Order! In replying to a question placed on the Question Paper for oral reply on Tuesday, 3 May 1988, the hon the Minister of Law and Order referred to the answer given by him to a question on the Question Paper of another House.

Two points of order were raised in this regard.

The first point of order raised by the hon member for Yeoville dealt with whether it sufficed that a Minister, in replying to questions on the Question Paper, referred to answers given in another House or whether there was not an obligation on a Minister to repeat the answer to the question in the House. It was argued that in this particular matter the Hansard reflecting the reply was not yet available for perusal and also that supplementary questions could not be asked in such a case.

The second point of order taken by the hon member for Pinetown was whether the same question could be asked in the various Houses.

Both points of order may be dealt with as follows: Mr Speaker, through the Secretary, exercises control over questions both before and after such questions are placed on the Question Paper, but his responsibility is limited to their compliance with the practice and the Rules of the House.

Clearly then a question appearing on the Question Paper for oral reply appears properly thereon with the sanction of Mr Speaker as aforesaid.

The Chair is unable to lay down the form in which a Minister should reply to a question and neither is the content of a reply a matter for, or the responsibility of, the Chair.

When a Minister, however, answers a question on the Question Paper of this House with reference to an oral reply given by him in another House in answer to a question on the Question Paper of that other House, I am of the opinion that it is advisable that the said Minister either answer in full the question appearing on the Question Paper of this House or table his reply thereto in the customary way. This practice will extend equal courtesy to the members of both Houses concerned.

That is my ruling on these points of order.

Mr Chairman, the subject of optimum verses maximum production methods and in how far this has affected agriculture along the curve of the increasingly higher yield, with specific reference to the excessively large quantities of fertiliser that have become the practice, particularly in maize production, and how this is a prominent factor in causing the financial tragedy in the industry, has already provoked strong reactions from, for example, Prof Folscher of the University of Pretoria, as well as from other researchers.

On 9 March 1984, in cols 2750 to 2754 of the Hansard of that date, the hon member for Lichtenburg discussed this matter most eruditely and referred particularly to the fact that the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing was the only objective body that could handle research and advice responsibly, not the manufacturers of the means of production.

Now, four years later, in 1988, according to a doctoral thesis at the University of Pretoria in regard to the above-mentioned matter affecting overfertilising, it appears that what the hon member had to say then was very true.

A considerably lower fertiliser input than that recommended commercially in the past can be resorted to with great economic success. The financial risk in regard to maize production, because of unpredictable annual crop fluctuations, is therefore increased unnecessarily through the use of excessive quantities of fertiliser.

The possible withdrawal of marginal land, or land with a low potential, from maize production will offer no permanent solution in regard to uneconomic production. It can even lead to a situation in which the RSA would no longer be self-supporting as far as its most important food resource—which is of course maize—was concerned, and this would obviously have great strategic implications.

The financial tragedy in which the maize industry finds itself is attributable to the misapprehension regarding the functioning of the complex biological, soil, climatic and plant production system. The crucial problem here would appear to be that the fertiliser input has gradually increased out of all proportion in comparison with actual maize harvests.

NPK fertiliser guidelines to realise an imaginary harvest in terms of acceptable soil potential estimates are obviously the main reason for this tragedy. OTK’s research results of a specific long-term experiment indicate that one can get by with considerably less fertiliser and even make a higher profit. Research results of African Explosives and Chemical Industries show that one can make do with less nitrogen.

Dr C du Preez and Prof Burger of the University of the Orange Free State said, on a particular farmers’ day, that very much less nitrogen could be used for maize and that its application could be curtailed. Prof Fölscher has on a number of occasions, both in public and in the agricultural Press, issued warnings in regard to the economic invalidity of excessive spending on production inputs, and particularly fertiliser.

Various leading farmers have, for some time now, been following this approach of the scaling down of inputs, in fact, with great economic success, as is reported nowadays in the Press.

It is therefore very clear that there can no longer be any doubt that there had been vast overspending on fertiliser over the past years in that, with a view to the maximum harvest imaginable, farmers have set their sights on the basis of NPK fertiliser guidelines according to soil potential calculations, instead of with a view to optimum yield.

Therefore, we on this side believe that great structural change is possible within the maize industry, but structural change solely from this industry to other industries would merely shift the problems from one agricultural sector to another.

I want hon members to understand very well that we are not completely opposed to a change-over to other sectors, but we believe that a new trend of thought and a new approach within the maize industry is more important, and that is the economic principle that we must produce for the optimum and not for the maximum.

When one looks at the economic justification for cultivated grazing, as compared with other branches of the industry such as maize and wheat, it would appear, in terms of recommended fertiliser practices of high nitrogen inputs for grass grazing, not to justify the withdrawal of cash-crop cultivation on marginal land.

The hon the Minister would seem to view a drastic change-over from the maize industry to grazing crops and cattle as being a new utopia. He should have been watching everything with an eagle eye and have ensured that sufficient research was done in regard to fertilising and, more specifically, the iniquities of overfertilising. The concept of optimum production rather than maximum production should long ago have been emphasised among farmers by means of extension services, and they should have been warned against a theoretically unrealistic harvest potential.

Cultivated grazing is going to use just as much fertiliser as maize if production is to be successful. I have already said that the hon the Minister should have watched everything with an eagle eye, and that is why I am asking him now what has become of the Pistorius Report. Has the content of that report not yet been made public? As early as eight years ago it issued warnings in regard to unnecessarily high fertiliser input. I quote as follows from the report:

My plea to the hon the Minister is therefore that any change-over must take place circumspectly, that farmers must be trained to produce along optimum and not maximum lines, and that any change-over in this industry in regard to the use of maize—this is probably still the product producing the highest fodder yield per hectare—will have to take place within the maize industry itself.

Mr Chairman, on various occasions this year the hon member for Parktown expressed himself as being very strongly opposed to the smoking habit. Let me say right at the outset that I have very great respect for the hon member’s medical knowledge and also his surgical ability—let there be no doubt about that—but I do want to ask him to temper his statements somewhat.

During the Second Reading debate on the Budget of the House of Assembly, the hon member made a very strong attack indeed on a certain booklet issued by Dr William Whitby, entitled Rook sonder Vrees. On 23 March 1988 the hon member said:

The hon member went on to say that this booklet was untrue and unsubstantiated and that it had absolutely no value, and that he would very much like to see it banned. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order; may I enquire how this fits in with the Vote under discussion? [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Humansdorp may proceed.

If the hon member will just listen, he will find out. [Interjections.]

It is strange that in his foreword the writer makes practically the same statements as those made opposite. Dr Whitby says that he can no longer tolerate the unbelievable nonsense and dishonesty of the campaign against smoking. This is precisely the opposite of what the hon member for Parktown says. In no way do I wish to intimate that I agree with the statements of Dr Whitby, but I do ask myself who is correct. If this booklet says anything, it tells one that there are differences of opinion in regard to this matter and that there is certainly not unanimity in this regard.

No, that is wrong.

The hon member says the booklet is full of untruths. However, the quotations in the booklet—the quotations make up practically the whole booklet—come from recognised medical journals throughout the world.

No, completely wrong.

The hon member denies and refutes it.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

No, Mr Chairman, unfortunately, I have very limited time. I shall discuss this matter with the hon member at a later stage. I am being very friendly; I am not annoyed with him. [Interjections.]

Does the NP support that booklet?

Order!

Inter alia, the hon member makes certain demands of the Government—and now I come to the important point—for example, in connection with the banning of advertisements, legislation in respect of the nicotine and tar content, restrictions on age groups in regard to smoking, restrictions on selling points, etc. Hon members who listened to the debates would have heard him say this.

The hon member knows very well that this will not work. Just as soon as one bans something, it goes underground and then, of course, it becomes more difficult to combat.

Like the ANC?

What is more, hon members of the PFP are continually preaching to us about human rights. Where can one find a more basic human right than the subject under discussion?

The right of the farmers to grow tobacco!

Order!

I am talking about the right to smoke, not to cultivate tobacco. [Interjections.]

The hon member is continually asking what the standpoint of the Government is. The standpoint of the Government is very clear. The Government does not believe in legislation, but rather in negotiation and persuasion. What is more, the Tobacco Board and the manufacturers are responsible bodies which are prepared to negotiate in regard to this whole matter. [Interjections.] There is continual negotiation, and we can prove it. Unfortunately, I do not have sufficient time to quote all the material, but I have it here.

In fact, everything that we have achieved in this respect in discouraging the smoking habit, we have achieved in this country through the medium of negotiation and not legislation. There is scarcely a public place today where smoking is not prohibited. [Interjections.]

Order!

I fully agree that smoking should be kept out of enclosed places if it causes problems for other people.

The hon member reminds one of the distant past when rulers of old used the cruelest methods imaginable against smokers. Unfortunately, I do not have the time to elaborate on this, but I think it would be a good thing if the hon member were to read about it. Perhaps the hon member could learn a lesson from it.

In our own House we have wonderful examples of hon members who enjoy their smoke. One has only to see the contented expressions on the faces of the hon members for Roodeplaat and Wynberg as they sit smoking outside this Chamber. Just look at the hon member for Fauresmith; he can even enjoy a cigarette without lighting it! [Interjections.]

Once again I want to point out to hon members of this Committee the importance of the industry. It provides a living for 1 540 farmers. But that is not all. There are also 64 000 workers involved. There are 64 000 workers on their farms! Then there are a further 10 000 who are employed in the secondary industry. [Interjections.]

This is without doubt one of the most labour-intensive industries in the whole of the agricultural industry. The gross income of the farmers from this industry amounts to about R200 million. What is more, annually it contributes R650 million to the treasury. Mention any other agricultural industry to me that can in any way compare with the tobacco industry in relation to its size. [Interjections.] Perhaps the hon member for Caledon could have something to say as far as the beer industry is concerned—I understand that they contribute a little more to the Treasury.

What is more, this is one of the few branches of agriculture which do not come cap in hand to the State for assistance. This is an industry which stands on its own two feet and finances itself.

The industry represents a total capital investment of R1 300 million. Moreover, by means of reverse sectoral links, it generates R332 million in the South African commercial and industrial expenditure cycle.

My appeal is simply: Do not do an unnecessary and undeserved injustice to this sensitive but also very important industry.

Mr Chairman, in pursuance of what the hon member for Humansdorp said, may I just say that the standpoint of the Tobacco Board, which is the board responsible for this particular industry, is a very responsible one in regard to the health problems of tobacco. The Tobacco Board adopts the attitude that one should not advertise the use of tobacco in ways that could be detrimental. They are particularly cognizant of the pleas emanating from the medical profession about tobacco causing cancer.

Have you seen that booklet that they are distributing?

I want to agree with the hon member that this is a very important industry. It is an industry which has been adapted to a specific area in relation to its particular circumstances. What is particularly important about this industry is that it is extremely labour-intensive. We have respect for the attitude of the health people, but no matter how they attack tobacco and smoking, people in South Africa will continue to smoke, and as long as there is a demand for it, there will be producers producing tobacco. That is simply how the market operates. I am pleased that the hon member referred to the tobacco-farmers because they are unhappy about certain trends and certain arguments that are prevalent in this connection.

Cancer-growers!

I shall come back later to the hon member for Delmas in regard to the question of overfertilising. I think the hon member for Lichtenburg also had something to say about this. When the time is ripe, I shall reply to him as well at that stage.

The debate began on a positive note. Let me be honest and say that we did not expect it. We are used to the hon member for Lichtenburg climbing in with a vengeance. He adopted a completely different attitude—a very responsible attitude—something for which I wish to express my appreciation. The hon member went so far as to congratulate the Government on its positive steps in regard to the flood disaster. The hon member even went so far as to say that the six-year and ten-year schemes were good schemes. These will prove their worth in the future. The hon member made certain complimentary remarks, and I eventually gained the impression that he had talked himself into rather an embarrassing situation. He then said that the Government was in the process of taking over the CP’s agricultural policy.

That’s it!

It was very clear to me that the hon member was embarrassed. [Interjections.] Nevertheless, I appreciate the hon member’s attitude in approaching agriculture in South Africa responsibly.

It would be very easy to occupy ourselves for hours once again, as usually happens in most agricultural debates, simply identifying the problems in agriculture. I think that we have given sufficient attention to them over the past six to seven years.

The drought, the inflation rate, the fluctuating increases in input and output prices, the exceptionally low world grain prices, a sudden and drastic rise in the interest rate at a very inopportune time for agriculture and, last but not least, a flood disaster such as we have never before experienced, were the main causes of the problems in agriculture. I want to leave the matter at that. I would prefer to look at the solution to these problems.

The hon member pointed out that the damage suffered in the drought-stricken areas was seven times greater than that suffered in the flood-disaster areas. I think it is a very dangerous thing to compare the various disasters that we have experienced recently with one another. Someone said on occasion that drought was like a cancer; it ate at one’s body over a long period. A flood disaster is like a heart attack; it happens suddenly. If one recovers, one bears the scars of both. That is the difference between the two. The most positive sign for agriculture in South Africa at the moment is the fact that it has rained. There is sufficient water behind the dam walls to assure good crops to meet the country’s requirements for the next season or even longer. It has rained, there is sufficient reserve moisture, and the prospects for the next summer-grain crop are good.

I should like to refer to a few statistics as further proof that agriculture is starting to recover. In 1987 the gross income of producers amounted to about R12,855 billion, which was about 12% higher than the figure for 1986. This increase is due chiefly to the horticultural and stock branches in which things are going very much better than in the other branches of the industry. In contrast to this, farming expenditure increased by only 6%, which indicates fewer inputs in view of the fact that the prices of farming requirements increased by only 9%.

This joins up with the idea that was also expressed by the hon member for Delmas, namely less spending on inputs. The farmer does not always have control over the price of inputs but does, in fact, have control over the number of inputs that he uses in order to maintain a certain production. That is precisely what happened in the maize industry.

The result is that the net income of farmers—after the deduction of interest—rose by about 22%. This follows on an increase of 23% from 1985 to 1986. As a whole, the net income of farmers improved considerably. Although this cannot yet be regarded as a satisfactory level—with that I agree—in the first place this great improvement indicates the particularly low level to which net income fell, particularly in 1983 and 1984. In other words, net income was at an extremely low level, and now that backlog has to be overhauled. Secondly, however, it shows that conditions improved considerably over two successive years. Nevertheless, farming debt has risen further and is estimated to have been R13,3 billion as at the end of 1987. Although this is 6,8% higher than at the end of 1986, it does indicate a considerably slower rate of increase. The value of capital assets increased by only 4,6%, which indicates a further although slower deterioration in the asset to liability ratio in agriculture.

I want to join hon members in predicting that the worst is now over, but I also want to say that we still have to make certain adjustments in these difficult times. We have to lay a strong foundation to enable us to deal with these problems more effectively in the future. We have learnt a very great deal indeed during this difficult period.

I agree with the hon member for Bethlehem that we must move away from an exaggerated pessimism in agriculture. Things are going well with certain sectors in agriculture, but we do agree that the situation in agriculture as a whole is not sound. A great deal still has to be done.

There is one other aspect to which I would like to refer and about which very little has been said recently. This is the question of soil conservation. All is not well in this sphere at the moment, and I want to give hon members the assurance that my department is considering the situation very seriously. The floods have proved that we shall have to give very serious attention to soil conservation measures as well as to the application of the present Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act. It is a good Act, but we do not have sufficient trained manpower to implement these important functions. A person who was standing looking at the enormously silt-laden storm-water rushing past, remarked: “It is too thick to drink and too thin to plough.” That is typical of the situation when things are not going well with the soil and floods occur.

Annually we are still losing something like 30 000 ha of agricultural land which is being used for other purposes. I am referring to roads and urban expansion. We cannot permit the valuable fertility of our agricultural land to be lost to us in this way. That is why we advocate very much stronger action and are seeing what we can do about it. We cannot afford to lose 30 000 ha of agricultural land for all sorts of purposes annually. We will make a submission later, and I shall also consult the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, who is present here, in regard to this matter, as he is now involved in the utilisation of land in South Africa.

A subject which was discussed throughout this debate by various speakers is the question of marketing. Over the past year important decisions have been made. I would say that they were fundamental decisions in regard to agriculture in the times in which we are living. One of the decisions was that taken by the SA Agricultural Union, during its annual congress in Durban last year, to the effect that we must produce in a more market-oriented fashion in South Africa. We must develop market-oriented production systems in South Africa. That is a fundamental and an extremely important decision that was taken. It affects agriculture fundamentally in all its various sectors.

When we look at South Africa’s most basic marketing problems, we see that these are the surpluses and shortages that take place from time to time. The marketer has two kinds of markets that he has continually to watch; he must watch the local market and the world market, because one moment there is a surplus and the next moment there is a shortage. To link up and harmonise these two markets with each other so that there is no financial disruption for the consumer and so forth, makes exceptionally heavy demands upon the various marketing bodies. I am referring here particularly to the marketing boards.

The hon member for Caledon made a very important remark to which I should also like to refer, and that was that South Africa could not develop a food industry on the dumping of surplus products of other countries. I do not think that would be in the interests of South Africa, and I think it would strategically be completely wrong if one wanted to build a food industry in this country and were then to build it on the dumping policy of many of these other countries which subsidise their agricultural industries on a scale with which this country just cannot compete.

While I am on this point I want to say that one cannot compare the various subsidy systems applicable in South Africa with subsidy systems applicable in the EEC and the USA. The hon member for Fauresmith was one of those who said that a subsidy must be directed at achieving a specific purpose. Therefore, subsidies must not be allowed for the sake of subsidising in order to assist agriculture. Subsidy systems must have a specific purpose because there are also certain dangers connected with subsidies.

It is necessary for us to take important steps from time to time and to impose quantitative import control on agriculture in terms of section 87 of the Marketing Act. We are aware of the fact that this creates problems for many people in the processing of agricultural products. However, one must get one’s priorities right. Certain products are imported at less than half the price of the South African product. There is at present a great demand, on the part of the processors of agricultural products, to import as many of these products into South Africa as possible. They compete with one another because those who have permits are in a far better position to compete than their opponents without permits. For that reason there is on-going discussion between the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology and I in regard to this difficult matter.

We are giving attention to the quality of the agricultural products we import.

†The hon member for Bryanston also referred to this. I share the hon member’s concern in respect of the water content of imported chickens. In this particular case it is not possible to determine the exact percentage of absorbed water unless the carcass mass prior to water absorption and freezing is known. For practical reasons that is not possible. Although regulations exist that prescribe the maximum water content, namely 8%, it is as pointed out, not always practicably possible to determine the exact water content of imported chicken. In this respect I refer hon members to a reply that I gave during question time.

The hon member can rest assured that chickens will only be imported when I am convinced that there is a shortage as was experienced during the past Christmas season when a shortage was caused due to a high mortality rate in the chicken industry.

Are chickens not bred to have a high mortality rate?

Cannot the hon member ask a decent question? [Interjections.]

*A suggestion which is often made is whether surplus stocks, particularly of basic food products like maize and wheat, cannot be carried over to the next year instead of our exporting them at a heavy loss.

We are following a policy in South Africa which is called Joseph’s policy, in terms of which we carry over 900 000 tons to the next year in case we need it as a result of shortages. It has already happened—I am thinking now of three years ago—that we have had to fall back on to these Joseph’s stocks.

It is important to remember that if we have to import the products of which we normally have an on-going surplus, quality problems may arise. We have experienced quality problems in regard to the import of maize, and I am referring particularly here to maize for grain-feed purposes. Hon members will remember the tremendous aphlatoxin problem that we had. I even received letters from housewives who contended that their little lapdogs had died as a result of the import of maize. There was a great fuss about this and, of course, the Press made more of it than was necessary.

The policy of greater market orientation has also had an influence on the policy of our department and of our marketing boards.

The establishment of the so-called consensus committees is proof of this. In a marketing situation and with a more market-oriented policy one has to consider the consumer, particularly the consumer of food in South Africa. That is why, in its negotiations with marketing boards, the National Marketing Council has succeeded in establishing these consensus committees which consist of equal numbers of producer and consumer members, because there was always the argument that the producer majority was sometimes misused in order to force certain prices onto the consumer.

In certain countries where the same method has been applied, the authorities have gone so far as to abolish the producer majority. We would not like to do the same thing in South Africa; we should like to retain our traditional policy of a producer majority in our marketing schemes, because in any case the producer has the major interest in the production and marketing of primary agricultural products. We should like to retain that.

The consensus committees work very well, and we have applied this system in the various boards. As far as the Tobacco Board is concerned, this is the case; it is also the case in the Wheat Board. The Wheat Board is a very sensitive and a very important marketing board in regard to food, and particularly bread, and the system works very well indeed.

We have also adopted the attitude that the marketing boards must negotiate with various consumer organisations. This is being done. The boards go out of their way to have on-going liaison in this connection. The department itself and, in particular, the Directorate of Agricultural Economic Trends, is also engaged in research into consumer requirements with regard to certain foodstuffs connected with the various marketing schemes so that the various marketing boards which deal with specific commodities can be informed accordingly.

†I want to come back to the hon member for Mooi River. I must say that I appreciated his comments, namely that co-ordination is essential and that it is also important that the Brand Committee should present its report before the new planting season. Furthermore, the committee will also put forward proposals with regard to the present marketing arrangement of the Maize Board, including the imposition of control country-wide. I agree that this is a problem, but unfortunately the maize industry is experiencing tremendous problems, and we must solve those problems in collaboration with, and with the co-operation of producers of other types of grain in South Africa, for instance wheat. We are also producing a surplus of wheat at present, and there is very strong competition in the feed market among feed grains. This committee must therefore look into this whole matter, and I hope that we will have the necessary recommendations before the end of this year.

*The hon member for Vryheid referred here to meat prices. I just want to tell the hon member that this is a very interesting matter. Meat prices in South Africa are income-sensitive. They have a high income elasticity—if things are going well with the economy, things go well with the meat industry. One finds this interesting statistic that this year’s supply of meat, compared with that of last year, did not increase. If one includes imports, one finds that we have basically the same quantity of meat available as last year, but that meat prices have nevertheless increased by about 27%.

What is more, meat prices are at present left entirely to the market. At the moment meat prices are very much higher than the floor prices. One has therefore to consider the various commodities. I want to tell the consumers of South Africa that we can, in fact, curb the drastic increase in meat prices by allowing a few additional imports. In fact, I think the Meat Board has also indicated its attitude in this connection. It boils down to the fact that we have, in fact, to import a little more meat in order to increase the supply. Naturally, when we increase the supply, people are simply going to buy more meat. However, this does not mean that meat prices will of necessity drop considerably with immediate effect. People who can pay will simply buy more meat. Nevertheless, I appreciate the hon member’s attitude in regard to the meat industry. I think that the Meat Board is handling the situation in a reasonably responsible way. We shall also be having discussions with them shortly on this, and also with the consumers.

Another very important policy standpoint was also adopted in agriculture recently. This affects the structural change. The hon member for Cradock and the hon member for Caledon discussed this matter. I should just like to rectify one incorrect concept. All summer-grain products are included in the land conversion scheme. It is therefore not only maize that is affected. We have to look at the summer-grain position as a whole.

Naturally I agree with the hon member for Lichtenburg when he says that this cannot solve the short-term problems. The long-term problems are the most important. It is a question of the philosophy behind the land conversion scheme. That is, in fact, a greater diversification of inputs and of production systems on the farm so that the farmer will be in a better position to control the risk factor on his farm. Even risk has a control system. This means that a farmer will more easily and quickly be able to react to market changes when he has a market-oriented production system. That is why we are looking at what the hon member for Cradock referred to as a sort of whole-farm approach. In such an approach, all the various facets are taken into consideration—the correct use of resources, diversification, the management of labour and of capital, and so forth. All these various production factors are thrown together in order to give the farmer the necessary assistance and information in this regard.

The hon member made another very important statement. One cannot look only at structural changes on the part of the farmer. This structure has to be subject to adaptation throughout agriculture in South Africa, the whole structure of agriculture. I am referring here specifically to financial institutions. I am also referring to agricultural co-operatives. I want to say something now in regard to an allegation that was made to me. One has to be careful, of course, that one does not always consider an allegation to be a fact. However, it may perhaps be necessary for one to have a closer look at this. The allegation is made that some of our large grain co-operatives assist farmers to incur greater debt by cultivating more grain and more maize because this is beneficial for their own particular turnover. I say that this allegation is made. If this is in fact so, it is of course wrong. It is wrong. Therefore, it is no use our coming to light on the one hand with a land conversion scheme for marginal land, while on the other hand co-operatives follow a financing policy which encourages farmers to incur further debt affecting the production of cash crops for which there is no market and in regard to which problems are being experienced at the moment.

The structural changes must therefore be followed throughout the entire agricultural policy.

There is a further theme that was also apparent throughout this debate. In fact, I do not think there is any agricultural debate in South Africa in which this is not the main theme. I am referring to the question of interest rates on input costs.

I say that the debate in regard to input costs, interest costs, subsidies, inflation and all these problems continues to revolve around capital and capital formation in agriculture. In this connection I must point out that these factors cannot be discussed without bearing in mind that agriculture is part and parcel of our overall economy in South Africa. In fact, I want to say that the struggle in and around agriculture, as a sector of the economy which has to operate in a market-oriented fashion in a free economy, will have to be joined most strongly by forces which have their origin internationally and nationally in those spheres as well.

The hon member for Wellington’s oblique reference to rates of exchange has more to it than meets the eye. A change in the rate of exchange which weakens our product prices abroad does not take into consideration our production costs, our production conditions or whether we first want to make adjustments. It immediately affects the producer detrimentally or beneficially.

The same thing holds good in regard to interest rates. As the hon member for Fauresmith said, interest rates are the price of capital which, as such, divide capital as a resource and an income among the participants in the economy. If we stand by the point of view that agriculture is an integral part of the economy, oversubsidised interest rates to farmers will totally distort the distribution of capital between agriculture and the other sectors, and within agriculture itself among the various branches of farming.

An oversubsidised interest rate of this nature for agriculture will further distort the already unbalanced distribution of income in agriculture. What is more, this will be translated into higher land prices, and we can mention examples. In the appointed area—this is the area of the hon member for Soutpansberg … [Interjections.] … we have the classic example that in the purchase of land which is highly subsidised—this is also the land which is the most highly subsidised in South Africa—we have found that the interest subsidies are merely translated into higher land prices. This results in the fact that one has to do with land prices today which are well above what is affordable, taking the agricultural value of that land into consideration. This is a classic example.

Without going into any further detail I must say that this is going to limit the entry into agriculture to large financial forces, and the young farmer who wishes to go farming will be placed in a difficult position. The young farmer who wishes to enter agriculture can only do so when the price of the land is in line with his ability to pay and in line with the agricultural value of the land. I am afraid that that gap has become far too wide, particularly over the recent past in South Africa. One of the symptoms that spring from the financial situation in agriculture, and the droughts that we have experienced, is the gap between the agricultural and the market value of land.

Various hon members also referred to the effect of the great burden of debt of the farmers. In this connection hon members who have expressed their concern at the rate of interest which farmers have to pay must not ignore the connection between cause and effect.

The most important causes of the farmers’ burden of debt of R13 billion are drought and inflation. The result has been that the interest sensitivity of farmers has increased together with the scope of that debt burden. In saying this it is not the intention to play down the seriousness of the matter, but rather to say that every effort must be made to eliminate the causes of that debt because, even if one were to write off this farming debt but did not address the basic causes of it, one would be indulging in a futile exercise.

Once again, a few statistics in this connection. We are very grateful to note that as far as input costs are concerned the price of farming requirements rose by 9% from October 1986 to October 1987, as against the 17% in the previous year. This is a very encouraging situation.

This ray of light gives one renewed courage. What is also very praiseworthy is what the farmers themselves are doing to try to curb price increases in inputs and, by so doing, to temper unfair profiteering by companies, a matter to which the hon member for Wellington also referred.

To look at the prices of the 110 commodities monitored by the Co-operatives Council, is a very interesting exercise, and we have learnt much from it. It is very clear that the moment an industry is in difficulty, the prices of certain of those input suppliers drop. I want to take the grain industry as an example and refer particularly to commodities such as insecticides and weed-killers. These prices show a downward trend. When one looks at the stock industry one realises that the prices of commodities such as dipping fluids and stock medicines are shooting sky high because that industry is able to carry the increased prices. The traffic is being watched very carefully. If the traffic can bear it, they let the prices rise.

We and the co-operatives are watching these 110 commodities. I am also very grateful indeed for the legislation which is to come before Parliament in terms of which the consumer will have a greater say and more statutory powers. I want to say now that this also holds good for the individual South African farmer because he is a very large consumer. More than 80% of our farmers in South Africa are individual farmers today; they are not companies. They are small businessmen who are large consumers of these inputs, and we will look after them.

My department and the Department of Commerce and Industry have established a permanent departmental and ministerial liaison committee and we co-operate in keeping an eye on untoward price increases. I have the assurance of my colleagues that we shall also watch the situation from this side.

Finally, as far as this aspect is concerned, I want to compliment many of our farmers on their management ability in that they do not ignore economic laws, but adapt their farming systems and their inputs accordingly.

Another subject that was discussed here in detail was the question of labour. The hon member for Soutpansberg referred to certain labour problems and said that farmers were inclined to mechanise as a result. I shall come back to that later.

†This point was also raised by the hon member for Mooi River. He mentioned that the generally good relations between farmers and their employees should not be harmed. I agree with the hon member that good labour relations on our farms are of the very greatest importance. We must bear in mind that between five and six million people—that is 1,3 million workers and their dependants—comprising approximately one quarter of the population of the RSA are accommodated on farms.

Aspects such as training, not only of the worker but also of the farmer for the better management of his employees, are of the greatest importance. Housing is also important and this is a matter which is continually receiving attention. Approximately 47% of Black children in primary schools receive education at farm schools, and this is also a matter which is being seriously attended to by my colleague, the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid.

I think the hon member is aware that the SA Agricultural Union also realises the necessity for good labour relations and is at this very moment consulting with the Department of Manpower regarding the applicability of certain labour laws to agriculture. Failure to maintain good labour relations on farms will without doubt also lead to an increase in mechanisation, which is an aspect to which the hon member for Soutpansberg also referred.

*There are certain commodities in agriculture which, in my opinion, will remain labour-intensive for the foreseeable future. I mentioned one at the start, namely tobacco. Another one I want to mention is cotton.

The harvesting of cotton is done mechanically, but in South Africa, where we have sufficient labour at our disposal, cotton is harvested by hand. This of very great importance indeed because it ensures a particularly high quality. Agricultural engineers have not yet succeeded in designing a cotton combine harvester which can give one that quality. That is why we try to harvest cotton by hand in South Africa. As a result, cotton is placed in a more competitive situation with regard to the cotton we import. By the way, cotton is also imported.

That is also why we are carrying out the so-called pipeline investigation. In referring to the pipeline investigation I come to the point made by the hon member for Winburg, namely that we must give attention to the further processing and export of agricultural products. The pipeline approach, on which the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology and I are engaged, is designed precisely to look at the primary production of a specific agricultural commodity. I want to refer again to cotton.

For example, it is no use producing sufficient cotton for South Africa. Our cotton consumption in South Africa is about 600 000 bales. This is after the cotton has been seeded, and not the boll. This is no use because, over and above this, one needs literally hundreds of millions of rand investment in the spinning and weaving industries. Therefore, one cannot ask the farmer to produce sufficient cotton while the secondary industry lags behind and does not have the money or the ability to make the investment. One has therefore to look simultaneously at what is called the pipeline approach.

One has also to look again at the question of prices. At the moment there is a strong foreign demand for wool. The old farmer said that things had never gone so well with him before; when he received his post, there was always a cheque in it for him. If it is not a “voorskot”, it is an “agterskot”, and if it is not an “agterskot” then it is a “middelskot”. That is the situation nowadays in the wool industry. Nobody expected this tremendously strong demand for wool to develop. The fact is that our domestic consumption of wool has been detrimentally affected as a result of the high wool prices. People in South Africa are beginning to change over to other fibres instead of wool. Therefore, prices have a very strong influence.

Mention was made of the question of export incentives. This was also a matter to which the hon member for Winburg referred. The Department of Commerce and Industry is looking at the question of export-incentive measures. The whole policy is being reviewed. We know that the various categories of incentives were not applicable to agriculture. Our department has made good inputs in this connection, and we hope that we shall receive assistance which will in all probability mean a great deal to agriculture.

The hon member for Barberton, who apologised for not being able to be here today, referred to the question of tax. He referred to value-added tax and asked whether my department had made any inputs in this connection. I can assure the hon member that we have made inputs along the correct channels. In this connection there is close liaison with the South African Agricultural Union, which itself has a committee making an intensive study of the influence of the recommendations of the Margo Commission.

Like the hon member, I too have certain reservations in regard to the way in which the application of VAT is going to affect agriculture. Certain problems have been pointed out to the Department of Finance. I asked the hon the Minister of Finance to ensure that the Permanent Tax Revision Committee gives special attention to the application of VAT in agriculture.

If we implement the recommendations of the Margo Report next year and see their influence on our tax, by then we shall hopefully also have this effect on agriculture in hand.

The hon member for Lichtenburg put certain questions to me in regard to the various assistance schemes, inter alia in regard to the drought assistance schemes which we have instituted, particularly in the grain areas in the west. A very important facet of this scheme is that of enabling specific areas to qualify. The purpose of the scheme is to be of assistance to certain communities in the process.

There are certain communities in the rural areas, particularly in the Western Transvaal, whose only economic activity is agriculture; in other words, if the farmer has a poor cash flow, this affects the chemist, the businesses in the town and, so they tell me, even the attorneys there who can no longer make a living. That is why the idea is that one should build in a formula in this way which will affect these particular areas. In this way one would have emergency drought-stricken areas. I am sure that the hon member for Lichtenburg’s area would fall into this category.

The hon member is worried that the scheme will not get under way. Committees are investigating this matter at the moment. We have been looking at a 40% cut-off point. I want to say immediately that this is not a fixed formula. The specific amount available to me is R120 million. We will stretch these norms so that we can make full use of the R120 million in order to involve as many farmers and communities as possible in this assistance.

The hon member asked me whether this scheme was applicable to irrigation schemes. There is quite a difference between this scheme and irrigation schemes. We have various formulae in this regard. A common factor of these two schemes is that everything revolves around the question of yield. Both schemes are aimed at enabling farmers to continue production.

The criteria for both schemes have a common connection in so far as they take into consideration the quantity of available irrigation water which determines production, and in the case of the assistance scheme for maize farmers, the production over a number of years is taken as a yardstick. This is the difference between the two schemes. When one knows that one has 50% or 20% water, one can determine one’s production potential. Then one looks at the socio-economic position of that particular scheme—I am referring here to the Riet River scheme—because if the quantity of water falls below a certain minimum, we make additional assistance available.

I have the list here. A quota of from 0% to 9% receives the full subsidy. A quota of from 10% to 19% receives 85%; a quota from 20% to 29% receives 65%; from 30% to 39%, it is 45%; from 40% to 49%, it is 25% of the subsidy; and on 50% and more there is no subsidy because we feel that in respect of certain irrigation schemes—we refer to Vaalharts—a person with a 50% water quota can still survive. That is the difference between the two schemes, and this is not applicable to the present scheme which we have announced.

The hon member also asked me what the conditions would be for further assistance in the future. I think these conditions have already been laid down by the Cabinet, namely that in the first instance assistance should not be aimed at supporting producer prices. With this we do not envisage curtailing the efforts to bring about price stability in terms of the provisions of the Marketing Act. When one has a market-oriented policy, one increasingly has to move away from a price-support system, otherwise it is not market-oriented.

Secondly, the aid measures must not be such as to encourage producers to incur further debt. Neither must the aid measures encourage the promotion of large-scale land-ownership and benefit that aspect unduly at the cost of the small or medium-scale farmer.

There were mistakes in our previous schemes and we rectified them. We are now setting certain limits, even as far as the six-year and the ten-year schemes are concerned. In that case the situation was that only a few large-scale farmers owed millions of rand.

Furthermore, it must encourage young newcomers to agriculture. Loans must be based on the ability of the borrower to repay them. The hon the Deputy Minister is very strict in this regard; he looks at the payability of a farming unit. This payability is to a major extent the deciding factor, because then one has an economic base.

The effect of any aid measure on inflation must also be very carefully considered. Assistance must be such that debt redemption is assisted and structural adaptations in agriculture are also being promoted. These are the yardsticks that have to be used in the application and development of any new aid scheme for agriculture in the future. I think the hon member will agree with me that these are sound measures.

It needs to be mentioned that the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, which is not involved under this Vote—however, this is important—has already appointed a committee to evaluate the effectiveness of all the various aid schemes on an on-going basis. I take it that as agriculture develops in future, some of these aid schemes will become obsolete. Some of them will then possibly be phased out and others adapted. If the hon members makes good suggestions, whether they are CP policy or not, we will accept them. I assure the hon member that we shall do so. [Interjections.]

It can therefore be expected that the aid provision conditions will be adapted from time to time, according to farming circumstances, for example the recently announced new aid scheme for stock farmers in the drought-stricken areas to replace the old drought-assistance schemes. New aid schemes can also be introduced to promote the restoration of agriculture, for example the land conversion scheme.

However, I do not think that we have heard the last word in regard to the land conversion scheme. We are budgeting for eight years and the cost will amount to R280 million. I do not know what the budgetary position ahead will be, but we shall have to see how the scheme develops in the future. It was only for the purposes of proper planning that we worked out a scheme for eight years.

I want to tell the hon member further that the land conversion scheme is part of a package approach. Another part of the package is the fact that the Government has decided, in the 1989-90 season—that is the financial year following upon this one—to look at the losses incurred on the export costs of all kinds of grain up to and including two million tons. The Government is prepared to subsidise the export costs by R200 million, depending upon the availability of funds. Our attitude is that when other countries subsidise agriculture, they do so so that they can dump those goods on South Africa. That is why it is also necessary for us to protect our grain producers against this sort of thing, and it also gives us the opportunity to bring about a phasing-in process of structural changes and diversification in the various spheres of agriculture.

The hon member for Caledon also mentioned another very important aspect in connection with structural change. I really do want to sympathise with him. He said that there were certain parts of the Western Cape—I think he referred particularly to the Swartland—which were exclusively wheat-producing areas. Their resources are such that they cannot diversify. This is a specific area with a specific problem. For this reason additional research will have to be undertaken in regard to other crops. I think in this respect, for example, of the lupin industry which holds out great possibilities for the stock factor. We know what the problem with the lupin industry is—it causes septoria in the wheat. However, research is presently being done in order to solve this problem for them.

By way of a concluding remark I want to say that the hon member for Swellendam made an appeal to the Official Opposition to talk to their allies. We must take note of the very high sensitivity abroad, not only in respect of sanctions but also of boycotts. In many respects boycotts affect us more than sanctions do. I took the trouble to make some inquiries from one of the export boards. They keep a regular record of the various reactions in regard to political occurrences in South Africa. From the nature of the case they have to do so because they are continually confronted by revolutionaries abroad.

They sent me this cutting from a London daily, with a photo of Mr Eugéne Terre’Blanche standing in front of his speaker’s rostrum and with the reverse swastika very clearly visible. The caption to the photo reads: “Catch 22—many new fascist supporters of Terre’Blanche.” These people contend—they are objective; they are not politicians—that at the moment Mr Eugene Terre’ Blanche is receiving more publicity than any other politician in South Africa. That publicity affects our exports.

I do not know what the political connection is between the CP and the AWB—I am not so au fait with their inner workings—but I want to tell my friend and colleague, the hon member for Lichtenburg, that he should say something to these people.

You give him the publicity. [Interjections.]

I want to thank hon members very much indeed for the responsible way in which the debate has been conducted. I thank hon members on my side of the Committee for their very responsible speeches. I also thank hon members of the Official Opposition and the PFP for their speeches. I want to direct a particular word of thanks to the hon member for Mooi River who is sitting here as an individual but who nevertheless always makes a very good contribution towards agricultural debates.

I also thank the hon the Deputy Minister for having assisted me so well. We have a very good working relationship. One cannot be alone in this sort of job; one must have someone standing by in support.

Last, but by no means least, I want to thank the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing. The Director-General has arranged for the four chief directors to be present here. We had a discussion on the debate yesterday evening, and each and every one of them told me that they had attended this debate with particular interest and that it had been very enlightening for all of them.

Vote agreed to.

Vote No 10—“Development Aid”, and Vote No 11—“Education and Training”:

Mr Chairman, I should like to ask that we devote some attention to the Education and Training Vote during the first part of this debate.

At the beginning of this debate I should like to extend a few words of gratitude which are very, very sincerely meant. In the first instance I want to thank my colleague, the hon the Deputy Minister, for the exceptional contribution he has made to the large measure of stability and the effective functioning of education in Black communities throughout the country. He has the responsibility for school matters and has displayed exceptional skill, in the area of negotiation, in defusing problem situations.

I should like to express very warm thanks to the Director-General and his top management, as well as to all the staff of the department. This is a department which requires both professional expertise and innovative ability of its top staff, as well as exceptional ability due to the vast scope and the complexity of its task. In addition, in the difficult situations in which they operate, they must also be good communicators, people of sensitivity who can judge the needs of others, and they must also be good diplomats.

For that reason I should like to express very warm thanks to the Director-General, his two deputies, Dr Meiring and Mr Strydom, the Chief Directors and everyone with them in the top management team. Dr Fourie, the Director-General, is to retire from the service of the department in August, and looking back on his career I want to congratulate him on, and thank him for, the important and lasting contribution he has made, and to extend to him my best wishes for the future.

†I would also like to express very warm thanks to the various advisory bodies representative of the teaching profession and of the communities concerned which have made invaluable and indispensable inputs as a basis for the work of the department. In particular I would like to refer again to the hard work and the very practical contribution made by the Council for Education and Training consisting of experts and community representatives from all parts of the country.

*In the schools, which represent the grassroots level, and in the circuits and regions, staff often made great sacrifices under difficult and trying conditions in order to ensure the success of the department’s work. Unfortunately, some unnecessarily uncomplimentary remarks have been addressed in this House towards the officials, and I want to say that no government’s policy could be executed in the difficult field of education for Black communities if it were not for the outstanding qualities, the dedication and the willingness to forego all thoughts of normal working hours and normal working conditions, a characteristic which is being displayed by the staff of this department, both at head office and at the decentralised level. I want to express my gratitude to them.

†We also owe a word of thanks to the parents and the community leaders in the various Black communities of this country for the sensible and practical approach which they have taken throughout this year to ensure that the priority of education is asserted and the importance emphasised of young people availing themselves of the educational opportunities that are at their disposal in order to improve their opportunities in later life. The contribution which the leaders among the parents and in the community—I also want to include quite a diversity of positive-minded church leaders—have made towards stability in the educational field is, in my opinion most very outstanding and I would like to thank them for that.

*In expressing my thanks I also want to refer to my colleague, the hon the Minister of National Education, who has a very important co-ordinating task in relation to general education matters. I am sure I also speak on behalf of other hon Ministers who are responsible for education when I express gratitude for the way in which he promotes co-operation, consultation and consensus among the various Ministers responsible for education. I also want to thank the Department of National Education which, in many respects, has to mediate for all the other education departments whenever finances are negotiated, and which does so extremely effectively. I also want to express gratitude to the various consultative bodies which render service to the Department of National Education and with which our department is also involved, because the benefits which the various education departments derive from the work of the Minister of the Department of National Education, cannot be overemphasised.

This year’s Main Budget of Parliament represents an increase of 10,7% over the revised Budget of the previous financial year. Government expenditure is therefore being restricted to under the inflation rate. When we compare the Education and Training and Development Aid Votes with this, the high priority which this Government continues to give to the development of the self-governing territories and to the provision of education to our Black communities is apparent from the increase in the appropriations for these Votes.

In this regard I want to point out in advance that the total appropriation of the Department of Development Aid shows an increase of R1 018 million over the appropriation in the Main Budget of the previous year.

That is an increase of 33,6%, the lion’s share of which is earmarked for aid to the self-governing territories—the so-called additional as well as statutory amounts—namely a total amount of R949 million, an increase of 38,1%. I shall have more to say about this later when I deal with this vote.

The total appropriation for the Department of Education and Training—if we do not take into account the hospitalisation costs in relation to Medunsa, which will henceforth be provided elsewhere—amounts to R1 640 million this year and shows an increase of R260,6 million. That is an increase of 18,9%. I mention this specifically because the explanatory memorandum to the appropriation gives a lower figure of 10,28%, but the adjustment for the elimination of the hospitalisation costs was not taken into account there.

As to the total provision to the self-governing territories for education, which is not undertaken by the Department of Education and Training, but which is channelled via the Department of Development Aid, Parliament’s contribution this year amounts to R1 570 million, which is an increase of R294,7 million—an increase of 23,1%. We therefore have an increase of 18,9% in the case of the Department of Education and Training and an increase of 23,1% in the case of education for the self-governing territories.

It is therefore clear from this that the Government’s objective of providing equal opportunities, coupled with equal standards in education, to all communities in the RSA, within the country’s financial means, and particularly in so far as the provision of education to the Black communities is concerned, in view of the imbalances there, still remains a high priority, despite the strict discipline in the Budget. Although the increase in the appropriation for Black education this year is smaller than the increases over the past few years, reasonable provision could still be made for the considerably increased number of pupils, in regard to primary and secondary education and the education of the retarded, by saving on other programmes in order to effect increases of as much as 26,1%, 24,2% and 51% in the aforementioned three sectors of education.

I think it is clear that the country’s economic growth rate, which—as we all know—is also influenced by the malevolent sanctions and disinvestment campaigns of our enemies, is having a restrictive influence on the Government’s declared intention to reduce the existing imbalances in education as far as possible, and to eliminate them wherever it is able to do so, in accordance with the 10-year plan. The country’s ability to expand and improve its educational services is therefore being directly influenced by the economic onslaught against the RSA. Reform and development in these areas, as in other areas, is very closely linked to the country’s economic growth rate. In this regard it is essential that serious attention be paid to both the affordability and the cost-effectiveness of two important aspects of the tremendous growth in the provision of education.

In the first instance I want to refer to the university level. Both the Committee of University Principals’ new De Lange Report on universities as well as the vice rector of the University of Pretoria, Prof Flip Smit, issued a warning earlier this year that the growth iff the numbers at universities had, for some time now, outstripped both the population growth rate and the economic growth rate by a considerable margin—6% in the case of the average growth rate of the universities as opposed to 3,4% per annum in the case of the average economic growth rate over the past few years—and that the country would not be able to afford such a growth rate indefinitely.

