely bowls. I do not know it the hon. the Minister knows anything about it but the game of bowls is one of the most fantastic and wonderful games. It is a game which can assist people. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that blind people play bowls nowadays. It started in Australia and it is catching on in South Africa. I hope that this organization will receive the hon. the Minister’s very sincere support. I want to tell him publicly that this organization, which has endeavoured to help these unfortunate people, has to rely on charity. If the hon. the Minister will give some indication that if they approach him he will assist them, I think it will be a most wonderful gesture. We as bowlers try to encourage the blind people to play bowls. I think it has been a wonderful thing for these unfortunate people. I should be very glad indeed to hear that the hon. the Minister is prepared to help this organization.

Here we are dealing with the beginning of a new Department, a Department which has been received with mixed feelings.

Why?

The hon. member asks “why?” That only goes to show that he does not understand the position at all. In a moment I shall deal with the point why this Department has been received with mixed feelings. First I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister who has to run this Department and who has, in his day, represented South Africa in our national game, rugby football, and to wish him everything of the best for the future where he will once again be playing for South Africa.

Before dealing with the details of the Department’s task, I want to express the hope that the hon. the Minister and his Department will, through their activities, succeed in promoting not only greater fitness, increased participation in sport and as a result spiritual fitness and increased productivity in our country, but more particularly also sportsmanship amongst the citizens of South Africa. In speaking about sportsmanship I want to refer to the mixed feelings with which this Department has been received. I am sorry that the hon. member for Wynberg is not present.

What has she done?

What she has done is rather important. I hope I shall not shock that hon. member. The hon. member for Wynberg addressed a political meeting on sport at Hermanus and I want to quote what she said. She reminded the audience that the Nazis also had a Minister of Sport.

You see what she was insinuating—

Do you see, Mr. Chairman, how this new Department was received after the aims of the Department had been announced in public, as was also done here this afternoon by the hon. the Minister? The insinuation is that this Department will be used for brain-washing young people in an attempt to win them over to the National Party through the medium of sport. I say it is disgraceful of an hon. member of this House to say something like that, knowing that that is not the case and knowing —or she ought to have known—that Departments of Sport are in existence in other Western countries as well. In France there is a Ministry of Sport and in other Western countries, as the hon. the Minister said this afternoon, there are centralization of control over sport, because countries developing as industrial countries realize that diversion should be created for their people in the form of sport and recreation otherwise young people land on the streets as ducktails. For that reason we believe that the establishment of such a Department promotes productivity. I am sorry that the hon. member for Wynberg entered the Chamber somewhat late. A moment ago I brought her to book about her unsporting remark concerning the establishment of this Department. This remark “that the Nazis also had a Minister of Sport” is virtually equivalent to the statement that Wynberg’s member of the House of Assembly is a member of the Progressive Party.

Who said that?

No, I am saying that it amounts to that. Were I to make that statement it would amount to the type of distortion the hon. member perpetrated at Hermanus. [Interjections.] Yes, Mr. Hamilton Russell, the previous member for Wynberg, was a member of the Progressive Party. But, Mr. Chairman, this did not stop there and to-day I want to make an appeal to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. I told him a short while ago that I was going to discuss these matters and he then disappeared. I want to appeal to him. He spoke here about patriotism a few days ago and I believe that he was sincere in the same way as the hon. member for South Coast was sincere. I believe that he himself was sincere about it, but I want to appeal to him to see to it that remarks of this nature are not made. These are things which can only injure our country, because what is the result of such a remark concerning Nazis and sport? The impression is created in the outside world that we are establishing a new Department for the sake of the National Party, for the sake of regimenting the minds of young people. What must be the effect of that on the outside world? For that reason I am saying that I have every right to make an appeal to the Leader of the Opposition. I know that he himself does not feel this way, but he should not stand for such remarks and should be stern with such members on his side. But that is not all. During the Budget debate the hon. member for Constantia, the United Party’s main speaker on financial matters, also referred here to the establishment of the Department of Sport when dealing with expenditure; his main complaint was that the State was spending too much and was consequently promoting inflation. He was told that this Department was budgeting for R150,000 only, but just listen to what he said. He said—

Do you hear, Mr. Chairman, he called the then Prime Minister unpatriotic, that thing which the Opposition, too, say they want to eradicate in this country. The hon. member for Constantia said that it was unpatriotic to create such a department. He continued by saying—

Do you see how things are exaggerated, Mr. Chairman? The hon. member for Newton Park who spoke here a short while ago knows, as we all do, that there is a need for making our young people active participants in sport, and in referring to sport, I mean apart from existing sport organizations which are well-organized and apart from schools where good provision is made. As regards fitness, even amongst the ballotees in the Defence Force one need only consult the Report of the Groenewoud Committee which was presented to us the other day; one need only read the Committee’s comments on that to come to realize how essential it is that the youth of our country, our productive potential, should be made healthy and strong physically so that the spirit, too, may be healthy.

Mr. Chairman, we on this side and I believe all sensible members on that side of the House are grateful for the establishment of this Department; we believe that we can make a contribution to this Department by making practical suggestions to the Minister and his Department and by not making destructive criticism of this nature which will detract from our country’s prestige in the eyes of the outside world. We believe that we can all make a contribution in this connection by making practical suggestions and by pointing out where this new Department can render organizational assistance and can give encouragement in particular vicinities, in particular communities and in particular directions. If we can approach this matter from that angle I believe that we shall be able to reap the fruits of such action very soon, but then we must at all costs get away from the approach of some members on that side of the House.

I would like to approach this proposition from the angle of the hon. member for Kensington, and in his spirit, more than in the spirit of the hon. member for Stellenbosch. Let me say in defence of the hon. member for Wynberg, that experience has shown that in those countries where ministries of sport were created and money was voted by the State for the propagation of sport, those countries were mostly fascist or communist. These people felt that they had to succeed in the eyes of the world, otherwise they failed in their own nationalisms. It was natural for people to be suspicious when this announcement was made, having regard to history and experience in regard to ministers of sport. We all know what went on before the war; we all know how German youths used to go into sporting events for the love of the fatherland, not to excel as an individual. We know how they tried out various methods of training which were dangerous, to a degree, to demonstrate the superiority of German youth over all other youth.

What about professional sport?

I do not wish to enter into that field of discord, because the Minister has said here that it is not his intention to indoctrinate our youth, but to promote sport. I therefore join in this debate to support the contention made by the hon. member for Kensington that this is a good portfolio, if the money is going to be spent in the field of education. Sir, I can speak with some experience. It has been my contention for years that if the African, the Coloured and the Indian were given sporting facilities and encouraged to participate in sport, they would be far better citizens of this country, and they would be able to contribute to the national welfare. On those grounds I can also speak from experience, because in a minor way the municipality in which I spent 30 years of my life, did something positive in the direction of promoting sport. I would like to mention that fact here to-day. In regard to swimming it was the municipality of the City of Kimberley which hit upon the idea of building an Olympic standard swimming bath and, more important still, engaged a coach of international reputation to coach children and young people in the swimming bath. The result is that South Africa produced a world champion in the person of a young lady called Karen Muir. I do not want to pursue that further, except just to make the statement as one of fact. The Kimberley municipality also built swimming baths for Coloured people in the Coloured township and for Bantu in the Bantu township but it ran into difficulties with regard to the methods of coaching to be used in the case of these people.

They have also built sports grounds in all the townships and they have assisted with cricket and football grounds. They have done a great deal of work in promoting sport amongst the groups which constitute the population of that particular city. Sir, in moving around the Cape Province, especially on the platteland, I have been astonished to find that sporting facilities in the Coloured and African schools are almost non-existent. I would like the hon. the Minister to say today that some scheme will be worked out whereby all schools, not only White ones, but all schools, will be assisted to whatever extent may be thought necessary and in terms of whatever regulations may be framed, because that is the field in which I think this portfolio can do quite a lot of good.

In an advisory capacity, anyhow, as a minimum.