It is also a known fact that a tremendous explosion is taking place in the numbers of Black pupils at secondary school level in the RSA as a whole. That is the second aspect, apart from that of the universities, which I want to emphasise. I want to mention the figures here. In the case of Black secondary pupils there has been an increase of 147 000 to 1 062 000 in the 13 years from 1974 to 1987, an increase of 622%, and if we express that as the percentage of the total school population formed by the secondary pupils, it is an increase of 6% to 22,6%—which I think has been one of the most important achievements of the Department of Education and Training and the other education departments for Black peoples during the past few years—whilst the numbers of full-time Std 10 candidates has increased twelvefold during the eight years from 1979 to 1987, from 11 000 to 137 000—the latter figure including the TBVC countries—74 000 of whom passed their matric examinations last year.

That is not to mention the additional 162 000 private candidates who are doing Std 10 in instalments, as it were. We therefore have to take account of the entry of enormous numbers of people with secondary and tertiary qualifications into the labour market in the future.

Prof Cas van Vuuren, rector elect of Unisa, recently said:

It is generally accepted that the expansion of education and the training of manpower is an important factor which promotes the country’s economic growth rate. However, the expectations in regard to the growth in education could also overstretch the financial capacity of the country and its economic growth rate. The question that arises is whether there is a reasonable expectation of adequate job opportunities for the explosive numbers of secondary and tertiary students. The question is whether a larger proportion of the available funds should not be spent on job-creation programmes for people with post-primary training rather than on the unbridled expansion of relatively expensive secondary and tertiary training per se. There is undoubtedly also an urgent need to focus and to channel the content of educational programmes as well as the selection and admission of students to a far greater extent in accordance with the requirements of job opportunities. That is why the new career-oriented educational model, which the Department of Education and Training has worked out for the entire school cycle from grade A to Std 10, and which it is in the process of implementing in phases with great success, is both essential and extremely well-timed. I also think that educational programmes should be directed at preparing pupils and making them ready for their entry into the so-called informal sector. As far as I know, this aspect has not yet received proper attention, but it has been placed on the department’s planning strategy. Furthermore, I was disturbed to learn that pressure is being brought to bear by the community on some tertiary institutions to take in more students in order to keep them off the streets and to save them from unemployment—an extremely expensive method of combating unemployment!

I have therefore instructed the Department of Education and Training to begin this year with the holding of exhaustive discussions with all interested parties regarding the question of the enormous growth in the numbers at secondary and tertiary institutions in the light of affordability as well as appropriate job opportunities. I myself shall be actively involved in these consultations. The entire South African educational system and a great number of State bodies, as well as the private sector and the Black communities, have a great and pressing interest in this. I want to make it clear that my intention is by no means to curb the progress of any aspect of the expansion of education for Blacks, but rather to ensure that expenditure is as cost-effective as possible and that it makes a real contribution to career possibilities and an economic livelihood for pupils and students.

†Against this background I should also like to clarify the position with regard to compulsory education. During the seventies efforts to introduce compulsory education for Black children met with opposition from the Black community both on political and on practical grounds. In 1980 a form of compulsory education was introduced for communities which voluntarily accepted it. However, at present only 371 schools are involved. In such cases parents have had to provide a written undertaking to keep their children at school up to the age of 16 or until they had passed Std 5. The department has in turn provided free stationery in such cases in addition to free textbooks which had already generally been provided before that date. However, the necessary regulations for enforcing this in terms of the Education and Training Act of 1979 were never promulgated or applied, not even on a local or regional basis.

Meanwhile the inducement of free stationery has become generally applicable to all schools. I therefore have to state that in fact effective compulsory education does not exist in the department.

However, compulsory education for all Black children in the Republic of South Africa remains a goal of this department. In view of the fact that it has been estimated that about 1 051 000 Black children of schoolgoing age in the whole of the RSA are not attending school at present, the general implementation of compulsory education over a short period is simply not practicable. I believe certain requirements have to be met before compulsory education can be introduced nationally or regionally.

Firstly, there should already be school attendance on a voluntary basis by the large majority of the age group; secondly, adequate facilities and manpower should be available, or in near prospect, to provide schooling for all children; and thirdly, the parents, guardians or custodians of the children should be able and prepared, with the support of the community, to accept full responsibility for school attendance by their children. The relevant national plans of the department will now be reviewed with a view to a programme for achieving as nearly as possible general compulsory education as at a target date to be determined. This date will be made known in due course.

Mr Chairman, I should like to conclude my introductory remarks at this point. I shall reply to the debate at a later stage.

Mr Chairman, I request the privilege of the half-hour. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister referred to a number of matters, and it is not possible for me to react to all those matters. A number of matters are subjects on which we disagree drastically, but we should like to associate ourselves with the hon the Minister’s words of thanks and appreciation to Dr Fourie and officials of the department.

Unfortunately I am not able to deal with the hon the Minister’s completely unsatisfactory statement on 29 March concerning the irregularities in the purchasing of a computer-backed tuition system, because a ruling by Mr Speaker prevents me from doing so.

We are discussing the Vote dealing with the education and training of Black people which has not yet been transferred to Black governments, be they independent or self-governing.

By way of commencement, I briefly want to state the standpoint of the CP, as the Official Opposition, in that regard. The CP believes in the right of every people to govern itself in a country which it can call its own fatherland. We also want the other Black peoples to have that right; not only the TBVC peoples, but also the six self-governing peoples. We therefore believe that those Black national governments should also have a full say in their own education in their various national states, without Coloureds, Indians, Whites or any other peoples being able to interfere. [Interjections.]

On the road to the pinnacle of freedom, viz independence, the rights and powers over the education of each Black population group should gradually be transferred to that people, but in conjunction with that the gradual transfer of rights, the gradual transfer of the accompanying responsibilities, must also take place.

One must always guard against standards of education being created by the White government, standards which are not economically affordable or attainable, as regards quality and available financial sources in particular, for the Black people concerned. The Whites must not create standards for the Black peoples which they will not be able to maintain later, since in the final instance each people has to be responsible for its own education—the right to make decisions about it for themselves—but also for the accompanying obligation.

One of the most important obligations is to pay for it. No people with self-respect can be and continue to be financially dependent on another people.

Surely the Black peoples do not want to perpetuate or exacerbate financial dependence on White South Africa for their education requirements. Surely their ideal must also be to give substance to their striving for freedom, up to and including independence, by becoming self-sufficient and maintaining their own identity. At the same time the Whites should not allow their capabilities, including their economic capabilities, either to be abused, or simply to be held to ransom by Black peoples.

Owing to the relative handicap Black peoples have when it comes to development, as opposed to the Whites, economic interdependence and the fact that labour is a very important export production factor and earner of foreign exchange for the Black peoples, a percentage of those peoples will work and live partly in White South Africa for the foreseeable future, and in principle education will have to be provided for them there.

The CP’s policy therefore expressly provides, in the first instance, that the White government should, in principle, have jurisdiction—or authority, if hon members wish—over the citizens of neighbouring states in White South Africa, over the education of those groups as well; in the second instance, that that education should as far as possible correspond with the education of the fellow-citizens of those people in the neighbouring state; and, in the third instance, that agreement can be reached between the White government and the Black national government concerned, in each case, that that Black government itself provides education for its fellow-citizens and citizens in White South Africa and therefore renders the service concerned to its people itself. Such a policy confirms, on the one hand, the right of self-determination of peoples and, on the other, the sound basis it provides for good neighbourliness and agreement on such an important matter as the provision of education for every people by every people.

Thus, despite certain unfavourable realities, the CP eventually brings us to a point where, by agreement between peoples, there need not be a Black Minister for Black education in South Africa because Black Ministers from the neighbouring states will occupy that role themselves without, in terms of the agreement between peoples, the White man relinquishing his jurisdiction, authority or final say in his own country over citizens from neighbouring peoples, and whilst the objective of White majority rule in the White fatherland, and maximum Black settlement in, and development of, Black states is carried out.

It is obvious that the White government will limit that degree of Black presence in the White country in relation to the White man’s ideals, expectations and objectives, and will consequently want to keep the provision of Black education in White South Africa within those limits. We are therefore in favour of the provision of Black education at the secondary level taking place predominantly, if not wholly, in the Black states themselves. We have said this in the case of Black farm schools on White farms as well, and apparently the hon the Minister agreed with that. Perhaps he would like to qualify that today, but that is what I understood him to say.

These views which I have just set out, have been held for a very long time by right-minded conservative members of the NP, the party in which I was born and grew up. Those of them who still hold these views, but are still sitting in that party, belong in the CP, because in essence the NP holds a completely different view today.

Thanks to the fruits of separate development—I am not saying that mistakes were not made—the NP is fortunately being delayed in its transformation of the educational position, as I put it, to the one single educational system for one nation of all inhabitants, irrespective of race, colour, religion, sex or ethnic ties.

That which still remains of the CP’s view in practice, is tolerated by this Government because it constitutes such an unshakeable part of the present reality, a reality which the predecessors of Pan-Africanism, the ANC, the UDF and the PFP did not want, and which they predicted we would never realise in practice, but a reality created by a Government which at that time implemented the policy of the present-day CP because it had the will and had developed the ability to carry into effect the deepest striving for freedom and sense of self-determination of true nationalism.

This new leftist-radical Government is now distorting numerous Black education systems into one system for all in one nation’s country, excepting, as I have said, those systems which have already developed in such a way that the NP simply has to live with them.

This Government is now allowing Coloureds and Indians to interfere and have a joint say in Black education. Instead of a gradual transfer of authority to each particular Black people, there is a movement towards multi-ethnic education. Certain elements of “people’s education” are even being considered. Joint core-syllabuses are the order of the day, whilst the specific developmental and cultural needs of each people have to take a secondary position.

In the words of the hon the State President, even this hon Minister is working himself out of his post to be replaced by a Black minister who, unlike various ethnic Ministers, will have to be a general multi-ethnic Black Minister so as to fit in with the Government’s integration framework. What fun this new Black multi-ethnic Minister will have with “people’s education” and core-syllabuses! Why should he be bothered about ethnically-oriented education? He would have to be above own culture, Pan-Africanistic and UDF-oriented, and full steam on the way to equality, irrespective not only of race or colour, but also of ethnic ties. [Interjections.] How he will enjoy sitting in the hon the State President’s Cabinet and influencing decisions concerning matters relating to the education of Whites, Coloureds and Indians—their syllabuses, standards and financing! How little will he care for the right of the White man to decide for himself about his education and the responsibility of the Black peoples increasingly to pay for their own education, when he is sitting in the Cabinet where he can take the money he needs, as it were, by way of “bargaining”, which is really just political blackmail!

How little will he care about the specific requirements of Black peoples as regards development when he supposedly becomes detribalised like some city dweller and, with a new identity, can strive for those educational qualifications which certain Blacks want so as to take over the positions presently held by White officials, just because they are Black, in the name of no discrimination and equal treatment, irrespective of race or colour! This will not be done to develop their own Black state, but to occupy the White state. How strongly will this hon Minister’s Black successor feel about the removal of so-called discrimination in schools; the admission of Black scholars to White schools, Black students to White universities, technikons and colleges! If the present White hon Minister carries on as he is doing, hon members can just imagine how his Black successor could expand on that. He will not be in favour of as few Black high schools in White areas as possible, as this hon Minister apparently still feels. He will establish Black numerical superiority wherever he wishes; in Germiston rather than in Katlehong, on White farms in the Potgietersrus area rather than in the Black homeland of Lebowa.

If, as he did on 9 March this year, this hon Minister is prepared to take away the rights of a White farmer and owner of a farm as manager, or, technically speaking, governing body, of a Black primary school which he himself built on his farm for the sake of emancipation, and is prepared to hand him over to a new governing body in which he is only one against a Black majority of parents of pupils in that school, parents, most of whom work on his farm, and then make disgraceful misrepresentations about it in this House, as he did on 9 March—I shall come back to that later—what will the moderate, so-called budding Minister who is going to succeed him get up to! [Interjections.]

It will be in this same House, because he is going to be a Minister of general affairs and will have to sit here and debate and discuss his Vote. That “Muzorewa” for Black education, who has to succeed the hon the Minister, will expropriate that White farmer’s land. He will not bother with a softening-up process of contracts, short-term leasing and then registrable long-term leasing, followed by negotiations to purchase. He will not let the farmer serve on the governing body under a Black majority under the pretence of Black parental involvement. He will throw him out altogether and give him no say, and then still, as I say, expropriate his land.

This Government must be the most foolish and most dangerous government this country has ever had.

I would much rather have spoken about the urgent need for agriculturally and technically-oriented education for the Black peoples, about the fine and comprehensive annual report of the department, and about the dedicated and experienced educational experts, schooled long ago in the old Bantu education, who fortunately still have a major and positive influence in the department, but perhaps I will have time for other aspects at the end of my speech. However, I am afraid that something else is crying out for an answer, and that is the severity and crudeness of the hon the Minister’s completely unjustified and factually erroneous attack on me, inter alia, but in particular concerning the position of the White farm owner and farmer in the new governing body, as approved in the amending Bill on 9 March, after we had opposed it.

Unfortunately it has become the practice for numerous hon Ministers to abuse their opportunity till the final word of reply to a debate, and then the hon members on this side of the House have to use subsequent opportunities such as this one to set the record straight. I sincerely hope that the hon the Minister’s apparent obsession about getting at me personally will not cloud his judgement again today. [Interjections.] I said the following about clause 11:

Then the hon the Minister came and said in his reply that a governing body only became relevant if the owner of the farm had decided not to manage it himself. He went on to say:

“He” refers to the farmer.

What absolute rubbish! Let us begin with the section dealing with the definition. According to the old Act—I mean the Act as it was before the amendment we voted on on 9 March—a governing body with regard to a Government-sponsored or private school is defined as the owner, person or body which manages that school in terms of section 8(8). In terms of the provision in section 8(8) in the old Act, the owner, or the person he appoints or authorises, whichever one of the two, is known as the “governing body”. In terms of the new provision in section 8(8) in respect of a farm school, there is the express, and not enabling, provision that the governing body must be a body—no longer just a person as in the old provision—consisting on the one hand either of the owner, or his representative, and on the other hand, the parents concerned—the plural is used, which means that there cannot only be one; there has to be at least two—of those pupils who are registered at that school. They mean parents in the broad sense of the word. That is precisely what I said. The farmer who is the owner, is being made subject to Black majority in the governing body of the school, on his own farm, at a school which has been built and is being maintained mainly with his own capital. The same applies to the representative of the farmer, if the farmer does not wish to manage the school himself. It is as simple as that. If only the hon the Minister had prevented his obsession with becoming personal from clouding his lucid moments!

Five different jurists, amongst whom were attorneys, held precisely the same opinion in this regard. [Interjections.] At that time the hon the Minister was particularly caustic about attorneys—something I did not expect of him. However, this could be because he himself has not practised as an attorney. In any case, just to satisfy the hon the Minister, I also consulted a lecturer in law at RAU, and he also agreed with us. Of course the hon the Minister is welcome to go and consult the legal advisers in his department, not that I am intimating that he has a snowball’s hope of getting support from them for his standpoint. [Interjections.] Against the background of these facts, I now ask him, concerning the misrepresentations the hon the Minister made on 9 March to consider the unbridled language he used on 9 March when he said:

I hope the hon the Minister now understands that like the proverbial four fingers, his disparaging remarks are pointing back at him, as well as the hon member for Bloemfontein East and the other jubilant NP back-benchers who so trustingly believed the poor Minister. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister also said the following about my standpoint:

It seems to me that this hon Minister no longer has the ability to be ashamed of his disgraceful misrepresentation. His obsession with disparaging his own people and seeking the favour of the Black majority, in order to consolidate a few White minority rights, has consumed him completely. [Interjections.]

Order! No, I cannot permit this running commentary whilst the hon member for Potgietersrus is speaking. Hon members must assist me in this regard. The hon member may proceed.

In conclusion, I must also remind the hon the Minister … [Interjections.] Does the hon member Dr Golden want to go to Potgietersrus to do the polka again? [Interjections.]

Order!

I was saying that I must also remind the hon the Minister of another abuse of an opportunity to reply and of his misleading this House on 9 March about the maximum penalty which was increased from R50 to R500 in clause 15. The hon the Minister said:

I now want to quote my exact words:

A downright mean false accusation was made against me. It grieves me to associate with a former rector of my Alma Mater at this level on which the hon the Minister began to operate on 9 March. I quoted his own words, since I have only used his words; not mine. I was only repeating his words to him. As I was saying, it grieves me to associate with him on this level, but the hon the Minister left me no choice.

I shall conclude with a very simple question to the hon the Minister. Do his jurisprudence—I am only using his own words—the regard for what he is and for what he has done, about which he feels free to let his own people judge him, the malice with which he tried to sling mud, his intellect, his feeling of shame, if he has any, his misrepresentations and his spitefulness, allow him to reconsider the path on which he finds himself? [Interjections.] That is all I am asking. I am only asking the hon the Minister to reconsider; I am not asking him for an apology. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Potgietersrus is now apparently the chief spokesman on Black education of the party on that side of the committee. If that is the case, I want to congratulate him most heartily on the fact that he has been entrusted with that responsibility.

I intend to treat the hon member as courteously as is physically possible. I just want to tell him that it does not behove a young hon member like himself to behave here in such an arrogant and derogatory manner towards an hon Minister of the State or towards any hon member of the House, either senior or junior. [Interjections.] I want to add that it is an embarrassment to us older members in the House, who have already developed a little calmness of spirit, to listen to speeches of that nature. I want to advise the hon member, in all civility, that it would be more conducive to good debate in the House if he could calm down a little.

And if he kept to the truth and did not mislead anyone!

The hon member began by giving us a short exposition, a repetition, of familiar old policies. He said nothing new, except that after the division of the land had taken place, we in South Africa would still have Blacks, that those Blacks would need education and that that education would naturally have to be paid for.

I have news for the hon member. If a CP Government were ever to come to power in this country … [Interjections] … it would not mean that they would be in a position to spend less on Black education in this country than is being spent now whilst it is the responsibility of the present Government, because what are the facts.

Today in this Committee we are dealing with a debate on education and training of the future participants in the economy, not only of the country as it exists today, but also of the entire sub-region of Southern Africa. We are therefore also dealing with a discussion of the future of people who will participate in the economy, which will also include what the CP visualises as its future. In view of this I want to tell the hon member that I think it would be a good thing for one to act in a realistic manner in regard to these matters. It is no good expounding visions here or engaging in flights of fancy. That would only lead one to disillusionment.

It is a pity that the hon member used this debate largely to engage in a personal quarrel with the hon the Minister. Aside from that it related to legislation that had already been piloted through all three Houses of this Parliament and that already appeared on the Statute Books. I think the hon member has allowed an opportunity for meaningful debate on a very important subject to slip away.

I shall now try to be more positive. A week or so ago the department’s 1987 annual report was made available to us. It is a comprehensive document which expounds the activities of the department as fully as one could hope it would. What is more, it is a success story. It also serves as a testimonial for the Director-General of the department, Dr Fourie, who will shortly be retiring, and his entire staff, from the highest to the lowest levels. The achievements that are documented in this report could only be attained with extraordinary skill, dedication, persistence and enthusiasm. The officials deserve our praise and our gratitude, and the praise and gratitude of South Africa as a whole. I believe, however, that they themselves would like to share that praise and gratitude with the hon the Minister and his able Deputy Minister.

I want to associate myself with the tribute which the hon the Minister and his Deputy Minister received in a leading article in the Cape Times of 28 April. With reference to the department’s achievements, the newspaper wrote:

No one who knows anything about education and training will differ with the Cape Times in this instance.

On a personal level I should like to thank the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister and senior officials of the department most heartily on my own behalf, and on behalf of the members of the standing committee, for the wonderful co-operation and support we received from them on such a continuous basis.

I should now like to go on to substantiate a statement I made, namely that the annual report documents a success story. Success must be measurable, and the yardstick I am using is the principle which the Government established in 1983 in the White Paper on the Provision of Education in the Republic of South Africa, namely:

Let us evaluate that yardstick in certain areas in order to see whether any progress has been made and whether progress is still being made. In each instance we shall use 1983—that is the year of the White Paper—as the base year. Let us begin with the Estimate of Expenditure. In 1983 it was R561 318 000; this year it is R1 640 728 000, an increase in nominal terms of 192,5% over five years, which also represents a large increase in real terms. That looks like progress to me.

When one looks at how this increased expenditure is reflected in the per capita expenditure in respect of primary and secondary pupils, one finds that the figure in 1983 was R237,16, and last year 136% higher at R560,50. We need not be ashamed of this, particularly not if we take into consideration that in 1978-79 it was still only R68,84.

Another test for progress which is often made, is the teacher-pupil ratio. Let us look at how things stand there. In 1983 the ratio was 1:40,5, whilst last year it was 1:37,5. In 1968 it was still only 1:58. That, too, represents more than an encouraging amount of progress en route to the ideal that has been set for the year 2000, of 1:35 for primary schools and 1:30 for secondary schools, a ratio which will be educationally satisfactorily responsible. This is a particularly fine achievement if the size of, and the increase in, numbers are taken into account. The numbers with which Black education has to contend, are staggering. The best way to grasp their extent is to compare them with the numbers of Whites. I shall round off the figures throughout. Last year there were approximately 952 000 White children from Sub A to Standard 10 at school. In the RSA, in which the self-governing territories are included, there were 4,7 million Black children at school, 752 000 of whom were in Sub A. There were more than 1,9 million children, 330 000 of whom were in Sub A, under the control of this department. All in all these children were enrolled at 8 195 institutions. An additional number of some 44 000 children are added every year in respect of this department alone. Last year the figure even higher than 50 000.

These facts naturally necessitate an enormous building programme. Last year 52 new schools were erected with 2 374 classrooms and room for 86 940 children. Aside from that, 411 classrooms for 16 440 children were built on at farm schools. This means that in only one year additional room was created which could accommodate approximately 11% of all White children attending school. Put differently, the challenge with which Black education, which is the responsibility of this department, is faced, is to make as much additional spatial provision in the space of some nine years as that which White education as a whole at the school level has had 330 years to provide.

The most amazing fact of all is that the department is not shying away from these challenges.

Order! The hon member for Stellenbosch’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I am pleased to afford the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Order! The hon member for Stellenbosch may continue.

I thank the hon member for Pietersburg.

The department is not shying away from these challenges. In fact, even their critics are finding it difficult to keep up. The figures are changing at such a dramatic rate in a positive sense that those who criticise are virtually always wide of the mark. My advice to those people who want to criticise is to get their facts straight, because they could easily find that they were making themselves look ridiculous.

I should also like to devote some attention to the situation with regard to teachers. Last year the department had 52 867 teachers in service and the self-governing states 65 498. That is a total of 118 365, which is 29% more than in 1983. The department views the quality of actively serving teachers as the determining factor in the provision of qualitative education. For that reason teachers receive in-service training with a view to upgrading their efficiency in the classrooms. Last year 628 such courses were offered, in which 14 531 teachers were involved. That represents almost 28% of all teachers who were in the service of the department. Even more teachers were involved in the overall training campaign of the department, namely more than 50%.

The fact that there are teachers in service who do not yet have a matriculation certificate—this is a phenomenon with historical roots—has often been criticised. December 1990, which is two and a half years from now, has been set as a target for all those teachers who are in a position to do so, to obtain a Standard 10 certificate. The Adult Education Section has been given the responsibility for this task.

This success is even described by the Cape Times as a “remarkable achievement”. The percentage of teachers without a Standard 10 certificate in 1983—the base year which I have used—was still 73,6%. Last year it was already only 49,7%—indeed a remarkable improvement. One method which can be used to indicate the success or otherwise of an education system, is the staying power of the system or, put differently, the drop-out rate for children during their school careers. Statistics prove that only 6,2% of the children who began in Sub A in 1969 reached Standard 10. Of the children who were in Sub A in 1976, 20,78% reached Standard 10 last year. That is undoubtedly not good enough, but it nevertheless already indicates excellent progress.

I should now just like to return briefly to the White Paper. The HSRC investigation and the so-called De Lange Report advocated, in forceful terms, that career-orientated education would be a more appropriate course for a large number of young people than academic education. The White Paper associated itself with that view as well as with the recommendation of the educational task group that a balance should be struck between academic education and career-oriented education with a view to the manpower requirements of the country. The department began to explore this school of thought with great circumspection and sensitivity. In Sub A to Standard 3 the general formative education was expanded so as to also make provision for the establishment and development of skills and techniques and the concomitant knowledge content. This is termed the technical moulding phase.

Standard 4 is a transition phase. Standards 5 to 7 are termed the exploratory phase and pupils are brought into contact with a variety of career directions as part of the normal school programme.

Up to that stage—Standard 7—everyone participates in this programme. In Standards 8, 9 and 10 pupils with the necessary interest and aptitude may receive a credited modular training in the career of their choice in accordance with the manpower requirements of the country. It is hoped that 21% of the pupils will participate in this specialisation phase.

Measured against the figure of only 1% of secondary pupils who have thus far received technical education, and the 2,4% at the primary level, the new programme represents phenomenal progress.

The success of this department will determine our future. If this department achieves success, we shall have a prosperous future, because then we shall be in a strong enough position to tackle our biggest problem in this country, namely the problem of poverty. Should this department not achieve success, however, we shall have a miserable future in this country, regardless of whatever wonderful constitutional model we were to develop. That is why I believe that it is appropriate for us not only to congratulate this department on the wonderful achievements it has made but that together with the rest of South Africa, we should also, in our own interests, wish them good luck and success on the road that lies ahead.

Mr Chairman, may I ask for the privilege of the second half-hour?

I shall not be following directly on what the hon member for Stellenbosch talked about, but as far as his concluding remarks are concerned, I would certainly concur with his comment concerning the enormous importance of ensuring that this department is successful.

In the limited time at my disposal, I will be concentrating on a few issues, which always means that one has to be selective and cannot talk about the wide range of activities that this department is involved in.

I would like to start, however, by placing on record a word of thanks to the officials of the department. Throughout the year I have always found them helpful whenever I needed information or assistance with anything. I would also like to associate myself with the remarks of the hon the Minister in wishing the Director-General, Dr Fourie, well on his retirement in August. He has had a long spell in a very difficult post, and he has certainly earned his rest.

I was also pleased to hear the hon the Minister’s remarks about compulsory education—about getting it on a more realistic basis than at present.

First of all I should like to refer to the annual report of the department, and in most respects I want to compliment them on it, although there are some aspects which I am going to criticise. Firstly, the report was produced promptly—far more promptly than that of virtually every other department. Secondly, it contains a wealth of information. Thirdly, it is produced at modest cost. It think it is appropriate that it contains the necessary information without pages and pages of glossy, full-colour photographs which, I might say, is in dramatic contrast to what we have received from some other departments.

I should also like to thank the hon the Minister and is hon Deputy Minister for the courtesy they have shown me and my colleagues during the course of the year whenever we have had to approach them in relation to certain matters. The hon the Deputy Minister is particularly involved with Black schooling where many of the problems arise and I should like to record our thanks to him for his accessibility and willingness to discuss matters and to make time for us in his very full schedule whenever it becomes necessary. I want to thank him for that.

Unfortunately, Mr Chairman, diligence and attitudes do not always spread to all the officials in the field, and it is an unfortunate fact of life that the mistakes of a few can often undo the good work of many.

I must also record again the fact that I believe it is embarrassing for us as Whites to be sitting here talking about Black education without having Black people inside this Chamber when one is discussing their education. [Interjections.]

Despite the achievements of the department—and there have been many achievements—there are still overriding problems. I believe that these are problems of credibility and of legitimacy. In many parts of the country there is very little trust between the department and the communities it is there to serve. The hon the State President has said that he would like to see a Black Minister of Education and Training. If he believes that such a move in itself would make a major contribution to solving the problems in Black education he is deluding himself: on the contrary, a Black appointee as Minister, who is not representative of or directly accountable to the Black community, would exacerbate rather than solve these problems. He would be seen as an Uncle Tom, and become the focus of heightened dissatisfaction.

What is needed is an education system which represents the wishes of the Black community, not a system which is essentially determined by a White NP Government that has consistently refused to grant basic human and civil rights to the Black citizens of this country.

I have referred to a lack of credibility and I should like to quote some examples to support my contention. By way of example I should like to refer to some instances arising from the annual report of the department, because while it is comprehensive in many respects, the annual report sometimes differs from the reality in respect of some key issues.

The first such example I should like to refer to is that regarding unrest in schools. I quote from page 5 of the report, as follows:

Now, Sir, in reply to questions in this House the hon the Minister has given the following facts relating to schools affected by boycotts or disturbances. In 1986 there were 146 schools with 72 000 pupils affected. In 1987 there were 147 schools with 128 000 pupils affected. In relation to high schools alone 105 were affected in 1986, while in 1987 a total of 97 schools were affected. This figure represents 26% of all high schools. According to this annual report, however, there has been virtually no disruption. I accept that the nature and the intensity of the disruption and the boycotts vary considerably from school to school. Therefore one cannot simply assume that all those schools were completely “deurmekaar” throughout the year.

Nevertheless, the statement in the report is simply not true. In the Cape Peninsula alone most of the high schools were subject to considerable disruption for a large part of the year.

Secondly I should like to refer to the question of matric results. These continue to be appalling. Only about 48% passed at the end of 1986, which is the exam year covered by this report. Yet, in the first 113 pages—these cover the descriptive part of the report—there is no mention whatsoever made of that fact.

Those very poor matric results are mentioned only in part 2 among the statistics. While I accept that the department wants people to be impressed by what it is doing—that is fair enough—it should not impress them at the expense of providing a complete picture. The fact that there is no direct comment on this matter in the main report must lead one to either of only two possible conclusions. Either the department is trying to conceal unpleasant facts, in which case one has to ask oneself what other unpleasant facts are being hidden away, or it does not consider a 52% failure rate a matter of major concern and therefore worthy of mention in the first 113 pages of the report. Either way, this reflects badly on the department and reduces the credibility of the report.

The third aspect to which I wish to refer is teacher training and the credibility of the department and the hon the Minister in this regard. This year, for the first time, a shortage of money has resulted in the fact that there are not as many teachers in Black education as there should be or as are available. In answer to a question, the hon the Minister told me that there were 905 qualified Black teachers who could not be given posts in Black education. He pointed out that he was referring to professional qualifications, and not necessarily to M+3, but over the years we have been led to believe—this includes the hon the Minister—that the biggest problem was a shortage of qualified teachers and that, in a sense, more money would not solve all the problems, However, we have already reached a stage at which the size of classes cannot be reduced because the money is not available to create posts for all the qualified Black teachers, even those from within the community being talked about.

I would like to quote three short sentences from the annual report in respect of teacher training. The first is on page 71, and reads as follows:

I would like to emphasise the words: “every means at its disposal”. Allow me to quote from page 73, as follows:

I quote from page 77, as follows:

The impression given is one of determination to train primary school teachers. As usual, however, apartheid takes precedence over education. White teacher training colleges stand half empty. Filling them with Black students would immediately increase the number of Black teacher training college students by 49%, and yet the hon the Minister told this House that he had not even made such a request to the White education department. Whose interests is he serving by his refusal to do so—the NP’s or those of hundreds of thousands of Black pupils and of the teachers struggling to cope with impossibly big classes?

The smokescreen of language and culture is often thrown up in this regard but, from Std 2 onwards, teachers in primary schools have to teach in the medium of English or Afrikaans. Three or four years at a non-racial teacher training college will not destroy the culture of those prospective teachers. In fact, their use of the English and Afrikaans languages, which is one of the major problems in Black schools, would improve dramatically in that environment.

Whatever smaller problems there might be, the advantages outweigh them by far. In fact, admitting Black students to fill the empty places at White teacher training colleges would be equivalent to adding R170 million, or 10% to the total education and training budget. In respect of teacher training college facilities—I refer to capital expenditure—it would represent a 1 000% increase in the 1988-99 budget year. That is what it would cost in terms of capital expenditure to provide those places out of the hon the Minister’s budget.

Yet nothing happens. It is not surprising, therefore, that the credibility of this department is so low in the eyes of many people when it fudges the reality of many key issues.

I would like to refer to a second matter, the Advocate-General’s report on the purchase of the Ivis Interactive Video system by the department. The report raises more questions than it answers. The hon the Minister and Deputy Minister did the right thing to refer the information to the Advocate-General when it came to their attention. I am not suggesting that my unhappiness relates to anything to do with their personal honesty or integrity. I believe, however, the hon the Minister’s response in his statement of 29 March this year was a disaster and an evasion of his responsibility. It does a disservice to his department and to anyone who has the right to prove his innocence. I call on the hon the Minister to appoint a parliamentary select committee to investigate all aspects of this purchase, and not simply those covered by the Advocate-General Act.

In essence the department wanted to get involved in interactive video and it made contact with an individual or two who formed a company to deal with the department. Other companies in the field were not approached on that basis. There are many unanswered questions. I want to pose just ten of them this afternoon.

Firstly, why in early 1985 were no companies advised that the department was seriously interested in working with others to develop interactive video systems?

Why were no other companies invited to tender at that stage?

Having not even spoken to other companies at the developmental stage, how could the department claim that it was not aware of any other supplier?

Fourthly, if the department had acted correctly, why did Dr Meiring admit in the report that they had not, and why did the department refuse to comply with the Tender Board’s request for a categorical declaration that Learning Technologies was the only supplier?

On what grounds did Dr Meiring state in a letter that Learning Technologies was the only firm “capable of developing” the courseware and hardware when other firms were not approached at the initial stages?

Purchase was conditional on the giving of the categorical declaration demanded by the Tender Board. As that was never given, on whose authority was the purchase made?

What did the Director-General think his son’s involvement with Learning Technologies was and did he not have a duty to find out exactly what his son’s connection was if he did not know?

Tenthly, did Dr Fourie say to a financial magazine: “No, my son is not involved with Learning Technologies.”? The magazine says it was a taped interview. Why would Dr Fourie want to say such a thing?

We are dealing with the circumventing of tender regulations in the most unusual and suspicious circumstances. An amount of at least R4,8 million is involved. The hon the Minister may believe that no further steps are necessary but we do not agree with that. The case for a comprehensive enquiry is irrefutable. I call on the hon the Minister to support the appointment of a select committee.

We have no desire to harm innocent persons, but we need to know the whole truth about this matter. The sooner an enquiry is held, the better, because this issue will simply not go away.

I now wish to turn to local Western Cape issues relating to this department. The major issue I wish to address is the question of students who are not at school because they are not being admitted to schools. One could speak on this for two hours. 1987 was a turbulent year in many of the high schools here in the Western Cape. The question of registration here at schools became a major issue. There are conflicting versions as to what exactly happened, who said what and who agreed to what.

The year 1988 started with further controversy over registrations and again there were conflicting versions as to what exactly happened and did not happen. In the end provision was made for late applications to be accepted for consideration up to 20 February 1988. The vast majority of the 1500 late applications were refused. One now has the totally unsatisfactory situation that about a thousand students who wish to attend high school are being refused admission. This is disgraceful and looking for trouble.

It is untenable that children wanting an education are turned away even though some of the high schools have hundreds of empty places.

The main reasons given by the department are unacceptable or inadequate documentation, including false reports, and frivolous, unsubstantiated reasons for delay in applying.

I have serious doubts about the efficiency and impartiality of the department’s evaluation of these applications. I also do not accept that leaflets, Radio Bantu announcements and loudhailers necessarily result in all parents and students fully understanding how a completely new and different form of registration must be complied with. However, even if that were so, and even if one considers the most extreme case of someone who submits a falsified report, is that sufficient reason to deny a fourteen-year-old child a full year of schooling?

I believe it is not. If those were White children, it would be literally criminal not to admit them.

Night school is not the answer, especially for younger children. In any event, what makes them “untouchables” in respect of day schools but acceptable at night schools? There is no logic in this.

I appeal in all honesty to the hon the Minister: Even if he believes that these children or their parents were at fault in some way, he must find a way for them to be admitted to day schools. It can be done.

The second Western Cape issue I wish to refer to, is the Injongo Primary School. I believe this is a classic case of departmental inefficiency and neglect until matters got completely out of hand. Tensions have existed over a couple of years, and last year they came to a head. The parents followed all the correct channels, but no progress was made. Eventually they sent their grievances in writing to the circuit office on 15 December 1987. The complaints included allegations of the principal sending children to buy liquor during school hours, the principal being drunk at school, the principal giving corporal punishment to girls, and a teacher having sexual relations with a schoolchild.

What did the circuit office do? Nothing! There was certainly no reportback whatsoever to the parents. Tensions rose further, and in March of this year they exploded. A fight took place at the school involving, inter alia, the principal and a teacher, Mr Wellington Mvunge. Both had knife wounds. Mr Mvunge was suspended without pay. Charges were laid with the police against Mr Mvunge. They declined to prosecute. The knife used in the fight was neither Mr Mvunge’s nor produced by him, but he was suspended and the principal stayed at the school.

The parents were incensed. They believed that the culprits were going free while the innocent party was suspended without pay.

Hundreds signed a petition calling for the transfer of the principal and the deputy principal and the reinstatement of Mr Mvunge. They refused to allow their children to return to the school. Now, nearly six months after the parents had approached the inspector, and five months after having handed written representatives to the circuit office, a departmental inquiry is being held. Last night Mr Mvunge was arrested and is apparently due to be charged with intimidation arising from events since his suspension. He has also not been paid for the four weeks that he worked in March prior to his suspension.

It so happens that Mr Mvunge belongs to DETU, a teachers’ union which is not recognised by the department. Last year, when a sportsmaster attacked the acting principal of Langa High School, he was not suspended and lost no pay. He was transferred to the circuit office. On that occasion, however, it was the acting principal who was a member of DETU. Is it surprising that the parents and teachers have so little confidence in the department?

What is of the utmost urgency is the establishment of mutually acceptable channels of communication. Tensions are running very high right now in the township communities and schools. Excluded children, suspended teachers and alleged victimization are critical issues at present.

It would be extremely foolish to ignore the seriousness of the situation. It would be equally foolish to lay the blame at the feet of agitators. Black people in the Cape Peninsula, in and out of school, have had a raw deal for decades. It is about time that something is done about it—fast!

Mr Chairman, at the outset I should like to join the hon member for Stellenbosch in thanking the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister and the officials entrusted with education and training. The hon member for Cape Town Gardens also thanked the officials, the Director-General and the Ministry for their help to him, and we want to thank him for that. He also passed several remarks on the matric results and the quality of teachers, matters which I shall come to later in my speech.

As regards his remarks on the report of the Advocate-General, as far as I know Mr Speaker ruled that the matter was still being discussed in a standing committee and that we should not discuss it in this House. I shall consequently not pursue the matter.

I want to associate myself specifically with the remarks of the hon the Minister regarding the officials of this department, and I want to agree with them wholeheartedly. On this occasion I want to convey the sincere thanks of the NP’s study group to the hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister for the way in which they carry out their task. We are particularly impressed by the fact that they are so serious about this matter that they are devoting their lives to this. We have very great appreciation for the way in which they constantly keep the study group informed. We want to thank them sincerely for this.

The hon member for Stellenbosch pointed out to us the excellent achievement of this department, as well as the enormous challenges still facing this department. The hon member for Cape Town Gardens mentioned the tremendous backlogs, but no one can deny that tremendous work has been done, particularly in recent years, to eliminate these backlogs.

On this occasion I want to give attention to a publication by the late Elmon Mthonsi, namely Black Matriculation Results—a Mechanism of Social Control. This publication served as a thesis for a Masters degree at Potchefstroom University. It is astounding that a work which was so totally devoid of scientific merit, could serve as a thesis for an MEd degree at such a recognised university. Mathonsi associated himself with, and received assistance from, the National Education Union of South Africa, the Congress of South African Students, the Azanian Students’ Organisation and the National Union of South African Students. In addition there are several references to, and quotes from, recognised Marxist literature, which gives an indication of how he approached this subject. Consequently one can understand that he came to the conclusion that matric results of Black people would only improve if the so-called suppressed Black majority took over power in this country. He alleged that matric results were manipulated so that Black people fared badly and so that they could continue to hold inferior posts in this country. It is clear that all academic and scientific standards were totally ignored. His findings and statistics were deliberately used to arrive at a preconceived standpoint. For that reason it is important for us to give attention to this and not simply ignore it.

On this occasion I want to appeal to the majority of Blacks not to allow themselves to be incited by trouble-makers of this kind and by intimidators in general. We want to appeal to them to reject the intimidation which occurs in their midst from time to time. They must always realise that there is a need for more facilities, and that they should not destroy existing facilities.

It is unbelievable that a university could award a Masters degree in this case. Let us take a look at this thesis. He started by distributing a questionnaire bristling with grammatical errors and spelling mistakes. It was not at all objective either. He started out by alleging that there was concern about irregularities and the deterioration of matric results. He stated that there was concern about the matric results. He then went on to ask whether or not this was so. In some questions an opinion was asked on factual matters, for example, what the qualifications of examiners and correctors were. If the respondents did not know these facts, they obviously had to hazard a guess in this regard. Surely he could have consulted the primary source, the examination division of the department, to acquire this information. However, he did not do so. Anyone who is working on a thesis obviously consults authoritative sources, and the fact that this was not done in this instance indicates that he undoubtedly had ulterior motives. Mathonsi used the results of the questionnaire to arrive at the conclusion that the Department of Education and Training was indifferent and negligent with regard, inter alia, to the marking of examination papers.

The marking of examination papers of Black matriculants is an enormous task. It is not easy to find almost 6 000 people every year to mark the examination papers. Three million examination papers, weighing 330 tons and packed into 2 800 containers for consignment must be marked. Teachers are appointed as examiners. They must apply for this, and then the headmasters and the circuit inspectors are used to check the qualifications and experience of these people who have applied. Research undertaken in 1986 brought to light that at that stage 40,9% of the examiners had four or more years of post-matric training and that 59,5% of the examiners were Blacks.

Mathonsi alleged that the matric results were being manipulated to suit the economy of the country. This accusation was devoid of all truth. Like the results of all other departments, these matric results are submitted to the Joint Matriculation Board, which acts as moderator. They do random tests, and then these examination papers are checked to see whether they have been marked properly.

Mathonsi accused the department of lacking security, of holding back results and of making students rewrite examinations unnecessarily. The results of some schools were held back in 1981. However, this was because of leaks which occurred, and consequently those students had to rewrite the examinations. It was in the interests of integrity and so that the value of the certificates could be maintained. The department places a high premium on security and confidentiality. In 27 years there has only been one such leak.

Mathonsi alleged that the matric results of Blacks were being manipulated by the Government. However, if one considers the matriculants themselves, during the past few years very few matriculants have questioned the results or asked for examination papers to be remarked.

In conclusion I want to emphasis that Mathonsi’s thesis can be described as unscientific and invalid. The fact that he mainly used secondary sources, and did not use the department’s examination division as a primary source, further confirms the inferiority and invalidity of the thesis. It is very upsetting that this work, which is not at all authoritative, could form the basis of an MEd degree.

In conclusion I want to wish the hon the Minister, the hon the Deputy Minister and the department everything of the best in the tremendous task they are engaged in, in the interests of everyone in South Africa.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Umfolozi will forgive me if I do not react directly to the topic he discussed. I merely want to tell him that I listened attentively to his speech and I think he dealt with the topic very effectively.

Every hon member in this Committee will probably agree with me that high-level manpower is of the utmost importance to every country. A country can never develop to its full potential if it does not have enough well-trained people to take development to the highest level. In order to do this it is necessary for universities, technikons and colleges to make their contribution.

These tertiary education and training institutions can supply manpower, particularly high-level manpower, which can, within a particular period of time, change a country from an underdeveloped country into a developed country. Universities and technikons also play a very important role in this process in South Africa. Because this discussion concerns the education of Black people in particular, it is necessary to consider the contribution which these universities and technikons make to the provision of high-level manpower at tertiary institutions.

When we look at universities we see that in 1977 there were a total of 4 528 students. In 1987 this number had grown to 30 642. This represents an increase of approximately 680% over 10 years. In 1976 808 degrees, diplomas and certificates were awarded to Blacks at universities, while in 1986 the number stood at 3 662. This number has therefore increased by approximately 450%.

With regard to career-orientated tertiary education at the Northern Transvaal Technikon, an equally impressive increase has taken place in the number of students. The number grew from 586 students in 1982 to 1 881 in 1988. It is in the technical field that the greatest shortage of high-level manpower is being experienced in South Africa. For that reason it is gratifying to know that several national diplomas are offered at the said technikon in business management, physical and chemical science, electrical, mechanical and civil engineering, building sciences, surveying and mining.

However, in my speech today I want to spotlight the role played by Medunsa in South African society. Here we are really dealing with a unique specialist university. Unfortunately time does not allow me to give a full exposition of all the functions of that institution, but it is important to point out a few aspects.

During 1987 a total of 17 dentists, 78 doctors, 43 nurses, a large number of paramedics and the first two Black veterinary surgeons completed their undergraduate and post-graduate studies. In spite of the very high standard maintained in this training and the high requirements laid down for students by the relevant statutory bodies, it is remarkable to see how high the percentage passes were of all undergraduate students per academic year.

I think, with reference to the speech by the hon member for Umfolozi, it would also be interesting to look at these percentages at tertiary education level. At Medunsa the pass rate for first year students was 53,9%, for second year students 61,3%, for third year students 71,2%, for fourth year students 84,8%, for fifth year students 87,2%, and for sixth year students 89,8%. If this is not a success story of progress at that level, I do not know what a success story is.

It is a success story of partition!

Medunsa also plays an important role in the general community. The Medunsa institute for community services, also known as Medicos, provided important medical and dental services in the rural hospitals in 1987. The Medicos centre at Soshanguve provided an on-going service in rehabilitation centres, in a crisis clinic for emotional help in the social context and a day centre for 70 handicapped children—to mention but a few.

Judging by all this information Medunsa is entitled to claim, not only that it provides really well-trained manpower for South Africa, but also that it reaches out its hand to the community and renders an extremely valuable service to the community in general.

Medunsa’s aim is eventually to train 200 doctors, 50 dentists, 50 veterinarians and 300 people for medical aid services per year. If that target could be reached, can hon members imagine what a tremendously positive affect that would have on all the medical services in this country? The academic facilities to achieve this target already exist, but the clinical facilities are inadequate. The present facilities will have to be expanded, but large amounts in additional funds are needed for this.

In addition I merely want to mention that virtually 80% of Medunsa’s students rely on financial assistance from sources other than their parental homes and from the university itself for their studies. As a matter of fact, in contrast to other universities, only approximately 22% of the students at Medunsa receive a study bursary, and this includes students who negotiate bursary loans, which of course mean that these students have to repay all the money which they have received in the form of bursary loans.

At a time when an increasing number of voices are being raised against university study which is irrelevant and not aimed at satisfying needs, Medunsa is an excellent example of an institution which is aimed at the needs of the community and the development of our country and its people in the medical and allied fields. There is no doubt about the fact that the State is meeting its obligations with regard to the subsidising of this university.