I was just going to say that our White schools all have tremendous reputations as far as the provision of sports facilities is concerned. They have produced Springboks in every field of endeavour in the sporting world. But it is a sad story when one deals with the Coloured schools, and an even worse one when one deals with the Bantu schools. I believe that if the Minister of Sport is going to set up bodies to propagate sport and even finance the provision of sporting facilities in the schools, we will greet him next year with a tremendous amount of enthusiasm. He has read out a very long statement about the aims and intentions of the Department, but how is he going to bring all this about; how is he going to do it? We have had references here to the cricketer D’Oliveira and to Sewsunker Segolum, known as Papwa. We have had references to Japanese swimmers and others. Sir, I am not pleading for mixed sport because that is not my function here this afternoon. What I want to say is that we must get the best out of the people in the country irrespective of the colour of their skins because a good citizen is a good citizen, be he White or Black. If sport is regarded as the foundation in forming the character of White youths, girls and boys, then it must surely also apply to the Black youth and to the Coloured youth as well. I think that the hon. the Minister might direct his attention to the fact that the Coloured schools which fall under my care are in crying need of assistance and guidance. When I see the amount of money that we are being asked to vote here as grants-in-aid, R64,000, I think it is totally inadequate, but I am willing to accept the statement that this is merely a token payment. When one takes cognizance of the tremendous range of sport in this country and of the numbers of clubs and associations and the skills of the various people who participate in these sports, one must realize that it would be difficult to differentiate between one sport and another. All forms of sport should therefore get, as near as possible, equal or similar treatment. I ask the hon. the Minister to give us some indication as to how he proposes to make allocations, not necessarily out of this R64,000, which I think is a drop in the ocean in regard to the needs of sport, if we are going to do the job properly. If we are going to concentrate only on certain prestige sports, like getting the Springbok forwards back on the ball, then I think this amount of money might be enough. But when one considers golf, which is an expensive game, the Coloured people have little or few facilities. [Interjections.] Well, do not let us make it too bad; let us say that they have few facilities. I say that they have few facilities for this reason: Certain golf clubs do try to assist by making their courses available, and then run into the difficulty that the Minister of Community Development refuses permits. I do not want to enter into the discordant field of the refusal of permits, but the hon. the Minister must realize that if Coloured people or Indians or Africans want to play golf, they have to have a golf course: you cannot play golf anywhere else except on a golf course. The same thing applies to cricket grounds or any other game.

To play cricket properly, the ground must be turfed. Football grounds must also be turfed. The days when the Springboks used to play on matting wickets in this country are long past. As soon as we became trained and had experience of playing on turfed wickets, we entered world class, and we became world beaters. Among those world beaters, as my colleague the hon. member for Boland said, is a man by the name of D'Oliveira. We do not know how many others there may be. If turf wickets were provided for Coloured clubs who is to say that we might not have a Coloured Springbok eleven, which could knock the daylights out of any other side, including the West Indies. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman. I must admit that it is an exceptionally great privilege for me to be able to participate in this particular debate. As ex-sportsman one feels that it is a very happy day if one is perhaps able to make a minor contribution to sport in general. It was probably also a very happy day for every South African when the late Dr. Verwoerd made his announcement that this separate Ministry of Sport and Recreation would be established. That announcement was ratified in the Government Gazette of 1st July, 1966, and hon. members are acquainted with the contents of that announcement. As I see it I am of the opinion that this ministry envisages the promotion of sport and recreation in South Africa so that we may continue to exist as a physically and spiritually strong nation.

When we are dealing with such a new Department it is probably desirable that one refers to what is being done in the civilized Western countries. What was for me a really sad phenomenon was that the hon. member for Karoo, immediately upon beginning his speech, referred to other countries where there are separate departments for sport and recreation. He said that in such cases one was dealing with a fascist country. In addition to that the hon. member for Wynberg had to go and shout “boggem”. That did not really surprise me for if she could on a previous occasion have uttered words such as Nazi-ism, etc., I can understand why she cannot at this stage really appreciate this fine thing which this Government is bringing into being. I also want to say that before I will accept the bona fides of the hon. member for Kensington in this connection he shall have to repudiate the remarks made by the hon. members for Constantia, Wynberg and Karoo otherwise he must not expect me as sportsman to be prepared to accept his bona fides in this connection.

Since we are dealing here with a new ministry it is a good thing to refer to what is happening in the Western countries. I want to refer you to France where there is a separate Ministry of Sport and Youth. There is a separate Minister which handles this important matter. That Department has published a splendid brochure. Minister Missofe, the Minister for Sport and Youth Affairs, as well as the Secretary of that Department, have both written forewords to that brochure. He began by saying: ‘‘France, where is your youth going?” This Department has done wonders in France. Last year for example they appropriated R61.093,000 from the general state coffers. West Germany has also made an exceptional contribution to sport and recreation in that country. There the central government and the provinces jointly appropriated R35,700,000 for that purpose. Great Britain has not lagged behind either. There an amount of R6,600,000 was appropriated for that purpose. Now the following question crops up: “What is being done in the civilized Western countries with that State support?” A general pattern is being followed in this regard. Subsidies are being given to the national sport federations. They, in their turn, subsidize their subsidiary members. Those subsidies, which are mainly intended to defray administrative costs and the costs of projects are made over by the National Federations to their subsidiary institutions for the same purposes. These countries also have central bureaux where administrative knowledge and other technical material is collected, which is then distributed amongst their members so that they can keep abreast of the best developments in the civilized world in this connection. But they also go further. Important research in regard to sport and related matters is also being carried out there. There are national exercise facilities and many national courses where the people can receive instruction and training.

We come now to South Africa. We are asking now what the position is in regard to our people? I must admit straight away that when I took part in sport, whether it was locally or whether it was internationally, I was afforded the privilege and the opportunity of seeing what sport means for the building of the characters of young people and how sport contributes towards the creating of good human relationships amongst young people. That is true, because we have in addition the impressive evidence of research workers in the field of group dynamics, which deals with the role which groups play in the formation of the characters of groups of young people and also of individuals. We must admit at once that sport has a very important influence on the life of the group as well. My attitude there is that sport has a tremendously great potential. This powerful potential for forming character is merely being utilized sporadically here in South Africa. I think that, with powerful State support, this mighty potential can be developed further. But sport has also taught me that international sport achievements not only increase the national pride of a nation, it also increases its international prestige. I think we can acknowledge that, with a few exceptions, the sporting achievements of a country raises it in the ranks of the great nations. I have also learnt that sport makes the youth capable of defending itself against the onslaught of spiritual and physical decay. On a certain occasion the late Dr. Malan said—

Now, surely we know that a nation which is debilitated and defenceless cannot be strong in character and spirit? You know, Sir, what the classical writer Juvenal said: “Only a healthy body can accommodate a healthy spirit.” Surely, we must all admit that the high standard of living which we maintain is enervating us as nation and depriving us of our driving force. If that can happen, how can the nation be able to defend itself against the onslaught of spiritual degeneration and decay?

When the history of the unification of this nation comes to be written one day I believe that in those annals the role played by rugby, for example, in this country in the unification of this nation, will occupy a very important place. That is why I say that 1st July, 1966, will remain a red-letter day for everybody in South Africa who takes an interest in the sport and recreation of our people. We are grateful that, as in many other cases, our Government in this case too, also had its finger on the pulse of the requirements of our people, and has created this separate Ministry of Sport and Recreation for us.

Mr. Chairman, I do not think that anybody here can find fault with the speech made by the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central), who has just enumerated to us the advantages of participating in sport. I want to agree with the hon. member where he said in regard to rugby that, when the achievement of unity in the country is written about, it will be acknowledged that that national game has played a tremendous part in bringing the people of South Africa closer to one another. But I do not want to discuss the advantages of sport and recreation any further with the hon. member. I think that all of us agree with the hon. member in that respect.

I also think that there is general unanimity in this House in respect of the objective of this Department of Sport and Recreation. The objectives of this Department can be summarized briefly as follows: In the first place, to give advice and to grant assistance in regard to any matter which can be related to sport and recreation; in the second place, to grant financial assistance to any body which seeks to promote sport and recreation in South Africa; in the third place, to invite prominent sportsmen, teams and administrators to this country to promote our own sport, and consequently also to send our people abroad to promote sport there. That recreation is added to sport in this Department, is to my mind of great importance. I think that all sport is usually a form of recreation, whereas all forms of recreation need not necessarily be sport. For instance, a man who likes watching nature, a so-called “bird watcher”, takes part in a form of recreation. That is not necessarily a form of sport.