Today, however, I want to address the private sector, and ask that they become more involved in training, and particularly in the financing of the education of high-level manpower in South Africa. The private sector is also dependent on a corps of well-trained, high-level manpower and for that reason it is surely not unfair to expect a larger financial contribution from the private sector. By increasing their contributions and by more donors coming to the fore, the private sector will not only make a meaningful contribution to the development of South Africa in general, but also specifically to the growth and development of this extremely important university, Medunsa. Mr Chairman, in conclusion I want to express the hope that this appeal of mine to the private sector today in this Committee, will not fall on deaf ears.

Mr Chairman, the hon member Dr Golden’s speech was further proof of the tremendous progress made in the field entrusted to this department. I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate the department most sincerely on this annual report. It is an excellent report, and it is a valuable report which is also of great assistance to us in this debate.

Secondly, because Dr Fourie is not going to be here next year when we discuss this Vote, I want to congratulate him most sincerely on a fine career in the department, and wish him and Mrs Fourie everything of the best for the future. He performed his task admirably.

Mr Chairman, when one studies this report, it is quite clear that very substantial progress was made as regards the functions of this department. The number of pupils is increasing at a tremendous rate—very much more rapidly than the population is increasing. The number of teachers is increasing even more rapidly than the number of pupils is increasing, and in this way the teacher-pupil ratio is improving.

One of the really impressive achievements is that the qualifications of teachers have improved tremendously. In 1983 the percentage of teachers who had not passed Std 10 was 73%. In 1987 this figure had declined to 49,7%. I feel this is an excellent achievement.

Similarly the number of matric pupils is increasing very rapidly. The department’s functions are increasing accordingly, to such an extent that in 1987 there were a total of 1,9 million pupils and students in 8195 institutions. This points to good progress. It is indeed fine progress.

Carry on like this, Ferdie! Do not change the tenor of your debate now! [Interjections.]

No, the hon member for Langlaagte must not get excited yet. [Interjections.] Yes, he may be sorry later. [Interjections.]

Order!

As I have said, this was good progress. Nevertheless there is irrefutable proof in this report that in this sphere there was much more progress in the self-governing states than in the Republic of South Africa. Of course I do not want to detract from the department’s good work and its tireless efforts. However, the fact remains that conditions prevailing in the self-governing states are more favourable for education than they are here. Of course there are many norms which one must apply to determine the quality of education. One of the very important norms is the following. When the percentage of children from the total school population who are in the higher standards increases, this means they are progressing further, passing higher standards, and the quality of education is then also unmistakably higher.

The fact of the matter is that as regards this department’s field of endeavour, the number of pupils in Std 10 increased by 105% between 1980 and 1987. This is a very fine achievement. In the self-governing states this number did not increase by 105%. It increased by 162%. This could also have been achieved here. When we take the pupils in matric as a percentage of the total school population, 1,7% of the pupils falling under this department are in Std 10. On the same basis 2,8% of the pupils in the self-governing states are in Std 10. Surely this is far higher. This indicates that the quality of education being provided there is higher.

When we look at the other end of the scale, what do we find? Let us take the number of pupils in Sub A as a percentage of the total school population. Then 17,4% of the pupils falling under this hon Minister’s department are in Sub A, whereas 15,7% of the pupils are in Sub A in the self-governing states. The percentage is therefore lower. It would therefore seem that the percentage of pupils in the lower standards in the self-governing states is lower than here, whereas the percentage in the higher standards is higher. This means that the quality of education being offered to Black children in the self-governing states is better than outside those states. The achievement is therefore better.

No!

It is so! The overwhelmingly important reason for this lies in the fact that in the self-governing states we have group-specific education. [Interjections.] We are dealing with group-specific education in the Black self-governing states. This is the exact opposite of “people’s education”. The fact of the matter is that the teachers there are the compatriots of the pupils. The departments there are manned by compatriots of the pupils. The relevant Minister is also a compatriot of the pupils. The legislative authority is manned by their compatriots; as is the executive authority. In other words, we are dealing with group-specific education. It is this which provides education of the highest quality. That is why it is the CP’s unambiguous standpoint that this is what should be promoted in South Africa if we want to achieve education of the highest quality in South Africa.

However, the fact of the matter is that the Government’s policy is undermining this. There is no getting away from this. The hon the Minister can sit there shaking his head. It will avail him nothing. Actually he is the arch-underminer. [Interjections.] He is the arch-underminer. He is undermining himself because he is moving towards one central department of education. After all, there is only one Minister deciding on the policy. His centralisation policy is undermining group-specific education.

In the second place I want to refer to the Government’s policy with regard to the abolition of influx control. In the report it is said that provision must be made every year for 44 000 new pupils, but in 1987, owing to the abolition of influx control, an additional 50 000 children descended on the education market. It is not possible to provide decent education if one is dealing with an unknown factor and cannot plan properly.

However, the hon the Minister is undermining this group-specific education in the most important respect in that he announced that he was going to implement, accept and apply certain aspects of “people’s education”. He said he was going to implement the good aspects of “people’s education”, but not the revolutionary aspects.

The fact of the matter is that “people’s education” is a subdivision of the total strategy of the Marxists to gain political control in South Africa in the “liberation struggle” over a wide front, including the labour sphere and the sphere of community organisations, by means of “people’s power”. They are planning a total take-over, and this is a political objective. The fact of the matter is that the hon the Minister nevertheless said he was going to implement aspects of this philosophy.

That is not true, and you, know it.

It is true.

[Inaudible.]

Did the hon the Minister not say he was going to implement some aspects? Is he not going to do anything in that regard?

I never said I was going to implement that philosophy, but rather the opposite, and you know it.

He said he was going to implement the good aspects, and I want to tell him that “people’s education” is a political philosophy. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister can argue any way he likes, but he cannot simply extract the good aspects, because this total onslaught has a psychological dimension. [Interjections.] The fact of the matter is that group-specific education has an educational goal, namely to establish education of the highest quality. “People’s education” has a political goal, namely “people’s power” and the seizing of power.

I have always said that.

Now the hon the Minister says he is going to implement certain aspects of “people’s education”, but he should rather fight “people’s education” in its entirety. He is not fighting the ANC; on the contrary, he is meeting them halfway. [Interjections.] The moment he said he was going to implement certain aspects of “people’s education”, he started to lose the psychological war, because in doing so he intimated that he was not sure what he was doing. He is not sure, because he is no longer dealing with group-specific education. That is why he admitted at once that he was unsure. He is no longer fighting the revolutionaries; he is encouraging them. He intimated that he was receptive to “people’s education”, and in doing so he enabled them and encouraged them to bring more pressure to bear on him.

I want to say that this is not all. The problem is not only the aspects of “people’s education” which he has accepted, but the entire point of departure of this Government. The ANC wants one undivided South Africa, and this Government is creating one undivided South Africa. The ANC wants one central education system, and this Government is heading in that direction. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, soon after the hon member for Lichtenburg had started speaking, I actually felt rather relieved because he started his speech quite well. I was actually beginning to wonder what I should say, because I agreed so wholeheartedly with everything he said. However, he then went on to bedevil matters. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I am a junior back-bencher and I do not know whether what I am going to say is parliamentary. Nevertheless, I want to get this off my chest today. Of course, I am not implying that I can protect the hon the Minister. I do not think he needs my protection either.

You know, Sir, I always thought this was a Chamber in which great dignity was maintained, and that the people who sat here were upright and civilised people. Having listened to the hon member for Potgietersrus I am no longer so sure of this. In any case, I found listening to him shocking. I therefore do not know whether one can still accept my premise. [Interjections.]

I am an old man, and for that reason I feel I am entitled …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Walmer was insinuating that the hon member for Potgietersrus was not a civilised person. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, I am addressing you on a point of order. I feel what the hon member for Walmer insinuated was impermissible.

Order! The hon member for Walmer may proceed. I did not interpret his words in the same way.

Mr Chairman, on a further point of order: The hon member for Walmer said when he first came here he was under the impression that civilised and decent people met here. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, he then went on to say that after he had listened to the hon member for Potgietersrus he was no longer of the opinion that this was the case. He therefore insinuated … [Interjections.] Mr Chairman, I wonder whether hon members realise what the Rules with regard to points of order involve. The hon member for Walmer therefore insinuated that the hon member for Potgietersrus was not a civilised person. I consequently request you to reconsider your ruling.

Order! I shall check the hon member for Walmer’s exact words in Hansard and give a ruling later. Meanwhile the hon member for Walmer may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I thank you. Unfortunately some of the time at my disposal has now been lost. Because I am a man of some considerable years—I can therefore claim the privilege age gives one—I can say that I have been an Afrikaner for longer than most of the hon members sitting here. But I do not know the kind of Afrikanerdom I am now experiencing, particularly not that of those who claim so vociferously to represent the Afrikaner people, because Christian Afrikanerdom is obedient to certain demands of decency which simply cannot go unheeded. [Interjections.] That is all I have to say in this regard.

I prepared myself for what I expected to happen, namely that the hon member for Cape Town Gardens would raise the entire problem of teacher training, and he did mention that there were so many vacancies at White training institutions that some of those vacancies could be used to provide teachers for Black education where there was such a need for them. Of course this kind of remark attests to a specific ideology to which some people can sacrifice truth and science. As long as one can realise a specific ideology and as long as one can achieve specific political goals, it does not really matter what the scientific basis of one’s behaviour is.

These Departments of Education and Training and of Development Aid have a specific task which they are carrying out in a responsible way, and the way in which they are doing this is scientifically justified. If one considers the overall problem of teacher training, one must first consider what is meant by education. What happens in education? Hon members know that if one looks at a child at school there are two things which the school is expected to do. First there is the cultivation and reinforcing of specific basic attitudes, which can be summarised as an attitude towards, outlook on or view of life, and then there is the learning of specific basic skills to enable the child to control his environment. This includes reading, spelling, writing etc, and all that develops from this.

A teacher who is dealing with this school-child should actually see himself as a person who must deal with that child in what is a familiar setting for that child. The familiar setting is the specific domestic milieu from which the child comes. There must be continuity between that milieu or family and the school. In other words, a teacher must be produced who is able to deal with this child. It is an enormous task to uplift a large component from the Third World to a First-World level in which meaningful participation can take place in First-World civilising functions. They are keen to do this and we do not begrudge them this.

However, we must be careful. All Blacks are not Third-World people, and all Whites are not First-World people. There are shades of grey in between. It is not true that one is dealing with two radical extremes, between which there is a relocation from one side to the other. There is an entire spectrum of development in between. There are people who have progressed along the road to acculturation, whom we can use to teach in these Black schools. These are therefore people with a foot in both worlds. This is actually the reason why we cannot have Black teachers studying at White teachers’ colleges in a White community by way of enforced association. There is a specific climate among Whites, which is different to the climate among Blacks.

I want to go so far as to say that I believe that teacher training should not take place at a university at all. There is a gnostic and analytical attitude at universities, whereas there is actually a pathic, caring attitude needed among the students at the teachers’ college. These are therefore people who want to help others, whereas things are quite different at a university. There one wants to learn about the realities, to plumb the realities, to describe them and eventually to control them.

If we look at the returns of the department in respect of teacher training, we find that an enormous task lies ahead of us. Up to the year 1999, before the turn of the century, between 55 000 and 70 000 teachers must be trained. It is true that if we used these White places, we could make a certain contribution. However, we shall have to find another model for teacher training in any case. We shall have to consider the old system of “pupil teachers”, where we will even have inservice training, rather than that a student finishes studying and then goes out to teach. We must see whether we cannot apply the old system of participation, on the part of those schools where one has good accredited teachers, to help in the training of the teacher. They will then return to the teachers’ colleges periodically, where they can acquire a theoretical foundation for their practical experience.

The mistake we make in a lot of our training, and particularly teacher training, which I was involved in for a long time, is that we confront students with problems which they do not consider to be problems. They then learn the answers which one gives them off by heart without knowing what they mean, or what they are eventually going to do with them. Let them come face to face with the problem, and then give them the answer later. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to associate myself immediately with the comment made by my colleague, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, when he said he found it embarrassing to debate this Vote on Black education without any Black people participating in this debate. It obviously reflects very accurately the unfortunate political situation which exists in this country. However, I accept that my colleague stressed this point more than adequately and I shall move on from it.

It is generally acknowledged that sport and culture are part and parcel of the whole education process. Certainly one finds in White education that schools are virtually instructed to encourage pupils to participate fully in these activities. This is easy in our White schools because of the tremendously good facilities that we have, and also thanks to the fact that many of our teachers have, as a result of their own participation in our school system, played sport themselves and are therefore able to participate in the coaching of it. Obviously this applies to cultural activities as well.

The Department of Education and Training concedes that this is an important point in their education system as well. In the recent annual report we find for example that during 1987 a social services section of this department was established with the following aim and function, and I quote from their report as follows:

If we look very carefully at the structure that has been set up to handle the social services section we certainly accept that it does deal with sport and culture both within the school and out of school.

I believe that this is an important step forward, and I am pleased that it has been taken, but I think it is also important that I say that I must express my absolute amazement at the incredible size of this particular section—a department within a department. It has three deputy directors, and 7 to 8 assistant directors—I could not quite work that out—which in itself makes it a huge bureaucratic structure. I note, too, with interest that 434 members of staff from the now defunct development boards have been transferred to this section as well. I wonder whether the three deputy directors and the assistant directors are people who have also been transferred across from the boards that existed previously. I sincerely hope that all these people are constructively employed and are not just there in some form of sheltered employment only. I hope they are not just relics of a department which caused the Government some embarrassment when it had to be dismantled.

The point I want to make is that I am not quite sure what all these people are in fact doing. I read with interest in the report that there have been some major achievements in the area of sport and culture, but the number of pupils involved is still extremely low despite the opposite impression that the report may try to give. No doubt one of the main reasons for this is the limited number of recreational facilities that exist in Black areas. They are extremely limited if one takes into account the number of people who have to use them and the number of people who live in the areas. I am particularly concerned to note from the report, and in fact from other documents given to me by the Department of Education and Training, that the amount of money for the provision of such facilities has been severely curtailed during the current financial year—a decrease of 33,79% or R21,5 million.

In reply to a question I put to the hon the Minister yesterday I learnt that no new out of school sporting facilities are being planned for this year. All that is being done in this regard is that certain facilities started last year will be completed this year, 1988, at a cost of approximately R11 million. I accept that the Department of Development Aid is involved in certain sporting and recreational developments as well to the cost of nearly R8 million, but this particular department, the Department of Education and Training, has no new plans on the drawing-board at all.

We have to accept that there is a gross shortage of proper recreational facilities for schoolgoing children or in fact for all the people who have to live in the Black townships and in Black areas in general. Certainly in the squatter camps no such facilities exist at all. I urge this hon Minister to look more carefully at this matter. I certainly accept that far more is being done now than in the past, but it is still far from satisfactory. I want to say that as a former school teacher myself, I do know the importance of extra-curricular activities in educating the whole child, of motivating the child, and of occupying his leisure time in healthy exercise. This particular principle applies to all children; the needs of all children are the same. However, the facilities and opportunities for Black children remain extremely limited. Instead of curtailing expenditure in this area, the amount of money being made available should be increasing rapidly each year.

In conclusion on this particular point, I want to say that I sincerely hope that the new social services section of the Department of Education and Training is a sincere attempt on the part of the Government to improve recreational facilities and opportunities for Black children, and that it is not just an attempt to hide the large number of State officials who are no longer gainfully employed. I ask the hon the Minister to comment on this particular point and I look forward to his answer.

On a different note, I do wish to touch briefly on the possibility of a school-feeding programme, which I believe is essential in many areas of South Africa if education is to be fully effective. I can recall very well several years ago when the very real concern was expressed throughout the country when it was discovered that as a result of a number of factors, with unemployment obviously the chief one, a number of White children were going to school in the morning without a proper breakfast and without any lunch to eat during the day either. We found that all types of support programmes were established and there was much talk that school-feeding programmes should in fact be introduced at Government expense. The point is that it was generally acknowledged that proper nutrition is absolutely essential if a child is to learn properly and that mental stimulation cannot occur unless a child is being given proper meals during the course of the day.

It is generally acknowledged that many Black children in this country attend school in the morning without having had anything to eat and are unlikely to receive any food during the course of the day until the evening meal. Much money is being spent on the education of children and I ask the hon the Minister whether it would not be a pertinent point to consider bringing in some form of State-subsidised feeding scheme for children at schools …

Hear, hear!

… in order to ensure proper nutrition and therefore to ensure that proper learning takes place. We accept that the cost of education is increasing rapidly and it is essential that, if the children are to take full advantage of what is offered to them, they must go to school properly nourished in the morning and be properly nourished during the course of the day. With the cost of introducing a feeding scheme the department may well be able to ensure that the education they are offering the children is of optimum benefit to them.

If this matter is investigated fully, it may well be found that the cost involved is not prohibitive and that in the long run it will be extremely worthwhile. I ask the hon the Minister whether his department has in fact investigated this matter and, if not, whether he will be prepared to do so in the future.

Mr Chairman, to start off I just want to make a few remarks in which I would very much like to associate myself with remarks made by the hon the Minister.

In the first place I should like to associate myself with what the hon the Minister said about the Director-General, Dr Fourie. It is true that this is probably the last time we shall be gathered together in the discussion of a Vote. I should like to take this opportunity of expressing my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to him. He met me for the first time when I was a novice in the office in Pretoria, and we have come a long way together. I came to know him as an educationist par excellence. He is a gentleman in the true sense of the word. We went through many crises together, and I will always remember that. I should like to thank him for his friendship, his advice, his counsel and his loyalty throughout the years. I would very much like to wish him and Mrs Fourie every success in the many years they still have ahead of them.

I should also like to associate myself with the thanks the hon the Minister expressed to the officials of the department—from the two Deputy Directors-General, our Chief Director and Regional Directors down to the lowest management echelons. We in this department have become accustomed to being involved in crisis management, and this has frequently taken place under pressure. We must remember that these people are educationists, and on this occasion I should like to pay tribute to them for the way in which they have made a very singular contribution to the future of our country and our people.

†If should also like to mention that a few members of the Council for Education and Training are here today. I want to thank them for the important role that they are playing and for their advice which is of the utmost importance to us. We want to thank them for the professional way in which they are fulfilling their role.

*In his book, Education Leadership, Robert S Fox gives the following definition of education, a definition I should like hon members to listen to. He says:

When I read these words I immediately thought that if one wanted to describe the man, Dr Gerrit Viljoen, the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid, this description would fit him to a T. He is a man of vision, creativity and knowledge. He is outstanding in his relations with people and in his organisational ability. [Interjections.] That is why I want to say that we are grateful that he is the one who is heading this department, and I also want to say that it is a singular privilege to work with him. I should also like to thank him very sincerely for the way in which he has guided us and for the fact that we have been able to share in his vast knowledge and wisdom. [Interjections.]

I have been a member of this House for 14 years now, but it is a long time since I have been as disappointed as I was when I heard the speech of the hon member for Potgietersrus. [Interjections.] The hon member must not speak of “ugly”, because I should like to speak to him about that. Over the years specific relationships have been built up here across party-political boundaries. I have friends in the CP. Year after year we have listened to the hon member for Lichtenburg, and we disagree with one another, but when an hon member sinks to the level to which the hon member for Potgietersrus sank today when he addressed one of our great Afrikaners as he did, one does not even want to react to it. Here we are shaping the future of all our children, and this type of debate contributes nothing towards that end.

Last year, when the hon member for Lichtenburg introduced the discussion on behalf of the Official Opposition, he indicated to us how the communists were supposedly using Black schools to launch this onslaught. This year the hon member for Potgietersrus proclaimed his CP standpoint of White domination. According to him the White man will decide about everything. While he was talking, I asked myself whether the world in which I was living, and in which I was in contact with Black people, did not exist for that hon member. I cannot come to any other conclusion but that that hon member does not know what he is talking about when he puts forward the absurd arguments he put forward today.

I do not think you understand them.

If he still thinks we are living in an era in which the White man makes the decisions while the Black man humbly stands back and says “yes, boss”, he is living in a fool’s paradise.

That is not what he was saying.

Of course that was what he was saying—by implication. That is what White domination means.

First I said it and then I did not.

Last year the hon member for Lichtenburg said that the communists would use the schools in their onslaught. With that standpoint the hon member for Potgietersrus will be creating so much friction and conflict in this country—which will serve the communist cause—that they will not need schools to promote their cause.

Now you sound just like an old UP man from the sixties.

Agri Klaste is a Black journalist. Last year, shortly before the election, he made a speech in London. I think he is now an editor. At the time he said that in his view there was not very much more hope left for the Black man in South Africa and that the Black man was now actually pinning his hopes on violence. He then said that he hoped the CP would win the election, because then he would know that the radicals had their best chance. Listening to the hon member for Potgietersrus this afternoon confirmed this statement made by Mr Klaste.

But what do we have at the moment?

The fool without the paradise! [Interjections.]

I want to thank the hon member for Cape Town Gardens for his kind remarks. We do not always agree, but at least the hon member for Cape Town Gardens knows what he is talking about. I think he knows what is happening to a certain extent in the Black communities, and we can listen to his criticism. I want to thank him for his kind words and his kind remarks.

*The hon member said, however, that he had read the department’s annual report and that there was no comprehensive report on the unrest situation, and he then referred to the schools which were affected.

†The PFP usually puts this question on the Question Paper, and they then use this terminology, but I want to ask how one measures the intensity of disruption when a question is asked as to how a school is affected. If a window-pane is broken at some school, is that school then affected or not? The fact of the matter is that when we look at the situation in perspective, there is a great improvement in our schools. We are making progress.

*That is our problem, Mr Chairman. The hon member contends that we do not furnish a comprehensive report, but our problem is specifically that the facts are distorted to such an extent that we never manage to convey the full picture, because everyone is so eager to tell the world how bad things are in Black education.

The hon member also referred to the situation in the Western Cape. When he was criticising us this afternoon—and he has every right to criticise us—he did not tell the full story behind the Langa incident either. Last year in May we received certain reports that something was wrong in the Western Cape, particularly in Langa. We then began to investigate the matter and appointed a commission of inquiry. What were the facts, Sir? The facts were that to a school with enough teachers and equipment to accommodate 1 000 pupils, 1 700 children had been admitted. Surely one cannot have any effective education whatsoever under such circumstances. Then we began—and by “we” I mean our top officials and I—to take this matter in hand and hold discussions with the parents. We began to talk to the parent community and held discussions with some of the PTSAs. We had more than 11 meetings with those people in an attempt to reach a settlement, and it was very clear to us that there would have to be some or other form of registration. Then in June, at the beginning of the term, we said that we wanted that registration, and we proceeded with our negotiations. We were then asked whether we could not defer this to the beginning of this year. We agreed, the proviso being that we would have their co-operation. We proceeded to establish ad hoc committees to facilitate communication, because we felt that there were no open channels of communication. About 10 meetings were then held there, ultimately resulting in certain resolutions being adopted. Everyone participating in this process agreed that this year there would be registration before the schools opened and that parents would enrol their children for registration purposes—that the children therefore had to register during the month of January. By 23 January it was apparent that not everyone had registered as yet. Three times we extended the date for registration. At some point, however, we must surely begin to restore order in the schools. After all, we cannot simply allow matters to take their course. It became very clear to us that radical forces were manipulating children for their own ends. We therefore reached a point at which we said “so far and no further”, because our objective was effective education. For that specific reason we called a halt. We had to decide how many teachers there should be, how many school-books were needed and how much stationery was necessary, because we wanted our children to be given the best available education.

That is the story. The eventual outcome, in this situation in the Western Cape, is that today the number of children at school exceeds the previous year’s figure by 2 000. Those are the facts. The fact of the matter is that during December of last year this department built two secondary schools—two new secondary schools. Surely that is a fantastic achievement! We have made progress, have we not. At present there is order in education and order and discipline in the schools. There is staff. There are books available in all the schools. And the number of pupils exceeds the previous year’s figure by 2 000. That is what I call the full picture. Let us present nothing but the complete picture, the actual picture. There are, in fact, problems. Let us nevertheless acknowledge—that is all I am asking the hon member—that there is another side to the picture. We are not all little angels. In the Black community, after all, there are also people who misuse children for their own ends. We can rightfully say this because we have spoken to them. We have listened to them. We have examined their strategies. We are not saying this in CP terms—isolated or viewing things from the outside. Let us also acknowledge, however, that there is a great deal of goodwill amongst those people. There are people who do want to co-operate, people who do want their children to receive the best available education.

That is why I believe that we have handled the Western Cape affair correctly and that we will, in any event, have proper education from next year onwards, the kind of education we would like to have. At some or other point, however, one has to restore discipline and order.

I should like to come back to the point I raised in my earlier reference to Fox’s definition of education. I want to say that this definition by Mr Fox is characteristic of the philosophy and the points of departure of this department and the way in which it wants to do its job in the specific interests of the Black communities of our country, but also in the interests of a peaceful and prosperous future for all South Africans.

In wanting to apply this definition of Fox’s to the Department of Education and Training, I believe that there are two aspects that have to be included—two things one should not neglect to mention either. These are “care and empathy”. This means that we must sincerely care and look after the interests of others with empathy. In fact, these two characteristics are, in my view, two very important pillars on which the department’s value-system rests. Vision, creativity, knowledge, sound human relations and organisational ability are certainly praiseworthy characteristics in their own right. They can nevertheless not come into their own if they do not arise out of a sincere, honest commitment to creating opportunities and satisfying the educational needs of each and every pupil.

I should like to state that it is a singular privilege to share in the many challenges which the department faces daily over a vast spectrum. One need only think of the respective cultural and language groups to which education is given, the geographic distribution of communities throughout the country, the demographic factors such as unparalleled growth, the school population and the process of urbanisation, the unique problems of education in remote rural areas and, of course, the socio-cultural and socio-economic factors which also have a direct influence on the rate of progress and the degree of success achieved by the individual pupil.

It is nevertheless also a fact that the educational content which children must marshal for assimilation into a sophisticated Western techno-culture does not always dovetail very smoothly into the norms, values and customs of the parental home and the community. In-depth attention needs to be given to building a solid bridge between the parental home and the school to make the pre-school pupil ready for school and to allow him to enter the new world with confidence. On the other side of the spectrum one needs programmes for adult education which are not only aimed at obtaining academic qualifications, but also at the enrichment and upliftment of the community.

Meanwhile there is increasing social pressure, of course, for more and better education, increased expectations about education—frequently unrealistic—and, last but not least, the exploitation of education and of the child for political gain.

If one took all these factors into consideration, one could see this as a virtually impossible challenge, and many well-informed people could shake their heads and say that against that background it was not possible to achieve success. Without determination and a sense of vocation arising from an unshakeable faith in the potential of this wonderful country and its people I do not think it is possible either. And yet, when one studies the past few years’ debates in this Chamber, and the Department of Education and Training’s annual reports—I thank the hon member for Lichtenburg for acknowledging this—one sees testimony of the exciting progress made in all spheres. For me it is quite interesting that today the hon member for Lichtenburg referred to the progress we were making in the self-governing national states. When all is said and done, it is NP policy that brought the self-governing states into being. That is an indication of our successes. The CPs always wish to indicate that we are not making any progress, that we do not want any further development for the self-governing national states. I am glad that the hon member placed this argument on record this afternoon and that he thinks our policy is succeeding. [Interjections.]

When one looks at these reports, one notes the dramatic improvement in the quality of education, the qualifications of teachers, teacher-pupil ratios, classroom-pupil ratios which have improved, even down to the astounding building programme. I think it is also true that this progress can no longer be ignored. What is really striking, in fact, is that even the fiercest critics of our department are increasingly being forced into the grudging acknowledgment of the fundamental progress which is being made, specifically because these efforts at discrediting the department are becoming increasingly transparent and making their own credibility suspect.

It is also true that this progress has resulted in an increase in the unprincipled efforts of radicals to exploit pupils in certain areas because success in education frustrates their objective of causing disruption and chaos in this country. Perhaps we should tell that to the CPs for once. There is only one way to stop the ANC, and that is to achieve success in the task of education and development.

I also want to emphasise that in the development of education we have no ulterior motives. Here it is primarily a question of the child and his right to those opportunities which will prepare him for his future life so that he can also make a significant contribution to the future of our country.

I should like to mention a few examples characteristic of the progress being made. The first is the establishment of schools of industries and reform schools. Last year it was announced that the Department of Education and Training had accepted responsibility for the provision of schools of industries and reform schools. This afternoon I want to focus hon members’ attention on the fact that all education and welfare authorities have agreed that the term “schools of industries” be replaced by the term “child-care schools” or, in Afrikaans, “kindersorgskole”, and that the necessary statutory amendments will soon be effected. The provision of child-care schools is a responsibility which is also being accepted with enthusiasm by the department, bearing in mind the numerous implications.

In addressing the unique needs of the individual child, acknowledgment is now also given to the fact that in any community there is a group of unhappy children who frequently go off the rails as a result of external factors beyond their control. These children clearly have a need for special care, attention and love. In the past many of them were detained in prisons owing to a lack of other facilities. Hon members will agree with me that that is an extremely unhealthy state of affairs and that we are duty bound to look after the vicissitudes of each and every one of them as a part of our God-given task. When all is said and done, each of them is a precious being who is entitled to the best help and assistance in his struggle to become a worthy member of society.

These schools aim at preparing the child spiritually, intellectually and physically, in a therapeutically conducive atmosphere, to become a balanced, well-adjusted adult. The emphasis is on the positively stimulating the pupil, the developing his self-image, preparing him for a profession and providing healthy recreational activities.

It is a pleasure for me to be able to say today that two child-care schools, one in Simondium in Paarl and the other in Kinross in the Transvaal, and one reform school in Rawsonville, near Worcester, will be opened in July this year, each being able to accommodate approximately 200 children. I would very much like to thank the members of the inter-departmental committee, and those of our officials who worked on this, for their help. I also want to thank my hon colleagues in the House of Assembly who have co-operated throughout.

†Mr Chairman, management training is another example of the progress which is being made in our department. It was found that the main reason for poor results at some schools was a lack of managerial ability and experience among principals and senior staff. This resulted in the development of a unique management development programme involving some 14 000 principals and heads of departments at schools.

The programme was extended this year to include farm schools as well as staff at the department’s head office. The basic programme consists of eight modules, for example, self-management, managing the performance of subordinates and other modules. This programme has already resulted in the establishment of a management culture in the department which benefits directly not only the officials and teachers but, most importantly, the individual pupil as well.

Another example is education in rural areas. In July 1987 the report on the Provision of Education for Black pupils in Rural Areas was made public. The provision of education in rural areas is a world-wide problem. The provision of education has to keep pace with swift constitutional socio-economic and social changes occurring in South Africa. All these factors point to a very complex situation and seem to militate against efforts to solve the problem.

I believe that the department’s concern has led it to tackle the problem with boldness in the firm belief that much can be done to speed up reform and to create equal opportunities for these pupils as well. There were 128 recommendations and we are showing progress in this regard as well. A major three-year management and teacher development programme for all 12 000 farm school principals and teachers is one of them, the introduction of Std 6 and 7 classes at more than 400 rural schools is another, and the bridging period for pre-school children has been extended to include children on farms.

I want to refer to one of these programmes which have enjoyed the attention of the department, and that is subsidies payable to farmers who erect farm schools. These subsidies have been increased substantially. Up till now the basis for subsidising the erection of farm schools has been limited to 50% of the erection costs up to certain maximum amounts, namely R6 000 for a class-room, R120 for a toilet, and R600 per classroom for maintenance, payable every five years. The system proved to be totally unrealistic when present building costs are taken into account and in the light of the department’s responsibility in general to provide education on a national basis. The new system which will apply in future provides for the subsidisation of up to 75% of the valuation of the facilities provided, limited to 75% of the norms for the erection of education facilities laid down by the Treasury in consultation with the Department of National Education. These building norms are the same for all education departments. The new system also provides for the subsidisation of certain other facilities which did not qualify for a subsidy under the previous system, namely housing for teachers residing on the farm concerned, informal accommodation of pupils in remote rural areas, as well as basic sporting facilities. Details of the new system will be made available to farm school owners through the local offices of the department as soon as possible. It is hoped that this new dispensation will promote the provision of education on farms in general, and especially in those areas identified by the department where schools are urgently needed. The goodwill and co-operation of farmers in this regard is highly appreciated, and I believe that the improved subsidy will assist them in providing and extending this important service.

*Unfortunately my time has run out. In conclusion I should just like to say that I think that all these matters we have referred to are an indication of the seriousness and the compassion with which we are tackling this issue. We believe that if we are prepared to face up to the realities of this country and do not, like the CPs, indulge in flights of fancy, there is hope for us, because there is an inexhaustible store of goodwill amongst the people. With the dedication of a department such as ours, and with the realisation that the education of our Black children is also going to determine the future of others, including the White children in this country, I think that a wonderful and prosperous future lies ahead for us in this country.

Mr Chairman, may I say what a pleasure it is to follow on the hon the Deputy Minister for whom I have a very high regard. I too wish to pay tribute to him for the conscientious manner in which he is fulfilling his duties. May I just say too that I also welcome the fact that he always has an open door when one needs it.

I also just wish to say to him that while I know that I am talking on behalf of the agricultural community, one appreciates the fact that there is going to be a new subsidy system for farm schools. I think this is long overdue and that it will meet one of the problems which is now being experienced.

I also wish to say that I support very strongly the comment that was made by the hon the Deputy Minister that the best insurance for a stable future in this country lies in improved education for everyone.

I wish firstly to compliment the department on an excellent report and the document dealing with Black education in the provinces. The Natal copy is particularly interesting. I also wish to pay tribute to the department for the manner in which it has handled a particularly sensitive and important task. However, I wish to direct my attention again to the question of Black education in the rural areas. It was on that basis that I listened with such interest to the speech of the hon the Deputy Minister.

When I read the publication on education in Natal I realised once again what the advantages are that are enjoyed by scholars who receive education in the urban areas as opposed to those who live in the rural areas. While I accept the fact that considerable progress had been made in this regard over recent years, I must voice concern once again that in Natal one is forever bumping one’s head against the fact that there is still an alarming inadequacy of secondary school facilities for Black pupils. This problem is being compounded by the fact that the education systems in Natal and KwaZulu are closely intertwined. Yet they are being financed from different sources and are also being administered through their respective systems. It is the pupils from farm schools who appear to be the ones who are most adversely affected in that their primary education takes place within the structures of the Department of Education and Training, yet—and again I refer to Natal—secondary education is so often only available in KwaZulu, which means that these scolars then fall under the control of the KwaZulu education system. It would appear to me that there is a need for closer co-ordination between this department and the KwaZulu education department in regard to the siting of secondary schools and the administration of these schools in the rural areas so that the functions of these two departments can be streamlined more effectively. As I see it, any disparities could in this way be more easily eliminated.

I, too, wish to express concern at the lack of co-ordination that becomes apparent from time to time within the structures of this department itself. I wish to refer to matters which have been brought to my attention during recent months where promises and undertakings and approval for certain projects have given by officials of the department, only to be rejected and repudiated at higher level much later. Meanwhile, acting on the assurances given, work on certain specific projects has been undertaken, causing acute embarrassment to those who have endeavoured to upgrade such facilities in the interests of improving education for the scholars under their management. I would like to make an appeal that in cases of this nature—the hon the Deputy Minister is aware of these—special consideration be given to the problems that have been created as a result of what has taken place.

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in following up on the hon member for Mooi River. I thank him for his positive attitude to Black education. I am sure that the hon the Minister will reply in regard to the problems he raised.

The Government is regularly reproached for the fact that too little is done to improve Black education. This is a blatant untruth, and everyone who says that, is a stranger to the truth.

Taking only the increase in the number of Black pupils as a criterion, it is clear that a gigantic effort is already being made by the Department of Education and Training, not only to improve existing educational facilities and standards, but also to keep abreast of the increasing needs. As its basic point of departure the department accepts, inter alia, the following principles as contained on page 3 of the White Paper on Education Supply in the RSA, 1983:

The professional status of the teacher and lecturer shall be recognised.

By the acceptance of the second principle a specific value is given to the educational profession, and this necessarily leads to greater emphasis on the training of teachers to make them more suited for their task. The task of the department in this regard may be divided into three namely: In the first place, the provision of sufficient qualified new teachers to keep abreast of the increased needs; in the second place, the improvement of existing teachers’ formal qualifications to better equip them for their task; and in the third place, in-service training of all teachers by means of crash-courses and refresher courses.

Accordingly, since 1987 the department has launched intensive, improved recruitment and selection programmes with a view to ensuring that the best use is made of the available human material. In the selection programme use is made of all available relevant information concerning candidates, for example school achievements, psychometric test results, questionnaires and interviews. The selection programme enables the department, inter alia, to decide on the awarding of bursaries on a more scientific basis.

The above information is also at the disposal of educational institutions and enables them to decide on the admission of candidates to specific courses. This selection procedure is constantly being adapted and improved.

To meet the growing need, it was decided as far back as 1985 to establish an additional 10 teachers’ colleges at a rate of two per year. In 1984 there were only seven teachers’ colleges and one college for continuing training, while the number of full-time students was 4 654, as against 13 teachers’ colleges and one college for continuing training in 1987 and 7 571 students. A fourteenth teachers’ college at Daveyton has opened in 1988.

As regards the supply of qualified teachers from teachers’ colleges, the number in respect of both primary and secondary education has grown from 595 in 1982 to 1 515 in 1986. In 1987 more than 2 100 qualified teachers left the department’s teachers’ colleges. Expressed in financial terms, the amount budgeted for pre-service training has increased from R2 286 000 in the 1980-81 financial year to R30 362 000 in the 1987-88 financial year.

However, it is not merely a matter of providing more teachers. Consideration must constantly be given to improving standards of training, inter alia by the possible introduction of four-year teaching courses and closer co-operation among teachers’ colleges and other tertiary institutions, particularly with a view to the mutual recognition of courses, the provision of more and better equipment for training purposes and extending training facilities for technical teachers.

The amount voted for bursaries for students at teachers’ colleges has increased from R347 000 during the 1980-81 financial year to R10 650 000 during the 1987-88 financial year. In addition, bursaries are as far as possible sufficient to cover the full direct study expenses and accommodation expenses of a student.

Academic education is and will remain important, but in the South African context the importance of technical and career-oriented education cannot be overlooked either.

With a view to the experimental introduction of technical studies at schools during 1987, an appropriate technical instructors’ course is being offered at the Plessislaer Technical College, and 75 candidates enrolled during 1987 and a further 45 during 1988. The three-year Secondary Technical Education Diploma is currently being offered at five institutions and, during 1987, 98 students gained this diploma. Holders of the diploma are competent to offer technical subjects at the proposed vocational schools, comprehensive schools or technical secondary schools.

A great deal could still be said about the training of pre-primary and junior primary teachers, the provision and improvement of buildings and equipment and innumerable aspects affecting the pre-service training of teachers, but unfortunately time does not permit me to do so.

In the rapidly changing world we live in, teachers, too, must keep abreast, and in this regard continuing training plays an exceptionally important role. This aspect, inter alia, is formulated as follows in the White Paper:

1. (a) Facilities for continuing training should be carefully planned so as to be easily accessible and also accessible through distance teaching.
2. (b) Criteria for all continuing training courses should be uniform with a view to control over standards and the acquisition of certificates.
3. (c) There should be facilities for continuing training for incumbents of all types of teaching posts.

At 51 circuit centres teachers are afforded the opportunity to obtain a Std 10 certificate. During 1987 teachers achieved 15 819 successes as regards subjects in the National Senior Certificate examination.

From 1983 to 1987 the percentage of Black teachers in the department without a Std 10 certificate had already declined from 73,6% to 49,7%.

The department itself is offering six full-time one-year specialisation courses in woodwork, art, school librarianship and media science, remedial education, physical education and an instructors’ course for technical teachers. During 1987, 255 teachers were trained in the above fields.

The Vista University undoubtedly makes some of the most important contributions in the field of continuing training. During 1987, 14 909 teachers were enrolled for either the Secondary Teachers’ Certificate or the Secondary Teachers’ Diploma—Further Training. In 1987 2 497 teachers obtained further educational qualifications across a wide spectrum of subjects.

Since the beginning of 1988 departments for further training have also been established at four departmental teachers’ colleges, at which the Junior Primary or Senior Primary Teachers’ Diploma may be obtained over a period of four years on a part-time basis. Should this experiment prove successful, the project will, in due course, be extended to other colleges. Almost 500 teachers were admitted to this course at the beginning of 1988.

By way of encouragement the department operates a study-aid scheme whereby an amount of R230 per successfully completed subject is paid to teachers studying at Unisa or Vista.

One final aspect to which I want to turn briefly is that of in-service training. These courses are presented with a view to updating teachers’ subject knowledge, acquainting them with new syllabuses and syllabus content and improving the skills and effectiveness of teachers in the class-room. During 1987, 628 such courses were presented and 9 292 teachers participated in them. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I have very limited time at my disposal, so I hope the hon member for North Rand will forgive me if I do not comment on his speech on teacher training colleges.

There is one particular point that I want to talk about tonight and that I want to raise with the hon the Minister and that is the whole question of the enormous number of Black children who are not going to school at all. I gather that the official estimate is in the region of one million children who are receiving no formal education at all.

I think hon members must realise that this is a very serious situation indeed. Any future happiness and prosperity for our country depends on the upliftment of disadvantaged members of our community, and if we are going to condemn the considerable section of our population to a life where they are restricted only to labouring occupations because they are illiterate, we can expect only frustration and discontent.

I am particularly exercised in my mind by the children in the squatter camps who probably constitute a major portion of the non-school-going children. I do not know how many hon members on the other side have ever visited these squatter camps—I suspect not all that many—but if they have, they will be aware of the grinding poverty in which a whole generation of children are growing up. They will be aware of the frustration of the adults because they are not able to give their children a better life. Parents who live in situations of desperate poverty would, I know, feel less frustrated if they were able to give their children some sort of hope for the future. All their hopes are bound up in what their children will be able to do some time in the future of South Africa. What they do have is a situation where they can really hold out no hope at all because education for the children seems to be beyond the realms of what is possible.

I am aware of the fact that certain of the squatter camps are relatively close to schools and that some squatter children are able to attend. In the case of the removal which was handled the other day, from Varkfontein to Daveyton, those kids are going to school now, and the squatters wanted to move because they knew it would be possible for their children to get a decent education.

My plea to the hon the Minister, however, is to include the children of the squatter camps in his planning for the future because if he does not do so, he is treading a very dangerous path. A frustrated person who feels that society has not allowed his potential to be developed to the limit of his capabilities can become a very dangerous person, and a person who is discriminated against because he has not had the opportunity to improve himself through education is, I believe, going to be the revolutionary of the future.

I have often looked at the children in our squatter camps and wondered to myself what sort of people they are going to be when they grow up, and I am afraid that I hold out no great hopes for the future in many respects. I wonder whether my children are going to be able to live side by side in the same country with these children when they become adults, and do so peacefully.

The squatter community as a whole is an unhappy community which is harassed and often moved from pillar to post. Nobody wants to accept responsibility for the majority of them, and their lives are very difficult indeed. I would like to ask the hon the Minister or his deputy what the plans for these children are. If there are no plans, then I must urge him to make the education of squatters’ children one of the macro planning projects of his department. I believe the size and scope of the problem that exists has to be identified and evaluated and, following an investigation into this, some hard decisions are going to have to be made because it is just not possible to leave things as they are.

I must ask the hon the Minister whether plans are already in progress and what he is going to do about a problem which is escalating daily.

Mr Chairman, I do not intend to react to what the hon member for Bryanston had to say about the children in squatter camps, but I want to address a situation very closely related to his problem, and that is to help Black children to more easily become accommodated in the Westernised education system in which they find themselves from the age of six onwards.

*I want to speak about something which, to a small extent, is being done by this department and which I feel very strongly we should implement as soon as possible. Every child who has to go to school at the age of six should be tested for school-readiness. At our White schools there are plenty of opportunities for parents to have their children tested and to make sure that the child is ready, to utilise the opportunities offered him within the structure of the educational system. These basic skills which every child really needs to eventually make a success of his whole school career, should be fostered in him by means of a meaningful and effective school-readiness programme so that eventually he will be able to utilise what is offered to him.

*The children from the Black community, in particular, come from a deprived background as regards the culture which they have to acquire within the Westernised educational system in which they have to be prepared for an eventual career in the adult world.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr Chairman, before business was interrupted earlier this evening I was about to explain why it was necessary for special attention to be given to young Black children as regards a programme to promote school preparedness among them. At the same time this could also serve as an opportunity to provide work in the informal sector …

Order! Hon members must lower their voices. I can barely hear the hon member for Kempton Park. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, as I was saying, at the same time this could serve to create employment opportunities in the informal sector for a large group of women who, at this stage, must either work far from their homes or cannot get work at all. This would help these women to develop a positive self-image. It would also help to keep Black mothers in the townships, and this would ensure that there was better supervision of children in those townships.

We know that by the end of this century an additional 8 million people will have to be absorbed into the labour market. Our only hope in this regard is to use the informal sector. For that reason I feel that this affords a good opportunity to try to train Black women in Black residential areas, but also in rural areas, in order to use them to prepare these young children for a school career and to utilise the opportunities which they are going to be afforded. This also has tremendous benefits for the children. They can then be under supervision while the mothers themselves are working elsewhere. At the moment Black mothers frequently lock their children out as they cannot leave their houses standing open because criminal elements would loot the houses. Consequently many of these children are out in the street all day long.

They are not always properly supervised either and frequently do not go to school regularly. If we could use more of these mothers in this way so that these children could also be looked after, we know that there would be better control, and they would learn discipline too.

At the same time this affords an opportunity for these children to start learning the socialising process, and in the project to which I shall refer in a moment it was also found that these children developed tremendous spontaneity. Their self-image also developed in a positive way so that they were far more receptive to the development process which took place during training, and which continued when they eventually went to school.

At this stage wonderful initiatives are underway in Soshanguve where a college for continuing training launched such a project. In this set-up women who have already been selected receive two years’ training, and these people each bring a group of approximately 10 children per woman to be trained with the aid of workshops. This training is given in the mornings, from Monday through to Thursday. On Sundays parents are then informed of the progress their children are making. It is very interesting to see how many parents are really getting involved and are following their children’s progress with great interest.

The major advantage is that while these mothers are being trained during these two years, the children are also being prepared for the education process which must follow later. This therefore has the immediate effect that these children are already being cared for, and this can eventually have a beneficial ripple effect. This would mean that those children would have a better chance of making progress at school, and this would definitely affect the failure rate, which means that we would save a lot of money because our children would not need to be kept at school for as long, eg by keeping them in grade 1 for a year or two, to prepare them for school.

Of course an important aspect is that it is necessary to make these parents aware of the backlog, and perhaps in this way also bring the parents closer to the children and the level of development to which they must be trained.

At this stage I really want to appeal to private undertakings, which are prepared to make money available to help develop the Black communities, to consider this project too. They can really work with the authorities to make funds available to get this kind of project off the ground. We will be able to do this in a scientific way and, if necessary, even help these people to start their own industry or business undertaking in their own homes, even if a small amount of funding is needed.

I also want to appeal to the hon the Minister and the Deputy Minister to investigate this matter and see whether we cannot get this entire training scheme to spread from this area near Pretoria to other areas throughout the country.

Mr Chairman, I would like to agree with the hon member for Kempton Park about the excellent work done by this department in the pre-primary phase of education.

I would like to add that I feel that hon members of the PFP in particular do not give this department enough credit in relation to the work it does. We would all admit that certain aspects of education for Blacks in this country may be less than perfect, and that there were things deserving of criticism in the past, but PFP members seldom if ever qualify or temper their critical remarks by giving credit for the truly remarkable achievements—in some cases their achievements are quite miraculous—of the Department of Education and Training in the past few years. Judging by the statistics in the memorandum to this Budget Vote supplied by the Director-General, and those mentioned by several speakers in the course of this debate, these achievements are probably unparalleled anywhere in the world, let alone in Africa. [Interjections.]

The Government acknowledges that Black education is a developing system, but the rate at which education is being brought to the underprivileged and less developed communities in this country is one of this Government’s major achievements of the 1980s. What the Department of Education and Training is doing is achieving education in the fast lane for hundreds of thousands of Black children who would otherwise not have a hope of receiving education. However, those on the left of the NP are very reluctant to give credit. They use arguments that might have applied in the past but are not true or relevant today. I can provide a recent example. In the February 1988 edition of Inside South Africa, Mrs Sally Motlana, well known Black activist and chairman of the Black Consumer Association, is quoted as saying the following:

This is a reference to White children—

This statement went quite unchallenged by the author of the article and editor of the periodical, Jennifer Crwys-Williams who, I believe, has been appointed an editor of The Star, but it is, of course, quite untrue. All parents, both Black and White, have to buy school uniforms for their children, but all books and stationery are provided free at Department of Education and Training schools just as they are at White Government schools.

All that Black parents are requested to do is to pay school funds, and that is required from White parents too. No tuition fees are paid at all. These school fund contributions can be as little as R5 per year.

During last year’s debate the hon member for Bezuidenhout quoted Dr Samuel Johnson to the effect that the true test of a civilised nation and the quality of a society is the extent to which it takes care of its neediest members—the weak, the disabled and the poor. If this is true, then some of the things I saw when I participated in a study tour of some of the department’s educational institutions north of Pretoria during last year’s recess makes me feel that we really pass this test with flying colours. By the way, I am informed that hon members of the Official Opposition and the PFP were invited to participate in this tour, but not one of them came. [Interjections.]

The places which we visited, like the Philadelphia secondary school … [Interjections.]

Order!

I cannot answer those interjections. This secondary school for disabled Black children near Soshanguve maybe does not fit into the PFP’s scenario. We must not confuse them with facts that don’t fit into their scenario. When one visits a classroom at this school and sees 16 blind Black matriculants writing their history exam on braille typewriters, one begins to appreciate not only the breadth of the Department of Education and Training’s achievement, but its depth as well. What is even more miraculous is that 75% of those children passed that exam and, in fact, all their matric exams according to information I have received from the department.

When one speaks to a young Black girl who is sitting in a wheelchair because she is crippled and has no arms, and she is in the process of writing her exams with her foot, and she tells one that she is going to study to be a social worker if she passes, one knows there is hope and opportunity for absolutely everybody in this country. That is the achievement of this Government.

Philadelphia is the first secondary school for the physically disabled Black child, built and funded entirely by the department. It is a milestone in the achievements of the department. Of course there are many other such schools supported by the department with subsidies, but this is the first one of their own. In fact, this year’s budget for the education of Black disabled children reflects a massive increase of 50%, to no less than R33,6 million.

There is an extensive list of other schools supported by the department in this way in the memorandum by the Director-General. This is really a proud achievement. For the first time there is provision for two industrial schools and a reform school, accounting for R9 million of the increase.

Philadelphia is the flagship of this effort. When it is completed in 1988-89, it will accommodate 400 disabled pupils. At the moment there are 270. The school was officially opened in 1986. At present it has a teacher-pupil ratio of 1:6. In other words, these children get the very best care and attention one could hope for. Some of the personnel themselves are disabled. This is a wonderful example to the children and it speaks for the department that they are prepared to promote disabled people on the basis of their achievements.

All the children are accommodated as boarders at the school. They are taught in no less than six Black languages as well as the official languages of the Republic of South Africa. They are drawn from all over the Republic and from all levels of society and are referred to the school by other schools, hospitals, social workers and friends. They travel home twice a year at the expense of the Government.

The standard of equipment and training aids available to children and staff is most impressive and includes computer facilities and computer literacy courses. In fact, there are many computers at the schools.

The school has two laboratories, four workshops, a big media centre, a large and well-equipped domestic science kitchen, a half-size Olympic standard swimming pool, as well as the usual school facilities. The school produces good results. Of last year’s matriculants, nearly 75% of the blind students and about 40% of the physically disabled pupils passed.

In sport the school does even better. In the 1988 Northern Transvaal section of the South African Games for the Disabled the junior school pupils won 57 gold medals and broke 27 South African records and three world records. In the senior section seven gold medals were won and three South African records were broken. These are truly outstanding achievements.

However, when one visits the school it is not the excellence of the facilities which strikes one most, but the absolute dedication and enthusiasm—in fact, one could almost call it fervour—of the teaching staff. Of course there is a reflected enthusiasm and happiness among the children and the communities they come from. I have seldom been more impressed. Something very good is happening North of Pretoria at Philadelphia and other educational institutions run by the Department of Education and Training. The opportunities are there for even the most helpless members of our society, but there is almost a conspiracy of silence about this, especially from the hon members on the other side of the Committee. [Interjections.]

In conclusion I wish to say that it is most encouraging to see from the Director-General’s memorandum that the department intends extending its operations in this field of education for the disabled Black child most substantially. One of the main thrusts of this development will be towards more career oriented education for the disabled. This is currently under investigation by the department.

It therefore gives me very great pleasure to support this Budget Vote.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Rosettenville spoke about the PFP’s attitude towards the achievements of the Department of Education and Training with regard to Black education. I want to say to her that I listened to her with great interest.

Order! Hon members must lower their voices.

I wish to tell the hon member for Rosettenville that she must understand that this party has always acknowledged the good work that the Department of Education and Training has done with regard to Black education, but obviously we are extremely critical of where this particular department and in fact the Government have failed. I must ask the hon member tonight not to be too susceptible to her party’s propaganda when it comes to understanding what is really happening in Black education. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon members for Berea and Turffontein cannot carry on a debate on their own.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Is it acceptable for an hon member to say of another member that he is a “bloody idiot”? [Interjections.]

Order! No, that is certainly not parliamentary language. The hon member for Berea must withdraw that.

Mr Chairman, I thought my comment was appropriate, but I shall withdraw it. [Interjections.]

Taking into account what the hon member for Rosettenville had to say, I wish to refer immediately to an article which appeared in the South African Digest and which was apparently an extract from the South African Fact Sheet of March this year. The issue of the South African Digest to which I refer is dated 1 April 1988. An attempt is made in this article to claim that the education at Black schools is not in any way inferior to that at White schools. The article refers among other things to the Government’s policy of equal education for all, the fact that the same standards apply in Black schools as in White schools with regard to syllabuses and examinations, that the same core syllabuses are used, that entrance standards for universities are the same, and the conditions of service of Black teachers are identical to those of White teachers. I wish to say that I do not have real problems with those particular points of view. Then the article makes the following statement:

I have a tremendous problem with this statement. I am prepared to acknowledge that the Department of Education and Training—I have already said this—has undertaken a massive upgrading programme with regard to Black education. We know that; we acknowledge that. I am prepared to concede that the Government is spending far more money on Black education than it has in the past, but for the Government or any other organisation to suggest that Black education and White education are at the same levels in this country, for the reasons given in the particular article to which I have referred, would be a gross misrepresentation of the truth. [Interjections.] We simply need to look at the whole funding structure of Black education. We need to look at the facilities and equipment of Black schools in comparison to those of White schools. We need to look at the system of teacher training and the qualifications of the majority of Black teachers in comparison to those of their White colleagues. We also need to look at teacher/pupil ratios, and then we will realise that in South Africa Black education remains grossly inferior to that of White education. [Interjections.]

I would urge the hon the Minister to encourage his department to be totally factual at all times in discussing the level of Black education, particularly when it tries to compare Black education with White education. Unless we as South Africans are totally honest with ourselves at all times in admitting that Black education still lags far behind White education in all respects, and that a great deal has to be done to uplift the standard of Black education, I am concerned that we will never strive fully to achieve complete equality of educational opportunity for all. That is what the Government claims its goal is. Unless we remind ourselves at all times of what we still have to achieve in Black education we will be doing this country a grave disservice. Equal educational opportunities under the control of a single Department of Education has got to be the prime object of this country, and I urge the hon the Minister to do all he can in this regard towards implementing a policy of this nature within the shortest time possible.

Mr Chairman, I should like to thank hon members—in fact I want to thank everyone—who contributed to this debate. Those who did not provide any insights into the subject, provided insights into themselves.

I want to begin with my colleague, the hon the Deputy Minister, and without much ado—we know and understand each other—I want to thank him, not only for his contribution to the debate, but also for the amount of work that he personally put into making the achievements that he spoke about possible. [Interjections.]

Furthermore, I want to thank hon members on this side of the Committee. I want to begin by expressing my sincere thanks to the hon member for Stellenbosch—he is also the chairman of the Standing Committee on Education—for his contribution and for the important point that he raised, namely that to a great extent the success and welfare of the Department of Education and Training is going to determine the future of this entire country.

The hon member touched on an important point when he referred to the improved power of retention of the school as one of the successes of the department; in other words, how the ability of the school to keep children at school and to prevent them from dropping out, had improved.

In order to illustrate this further I had a look at the statistics, and I think it is really a remarkable picture. The period that a group of children of a specific age group would normally spend at school is 12 years. During this 12-year period, which began in 1969, 34% of the particular Sub A group eventually reached Std 5 seven years later. A while later, beginning with the 1981 group, 52% of the Sub As reached Std 5, which in my opinion is a considerable achievement.

If we look at the percentage of the Sub A group that eventually reached Std 10, the percentage of the group that started school in 1969 and eventually reached Std 10, was 6%. The percentage of the group that was in Sub A in 1976 and that reached Std 10, increased to 21%. If one looks at the secondary schools alone and at the Std 6 group of 1976 and their progress over the five years up to matric, one sees that only 16% of them persevered. Fifty-two per cent of the Std 6 group of 1982 reached Std 10 last year. These are recent improvements in the power of retention of schools from 34% to 52% at primary-school level, from 6% to 21% at both primary-school and high-school level and from 16% to 52% at secondary-school level.

A further interesting indication of the success of the growing stability in the school, in terms of pupil numbers, is that the total number of pupils at Black schools in the RSA has increased by 42% during the past seven years. However, if one looks at the primary school, it is only 24%, which shows that there has already been a stabilisation. Opposed to this, there was a growth of 327% at secondary schools over those seven years.

What I want to illustrate with this is the point the hon member for Stellenbosch made, namely that this department has not only been successful with regard to the number of pupils that it accommodates, the quality of the teachers’ training and its matric results, but also with regard to the power of retention of the school. The hon member for Durban North also referred to this matter in his speech.

I should like to bring another very interesting aspect to the attention of hon members and invite them to look at page 232 of the annual report—it rightly received many compliments here. What is particularly interesting is that the histograms show that in the area of the Department of Education and Training, the pupil numbers from Sub A to Std 2 were levelling off during the period 1981 to 1987. Therefore it would appear that the pupil capacity, at these four standard levels in primary school, has already been reached in the area of the Department of Education and Training. This is a very encouraging picture that indicates that if this tendency continues, as is already the case with Whites, Coloureds and Indians, there will also be a levelling off of the growth rate in the senior classes. I am mentioning these points in order to supplement what the hon member for Stellenbosch said with regard to the power of retention of the schools.

The hon member for Umfolozi gave a fine elucidation of what the late Mr Mathonsi said in his publication, Black Matriculation Results: a Mechanism of Social Control, which was published by Scottaville publishers this year. The hon member showed how totally unscientific and how blatantly ideologically prejudiced was this research that attempted to create a false impression, on the grounds of obviously unreliable statistics, that the department was deliberately denying Black pupils the opportunity to matriculate successfully. The fact that disturbs me most is that the man who wrote this book held an M Ed degree from the University of the Witwatersrand. He apparently obtained that M Ed degree on the grounds of this study!

In his study he mentions that his promoters were Messrs Peter Randall and later Ian Moll of the Faculty of Education at the University of the Witwatersrand. I must say it is really shocking that a piece of work of this standard can be recognised, by a university of some standing, as the basis on which an academic degree, at the level of an M Ed, can be granted. For this reason it did not surprise me that when this matter appeared in the newspapers, the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of the Witwatersrand found it necessary to write a letter to the department to say:

†However, I add, he did not deny that they had acknowledge that the work had been submitted for academic recognition in his own faculty!

’That is the sort of quasi-scientific approach that one unfortunately encounters even at universities that are supposed to be held in some academic esteem.

Mr Chairman, is the hon the Minister prepared to answer a question?

No, I am now reacting to the debate.

The hon member Dr Golden made an important contribution concerning Medunsa, and I want to thank him for emphasising—the hon member for Kempton Park did so as well—that it was essential that the private sector should become more involved in the financing of the various training activities of an institution such as Medunsa. It is wrong to assume that because this institution is subsidised mainly by the Government, and because a university such as Medunsa might receive a relatively high subsidy, it is not necessary for the private sector to provide assistance.

The hon member for Walmer made a valuable contribution with regard to the training of teachers. I want to agree with him that the old concept of the pupil teacher, namely the teacher who moves from practice to theory, is one that we would do well to introduce again, in contrast to the teacher who is trained theoretically as a young person without really having any practical experience. This reversed process is one that should necessarily be widely used in the realities of the Department of Education and Training.

The hon member for Walmer also referred to the important bond between the school and the home or community, with a view to the argument that the hon members of the PFP use time and again, namely that the vacancies at White teachers’ colleges should be used for the training of teachers for Black schools.

To add to what the hon member for Walmer said in this regard, I want to refer to a very interesting diagnosis made recently by none other than Mr Julian Ogilvie-Thompson, the chairman of De Beers and one of the prominent members of the top management of Anglo American, at a function at Rhodes University. He believes that the Government and the department are largely to blame for the fact that the education system for Blacks is not everything that it should be. He was reported as follows:

Although he admits that it is their own choice, he says:

Those of us on this side have often referred to the fact that progress in education for Black communities …

Order! Hon members are holding too many enthusiastic conversations among themselves. The noise level is far too high.

†Order! While I am giving this ruling the hon members for Yeoville, Johannesburg North and Berea just keep on talking.

Mr Chairman, they are innocent. I was talking.

Order! The hon the Minister may proceed.

Coming from a person who can certainly not be regarded as an ideological friend of the Government, these remarks are of great importance, and they show with what sensitivity that all educational authorities should deal with the problems of cultural and language adjustments of pupils from a community which, furthermore, is adjusting to the process of modernisation and urbanisation. Therefore, it is not easy to say, on the grounds of statistics, that there are empty places that must be filled. The effect that such an arrangement would have on the ability of teachers to be helpful in this process of cultural adjustment is of fundamental importance, and I am grateful that the hon member for Walmer emphasised it.

The hon member for North Rand made a lucid contribution on the subject of teacher training. I think the hon member for Cape Town Gardens should take note of it, as many of his questions were answered.

I am also grateful to the hon member for Kempton Park for her particularly well-prepared contribution about the creation of informal job opportunities in the Black community for women who look after children at pre-school level.

This project that she referred to, which was dramatically successful in Soshanguve, is being extended to Atteridgeville and possibly also Mamelodi this year. Other colleges of education have also been requested to consider similar projects. Furthermore, remedial advisers and educational aid services have already been included in this sort of project, and there is already a movement in this direction in Sebokeng.

I recently spoke to people who promote the spreading of the Gospel through sound, in response to the need that they identified in Botshabelo, where literally hundreds of children are being cared for during the day by women who have an extremely limited education, while the children’s parents work. With very little help, with audio-visual material on Bible stories, for example, a tremendous cultural enrichment can be achieved in these informal care centres in the homes in Botshabelo. In principle the department gave its support to this project which will be expanded further.

†The hon member for Rosettenville dealt very competently and in a very well-informed manner with the Philadelphia Secondary School for the handicapped. I am very pleased about the degree of her satisfaction because I share it—when I formally opened that school, I was myself tremendously impressed. The thing that impressed me most, was the astonishingly high level of achievement which these children displayed in public examinations right up to the senior secondary level, and if that—in the case of handicapped children—is not proof of the inherent abilities of these children and people coming from their community, I do not know what other evidence could convince someone in this regard.

I would now like to deal briefly with the contributions of the hon member for Cape Town Gardens. He said what is required is an education system reflecting the wishes of the community.

With that I agree in principle, and I can mention in this regard that the department has recently, after extensive consultations with a working group representative of Black educationists and community leaders from all over the country, revised the regulations with regard to the election and the powers of management councils, or school committees as they used to be called, at both primary and secondary schools. This new refurbished system of democratically elected parent representation in the local administration of education will be implemented in the next few months. But what is more important is that the management councils of each school will in future be represented by their chairman in a committee of chairmen of management councils in a locality or a community. These committees of chairmen, in turn, will delegate representatives to the regional committees of education and training, and each of these regional committees of education and training will delegate their representative to the National Council for Education and Training. Instead of being a ministerially appointed council, this Council for Education and Training will therefore in future really represent, in a step by step tier process, the elected representatives of the Black communities who are interested in and well-informed on education. I think this is an important step forward.

The hon member also referred to the fact that not as many teachers have been appointed this year as are available for appointment. It is true that although we have created more than 1 700 new posts in the Department of Education and Training this year, this total of new posts is not as generous as it was in previous years. The result is that where in previous years the increase in the new posts was such that we were forced, by the nature of the circumstances, to appoint insufficiently qualified teachers on a temporary basis, this year we could, in many cases, appoint sufficiently qualified teachers, especially those fresh from training colleges, and it was therefore not possible in all cases to reappoint insufficiently qualified teachers, again on a temporary basis, in newly created posts.

The hon member also referred to the question upon which I have already briefly touched—the question of empty places in White colleges of education. I should like to point out that this matter cannot be dealt with simply on a statistical basis because the geographic situation of the available places does not always coincide with the areas in which there is a real need for further training. Secondly, there is a strong insistence among Black communities on having teacher training colleges in their communities because of the role these colleges are playing in the upgrading of the general cultural and educational level of a community—a role which is tremendous in its scope and which is greatly appreciated.

Mother-tongue education plays an important role in the practical school situation where it is not only important during the first four years but also serves as an additional instructional instrument in the remaining years of a pupil’s primary school career. This is of course a matter which cannot readily be properly accommodated in the proposed system which the hon member suggested. I should also like to point out, however, that I was rather surprised when an offer was made at the beginning of last year by the hon the Minister of Education and Culture in the House of Delegates to Black education to make use of empty places at certain colleges under his administration. There was, however, no readiness on the part of educational advisers in the Black community at that stage to avail themselves of this offer. Moreover the new facilities which are currently being provided for new teacher training colleges in Black communities are provided in such a way that they can also be converted into high schools or secondary schools should the need for further training decrease in future, or even if it should increase in such a way that fully-fledged facilities for all facets of teacher training can be justified.

Mr Chairman, will the hon the Minister tell us whether we are to understand indirectly or implicitly from what he has just said that he feels that at no time in the forseeable future is there going to be a problem caused by a shortage of qualified primary school teachers for his education system?

Order! Before the hon the Minister reacts to this question I want to point out that there is far too much commotion in a certain part of the Committee. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, the hon member pointed out himself that we had so many primary school teachers available at present that we could not even appoint them all. Although we do not have sufficiently large numbers of fully qualified teachers the problem he mentioned does not really present itself.

Finally, Sir, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens also referred to the Advocate-General’s report in relation to the purchase of certain computer-assisted educational material by the Department of Education and Training. I should like to point out that the chairman of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts has informed me that this matter has been put on the agenda of that standing committee and will be fully dealt with and reported on to Parliament. Therefore I do not think it is necessary at this stage to take any further steps such as appointing a select committee.

Furthermore it is interesting that one of the points under discussion in the report is the question whether the Department of Education and Training was justified in recommending to the authorities concerned that the purchase in question be carried out without asking for public tenders. I should like to point out that the purchase of computer-assisted educational material without calling for tenders took place on two previous occasions as well. In both instances, and for good reasons, prior to making the purchase the department had submitted arguments to the Tender Board and to the Treasury, which they accepted and on the strength of which they approved similar purchases. The purchase of computer-assisted educational material without calling for tenders first has therefore occurred before. It is not a unique or unusual irregular step which has taken place in this particular case.

Furthermore I should like to point out that the Advocate-General mentioned in his report that he thought there was at least one firm that was likely to be able to produce the required material mentioned in the certificate provided to the Tender Board by the department.

It is interesting to note that in 1986, the following year, when public tenders were invited for the purchase of further material in this field, that particular firm, which was considered a likely candidate, was conspicuous by its absence; it did not tender.

Of course not! You are missing the whole point.

Several other firms tendered. [Interjections.]

The department’s opinion that there was only one firm really capable of producing this kind of material in the foreseeable future was further confirmed by a report published in Computer Week of 18 April 1988. According to this publication the South African Vocational Endowment, an endowment or foundation established in South Africa by a group of US based companies, had decided and announced that they were purchasing from the firm Learning Technologies—that was the firm at issue in the Advocate-General’s report—computer-assisted educational material to the tune of R20 million, all of which was to be invested in material to be provided for the education department of KwaZulu. In justifying this choice, the executive director of the South African Vocational Endowment explained what had preceded their selection of Learning Technologies, as follows:

In essence this concurred with the conclusion to which the department had come when it provided the Tender Board with the certificate. The executive director continued, as follows:

His next words are very important, especially in the light of the fact that he represented an American foundation, not a South African organisation:

This is what an executive of an American foundation said in respect of the company.

In the light of this additional evidence, I think the prima facie impression I derived from the Advocate-General’s report, namely that he did not find either that there had been any irregularity or that there had been an underhand procedure or avoidance of normal approval procedures prescribed by the Treasury or the Tender Board, proved to be correct and was confirmed by the evidence available to me. [Interjections.]

I would like to reply briefly to the hon member for Bryanston, who referred to children not attending school, and to the inhabitants of squatter camps in particular. The department is fully prepared—in practice it takes the initiative—to provide educational facilities for the inhabitants of informal settlements, but not for people who are illegal squatters in any area.

What about their children?

The result is that areas such as Needs Camp and Good Hope near East London, Crossroads near Cape Town and many other similar informal settlements have in fact been provided with educational facilities.

I would also like to point out, in respect of the hon member’s emphasis on the importance of getting children not attending school to go to school, that considerable progress has been made in this regard. The number of Black schoolgoing children, expressed as a percentage of the total Black population, has increased from 17% to 27% since 1970, and the percentage of Black children of schoolgoing age at school has increased in the past ten years from 75% to 86%.

When one considers the secondary school pupils as a percentage of the total school population, one sees that that percentage had increased from 6% in the early seventies to 22,6% last year. This gives a clear indication of the progress that has been made in this regard.

The hon member for Durban North referred to the question of school feeding. The department accepts that proper nutrition is an essential prerequisite for proper education but the department is very careful about the possible introduction of official school-feeding systems, because this could undermine the responsibility of the parents for taking care of their children.

However, it is accepted that the community concerned has a responsibility and should take the initiative in this regard. There are several voluntary school-feeding systems at quite a number of departmental schools. They are run by private organisations, churches and leaders in the community. The department welcomes this, encourages it and gives it every possible support. Leading members of the parent community often come to the schools to prepare the food there on behalf of the parent community and to provide for the children accordingly.

With the limited finances available there is no question that the department could at this stage divert some of its money towards direct funding of such schemes.

I would also like to give the hon member for Durban North the assurance that the new Social Services Section of the Department is responsible for three very important and, each on its own exacting, duties. Firstly, there is the promotion of culture; secondly, there is the promotion of sport—especially for the out of school population; and thirdly, there is the promotion of youth courses and youth motivation. This is a new service that was instituted slightly less than a year ago, and many of the arrangements for providing this service are still in the process of being negotiated or finalised.

We tried to avoid unnecessary capital investment, for instance by negotiating with private sector bodies owning youth resorts to lay on our courses at such organisations without involving us in the capital investment and doing it on a lease basis.

The hon member for Durban North also said that the department seems to be inaccurate in saying that Black and White education are at the same level. If that is being stated, I think it is an understandable over-reaction by a department which so often has to deal with the opposition consistently pointing out the shortcomings and the weak points, and seldom really generously acknowledging the achievements. They might have overreacted in this way as a result.

I want to say unequivocally that the department acknowledges the disparities which exist, and it has committed itself repeatedly in the past to eliminating those disparities as soon as possible within the financial ability of the country.

The hon member for Mooi River apologised for his absence. He referred to certain impressions that had been created in negotiations and which had allegedly been repudiated afterwards by representatives of the department. I am aware of such cases and I can give him the assurance that I am taking steps for a special enquiry, if necessary by legal authorities from outside the department, into the complaints that have been received in this regard.

*Finally, I come to the hon members of the Official Opposition. The hon member for Lichtenburg dealt with the success that the self-governing regions were having in education. I agree with him; the reason is that it is group-specific (volksgerigte) and group-based (volksgebaseerde) education. The Department of Education and Training believes that where it is at all possible “volksgerigte” education should be promoted in schools by mother-tongue teaching and the teaching of a specific community within a cultural context.

As I said by way of interjection, the hon member gave a totally unfair, distorted picture of what I had said in the past about people’s education.

I want to emphasise again that the concept of a people’s education is a revolutionary and under-mining concept that seeks to bring about chaos and ungovernability in education in South Africa, as well as in other facets of society. They want to implement a revolutionary alternative in the vacuum that would then arise. For this reason people’s education, in this politico-revolutionary sense, is totally unacceptable and is being opposed by the department on all fronts.

However, I also said that the term “peoples’ education”, which is actually nothing other than “volksonderwys” if one translates it into Afrikaans, also has two positive elements, namely that the people should be represented in the management of education and that the curriculum should take into account the endeavours, values and aspirations of the people that it is being offered to. In that regard we in the department are doing everything possible to achieve this in so far as the Black education system in South Africa has not fulfilled this requirement in the past. [Interjections.]

What shall I say about the hon member for Potgietersrus? [Interjections.] He reacted with all the touchiness of a wounded ego, but I think he would do well to look up and reconsider the vehemence—I would almost say venomousness—of the attack that he launched in the debate that he referred to and that I reacted to. Since he is an hon member who has not had much experience here, I want to tell him that in this House one must also learn to take one’s punishment when it is meted out to one. [Interjections.] However, I also want to say that if I offended the hon member, I am sorry.

As is done in a good sermon I want to raise three points about the hon member. The first point is that he argues well. The second is that he knows that he argues well. Thirdly, he makes no secret of the fact that he knows that he argues well. [Interjections.] I think I should leave the matter there.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I have a problem with the ruling that Mr Speaker gave on 21 February 1979 with regard to a matter that was before the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and which was debated here by the hon member for Cape Town Gardens and the hon the Minister when the Standing Committee on Pubic Accounts had not yet given a final decision on it. It was brought to my attention at a much later date but, nevertheless, I should like to raise the matter as I think it irregular that it was discussed by the hon member for Cape Town Gardens and the hon the Minister.

Order! The hon member for Brakpan will concede that just as it was brought to his attention rather late in the day, it has now been brought to my attention at an even later stage, when the debate has already, in fact, been dealt with. Nevertheless, I shall investigate the matter with a view to taking the appropriate action.

Mr Chairman, may I address you on that issue? That matter being considered by the Standing Committee on Public Accounts was not referred to that committee by this House in those terms, and it is therefore incidental to the nature of the work they do of looking through the accounts of the various departments. The matter has incidentally been discussed in that committee. Therefore, in that sense, in terms of the Rules of this House, I would suggest that while the proceedings of that committee are confidential until their reports are made, in terms of debates in this House something which may incidentally arise in that committee is certainly not precluded from being brought to the attention of this House in terms of reports laid upon the Table in this House. The Advocate-General’s report, for example, on that subject has not been referred to that committee or any other committee of this House.

Order! In considering the matter, I will take note of what the hon member for Cape Town Gardens has just stated.

Mr Chairman, since the two votes of the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid do in fact relate to each other, I merely want to make a few remarks about the hon the Minister’s reply in respect of the Education Vote. It was a pleasure for me to listen to a brilliant academic, as we have come to know the hon the Minister over many years. I am, however, of the opinion that even he has been let down by his academic abilities because here in the House he dealt with and judged an M Ed thesis that he had not even read himself.

Furthermore I want to say that if there is one hon Minister who, in my opinion, underwent an ideological transformation, it is the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid.

Let him listen then!

I should like the hon the Minister to listen to this. He changed from an hon Minister whom I came to know over many years as a fiery Afrikaner Nationalist, into a person who has at present accepted the new philosophy of a broader South African holism. [Interjections.] That is precisely what happened.

Last week we were informed, during the discussion of the hon the State President’s Vote, that this hon Minister was on his way out, and that on the day he was appointed, he was aware that education—the portfolio which he has just dealt with and, I think, the Development Aid portfolio—would ultimately be taken over by a Black person in the Cabinet of the central Government of this country. [Interjections.] We must therefore accept that the hon Minister is serving his period of notice. Over the years we have come to know him as one of the foremost thinkers on that side of the House; the first hon Minister who spoke of a possible transitional government, a co-ordinating legislative and executive authority. He said—and I want to repeat it to him—the following at Brits on 28 April 1987, before the last general election:

I think the hon Minister should, in view of the latest announcements by the hon the State President, bring his statements closer to what is going to happen in practice. I think it will be interesting to find out how his portfolios, the two Votes which are now being discussed, will fit into a new dispensation which he foresees for South Africa.

He will probably become Prime Minister!

That is quite possible, because I think the hon the State President will look for someone who does not have a job to fill such a post.

You are seeing apparitions again!

That hon member said I was seeing apparitions. However, when I listen to the statements by many hon Ministers on that side, I realise that they see many nightmarish apparitions for the future of South Africa. [Interjections.]

I now want to ask the hon the Minister whether he foresees the Blacks of South Africa being represented by fewer votes in the electoral college than those of the Asians, who are less than one million in number, as against the more than 20 million Blacks.

What about the discussion of the Vote?

It fits into the discussion of the Vote. That hon member asked what it had to do with the discussion of the Vote. This hon Minister is responsible for Blacks in this dispensation, and I am now talking about Blacks in this dispensation in the future. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister must tell us, because in my opinion it is of course not defensible or justifiable. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he agrees. Surely one cannot give 20 million Blacks fewer than 13 votes in the electoral college in the new dispensation in South Africa. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he agrees.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I should like to ask whether the hon member is in order, because I maintain that the hon member is discussing constitutional aspects which do not fall under this hon Minister’s Vote.

Order! I have been listening to the hon member, and it seems to me as if he is, in fact, venturing into the sphere of constitutional development. I have, however, given him an opportunity to indicate that his argument does in fact relate to this Vote, but the hon member must not venture into the sphere of constitutional development. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I respect your ruling. I merely want to tell you that in my opinion the constitutional development of Blacks, especially in the national states, but also outside them, is very closely involved in this hon Minister’s functions, as well as in the constitutional dispensation. [Interjections.]

Order! I grant the hon member that there are points of contact, and that is why I allowed him to proceed. He should, however, confine himself to those aspects which do, in fact, relate to this Vote.

I respect your ruling, Mr Chairman. I merely want to put this last question to the hon the Minister. If he agrees with what I said—if it is so that the possibility exists that a Black State President can be appointed, and if this electoral college procedure is as I put it—and surely there can be no doubt about that—I nevertheless want to ask the hon the Minister whether the NP will not be clinging desperately to the majority in such an electoral college. That is all I have to say about the constitutional aspect. [Interjections.] We shall come to do it again.

They did not listen to the hon the State President’s speech. [Interjections.]

Order! We do not need more than one chairman here.

I therefore want to come to the financial accountability which this hon Minister has to the taxpayers, whom we represent in this House, when it comes to funds which are appropriated from the Central Revenue Fund in respect of the self-governing areas. I am also saying that the hon the Minister owes this House an explanation of that expenditure. I am of the opinion the hon the Minister himself mentioned, in the discussion of his previous Vote, that there had been an increase in expenditure for self-governing states of nearly R900 million to R1 000 million, according to the budget. I want to say that it is imperative that we receive an explanation as far as the expenditure of these funds are concerned, because there is reason to believe—more than conjecture—that in many respects there is a scandalous waste of funds taking place.

Prove it!

I shall bring the evidence, and I hope the hon the Minister or hon members will be able to reply to it.

When?

This very evening. Before I do so I merely want to make it very clear that this side of the House is not opposed to the development and upliftment of the self-governing states. [Interjections.]

It is part of the ethnic policy (volkerebeleid) of this side of the Committee. [Interjections.] If there has been proven misappropriation of those funds, we cannot allow it. I want to mention one example. The Auditor-General made the following finding in his Report on the Accounts of Highveld Area Development Board. I quote from page 2:

Order! I am sorry, but the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I merely rise to give the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Order! The hon member for Pietersburg may proceed.

I quote further:

Further mention was made of a computer costing R1,2 million.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member’s quotations come from the Auditor-General’s report on a development board, and a development board does not function in a self-governing territory. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member my proceed, but he should bear in mind what the hon the Minister has just said by way of a point of order.

In the period covered by this report, this development board was the responsibility of the hon the Minister.

The hon the Minister then said that he “was not prepared to approve the purchase of the computer ex post facto. This expenditure is therefore reported as unauthorised”.

I want to move closer to another topic which I am very familiar with, namely the self-governing territory of Lebowa in my district. Earlier this year, arising out of a written question, I received the following reply from the hon the Minister. I asked the hon Minister about a hospital being built in the Mankweng area. I asked how much it would cost, when it would be completed and how many beds would be provided. The hon the Minister’s reply was that the final price would be R38 550 100, the date of completion would be the end of March and the number of beds would be 415. The information which I gathered very recently was that that hospital was still standing there exactly as it has always been. Not a single patient has been admitted. In fact, the hon the Minister of National Education and Population Development received only one application for the post of medical officer. There we have R38,2 million, and my instinct tells me that there was no proper liaison between the two departments and that although this tremendous expenditure was incurred, there is no functioning hospital there.

Furthermore, I refer hon members to a report in The Star of 7 March under the heading “R11 million hospital a waste of money”. I quote:

I have been told that that hospital is now up to window-sill height, and I hope its history is not going to be the same as that of the Mankweng hospital. I should like to have a clear reply from the hon the Minister, unlike last year when I asked about the Packshure company in Pietersburg in which allegedly more than R1,9 million had been involved. The Dekker report then disclosed that amounts of R162 000 loaned to Ministers and members of Parliament of Lebowa from the funds of the Lebowa Development Corporation had not been redeemed.

Last year I asked a very pertinent question about the four water condensation machines which, together with their generators, trucks, tanks and modifications, had probably cost more than R1 million. Granted, according to the Department’s reply, one unit cost R130 000. The units therefore cost R520 000, and with the extras, half a million rands, Sir. Last year I wanted to know from the hon the Minister whether they were still operative and what the present unit costs per litre of water were. That was last year, and what was the hon the Minister’s reply? He would consult the Chief Minister of Lebowa, under whose autonomous authority it then fell, and he would provide me with the necessary information. That was the last I heard of it, and I myself had to try to ascertain further what had happened to these units. Now, this evening, I am perhaps in a position to inform the hon the Minister, if he still does not have the information relating to these water machines. According to my information there are service reports from the Lebowa government service which indicate that there were four units in operation. They are namely the L90-L1, the L90-L2, the L90-L3 and the L90-L4, and I can even show the hon the Minister photographs of where they are now standing, neglected and exposed to the elements.

According to my information the last unit was apparently still in operation in October 1987, namely the L90-L2 unit, which during that month had had a diesel consumption of 1 529 litres, but I do not know how much water it produced. Therefore it was still in operation this year, when I put the question to the hon the Minister. One unit, namely the L90-L1 unit, has, according to my information, been out of order since 9 July 1984, but reports were still being submitted and maintained until at least February 1986. Even after it was out of order, requisitions were submitted for electrical repair work to this unit, long after July 1984.

It sounds to me like that tender business!

It seems that the L90-L3 unit was still working until April 1986, while the reports were completed until April 1987. As far as the L90-L4 unit is concerned, it seems that work reports were still being completed even as late as July 1987, while real production seems to have ceased long before that date.

That was probably what caused the floods in the Free State! [Interjections.]

I now want to ask the hon the Minister whether any of these units are still in operation and, if so, where they are being utilised. If it is true that they are now going to wrack and ruin from exposure to the elements, the hon the Minister should tell hon members of this House that this entire project was a grandiose failure and an abominable waste of the taxpayers’ money.

Tell me again how much they cost?

Again I say that we on this side of the House are not in any way opposed to the development and upliftment of the self-governing territories. In fact, the hon member for Lichtenburg has often said that we are in favour of the real and worthwhile development of those territories. We would like to see decentralisation being stimulated. We would like to see employment opportunities being created.

With whose money?

If necessary, with the taxpayers’ money, but then … [Interjections.]

White money?

… but in that case it must not be spent in the way I have just illustrated. [Interjections.] Millions of rands taken from the taxpayers’ of this House are involved, and it is our duty to keep a watchful eye on that kind of situation. That is why I mention these things, and I would be glad if next year, or whenever we reconvene here, the hon the Minister could furnish me with accurate replies on these matters, because we cannot allow taxpayers’ money to be wasted in this way. It is the duty of that hon Minister to report on it in the discussion of his Vote, and this is the appropriate occasion. We eagerly await replies, because I think he owes it to the general public.

Mr Chairman, I could hardly believe my ears when I heard what the hon member for Pietersburg, the CP’s chief spokesman on such an important issue, discussed this evening. He discussed three issues. The first part of his speech was a personal attack on the hon the Minister. He wanted to portray the hon the Minister as a person who had been, but was no longer, a good Afrikaner. Furthermore, he spoke about constitutional development and tried to imply that the hon the Minister would have to clear off and would be pushed aside, as if we would be so stupid as to push aside the talents of such a person as the hon the Minister and no longer utilise them in the interests of all the people of the Republic of South Africa.

He then went so far as to use the remainder of his time to discuss a few water condensation machines. Here we are dealing with an important Vote which affects the lives of nine million people in the Republic of South Africa, including Blacks who are citizens of South Africa. Yet he considers it to be important to discuss water condensation machines and say nothing else about their interests.

When the hon members of that party talk about separate development they usually mean separateness without development. [Interjections.] They talk about apartheid without development. When they talk of partition, that means no development at all in respect of Blacks. They openly refer to second-class citizenship or no citizenship. The impression they want to create is that the Blacks in South Africa are being favoured and that the Whites are being wronged. [Interjections.]

But what are we doing this evening? We are discussing the problems in this country. It is a development issue, and I should like the hon member to speak about development, which includes the development of Blacks.

What concerns me about the CP’s policy, as it is proclaimed here as well as in public, is that the impression is being created that they want to put people somewhere where nothing is going to happen and no money is going to be spent. In other words, part of their policy is an image of apartheid without the expenditure of money. It costs millions to implement such a policy, but they are not willing to implement the policy. They want to practise apartheid without having to pay for it. That is what they want to proclaim to the voters. [Interjections.]

They forget that today we are speaking about 10,5 million economically active people in South Africa, of whom seven million are Black. They are the ones we are discussing, and they are the ones about whom this department is concerned, over whom the department wants to keep a watchful eye and has to provide with guidance in order to help them.

The problem I have with the CP’s perception of Blacks is that their hatred exceeds their love. That is the impression one gains, that the Blacks are people we hate. The impression they evoke is dangerous in South Africa, for us and for the Blacks.

You are creating that perception! [Interjections.]

They talk of “separate but equal”, but in fact there is no such thing. [Interjections.] They merely want to protect the interests of the Whites and forget about the interests of others.

This evening this chief spokesman of the CP did not say one good word about the department and the officials—they are sitting over there in the officials’ bay—nor about the hon the Minister. On behalf of everyone on this side, on behalf of all the Whites of South Africa and on behalf of the Blacks I want to express my gratitude to these officials and this hon Minister. I collaborate with those officials, and if there are people for whom I have a high regard, people who are fighting in the frontline for South Africa, they are the officials sitting over there. [Interjections.]

The CP members do not have the decency to thank those people for what they are doing. [Interjections.]

I want to congratulate the department on this annual report which it published. One of the hon members told me: “Look, I do not always read these things, because it does not concern my Vote or my study group, but this year I read it because it was so interesting and attractive.” Thank you very much for that!

The people are working on accelerating the development of the self-governing territories. They want to stimulate self-development. They must give the Blacks a helping hand. That is their task, and it is not a pleasant one. They want to eliminate the inhibiting factors and the backlogs. They want to expand development in a regional context. They want to tackle the administration, the training and the housing of the nine million people to whom I have just been referring. They want to assist people in their urbanisation. This department and those officials are the South African Government’s most important instrument in giving the Blacks a helping hand.

If one considers what those officials have achieved in a short time, one can be proud of them. They are responsible for the six self-governing states. They are responsible for nine million people who have to make a living in those territories. If they cannot do so in those territories, all those people will land on our doorstep. That is the task of that department.

During the past few years they have transferred freehold over 4,2 million hectares to the national states. The CP should have given them credit for that. They should have been given credit for transferring 43 towns to those self-governing territories. They should gave been given credit for having improved the infrastructure, as well as for all other essential things they are maintaining in those states, such as water supply, roads and other matters which they deal with.

They established nearly 2 000 small farmers on 72 000 hectares. I am referring to the officials sitting over there, and also to the hon the Minister. They presented 150 courses, which were attended by 2 000 Black students.

What does one find outside? What does the CP have to sell to the Whites? They allege that everything is being given to and being done for the Blacks, and they point a finger at the NP. They point a finger at the hon the Minister and at those officials and complain that everything is for the Blacks.

But it is true!

That hon corporal sitting over there should just pipe down! [Interjections.]

Order!

Is it responsible conduct, on the part of an opposition party that says it is going to take over the government, to turn nine million people into enemies of the Whites? That is, in fact, what they are doing in this country. They are not interested in the development of those people. One should go and see whether they are present when the hon the Minister arranges a tour. Not one of them is interested in seeing what is going on in the Black states. [Interjections.]

They say that we should realise that we in this country cannot continue to survive in a sea of poverty. The partition which they preach and its implementation which they advocate, would plunge South Africa into a sea of poverty which would destroy us all.

Blacks are being guided and assisted by this department and its officials to help themselves. These officials are front-line fighters for the Whites in South Africa, and we thank them for that. The hon member complained that things were wrong here and there. A trainee player does drop the ball from time to time, but learns to carry the ball. That is what the officials are trying to teach those people to do.

These various population groups which exist in South Africa, are a reality, and they are not going to disappear like mist in the morning. The CP, however, is not interested in any improvement in the quality of life of the Blacks in South Africa. They never gave me any indication of that. Nor have they ever advocated it.

The hon members of the Official Opposition say we should ask ourselves whether the self-governing states are in a privileged position. That is what they tell the general public. They tell them that the Blacks are being favoured and the Whites are being wronged. What is the position? How much money is being spent on Blacks? Allegations are made about duplication in the administration and in the legislative structures in respect of the so-called costs of separate control.

I have said that there are six of these states, and the total allocation to them by the South African Government is R3 437 million. That is the total amount that has been appropriated for nine million people. Out of the total Black population of the self-governing and independent states, 55% are in the self-governing territories.

Order! I am sorry, but the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I merely rise to give the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Mr Chairman, I am deeply indebted to that hon member.

We are speaking of a total of 15 million people in South Africa. In speaking about allocations, we say the governments of the self-governing territories are regional authorities within South Africa which are performing essential services. Now we want to know whether they can claim Government funds for administration and the provision of services. Of course they can. If they cannot take charge of the administration and provide those services, we shall have to do it. Such administration on a decentralised basis is essential.

A moment ago I mentioned the amounts, but first I want to analyse them a little. The six self-governing states spend R1 120 million of that R3 000 million on education alone. It is therefore given a high priority by them. Furthermore they used the R382 million for health services and almost R441 million for pensions. That brings us to a total of R2 000 million of the R3 000 million, so that they have R1 000 million left with which to perform other functions. Would the hon members say that that amounts to those people being favoured and that they are very well off?

If we were to compare the allocation for those nine million people with that of South West Africa, we would find that South West Africa, with one million people, receives R1 000 million from South Africa while the six self-governing states, with nine million people, receive R3 000 million. Is that giving them an unfair advantage? Is that giving those people an advantage over the Whites? Are the problems which the hon member mentioned here about the water pumps and the hospitals not, in fact, the very consequence of insufficient funds? We should truly take a very good and penetrating look at these things.

Now there is another question, namely whether misappropriation is taking place. It has been found that no misappropriation or unproductive spending took place. Nor has there been ineffective application of funds. In the case of these people, however, we are dealing with under-provision and a non-favourable formula. What is, in fact, true is that there is a backlog and an under-provision which is very serious.

There are no additional funds in the present budget. The result is that these people have had to terminate a number of capital works. They were plunged into various crises and, in certain circumstances, cannot carry on as a result of the lack of funds which I mentioned. If there are any irregularities, these people have identified them themselves and have themselves requested the investigation.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

The hon member need not ask me any questions.

The hon member had a problem with the running of the hospital. I said that they were mainly financial problems.

We now ask whether effective spending is taking place in these states. Separate development does not mean unequal treatment of communities. In the Press there is a lot of criticism against the department about irregularities. I shall tell hon members where the criticism comes from. I cannot say that there are no irregularities taking place. There is no state in the world in which the ball is not dropped somewhere. If we consider the criticism, we find that various things are being written in the newspapers.

The allies of the CP are the PFP. The PFP want to destroy the NP and its policy of separate development with what they write in their newspapers. That is their goal. By contrast, the hon members of the Official Opposition do not want to destroy the separateness, but the development. They only want to destroy the one leg, but the PFP wants to destroy both.