The competition element in sport is of course an important factor, but this Department of Sport and Recreation need not necessarily devote its attention exclusively to the competition element in our sport. I think that it is very important that we in South Africa should not always try to promote the competitive aspect of sport only, but that we should also try to promote the general spiritual and physical advantages it has for everybody, over and above the competition element. South Africa has undoubtedly benefited a great deal as a result of the many outstanding achievements accomplished by our sportsmen in the field of international sport in the recent past. I think that I should mention a few names in this regard. The hon. member for Karoo mentioned the name of Karen Muir. In addition there are Anne Fairlie, Deirdre Barnard, Cliff Drysdale, Annette van Zyl, the Pollock brothers, Gary Player, Eddie Barlow, Peter van der Merwe, and in particular our Gazelle team which is at present making a good name for South Africa in South America. I think that one has to admit in general that the work done by sportsmen as ambassadors for their country, cannot be underestimated. I think that they often do more work of that nature than all of us in this Parliament or even our ambassadors abroad can do. These people are in many respects more invaluable than they are. As far as I am concerned, there is therefore no doubt about the fact that this Department of Sport and Recreation can serve a good purpose in South Africa. I also want to say that the Secretary appointed to this Department is exceptionally well-equipped and thoroughly trained for his task as Secretary. I also want to say that with our modern industrial development it is undoubtedly so that people will have more and more leisure. Our five-day week has become a general institution. Therefore, Sir, the fact that leisure will increase and that as a result there will often be insufficient forms of recreation for the people, should cause us concern, as it does most modern countries. We should also be concerned—and I think the hon. the Minister mentioned it in his statement—about the incidence of diseases of the heart, the lungs and the circulation of the blood, which can often be attributed to the fact that we no longer avail ourselves of our salubrious open air, and that owing to our modern conditions we no longer find it necessary to do hard manual labour. The human body undoubtedly needs physical exercise and recreation to enable it to defend itself in the physical sense, as the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) said. For sound emotional development, too, it is essential that sport and recreation should play a major role. I think that it is essential that we should keep our young people off the streets and out of the bars and out of places where those dangerous influences are to be found, which are often injurious to the general morale as well as building a healthy nation.

One of the hon. members was quite correct in saying that sport and recreation was one of the most important ways to combat the ducktail problem—a consequence of our modern way of living. I believe that as long as the countries of the world can compete with one another on the sports field, it will keep them from fighting with one another in the physical sense. This Department of Sport and Recreation can also encourage young people and help them by means of the funds they will have at their disposal. It can help young people who find it too expensive to participate in sport. We should not forget that under modern circumstances sport is expensive. Some of our young sons and daughters are often not in a position to take part in sport owing to the fact that they cannot afford it. Owing to the fact that high subscriptions have to be paid to the club to which they want to belong, they cannot take part in that sport. If such financial assistance is granted to a sports club, it can also have the result that that sport will become cheaper for the people who cannot afford it. If we follow this course, we shall afford so many more young people an opportunity of taking part in sport.

I am also convinced, Sir, that we are too inclined to think that rugby, cricket, swimming and the other more popular kinds of sport are the only kinds of sport in the country. But there are many other kinds of sport which are not as well-known, which this Department of Sport and Recreation must assist. I am thinking of kinds of sport such as fencing and archery. Such kinds of sport are virtually unknown in South Africa so far. By means of such a Department, these kinds of sport can also be propagated. To promote sport and recreation in South Africa, it is also absolutely essential that we should have coaches of the right type. It often happens that a weak coach does more damage than good to a particular kind of sport. If it is the objective of this Department —as was said in a newspaper which reported a statement issued by the Secretary some time ago—to assist us in getting better coaches in South Africa, I want to say that it is a fine objective. I also think that when we come to the planning of sports-fields, this Department can play a very great role. How many times have we not seen local sports clubs planning their sports-fields wrongly because they do not have sufficient expert knowledge at their disposal? Here we have a Department which they can approach for correct advice and correct guidance. In other words, the mistakes that may be made, can be restricted to a minimum. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, I am in full agreement with the hon. member for Newton Park, except for one case, namely that when he read the list of names of sportsmen who have done well, he failed to mention the name of the member for Port Elizabeth (Central). Every upright and well-meaning citizen of South Africa welcomes the establishment of the new Department of Sport. In these times of disruption in almost every walk of life, the youth of our country is being flung about by the winds of change which are fanned abroad. They are finding it almost impossible to find the right course and to keep to it on their own. Guidance and assistance are needed, not only from parents and teachers, but also from the State. That is why the establishment of the Department of Sport is a step in the right direction; by that it has been proved once again that building the character of our youth is a serious and very important matter to the National Party. The amount of R150,000 has been placed under this Vote, and the amounts which we shall vote in this regard in the future, are good investments as far as South Africa is concerned. It is the premium South Africa pays to ensure that its sons and daughters will be armed physically and spiritually for the great struggle which awaits them in the future, a struggle which will become more violent as time goes by. We are spending millions of rand on education to ensure that our sons and daughters are equipped intellectually for the task which awaits them. But this spending will be worthless if we do not see to it that provision is made for the necessary facilities and opportunities to ensure that our youth spends its leisure profitably. Up to now we have allowed our youth to be lured away from healthy and wholesome types of recreation to activities which are foreign to South Africa and have an adverse effect on the spirit of the South African youth. Owing to this unfortunate state of affairs, a great percentage of our youth are occupying their spare time with things which will not equip them properly for their task in the future. In the past we have always adopted a negative attitude towards this problem. We accused the youth of being rotten and bad. In a changed world we failed to come up with a changed approach as regards the youth. We did not create or give an alternative to the youth.

An alternative which is obvious, is to lure the people of South Africa back to the sports-fields. It is an obvious fact, and it has also been said by speakers before me, that participation in sport has a beneficial effect on the human character. Only a very small percentage of South Africa’s young people are taking part in organized sport to-day, not because they are bad, and not because they do not want to, but largely because sufficient facilities and coaching do not exist and because of the fact that participation in sport is at present beyond the financial means of our youth.

The new Department of Sport will endeavour to remove these obstacles. Every South African who is worth his salt and has the interests of the youth of the country at heart, should therefore welcome the establishment of this Department. That is why the attitude adopted by certain members of the Opposition is so incomprehensible to me. They say that they want television in South Africa. There is clear proof that in all countries where they do have television, it has a detrimental effect on the character and the spirit of the youth. They are prepared to expose our children to that danger, but they do not want to agree that we are re-inforcing and broadening the spirit and the body of the South African child.

Mr. Chairman, it is very clear that the interests of the youth of South Africa were not taken into account when those remarks were made. It was merely a continuation of the Opposition’s personal feud with the Minister of Sport. It is obvious that it is the objective of the Department to draw the masses and not so much to work with the individual. The ideal is to broaden and re-inforce the basis of the pyramid and in that way the apex will also rise. However, I want to make an appeal to the Minister that he should not forget the talented and promising sportsmen of South Africa. Under the present set-up sport has not only become a business, but also a powerful factor in the international field. Sport stadiums all over the world are packed to capacity today, whereas political meetings go unattended. Without detracting from the achievements of our envoys abroad, I nevertheless want to say that the conduct and the achievements of the persons mentioned in this House to-day, namely sportsmen who have represented us abroad, have contributed a great deal to the change that has come about abroad as far as relations with South Africa are concerned. Our sportsmen can only render these wonderful services to South Africa if they can compete successfully against the world’s best. If our sportsmen and sportswomen are merely average, international sport will continue to kick us out of their bodies for reasons which are not related to sport. If we have an athlete who can run the mile in 3 minutes 55 seconds, if our cricket team is the best in the world and if our swimmers break records, countries abroad will visit us and invite us. That is why I feel that the Department of Sport should see to it that every outstanding sportsman or sportswoman is granted every opportunity to develop such potential to the full. Every sportsman of international standard we produce in that manner, will be an asset in the struggle which lies ahead for South Africa.

I think the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet is inclined to forget that for years and years our sportsmen have fallen under the aegis of various sporting bodies with a considerable amount of success. It is for this reason, I think, that there are some who had reservations about the necessity for the establishment of a Ministry of Sport. If it is possible for this Ministry to assist our exceedingly capable sporting administrators and sporting bodies in the performance of their duties and to make their tasks more easy, then it will perform a useful function. But to me it is not clear precisely what the terms of reference of the department are. I take it that one of the main functions of the Minister will be to assist financially those sporting bodies requiring such assistance. If I am correct in this assumption, then I hope that some of the lesser known sports will enjoy his immediate attention including lifesaving. I am sure the Minister realizes that the lifesaving clubs in the Cape Province, clubs with which I am familiar, exist only on a very small subsidy from the Provincial Administration, a subsidy which is completely inadequate for their very necessary work. I do not think it is necessary for me to laud the achievements of these lifesaving clubs because their achievements speak for themselves. I can only express the hope that the Minister, if it is at all in his power, will give whatever financial assistance he can to these very laudable citizens.

I also hope that the Minister will go out of his way to encourage those kinds of sport in South Africa that are still new, new in popularity and which are not yet as well developed as some of our older forms of sport. Here I think in particular of big game fishing and of its importance to the tourist industry in general and to the communities in our coastal areas in particular. It is on this account that I want to urge the Minister, because I assume it is part of his duties, to make representations to his cabinet colleagues for the immediate banning of trawling in False Bay. This is a matter which from time to time has received a lot of attention in the Press but I believe it will only be through public pressure, pressure from all quarters, that a satisfactory solution can be achieved in this dispute. The solution to the dispute must be no less than the closing of False Bay for trawlers. We have seen in the Press how large marlin and tunny have been caught within the confines of False Bay. Our late Prime Minister himself was a distinguished fisherman and caught a tunny of some size in False Bay. All these big game fishing attractions will go by the board if trawling is allowed to continue in False Bay. Therefore I urge this hon. Minister to use his good offices with his colleagues in order to ensure that this one small portion of our coast is kept free for the use not only of our big game anglers but also for line fishermen and rock anglers and as a marine reserve also assume that the Minister will have the power of making representations concerning another sport to the Administrator. If I am correct in this assumption. then I hope one of the tasks which will receive his immediate attention is protection for the young surfers using the corner at Muizenberg. It appears that the local authority concerned suggested yesterday that a ban should be placed on the use of Muizenberg corner, a traditional place for surfing, during certain months of the year. I hope therefore that the hon. the Minister will use his influence on behalf of these young sportsmen of South Africa and do what he can to assist them. Mr. Chairman, I have raised these points on the assumption that the Minister can make these representations and that he can be of service …

Order! The hon. member’s assumptions are correct.

We have listened to some interesting speeches after the hon. the Minister gave us an outline of the function of his department. Previously there had been a good amount of confusion on the motives for establishment of this department. After listening to the hon. the Minister this afternoon, we can regard him as being the Father Christmas of sport and recreation in South Africa from whom we can obtain financial assistance for the purpose of development of sport and recreation in South Africa. From this Vote I notice that certain organizations have already received allocations, something with which I have no grouse. In the speeches made here this afternoon the emphasis was on sport. I should like to approach the matter from a slightly different angle and start off with gymnastics, a recreation which is basic to body building. It is all very well to have these prestige sportsmen going all over the world. To get there, however, we have to start at the bottom. Over the years the Cinderella of our educational system has been our gymnasts. There are the difficulties they are having in obtaining suitable halls. I do hope the hon. the Minister will be able to assist in this direction and also by providing the necessary cash. In order to encourage public support to a large degree he should subsidize the gymnastic clubs on a rand for rand basis. These gymnastic, and other clubs of a similar nature, really apply occupational therapy to the body. In these days when a large section of our people are living in concrete boxes and cages, which we call flats, some form of recreation is required, a facility which has more or less been lacking. The Minister may say that this is a function of the Department of Education. The Department of Education does play its part but there is a gap between this department, local authorities, provincial authorities and these clubs in so far as the provision of the necessary funds are concerned. I hope the hon. the Minister will give his attention to this. When providing funds for the physical development of our youth, for those of middle age, and for keeping our elderly occupied, we should not rely too much on the amateur instructor. The Minister should give serious thought to employment of the professional instructor. It is of little use to grant moneys to clubs which do not have the necessary trained personnel to undertake the training. If we start on the right basis with the development of the body, the mind will also be improved. In this way we will be able to build up a race in this country—here I am not referring to colour—of which we will all be proud.

We all look forward to seeing what the Minister’s future is going to be in this new department. We are looking forward to this department being developed. Do not let us get the idea, however, that this department has been established to finance overseas tours of rugby teams, soccer teams or swimmers. That will come, but for the present the object should be basic training of our juniors so as to build up their bodies and their minds. I hope the hon. the Minister will take this into account when he deals with applications from sporting bodies for assistance. In dealing with requests from sporting bodies for assistance, the Minister may be placed in a most difficult position. I do not like to think that people will be forced to join certain organizations before they can qualify for a grant from the Minister. The background of every organization applying to the Minister for assistance should be thoroughly examined. I would not stress the national side of it too much because you often find that the national organization is remote from the real feelings of local bodies. Very often you will find that the trend of thought on a provincial level is not the same as it is on the national level. Certain organizations have adopted a national title although they are not really national. I hope the hon. the Minister will take note of this and that he will ensure that a thorough investigation is made into the background of every organization applying for assistance in order to establish what and who the organization represents, which other bodies are affiliated to it and membership. Do not let us accept an organization as being national merely because it has adopted a national title whereas in actual fact it represents only a particular part of the country. I do not want to bring politics into this. We all hope that this department will not lead to a regimentation of our youth. That should not happen and we look to the Minister to see that it does not happen. Let us see whether he means what he says.

I want to thank the hon. member for Salt River immediately for the thought that he reckoned that I was not going to turn this into one of these Nazi movements.

I did not mention a Nazi movement.

It was said by another member of the United Party. I have no intention of allowing this department to develop along those lines at all. If the hon. member goes back to the original gazetted functions of the department he will see that the main function of the department is to co-operate and assist. There is no suggestion there of “directing” or of “controlling” in any way whatsoever. In so far as the hon. member for Newton Park is concerned, I should like to say that he made a fine contribution to this debate. This is true also for the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central). These two hon. members talked the same language, a language which I can understand. I think there is great scope for the development of this department in South Africa. I should like to say to the hon. member that I am happy that he was able to convince his colleagues that this is the case. Originally the whole atmosphere which was created against this department was a shocking one. Let us see what language was used and compare it with the language of the proclamation establishing the department. I want to quote some of the comments which were made. For instance: “The Nazis also had a ministry of sport. You can bet your bottom dollar that this new portfolio will not be confined to bodily exercising but it will be used to influence the minds of our young people and be a kind of brainwashing in disguise. It will be a kind of brainwashing that will suit the Nationalist Party.” I refer to this because it is so out of line with the sentiments expressed by the hon. member for Newton Park. I am very pleased to say that this was stated by a member of his party, a member who has not taken part in this debate. Perhaps the hon. member for Wynberg must try to justify why she had these views. I should like to know however why it should be necessary in South Africa that whenever the Government comes with any proposal, however constructive it is, it should be associated with the Nazi movement. Surely hon. members must realize that that horse is not running any more.

Not any more?

I am talking about this Nazi business that has been thrown around for years and years. The public do not believe them any more. As a matter of fact, they are getting sick and tired of it. Even the hon. member for Newton Park I think must be sick and tired of that sort of argument. [Interjections.] I have no particular argument with the hon. member for Simonstown. My argument is with the hon. member for Wynberg who made this statement. There is also the argument which was put forward by the hon. member for Constantia, the leading Opposition spokesman on matters of finance. He had certain scathing remarks to pass on the establishment of this department. He was no doubt influenced by the fact that I was going to be the Minister in charge of that department. As far as he is concerned, I am like the red rag to a bull. According to Hansard of the 22nd August, 1966 (Col. 1169), the hon. member said the following—

Further on in the same column he is reported to have said:

“I think it was a shocking example to set. I think the Prime Minister ought to be ashamed of himself”. This is the sort of language hon. members seem to think they have every right to throw across the floor of the House. When I was reading this quotation, the hon. member for Kensington said “Hear, hear! ”. But I would like to say to the hon. member for Kensington that if it was so wrong that we should have some central authority to assist and to help sport, if it was such a bad thing, then I should like to suggest to him that he might also condemn Britain where there has been a system of central support for sport for years and years. He must also then condemn France where there is a Ministry for Youth and Sport. He must also condemn Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Switzerland and even the U.S.A. The hon. member for Newton Park put his finger on it. He talked about the fact that the young people of this country, and for that matter the young people of any country that is highly industrialized and developed have less and less opportunities for recreation and sport. And if you do not look after them, they will turn into what he called “eendsterte”. The announcement setting out the functions of this department was available to all hon. members, including the hon. member for Kensington, the hon. member for Constantia and the hon. member for Wynberg. Referring to the objects of this department the announcement stated that: “The promotion of sport and recreation in the Republic in order to ensure the development of a sound and healthy people”. One sees so many reports that in highly industrialized countries opportunities for recreation are not available to the young people. They do not have the same outdoor facilities which we have available to us in South Africa. So what do you have? You get the “mods”, the “rockers” and the “ducktails” and these young people are giving the authorities a headache. Now South Africa comes along and in the light of what has been done in this field in other countries tries to take on something new, although on a modest scale, to try and provide the necessary facilities to try and prevent our young people developing in the same direction. But the hon. member for Constantia thinks it is a waste of money—or, at least, he thought so until some hon. members, like the hon. member for Newton Park, told him what they thought about it.