For example, in the article on the “fat-cat syndrome” they write about the mismanagement in Black territories and speak of a 5% inefficiency. One only has to look at the headlines. For example they speak of “Homelands corruption runs to R175 million”. They say the estimated ineffective appropriation or misappropriation of funds amounts to 5%. I shall discuss the articles in a moment.

But first I just want to say that the self-governing territories are just like the RSA, subject to auditing and reporting. Misappropriation cannot occur without these people realising it or reporting it. The self-governing territories are, like the RSA, subject to the Exchequer and Audit Act with all its prescriptions in respect of controls and control measures.

Every year the Auditor-General publishes a report on a proper audit. The unauthorised expenditures for 1985-86 were 2,76%. This was not due to misappropriation as such, but to proper procedures not having been followed in the spending of money. No institution is indemnified from misappropriation.

Let us take a look at what happened here. They say:

That was an article that appeared in the Afrika-Instituut-Bulletin but which was originally reported in The Argus. Now hon members must see how distraught they become. Where did it come from? The hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs said in his speech (Hansard: House of Assembly, 1987, col 5430):

It could be regarded as ineffective. He was speaking about independent states; not self-governing states:

This ineffective spending is quite an achievement for people who have only now started to play the game.

Let us take a look at what happened in the newspapers, however. They reacted as follows. I have already said The Argus headline was “Homelands corruption …”. They make a calculation based on the allocation that comes from the State, and take 5% of that. Referring to the same item Business Day speaks of “bottomless pits”. The Natal Mercury headline reads: “‘Dubious’ homeland loans questioned”. The headline of Business Day of 22 February 1988 is as follows: “Things fall apart”. The Sunday Times report on this reads as follows: “A crusade against crooks”. Subsequently the report in the Afrika-Instituut-Bulletin, which I have already mentioned, appeared.

One of the leaders of the independent states, namely that of Bophuthatswana, said:

These people are self-critical. They are responsible. I want the hon members of the Official Opposition, who are sitting here listening, to say whether we must take a close look at the reality of development, and whether we are paying enough attention to it.

Mr Chairman, I merely want to say that I fully agree with the hon member for Vryheid when he emphasises that the basic problems which we are experiencing in the development of the self-governing territories have, in fact, been typical of the problems which are being experienced throughout the world in developing societies. He also places his emphasis correctly. I agree with him on the confusion which sometimes exists in respect of the concepts “self-governing territories” and “independent territories”. I am sorry that at the end of his speech the hon the member himself made the mistake of referring to Bophuthatswana as a self-governing territory and not an independent territory.

I beg your pardon, I meant QwaQwa. [Interjections.]

It was the printer’s devil!

The Department of Education and Development Aid is, in respect of the Budget, one of the five major departments in South Africa. After the Department of Finance, the Department of Defence, the Department of Constitutional Development and Planning and the Administration: House of Assembly, this hon Minister’s department is, according to the Budget, the fifth largest department. [Interjections.] In that sense the department is of course involved in tremendously important work. I want to say at once that if one peruses the annual report, it is very clear that this department is nothing but a whole series of Government departments rolled into one. If we consider the administration of the remainder of the departments, we find that there are quite a number of other Government departments which perform the various functions, in respect of the other population groups, which are dealt with in this single department in respect of the self-governing territories.

I shall come back to the more political aspects later, but I want to say at once that in perusing the report I was impressed by the great diversity of functions and tasks with which this department has been entrusted and, in fact, by the way in which they have performed those tasks. Bearing in mind that my own knowledge is limited, I find the particulars in the annual report particularly illuminating, informative and stimulating, and I want to express my appreciation for the work which is being done by this department in the development of the self-governing territories. At a later stage my colleagues will discuss the report itself, but I am now discussing the contents of the report. It would be meaningless simply to repeat here what is stated in the report, because it is there for everyone to read. For me to repeat statistics and facts here would surely not make any proper contribution to the debate on this matter.

Yet I must emphasise that in respect of the task with which Parliament is entrusted, the development of a large number of people, I am impressed by the urban development which has taken place. By that I do not want to imply that we have gone far enough and that enough has been done. I am, however, impressed by what has been achieved over the past three years. I am also impressed by the various agricultural projects, including the question of agricultural education, marketing and economic investigations. In this regard the various trust plantations, the sisal project, the development of the rice industry and coffee especially come to mind. I am especially interested in, and impressed by, the extent to which emphasis has been placed on the development of commercial farming.

I shall return to that later, but I believe that that type of farming should be emphasised to a far greater extent, together with the development of a separate class of independent, full-time farmers within the self-governing territories. I also want to remind the hon the Minister of the basic recommendation, in this very regard, which was made in the past by the Tomlinson Commission. It dealt with the necessity for moving away from a communal system of land ownership to a unit system of individual farmers in which the farming unit would be adequate to provide the individual farmer with sufficient income so that he would not have to become a migrant labourer and leave.

I was impressed by the work of the Land Utilisation Section, as set out on pages 38 and 39, and that done by the Nature Conservation Section, as set out on pages 40 and 41 of the report. Because I am particularly interested in this matter, I was also very impressed by the various references, in various places in the report, to the development on the Makatini Flats. I believe that the Makatini Flats as I know them—my knowledge is limited, however—constitute tremendous development potential for South Africa; on a far larger scale even than would appear from the report.

I am disappointed by the decline in the facilities for job creation, something which is apparent from the report. On the basis of the economic situation in South Africa, it should be given special attention in the year that lies ahead.

With this I have expressed my appreciation for the work of the department and for the report. I now want to come to a few more political aspects. I agree with the hon member for Pietersburg in the sense that proper control should be exercised. In my opinion control should not be exercised on the expenditure by the hon the Minister’s officials, but on how the money is utilised by the governments of the self-governing territories. I do not want to level any accusations, but questions are continually being asked about whether proper control is being exercised over the way in which these amounts of money are being spent by the governments of the self-governing territories.

I want to say at once that I am not one of those who say that it is a gift or a waste of money and that it is being spent to perpetuate apartheid. Even if those self-governing territories did not exist, our Parliament would still have been obliged to make provision for educational services and all the other services which are being rendered by the Department of Development Aid to those self-governing territories. [Interjections.] Therefore to say that this help is, in fact, a waste of time and merely the implementation of apartheid is, in my own personal view, not correct. But that does not absolve us from exercising proper control over the spending of money.

I want to add that I have taken cognisance of the 4,2 million ha of land which have been transferred. The hon the Minister will know that for years I have asked for that land belonging to the Trust to be transferred to the self-governing territories. I am grateful that it has progressed as far as it has, but I think that that process must take place more rapidly than has hitherto been the case.

I note that at this stage the Blacks own only 1,5 million ha altogether, but I do not have time to talk about that.

I want to point out that according to the report the population density of QwaQwa is the highest of all the self-governing territories. I know the matter is sub judice, but the inclusion of Botshabelo in QwaQwa makes no sense as far as I am concerned, in view of the facts which have already been furnished in the report.

I have already discussed the necessity for the development of a commercial farming system and I want to emphasise this further. What I often find lacking is an approach based on a co-ordinated development project in which agriculture as well as medicine, health, education and so on are all concentrated on one specific community. I am thinking especially in terms of development projects in Malawi, which I have studied on more than one occasion.

In conclusion I want to make three important observations. I also turn to the hon member for Vryheid, who spoke about Urban development. It is all very well to speak about people who are being removed from one town to another, but the question is whether those removals have always taken place with the full co-operation, knowledge and prior consultation and approval by those who were moved to those towns. I should be glad if the hon the Minister could give that assurance, because if we consider what happened in places such as Oukasie, the question is whether it took place with the voluntary co-operation of those people. [Time expired.]

Order! Before I call upon the hon member for Turffontein to speak, I merely want to confirm a ruling. I have considered the point of order raised by the hon the Chief Whip of the Official Opposition, and after having examined the Hansard, I abide by my original ruling that it was not a valid point of order.

Mr Chairman, I too am sorry that the hon member Prof Olivier did not have time to complete his speech. We should like to thank him for the appreciation and the gratitude he expressed in relation to the tremendous development task which rests on this department.

The hon member Prof Olivier referred, for example, to the great variety of functions and responsibilities of this department, and what the hon member said is true—this department embraces virtually all the functions that have to be performed in the rest of South Africa. In so far as his criticism of control over expenditure is concerned, we agree with the hon member, and I want to say that we are also concerned about this. We have also on occasion, whenever we have had the opportunity to speak as Nationalists to the hon the Minister about this, expressed our misgivings and asked that the department and the hon the Minister should look at the efficient expenditure of the taxpayers’ money. However, I think the hon the Minister will discuss this specific matter at length this evening, or perhaps tomorrow.

The last point the hon member raised, was the question of the resettlement of people. I want to give the hon member and the House the assurance that as far as we are concerned, there is no longer any need for, or possibility of, such things as forced removals in South Africa. Whenever people are resettled, this must be done in consultation with the people themselves.

And the squatters?

You see, Sir, it is no good debating rationally with people like the hon member for Loskop … Losberg … [Interjections] … who has just asked “What about squatters?”. Of course we are worried about squatting. The hon member should just open his ears. What I said to him was that whenever people have to be moved, we must do so in consultation with those people in order to persuade them to move to a better location.

The far right wing of Mondeor!

Development aid to the remote self-governing territories remains an urgent necessity, notwithstanding the constitutional status or the degree of development of our six self-governing territories in South Africa. That is why we on this side of the House support the Government and why, together with the Government, we are absolutely committed to full responsibility in relation to involvement in the economic and social prosperity of our Black fellow South Africans. Development aid to developing communities and aid to self-governing territories in remote regions will determine the measure of our success in the decentralisation of our industries and the deconcentration of our population distribution in South Africa. What I am trying to say, therefore, is that it is possible that selfish self-interest may well entail some political advantage in the short term for those people who are preaching it, but in the long term it will have an undermining effect on the economic prosperity and the social upliftment of all people in South Africa, which will ultimately also be to the disadvantage of the Whites. The prosperity of us as Whites … [Interjections.]

Order! Just a moment, please. When the Chair asks for order, it is expected that all hon members will comply with that request. One cannot simply continue talking when a request has been made for order and silence in the House. The hon member may continue.

Mr Chairman, as Whites, our welfare, our progress and our prosperity will be very closely linked to the welfare, progress and prosperity of territories such as Gazankulu, KaNgwane, Lebowa, KwaNdebele, QwaQwa and KwaZulu.

And such as Mondeor!

That also applies to all the other Black communities outside the national states of South Africa. The question is what the viewpoint of the Official Opposition and of the PFP is with regard to the development of remote areas in South Africa.

The question is whether we have at least reached consensus on this matter, which is of such cardinal importance for South Africa as a whole. The hon member for Pietersburg made a very interesting and a very clear statement here this afternoon of which, if it is true, we are appreciative. He said that the CP was not opposed to the development of self-governing territories. We appreciate that. [Interjections.]

However, I want to ask the hon member, since we are now only at the beginning of the debate, how we should be involved in the development of those territories. How involved should we be, for example, in relation to allowing private White capital within the self-governing territories of South Africa?

Do it!

The hon member for Lichtenburg says “do it”, but surely those hon members are the ones who are saying that we should return to the Verwoerdian philosophy. We must return to what Dr Verwoerd had in mind. The hon member for Lichtenburg will certainly remember that the standpoint of Dr Verwoerd and of previous governments was that the Black territories should undergo their own natural development, that White capital should not be allowed into the Black areas of South Africa and that the establishment of industries should take place on the borders—that is to say within the White areas of South Africa. Do the hon members also subscribe to that standpoint of Dr Verwoerd, or have they, in fact, taken a further step together with Mr Vorster?

We have already given you our answer!

When Mr M C Botha was Minister of Bantu Administration and Development, Mr Vorster adopted the standpoint that White capital should be allowed within those areas of South Africa. Should we use only the taxpayers’ money, or should we utilise White private initiative and capital in order to proceed with this?

Do you not want to go and stay in Mondeor? [Interjections.]

The hon member may make jokes about Mondeor if he wishes. Mondeor is in the process of becoming the biggest boomerang to hit the abuse of favourably disposed people. They were involved in a so-called non-political meeting at which those hon members’ people held the platform, because the chairman was one of the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis’s Stallard Foundation, and there was a former minister of the Reformed Church who delivered a political speech in the opening prayer. [Interjections.]

Tell us what happened to you in your constituency! [Interjections.]

Order! Hon members of the Official Opposition cannot continually pass comment whilst the hon member for Turffontein is delivering his speech. The hon member may proceed.

There is an earnest desire among Black leaders, communities, entrepreneurs and individuals to see the development of their own people take place. They are seeking prosperity and progress. Therefore, since that inherent desire and potential exist, a few questions remain to be answered. What are the authorities doing? What is the private sector doing? What is the White capitalist in South Africa, with his leadership, expertise and capital, in fact doing to become involved?

During a previous debate last year I made an appeal to the hon the Minister that consideration be given to the possibility of a White Paper dealing with the entire concept of development aid. I appealed for proper co-ordination, effective expenditure and guidelines in accordance with which action could be taken so that every component of development aid in South Africa would know precisely what the other components were doing and so that there would be no duplication. [Interjections.] I am not advocating this so that control may be exercised, but rather in the interests of playing a supportive role in these remote areas of South Africa and of making them magnetic forces so that they may thrive and prosper together with the rest of South Africa.

As the English say: “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.” In the department’s annual report, to which the member Prof Olivier referred, we can see these successes of the Government’s policy in relation to the establishment of communities, the creation of physical infrastructure, industrial development, agricultural projects, planning, the provision of employment, economic aid, research, social services as well as the creation of opportunities for Black entrepreneurs in those areas.

When one travels abroad and goes and looks, for example, at the projects that are under way in the well-renowned country of Israel—I say this again this evening—one realises that South Africa need not take a back seat to anyone when it comes to the projects one sees there as compared to projects one sees here in Southern Africa.

Our projects compare favourably with the best in the world. I want to assert that there are few places where developing communities, particularly in Africa, can boast of as much success as we have here in South Africa. This is thanks to the initiative and the policies of the NP Government.

Order! I regret to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon member for Turffontein an opportunity to complete his speech.

Order! The hon member for Turffontein may continue.

Sir, I should like to thank the hon Whip.

We are aware of South Africa’s political, economic and social diversity, of its ethnic variety and its developing and developed areas. It is an unfortunate fact that the so-called “haves” make up approximately 30% of the total population and the “have nots” approximately 70%. It is for this very reason that wherever a disparity exists in respect of people’s prospects in life, it is the responsibility of the developed community to assist the developing communities in South Africa. We are not living in isolation in South Africa. We are all living together here at the southernmost point of Africa. The stronger we can be internally, the stronger we can be with regard to our aid, including that to our neighbouring states.

On the contrary, the linked destinies of various communities which function within the same regional context and within the same regional economies of South Africa, can surely not be disputed. That is a fact which everyone must appreciate.

The fact is that according to figures which have been made available to me, 8,1 million people, or 29% of the total South African population, are to be found in the self-governing territories. One fifth of these work as migrant labourers and commuters, outside the self-governing territories, in the rest of the Republic of South Africa. That figure excludes the TBVC-countries, which are already independent.

The prosperity of everyone in South Africa, both Blacks and Whites, is very closely linked to the upliftment of the developing sector, the combating of poverty and the expansion of capitalism among the Black population groups in South Africa as well.

I want to repeat that no-one in South Africa need be impoverished as a result of the enrichment of others. No-one need be satisfied with less in order to satisfy the appetite of others who would also like to earn that prosperity. Everyone would be able to share in South Africa’s prosperity if we planned correctly and spent the funds effectively in order to help the people to develop.

Development aid must take place in partnership. In other words, aid must be supplementary to the efforts of the developing communities themselves. The potential of the developing communities must be recognised and expanded. The developing communities must be able to identify and satisfy their own requirements. Precisely because our destinies in South Africa are linked, we must complement, understand and recognise one another’s aspirations and needs instead of sowing racial hatred and mistrust among one another.

In the remaining two minutes at my disposal I want to come back to the hon member for Durban North. I am sorry that he is not here. It is interesting to note that there are only three hon members of the PFP sitting in this Committee at the moment. [Interjections.]

†May I just refer—I ask the hon member for Johannesburg North to convey this to his absent colleagues—to some very unjustified remarks from the benches on my immediate right in this very debate. For example, this evening my colleague, the hon member for Rosettenville, conveyed to this House her honest and sincere impressions of a visit arranged by the hon the Deputy-Minister of Education to look at educational institutions and the efforts made by this department to improve education of Black people in South Africa. While she was giving positive and touching examples of successes and appreciation, the hon member for Durban North chose to denigrate her observations as just “NP propaganda”.

We take that amiss. We do not accept that as positive criticism and I would like to say that it is disgraceful. They display this holier than thou attitude while they did not even have the decency to accept the invitation to go and have a look for themselves. That is really bad. [Interjections.]

Order!

I went on other tours. I want to address the hon member for Johannesburg North on this. There was, for example, an invitation from the government of KwaNdebele to go on a one day visit and have a look at what was happening in that small self-governing territory north of Pretoria.

Not a single member of the PFP took the trouble to go on that tour, and that includes the hon member for Johannesburg North in particular, who has had a mouthful to say about the KwaNdebele government from time to time and what is going on in that country. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Turffontein is deliberately misleading the Committee because he knows I was not in the country at the time and so I could not possibly have gone on the tour. [Interjections.]

Order! That is not a point of order. The hon member for Turffontein may continue.

Mr Chairman, if the hon member for Johannesburg North could not go, he could have sent one of his colleagues. [Interjections.]

I was out of the country when the invitation arrived!

When one hits them hard, they fly off the handle, Mr Chairman.

I want to conclude. We visited a small area, KwaNdebele, for a day, an area which, under the guidance of this department and of this Government, has achieved things in the space of ten years which I have not seen a developing community achieve anywhere else in the world. Hon members should go and look at their industrial development, their agricultural projects, their water supply and their community development—they are something to boast about. However, in addition to the negative English language Press and the foreign critics, one finds only negative pronouncements and insubstantial opinions coming from those left-wing elements in South African politics who call themselves the “Progressive Federal Party”. I wonder what the “Progressive” stands for. PFP probably stands for “Pack for Perth”, “Preach for Preservation”, or “Puff For Puff For Puff”. That is what it stands for.

I want to conclude by telling the hon members the following: We look upon them rather in sorrow than in anger. [Interjections.]

Order! I am going to ask only one hon member to speak, and it is not necessary for the Committee to voice its approval or otherwise in chorus.

Mr Chairman, I noticed that when this debate began the hon the Minister was wearing a beautiful rose in his lapel. As the debate progressed he discarded that rose—he is now no longer wearing it. This makes me think of how he began in public life. He began with a policy of partition, even for Coloureds, and he ended with power-sharing which has come to nothing. [Interjections.]

Allow me to make a few remarks about what the hon member for Turffontein said. I do not want to devote much attention to him because I do not think it is worth it. Nevertheless, I want to ask him this important question, namely whether he is prepared to stand up and tell the Committee what happened to him in his own constituency in Mondeor a few evenings ago. It appears to me that he was the victim of a forced removal in his own constituency at that particular meeting. [Interjections.] Perhaps it was more than that. The hon member for Turffontein spoke at length about the nature and necessity of development aid. I shall come back to that later.

At this stage I want to make a brief remark about what the hon member for Vryheid said about a remark made by the hon member for Pietersburg. It concerned these water machines and their accessories. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Vryheid objected to the fact that the only contribution that the hon member for Pietersburg was able to make to this debate on behalf of the CP was his reference to these water machine problems. It sounds as if that side of the Committee does not realise that when the taxpayers’ money is being wasted it is the responsibility of this side of the Committee—no, more than that, it is our duty—to point it out. That is what the hon member for Pietersburg did. In fact, if we add this waste of taxpayers’ money which, including the water machines and accessories, amounted to more than R1 million, to the golden handshake given to Mr Riaan Eksteen as well as the R11 million for the song, that side of the Committee is responsible for wasting R12,5 million of the taxpayers’ money. [Interjections.] In passing, I want to refer to the hon the Minister’s remarks about the M Ed thesis that was mentioned. When he referred to it, I rose to ask him a question about it. He was not prepared to reply to a question at that stage. With all due respect, I want to tell him that it is clear why he did not want to reply to a question. The hon the Minister must now tell me whether he associates himself with an M.Ed thesis or dissociates himself from it without having read it. I am looking him straight in the eye, and he must now tell this Committee whether or not he read that thesis.

Yes, I have it here!

I am not asking whether the hon the Minister has it, I want to know whether he also read it.

Yes!

And did the hon the Minister give an academic opinion on it?

Yes! [Interjections.]

Having read the annual report, and as a member of the standing committee, I got the impression that the annual report was thorough and testified to good planning.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

I do not have time for any questions now. If I have time at the end of my speech I shall gladly reply to a question.

As a member of the standing committee, I got the impression, when reading the annual report, that it was a thorough annual report which testified to good work. I should like to congratulate the department on it. It is an annual report that testifies to activities that are a credit to them. Secondly, I want to congratulate them on the good partition work they are doing. If one looks at page 10 of the annual report, it is clear that good partition work has been done. Development aid is being given to the six self-governing territories, as well as to other territories that fall under the SA Development Trust. The development aid is divided into various categories, namely budget aid; administrative and technical assistance which is subdivided into manpower aid, training, agency services, etc; as well as the purchase and administration of land. When these various facets of the development aid are read in conjunction with a short sentence that appears on page 9 of the annual report, I ask myself—and I am asking the hon the Minister to give us an answer in this regard—if there is not perhaps a hint of a guilty conscience here. The sentence reads:

Was it really necessary to let their slip show in this way by saying: “We cannot be accused of paternalism”? In reality, what appears on page 10 endorses the fact that aid is being provided in such a way that it occurs in no other way than in a paternalistic one. However, we need not be ashamed of that. I am asking the hon the Minister whether it was really necessary to let the their slip show in that way.

Furthermore, in the light of the annual report I want to ask what the policy of that side of the Committee actually is. Is it partition? The annual report gives the impression that partition-orientated development aid is indeed being given. Is the standpoint of that side of the Committee that their policy is one of partition? If this is the case, I want to ask them what criticism they are then able to level at this side of the Committee’s policy on partition. Or is their policy one of partition and power-sharing? [Interjections.] Or is it one of power-sharing with just a little partition? [Interjections.] It seems that the power-sharing component of the policy of that side of the Committee is swallowing up the little partition that has remained. Let us look at what the hon the State President said in this regard. The hon the State President said the following in the latest edition of Die Nasionalis of May 1988:

If a Black Minister is able to manage Black education matters, surely it follows logically that it will also be possible for development aid that deals with Black communities to be managed by a Black Minister. We ask the hon the Minister what functions would remain for him in this Cabinet after power-sharing had been taken to its logical conclusion. Indeed, it would mean that that hon Minister would no longer be able to manage his portfolio and that he would be phased out in this power-sharing process. The only question that we are still asking, is whether he would also be as fortunate as Riaan Eksteen.

They are going to privatise him.

A further question that I should like to ask, is what the underlying philosophy is with regard to the development aid that is being given. Is it that the Blacks have a right to development aid and that the Government is obliged and required by law to provide that development aid? Is that the underlying philosophy because we want to tell that side of the Committee very clearly—we are saying it equally clearly to the hon member for Turffontein—that this side of the Committee is not opposed to development aid. Indeed, in terms of our policy of partition, we are strongly in favour of development aid that will encourage the development and self-determination of separate peoples and improve their living conditions. [Interjections.]

When the hon member for Turffontein talks about the “haves” and the “have-nots”, we want to ask him whether it is the language of the NP to talk of the “haves” and the “have-nots”. It sounds more like the language of a philosophy that is foreign to what the NP tells its voters. We say yes to development aid, but we say it on the grounds of our sense of Christian responsibility and not because we feel obliged to do so. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it has twice been my privilege, within a short period, to be treated to the professorial superficiality of the hon member for Losberg. [Interjections.] I think it is a long time since we have had dished up to us such a hotchpotch, of unrelated remarks that were simply jotted down in the course of a debate. [Interjections.] I am astonished that anyone could be brought into this debate—which deals with so important a matter—on behalf of the Official Opposition with such an evident lack of preparation. This is in contrast to the hon member for Pietersburg, who made a very well-prepared contribution here. I thank him for that and I shall come back to the details in due course.

Right at the outset I should like to tell the hon member for Turffontein, in regard to his reference to the idea he put forward in the debate last year about the proposed White Paper, that this is indeed being given serious attention. At the customary indaba or “bosberaad”, as it is traditionally called, where the Minister, together with the top management of the department, deliberates for several days about policy and planning, important spadework was done last year in connection with the formulation of such a White Paper which would deal with the approach to the responsibility for development aid as it concerns South Africa. This differs from the traditional development aid responsibility, as dealt with in the literature, relating to the world in general. There it is, for the most part, a matter of aid being granted by a specific state to another state which is geographically separated from it, and often is not even constitutionally related to it. Here in South Africa development aid is granted to a state which forms part of the RSA; aid is granted to self-governing territories that form part of the RSA. Like all regional authorities, for example the provinces, they are entitled to support from that State under whose central Government they fall as far as their development activities are concerned.

In that sense the White Paper is taking shape and we hope to achieve finality in that regard in the course of this year. In this way we shall be able to clarify, to a greater extent, precisely how the Department of Development Aid views its mission and its strategic objectives.

I should like to thank the hon member once again for the suggestion he made in this regard last year.

Although this may be the wrong time of day for this, I should like to take this opportunity to express a few words of thanks. The Director-General and his staff, in particular, have again shown this year the calibre and dedication of the top level of our public servants, because in this department special demands are made, and sometimes unreasonable sacrifices are demanded of the staff. People who make a fuss about overtime, being away from home for long periods and being exposed to what are sometimes dangerous crisis situations, simply cannot do the work in this department.

I want to extend my most sincere thanks to the Director-General and his top management for the example they set in the department and for the leadership they provide, whereby their own dedication has filtered through to officials at the lowest and most modest levels. As I said earlier in regard to my other departmental responsibility, the quality and dedication of officials is a key factor in the implementation of sound Government policy. A policy may be outstanding, but if we did not have officials of this kind that we are very grateful for, we would have a very hard time of it.

I also take pleasure in referring to the important contribution made by the Commissioners-General, as representatives of the SA Government with the various self-governing territories, for the important liaison work they do and for the important task of reciprocal interpretation they perform. I want to assure them that we regard their contribution and their role as absolutely crucial.

I should also like to refer to the role played by the Chairman of the Commission for Co-operation and Development, the hon member for Vryheid, with regard to various matters that relate to the functional sphere of this department. I wish to extend my most sincere thanks to him for his contribution and for the sober and practical negotiating skills which he has displayed in dealing with various problem situations. The new General Manager of the SADTC, Mr Frik Weyer, is also with us tonight. I wish to extend a hearty welcome to him and thank him in advance for continuing with the important work done by his predecessor, Dr Koos Von Marie, in the running of this vital arm of the Department of Development Aid, namely the SADTC.

I would be neglecting my duty were I not also to refer to the exceptional dedication with which the Chief Ministers of the various self-governing territories perform their task, as well as to the contribution made by a number of their Cabinet Ministers, in close co-operation and in interaction with the Department of Development Aid and I, in promoting sound mutual understanding, good liaison and trust between the SA Government and the various self-governing territories.

At this stage I do not wish to go any further, but tomorrow afternoon I should like to recognise the rightful share contributed by the hon member for Pietersburg, the hon member Prof Olivier and my colleagues when they emphasised the importance of representation, in this House as well, in regard to financial management and expenditure in the self-governing territories.

Whereas on the one hand we dare not deny the autonomy and right to internal self-government and internal self-control of these territories, and must be careful not to take any steps that could create the impression that we are guilty of paternalism, and while we should not undermine the self-confidence and sense of responsibility of these Governments, it is nevertheless true that this House and Parliament is the ultimate source of a very large proportion of the funds made available to these territories, and therefore it is the duty of the Minister responsible for this Vote to report to this House. Tomorrow, when we resume this debate, I intend dealing with this matter in more detail and dwelling at some length on the steps taken in this regard.

I now take the liberty of moving:

Agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr Chairman, I move:

Mr Chairman, I should like to make an announcement which is of public importance. The Supreme Court in Port Elizabeth ruled this morning that the Government’s declaration of the King’s Beach area as White was invalid. Therefore, somebody else owes me an apology.

Mr Chairman, following the announcement of the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council in respect of the Supreme Court case in Port Elizabeth, I wish to record my gratitude to the hon member for Gelvandale who, along with the City Council of Port Elizabeth, took this matter to the Supreme Court. I think he deserves the praise of this House for having done that. [Interjections.]

*Mr Chairman, I should like to agree with the hon member Mr Douw in his criticism of the Government during the Second Reading debate of the main Budget with regard to the way in which the tax proposals affect the long-term insurance industry. The hon member is correct when he says that the insurance industry plays an indispensable role in the creation of capital.

†What disturbs me, Sir, is that there seems to be a totally wrong perception of what the long-term insurance industry represents, both in respect of its philosophy and its concept. I say this with all due respect. The minority report recommendations of the Margo Commission, in respect of the industry, seem to display much more empathy as to the nature and function of the industry. There appears to be much more appreciation of the role of the life insurance industry within the broader context of the South African economy than is perceived by the members of the commission who signed the majority recommendations.

I say this without wanting to detract from the yeoman service rendered this country by members of the commission. They gave excellent service. The report, as the hon the Minister stated, contains over 300 recommendations for the improvement and the reform of the South African tax system. For the benefit of hon members in this House, let me quote the view expressed in Chapter 15.28. I quote paragraph (b) of the Commission’s report:

Who can argue with that particular statement?

There is a further view in the minority report which I can fully subscribe to. I now quote from paragraph (c):

Hon members will recall that during the Second Reading debate on the Budget I said that one way of mobilising and redistributing wealth to ensure greater economic equality and political democracy was through a social security system. The State and the private sector, through the life insurance industry, can complement each other in this particular task.

Incidentally, whenever one pleads for the redistribution of wealth and land, images of socialism are conjured up amongst some people. I will deal with this matter further during the Third Reading debate on the Budget, because it appears as if the hon the Minister and I do not see eye to eye with regard to the distribution of land. I think, with all due respect, that the hon the Minister distorted my view on the issue of the redistribution of land in this country. We will deal with this matter during the Third Reading debate.

I believe the decision to increase the taxation of life insurance from the present 40% to 70% of investment income and thereby taxing assurers at an effective 35%, is ill-conceived. I say this with respect. I am at a loss as to why this is being done.

What is your proposal?

I am coming to that, Sir. I cannot understand the logic nor the rationale behind this proposal. The industry itself is very reasonable in its attitude towards taxation and has made proposals to the Government in this regard. In fact, they have submitted lengthy evidence to the Margo Commission itself in which they spelt out alternative tax proposals. The industry is not averse to being taxed. It concedes that it must play its part in providing revenue for the fiscus. The industry itself also agrees with the majority of the Margo Commission’s findings.

Order! Hon members at the back of the Chamber, on the left-hand side, must please lower their voices. The hon member may continue.

The industry itself agrees with the Margo Commission that in principle, the taxable income of a life assurer should be investment income less expenses. They say, however, that the individual constituents of that formula are vital and their differences with the commission in that respect are significant. Sir, the commission recommended that selling expenses should not be allowed as a deduction. I cannot accept that view. Selling expenses are as much a part of the cost of a policy as are investment or administrative expenses. It is precisely because of the fact that it is only the life-insurance industry which is marketing long-term savings through brokers and other intermediaries that they are able to persuade the general public to save. If it were not for this type of marketing, capital formation in this country would be in a dismal state. This stands to the credit of the long-term insurance industry.

If the idea with the increased taxation of the insurance industry is to break the concentration of savings into one sector, I am sure the hon the Minister will not succeed. What he is doing now will be totally counterproductive. If it was as a result of pressure from the building society movement, I think they are targeting their criticism at the wrong people. It is perhaps the overregulation of the building society movement itself that is responsible, because building societies are by law forced to invest 80% of their assets in mortgages. All the hon the Minister is doing now, is punishing the insurance industry for being successful in mobilising the nation’s savings. Surely one does not kill the goose that lays the golden egg. The industry should be encouraged and not punished. I want to repeat that I do not believe that the increase in taxation of the life-insurance industry is in the interests of this country. The simple fact of the matter is that with sanctions being applied, this country is not attracting the long-term foreign capital needed to expand our economy. Therefore, the lack of new foreign investment makes it imperative that savings of individuals are actively promoted and encouraged so that we can achieve a higher growth rate in this country. It is common knowledge that personal savings are at historic low levels. The economist of a large life insurer has pointed out that the percentage of personal disposable income savings plunged by an average of 10% between 1960 and 1980 when only R1,8 billion of personal disposable income of R79,2 billion was saved.

Order! I am afraid the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon member the opportunity to complete his speech.

Sir, according to the Reserve Bank’s latest bulletin, the average personal savings ratio of 3% in 1987 showed almost no change compared to the level in 1986. However, in the third and fourth quarters of 1987, households’ increased recourse to borrowing for financing consumer expenditure caused the average personal savings ratio to be reduced further—to as little as 2%.

Sir, that is the sorry tale of savings in this country, and it is not getting better. This hon Minister knows that South Africans are fond of living above their means. He knows that at this moment the economy is overheated as a result of consumer demand, which causes a chain reaction—credit, followed by money creation and then inflation. The hon the Minister knows that we cannot allow the money supply to get out of hand. He knows that it is because of the high level of inflation that people are loath to save—in real terms the interest rates are negative. Here I am speaking about saving with short-term deposit-taking institutions.

Sir, one cannot fight inflation by shooting oneself in the foot. This is exactly what the hon the Minister is doing by increasing the rate of taxation which applies to the long-term insurance industry. [Interjections.] Sir, I do not hold a carte blanche brief for the industry. I do have certain points of criticism of the life insurance industry. My main criticism is the fact that the assets of policyholders are primarily channeled into property investment in the White areas of this country. Yet, Black people—here I use the term “Black” in its broadest sense, to include all people of colour—are also policyholders. I do not buy the argument that property investment is done on a purely business basis only. I believe that social factors should be taken into account as well. In short, there is also a social responsibility.

I therefore call on the life insurance industry to contribute much more significantly to infrastructural development in Black areas as well. I believe the hon the Minister should have delayed any sort of taxation proposals in respect of the life insurance industry until the officials of his department have had adequate consultation with the industry in order to consider rational alternatives.

Mr Chairman, 30 December 1987 was a historical date for the Labour Party of South Africa. On this day more than 3 000 delegates elected Rev Allan Hendrickse as the national leader of the LP—unopposed and with a standing ovation. Those 3 000 delegates asked Rev Allan Hendrickse to put their case in Parliament on their behalf. Sir, he was given a mandate to negotiate aggressively, from a position of power. It does not matter who says what about my leader; he has a mandate to put the case of the underprivileged in South Africa in this Parliament.

It is high time that we in South Africa decided whether we want a head of State or a party leader at the head of the country.

I say this because it runs counter to one’s principles when one’s head of State gets up in this House and says he is talking on behalf of the Afrikaners. I am not ashamed of being a South African, and for that reason I expect my head of State to talk on behalf of everyone in South Africa. [Interjections.] History will prove that the steps taken by Allan Hendrickse in South Africa are indelible. History will prove that our battle with the NP is not in vain, and our children will learn in due course that the struggle for liberation which we have begun here will give them their freedom. [Interjections.] Mr Chairman, I should like to request the privilege of the half-hour.

I shall not be able to talk politics on end. I therefore want to come back to the Vote before the House, viz the Finance Vote. If one measures the conditions in the South African business world over the past 18 months purely in terms of economic criteria, one will see that there has been an upswing in our economy, and, in my opinion, a higher average rate of real economic growth in the long term. Our economy is heading for a positive growth rate of between 2,5% and 3%, despite numerous challenges and crises that face the country daily.

What comes to mind in this connection is the threat of sanctions, the well-known economic problems of structural inflation, unemployment, rural impoverishment, increasing militancy among workers, budget deficits and greater international competition. Viewed in the long term, our political and economic problems and challenges concern the question of how the legal and rapidly increasing demands of the large Black segment of South Africa’s population can be satisfied with the restricted means of a semi-developed economy, which has to be used as the basis for designing an appropriate socio-economic and politically economic system.

South Africa is in a transitional phase, and I am positive that solutions to our constitutional problems can be found. The hon the State President’s historic opening address on 5 February this year ushered in a new economic era. Permit me to quote what Dr Gerhard de Kock, Governor of the South African Reserve Bank, said when he recently addressed the Afrikaanse Sakekamer of Cape Town:

That is very important to me. Just like Dr De Kock, I have no doubt that we shall be able to bring about peaceful change in our country. I believe that with God’s guidance we can find solutions, but only if one very important prerequisite is kept in mind, viz that the interaction between the economy and politics must be acknowledged. Even the State President’s Economic Advisory Council paid attention to this in drawing up its recommendations for a long-term economic strategy for South Africa. The Economic Advisory Council said there should be further political progress in order to reduce civil unrest. Secondly, business confidence must be restored, and thirdly, foreign views of South Africa must at least be moderated to improve our access to the international capital market. This strategy also presumes an economic system which will encourage individual achievement and ability and offer everyone equal opportunities and acceptable conditions in which private initiative and effective competition can be promoted in a positive way.

In reaction to this the Government reconfirmed its constitutional obligations as well as its commitment to a market-orientated approach in its economic policy. On 5 February, through the hon the State President, the Government announced steps to free the economy and relax restrictions on labour mobility and individual enterprise. Consequently I was very disappointed to read in Die Burger this morning that the deregulation policy had aroused criticism. I quote:

The major reason for the Government’s development of a new policy of deregulation and urbanisation resides in the enormous unemployment problem. Estimates of the magnitude of unemployment in South Africa vary between 1,5 million and 2,5 million people. Without a doubt, one can draw a clear causative connection between unemployment and poverty on the one hand and political unrest, social alienation and especially political enmity in respect of the status quo on the other, all of which are found among Black South Africans. A purposeful implementation of the dynamics of urban development can certainly defuse matters, and that is why I take exception to people who want to denigrate the deregulation policy.

I say this, because I believe that part of the answer lies in the deregulation that certain groups are suddenly balking at. Control measures which restrict entrepreneurship, initiative and creative business activities must be removed. It is necessary to relinquish the deeply-rooted obsession with the maintenance of First World standards. South Africa is not a First World country; it is a developing country with a strongly developed modern sector.

I want to tell those who object to deregulation that we in South Africa must talk about applicable standards more often. Consequently we must adapt and implement our building regulations, safety regulations, labour regulations etc accordingly. What deregulation amounts to is that the authorities, as well as the general public, must realise that a greater variety of economic agents must be permitted to start doing business. In brief, more room must be created for what is known as the informal sector. [Interjections.]

I believe, however, that it is necessary to establish decentralised community development programmes, which must be aimed at mobilising local community leaders to support local initiative and direct external assistance at the stimulation of the production of goods and the rendering of services for which a market exists.

In my opinion economic development is a do-it-yourself process. At most external aid can stimulate and grant assistance.

In order to explain the need for an informal sector, I want to say that the creation of new employment opportunities is determined by the rate and pattern of economic growth. Our economy’s performance during recent decades has been extremely poor. Although the economy grew by almost 5,5% in the sixties, there was an average growth of only 3,5% in the seventies. It was even worse in the eighties. Even if one takes the strong growth of 1980-81, resulting from the high gold and other metal prices, into account, the average growth rate between 1980 and 1985 was only 2% per annum. Between 1983 and 1985 the economy actually came to a standstill, with the growth of 1984 cancelled by the retrogression in 1983 and 1985. Since then economic growth has been a priority because of the needs of the labour market.

During 1986 the hon the Minister of Finance started stimulating the economy in the short term by means of low interest rates and selected higher Government spending which all of us in this House know about. These measures were aimed at getting the economy going in the short term, and we all know what positive effects this had.

In the past South Africa concentrated mainly on import substitution as a growth stimulant. I was disappointed to see in Die Burger this morning that our imports have increased to a new record high. I should like to quote from the report:

We must implement import substitution in order to stimulate domestic growth. At the same time I can mention that large increases in the prices of our major export products such as gold, platinum and diamonds stimulate the economy from time to time. In terms of volume, export growth created the breeding ground for a higher domestic growth rate in the sixties and early seventies. During the past few years, however, the traditional growth factors have not been able to supply the necessary stimulus for employment creation, and consequently the Government was forced to turn to domestic growth sources to a greater extent. As a result attention is being focused on the urbanisation process and the improvement of the labour market to an increasing degree. Deregulation and urbanisation provide the potential for a strong stimulus via a greater domestic demand for certain products.

For that reason I now want to turn to the South African businessmen and tell them that the need for reform is not restricted to the political sphere. A great deal still has to be done by the business world, not only by simply eliminating all the remnants of racially discriminating conditions of service, but also by facilitating greater participation of Black South Africans at all levels. I would be the first to admit that a considerable degree of non-racial interaction and co-operation already exists in the work-place, but I believe that by promoting these relations, businessmen will not only be promoting the development of their own companies, but will also be serving the interests of the broad economy.

In fact, I believe that they will be serving the whole community in this way. It is of the utmost importance that businessmen reflect on the way not only in which one must move closer to the objective of equal opportunity, but also on how one can adjust to the needs and aspirations of the emergent South African community.

In a South Africa in which the wealth-creating processes of the First World have to form a durable synthesis with the needs and aspirations of the Third World, a great deal can be said for matching the interests held in the country as a result of increasing home-ownership by means of giving workers a direct interest in the enterprise they work for. This view is definitely in line with the worldwide trend away from centralistic socialism on the one hand and strict capitalism on the other. It tends towards something between the two, which of course is not based on ideology, but on pragmatism which derives its strength and support from the fact that it can work.

I now want to say something in connection with inflation. The major characteristic of the reconstruction of our economy during the past two to three years has been the success attained in combating inflation. In 1985-86 the inflation rate reached a South African record high. Various domestic factors led to this. Recent events have been a clear indication of the influence of international politics on the economy, however. I regard what happened when international bank credit was withdrawn in 1985 as an object lesson in this connection. As I said earlier, the major challenge facing the South African economy during the next few years is the provision of sufficient employment opportunities for the country’s growing labour force.

According to official calculations, approximately 300 000 additional employment opportunities have to be created annually in order to supply the new entrants to the labour market with employment. At the present rate it will be possible only to accommodate new entrants every year, and one will not be able to make provision for a drop in the present high level of unemployment. A sustained disciplined monetary and fiscal policy during the past two to three years has saved the day, however.

It was with great appreciation that we heard recently that the inflation rate had reached its lowest level in years last week. I believe that South Africa owes a lot to the hon the Minister of Finance and his competent advisors. Dr De Kock spelt this out beautifully in the speech I referred to earlier, and I quote him as follows:

There is a possibility that we may have a single-figure inflation rate within the next year. In this respect we are greatly indebted to those heading our economy. I believe that, because I know the people who are operating the country’s economy.

I should appreciate it if the hon the Minister would react in his reply to a report that appeared in this morning’s edition of Die Burger. It reads:

He went on to say:

In this connection I want to know from the hon the Minister whether the salary restrictions in the public sector will have an effect on the country’s economic prospects. I also want to know whether the economy is in danger of becoming “overheated”, something that can lead to an increase in interest rates in due course. The following question is also important: Have the attempts to curb inflation had a negative effect on the economy?

†In conclusion, Mr Chairman, I should like to refer to some recommendations of the Margo Commission. I did deal with some during the Second Reading debate on the Budget, but now I should like to refer to some recommendations that have a direct bearing on lower income groups.

It is proposed that donations to charitable organisations not be tax deductible. This is a highly objectionable proposal that would cause grave problems to numerous charities, in particular to those benefiting Blacks in South Africa. If personal income tax, income tax, GST or VAT were all reduced, it might be argued that individuals and companies have sufficient additional funds to contribute proportionally more to charities. It is unlikely, however, that these taxes will be drastically reduced, and as a result charities are likely to lose out.

There are also a number of other changes which have been proposed. I think these are likely to go against the interests of lower income groups. First of all, greater stress on user charges will result in lower costs of social and other public sector services. Secondly, child rebates will be limited to a certain number of children. Thirdly, dependants’ rebates are to be abolished. Fourthly, tax exemptions for building society dividends are to be abolished. Finally, food will no longer be exempt from GST.

I recently read with great interest an article in The Star stipulating that the quality of bloodstock in South Africa might plummet if a recommendation by the Margo Commission was legislated. The recommendation embraces all livestock and would prevent racehorse breeders from writing off the capital cost of bloodstock against income from other sources. In terms of the recommendation, such capital expenditure could only be written off against income generated by bloodstock investment and not from other sources.

If the Margo Commission’s recommendations should be legislated, there would be no incentive for businessmen to plough money into bloodstock. Even worse, existing businessmen breeders would have less money to invest in bloodstock owing to their income from other sources first being taxed, unlike at present. I should like a clear answer from the hon the Minister in this respect. I know he addressed the Breeders’ Association some time ago in Johannesburg.

*Mr Chairman, at the end of my speech it is a pleasure to express a word of special thanks on behalf of my colleagues in the Standing Select Committee on Finance to the Auditor-General and his competent officials for the assistance they have given us during the past few months. We want to wish them everything of the best. This also applies to all the officials in the Department of Finance who regularly advise the committee.

Mr Chairman, a great deal has been said about privatisation. According to the hon the Minister, those who constantly criticise State expenditure or the State’s involvement in the economy should now be delighted at the fact that privatisation is going to be implemented. The hon the Minister went on to state that it was gratifying to learn that investigations had been carried out, or are still going to be carried out, to privatise certain semi-Government institutions, inter alia Eskom and the SATS, and also post and telecommunications and the State’s Foskor plants.

In his Vote the hon the Minister said that privatisation was not merely confined to the conversion of semi-Government institutions. A new approach, which made its appearance recently, was that of toll roads which are being established, financed and run by the private sector. The hon the Minister emphasised that the Government was already conducting negotiations into the relevant matter and that contracts had been concluded with two large consortiums. That, however, is where the problem lies.

It would cost this country billions of rand to privatise semi-Government institutions, Government institutions and toll roads. Where must the money come from? It can definitely only come from the big financiers, but unfortunately in South Africa those financiers are not Coloured or Black people, but only White people. Privatisation is therefore only going to benefit the …

Whites.

No, not only the Whites, but the privileged Whites. I speak under correction, but the Afrikaners are not actually included in this, because approximately 87% of the country’s money is in the hands of “Rooineks”, with only 13% of the country’s revenue in the hands of the Afrikaners. Privatisation is only going to benefit the very rich financiers in this country. The poor people of colour will not benefit from privatisation at all.