On the question of prestige sport I should like to say that I do not consider that this type of sport is the only sport to be looked after. As a matter of fact, most prestige sports are financially capable of looking after themselves. But what has to be encouraged are those types of sports which are to a certain extent still unknown amongst the public. Take a sport like netball. There are people who are keen to play some game but they do not have the necessary funds. It is in respect of a sport like this where I am anxious to assist to build, as the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet has suggested, a wider base for the pyramid. I do not doubt for a moment the valuable contributions that have been made by the various sporting organizations to sport in the past. Just think what they, by voluntary effort alone, have been able to do for sport in South Africa. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) as well as the hon. member for Newton Park referred to rugby. Rugby in this country is well organized on a competitive basis and the physique and fitness required for it have played a great part towards building the character of a lot of people. Then there is the opportunity it offers to the various sections of our White population to rub shoulders with one another. That has done us a tremendous amount of good. That is the spirit that must go with sport. If a case can be made out to the department for assistance, I shall be anxious to assist. I agree with the hon. member for Salt River that it is not necessarily that the national body only counts or that it must necessarily be a body that is affiliated to the National Association. If hon. members look at the Estimates they will notice that an amount of R10,000 is being provided to the S.A. Federation for Youth and Sport with which I think 42 national groups are affiliated. But the balance of the sub-vote, i.e. about R50,000 odd, will also go out in the form of assistance. But these funds must be well used. I do not want people to get the idea that these funds will be used to send people overseas just for the sake of having a nice tour. The hon. member for Simonstown referred to surfers. I have got a lot of time for these surfers. Although it is a new sport which has come to South Africa it has a great future. I remember the days when there were only a few hundred Surfing boards in South Africa. To-day there are probably a few thousand. In the United States, however, there are probably 250,000. I should like to see this, particular sport being developed in South Africa because I think it is a healthy one for our youth. But I want to be frank with the hon. member. When I was approached with a request to help with financing a team to go to California I refused. But I told them that what I was prepared to do was to help them at this early stage to lay a proper base to the pyramid in South Africa. I mentioned this just as an example of what my approach to the problem is.

What about the Coloured man?

I am coming to the Coloured. The hon. member must not forget that there are many other people, apart from those he represents, who have a big stake in the future of South Africa. But may I point out to hon. members the following paragraph in the gazetted proclamation whereby this department was established—

Well, the Department of Coloured Affairs wrote to me immediately asking in what way they could co-operate with us and wanting to know in what way we could work towards the creation of facilities and opportunities to create a broader base for the sports pyramid for the Coloured people. From this point of view we are very pleased to have a Department for Coloured Affairs. I was in a position to tell them that we were prepared to assist them but that we were not there to build, for instance, a golf course for the Coloured people, as the hon. member for Karoo seems to think we should do. We are not here to build turf wickets for the Coloured people. But what we are here for is somehow to subsidize Coloured sporting associations through the Department of Coloured Affairs so that they can broaden the field of their sporting activities. You must understand, Mr. Chairman, that everything must be done relatively. That goes for the Indians and also for the Bantu. This department is anxious to develop the entire field of sporting activities in South Africa. What is more. I think it is a good investment for the country and that is why I was so surprised with the hon. member for Constantia in trying to present this new department as a shocking thing for which the Prime Minister should be ashamed. We shall have to go ahead slowly. There may have to be disappointments but I am also satisfied that there are many organizations which with the assistance we will be able to give them will be able to increase their contributions to the advance of sport.

I should like to deal with some of the points made by the hon. members in the course of their speeches. The hon. member for Kensington asked about liaison officers. The idea is that in the main centres. Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, Durban and Bloemfontein, there should be a representative of this department. His function will be to keep in touch with the sporting bodies in his particular area. It is not easy to decentralize from Pretoria into the other provinces. These liaison officers will be men who are qualified, and the sporting bodies in their areas can go to them for advice. In so far as adult education is concerned, I should like to state that my department’s attitude is that as far as physical sports at schools are concerned, these are well organized and there is discipline. To that extent the Department of Education itself conducts its own affairs with schools of South Africa. Our concern mainly is with the youth after he has left school. We want to prevent him just going to a vacuum and being neglected. We want to ensure that he remains active in sport and that he does not go by the wayside physically. It is therefore mainly with the post-school period that we will be concerned.

The hon. member for Boland said he saw nothing about the Coloureds. I think he will appreciate that that is, however, not quite correct. He said we would not give the Coloured recognition but in that also he is not quite right. He will remember that in the team which was chosen for the last Olympic Games, Coloureds were chosen to be included. However I understand the International Olympic Committee did not want separate competitions but mixed competitions. As far as this is concerned even the hon. member for Karoo and the hon. member for Boland admitted that this did not fit into the pattern of South African life and South African sport. The hon. member for Boland talked about bowls for the blind. I consider that bowls lengthened the lives of many hundreds of thousands of people in South Africa because of the physical exercise involved especially later in life. I am sure therefore that the hon. member himself will have a long and more useful life in South Africa just because of his bowling activities. As far as bowls for the blind is concerned, I am prepared to consider any proposals in that direction even though I am inclined to regard bowls generally as basically the richer man’s sporting activity.

I noted what the hon. member for Stellenbosch had to say. I agree entirely with his remarks. I think this department can play a great part in South Africa regardless of the comments and criticisms that were levelled at it. The hon. member for Karoo also talked about prestige sports. I have already indicated what my attitude to this is. I have indicated the line I take there. He also referred to provision for schools, not only for Whites but also for Coloureds and other non-Whites. Actually, as I indicated, this department will mainly operate at post-school level. My department’s main concern is with the boy or girl who has left school, and the facilities available to them then. While they are still at school I consider that the opportunities are there for them. If at any stage we as a Department are called in to advise or to assist schools through the Department of Education, we would be only to happy to assist.

In regard to the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central), I indicated earlier how refreshing it was to hear his speech, as well as the speech of the hon. member for Newton Park. The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet said that the youth must not be allowed to fall by the wayside. I think he will appreciate, from the remarks I made, that that is the main function of this Department. Our young people must not be allowed to fall by the wayside, and moreover that by reasonable and regular physical exercise, of whatever sort, the length of life of our people will be extended, and the thrombosis rate, which is high in South Africa, will also gradually be on a lower level than it is today. The hon. member for Simonstad spoke about the life saying clubs. I have been in communication with them. The proposal they made was that an amount ol R20.000 a year should be granted to them. I think the hon. member will realize that if one thinks in those terms there will not be much left for many other people, and whereas I appreciate the good work they do they will also have to put up their case and it will be considered on its merits. I think the hon. member skated on thin ice when he spoke about the Yeats Commission’s Report, and so I will not reply to it. I think I have answered all the questions put by the hon. member for Salt River. He spoke about professional instructors. It would not worry me. There is nothing in the terms of reference that says it must be only amateurs or only amateur sport. I know that a professional tennis player who coaches young players is contributing greatly towards the future health of our people. So from that point of view I have no prejudices whatever.

Finally, I would like to say that I appreciate the goodwill so many members have shown towards the Department and I hope that next year I will be able to give more information.

I have no wish to detain the Committee, but there are two points to which I should like to refer. The first is that in the beginning I asked the Minister whether he would explain, in the new organization, whether his Department is to be a White Department. I see there are no Coloureds or African people on his staff, and I gather now that it is to be a White Department and that it will be prepared to advise non-Whites if requested to do so. What I want to know is this. Will there be a corresponding Department of Sport under the Department of Bantu Administration, will there be one under the Department of Coloured Affairs, and will there be one for the Indians? In other words, in this four-stream policy, if you are going to have a Department of Sport for the Whites, will you have corresponding departments for the others? We do that in education. There are separate Departments of Education and because they are so closely linked together I ask that question. I gather now that there will not be one.

Order! I do not think this is a matter for this Minister.

I have already asked and the Minister did try to give me a reply, but I thank you, Sir. I will not pursue it. The other point I wish to touch on is this. We have had quoted here this afternoon extracts from the speech made by the hon. member for Constantia during the Budget debate, quoted with a feeling of execration that anyone should have spoken in that way about the establishment of the Department of Sport. Have hon. members already forgotten the Budget debate? Here we had a Minister of Finance who could not make ends meet, who had to increase expenditure on the ordinary current account, who had to tax the ginger-pop of the children and to raise the price of beer, and we had the Minister of Transport raising the cost of petrol in Johannesburg. They were all raising costs throughout the country because they had no money; they could not borrow money. They told us all this, and we had to deal with that situation. We said that while they found themselves in that situation their timing was wrong in regard to establishing this Department of Sport. We have had 56 years since Union without a Department of Sport.

Many other new Departments have also been established since then.

That is quite true, but this is the moment they choose to establish a new Department. [Interjections.] Here is a country where there was a credit squeeze and where we are going to have forced loans from our taxpayers. That is the time the Government spend more money, and that is the objection. Read the speech of the hon. member for Constantia. He made it perfectly clear that it was the timing of establishing this Department that is wrong, and I think it must have been perfectly obvious to everyone. There was other expenditure which we thought was wrong at this time, and as we have gone through these Votes we have made a point of it. But to come alone here now and to say we were opposed to the Department and that the hon. member for Newton Park has now convinced us is the most ridiculous nonsense from the hon. the Minister. After all, he was in this party long enough to have learned some sense. I think this thing is perfectly obvious, that any objection to the establishment of this new Department was made because this was not the time.

Do you know that that hon. member asked for this Department five years ago?

A few years ago things were still going very well in this country, but this is the worst year we have ever had, and this is the year in which they choose to establish an extra portfolio. That is the point I was making. I will say this, that according to the Estimates they are not going on increasing the amount. I have not seen mention of it in the Additional Estimates. We must give the Minister a chance. [Interjections.] I think the arguments that hon. members have advanced about our Budget debate have no substance. The longer we have lived after that Budget debate, the more the attitude of this party has been proved right. We are still not out of the wood. We must still reduce expenditure, at least we are told so by the Director of the Reserve Bank. Every financial authority has told us so. When we ask why you do not cut your coat according to your cloth, we are told that we do not want this Department. You, Sir, with your knowledge of finance, will realize there is no substance in that argument at all.

I notice that the hon. member for Kensington very conveniently forgets the speech also of the hon. member for Wynberg about the Nazism that was being introduced in this Department. I would say to the hon. member for Kensington that I know why he got up and spoke in this way. This is to justify the great retreat of the hon. member for Constantia, the great retreat that those hon. members have had to make because those in their party who told them to oppose this new Department talked absolute nonsense. Hundreds of thousands of sporting people throughout the country welcomed the establishment of this Department, and only these foolish people opposed it. But now the hon. member is trying to justify the attitude adopted previously by the hon. member for Constantia. It does not bluff me because I know exactly why he got up and made that speech.

The reason why I made the speech is that I am a member of the finance group and I subscribe to this and support it wholeheartedly. That is the reason why I made my speech, and the Minister must not be under any misapprehension. I am not rising to defend anybody; no defence is needed. This is not the time to incur extra expenditure.

I think it is essential that one or two further questions be put to the Minister. Under this Vote he asked for R150,000 to float this Department, but the hon. member for Kensington also asked him a question to which the Minister did not reply, and which was the following: Under the Department of Education. Arts and Science there is a section for physical education, and the Minister has more or less taken over the most important officials of that section for his new Department. There is no objection to that, because the Minister must have people who know something about such a Department. But according to the Estimates R86.000 has already been made available for physical education and youth camps and other camps and societies and associations, while the hon. the Minister himself is asking for R150,000. Now my question is the following:

What will be the position in future? Will it be the task of his Department to take over where in the past that physical education section rendered assistance by subsidizing youth camps, etc., and by promoting physical education in general? I should just like the Minister to tell us whether there will be no overlapping, and whether he will try to eliminate overlapping, and whether he will also take over this function of the Department of Education in due course.

I am very thankful to the Minister for his explanation in regard to the Coloured people and the assistance they will be able to get through their Department, but I was rather upset when the Minister said he will not build a golf course for the Coloured people and he will not give them any turf wickets.

Not for the White people either.

But you did not say that.

But that is the whole trend.

I appreciate that this is a new portfolio and I am not trying to make it difficult for the Minister, but I think we must have clarity about certain matters. The Minister said that he was not going to spend money on golf courses either for the Whites or for any other group, and I accept that, but it is not quite as easy as that for the Coloureds, unless the Minister in his new portfolio is going to prevail upon his colleagues in the Cabinet to make it possible for the Coloured people to play golf. I believe that I am correctly interpreting the Government’s policy when they said there must be separate development, equal for everybody.

Where did they say that?

The hon. member for Houghton says they never said it should be equal, but I think it was intended to be similar. I want to put this point to the Minister that the Coloured people want to play golf. They want to be encouraged to play golf. I say that the Minister must encourage the Coloured people to play golf, and he must encourage his colleagues in the Cabinet to make golf courses available for the Coloured people.

What about yachting?

You are taking me into deep waters there. I think we must leave that to Water Affairs. I want to know why the Minister says he will not build turf wickets for the Coloured people if they want it. Does it also mean that he will not build turf wickets for the White people? In other words, the assistance which the Department of Sport will render will be physical and spiritual and directed at body-building, to have a nation built up in the spirit of sport in order to keep them off the streets so that they do not become ducktails, mods and rockers, etc. But it applies to a greater extent to the Coloured people, who have been given an area bordering on Cape Town, where there must be over 1.000,000 now, and there is a dearth of sporting facilities for them. I would like to tell the Minister that where it is not possible for the Coloured people to have facilities for sports-fields, like golf courses, the Minister must use his influence to make it possible for the Coloured people to make use of the White sports-fields or golf courses where the committee of that golf course is prepared to hand it over to them. For instance, we have the caddies’ match every year. Once a year, when the Coloured golfers want to play, I would like the Minister to prevail upon the Minister of Planning to make it possible for them to do so.

I must tell the hon. member for Newton Park that the two Departments have had numerous discussions in order to prevent overlapping. Basically it amounts to this, that the Department of Education, with its youth camps, will think in terms of the true school youth camps, but the Department of Sport will think in terms of adults.

All I can tell the hon. member for Boland is that there have been many suggestions, not only from Coloured bodies but also from White bodies and Bantu bodies, that this Department should contribute to certain capital works. We have told them that that is not what we regard as our function; if they want to talk to us about administration and they have a golf course but they have problems in running it from the administrative point of view, that is a different matter. It was also suggested that we should build swimming baths, but I had to say that is not our function. Therefore the hon. member will understand that if I want to develop along the lines I intend, I will have to conserve the funds that are available for subsidizing administration, coaching, etc.

Vote put and agreed to.

Vote 47,—“Planning,” R20,126,000:

Loan Vote H,—“Planning,” R1,300,000:

I think there is still a great deal of doubt in people’s minds as to the exact functioning of this comparatively new Department of Planning. The amount involved is getting bigger and bigger every year. It is over R20,000.000 this year and we know that part of it goes to the C.S.I.R., which is a statutory body which, I take it, falls under this Minister because it must be placed somewhere. and not because it is-directly administered by him, and we will have something to say about that later. But looking at the Estimates, one finds that they do not explain very clearly just how this Department is functioning. There is provision for a number of planners in the various sections, 20 odd planners, at a cost of some R110,000. Then we have the Group Areas Board, which does some investigation: but it does more than that; it actually makes decisions so it is not merely a planning board. Then we have the C.S.I.R. which is on another plane altogether. I think it would be very useful indeed if the Minister could clarify the whole position for us and tell us how these planners work. What are they planning? You have physical planners and economic planners and scientific planners, but who tells them what to plan? Do they look around for themselves and decide to put up plans to the Minister on a particular subject? How do they collaborate with the existing Departments which, until the establishment of this Department. did their own planning? In the past the practice has always been that a department did its own planning and came along with its proposals and its draft legislation and it was submitted to the Cabinet. How are they linking up with the different departments in their planning? I wonder whether it will not be very useful if the Minister could take an actual case of planning which has been done and tell us of a particular subject which has been out to a particular section of the planning division, and where it came from; whether it came from a department and was put to them, and what happened to it there, and what became of the plan when it was completed? Did it go to the Department first and then to the Cabinet? I should like the Minister to give us an actual practical example of what has happened in the case of some practical plan. I think that might give us a clearer picture of what is going on in this Department. The economic planning section is presumably engaged, amongst other things, on working on the economic development plan which is issued every year, but presumably they have other functions as well. I do not know how the scientific planning ties up with the C.S.I.R. It is not clear why there should be a scientific planning section when you have the C.S.I.R. right next door to you. Perhaps the Minister can explain what the tie-up is there. What exactly is meant by physical planning? Does it mean that they are engaged on geographical plans? I think if the Minister could give us a concrete example of an actual case of how a plan has been dealt with and what the result has been and what has happened to the plan, it will give a clearer picture of what is going on.

This new Department of Planning, which is as yet a very young Department, has already performed most important work, despite all the doubts entertained by the hon. member for Constantia. The hon. member had no criticism, but he asked a number of questions which the Minister will, of course, be able to answer very easily. I just want to refer to one question asked by the hon. member, which is whether the Minister can give us one concrete example of physical planning that this Department has already undertaken or is undertaking at the moment. Like myself, the hon. member is an inhabitant of the Western Cape, and he has surely heard of this great new project which is being undertaken at Rietvlei. That is an example of what this Department is planning, an entirely large new economic point of growth. That is an example of the physical planning to which the hon. member referred. In the short period at my disposal this afternoon I want to refer to one of the three sections of this Department, namely economic planning. Other hon. members on this side of the House will refer to the other two Departments, namely scientific planning and physical planning. It is of the greatest significance that this young Department, which is not even two years old yet, has already performed such valuable work in connection with those economic development programmes, of which two have already appeared. This work is of such great importance that a very well-known economist, Professor J. A. Lombard, said the following about it—

This learned gentleman mentions the Economic Development Programme in the same breath as the Budget speech and the annual report of the Reserve Bank. There is a very good reason for that. The programme is really an illuminating work and is, of course, completely different from the so-called five-year plans of the U.S.S.R. which were so popular in the twenties and thirties. There we had to do with totalitarian planning, planning that was compulsory, whereas here we have to do with an aid intended for the economic and financial policy leaders of the Republic and for private businessmen who want to avail themselves of the development possibilities set out in these programmes. This Economic Development Programme is intended to point the way for private initiative in those sectors in which there are the greatest possibilities for growth. As such this Economic Development Programme has a most definite effect on our economic development. These 31 sectors of our economy, which are dealt with annually and in respect of which a certain amount of information is published, enable private initiative to plan their own activities according to these particulars. On page 86 of the latest Economic Development Programme I read that the Board of Trade and Industries has already inquired into certain sectors, for example the textile industry and the chemical industry. Reports on these inquiries have already appeared. The Board is also bringing reports on the chemical and related industries up to date. It is also engaged in inquiries into the wood and related industries, and the metal and metal-processing industries. It will be endeavoured to publish reports on these industries in 1966.