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon member for Klipspruit West must not try to prompt the hon member. [Interjections.] The hon member for Riversdal may proceed.

Sir, I can give you the assurance that the hon member for Klipspruit West will not put me off.

What is the goat saying now? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, you will have to speak to hon members who make references to a goat. [Interjections.] I shall be compelled to ask hon members to tell the story of the goat. [Interjections.]

[Inaudible.]

Order! Why is the hon member for Robertson sitting there? He must please return to his seat. [Interjections.] The hon member for Riversdal may proceed.

Sir, privatisation is geared to profit-taking. Privatisation is going to establish top-quality services, but State subsidisation is going to be a thing of the past. In this country the man in the street will have to cough up for the provision of these services. As I have said, privatisation will mean profit-seeking. Consequently a great deal of money will have to be paid for services. I therefore want to allege that the poor non-White component will get the short end of the stick.

If the SATS were privatised, the State’s subsidy to commuters would, of course, fall away. Consequently commuters themselves would have to pay the full price. If the SATS were privatised, it is my view that travel costs would have to be increased. And who are the people who make use of the trains on the Cape Flats? The Coloured and Black people are the ones who are going to suffer. If the postal services were privatised, I can foresee that postage stamps, telegrams, telephone calls and parcel post would become more expensive. The poor man in the street will have to cough up.

Sir, most of the people in South Africa are already struggling to keep their heads above water and to make a living. In the event of privatisation those people would find it difficult to make a living. Sir, in the event of privatisation we are going to have a hard time of it, and we shall not be able to do anything about it. The lamentations will be a cry to high heaven.

One could counter this problem—and it must be done—if the Government were to help consortiums or companies to offer shares to the general public at prices as low as 50 cents per share and if the Government were to ensure that this was done.

Legislation will have to be drawn up so that all South Africans can benefit from privatisation. [Interjections.] Legislation will have to be introduced so that companies are compelled to give the man in the street an opportunity to acquire a share in this. Even the ordinary farm labourer must have an opportunity to become a shareholder. [Interjections.]

Order! I am sorry to have to interrupt, but the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to give the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

I thank the hon member for Swartland. If it were possible for the man in the street to become a shareholder, it would be possible to keep the maintenance costs of services low. I should like to hear the man in the street, who has acquired shares, speaking about his post office, his train and his toll road. [Interjections.] Negotiations will have to be entered into with consortiums and companies so that the man in the street can be involved. All South Africans—Whites, Blacks and Coloureds—must be given an opportunity to benefit from privatisation.

In his budget speech the hon the Minister also said that price control was not an acceptable option as far as the Government was concerned. The hon the State President appealed to the private sector to exert the utmost degree of self-control when it came to price increases.

Look how prices are shooting up now!

What has happened since 16 March 1988? [Interjections.] The price of cigarettes has increased by 4 cents per packet of 20. A pint of beer will cost 2 cents more and soft drinks have become more expensive. [Interjections.] In yesterday’s Die Burger it was reported that the price of butter had increased by 40 cents per kilogram or 9,3%. Before the price-hike choice butter sold at R2,25 per kilogram. New stocks are to cost R2,47 per kilogram. In yesterday’s Die Burger it was stated that the price of cement in the Cape Peninsula had increased by 8% yesterday, whilst in the Boland it increased by between 6% and 7%. [Interjections.] Die Burger states that the average increase throughout the country was 6,5%. The price of white maize and related products will increase by approximately 4%. The price of bread will be increased in October, even though the price of white bread was pushed up by 5 cents to 81 cents per loaf last year, whilst the price of brown bread increased by 7% to 63 cents.

These price increases are going to result in price increases for all their by-products or for products of which these items are ingredients. Let us take butter as an example. We know that butter is an important ingredient in cakes, tarts and biscuits. Bakeries …

Is the hon member speaking about goat’s butter?

Mr Chairman, you will have to speak to the hon the Minister too. [Interjections.]

Order!

Bakeries will now be compelled to push up the prices of their products. We know that South Africans love their milk tart. I am sorry, but the consumers will have to cough up as a result of these price increases.

I really cannot understand why butter has to be so expensive, because it is still the same cow with four legs, an udder and four teats which provided the milk and cream in the days when butter cost 2s 6d a pound. No expenditure has been incurred on improving those cows. The cows do not have six legs, two udders and eight teats. Cows are the primary agent in supplying butter.

I shall tell hon members why the price of butter has rocketed from a half a crown to R2,47. In South Africa we want to maintain First World standards in Third World conditions. The Government has compelled the dairy farmer to milk his cow in a shed which costs more than R30 000. Cows now have to be milked with machines, apparently for health reasons. As far as my knowledge goes, the healthiest and purest milk is that which comes directly from the teat into the bucket.

Let us look at cement. Building costs will now increase too. Consequently rents are going to skyrocket. Our people are going to have a lean time of it. What is very interesting, Sir, are the words of the spokeman for PPC, the largest manufacturer of cement in South Africa. According to Die Burger he said yesterday that the difference in price between the various regions was largely the result of the costs involved in transporting coal, and coal is used in the manufacture of cement. Mr Chairman, do you know that it is R5 cheaper to get a ton of coal to Athlone from Australia than it is to get a ton of coal to Athlone from Middelburg in the Transvaal? Did you know that, Sir? [Interjections.] Did you know, Sir, that a jar of bottled beetroot that we buy at the supermarkets for 89 cents does not contain even three cents worth of beetroot? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, if I could now start with the story of the goat …

Order! The hon member should rather leave the goat out of it. [Interjections.]

Sir, without the story about the goat there is very little of my speech left. [Interjections.]

Today I should like to discuss with the hon the Minister a few matters which I perhaps omitted to mention on other occasions. In the present economic climate, with sanctions, disinvestment, privatisation, the rapid population growth and the burden which this places on the economy, it is perhaps brash of me to come to the hon the Minister with a few requests. These are requests which do not relate to South African society as a whole, being confined more specifically to the areas and bodies I represent, ie the West Coast, the Western Cape, the Atlantis area and then also the sports community and private schools.

Approximately 150 kilometres to 600 kilometres up the West Coast there is a large area which has perhaps been neglected in the past. In the early planning stages it was thought that we would establish a new development axis here along the West Coast. There was a slump in the economy, however, and the political picture changed. There was a change in emphasis, and it seems to me as if we are not going back to that planning stage again. I am glad to hear that consideration is been given to completing a portion of the Mossgas project there. That is at least something. I am concerned, however, about the fact that there is insufficient economic stimulation for the West Coast. The West Coast is chiefly dependent on the fishing industry. The development of the fishing industry largely depends on the allocation of quotas and the control of fishing resources. The West Coast has not stood still; it has grown and its population has increased. The slump in the copper-mining industry in Namaqualand has caused people to move southwards and to settle there.

There are masses of people in the Vredenburg-Saldanha area and in Atlantis who stopped in their trek southwards in search of better economic prospects. The Sishen-Saldanha project, which cost millions of rand, created great expectations. The necessary infrastructure was created. The municipalities of Saldanha and Vredenburg amalgamated. The hon member sitting behind me is fast asleep, it is true, but he knows what I am talking about. The cost involved in the creation of the infrastructure for this project must now be borne by that community. With the slump in the overseas iron and copper markets, however, this project has not come up to expectations. Exports decreased. The project did not come up to expectations. The taxes of the inhabitants of the West Coast, on the other hand, have sharply increased. I think that a portion of those development costs should be written off, because the people cannot be held responsible for the services.

I am thinking, for an example, of an amount of approximately R5 million which now has to be paid by a Coloured community for services. Those services were furnished by the Department of Railways at the time, and the costs now have to be recovered from the people of the West Coast. If one had proceeded with the development, one could have expected the people to repay the money. I want to ask the hon the Minister whether he could not determine in what way the municipality in that area can be assisted and whether these liabilities could not be written off.

When there are crop failures and flood disasters and things go wrong in the economy, assistance is granted. Here we have a situation in which one has to determine how assistance can be granted. The people are not to blame for the fact that the project collapsed. Nor can the people who planned the project be blamed. It failed, however, because the international political climate turned against us and the price of iron dropped.

I want to link up with what the hon member for Riversdal said in connection with privatisation. I want to go so far as to say that we should start with a system in which people who would like to buy shares can do so on credit. If there is a demand for shares, a person should be permitted to purchase them on credit. I realise that this perhaps sounds strange, but ultimately we must determine what the object of privatisation is. The object of privatisation is to distribute economic growth over the broad spectrum of South African society so that everyone can benefit. The new symbol of the country’s economy should be: This land is our land. These services are our services. The road out there is also my road. A feeling of unanimity must be created in the implementation of the new policy.

If the Government has not succeeded in controlling a situation and now wants to remove the pressure, we are not going to succeed if we place that control in the hands of the private sector where the big monsters can take over. Ultimately the present objections to State control are going to be raised against domination by large companies.

Order! The hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise to afford the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Order! The hon member for Mamre may proceed.

When a person feels he wants to purchase a share, he discovers that the shares have already been sold to those large companies, and once again he is on the outside looking in. We must now bring those people in, Sir.

We must remember that what the State wants to sell to the private sector are not only the products of taxes paid by private companies. They were established with the taxes of the population as a whole. That is why a percentage must be reserved for the people so that they can share in that privatisation.

I should also like to lodge a further plea for development in Atlantis. I am grateful for the development in Atlantis. I am grateful for the money which has been pumped in there, for the housing and for the infrastructure. I am concerned about Atlantis, however …

We are too.

I am concerned about the soul of Atlantis. What has been done to improve the quality of life of those people? We cannot bring people together from every quarter and not think about the soul of the people there in Atlantis. That is why I want to ask the hon the Minister to grant greater tax rebates to companies. They are already being subsidised, but by way of greater tax rebates they could give that community something. This has to be done so that those companies can do something for the community life in Atlantis. You see, Sir, there is no community life in Atlantis, and that is what we must guard against.

The people in Atlantis have reached the half-way mark. They have come to live in Atlantis, but not to make their future there. They move on to the cities because the essence of community life does not exist in Atlantis. We must guard against that.

One will never succeed in keeping people there if one does not look at community development. The companies which are situated in Atlantis and which have a responsibility there must be persuaded to spend money on the community life in Atlantis. They cannot do so, however, if no financial provision is made for them.

There is something else which I find very regrettable. Atlantis now has a population of almost 60 000, but its police station … Oh, Sir, the hon the Minister must just come and look at that police station! It looks like the Kalbaskraal station. Even when one has long since passed it, one still finds oneself looking for it. Those people still do not have the necessary facilities. [Interjections.] I really think we should do something about that. I have already lodged pleas in writing for the Atlantis police station, but nothing happens. Mamre has now built its own police station.

Smugglenoster too.

The hon member must be careful, because Smugglenoster is very close to the Kingdom of Heaven. [Interjections.]

That is why I am advocating an examination of the utilities in Atlantis, particularly those services which are important to people’s security.

There is another matter that I should like to refer to, but I shall speak about that tomorrow. The hon the Minister of Finance is responsible for the monetary affairs of this country. I wonder, however, whether he has taken the time to read the Diemont Report and the White Paper on that report. In fact, I wonder whether that White Paper is still on the hon the Minister’s desk and whether it is still relevant. We in this country must stop wasting money on commissions of inquiry, because when the reports of those commissions are published, the recommendations are never implemented for more than a day before they are shelved. Consequently the problems are never actually addressed.

I am very unhappy about the fishing industry, because privatisation and deregulation are not implemented in that industry. Many of the decisions taken in that regard are political decisions. If the hon the Minister wants to straighten out the economy in this country, political decision-making on rights and quotas will have to cease. It will only be possible to solve this country’s problems if the decisions we take are fair, and are not decisions that lean more heavily to one side than the other. We shall have to learn to take cognisance of reports such as the Diemont Report which recommended that we examine the smaller and less-developed communities, and also the private individual in the industry. If those people are ignored, those of our people who have never encountered the trade union milieu will, as it were, be driven in that direction. We must be careful that we do not force the fishermen into a trade union set-up. If they wanted to join a trade union today, however, I would support them, because I am convinced that they do not get a fair and reasonable hearing from the Government. I meant trade unions in the negative sense, in case that is not the way it sounded.

I also want to refer to sports sponsorships. The hon member Mr Douw is always asking us not to sponsor foreign tours.

That is not quite correct.

The hon member is always saying that tax rebates in that regard are wrong. I do not want to disagree with him, because he is a greater economist than I am and also knows more about these things than I do. I want to ask the hon the Minister, however, whether he would consider giving larger tax concessions to sports sponsors who promote integration in sport. We must create a new spirit, and people who are prepared to create that spirit and to promote such an attitude should be benefited. Of course, those who are not prepared to do so should not enjoy the same benefits. I also want to ask the hon the Minister to accommodate sports sponsors for rural and undeveloped areas and to grant them certain benefits. A sports sponsorship is normally linked to advertising. I do not think there is anything wrong with someone offering his sponsorship in exchange for the best possible advertising return. There are rural areas, however, where the same products are manufactured. These areas are part of the market, but never benefit from those sponsorships because they are situated 500 kilometres to 600 kilometres from the mass concentration points. Sir, our sport in rural areas is dying out because no one is taking care of it. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to thank our hon leader and our party for their participation in the beach affair. I also want to thank the hon member for Schauderville for his congratulations. It is nice to be a member of the winning team. [Interjections.] Sir, I should like to ask that hon member on the opposite side to keep quiet. It would be better for him to have been at St Helena Bay today.

The contributions that primary, secondary and tertiary industries make to the gross domestic product are commendable. This has led to the South African economy being in a much more favourable position than in previous years. There are indications that the confidence that businessmen and consumers have in the economy has improved considerably. At the moment the domestic growth rate is adequate and the foreign reserves strong enough to leave the Republic’s economy better off.

Available figures indicate that local demand has improved significantly. There are also indications from small business undertakings and primary industries that this situation has improved considerably. At the level of secondary industries, the private sector’s working capital has increased. Companies have augmented their stocks, which had run very low. Several factors support these contentions. The sale of new cars has increased, for example, as has factory production, and retailers had good Christmas sales. It is extremely encouraging to note that the tertiary industries have also played their part in helping to restore the economy.

The collapse of world share markets also gave great cause for concern. It immediately gave rise to the fear that business activities would suffer a serious setback. This would inevitably have affected South Africa too.

Last year the position in regard to diamonds and wool was less exciting. As far as exports are concerned, we rely heavily on coal, sugar and maize. There were poor achievements, however, on all these levels. The Republic of South Africa’s exchange ratio has not improved either, and sanctions have had an adverse effect. The Republic can therefore not expect much help on the export side to stabilise its economy, and unless conditions in our country change for the better, it would be unwise to rely on an improvement in the exchange ratio.

Sir, politics plays a very important part. That is why, for all practical purposes, the world’s credit markets remain closed to the Republic of South Africa. For that reason we cannot bolster our domestic growth by importing foreign capital.

I want to express my thanks to the Reserve Bank which has again augmented the gold and foreign exchange reserves and stimulated the domestic economy. The Reserve Bank has been forced to adopt a specific monetary policy. The rate at which the economy develops must be controlled, although one does not need a very strict package in this regard.

It is very clear that this year is going to be characterised by high interest rates.

All South Africans are responsible for restoring confidence in the Republic of South Africa. We must win the confidence of local producers, consumers and manufacturers. We must encourage industrial companies to employ capital to improve existing activities. The Republic’s international economic image must also be restored, although some industrialists feel that the political climate has not improved sufficiently. The level of the gross domestic product will have to be improved, so that it can compete on the international level. We must also ensure that it maintains the expected growth.

Consumer stabilisation will also play a major role in economic growth. Trade unions and certain other bodies are developing alternatives for political parties, resulting in general strikes and boycotts. These strikes and boycotts cost the State millions of rand and result in a very high matriculation failure rate. These bodies will have to be scrutinised very closely. An annual growth of 5%, however, would give the Republic a very sound basis on which to combat all our socioeconomic and political problems. This would necessitate greater co-operation between the Government, local entrepreneurs, foreign investors and the labour market, however.

Mr Chairman, I am grateful for this second opportunity to participate in the debate. There is another matter I want to raise. This debate is probably not a suitable opportunity at which to do so, but if I were to raise it in another debate, I would be told that there were not sufficient funds available. I should like to raise the question of the South African Coloured Corps. I think that thought should be given to the relocation, expansion or refurbishing of the South African Coloured Corps. Coloured soldiers do voluntary service, and it seems to me that there is a certain degree of unfairness in regard to the funds spent on facilities. The facilities available to the South African Coloured Corps are atrocious, and I do not think that should be the case. I think that we should provide adequate facilities for those young men who are willing to serve on a voluntary basis. There must not simply be facilities; the facilities must provide them with some comforts. There is a considerable annual intake of recruits to the South African Coloured Corps. Many of the young men have to be turned away, and they get no further opportunity to join up because there are insufficient vacancies. They play an important part in the development of our people. There are insufficient technikons, and not everyone can go to university. Perhaps they cannot get the necessary training in the rural areas either. They therefore see the South African Coloured Corps as an opportunity to improve their quality of life. That is why they come in droves, particularly from the rural areas, but the problem that exists is that those young men cannot be accommodated.

I want to advocate that we examine the facilities there. We must look at the funds available to improve their lot. They are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice, but they do not even have a proper hall in which to hold church services. There is a large intake, and for years on end they sleep in tents. There is not even a decent parade ground. When we ask for a reply, we are told that additional facilities are going to be created. When that has to be done, however, no funds are available. I feel that the funds should be found to make those facilities available.

Another important aspect is that we have many veterans and retired South African Coloured Corps members. Many of our veterans had no economic benefits. They have meagre pensions, and the bodies which they used their own funds to create, and which they created with pride, cannot carry on. Many of those veterans simply have to leave buildings in a state of neglect, because they do not even have staff members to maintain them and are too old to do so themselves. They do not have the financial means to keep those institutions going. I want to know what the hon the Minister can do about such institutions which have been established and are falling into disrepair because the older generation cannot maintain them.

The people of this country all have a right to a reasonable quality of life. The boys and the young men of this country who are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice must also obtain facilities and be accorded certain benefits, because their days may be numbered to a greater extent than ours are. We can afford to wait comfortably for these facilities.

Mr Chairman, the Budget is an important instrument which reflects the stability and growth of the total economy. It shows us our strong points and highlights our weaknesses.

The external Government debt is most encouraging and I just hope it will decrease to what it was in the early 1980s. However, our exports need some jacking up. It is most interesting to see that after 1976 our exports dropped to an all-time low in 1980, because of the riots. Then, when the concept of power-sharing was introduced, we had a massive increase in exports between 1980 and 1984. Therefore, it is abundantly clear to me that our internal politics determines the export market. Here I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister. As he well knows, riots, strikes and boycotts have a definite effect on our export market. We in this country will have to take a very hard look at our internal situation.

We will have to look at the very root of our problem and we will have to be honest with ourselves Our present Government policies and our present constitution are not having the intended results. I believe most foreign countries are keen to buy our goods. They want to buy from us. I believe foreign competition can be beaten. We have the material wealth and we have the potential in this country. However, the legitimate demands of the masses will have to be met here at home. The opportunities are there but we must be open-minded.

For the sake of the economy—I must reiterate this—the Group Areas Act will have to go. The fact that that hon Minister’s Government wants to make the Group Areas Act an own affair is criminal. In fact, I would call it a rape of our Constitution.

It cannot be denied that Blacks have a legitimate right to sit in this Parliament. The fact that a man’s colour is black does not mean that he cannot represent his people. The fact that certain people have a lighter skin colour does not mean that they are superior. [Interjections.] The fact that some people have white skins does not mean that only they can live where they want to and that others should be denied that right. [Interjections.] Those laws are making us the polecats of the world, whether we want to accept it or not. The evidence is there and the writing is on the wall.

It is a wrong move on the part of the Government and the Cabinet not to give the pensioners an increase.

It is Chris April’s fault.

I believe our pensioners have suffered and sacrificed enough. They have built this country up to what it is today. They have fought and they have shed their blood so that we can enjoy the fruits of it and now, in their old age, the Government is not making life easy for them. I want to urge the hon the Minister to have another look at his Budget and find some money—he could find money for the maize farmers two years ago—and give all our pensioners an acceptable increase.

In our areas we are daily confronted with and our offices are bombarded with requests from pensioners who are starving. I want to state that a large number of pensioners in our communities are dying a slow death of starvation because of the high cost of living. I feel strongly that our pensioners do not deserve the treatment they are getting now. [Interjections.]

We can have the best budget in the world and we can have the best commissions in the world, but it will do us no good if we do not have the support of the masses.

You sound like the UDF.

The UDF does not represent the masses.

Let us remember that the overwhelming majority of South Africans, whether they be White or Black, do not want to see this country destroyed. They do not want to see that which they have built up over many years go to the dogs.

The overwhelming majority will give this Government their wholehearted support, but then the Government must be fair to the people. Because of the housing crisis a Black or a so-called Coloured cannot go back to a place called home at night. He is separated from his loved ones; and this is what hurts the very fibre of our community. Black men are being separated from the people who are dear to them. Does the hon the Minister know how many broken marriages there are due to a lack of homes in our community? I believe that the provision of housing in our community is a priority and we will have to look into our priorities in this country.

With reference to the new VAT system, I would like to know from the hon the Minister what percentage of our revenue he expects will come into our coffers. How much more will it be than the 26,9% that we are at present getting from GST? Will this lead to a reduction in individual taxes? I feel personally that we have to work towards lowering individual taxes in this country.

I am concerned that the physical volume of mining production of gold is dropping. I believe that gold should play a more meaningful role in our country. I would like to see gold enjoying a more prominent place in the international monetary system. I believe that that metal provides a viable basis for a monetary system. Furthermore, gold might help in the much needed stimulation of our economy. I realise that we must not put all our eggs into one basket. However, gold has and can play a more meaningful role in our monetary arrangements. A solid gold standard will provide a secure basis for long-term lending.

My comment on the standard income tax for employers—Site—is that it is an improvement on our present taxation system and I must congratulate the hon the Minister in this regard. This offers far more benefits to our people. In the long run everyone who earns a wage will be subjected to this tax system. People who are paying taxes by means of the Site system will no longer need to dread the “Due by you” letter from the Receiver of Revenue. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, firstly I want to express my sincere thanks for this opportunity to complete my speech.

I have probably made it clear why attention should be given to price control. The hon the Minister has said that the Government does not regard price control as an acceptable option. I understand that. I know that the Government does not want to clash with the private sector. The private sector, however, has taken no notice of the hon the State President’s request for a disciplined and responsible attitude, particularly in regard to price increases. The Coloureds, Blacks and Whites in South Africa who are less well off are having a difficult time of it. It is difficult for them to keep their heads above water. In South Africa it is difficult for the Coloureds, Whites and Blacks who are less well off to make a living. The Government will have to give serious consideration to introducing price control if the private sector does not want to act responsibly.

If price increases are not curbed, many people in this country of ours are going to die of hunger. If price increases are not checked we are going to create conditions in which it will be impossible to negotiate. We are going to create conditions which will be breeding-grounds for communism. If the private sector cannot discipline itself, the Government will have to intervene and introduce price control.

In conclusion there is something I want to ask the hon the Minister. Sir, I am not one who traffics in the politics of abuse … [Interjections.] … or the politics of recrimination. I am a realist; and because I am a realist who faces up to the realities in South Africa, I want to tell the hon the Minister that the eyes of all the aged I represent are focused on him. I therefore want to ask him whether he will not seriously consider granting the few rand we want for narrowing the gap in social pensions. [Interjections.] I know that the hon the Minister and his team of brilliant officials can put their heads together to make it possible for my old people to get that little bit extra that we have set our hearts on. I know they will make it possible. This request of mine comes from the heart.

Mr Chairman, I do not know how any hon Minister can say “no” after hearing an hon member make such an appeal for his people. We can only pray that his prayers will be answered here this afternoon.

†As we have said, Sir, in terms of the Site system husbands do not even need to disclose their wives’ earnings if their wives are among the lucky 83% earning less than R1667 per month. They no longer need to fill in those buff forms either.

In fact, if the hon the Minister’s department wants to do something good for our people, they should look at their buff forms and at the compilation of these forms. A lot of people still find them very confusing.

I also want to thank the Department of Finance, because they have put a lot of effort into the preparation of this Budget. We came out of a drought and went straight into floods which have cost this country millions of rand. We appreciate the efforts that went into the preparation and drawing up of this Budget.

Mr Chairman, a sound transport and road system contributes towards a healthy economy in a country. Unfortunately we do not have a sound transport or road system in this country.

If we look at our train system, we will notice that at the beginning of this year we were running at a loss of R1 billion. That indicates that the transport system in this country is not working the way it should be to contribute towards the economy of the country.

As far as our road system and the privatisation of our roads is concerned, I have nothing against the concept of privatisation, but I do have a problem with the way in which it is being done, with the methods being used by the Government. The hon member for Riversdal also referred to the privatisation of our roads. The Government, however, as the hon member for Mamre pointed out, ignored the White Paper on privatisation and simply decided to privatise certain roads. I am not sure they even looked at or studied that White Paper.

When one looks at the last road that was privatised, namely the N1 North out to Johannesburg, and one looks at the location of that toll plaza, it is clear to one that it will affect only one race group. Apart from the fact that these toll plazas are erected and managed by Whites-only companies, the so-called non-White group has to pay double to make that plaza viable. This specific toll plaza was erected without anyone’s having been consulted, least of all the so-called non-White groups in the area, in spite of the fact that the White Paper clearly states that they have to be consulted. The White Paper states that the Government has to liaise and communicate with the people in any area where a toll plaza is to be built. In this case it was not done. The Government simply decided to build a toll plaza there, saying it was meant “to catch” people coming from a certain area, which in this case happens to be Ennerdale where the so-called Coloured race group lives. They will be heavily hit by this toll plaza.

The hon the Minister encourages people to save and cut Government expenditure, yet they went and built a toll plaza so that our people will now have to pay more. Every journey by car into Johannesburg will cost a person R4 extra; and if he has to travel that road twice, he will obviously have to pay R8. That is a lot of money for any ordinary man. We have ordinary, everyday people living in Ennerdale, not people with high incomes. The whole system is wrong. It should affect the wealthy and the rich, which in this case is mainly the White group. The Government should build toll plazas where the Whites live and have an alternative route for them. The Government, however, used the Group Areas Act to dump our people hundreds of kilometres from the centre of a city and on top of that decided to erect a toll plaza so that these people now even have to pay whenever they come into the city. When one looks at the cost of bus fares, one sees that bus fares in that specific area are the highest in the Transvaal, and 100%—I should say 110%—of all the people living in Ennerdale work in Johannesburg. They cannot afford to sit at home or have their own businesses as is the case in most White areas. They do not own factories or big shopping centres; yet they are the very people who are being affected.

*The hon the Minister of Transport Affairs does not want to hear anything about it when one discusses this with the various departments.

†He does not care a hoot what happens to those people. His interest is a financial one. They work together with the hon the Minister of Finance. Yes, Sir, the hon the Minister of Finance has to work with him; he should not shake his head. He also had a say in privatisation matters as far as roads are concerned. He is part of this, and cannot, therefore, shake his head. He is looking for an income from that toll plaza. He is interested in that levy, because people have to pay to use that toll plaza.

Sir, I want the hon the Minister to use his influence to convince the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs that none of those people—I am referring to the people of Ennerdale, Lenasia South and Grasmere, who all belong to the so-called non-White group—should be affected by that plaza.

As far as the the proposed privatisation of post and telecommunication services is concerned—the hon member for Riversdal pointed out that that is also going to be a problem—I am afraid there is only one person in the House of Assembly who is going to be very bad off, and that is the hon member for Carletonville, Mr Arrie Paulus. I see that in the debate on the Post Office appropriation, he asked the hon the Minister of Communications to do away with all public telephones for general use and replace them with a white public phone for Whites, a black public phone for Blacks and special phones for Coloureds and Indians respectively. He then went on to say that the NP should have grey ones because the NP wanted grey areas. Now, Sir, I am afraid that that poor gentleman will have to make a choice. He will either have to refrain from phoning altogether, or he will have to make use of other public telephones—the white or the grey ones. He has a problem, Sir, because he is not far from what we are. If one looks at the colour of his skin, one will see that the skin of many hon members in this House is much lighter than his. So, he has a problem, Sir. I do not know if the hon the Minister will privatise phones as well, and provide special phones for him. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, hon members have so beautifully decorated the cake that the hon the Minister baked that I do not know whether I am going to be able to do the trimmings as well as they did or whether I am merely going to mess things up.

I agree with the hon member Mr Douw and I want to give him my wholehearted support—I know that it is true, even though I could not be in Pretoria owing to my wife’s illness—when he says that our hon leader has the backing of 3 000 people who said that he should come and negotiate as they wanted him to and not as the Government would like to have it done.

Sir, I have never done as much quick thinking as I did yesterday, because I was very interested in the hon the State President’s answers when he furnished his reply. When I say that our hon leader obtained a mandate to negotiate, I mean that he should negotiate as our people out there want him to negotiate. The hon the State President says we should co-operate. We want to co-operate, Sir, but we in this House cannot co-operate in the way in which the NP wants to go about things, while there are still signs of White supremacy. As they fought for their people in 1948, we are fighting for our people today. They said, for example, that no one would have to move as a result of the implementation of the Group Areas Act, and that they themselves would move. The Act was formulated in such a way, however, that we were compelled either to move or be thrown in jail.

The hon the State President also mentioned the number of people from overseas who came to settle here. He did not mention, however, how many people had fled the country.

Order! The hon member must please confine himself to the Vote under discussion.

Then let me first come back to the Official Opposition, because I am not going to let them off the hook, Sir.

Yesterday hon members of the Official Opposition said that we should not “moan and groan” for money and for pensions for our people. They did not say it in so many words, but that is what it amounted to. Today hon members lodged moving pleas for money and for pensions for our people. I am thinking, for example, of the hon member for Klipspruit West who made a very good case for more money for our people. My bench-mate did an equally good job. The hon member for Macassar, however, said yesterday that we should not sit here and “moan and groan”. I did not have much time to read the speech he made yesterday, but when he was sitting on this side of the House he complained endlessly. He was continually saying that Mandela should be freed, yet today they do not say a word.

Yesterday the hon member for Border said that he was shocked to the very core at the attitudes of hon members in this House, but he has never made a proper request to the hon the Minister for money for his people.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: You gave a ruling that the hon member should come back to the Vote under discussion. I think he is digressing. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may continue.

Mr Chairman, I do not tell those hon members what they should speak about. [Interjections.] I am speaking about money. They did not ask for money for their people; they did nothing but launch attacks when they were sitting on this side of the House. They did not ask for money. Now the hon member for Border is shocked to the core about the attitudes of hon members on this side of the House. [Interjections.] I never realised, however, what they were doing. Summing them up yesterday, I realised that they were doing strange things. When they were still sitting on this side of the House they never spoke about pensions or matters of that kind. The hon member for Macassar is the only one who complained about his peoples’ pensions, but now that he is sitting there, he says nothing about that. The hon member for Border said he was shocked to the core, but he never spoke about money. When he was still sitting on this side of the House, he spoke only about the ANC. He launched such fierce attacks on the hon the State President and other hon Ministers that he forgot to ask for money.

Let him have it, Oom Hansie!

I am really sorry that I was so late in getting a copy of the hon member’s speech. Now he speaks about the leader of our party who is no longer a member of the Cabinet. They did so much “moaning and groaning” about the fact that our leader should not be there, but today they themselves want to be there, if I judge correctly from their speeches. One hon member said yesterday that he would speak both languages, for the sake of other hon members, as if those hon members are not bilingual. They can speak much better English than the hon member for Macassar in any event. When I really lose my temper I speak three languages. [Interjections.] Yes, when I lose my temper I speak three languages. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member must confine himself to the Vote under discussion.

Mr Chairman, you occupy the Chair; it is not necessary for those hon members to tell me what I should speak about.

That’s right, Oom Hansie, let them have it!

I want to come back to the question of pensions. Today I am an old man, and there are other people who have also worked themselves to a standstill for this country. In the Second World War I worked day and night, and there were other people who worked with me at Plywoods making aircraft components for the war that was being waged.

Today those old people are worn out, and there is not even a pension for them. They worked day and night. For six months we never went home; all the while we were manufacturing aircraft components. We had a German there from Germany. He was the only German the Government accepted to help us manufacture aircraft components. We worked day and night without ever going home. There are people who worked there with me, and today they do not even have the prospect of a narrowing of the pension gap. Whilst the Whites and Coloureds fought there for our country—not for their country; for our country—I was also working day and night for our country. Today, however, there is no money for our people. It leaves me with such a feeling of unease and heartache.

I think the hon member for Riversdal really tugged at the hon the Minister’s heartstrings; I think that when the hon the Minister goes to bed this evening—I know he is a devout Christian; he has told me so—he will think twice about where he can find that money to help us all. I am not speaking only about our Coloured people, because our Whites worked there with me day and night. I am speaking on behalf of us all. The hon the Minister must think for a moment. If we can give so much money to the wine farmers, we can also find that money. We can save on things that are less useful. Those people have done their work for our country; they worked hard during the war. We must please find the necessary money for them. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to ask the hon the Chief Whip whether it is my turn now; we did not always stick to the speakers’ list, and I do not want to take another hon member’s turn.

I want to thank hon members sincerely for taking part in this discussion. A wide range of topics was broached, and I should like to refer to them during the course of my speech. I also have a whole series of announcements which were released half an hour ago and about which I want to inform hon members.

†First of all I would like to refer to the hon member for Schauderville. I noticed a particularly uncommon tone of aggression in his speech today when he spoke to me about taxing long-term insurers. The basic fact is that a debate on the fairness of tax can certainly not be concluded only by logic, because there is always a subjective evaluation in it and one can always expect to differ from the next person in terms of the ultimate objectives one would like to achieve with a certain tax. Therefore, when we talk about taxation, including this particular tax, we must return to the fundamental points of departure defined by the Margo Commission.

The Margo Commission wanted to recommend a tax system which would be based on neutrality. That means that if one saves with one particular financial institution, one will not have a distinct advantage over a person saving with another type of financial institution—in other words, one savings instrument should not be more advantageous in its returns than another savings instrument. This point of neutrality is not easy to achieve, particularly when it comes to the very intricate taxation system applicable to long-term insurers. Because one is talking about future commitments it is not easy to evaluate exactly what is current profits and what is taxable currently.

So, one thing is for sure and that is that ultimately, through a process of negotiation and discussion, we will arrive at a better tax deal than we have today. We said that we were on our way to implementing the Margo Commission’s majority report unless we found something better. Something better can only be found by means of discussions between the department and the insurance industry. We will be assisted, very ably, I am sure, by the Standing Committee on Tax Advice which will be announced as soon as we have concluded certain preliminary investigations and preparations. This tax committee, which will accept responsibility for certain of the outstanding issues in the Margo Commission’s report, will, once they get under way, give top priority to this issue of taxation of long-term insurance companies.

We must also bear in mind, however, that we did not punish insurance companies for being successful. I differ with the hon member as regards that remark of his. Taxation is not punishment and this taxation which we introduced on our way to implementing the Margo Commission recommendation—unless we find something better—is certainly not punitive. It is also not indicative of a Government which adopts a viewpoint against saving.

*Former Minister Hendrik Schoeman always said that if one adopted a standpoint against saving, one should have one’s head read. Hon members referred here to our advisers. They are not a crowd of stupid people who have to have their heads read. We did not adopt a standpoint against saving. After all, we are not adopting a standpoint against saving if we tax interest. We are seeking an equitable distribution of the tax burden over as many taxpayers as possible, and this includes such institutions. We must take a look at the enormous cash flow that long-term insurers have. I am the first who will concede that this is a difficult matter which requires further consultation so that we can reach a more equitable dispensation that we all agree with. In the end, however, it is also a question—and hon members will agree with me—of there being no taxation on the basis of consensus. If one cannot come to an agreement in the end, someone has to take a decision, and that someone is the Government, because the Government is accountable at the polls. That is the responsibility we all have.

Is it a subjective decision?

No, we have to get a tax system in South Africa which will distribute the tax burden equally and which will effect neutrality among various savings instruments. There is a very strong feeling that the dispensation that has applied in respect of long-term insurers thus far has considerably benefited life insurance as opposed to other forms of saving. We also encouraged other methods of saving, however.

The hon member for Bonteheuwel appealed for lower personal income tax and other hon members agreed with him. If that is one’s endeavour—and we succeeded this year in effecting a number of tax reductions for the individual—surely one is promoting saving. After all, the best way of promoting saving is to give people cash in hand. If one pays less tax, one is going to save less. The hon member for Bonteheuwel also praised the new Site system, viz standard income tax for employees. What are we achieving with that? It is a simple system which finally deals with tax for that 83% of working married women.

One cannot operate a system in which all kinds of deductions that are made have to be taken into account again later in the year, however. In other words, if all kinds of deductions were to be retained, one would have to submit a return at the end of the year in any case. This would be a futile exercise. That is why all the other tax rebates—such as a R75 policy payment concession, for example—are being abolished. We have not adopted a standpoint against saving by abolishing these rebates. No, not at all. We have adopted a standpoint in favour of creating a simpler tax system and a lower rate.

I want to remind hon members that when one is dealing with tax reform, one is not simply working out a new scale. The advisers can go and sit in front of the computers tonight and by tomorrow morning they will have worked out a whole number of new scales. Tax reform is not a new tax scale. Tax reform is a comprehensive procedure which redistributes the tax burden among various institutions that pay tax, and at the same time it attempts to broaden the tax base as much as possible. This is not something that one can tackle properly in one tax year. That is why it is being scheduled over a period and why there are going to be cash flow problems in the transitional process from one financial year to another. That is where the minimum tax on companies comes from. Fundamentally, however, this is not a tax, because if someone ends up in a tax situation, he can claim everything back. In reality those companies that make a profit and pay dividends, but are not taxable, have to make an advance payment.

I appreciate the way in which the hon member for Schauderville always prepares himself thoroughly. I also appreciate his standpoints, and do not want us to be unhappy if our standpoints differ. It is logical that that may happen, and it creates a beneficial situation that leads to good debating. With all due respect, I want to say that I think it is unfair to say that we are punishing people because they are successful. I do not think that is justified in these particular circumstances.

The hon member Mr Douw took exception to people who become opponents of deregulation. I agree wholeheartedly with his standpoint, because in many cases deregulation is something that stands in the way of an individual who can take himself into service, as it were. During the period up to the end of this century, a combination of self-employment, the informal sector and the small business sector has to be the greatest single employer in South Africa. That is the only way in which we can truly reduce unemployment. If we are going to permit interests—whatever interests these may be—to stand in the way of meaningful deregulation, we must specify these things and ensure that they are eliminated immediately. I thank the hon member for his standpoint in this connection.

I really liked the definition the hon member gave of economic development. He said it was a do-it-yourself process. That is a very descriptive term. Economic development can never take place when people expect the State to do everything for them. That is why his words were so appropriate. As an individual, I am a cogwheel in the economy. My conduct determines certain things, not only as far as I am concerned, but in respect of the entire economy.

I shall come to the statement I want to make in a moment. Nothing we say in the statement or which the governor of the Reserve Bank says in his statement this afternoon—I am not going to read it, but am simply going to refer to it—is going to help in any way if it does not influence people’s behaviour. That is the essence of the economy. That is why the hon member’s term “do-it-yourself process” was so striking. If banks, individuals and business enterprises do not react by way of their actions to the two statements that are going to be issued today, nothing is going to serve any purpose.

The economy does not work in the way in which we are working in this important Committee today, in which we are taking cognizance of steps the Government is going to take. We are not working with the figures of that in which we are instrumental today. No, Sir, we are working with an anticipation of people’s reactions. That is what we are working with. We are going to take certain steps and we hope that people will react accordingly, but we cannot programme them to do so. That is the terrible grey area of economic action, of policy-making.

The hon member Mr Douw rightly referred to the low economic growth rates we had in the eighties, or let me rather say which we had to suffer during the eighties. There are numerous factors that apply in this connection, however. I do not want to elaborate on them now, but I said earlier that our economy functions like a horse wearing a knee-halter. That knee-halter is a powerful thing; it has been strengthened in numerous ways. Some of the things that strengthen it are foreign sanctions, etc. Domestic problems and structural problems in our economy also play a part. In other words, we have a dual challenge in our economy. In the first place, we are hamstrung in the short term in that we have a relatively low ceiling under which we can show sound economic growth. I say “sound”, because a country can always show an incredible economic growth rate if it creates the money to enable it to do so. That is an exercise in futility, however, because in the end it catches up with one. That is our first challenge—to show maximum economic growth within the mobility our knee-halters allow.

The second point is that we must implement everything possible to move those inhibiting factors, that low ceiling, to as high a level as possible. That is our objective in the longer term. The political processes in South Africa play a part in this respect.

This House, and the place it assumes in the South African political system in its own right, also plays a part. It plays a part in respect of the place it has in this Parliament, because people look before they invest their money. The hon member—I think it was the hon member Mr Douw—rightly referred to a number of factors that influence confidence. People rightly consider the political prognosis of the country in which they want to invest their money. They consider these aspects and the message that comes from this Parliament—this Parliament which rests on its three legs—as an important factor in that relationship of confidence. I liked the point the hon member made, because what he said was true: In respect of economic policy, we must have a pragmatic approach on the basis of what can work. Those are extremely true words. There is no economic school of thought among any of the very reliable and highly trained and intelligent advisers I have and whom I have heard in both small circles and in broader circles who can give us an ultimate answer. They cannot. That is why we must listen, and then identify what can work. I also thank the hon member for his thanks to our advisers in the department. I have great appreciation for what he said in that connection.

The hon member referred to a report in Die Burger and asked me whether any of the attempts to crack down on inflation would have a detrimental effect on the economy. It is very difficult to quantify that specifically. It is very difficult to say that our fight against inflation—I have here a long list of steps that we have taken to combat inflation—and these specific steps have advanced the struggle against inflation, but have been to the detriment of the economy in some other way. I think, however, that the steps we have taken to combat inflation have been to the advantage of the economy as a whole up to this stage. Our task as the people who have to implement policy, and as people who debate these matters in this House, is to see the negative as well as the positive steps, to identify them and to support them if possible. I cannot answer that question specifically.

The hon member also asked whether the cutback on the salaries of Public Servants would have an effect on the inflation rate. In the same article I referred to earlier, Mr Mohr said, and I quote from Die Burger:

Pogings deur die Regering om inflasie te beperk, soos onder meer geen algemene salarisverhogings vir staatsamptenare nie en die bevriesing van posen vervoertariewe, verminder egter die moontlikheid van ’n skerp styging in die inflasiekoers vir ten minste vanjaar.

In the view of this economist, we are making progress with these steps and are succeeding to some extent in cutting down on the inflation rate.

The hon member also referred to the bloodstock business, and we shall get to that in a moment. The question of stud animals is rather interesting. Nevertheless we must be careful not to throw out the baby with the bath-water, as the expression goes. On the other hand we must be very careful, because we had an enormous loophole here. Consequently we had to close the loophole, but we must not restrict the bona fide stud-farmer in his attempts to promote a decent quality of livestock in South Africa. We shall give a final answer on this particular matter shortly.

I want to draw hon members’ attention to a few important announcements and to the background of these announcements. I have a number of interesting figures here, which will definitely provoke the interest of hon members who are interested in this. I shall stick to my notes as far as possible so that everything will be recorded absolutely correctly.

Although no statistics are available as yet in respect of national accounts or the balance of payments for the first quarter of this year, provisional information indicates that the upswing in the economy, which obtained a great deal of momentum in the fourth quarter of last year, continued in the first quarter of this year. That is good news. The volume of factory production increased by approximately 18% at a seasonally adjusted annual rate during the first quarter, compared with the fourth quarter of last year, wholesale and retail sales at constant prices increased by 15% and 4% respectively, the number of new cars that were sold increased by 35%, and the volume of goods imported and the volume of approved building plans at constant prices also increased sharply according to provisional indications. This accelerated rate of economic activity was associated with an increase—and this is the bad news—of 24% at a seasonally adjusted annual rate in the broad money supply M3 and the inevitable upward pressure on interest rates. The bank acceptance rate, for example, increased from 9,5% on 31 December last year to 11% on 31 March this year and then to 11,85% on 3 May.

It is common knowledge that the gross domestic product increased by an annual rate of almost 5% during the fourth quarter of last year. At the same time the gross domestic expenditure increased by an annual rate of as much as 6,5%. In view of the preceding information, it appears as if the growth rate of the gross domestic expenditure has increased quite a bit since then. Sir, I heard a few intelligent guesses in this connection. I shall rather not repeat them, since that would be irresponsible. It is very high, however.

Of necessity the effect of this was that the surplus—this is worse news—practically disappeared on the current account of the balance of payments, particularly if one takes into account that the export of goods during the past few months did not make a good showing. The exchange rate of the rand also came under some pressure, and the average weighed value of the rand as opposed to the so-called “basket” of foreign monetary units depreciated by 7,9% from 31 December last year to 30 April this year.

The downward trend in the inflation rate during the past year has been very encouraging. I have the figures here, and it is really encouraging when one looks at the improvement since 1986—we can go back even further—when we were operating on a quarterly basis of 18,9%, whereas in March this year we stood at 13,4%.

The rate of the increase in the consumer price index, measured over a period of 12 months, dropped from almost 21% in January 1986 to 13,4% in March this year. The production price index showed the same trend, but in recent months has increased from 11,3% in December 1987 to 12,2% in February this year.

These improvements in the general economic conditions are good for South Africa, and are welcomed. In view of the restrictions the economy is subject to, however, one must endeavour to keep the upswing within affordable limits and to make it last as long as possible. In this way we shall derive the greatest advantage in the long term.

It is difficult for me to put it into words—and it will probably be difficult to reflect this in Hansard as well—but I should like to use my arm to demonstrate to hon members what I mean. Instead of striving for a sharp upward trend—think of a graphic representation of a sharp peak—we are trying, since we have now reached a certain point against the slope, to level out the line a little so that the plateau can extend much further, if this results in a lower growth rate. It is like a child with a lollipop. He can either chew it and swallow it at once, or he can take a lick every hour or so, in which case it will last a few days. Sir, we want to take a lick every now and then, because we can do the best job—for the sake of our people—if we prolong the economic growth for as long as possible.

A realistic policy approach cannot ignore the restrictions the balance of payments has placed on our country’s economic growth potential at this stage. I want to draw hon members’ attention to this, since it is very important. There are restrictions as a result of the position of the current account of our balance of payments, and hon members, who are all involved in politics, after all, can reflect on this for a moment.