Mr. Chairman, I shall be very grateful if the hon. the Minister can give us an idea of the progress made in these reports on the metal-processing industries. I believe that in this respect we have to do with a most promising industry. It is generally known that the production of our steel is almost the cheapest in the free world. In view of our country’s tremendous reserves and resources, the Republic can look forward to a very long period of great prosperity in the metal industry. We have already made tremendous progress in the field of basic steel. There is still, however, a vast unexploited field as regards the metal-processing industry. The Department of Planning can be of tremendous assistance by indicating where such metal-processing industries should be established. I believe that this is an industry that may earn our country a great deal of foreign exchange, an industry that will be highly competitive in the world and an industry that can be of great economic benefit to us. Of course, the Department of Planning will have regard to the fact that our Railway rates are such that there are differences between the rates for unprocessed products and those for processed products. It appears to me that the best sites for those metal-processing industries will be near the coast. The reason for this is that the baric metal is transported much more cheaply by the Railways than the processed products. With a view to export, the Department of Planning should direct the establishment of this industry to one of our coastal cities. Perhaps that may also serve as an argument in favour of establishing the third Iscor near the coast. It will be possible for the Railways to transport the raw materials for this third Iscor quite cheaply, but the processed products which will be exported will carry a very which Railway rate. The Department of Planning will therefore have to give very serious attention to the establishment of a metal-processing industry.

Other hon. members on this side will speak more Specifically on the scientific planning in this regard. In all humility I just want to bring it to the hon. the Minister’s attention that this scientific planning should have a great influence on the National Advisory Education Council. One of the bottlenecks experienced in the economy is the shortage of trained manpower. It is a fact that many boys whose intelligence quotients are only 90 to 110 are not admitted to our technical schools because there are too few technical schools. For this reason the technical schools accent only the more intelligent boys. As a result of that the other boys are lost by the wayside and are a dead loss to our economic development.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to refer to the Resources and Planning Advisory Council and Subsidiary Committees which are referred to on pages 283 and 289 of the hon. the Minister’s Vote. I would like to suggest with respect that what I am going to say on this matter could well be referred to this Council or one of its subsidiary committees for consideration. During the last two years we have been left a little in the dark as to what precisely the functions of the hon. Minister’s Department are. I should like to quote here from a very excellent article, which was written by the secretary of the Department, who happens to be an old friend of mine. In this article the secretary of the Department set out in great detail the whole object of the Department and I must say he made certain things clear to me for the first time. I am going to quote two sentences to prove that what I am going to raise here is relevant to the Minister’s Department. I have before me a summing-up of a speech which was made by the secretary of the Department at Vredenburg describing the activities of the Minister’s Department. It was reported in the Burger on the 15th August this year. Amongst other things the secretary said—

This covers almost every subject that we are dealing with under this Vote. The secretary then goes on in this very excellent article to say—

On these grounds I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that the extract which I am now going to read from an article which was written by Professor Abbot, professor of Dairy Industry Research at the Natal University, is relevant to his Department. There are at least five different Government Departments which should be concerned with this matter. I wish to read from an extract from the Farmer’s Weekly of the 6th July this year. Amongst other things Professor Abbot had this to say—

I suggest that these facts are relevant to a number of Departments for various reasons. It is quite clear that skim milk is a product that should be dehydrated. I know this process is quite expensive, and that is why I am raising the matter but this is a product we cannot afford to ignore. It is a product that can be used for a variety of purposes either in peace or in war.

The five Government Departments concerned are the Department of Agricultural Technical Services in the first place, the Department of Justice which deals with emergency planning and the stockpiling of food in time of war, for civilians in particular, the Department of Health which is concerned with malnutrition, the Department of Defence which should be concerned with the building up of iron rations which are easily portable in time of blockade or war or whatever the emergency happens to be, and finally, perhaps, even the Department of Education, which in my view should be responsible for distributing surplus skim milk to indigent children whether they be Bantu or Coloured or Asiatic or White, at schools during school hours. To my mind this is a matter that concerns a great many Departments, but nobody seems to have thought of co-ordinating the collection and the dehydration of these thousands of gallons of skim milk which have a very high protein content and which virtually go to waste year after year.

I suggest that the first thing to be done in planning for an emergency, or even for normal circumstances, in dealing with a product of this kind, is to define the nutritional requirements or allowances for all the age groups in the Republic. This surely is a matter of vital public importance whether we are dealing with a situation of emergency or not. As far as malnutrition is concerned I want to remind this Committee that very little of this skim milk, as any doctor will tell you, is needed to transform a case of kwashiorkor, that is apathetic and miserable and dangerously near death, into a happy child with a normal state of growth and development. It seems to me that the current practical problems that face public health administrators and planners—in this instance the Minister and his Department—in the Republic in this regard are, first, to determine the extent to which the requirements of essential foodstuffs are not being met—and I think that in many cases they are not being met—and, secondly, to recommend and to implement the adoption of measures to meet the Republic’s requirements in this regard. I think Professor Abbot’s article and the figures that he gives are very significant in this regard. I would suggest that the adoption of these measures is very definitely a function of the hon. Minister’s Department. His Department has a great deal to do with the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. Since I am talking about foodstuffs in this instance I want to mention another very high protein-content food, namely, fish flour which is manufactured in the Republic and recommended by the C.S.I.R. Fish flour again would be of enormous value if collected and distributed under the auspices of the Minister’s Department in terms of malnutrition or in terms of stock-piling for emergency in the same way as skimmed milk. From the figures I found in Professor Abbot’s article—he is an expert in this field—it seems to me that an enormous waste of valuable protein foods goes on in South Africa at the present time. These are essential natural resources which should be conserved by us as earnestly and seriously as we conserve our water resources. It is clear that the Department of Agricultural Technical Services cannot do very much in this regard. It would not pay the farmer to transport at great expense the surplus skimmed milk to the nearest centre for processing. This processing is very expensive and the farmer cannot afford it. However, the State might well consider subsidizing this particular form of food. The other Departments which I have mentioned are also very much involved. I would make an appeal to the hon. the Minister that this matter should be referred to the Resources and Planning Advisory Council or one of its sub-committees for investigation. It is very important that South Africa should conserve at this stage, or any other, all the possible high-protein content foodstuffs that are available to us and that are not being properly co-ordinated and distributed for the benefit of the community as a whole at this time.

At the beginning of her speech the hon. member for Wynberg made the observation that we were being kept in the dark about the functions of this Department. Surely the hon. member was in this House last year—or, at any rate, she ought to have been in this House—when the hon. the Minister explained the task and the functions of this Department? Therefore she cannot plead innocent in this regard.

There are two matters that I want to raise very briefly. Both are matters of a local nature and relate to Pretoria and its vicinity. In the first place I want to thank the Minister and his Department very sincerely for their handling of the group areas determination in respect of the Pretoria complex and of course throughout the whole of the Republic. We all know only too well that problems arise in connection with this matter, but we may place on record that positive progress has been made and that that progress is the result of the realistic approach of the Minister and his Department. As far as the Greater Pretoria complex is concerned, the group areas have, as far as I know, already been determined for the various race groups. Nevertheless I should like to receive more particulars from the Minister in regard to the group area which was to be set aside for the Chinese. I understood that that area was to be determined in the vicinity of the Indian town of Laudium near Pretoria. We accept that the vast majority of the Chinese are law-abiding people. Nevertheless, in the vicinity in which they live, serious objections are being raised by the Whites.