I come back to the importance of saving. Although the country can realise a growth rate of 2% to 3% per annum from own savings, we shall definitely not be able to maintain a growth rate of 5% or 6% for very long. In fact, even in the most favourable conditions, it was not possible to maintain a growth rate as high as this for long periods. At the same time one must adopt a careful approach to prevent the inflation rate from rising again. The Government is determined to persist in its concerted attempt to bring the inflation rate down even further.

We must remember—I must tell the hon member for Riversdal that this did touch me, but I have been aware of this for a long time; I am not a hardhearted person—that if we get the inflation rate down, our aged will be the first to benefit. We must remember that.

It is essential to maintain a sound balance between the objectives of a higher economic growth rate in the short term on the one hand, and greater stability in the general price level—in other words, inflation—on the other. That is why the Government decided to take timeous action, and to institute the next package of policy adjustments, which is aimed at combating the trend toward overspending in the economy, at this stage. We are therefore decelerating slightly, so that we shall not go too fast.

The intention of this package is to effect a sound balance between fiscal, monetary and other policy measures, and to implement the adjustments in the economy over a broad front without making excessive use of only one policy instrument. At the same time the policy package has been made up in such a way that it should not cause an end to growth in the economy. It should simply have a dampening effect on the excessive spending that has taken place recently, so that a reasonable level of sound growth can be maintained without placing excessive pressure on the balance of payment.

The Government is satisfied with the way in which this year’s budget has performed thus far. A great deal of criticism—often unjustified criticism—has been expressed against certain fiscal measures, such as inter alia the minimum taxation on companies. The Government still feels, however, that tax of this kind is in fact justified in the present transitional phase to a new tax dispensation.

I want to make another important announcement. The Government has been encouraged in particular by the fact that with the assistance of the Reserve Bank, the Treasury has already succeeded in selling R4,2 billion’s new Government stock on the market, in order to finance the Treasury’s loan requirement. According to the budget figures, therefore, it is necessary only to market a further R2,5 billion during the rest of the year. This means that our activities in the market are not going to be all that pronounced during the rest of the year and that there is room for the private sector to carry on with their activities, without there being excessive pressure on interest rates from that quarter. That is the important implication this has.

As usual the Treasury is experiencing acute pressure to authorise additional expenditure for the present financial year. There are even appeals that one should not be hardhearted. With all due respect, a number of hon members of this House have been guilty of this. The Government is aware, however, of the importance of exercising strict control over such additional expenditure, in view of the present economic conditions. I said the other day that the implication involved here does not comprise an amount of R36 000 million; unfortunately it comprises more than R200 million. It is rather more difficult, therefore, to decide about an amount of R200 million than about only R36 million.

As part of the policy of placing certain restrictions on the high rate of development in private sector spending, it was decided to effect the following adjustments to the fiscal policy measures. With reference to sales tax, the first adjustment concerns debtors’ allowances. We are not increasing sales tax. One must remember that in these conditions there is always an option. If people buy too much, there is always the option of increasing tax, but we are not doing that. With reference to sales tax, dealers have the facility of claiming half of their sales as an allowance, which they then repay to the Receiver of Revenue over a longer period. I do not want to go into detail about the kind of transaction involved here, but this means that we are phasing out this system, so that dealers have to pay all the GST immediately once they have concluded a transaction. This should place a slight damper on that matter.

Secondly we announced in the Budget that fringe benefits on company cars would be adjusted, and we are doing this by increasing these values by an average of 15% as from 1 June this year. With regard to company cars, we are adjusting the values in order to be more realistic. We were a little more accommodating in this respect a few years ago.

Here are a few very important announcements with reference to monetary measures. The Reserve Bank is going to announce this afternoon that they are going to be very strict in accommodating banks and that shortly—if possible, immediately—banks will have to be very circumspect in granting credit, because this enormous upswing is being financed mainly from the creation of credit by banks. Consequently the Reserve Bank is going to be very strict in accommodating the banks; banks that do not adhere to this may even have to pay punitive interest if they do not stay within specific limits with regard to the granting of credit and the conditions of accommodation. In explanation I want to use the example of water spouting out of a fountain. There would be no point in running around with a bucket trying to catch up the water as it reached the ground. Instead one would go to the source and shut it off. That is what is happening here. As a result interest rates will increase in the short term. This is unavoidable, but we trust that the economy will then cool off sufficiently so that it will not be necessary to take the same course as in 1983 and 1984. I can assure hon members that we want to do everything in our power to avoid the interest rate patterns of 1983-84, because that harms the economy a great deal. That matter was explained in detail in a comprehensive statement made by the governor of the Reserve Bank this afternoon, and I do not want to discuss it any further in this context.

We also addressed a few other policy measures, of which the first concerns the Usury Act and the Credit Agreements Act. Only transactions up to an amount of R70 000 are subject to the provisions of the Usury Act at present, whereas the Credit Agreements Act includes transactions up to an amount of R100 000. These amounts have applied for some time, and it is necessary to increase them in order to make the necessary adjustments for the past few years’ inflation. A number of complaints have been received recently, particularly from the farming community in cases in which credit institutions granted loans at interest rates that were considerably higher than the maximum that is prescribed in terms of the Usury Act. What is at issue here, is that loans have been advanced for larger amounts than the fixed limit of R70 000, and therefore are not subject to the restrictions of the Usury Act.

The Usury Act is intended to protect the smaller borrowers in particular against exploitation, and must not be seen as an instrument that can be used to keep interest rates in general at an artificially low level. It would not be in the interests of a sound economy to do that. There is sufficient justification for a considerable increase in the maximum amount of loans that fall under the Usury Act and the Credit Agreements Act, however, and also to use a uniform provision under both Acts. It has been decided, therefore, to increase the maximum amounts for all new financing transactions covered by these Acts to R500 000 as from tomorrow, 5 May. This means that transactions up to and including R500 000 will now fall under these two Acts in which the interest rates are subject to the provisions of the Usury Act. At the same time the restriction in respect of smaller amounts, which is prescribed in terms of section 2 of the Usury Act, is being increased from the present R4 000 to R6 000.

Minimum deposits which are required on all transactions which are subject to the Credit Agreements Act, for example hire-purchase transactions, are being increased by 1/5 of the required amount as from 5 May. This means that whereas one had to give a minimum deposit of 10% when one concluded a hire-purchase transaction for some or other durable article before, one now has to pay l/5 or 2% more—ie 12% in total. The purpose of this is to encourage people to save a little longer and to get a little more cash before they purchase things by means of a hire-purchase transaction. At this stage, a very delicate stage, we do not want to do anything about the maximum number of instalments that one can pay afterwards. We are leaving that for the moment, and keeping an eye on the situation. With regard to hire-purchase agreements, therefore, we have simply increased the deposit by 1/5, which of course means that in reality one’s monthly instalments will be lower over the maximum period because one has paid a higher deposit. Because the interest rates are increasing, however, the monthly instalment will probably have to be adjusted as well. It is the increase in interest rates which has compelled us not to curtail the number of monthly instalments.

There is another important matter as well. We have found that lease transactions, particularly in the motor market, have begun to increase in volume.

Other durable goods, such as office equipment, also came into question in these agreements. In terms of such lease agreements, the use of the relevant assets is transferred to the hirer without any transfer of right of ownership taking place. The consumer then pays only a monthly lease and the transactions are not regarded as being subject to the provisions of the Credit Agreements Act or of the Usury Act.

There is significant difference of opinion regarding the interpretation of these transactions and certain institutions feel that such transactions should be covered by the restrictions contained in the Acts in question, and therefore abstain from this kind of business. It has now been decided, in order to eliminate any doubt, that the Usury Act and the Credit Agreements Act will be amended in such a way that it is clear that lease transactions also have to be covered by these Acts.

So as not to upset the normal practice of short-term leases, the leasing of cars, for example, these provisions will apply only to lease agreements for periods longer than three months, including any extension of an existing transaction.

The requirements in respect of minimum deposits and maximum repayment terms that apply to the different kinds of assets in terms of the Credit Agreements Act, will also apply to lease transactions. In other words, the excessively long periods which applied in respect of lease transactions will now have to be adjusted to the provisions in respect of other assets.

The Registrar of Financial Institutions will have discussions with the relevant institutions within the next few days to finalise the particulars in this connection. These provisions will apply to all new hire-purchase transactions which are concluded as from 9 May this year.

I want to give a brief summary. This policy package is being instituted with the purpose of preventing total expenditure from developing too fast, since this would bring the upswing of the economy to an early end. By taking timeous action now, one can prevent crisis measures from having to be instituted at a later stage, which could once again lead to large-scale disruption. It is not the intention to restrict total economic growth in any way. An increase in expenditure which is financed in a sound way is good for the economy. An excessively extended demand, which is financed by means of short-term domestic credit, can do more harm than good in the long term, however. The measures that are being instituted have only one purpose, viz to curb the recent excessive increase in expenditure. I think what is happening today is a very important event, because we have to be extremely careful not to let our economy get out of hand, but at the same time not to take steps which could hurt our economy.

I want to continue replying to hon members’ contributions. I now come to the hon member for Riversdal. I want to give him the assurance that privatisation will be dealt with with the utmost circumspection, because we are working with assets which belong to all the people of South Africa. We have to strive for a number of objectives in privatising. In the first place we must not simply make a private sector monopoly of a Government monopoly, which will leave the consumer in the same kind of undesirable monopolistic condition. We shall therefore take extreme care. The hon member must have noticed that the Competition Board has also been transferred to the department of the Minister entrusted with privatisation. I think the hon member should regard that as a meaningful policy step.

Secondly there are numerous models of privatisation in the world. Britain in particular has been very successful. The hon member and other hon members were quite correct when they said that if we could extend private ownership, we would achieve a great deal. It is true that many people in other countries who received the advantage of right of ownership sold their shares almost as soon as the share prices increased. We shall have to accept that as a risk. We must encourage people to hang on to what they get in that way, however.

Wherever possible, we shall ensure that the employees attached to certain institutions will also have an opportunity to get shares. I want to issue a warning, however. I do not know whether or not I understood the hon member correctly, but with all due respect, I want to point out that we cannot deviate from a realistic evaluation of the price of the shares. We cannot make shares any cheaper than their realistic value, because then we would be selling an asset which belongs to all the people of the country to other people at a discount. We cannot do that. Consequently we must market these shares at a realistic price. That is one’s share in the Post Office or in Eskom, and if one drives past a pole—whether it is a telephone pole or an electricity pole—and 20 people are hanging onto the pole while another 20 are preparing food and a few others are sitting in the trucks reading comic books, one will be upset because one is a co-owner of the institutions that those people are working for. One is co-responsible for the expenses that are associated with the work they are doing there. There is a certain involvement, and that is how one wins the ideological struggle, because private ownership is the best answer.

The hon member spoke about profit-seeking. Profit-seeking is not a swearword. Profit-seeking is responsible for some of the greatest developments in the history of mankind. It must either be controlled or kept within reasonable limits, however. The hon the State President referred to this, and there is legislation on our agenda for this year which will strengthen the Consumer Council and the Competition Board. These are the instruments which have to ensure that profit-seeking does not get out of hand.

I now want to tell the hon member that the billions of rand also come from the large institutions. They wait for the small man, who may not have bought in terms of billions of rands, to sell his shares and then they buy them. In this way at least we have gone through a process in which we have made right of ownership possible for all those who have a long-term view. This leads to the release of capital which can then be reutilised for the main priorities in our country. I think that is just as important, because we are experiencing a period in which there is a shortage of capital now that we have been cut off from abroad. There are so many advantages to privatisation, therefore, that we must certainly do our best to make it work. We must do this, however, taking the reservations spelt out quite rightly by the hon member into account.

The hon member deduced that of necessity the SATS’ commuter subsidies had to fall away. I do not want to make any predictions for the future. No one can commit himself to that. We are involved in a process of developing in terms of privatisation. We are moving into that era. We are also investigating the whole question of commuter services and the regional services councils are involved in this too. Consequently we are working with a complex formula. I wonder if there is any large commuter service in the world that can work without a subsidy. I doubt it. It would be self-destructive for the meaningful development of the privatisation of transport services as well as the position of the commuters if we anticipated things at this stage and started stipulating certain provisos. I want to emphasise the part played by regional services councils. Regional services councils have a part to play in the longer term, because they have to effect a better balance in the economic development. If I may say this in an exaggerated way, I want to repeat what I have said on prior occasions. If the commuter subsidy was paid only out of the Treasury, it would mean that the voters of the hon member for Northern Cape, who pay tax, would be making a contribution to the transport of commuters in the Peninsula and on the Witwatersrand.

Hon members must not forget that it is the first-class commuters who get the highest subsidy. What must happen now, therefore, is that the region must start paying the account for the services rendered to its people. There is no point in our consistently subsidising the metropolitan areas, because then everyone will go there. We should rather use our money also to develop the underdeveloped areas, the depressed areas. In that way we must remove Treasury subsidies from regional expenses as we progress with the regional services council concept.

The hon member spoke about toll roads, and so did another hon member. I have great sympathy with him because the toll road is in his particular constituency.

It is not only in my constituency; a whole town is affected.

I know what the hon member’s position is. I have a lot of sympathy with him, but I cannot intervene for him with my hon colleague. I merely want to tell him that he must fight that fight with the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs. The only thing I want to say, is that in the end it is a good development …

No, that cannot be true.

No, the hon member must wait a minute. I am not saying it is a good development because the hon member’s one town is paying; that is not what I am saying. I say that in principle it is a good development in that people who use certain services should pay more for those services if they can afford to do so.

If it is a new service, yes.

The hon member must wait a moment. He must not get so excited, because this is not the Transport debate. [Interjections.]

What I am going to say now, Sir, is associated with a matter that is very important to me, and it is also linked to things we spoke about earlier. If we really want to grant effective assistance to the needy in South Africa, we must move away from using a general system, by means of which we help people who do not need that assistance. I want to come back to our old example. Can that hon member give me one reason why he should buy subsidised bread? He does not need subsidised bread, but that is the system. Surely it would have been much better if it were possible for us to have a system in terms of which we could identify people who needed subsidised bread, so as to help them rather than to permit that hon member, and in fact all of us here, to buy subsidised bread.

You cannot compare that with the toll road.

I want to compare it with the toll road. I want to tell the hon member that one of the reasons why the Treasury and these hon members who are taxpayers are paying R1 billion in subsidies for commuters is that there are not enough toll roads in South Africa. [Interjections.] I want the hon member to think about that. If one has a service which is too inexpensive, all the people are going to make use of that service, and then they are not going to use the railway line in sufficient numbers for it to be a paying concern. I want to give the hon member an example. I do not know whether this is the case in his constituency, but let us assume that it costs a housewife who wants to go shopping in the city R10 in toll or R4 in train fare. What must that housewife do?

Take the train.

Of course she must take the train.

They are equally expensive. [Interjections.]

If toll was not payable, she would not have to take the train; she would be free to travel more comfortably by car.

I want to ask the hon member for Klipspruit West as well as the hon member for Riversdal to think about this aspect of a balance in the utilisation of infrastructure in South Africa. They must consider this against the background of user charging—the practice that people who use the service have to pay for it. People have to start paying for this to an increasing extent.

Then I want to say an important thing to the hon member, and I shall hurry. Hon members made a few important points, however, and I cannot neglect to reply to them. The hon member for Riversdal made a very important reference to the question of price stability and price control. The hon the State President’s appeal to the private sector did not mean that there should be no increases in wages and prices. The hon the State President addressed a request for the utmost discipline to be maintained, and in the second place he emphasised that we should use the favourable conditions prevailing in South Africa to break this vicious circle of a price increase for the sake of a salary increase and a salary increase for the sake of a price increase. That was what the hon the State President requested. That is why one cannot evaluate this whole campaign and appeal of the hon the State President over a period of 12 months. It is a matter which has to manifest itself over a number of years. It is logical, after all, that certain people must get increases over a period of years, assessed in terms of market considerations, and that certain prices have to rise as a result of basic economic developments.

If, for example, the hon member is an importer of a terribly important item—the pencil I have in my hand, for example—and he sells it for R1, whereas this item will cost him R1,05 later because of the drop in the exchange rate, surely he can no longer sell it for R1. If he wants to continue his enterprise, and if he wants to keep his clients, he will have to charge R1,20 or more for it. A total price freeze is impossible, therefore.

This brings me to the point that a system of price control is impossible. Who must decide upon this? What official can be given this terrible responsibility of taking a decision on the fixed price of this pencil, microphone or packet of paper clips? It is not possible for an official to sit in an office and determine this price and say: “You, Mr Manufacturer, or you, Mr Dealer, will not charge more for this item.” There are cases in which it took years to develop a product, and at the beginning a product of this kind is extremely expensive, because the manufacturer has to get all his development expenses back. One cannot prevent someone from fixing a high price in that case, simply because it costs only R1 to produce the item. One might say that the cost per unit is R10, because the item took 10 years to develop. If one insists then that it be sold for only R1, one is going to bankrupt such a dealer. The reaction of other people who are developing something to the advantage of humanity will be to say: “ Oh no, I am not going to continue.” Price fixing by means of any mechanism other than the market is looking for trouble, therefore. One needs an enormous bureaucracy for this. More than 400 or 500 people were used when we applied import control in the past. When it comes to control mechanisms, which people have to decide on, one gets into trouble. With all due respect, I want to say—this is not a reflection on the hon member—that anyone who thinks that one can control an economy totally is under the illusion that one can control people’s spirits and desires, because even if the hon the Chief Whip and I each have R10, we are going to spend it in different ways. Our needs differ, and that is why one cannot determine what should be at people’s disposal, and what should not.

I think I have said enough about this matter. I now come to the hon member for Mamre. I have great appreciation for his need to develop his community. What he said was true, viz that such a large community cannot simply be a halfway house. A place of that nature must have its character and all the facilities that make it a complete and satisfactory place in which to live. All I can tell the hon member is that I cannot promise him funds with which to achieve this, but fortunately there are forums at which he can put his people’s case.

He can begin with the Ministers’ Council, and his Ministers’ Council can take matters further when we discuss the big budgets. I do not want to say anything else about the matter.

I shall consider the question of the infrastructure to which he referred. I do not know exactly how the financing of this was done. I think I shall ask my officials to invite him for a cup of tea; then I can get the exact particulars from him. [Interjections.] It is important to know exactly what the situation is with reference to the infrastructure he wants us to write off. [Interjections.]

The hon member also spoke about the purchase of shares on credit. Sir, as someone who has seen these things happen often, I want to tell the hon member that it is an excellent idea to buy shares on credit when the shares’ price increases. It is a completely different matter to buy shares on credit when the shares’ price drops, however. It is tragic to have to pay off one’s debts at great expense when those shares are no longer worth that money. As I understood the hon member, however, he wants people to be able to pay off shares in some way. I consulted my hon colleague about this. We can have further discussions about this at a later stage. [Interjections.]

I do not want to talk about the question of political decisions on the quotas. I really do not have the knowledge to react to that. I merely want to tell the hon member that we cannot apply a political criterion in respect of sport sponsors, by saying, for example, that those who promote integration will be sponsored. If the CP were able to implement their ideas, they would say that those who promote absolute segregation would receive sponsors. I appreciate the spirit in which he put the matter here, however.

I now come to the hon member for Northern Cape, who spoke very briefly. He spoke knowledgeably about the necessity of confidence in economic growth, and I appreciate that.

The hon member for Mamre appeared on the scene again. He spoke about the renewal of the SACC. I want to tell him that he can indeed be proud of those people. I met someone who was manning that large machine-gun up on the border. The hon member probably knows that that machine-gun is called “the Missionary”. I asked the chap who was manning it, a member of the SACC, why it was called “the Missionary”. He said: “Sir, this machine-gun makes one pray!” The matter does not fall under my jurisdiction; consequently I do not think I can promote it. I think the hon member should take it up privately with Gen Malan. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Bonteheuwel raised a few valid points. I am not going to elaborate on the question of pensions. I have told the hon member that I really cannot promise anything at this stage. I have enormous problems in keeping the Budget in check and keeping it properly financed with my advisers. I am in complete agreement with him, however, that personal taxation should be reduced.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon the Minister?

Sir, I should like to finish completely first; I want to do justice to all hon members’ contributions.

I have already said something about most of the things raised by the hon member for Riversdal. Sir, we can put our heads together as much as we like, but we cannot have money printed. I should like to confine myself to that. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Klipspruit West had something to say about the toll road. I listened to his complaint, and will remember it when we debate this matter again. I think he should also take up the matter with the hon the Minister of the Budget in this House, however, so that he will have particulars in this connection at his disposal, because the Minister of the Budget served on the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, where this kind of matter is discussed. The hon member is able to have his opinions voiced in this way.

This brings me to the end of my reply. I hope I have done justice to hon members. I want to thank them sincerely for the constructive spirit in which we were able to conduct this debate, and for a debate of an exceptionally high quality. I have great appreciation for that. The hon member for Esselen Park can put his question to me now.

Mr Chairman, with reference to the guidelines sketched by the hon the Minister concerning privatisation this afternoon, I want to know whether he can give this House the guarantee that those guidelines will be exempt from any political connotations that could be to the detriment of this matter.

The hon member is requesting a terribly dramatic guarantee. Surely one would have to debate what a political connotation is first. I do not know exactly what the hon member means, but when we talk about privatisation, of an institution such as Iscor, for example, I can hardly imagine that political considerations can play a part, because it is purely a matter of business. One is negotiating to market the shares of an institution, and I do not know what kind of political considerations can play a part in privatisation as such in that case. When it comes to the utilisation of the revenue generated by privatisation, however, we find ourselves squarely in the political arena. That is when the guidelines laid down for us by the hon the State President come into operation, viz the discharge of debt, investment in infrastructure—especially in the depressed areas—and the financing of small business. This will take place according to those three priorities. In that respect politics plays a direct part, and indirectly the hon member has a very significant say, in that the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council of the House of Representatives is a member of the State President’s Committee of National Priorities. Consequently he can exercise a direct influence in that sphere, but until such time as someone else is included in the Cabinet, the hon member will have to make do with that.

Mr Chairman, at the opening of Parliament the hon the State President announced that the system of GST was to be replaced by the European system of value-added tax. I want to ask when this new system will come into operation. Will certain foodstuffs be exempt from tax? It has also been said that the consumers do not want to pay more. Will the hon the Minister please confirm that?

Order! The hon member must merely put a question, not make a speech.

Will services such as electricity, water and so on not cause prices to increase? Earlier the hon the Minister also mentioned the standstill agreements which he had concluded or arranged.

†This was received very favourably and I want to know whether we are paying our foreign debts or at least the interest.

’That is the second question.

Order! The question is long enough; the hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, the hon member wants to know when value-added tax will be instituted. We want to institute it as early as possible next year. There are many preparations that have to be made. People have to be canvassed and trained. A number of preparations also have to be made in the trade, and consequently there will be many discussions. Legislation has to be prepared and published for public comment, which has to be processed and evaluated. Then the legislation has to be adjusted. It is clear, therefore, that an enormous amount of work has to be done, but we hope to institute this as early as possible next year.

I have appealed to hon members in this House in the past not to come forward with exceptions. I have reminded hon members that the Margo Commission—the Margo Commission said this emphatically and hon members who look at the report will find it there—found that a year or two ago we lost R1 800 million in GST as a result of the exceptions. Of this amount only R300 million could be identified as positive assistance to the needy. Once again we tried to use an entire system to assist poor people, and instead we helped the wealthy people more than we helped the others. That is why we must not make exceptions. We must include as many taxpayers as possible at the base.

The proposal was that services be included as well. Those proposals will be published. There will be reaction to that and we shall have an opportunity to debate this in Parliament next year. I cannot anticipate matters, therefore, and say exactly what the legislation will look like. We all respect Parliament, and ultimately have to subject ourselves to what Parliament decides on a specific matter. My appeal once again will be that we make the base as broad as possible this time. Then one can keep the rate low. If the base is smaller, the rate automatically increases to provide the same volume of tax.

The hon member also asked whether we were paying our foreign debt. Yes, we have always paid all our interest. All dividends earned on shares are paid. The capital repayments on our international debt are being made as agreed upon. We are absolutely up to date in that respect. That agreement applies until 1990.

Votes agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr Chairman, I move:

Agreed to (Official Opposition dissenting).

Mr Chairman, before I begin to discuss Environment Affairs I want to extend my sympathy to the community of Simon’s Town in regard to the recent tragedy in which they lost their belongings and their homes in the fire. I should very much like the authorities concerned to investigate the cause of the fire, since not only personal losses, but losses to fauna and flora—which fall under environment affairs—were sustained.

It is always a pleasure to say a few words during the debate on the Vote of the Department of Environment Affairs. This is one of the Votes which is less controversial and in regard to which one has the feeling of constructively contributing to the beautiful facets of our country.

It is gratifying to encourage cities, towns and individuals to participate in a department’s programmes such as Arbor Day, World Environment Day, and from this year, Marine Day. These programmes are all aimed at making the public at large aware of the necessity to protect and to conserve our natural environment.

Unfortunately there are also facets of our surroundings which are less attractive, such as littering. It is difficult to believe that in this modern age littering by the human species is still one of the major unsolved problems. It is also hard to believe that of all living creatures, the human being is the only one that pollutes his own environment to such an extent that he becomes a threat to his own existence.

Effective control of waste dumping and dumping sites has been imperative due to the large-scale damage to and poisoning and pollution of the environment caused by thoughtless and illegal dumping of waste materials. It is indeed encouraging to hear that the draft regulations in terms of the Environment Conservation Act will probably be published during this year.

Where does one begin to solve the problem of littering and pollution? In my view the answer lies in the education of the entire public, or perhaps I should rather say that it lies in the conditioning of the public to be environmentally aware. Hon members will agree that this is a task that does not fall on the shoulders of the Government alone.

That is why I find the activities of the Keep South Africa Beautiful Association to be of particular importance. This association addresses the problem of littering by taking the task upon themselves to make all South Africans conscious of the evil of littering. A concerted effort aimed at the changing of behaviour patterns and attitudes with regard to litter and littering is evident from the “clean community system” programmes of this association.

One of the projects which earns our respect is the Zeebee Club to which some 10 000 children belong. They are 10 000 potential conservationists because I am very sure respect for the environment will become second nature to them.

In South Africa the current total waste generated per annum is close to 500 million tons. Of that, roughly 20 million tons are generated annually in urban areas. If one thinks of what goes into the waste stream one realises the need for recycling. I think recycling in South Africa needs a much more co-ordinated effort as well as incentives to make it work well. Better co-operation should be established between the manufacturing and the recycling industries. I am also of the opinion that town councils and municipalities could contribute a great deal to solve this problem. I think it should be possible to dispose of household garbage in a much more sensible way by, for instance, separating glass, metal, paper, etc. In doing so, recycling would become much easier and more profitable.

We all know that the department has a formidable range of functions and that it has achieved many successes over the past year. Many of these successes go unnoticed and I would therefore like to highlight one or two of these achievements.

The Weather Bureau has been particularly accurate as far as forecasts are concerned. The warnings of heavy rains and storms of the Southern Cape in June 1987, the cold spells of the winter last year, as well as the accurate forecasts of the floods in Natal in September 1987 are examples of the accuracy of the work done by the Weather Bureau.

Another example of the standard of the department’s work was the involvement of the research ship Africana in the search for the wreckage of the Helderberg aircraft. I am told that the assistance of the ship was called for at short notice and at a stage when hopes of finding anything were already fading.

Apart from the fact that the ship’s tight research schedule had to be rearranged and that the crew had to spend the December holiday season on board, it was established that the research equipment of the ship was second to none and in most cases far more sophisticated and more accurate than the equipment of the other international ships participating in the search. I do not think the department has received the credit due to it for the standard of service it has rendered in this connection. I should therefore like to take this opportunity to commend the hon the Minister and the officials of his department on their preparedness to be of service whenever called on to do so.

Let us come back to the importance of wetlands. As far as the coastal zone is concerned, one of South Africa’s major environmental problems is the siltation of our rivers, estuaries and lagoons. This has serious repercussions in so far as the ecology of our marine inshore coastal waters are concerned. In the past our rivers, estuaries and lagoons were characterised by areas of deep, clean water; by the extent of original vegetation such as trees, reeds and a variety of aquatic plants; and by abundant fish and crustacean life. Our rural countryside, too, was well-protected by dense indigenous vegetation and the impact of man was minimal.

Today, as a result of bad land management, caused largely by ignorance of ecological principles, over-population of people, increased settlement of the land, inflation, poverty, greed, politics, and the subsidisation of bad and uneconomic farmers, our countryside is becoming increasingly down-graded and poorly managed in many areas. Only pockets of well-conserved and well-managed land exist throughout our country.

Order! I regret to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Mr Chairman, I am indebted to the hon Whip of the Opposition. As I was saying, only pockets of well-conserved, well-managed land exist throughout our country. These are mostly within wilderness areas; national parks; game and nature reserves; proclaimed mountain catchment areas; some private conservancies and game ranges; proclaimed nature areas; Defence Force training areas, and some private farms.

The total percentage of this well-conserved land in South Africa is, however, very small. Wetlands, which include rivers, streams, lakes, vleis, marshes …

Order! I will be pleased if hon members will give the speaker an opportunity. I think there is too much noise in the House.

… lagoons and estuaries are probably the most important natural areas and natural assets that we have in South Africa. Few people realise that by destroying our wetlands, we are also destroying our marine resources of fish and crustaceans. This is because many marine fish and crustaceans require estuaries and lagoons as nursery areas for the larval stages and juveniles of their kind. If these nursery areas are destroyed by silt and other forms of pollution, they cannot fulfill their role and sustain marine fish and crustacean populations in the near in-shore oceanic waters. This in turn will affect tourism, recreational angling, marine eco-system disruptions and ultimately, the quantity of food available in the sea.

What can be done to save the threatened and dwindling wetlands of South Africa? The following action is required. Firstly, the State must not allow landowners to drain, plough, drown, destroy or pollute wetlands. We do have adequate legislation in the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983, to protect and conserve our wetlands. What is needed most, however, is the appointment of more staff to the Department of Agricultural Economy and the Marketing Soil Protection Division to ensure that the Act is properly implemented. This is an urgent top priority. If we do not implement this Act, our country will face ruin as a result of increasing intensity of droughts.

All landowners must be correctly educated with regard to environmental conservation and good land management. The State must make more funds available for environmental education and the creation of an environmental field of studying creatures in all the different ecological realms of South Africa. The Wildlife Society of South Africa has a number of active and proven conservation education programmes, operating mainly in Natal and the Eastern Cape. With minimum State help they could expand these activities to cover the whole country. Most land owners do not destroy the environment through vandalism, but rather through ignorance.

Over 70% of South Africa is in the ownership of White farmers. Unfortunately, this is where some of our worst problems concerning the conservation of wetlands occur. Because many of these farms are too small and uneconomical to farm, the owners plunder them to survive. Wetlands simply go down the drain and are destroyed forever. Subsidising these farms is a total waste of money. Millions of rands have already been lost in this way.

Lagoons and estuaries must not be interfered with, but should be maintained in their most natural state. All development must be kept well away from these sensitive and important assets. Pollution should not be allowed to downgrade this ecosystem. Human activities in these areas must be strictly controlled. Everyone must become involved in this struggle.

Just the other day there appeared an article in the Press which stated that the hon the State President, upon receiving the new manual from the chief executive of Keep South Africa Clean for the education of primary school children in conservation, anti-litter and anti-pollution actions, said that every Act which helps keep South Africa clean or the waters unpolluted made a contribution to preserving the country for future generations.

Finally, I am sure hon members share my regret that we are not in a position today to approve a much larger budget for the Department of Environment Affairs. One hopes that the economic conditions in the country will soon improve to such an extent that sufficient money could be voted to enable the department to fulfill its very important task with no restraints.

Mr Chairman, apart from the portfolios handled in this Parliament in respect of education and land affairs, the Department of Environment Affairs and of Water Affairs is one of our biggest departments which looks after the assets of South Africa. More than 106 million hectares of land are exploited with regard to agriculture and forestry in South Africa. The hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister are responsible for this. I may just add that only 15% of this country is arable. Hon members may wonder why I am placing such heavy emphasis on the environment affairs portfolio, but South Africa has to have a healthy environment in order to develop into a strong position.

In this debate, I am not going to deal with all the aspects under this portfolio, in other words forestry, environmental conservation, marine development and the Weather Bureau. However, I am going to place a very heavy emphasis on what the hon member for Newholme has already said in this House, namely environmental pollution.

If we do not take cognisance of this and track down the problems that this country is facing, we will not be able to resolve all our other problems, be it the fishing, agricultural and other allied industries that go with it. If the environment is polluted to the extent that South Africa is currently experiencing, I want to caution that we are going to have a very great problem to find money for education, because we need to try and educate man to keep the environment clean.

Last year I visited some of the Eastern countries of the world. One of these countries which impressed me tremendously, was Singapore. Singapore is today showing the world what discipline means. That community is able to resolve many of its problems by means of legislation. Not only have they achieved that, but they have also invested in proper education as far as the community is concerned.

I never saw any litter in that city. The laws against littering is so strict that if anyone litters the street and is caught, he is penalised. If a child is caught throwing something from the third floor of a block of flats, the parents of that child are punished. They get two warnings, but if a child is caught a third time, they have to find another place to stay. They then have to queue up for another house. That country has realised that it is going to cost a lot of money to keep the environment clean.

An unpolluted environment is vital for all the other allied departments that we have in Government. Let us look at some figures. It is estimated that the total waste accumulated in South Africa, is approximately 15 million tons. This is the amount of waste that people are littering. Of course, a lot of this is recycled, but it costs R30 per ton to recycle. We do benefit from this, but in the streets alone, the South African community litters 2 million tons of waste. This has to be picked up and it is the ratepayer who has to pay for this. That is why municipal rates are increasing in towns and cities.

If the value per ton is between R400 and R1 000, we are talking about street waste to the value of nearly R2 million. It is estimated that one person throws away about 1 kg of waste per day. Therefore if we do not pay very careful attention to the extent to which our rivers and streams are being polluted, as well as all other facilities, there is a grave danger that we may lose a lot of valuable natural assets that this country has inherited. We cannot afford to do that and therefore I believe that, if the community does not pay attention to this, it is obvious that there is not sufficient legislation. Even that legislation which we are at present considering will have to be reconsidered so that harsher measures may forcibly educate man to look after his environment which he needs for his future.

At present, if one looks around our cities, there seems to be no concern about the problems and costs that have to be faced in this regard. Local authorities are grappling with a very serious problem. For some people it appears to be a joke to see demonstrations or publicity or to see children picking up waste in our cities and towns. Many people are also wondering what the school-children are doing in this regard. We cannot carry on like this. Education at that level is important so that others may learn. I believe that everybody has to be educated concerning this problem facing our country.

There is another aspect with which I would like to deal under this Vote. With the population of 23 million, excluding the homelands, this country has another very important asset in its timber industry. Environmental control will therefore be very important for the future production of timber and by-products. The value of the timber industry at present is estimated at R94 million. I raise this issue because in a Bill which came before this House and the standing committee, we supported measures for the encouragement of tree-planting and the timber industry. I would like to make the point that—as we have stated before and will no doubt do again under the Agriculture Vote which is to follow—we are concerned that the land aspect is not being resolved to the extent that all communities can participate in this particular industry. Because of the restrictions that were placed on the non-White community—except KwaZulu which has a very large acreage of land where a lot of timber is being planted—the Indians and Coloureds have not had a fair share in this particular industry. Agricultural land should be open and made available so that participation by all sections of our community can take place.

South Africa plays a very important role in the world’s fishing industry. Out of a world catch of 84 million tons in 1985, South Africa’s catch amounted to 780 metric tons. The 1986 value of South Africa’s fishing industry was estimated to be between R500 million and R600 million. Therefore South Africa makes a very important contribution to this industry, which is also a very labour-intensive industry which can be favourably compared with the building industry and the mining industry.

Therefore it is necessary for this industry to grow. I again want to make the point here that we debated this issue under the Fisheries Act.

Order! I regret to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Order! The hon member’s time has been extended and he may continue.

Mr Chairman, I want to make a plea to the hon the Minister—he knows our concern—that when he looks at the quota through the new Quota Board he will consider our appeal that new quotas should be considered for small fishing communities such as the Indian and Coloured communities so that they will be able to participate in this very lucrative industry.

In conclusion I want to ask the hon the Minister to take note of a matter that I read about in an article in The Mercury of 30 April 1988 and which was also discussed in the standing committee. This House showed its concern at the fact that some local authorities have the control of the sea shore for various reasons through extended ordinances or possibly through whatever they inherited.

I understand that the Durban City Council has made an application and that:

The reason why I am raising this matter is that we have indicated that the control that the Durban City Council has—and I think this possibly includes Richards Bay—does not allow the small fishing industry or the small fishing groups of the Indian community to participate freely because the local authority has the control of certain sections of the sea. The hon the Minister and his department gave us an undertaking when passing the Fisheries Act that when the Sea-shore Act comes up for amendment he would consider our views on this particular matter and that we should make representation to him.

If the Durban City Council is given this blanket approval with regard to their application it could affect us as far as our proposals and recommendations that we wish to make are concerned. All I am asking the hon the Minister is that since the Sea-shore Act is going to be looked at by his department, this matter be held in abeyance so that we can discuss this whole issue with his department.

I want to take this opportunity, also on behalf of the House, to pay my compliments to the hon the Minister and his hon Deputy Ministers for the work that this department is doing in order to be able to control the different aspects that fall under his department, and to the officials who have been able to control and extend the facilities so that this department can function in a manner which will satisfy our need for the future.

Mr Chairman, I want to express my appreciation and that of the department for the kind words expressed by the hon member for Red Hill. I believe the hon member for Newholme also expressed kind remarks and congratulations to the department. I personally want to thank them for this although my colleague, the hon the Minister, will also do so when he replies. Before I spoke both these hon members expressed their views about the department and it is explicit in their presentations that they realise how important it is to conserve and protect our environmental resources.

I have no hesitation in stating that this Vote that we are debating here this afternoon is most probably the core of the country’s budget, as it deals with the very source of our existence. If we do not look after our natural environment, can we then expect the environment to look after us?

If present trends continue, the world of tomorrow will be more crowded, more polluted, less stable ecologically and more vulnerable to disruption than the world we live in now. Serious stresses involving population, resources and the environment are clearly visible ahead. Indeed, the problems of preserving the carrying capacity of the earth and of sustaining a decent life for human beings are enormous and are close upon us.

There are no easy answers, no simple solutions. The only solutions to the problems are complex and long-term.

In South Africa we have most of the world’s problems in microcosm. We have different cultures, different backgrounds, different religions, technically highly-advanced sections and subsistence farmers, and we are in the midst of an industrial revolution. The problems of the population explosion place heavy demands on resources utilisation and constitute a temptation to employ short-term solutions.

I fully subscribe to the principle that the best manner in which to ensure the survival of the natural environment is through the education of the public, and that this education process should start at a very young age.

However, this does not mean that the adults of this country should be excluded from the education efforts since their co-operation and active involvement is imperative for the survival of the environment. Indeed, we have opted for long-term solutions to the problem.

I am sure that hon members are aware that the Department of Environment Affairs is actively involved in many ways in educating the public. I refer to publications, competitions, museums, schools, radio and also the role we play on the SECOSAF Committee on education as far as the TBVC countries are concerned.

In the time available to me I should like to highlight one of the latest achievements in the field of environment education. There has long been a need for a comprehensive guide for teachers in all phases of education, and the department has recently issued a publication entitled Teaching for Environment Conservation. I have before me a copy of this publication. This guide was initiated by the Education Committee of the Council for the Environment, and I should like to take this opportunity of thanking them for their efforts and the perseverance that has gone into this fine piece of work. I quote from the guide:

An analysis of the methodology of teaching environmental conservation proves that it would be far better to include the subject matter in other subjects and not teach environmental conservation as a subject on its own. This, too, is one of the objectives of this publication. The publication is at present widely distributed to educationalists of all races in the country and copies are obtainable at the department’s head-office in Pretoria. I should like to urge hon members also to obtain a copy of this publication, which I can assure hon members makes for very interesting reading.

With regard to the influence of planning decisions on the environment, tertiary educational bodies such as the universities and technikons are asked to adapt their training programmes for professionals which have an influence on the ability of the environment to cater for these influences. These professions include those of engineer, planner, economist, architect, etc. I sincerely hope that these training institutions will react positively to this request.

As I mentioned at the outset, environmental education should not be restricted to pupils of school-going age or, for that matter, to students only. The harm done to the environment by adults, as was so aptly illustrated by the hon member for Red Hill when he spoke about his trip overseas, is often far worse than that done by the young, for example.

The problem of fishermen polluting our coastline with plastic and other waste should be addressed. There should be special programmes for the education of specific groups such as national servicemen, miners etc.

In the urban and built-up areas many people are concerned about the increasing pollution levels caused by all types of waste. In terms of the solid waste emanating from the households in our cities and towns, the Keep South Africa Beautiful Association plays an important role in trying to eliminate this type of pollution. I want to thank the hon member for Newholme for mentioning the good work done by this association in controlling the problem of Uttering in South Africa. This organisation, as hon members probably know, aims its attention mainly at the education of the public at large. Children are the main target as it is felt that this group will determine the behaviour of the future generations. The involvement of these groups is also encouraging since it indicates that the private sector has become aware of the necessity of environmental education.

I would also like to commend the Keep South Africa Beautiful Association for its efforts to involve the local authorities in the battle against littering. A few municipalities have heeded the call of the association. I appeal to others to follow their example to launch schemes to keep their own environment in proper shape. The association offers financial incentives for those who participate.

A good example of a city that has launched a very successful scheme is Durban. I wish to congratulate the city council with what they have achieved. Since the formation of the Keep Durban Beautiful Association there has been a reduction of over 50% of litter in the city. This is indeed a very fine achievement.

In this regard I want to share with the hon members here an experience which I had over the weekend when I was on an in loco inspection with the McHenry Committee in Ladysmith. I saw a great deal of plastic waste along the river banks and I drew the attention of the local authority officials who were with me to this. They then saw the need for joining up with the Keep South Africa Beautiful Association and to be guided by this association so that they too can benefit by what is being done on a national level.

The problem of littering along our roads is particularly noticeable on the highway between Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage. One way of solving this problem would be to make use of unemployed people as is being done by the Natal provincial authorities. I am sure the other provinces could follow this example. I have with me the statistics of the number of people employed by the Natal provincial administration to keep the highways in the province clean. It is a very commendable task that they have undertaken. It does not only create employment opportunities for some of our people who need this employment but it also helps to create an awareness among the people, as well as keeping the verges of our national roads clean.

In conclusion I appeal to hon members to remember that education, and environmental education in particular, should not be seen as something that is taught at school and then forgotten afterwards, as is the case with much that we learn at school. We never grow too old to learn.

Mr Chairman, year after year we talk about environmental pollution. The sadness of being a non-White community is that the Government does not care about our community, especially when it comes to environmental affairs. Why do I say this?

I come from the South Coast of Natal which is a beach area. The environment there is completely wrecked by a huge industrial township. This industrial township polluted our lakes so that the beautiful marine life there is lost. It was because of the negligence of the huge industries.

The Government has failed to take any action. I have spoken about this in numerous other debates. The hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs visited my area, as did the previous hon Minister, but up to today I feel that nothing has been done in my area.

We have an iron and steel factory and no matter what time of the day one goes there, one sees huge, dark clouds of smoke emanating from this factory. Where does this smoke go? Does it go into a White area? The White area is 10 to 15 kilometres away from there. It goes into our areas—the Indian area, the Coloured area and the Black area—and we have to breath it in. If one were to send any member of our community to a doctor to obtain a health report on the people, one would find that they have diseases due to inhaling those pollutants in the air.

Nothing has been done. However, if this factory had been in a White area, the Government would have taken stern action and that plant would have been closed down.

That is why they gave Isipingo to the Indians. [Interjections.]

We do not derive any financial income by way of rates from Prospecton. What, then, do we derive from it? Polluted rivers. Our sea is also polluted. We do not have our own beaches. The Durban City Council has only now opened our beaches. However, most of our non-Whites use the South Coast area.

Just look at our beach facilities. We do not have any shark nets. We must decide whether we want to breed sharks or whether we want a tourist beach. [Interjections.] Our beaches are not kept in order. What is more, the Government has created this little ethnic local authority with no funds available to them. How can they promote harmonious relationships within the community? They cannot. There is no money.

Isipingo is saddled with various nuisances. Firstly, there is the airport nuisance. Aeroplanes land at all times of the day or night. I do not think the people in my constituency get any sleep because sometimes one finds aeroplanes landing at 2 am. They make a noise, which affects probably 90% of my community.

My community cannot use our beach because of the off-shore harbour there. What happens is that when the off-shore harbour offloads oil, that oil is spilt, and where does that spilt oil go? It does not go to Durban South Beach; it comes back to Runion Beach. These are the kinds of hardships we have to endure.

Hon members may drive into any White area throughout the Republic and see how they are maintained, but drive into any non-White area and one will see the condition of environment in that area. It is a damned disgrace. [Interjections.] That goes for any non-White area. I am not concerned whether it be the Durban City Council or the City Council of Johannesburg. It applies to any non-White area.

Just look at the pollution in our areas. Look at the street litter in our areas. Nobody cares. [Interjections.] I feel the Government does not have any direction insofar as pollution and the environment are concerned.

When one looks at these, it is a damned disgrace. That is why I say that to be the other colour, as I am in this country, is sad.

Mr Chairman, as no one has spoken on the subject of water affairs, I hope you will allow me to say a few words on water affairs.

The hon the Minister will refer to the statutory position of the Department of Water Affairs regarding the establishment of township development in areas that are prone to inundation during floods. I do not want to elaborate any further on this aspect, except to extend my sympathy to all who have lost loved ones or property as a result of the floods and to express my appreciation to all who contributed in one way or another to alleviating the hardships.

I should like to extend to this House an offer to assist, as far as we are in a position to do so, with the promotion of irrigation farming in the Indian community. In this connection I want to refer briefly to the procedure that we presently have in the Water Act, Act 54 of 1956, which provides for the establishment of irrigation districts.

Irrigation districts are a well-known feature on the water resources development scene in South Africa. The first statutory provision for the establishment of irrigation districts is found in legislation of the former Cape colony and dates back to the previous century. The fact that chapter 6 of the Water Act, 1956, which deals with irrigation districts and irrigation boards, does not differ much from the old colonial legislation is an indication that the original thinking behind this form of water resource management has been sound, as it has definitely stood the test of time.

Irrigation boards are basically democratic institutions. Controlling bodies in such a district are democratically elected by the irrigators under their control and can be vested with wide powers to undertake the construction of water works, to allocate rights to public water from such works and to exercise control over the utilisation of such rights in the interest of all their irrigators. The concept of irrigation districts has, from its inception in the previous century, been based on private ownership of land.