In my own constituency I have the case of four or five Chinese families who are of course traders and who live amongst the Whites. In this connection I refer to the Eastlynne-Riverside area. There, of course, the Chinese live in houses adjoining their shops. The National Housing Commission has just recently built 394 houses in that vicinity, and that area is developing into a very fine suburb of Pretoria. Now we find that number of houses and shops there which belong to the Chinese, and I must tell you, Sir, that they are very unsightly, especially their backyards. If the Department has not yet taken a decision in regard to that group area, I want to ask that it be done as soon as possible. I know that the provision of accommodation in connection with removal is not the function of this Department. It is the function of another Department.

In the second place, we all know that the properties in a large city such as Pretoria, and now also and particularly Greater Pretoria, are owned by private persons and by companies. The City Council of Pretoria also owns properties and land, as do the provincial administration and the State. We also know that, as far as the State is concerned, there are various departments which have land at their disposal. I shall mention a few departments, namely the Department of Lands, the Department of Transport, and also the Department of Defence. I am not suggesting for one moment that the various Departments and the various authorities are not competent to develop and to plan those areas so as to serve the best interests of the city as a whole, but I do want to plead with the Minister that a body should be appointed to co-ordinate future planning. A blanket organization should be established so that careful planning may be undertaken in respect of Pretoria and its future and so that the activities of the various property owners may be co-ordinated through the agency of some board or other.

Mr. Chairman, I propose to speak for a few moments about the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. I see that the amounts available on this Vote show a rise of roughly R7,000,000 in the funds at the disposal of this council. It is quite a considerable sum compared to the previous sum when one considers the previous amount available was R12,000,000. It is difficult to appreciate why this should happen in one year, seeing that the actual rise in the funds of the C.S.I.R. itself is not anything like as much as this. This amount is made up largely of running expenses for research for other Departments. The main Department which did its own research in the past was the Department of Agricultural Technical Services. I see from that Department’s budget that they have not diminished their own budget as regards research. Therefore perhaps the Minister will be able to tell us why this sudden development of planning for other Departments and which Departments.

However, the most important point in my view in connection with this budget is that the increase of bursaries and research grants to universities, including medical institutions and hospitals, is an amount of roughly R113,000. That is negligible when one considers the needs of these universities, which the Mönnig Report clearly shows have been starved for years and in respect of which the Report demands a great increase. The Straszacker Commission which made a study of engineers’ training also drew attention to the fact that the universities were not receiving sufficient and sufficiently continuous—it is important to realize that it has to be continuous —contributions from the exchequer to carry out their duties as regards research and training in engineering.

I feel that it is time that the Government should make a serious effort, and this they have failed to do, although I have spoken several times in this House on the point, to break the financial bond that ties the universities to the C.S.I.R. The C.S.I.R. should be given the same status as a university, and once the funds which the Government has decided to make available for research become available, a committee of university heads or heads of departments should decide on the division among the universities. The universities should be in a position to decide their own form of research and the only co-ordination necessary from the central body would be to make certain that the research which is to be conducted in the various universities is not repetitive and that research work is not undertaken jn a field which has already been explored by another university. The universities should be able to use this money for pure research should they wish to do so.

If we want to create a full potential of research in this country, the universities must be freed from the gilded hand of the C.S.I.R. and the principle of no teaching without research and no research without teaching should be applied universally throughout the country. It is absurd to think that all the 13—and there will soon be 14—universities of the country plus the medical institutions and hospitals should be given R1,188,000 while the C.S.I.R. receives R18,178,900. The proportion available to the different institutions is ridiculous. The position of the C.S.I.R. as dictator and munificent parent in regard to State funds for research must be changed and the status of the C.S.I.R. reviewed completely.

I will now review shortly the history of the C.S.I.R. It has had a somewhat stormy existence. It has had great difficulty in finding a permanent home. At first scientific research was under the control of Mines and Industry. Later under Mr. Hofmeyr it went to the Ministry of Education. In 1945 it was obvious that there were further difficulties and that research was not receiving the help that it should. Mr. Hofmeyr, then acting Prime Minister, introduced the Bill for the establishment of the C.S.I.R. and he said—

Later, having travelled through two Ministries to the Prime Minister, it was transferred under this Government to the care of the Minister of Economic Affairs and now we find it moving its home again under this Minister. It never seems to be satisfied with its residence. Or else the owner of the residence does not seem to be happy having it under his care. Something is wrong somewhere. I may say, and I am not talking personally, that it was a disaster that it ever left the control of the Prime Minister, and we find ourselves to-day back with the scientific adviser to the Prime Minister, Professor Mönnig, advising him. While the C.S.I.R. is at the moment under the control of this Minister, there is a Science Advisory Council which remains in the Prime Minister’s department and under his control, with an office and staff in his department. We find Professor Mönnig stating, referring to the C.S.I.R., the following—

The Council has unfortunately concentrated more on applied research in industry than in the training of scientists. In fact, for training purposes it is a dead loss and to an extent it actually hinders teaching, because it withdraws from the universities some of the young scientists who should be carrying on their postgraduate studies and their research under the control of the universities and being occupied both in research and in teaching. It is not possible to over-estimate the importance of post-graduate research and teaching in the universities. [Time limit.]

Mr. Chairman, in view of the time I shall not be able to speak for the full ten minutes allotted to me. I just want to comment briefly on what was said by the previous hon. member with reference to the course taken by the C.S.I.R. in the past. To him as a scientist it should be clear that one of the reasons why one cannot take away the Government’s control over the universities or, at any rate, why the C.S.I.R. is being set up against the universities as far as the provision of financial resources is concerned, is surely to achieve optimum utilization of the scientific man-power available. Surely it has often become evident that an unnecessarily large number of people were working in a certain direction—just take oceanographic research, for example—and that resources and man-power were being used there which could be much better employed elsewhere.

The second thought that occurred to me while the hon. member was speaking about the C.S.I.R. having fallen under so many different Ministers was that particularly one idea expressed by the hon. member, namely that it was best when it fell under the Prime Minister, was rather strange. That is in effect where it is back now. It was definitely not while the National Party Government was in power that the C.S.I.R. was shunted about in that way.

When the Department of Planning was established approximately two years ago there was a great deal of suspicion on the part of members of the Opposition. I see in Hansard that the hon. member for Constantia welcomed the Department at the time with the song, “Why was I born so beautiful, why was I born at all”. I feel that, if it is taken into account that every new State Department which is established does have its problems initially, this Department has in the past two years given the lie to those words of the hon. member for Constantia in splendid fashion. One need only refer in passing to the two economic development programmes, to the Scientific Advisory Council and to the four channels into which research is being directed to-day. I also refer to the co-operation between the Advisory Education Council and the Scientific Advisory Council. Mr. Chairman, let us take the case of education. If one sees that education is not developing in a certain direction, it can be stimulated to go in the direction in respect of which it has been proved that more rapid growth will take place. We see that happening in the chemical industries of the Republic, which have been proved to be developing more rapidly than any other industry. These Councils have found that if one wants to plan correctly in advance, the right thing to do is to stimulate education to go in that direction.

I also refer to the reorganization of scientific research, which I mentioned at the outset, as well as to the progress that has been made in connection with group areas, in spite of the strong opposition encountered from local authorities which subscribe to the views held by members of the Opposition.

What has particularly aroused my interest is the programme of physical and regional planning in order to promote orderly growth. In that connection I am particularly glad about the establishment of the Resources and Planning Advisory Council. It was a very good idea of the Minister to have a group of experts, men who represent the provinces, the private sector, various important boards and the State Departments, at that high level so that they may see and co-ordinate the various trends of development and ultimately advise on planning and on how to look into the future in order to eliminate bottlenecks that may develop. These things prove to me that the Department has satisfied the first requirement in respect of an organization, namely whether it was necessary. To my mind the Department has proved very substantially that such an organization was necessary.

I should just like to express a few thoughts on regional development. It is accepted in our country to-day that the development of a country should not be confined to the privileged areas. The development of our country has naturally resulted in large industrial complexes arising in certain areas, while other areas have lagged behind somewhat in this respect. It has been found that it is better for economic growth and progress if development takes place on a proportionate basis. That is why I am so glad that the Department has accepted this idea of regional development, and that a development atlas has been prepared which identifies the various regions of the country as development regions throughout the whole of the Republic—although initially, perhaps, for statistical purposes only. Local interests can then meet, ascertain what their resources and their bottlenecks are, and eventually, on the basis of an economic survey which has been carried out scientifically, come forward with recommendations for a development plan. I appreciate that very highly, because it is of particular assistance to those regions which are lagging behind as far as their development is concerned.

I wish to conclude by asking the hon. the Minister whether he cannot perhaps consider also granting these local interest groups, the development associations, some representation on the Resources and Planning Advisory Council even if it is only on a broad representative basis.

The second request I want to submit to him is whether, in the preparation of development plans and, initially, the economic surveys, which cost money and which are undertaken on behalf of these institutions by the universities, he cannot consider rendering financial assistance to the various development associations in the Republic.

Progress reported.