If only members of the Indian population group are involved, an irrigation district can be established and supervised as an own affair by the appropriate department in the Administration: House of Delegates. If members of different population groups are involved, such an irrigation district will be dealt with as a general affair by the Department of Water Affairs. Two such irrigation boards involving Indian landowners have already been established and are functioning satisfactorily.

In both instances, however, the same provisions of the Water Act, 1956, apply. Bearing in mind the constitutional development of the last few years with particular reference to the Indian and Coloured population groups, the question can rightly be raised whether the present basis of the irrigation district system, namely private land ownership, is in fact the most appropriate or even the only workable basis for irrigation districts.

The Department of Water Affairs is presently undertaking a review of all legislation on water and this is a most opportune moment for members of this House to put their thinking caps on and to consider the requirements of the people they serve and to discuss new ideas or proposals for legislation on this point with me or the department. It may for instance be found that where private land ownership in the systems has sufficed until now, some other approach should also be provided for.

Constructive involvement of hon members of this House, in an effort to improve the Water Act, 1956, which has served this country well for more than 30 years, will be highly appreciated.

Mr Chairman, following on the hon the Deputy Minister of Water Affairs, I want to start by reading to this House a telex which I received this morning from the Housewives League of South Africa. I have learned that when women speak, one must listen and I have also learned that compliments coming from womenfolk must be appreciated, because they are not very plentiful. I want to read this telex. I quote:

I want to put this on record. I also want to say thank you very much to the Housewives’ League for the compliment they have paid the Government.

Mr Chairman, can the hon the Minister tell this House if that reduction in water tariffs is for the entire South Africa, or only for a particular province?

No, the reduction in tariffs is for all the water supplied by the Department of Water Affairs. That is approximately 50% of the total volume of water supplies to South Africa. The hon member would have noticed that in my statement I asked all the other supplying bodies to follow suit. I have also requested municipalities not to make profits on the sale of water. I have urged them to buy from the department.

Some time ago I said that in this time of change, adaptation and challenge in South Africa, as well as many cultural festivals, we in the Department of Environment Affairs have decided to dedicate our annual national environment week to the theme of conservation of our multifaceted cultural-historical environment.

A country without respect for the efforts, deeds and creations of its past leaders and population, is like a plough without a ploughman. Although the land is there to create new growth on the cultural plot, although the power is there to till the soil, the knowledge and skills of previous pursuits are lacking. Under the slogan “Our past, our future”, we want the South African public to know that the conservation of our rich South African cultural environment is as necessary for our survival as the conservation of natural resources. We must leave monuments behind, I said, not only to show the way to coming generations, but also to preserve and develop a cultural identity unique to our country.

We are South Africans first, and world citizens second. We do not want to lose our identity, because we love our rich cultural life. Every group in our country has left its mark on the cultural life—words, music, architecture, delicious South African dishes and arts all intertwine to create one whole with many segments.

I want to continue today and say that the South African environment is so important, not only what we can physically see, but also that which is not always so obvious. I ended that particular speech by saying that I wanted to close in expressing the hope that the future days set aside to remind our public of our commitment to environmental conservation, will be strongly supported by all media, and that our combined efforts this year will yield even better results than in previous years. Let us take from the past all positive and good things. Let us heed the mistakes and negative deeds and then try and create a healthy and unique South African environment—one with its own South African flavour and identity. Help us create a country that will be a haven for tourists, a paradise for nature lovers and a happy and safe place for us and our children.

That is still my wish for this department and our country as a whole. It has always been a pleasure for me to take part in debates in this House. Today we have heard very responsible and well-considered speeches. If I may, I wish to refer specifically to the hon member for Newholme.

He referred to a number of very important matters concerning the environment. I am pleased that he made the point that the local authorities will have to play an increasingly important role in the field of waste management and littering. Several other hon members also spoke on this topic. Solid waste management is becoming a big problem all over the world and it has actually developed into a large industry overseas. The hon member for Red Hill referred to his visit to Singapore. Those very highly and densely populated areas—for instance a little island like Taiwan—are spending millions in research on the handling of solid waste. The hon member for Isipingo stated that he lives in an industrial township which has wrecked the environment. We must take it for granted that the more industrialised our country becomes, the more we will be saddled with this problem of solid waste disposal. It is one of our big problems. I am glad the hon member raised that issue. It cannot be expected that matters which are essentially of a local nature should be controlled by central Government organisations. Therefore the hon member is quite correct when he says that local government will have to play a more and more important role in the local solid waste situation.

The hon member also stressed his appreciation of the work done by the research ship Africana. We are very proud of this facility and I can tell hon members that it is due to research done by, among others, the Africana that we could increase last year’s total allowable catch from 300 000 tonnes to 600 000 tonnes and this year again from 300 000 tonnes—I am talking about pelagic fish—to 500 000 tonnes. This means millions to the country and it shows what the benefits of research can be. This afternoon I would like to make a plea to this House that whenever there is a call for more funds for research, especially for the fishing industry but also for various other terrains, hon members must please report it because money spent on research always pays big dividends.

The hon member for Red Hill placed a lot of emphasis on environmental pollution and I agree that this is a matter of concern which requires positive action. I have already mentioned his reference to Singapore and the point he made about the strict discipline. I have travelled, although not extensively, to various countries where I noticed the harsh fines that are imposed for littering. In the state of California a $50 spot fine is imposed if they find one littering.

That is something that will have to be reconsidered in South Africa. [Interjections.] It is not that we do not have the regulations; the regulations are there. In response to the complaints by the hon member for Isipingo about the air pollution and all the other problems he has there, I can tell him that the regulations are there but they must be enforced. That is the main thing. I do not think that we need new legislation as much as that the existing regulations must be enforced.

I think the hon the member also spoke on the timber industry and I want to say something about the timber industry just now. The hon member complimented my Deputy Ministers and me and also the officials, and I want to thank him for that.

With reference to the timber industry I want to say that it is an important industry in South Africa. It is much more important than many people think. The local industry provides for local needs as well as exports. It also earns us a lot of foreign exchange. However, we shall not be able to continue at the present rate if we do not have an additional planting of trees every year. It has been estimated that something like 27 000 ha per annum additional plantings—this is the figure I have in mind, it could be slightly more—is needed. That is the acreage that we have to plant every year.

I think over the past few years we did not come close to that because there are always certain areas that have been under timber, that have been converted to other agricultural purposes. People do not always see timber as an agricultural product, but I regard timber as an agricultural product.

At present there is a tendency for very good agricultural land, land with very high potential—especially in Natal and the coastal region—to be bought and put under trees. Some people are perturbed about that and think that we should keep that soil for sugar cane.

Mr Chairman, can the hon the Minister tell us in connection with structural timber for houses, why it is that the local timber is three times higher in price than the timber, which is hardwood, that we get from Malaysia. Hardwood takes 30 years to grow and SA pine takes 10 years. Why is the price of this country’s timber so high?

Mr Chairman, I think it is largely a matter of supply and demand, but I shall deal with the timber industry in more detail just now as I see I have a few minutes to spare.

They are making a very big profit!

That may be so, but when one listens to the people in industry they tell one that they have had very large increases in their production costs especially as far as transport costs and all other costs go and they will make out a case that they are not making a very big profit. It is usually like this, that the grass on the other side is always greener. However, if the hon member wants to enter the timber trade …

I’ve been in it for 50 years, Sir!

If he has particular problems I invite the hon member to come to my office and I shall discuss them with him.

The pulp and paper market was the star performer during 1987, and consumption in this sector improved by nearly 13%. There is a growing need for paper pulp, and producers, particularly in the latter sector, benefited from the exceptionally favourable international trading conditions.

The output on the export market for 1988 also looks good; that is, according to the report by the Forestry Council. They say that the outlook for 1988 is very good. It is essential for the future well-being of this industry that we not only have sufficient resources to meet projected demands, but that in addition we have resources available to permit increased investment in manufacturing capacity. Without this the industry will stagnate. For this reason it is essential for the industry to increase the tempo of afforestation. I want to repeat that it is absolutely essential that the tempo be increased.

Equally important in this regard is that wood processors also create the incentive for growers to continue growing trees. Here I refer to the need for realistic prices to be paid for timber in the round; at least so that growers can maintain their profitability, otherwise they will leave the industry. What happens when a small grower leaves the industry is that the big concerns take over, and that is something we would like to prevent. We would like as many smaller growers as possible in the industry. Unfortunately, however, if it is not a profitable situation for the smaller grower they will sell out to the bigger concerns. That in turn leads to the formation of monopolies.

It is of equal importance that growers themselves do all they can to improve their productivity and contain costs wherever possible. To enable growers to improve their productivity the State is spending a lot on research; on new species; faster growing species and better adapted species of trees.

On the subject of timber supply, I am worried about the tendency to convert softwood stands to hardwood. This is due to the current shortage of hardwood and the better prices at the moment. The long-term consumption patterns show that this is not a wise practice, namely that of converting softwood stands to hardwood. In the 1990s it will be soft woods and not hardwoods which will be in short supply, and I think timber growers must take note of this. It is no use merely carrying on in a certain direction and not heeding the warnings from the industry, namely that we shall be needing softwoods more than hardwoods in the nineties.

The forestry industry is a labour-intensive industry, and bearing in mind the urgent need for further afforestation, I am of the opinion that this industry could make a significant contribution to alleviating the unemployment problem in certain rural areas which are suited for afforestation.

However, I think there is also room for afforestation in the catchment areas of our rivers. It has been proved that those areas which are under trees have a smaller run-off in the first instance, and in the second instance the run-off carries less silt.

If we look at the rivers in Natal and the amount of silt that came down during the floods, as well as the silt in some of our dams, I think it is essential that we should consider the possibility of planting trees in many of the catchment areas. I think this will be to the benefit of the whole water system.

We are discussing the Budget Vote Water Affairs as well and I therefore must say something about water. Against the background of the recent events regarding water resources I address this House with mixed feelings today. As has been pointed out by my hon colleague, great damage was caused by the recent floods and it will cost this country a great deal of money to restore what has been lost. On the one hand we had sufficient rain to fill most of our major dams which for years experienced a below-average inflow. For these full dams we must be thankful, and we are indeed. As far as we can see we will not have water restrictions for at least the next two or three years.

However, one must also remember the people who suffered repeatedly from these floods and who incurred disastrous losses. To them I want to express my deeply felt sympathy. In Natal it was Ladysmith in the constituency of my colleague the hon the Deputy Minister, in particular that was repeatedly flooded, with a tragic loss of lives and property.

I would like to deal briefly with the position in so far as the Water act is concerned. Section 169A (1) which was inserted in the Water act in 1975 requires that the position of certain floodlines must be shown on the general layout plan of any new township or an extension of an existing township before the establishment of such town-ship may be approved by the relevant authority. What I have said now is very important. The Act was already amended in 1975 to make provision for these floodlines to be shown on a general layout plan. The purpose of this provision is to fully inform the authority responsible for the approval of new townships before it approves a new township and to enable it to formulate appropriate conditions to which its approval will be subject. We can do whatever we want, such as to build dams and to look after the catchment areas, but there will always be droughts and floods in this country. There are certain flood plains that will be flooded from time to time. The Government has been very sympathetic to the people living on those flood plains. I think my hon colleague will vouch for that. We have been very sympathetic and we have tried to relieve the plight of the people living on those flood plains who were flooded out. This, however, is no solution in the long term. What must we therefore do? We must stay out of the flood plains where our town planning is concerned. We must not build on the flood plains and I would say that we must not till the flood plains.

The relevant authority retains its full discretion in the matter and is not prescribed to by the Water Act regarding the manner in which it must exercise its discretion. This, in my opinion, is the correct approach as it would be inadvisable for the Minister of Water Affairs to concern himself with township development, which is a matter completely extraneous to the Water Act and the objects of the Department of Water Affairs. However, I think it is my duty to warn the authorities to take note of what they must do.

Hon members are aware that subsection 1 (b) of section 169A does, however, vest in the Minister of Water Affairs the power to define an area which is likely to be flooded. That is done by notice in the Government Gazette—which we shall do—whereafter his approval is required for the establishment of a new township.

I think the time has come for us to adhere strictly to this section of the Act. The fact that none of my predecessors has over the past 13 years exercised this power tends to indicate that they shared my reservations on steps in this direction being taken on the initiative of a Minister who is primarily involved in the development of water resources and not in urban development. We do not want to interfere in urban development. It is not our job; it is not this department’s job. However, I think the time has now arrived when we shall have to apply this particular power. [Interjections.]

The proper authorities to be entrusted with this regulatory measure are, in my view, the provincial administrations, which are directly responsible for local authorities and the present tone of this provision will be carefully reconsidered when redrafting the Water Act.

These provisions of the Water Act do not have any relevance to townships established before 1975 and remedial steps in respect of the older townships cannot be dealt with in terms of the provisions of the Water Act, 1956.

Regarding Ladysmith in particular and the possibility of future floods in Natal, the position is that a committee under the chairmanship of the Director General: House of Representatives was appointed to investigate ways and means of alleviating the problems being encountered there. The committee will look into matters such as resiting that part of the town that is constantly being flooded, as well as flood redemption works. Both are costly projects and I eagerly await the outcome of the investigations and the committee’s recommendations.

Turning to irrigation development, I want to re-emphasise that this is a matter which has been identified in terms of the Constitution as an own affair of the respective population groups in the country. The initiative for such development must therefore come from the Indian community itself and can either be dealt with as a Govemment project, as was explained by the hon the Deputy Minister, or the local community can mobilise itself in the form of an irrigation district, for which provision already exists in the Water Act, 1956.

If need be, the present statutory measures may be extended to meet the demand if they are found to be inadequate for hon members’ purposes. The Department of Water Affairs has had wide experience and has gained considerable expertise in the development of irrigation projects and it will be a pleasure for me to place this at hon members’ disposal.

On Monday I made an important announcement in the House of Assembly on water tariffs and I shall thus not dwell on that subject again. I started off by telling hon members what the Housewives’ League’s opinion is.

I want to thank those hon members who took part in this debate. As I said right at the beginning, it is always very pleasant to be here with them and to take part in the debate and listen to the very responsible speeches made by hon members.

Votes agreed to.

Vote No 17—“Agricultural Economics and Marketing”:

Mr Chairman, it is a well-known fact that the discovery of gold and diamonds and the ensuing rapid industrial development had forced the South African agricultural industry …

Order! Is the hon member requesting the privilege of the half hour?

Yes, please, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: If we are permitted to object, then we are objecting to that.

Mr Chairman, if I may elaborate, I have 10 minutes of my own time and I have been afforded 15 minutes by the Chief Whip of the Official Opposition.

Mr Chairman, in light of what the hon member has said, I withdraw my objection.

Order! The privilege is granted.

Thank you, Sir. It is a well-known fact that the discovery of gold and diamonds and the ensuing rapid industrial development had forced the South African agricultural industry to accelerate its development as a consequence of unpredicted demands for foodstuffs. This explains the history of our agricultural commercial industry from subsistence farming until the time of the industrial revolution.

It is against the background of this sudden increase in the country’s economic growth that the government of yesteryear was forced to replenish the farming industry’s limited financial resources. I would like to elaborate on that. Farmers, up to the advent of the industrial revolution in South Africa, were subsistence farmers, mainly bartering and selling a few odd things for cash, but when the sudden demand came for extra food stuffs the farming industry was caught, to speak figuratively, with its pants down. The government of the day was therefore compelled to render financial assistance to the farming industry.

It is sad to note that in spite of today’s surplus agricultural products resulting from a fully developed industry, demands are made by certain sectors of the farming industry for financial assistance and loans, which are proving to be detrimental to agriculture as a whole. Presently the farming community has a debt of plus-minus R15 billion. Almost half of our farmers are virtually insolvent. That nobody can deny. I attribute this to injudicious subsidisation, the literally unnecessary high level provision of credit facilities and excessive Government interference and control in the various farming industries. This perturbs me. I am not just mentioning this as windowdressing. I can read reports and press articles about the state of our agricultural industries.

What perturbs me greatly—and I am very disappointed—is that I tabled a question to the hon the Minister to pinpoint the problem. I know the livestock industry is not suffering.

The forestry industry is not suffering. The fruit industry is not suffering. Somewhere something is wrong, because we get a global figure of financial loss and financial difficulties. In order to pinpoint those areas, I tabled a set of questions to the hon the Minister which were well within the purview of his department, but to my surprise and annoyance I got a reply to the following question: Question one: As at the latest specified date by which information is available, how many farmers in the Republic were solely beef, mutton, wool, maize, wheat, fruit and vegetable producers, dairy and forestry farmers and both wool and mutton producers and grain and livestock farmers? Question number two was: What category of farmers were receiving subsidies and other specified forms of assistance from the State as at the above date?

To my annoyance and surprise the reply was: The requested particulars are not available and cannot even be gleaned from the latest agricultural census data. This was the answer to question number one. Question number two fell away.

What kind of department does the hon the Minister run? Excluding the Director-General’s department, he has 15 directorates under him, each one in charge of those specific areas in regard to which I asked questions. My concern is the downfall and the degrading of that industry which for the last 100 years has been receiving Government assistance year in and year out! Certain sections of that industry are producing surplus food which is exported. The question is: Why is that particular industry getting deeper into debt year after year? Maybe I can assist them if they give me the answers to my questions. Which other department can give us answers to our questions?

The hon the Minister has a directorate of marketing. He has a directorate of marketing information. He has a directorate of investigation. That department at least should know how many farmers in the summer rainfall area are meat producers, how many fanners in the winter rainfall area are wheat producers and how many farmers are stock farmers or have ranches. They should know how many farmers have mixed farms. It is the duty of the hon the Minister to know this!

Good heavens, they can change over within weeks from wheat farmers to meat farmers!

Sir, I do not accept that answer.

Then you are unreasonable.

Last year the Government offered an inducement to farmers in the summer rainfall areas to change from grain production to livestock production. Why then is it necessary to pay inducement money? I ask this question in all sincerity. If the farmer has a right to change overnight, or in the course of a week or a month, why was that inducement offered to the farmers in the summer rainfall areas to change from grain farming to livestock farming? The hon the Minister’s reply does not hold water.

The argument I put from this side of the House is simply that there should be much, much more deregulation. That free enterprise system which we all subscribe to, and which the Government is committed to, should be put into effect as soon as possible.

The Marketing Act of 1937, which establishes several control schemes in the industry, was devised and implemented to protect farmers against the chaos of oversupply, falling demands and low prices following the depressions of 1930-31 and the drought of 1933.

I accept that it was essential considering the circumstances existing at that time. However, this was a time when many farmers were forced off the land. My own father was forced off the land because of those contributing factors. Stabilisation and protection were the watchwords of the system, which was devised with good intentions but which today threatens to destroy the very producers and markets for whose protection it was created. For further argument on that I would like to refer the hon the Minister to Hansard No 2,1986 (col 440—448), where on 13 February in a private members’ motion I put forward an unassailable case in this respect. I beseech the hon the Minister to take note in detail of that argument in Hansard. It is my contention that in order to ensure the protection of farmers and in order to have stability in the industry, the control boards should be done away with as soon as possible. The system has reached the limit of any conceivable utility. The onus is now on the Government and the ultimate responsibility lies with the hon the Minister of Agriculture who is present this afternoon. I believe that the hon the Minister has the power to change and cancel schemes that do not benefit the industry.

The Dairy Board has a notorious history for raising prices when there is a surplus of milk. When the fuel price goes up, the milk price goes up on the pretext of added transport costs. However, when the fuel price comes down the milk price stays right there. Why? The result is that the Dairy Control Board sets the price and is reluctant to reduce the price. Once they have tasted blood money, they want to retain that blood money. As a farmer I cannot see how a few cents’ increase in the fuel price can literally affect the farming income. Every opportunity the control boards have and the least chance they get, they will increase the prices. In fairness, if they were honest and sincere in their belief when the fuel prices drop those commodity prices should also drop. I cannot see why they do not. Is the hon the Minister impervious to these malpractices.

It is a world-wide phenomenon that marketing costs should dictate supply and demand. The control boards should not dictate prices. The control board has overstayed its welcome.

Next I come to the Maize Board. The first time I thought it was a joke when I saw a TV-advertisement, at thousands of rands expense, to stimulate the consumption of the most common staple food since man set foot in this country. Today the demand has diminished and not because of overproduction. The figures produced by the hon the Minister’s department substantiate my argument. If it is not because of production, what is the cause?

Why has the demand for maize for human consumption and even for animal consumption dropped? It is because sorghum has taken its place. The culprit undoubtedly is the Maize Control Board.

The hon the Minister can look at my argument in Hansard and he will find that I mean business. High prices induce over-production which in turn induces consumer resistance. This is a typical example.

Production is not high in this country; facts and figures prove that. I need not tell the hon the Minister that. I glean from his reports in the media that production is lower. However, why is there a surplus? Why are thousands of rand being spent on advertisements for TV and prize money being offered to encourage maize consumption? Undoubtedly, when I said I was putting an unassailable case until the time of the appearance of that TV advertisement I might have had a 1% doubt. However, that proves substantially that I was right on 30 February 1986 and all those who opposed us—the ruling party opposed that motion—were absolutely wrong. That is the reason why I say that the control board and the one-channel marketing system has to be done away with forthwith.

One can charge as much as one likes, people do not care. There is a definite consumer resistance, particularly as far as maize is concerned, and other products will follow suit if we retain these control boards.

I now come to the Meat Board. Here we have the same story. They can paint the most beautiful pictures they want, but given the time, if I investigate that, I can also prove them wrong in all the spheres of their activity. Why is mutton being sold at more than R9 per kilo and steak at more than R10 per kilo? Naturally, when the housewife goes to buy her red meat, instead of buying two kilos she buys 1,7 kilos, not because she wants to feed her family less but because of the high price. They cannot afford that.

What surprises me is that in the hon the Minister’s report mention is made of imported meat. They imported deboned chicken instead of importing mutton. Can the South African poultry industry not debone chicken?

They can.

Then why import it? Why import a commodity of which there is a surplus in this country? Why not import frozen mutton instead?

The Indian population are mainly non-beef and non-pork consumers. They consume mutton, chicken and fish. Of that population about 24% must have Halaal meat that has to be slaughtered in this country under strict religious supervision. I agree that that must be done. However, what about the rest of the community?

If one considers the Blacks, cheap mutton produced in Australia can be imported for them. The sheep in that country must eat less because in Australia they can produce mutton at a profit, export it to South Africa, freight and insurance paid, and sell it cheaper. It is in fact 30% cheaper than the South African product. What is the reason, I ask? Why is our own product priced so high?

Ten years ago the same grass grew, but today suddenly it seems to me as if the grass is not growing well. I again castigate the control board for the high price.

I have been advised that my time has expired. As regards fresh produce for the market, the hon the Minister states that there is a directorate in charge of marketing. The national markets—the agents—are selling produce that is not fit for human consumption; it is decayed fruit and vegetables that are absolutely rotten. I saw such a tray of peaches in the Pietermaritzburg market in December. There was a whole consignment with water dripping through the trays. The agent tells the buyers that they have not been inspected because they are at half price. The merchants bought that without opening the trays, and they did not find 14% of edible fruit in the trays. What sort of control is that? Why has the director been appointed there at the taxpayers’ expense? That is the question that must be looked into.

As regards 24D hormone herbicide, it is only restricted in one particular area in Natal, namely the Tala Valley area. However, just 10 kilometres away, surrounded by sugar-cane farmers who spray 24D, are Indian agricultural farmers; the only area in South Africa declared an agricultural area in Cliffdale. There farmers are suffering extensively as a result of this. I addressed the matter in this House last year and the year before last, and nothing has been done. I take it, then, that the pigment of one’s skin has a great deal to do with those restrictions. The sugar-cane farmers in the Tala Valley cannot spray 24D, but the sugar-cane farmers at Summerveld, Botha’s Hill, Hammarsdale and Cliffdale can spray and destroy those farmers who are predominantly market gardeners that rely for their livelihood on those pieces of ground. Nothing is being done about that.

Mr Chairman, in my opinion the Agriculture and Water Affairs Ministry is the most important ministry. I believe that the first man on earth must have been a farmer, and that the last man on earth will be a farmer. Agriculture is the alpha and the omega of life, for it is agriculture that provides the life-generating energy that all living creatures require for life.

Agriculture is dependent on nature and because of this dependence, it is vulnerable. The vulnerability of agriculture is clearly illustrated by the serious drought of recent years and the more recent severe flood damage.

South Africa is for the most part an arid, water deficient region. It is subject to variable rainfall, droughts, flood and high evaporation losses. The annual rainfall amounts to only 58% of the world average. Run-off is unfavourably distributed. The availability of underground water is limited, and the quality of water sources is deteriorating. In addition, the cost of providing water in most of South Africa is high compared with other countries. This is largely due to the greater storage capacity required on South African rivers to achieve equivalent yields. The cost will rise in the future owing to the greater distances that water will have to be transported to areas of increasing demand. This is one reason as to why our cost of production is high. There is a saying that for every inch of rain one gets a ton of cane, and this is very true. The rainfall determines one’s yield and in South Africa if one looks at the rainfall figures one will note that, as I have said, we get only 58% of the world average. As a result, in order to obtain the average production, we need to get 50% more rain. This is one reason why our crops production will be higher.

Talking about drought brings to mind the visit of the hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture to the Nonoti area. This was the first time that a Deputy Minister had visited the Indian community there and we thank him very much for that. During his visit to the Nonoti area he promised assistance to the farmers in that region but from what I am given to understand that promise of assistance has not been fulfilled as yet. I want to appeal to the hon the Deputy Minister to try to hasten matters because many of the farmers are destitute. I ask him to look into the matter.

On the issue of floods, the Government has undertaken to cover all the valid claims of private farmers in Natal and KwaZulu for the losses that they suffered in the floods of 1987. Farmers were permitted to submit applications for aid from 30 November, 1987 up to 29 February 1988. However, many farmers were unable to submit their claims for some reason or other.

An article appeared in The Argus on Monday, 2 May 1988. I quote as follows:

I would like to point out that during the floods in February and March even Natal suffered great damage. This damage was not noticed, however, because the floods in September 1987 broke river banks and deepened the river beds so that there was an easier flow of water. This is why the damage was not so great. Whatever damage did occur, however, was not noticed because of the damage done in 1987.

Natal was not declared a disaster area during the floods of February and March 1988. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to extend the help to those farmers who have had no assistance at all. There are farmers who suffered losses but they do not qualify for assistance because the date by which they should have submitted their claims lapsed without their doing so. The damages that they suffered during February and March this year are therefore not covered.

No one can deny that the lot of the farmer is a difficult one. To make things a little easier, the South African Agricultural Machinery Association (SAAMA) is to try to convince the Government that farmers’ machinery should be treated like their fuel and not be subject to GST. I agree with this point of view but whenever SAAMA broaches the matter, the Government’s short answer is for it to help farmers by reducing prices.

According to SAAMA the average profit on a tractor is 9,5%, which is well below the GST of 12%. In some cases up to 30% of the cost of a tractor is made up of duties, surcharges and GST. This figure is supported by the annual report on the prices of machinery and implements. I should just like to quote from it as follows:

The cost of agricultural machinery is high. The most commonly used tractor, the 58k W machine, costs over R60 000 with GST, and according to the figures provided the taxes on that machine itself amount to R20 000.

I cannot understand why farmers must pay GST on agricultural implements, which are regarded as input costs. Items such as fuel, fertilizer and seed, which are regarded as input costs, are exempt because they are regarded as part of the manufacturing process.

Because of the high cost, the agricultural implement industry sales have dropped from R532 million …

Order! I regret to inform the hon member that his time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I rise merely to afford the hon member an opportunity to complete his speech.

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon member for Cavendish. The sales of machinery have dropped from R532 million in 1981 to R187 million in 1985. In 1981, 24 862 units were sold and in 1986, only 4 736. That represents a decrease of over 20 000 units.

In order to function efficiently the fanner must have good, reliable machinery with little or no down time at all. Down time means loss of time, and loss of time means loss of money.

The total fanning debt on 31 December 1986 stood at R12 445,9 million. This figure represents an increase of 12% compared with the 1985 figures. Steps must be taken to lessen the burden of the farmers.

Whilst I am speaking on this debate, I should just like to raise the question of the subdivision of agricultural land and I should like to make an appeal on that issue.

The implementation of the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act, Act 70 of 1970, as amended, prevents the fragmentation of agricultural land into units which are too small to be viable. I am also against having units which are too small to be viable. However, I should like to make a special appeal. In certain cases we have had the extended family system whereby farmers have built more than one dwelling on a particular farm where they have grown-up or married children. In some cases they had three to four dwellings. I would like the hon the Minister, in this case, to consider the special circumstances in deciding whether he should allow the subdivision of those lands.

I would not encourage this sort of practice on a large scale, but I would prefer most farmers to get into a kibbutz style system, where they live together in a village and go out to do the farming. In this way one saves more space and it is easier to provide facilities such as water supply and electricity. Everything works like a partnership. This also provides security. I therefore make an appeal to the hon Minister to look into this matter.

Mr Chairman, I would like to start on the note on which the hon member for North Coast finished his speech, namely the subject of reducing land holdings for agriculture. I need not detail the matter, but I will ask the hon the Deputy Minister and the hon the Minister to look into this, especially in relation to Indian farmers who in the past have been very able market gardeners. I know some of them have eked out a living on just five acres of land, which is equivalent to about two hectares. This is a matter which can be looked into. In this age of deregulation, I think it is something which should be considered.

In the field of Indian agriculture, there have been and still are problems in regard to land, marketing, and education. It has been these problems which have prevented the agricultural industry from flourishing among the Indian community. I do not know what the present statistics are, but I would like them to be made available. In this regard I would like to hint that, with the aid of hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates, some kind of census could be carried out among the Indian people, with a view to obtaining the latest data and thereby improving agriculture among the Indian community.

It is a well-known fact that the Indians have been successful small scale farmers and market gardeners from the dawn of their arrival as indentured labourers in this country. On the expiry of their indenture contracts, many of them turned to the land, because they had an agricultural background, and they started market gardening. However, I am well aware that over the years, and especially the last three decades, much of the land has been expropriated for various developments and no alternative arrangements have been made to replace the land.

We are on the eve of expecting a White Paper on the Group Areas Act. This will be released shortly, I am sure. I trust that this White Paper on the Group Areas Act will adequately address the question of agricultural land for the Indian people, because the Group Areas Act has undoubtedly been an impediment in the way of Indian agriculture. If nothing is mentioned in this White Paper about agricultural land for the Indian community, I will make an appeal, on behalf of the Indian community as a whole, that some special arrangement be made to demarcate land for Indian agriculture.

Need I tell the hon the Minister and his deputy that agriculture in any land is second to none? I think it is a most important industry, because one can have all the industries in the world, but without food man cannot survive. It is important to that extent.

I therefore want to emphasise the absolute need of making land available for the Indian community. Sometimes suggestions are made in vain, and we get frustrated. However, I have faith in these two gentlemen who are closely associated with the promotion of agriculture in this country. I know they will look into some of the suggestions that we make. The suggestion I made last year was that we should give some kind of incentive to first-time farmers, people who venture out into farming for the first time, by way of a loan, if not an outright grant for the financing of farming implements and seeds, which are also very costly, and the like. I want the hon the Minister to give some serious thought to this matter.

While I ask that some land be made available, I know the Indian community is turning the other way. Many of them have turned to white collar employment, because they have become tremendously frustrated when they saw the land being taken away from their fathers and grandfathers. The older generations have endured many hardships, because they received no encouragement whatsoever, such as has been made available for agriculture at the present time.

I wish to make another suggestion for the hon the Minister’s consideration, and that is that he, in consultation with the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates, make available 1 000 hectares of land to start with. If we allow each Indian to use a piece of land, say between five and 10 hectares, we can accommodate up to 100 or 150 market gardeners. Their products will be of tremendous value to the country. The land could be provided somewhere alongside the Tugela Basin or some other area where an irrigation dam can be built. I think it is something we can jointly look at.

I again want to make reference to the Clairwood market. Last year I drew the hon the Minister’s attention to the lack of facilities at the Clairwood bulk sales market, and some other problems which the market traders were experiencing as a result of by-laws which are affecting them adversely. I do not think these problems have been resolved completely. I know they had a market advisory body set up which included the chairman of the Indian farmers’ union. However, that is not going to solve any problem. I think something more practical has to be done. I kindly want to ask the hon the Minister of Agriculture to look into this matter.

Before I conclude my speech, I want to ask the hon the Minister to give some serious thought to the dissemination of agriculture among the Blacks. I am not implying that he has not thought of this, but I think this is a matter of concern for all thinking persons in this country. They should seriously apply themselves to this. The population of this country is going to increase. There is going to be increased urbanisation. There is going to increased industrialisation. We are all aware of this. We need to get a reasonable percentage of Black people to become involved in agriculture. It would be of tremendous benefit to the country as a whole. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is once again an honour to visit this House and to address agriculture in general. I listened very closely to the hon members as they addressed the problems and in the few minutes at my disposal I would like to reply to some of the comments made.

The hon member for North Coast mentioned my visit last year to certain Indian areas in Natal and I must state once again what a tremendous impression this made on me. Through that visit I came to grips with the problems that Indian farmers are experiencing. They do have problems. From the farmers I experienced a hospitality which knows no colour and which knows only friendship. It was indeed a privilege to experience that. On that day we spoke about help to farmers and some hon members may remember the words that I used to the effect that I would not stand in the way of financial aid for Indian farmers.

Hear, hear!

That was our point of departure, but it is not a question of saying that one is in favour of financial aid and then simply returning to the Government to get some money and distribute it. If one is in favour of giving aid, one starts by creating procedures through which that money can be allocated. That is what we are busy with at present and I would like to mention a few examples.

The most immediate help that we could give was technical assistance and through the hon the Minister in the House of Delegates we have arranged for that assistance from our technical staff in Natal. There was a need to educate people who are going back to agriculture and we have opened courses at Cedara where Indian students can be trained. We have even gone so far as to give practical courses to Indian farmers in the areas where they live. We take the technical staff and the expertise to the farmer. From that point of view we have made some progress in getting Indian agriculture out of the serious problems it finds itself in.

The main problem that we have, however, is to get assistance from the Government into the pocket of the Indian farmer. I would like to explain that by using the White farming community as an example. In mentioning this I do not want to make a direct comparison, but it is an historical fact that over the years about 95% of the total agriculture of South Africa is situated in the White environment. White farmers control about 90% to 95% of the total production of agricultural products. The help measures involved there have evolved through time and with organisation. The White farmers are for instance organised at a lower level into farming committees. In that small group they assess their problems and then they form larger farming bodies where eventually they end up with the SA Agricultural Union. When there is a problem in a certain area, this problem is identified and put into the pipeline. The communication with the Government is through organised agriculture, which then points out the problem and discusses it with the Minister.

Through those means we can go to the hon the Minister of Finance and tell him that we need some money for this specific problem. The problem has been identified and there is a way in which one can control the efficient provision of funds. The main point and problem with regard to Indian farming is that that organisation from a low level right up to the top level has not yet had the time to really organise itself into an efficient body that can come to the Government and say what the problem is and negotiate for funds. We have opened that channel for Indian farmers and to some extent the problem is not on our side, but it lies in getting people organised to help themselves. That is not something that can be done in one year. In that direction we shall also try to assist the Indian farmer wherever possible. We have offered our assistance, but the assistance that we offer can only be implemented in practice if it is requested, otherwise we could be accused of meddling in affairs that we should rather leave alone. However, our technical knowledge and officials are available. I think the hon the Minister can comment on this later on, but we have started with some negotiations in this regard.

The same applies to the question of land. Here I am not trying to pre-empt the committee that is investigating this under the chairmanship of the Minister of Agriculture in the House of Delegates, but I think we have agreed on basics and on an approach. The attitude we have there is firstly to identify the problem and secondly, when we have done so, to try and find a solution to that problem.

Mr Chairman, can the hon the Deputy Minister tell this House and the country why agricultural land cannot be excised from the control of the Group Areas Act? Then farms can be identified and people can farm where they want to. Why can we not retract the Group Areas Act?

The question of land, land rights and personal rights has always been a sensitive one in South Africa and throughout the world. I am not going to deal with this matter in too much detail because the hon the Minister will address this issue in his reply eventually. However, what I would like to say on this point is that it is not as simple as scrapping laws and traditions and then starting to deal out land all over again. What is sensitive to one might not be sensitive to another, or might be highly sensitive on another occasion. I must also point out that the Minister of Agriculture in this House does show a sensitivity towards this whole problem and I think we have progressed and come to the point where we are sorting out the problems and trying to find solutions to the problem.

I am not going to say any more about identifying land because that is part of the future agenda and we are still looking at the different possibilities. This is as far as I should like to comment on the question of land. If we can give this some time to be sorted out then I think some of the emotion can be removed from this argument. Then we could get down to practical suggestions which can be applied in practice.

With these few words I thank hon members.

Mr Chairman, I was pleased to hear the hon the Deputy Minister speaking of the need for agriculture to be organised and for the fraternity to have proper spokesmen so that their needs can be conveyed to the appropriate authorities so that they can be dealt with sympathetically.

However, I must also remind the hon the Minister that it was only ten years ago that we were received as South Africans for the first time by Government representatives. Our memoranda of the past might have been worded in the most eloquent and articulate English and a case worthy of consideration for the amelioration of conditions under which Indian farmers practise was presented, but these representations were ignored. I believe it was only as recently as 1979 that we were able to talk across the table to the hon the Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues, who were prepared at least to listen and to have an appreciation of our problems. That happened under the chairmanship of the late Mr B J Vorster. The late Mr A M Moolla was in fact a doyen among Indian representatives in public life, and he said to me that this was the first occasion on which they had been able to talk to one another and appreciate the other’s point of view. At least there was a sincere desire on the part of this Prime Minister to examine our problems. He may not have been able to resolve them to our entire satisfaction, but he had sincerely committed himself to finding answers.

The reason for the failure of a highly articulate farmer’s representative body was that they had no one to speak to. I sincerely trust that the kind of response that representations made by these bodies meet with from ministries and officials will be an inducement for the emergence of an articulate body of spokesmen for the Indian community. That is very important, and one must put the record straight insofar as that is concerned.

Mr Chairman, through you I welcome what the hon the Deputy Minister said about organisations, and I should also like to make an appeal to the farming fraternity of South Africa—the White farming fraternity—who at present have all the expertise in regard to both agriculture and organisations, to make their expertise available through our Minister to the Indian community. This also goes for the Coloured and Black communities; developing communities need to acquire the information available to the White farmer; we do not wish to start inventing the wheel all over again. It is there and it is a question of making it available to other sectors of South African society. I would welcome favourable consideration of the suggestion I am making.

However—and here I address myself to the hon the Ministers—some 25 to 40 years ago, at about the time the hon the Minister’s party came into power, plans were on the drawing board which had in fact been conceived by the representatives of the White community in the city of Durban, to move the Indians out. One of the plans was that the Indians should be settled across the Umhlatuzana River on land then occupied by Indian farmers—some 6 000 acres …

10 000 acres.

Banana farming in South Africa was earned out in Cavendish—that is where the name Cavendish Dwarf comes from; Cavendish happens to be the railway station serving Chatsworth. As much as 6 000 acres was under intensive cultivation …

10 000.

Very well then, 10 000 acres; I am being conservative in my estimates. That acreage of land was under banana cultivation, and bananas were produced in South Africa at Cavendish, hence the Cavendish Dwarf. I read about this in a South American newspaper as well; they are currently experimenting with producing bananas from seed out there!

This land was taken away with a view to settling the large Indian population which, in terms of the Group Areas Act, had to leave the Durban borough. The housing settlement there is proof of what I am saying. However, there was a tacit understanding when representations were made that the farming community that was being displaced in that area would be provided with land that would be found for them and which would be suitable for that purpose; if not the exact acreage, then enough to satisfy a displaced farmer.

Thus far, nothing has happened. What was the consequence of Indians giving up farming land in Chatsworth? It was the emergence of White farmers, who have now cornered it the banana market! I am not against that, but I believe that anybody who knows the history of this matter will be pained to know that such a thing happened. In fact, historically, our community was engaged in banana farming for more than 100 years. They supplied bananas to the Transvaal, the Cape, Natal and the Free State. Suddenly, in the guise of providing homes for Indians they were displaced and dispossessed of farming lands and up to now those lands have not been replaced.

I believe that that is something which has to be attended to. The hon the member for Cavendish comes from a farming community. The hon member for Cavendish is aware of the Cavendish Dwarf. The hon member Mr Iyman is another one. I myself belong to a farming community.

Order! The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition must please address an hon member by referring to his constituency and not to his name.

Sorry, Mr Chairman. I meant the hon member for Camperdown. As I said, I am aware that in the Chatsworth area one of the farms is referred to as Farm Reddy which proves that there were sizeable holdings there in the name of my own clan. All I am saying, is that we cannot explain away in terms of Government philosophy or policy the inability of the authorities to make good an undertaking that was given when I was chairman of the Executive Committee. I believe that some land at least must be found that will be suitable for this purpose so that we can demonstrate in a tangible way the concern arising from the loss of that land.

There is another point that I want to make. Earlier on in this debate great play was made of timber. I believe timber will be the basis of not only an enormous industry in this country but also the basis for providing employment for people of colour so that they can earn an honourable living and even become small businessmen. When I travel around the country I often see vast areas turning into dongas. This is land that would be suitable for afforestation and/or the planting of gum trees, wattle trees or any other type of tree that could form the raw material for the manufacturing of pulp and paper. This would surely assist in arresting the great crime that we as South Africans commit every day by sending over a million tons of topsoil to the ocean per day. That is the figure that was established during the Green Heritage Year. If one adds inflation to that I am sure the figure is now well past a million tons per day.

Why are we not encouraging South Africans, whether they be Black, Coloured or whatever, to plant trees so that they will be able to preserve the topsoil? At the same time this would provide a basis for an honest income. I think there are vast areas in South Africa, or at least in Natal, which can help to provide employment and opportunities for economic development and growth. A Black man could be a contractor, cutting down timber and chopping off the tops and selling it as firewood. Another person would be able to hawl wood to the crushing plant as a cartage contractor. What one does in the process is to establish a whole series of businessmen. Who knows, in time the Black man can also be the person who provides the seedlings—he can be the person who plants the seedlings. I see a wide vista of opportunities but I think it is the duty of the authorities to approach this matter in a practical way. They must involve the developing and the underdeveloped sectors of our society to make a contribution. This would be beneficial for themselves and for the whole country.

Our geographical position at the southern tip of Africa places us in a very favourable logistic position for the exporting of paper. I believe we have a future in the field of paper exporting because it is not something that will go away tomorrow. However, we need to approach the matter in the correct way. As the hon the Minister told us earlier, the timber that we have here grows quickly and that is what we would need for an industry that is also a very large consumer. I want to leave these thoughts with the Committee.

Mr Chairman, agriculture is a most important factor in any country in the world. Even the highly industrialised countries have to rely to a great extent on the agricultural ability of such countries.

If we cast a glance down the corridors of biblical history, we will find that every prophet of God that came into this world, including Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed and others, were all agriculturalists in one way or another.

The Indian community, along with its business acumen, also has agricultural ability, and agricultural activity is so deeply rooted in the life of the Indian that it has, so to say, become his tradition and culture.

The Indian labourer was brought into South Africa by the British colonial authorities to save the South African sugar industry from ruin. This alone shows—and shows loudly and clearly—that the Indian inclination towards agriculture is very highly rated. The British had to choose people from India rather than from any of their other colonies. Even though they had so many other colonies, they had to bring Indians into South Africa to save the industry from ruin.

In establishing farms and farming communities, it appears that White immigrants are being assisted on a priority basis. I believe that the department should be geared to provide for the establishment of Indian farmers and I think that the hon the Minister’s department will have to play a role in conjunction with our hon Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in order to obtain the required establishment of Indian farmers.

May I take the liberty, Mr Chairman, of pointing out to you a shining example of an Indian farmer who has made a success in this field? He is a person by the name of Mr Gora Karodia, a top class dairy farmer who imported a Friesland cow which, at the central show at Bloemfontein, was judged the supreme champion dairy animal.

This man entered farming and, against all odds, advanced in his profession of agriculture to the highest standard. He was not assisted. He received no assistance from the Government, but he did it all on his own initiative. All his achievements were attained by himself on his own initiative and through his own efforts. This shows how the Indian can succeed, flourish and advance with appropriate assistance.

In the Transvaal the Indian agricultural community is really being neglected and overlooked. A number of agriculturally-minded Indians desire to become farmers and require smallholdings. If the authorities will direct their attention to these requirements a very healthy Indian farming community will be created and established.

What we need is a bold policy which will ensure that farmers are introduced to the land. Our people have proved themselves in this field in the past.

I welcome the hon the Deputy Minister’s remarks about technical assistance that will be made available, but what good is technical assistance without land? We need land, and as much as this question of land may be a sensitive issue, when it comes to agriculture I see no need for sensitivity, regardless of whether it be Black, Coloured, Indian or White agriculture, because people who have an inclination towards agriculture are the ones who will boost our economy. What is more, they will not grow black carrots and white carrots and red carrots. They will grow one type of carrot, whether they be Indian farmers or White farmers.

What about the Parliamentary carrots? [Interjections.]

Well, we do not have donkeys to take those carrots that are dangled, so what can we do?

The hon the Minister must take a bold step and the administration should make land available for the settlement of new farmers so that we can introduce people to the land. This will be a positive and real contribution.

The agricultural land which is available to Indians, particularly in the Transvaal, is very expensive and if one compares it to the land which is made available to the Whites, we find that this is brought about by an artificial shortage. If there was no artificial shortage and the Indian was given a chance on a par with his counterpart, I can assure the hon the Minister that the Indian would make a very successful agriculturist. This we can prove. Therefore I ask that steps be taken in the right direction.

As far as our hon Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates is concerned, there are certain inhibitions in his way. These inhibitions are brought about by the department of the hon the Minister of Agriculture and the Group Areas Act. These things must now be done away with. We are now moving into a progressive era. I think land, particularly agricultural land, must be opened to all communities. The Indians are land-starved as far as agriculture is concerned, particularly in the Transvaal. I think it is most needed in the Transvaal. In Natal we still have land, which my colleagues here can speak of, but in the Transvaal we really have a shortage of land and I ask that land be made available for our prospective agriculturists.

Mr Chairman, I think when we talk about agriculture, there is much confusion. One has to know whether this is a general or an own affair. It was said back in 1985 during the debate on the Vote: Agriculture that we should depoliticise agriculture and that it should not be an issue for political debate. That was bom out of very good intentions, but subsequent to that, when we saw the actions, they do not justify the statement. We have a Minister of Agriculture, but we have restrictions and we have no land.

I want to repeat something I said during the debate on the hon the State President’s Vote. I said that in the constituency of Southern Natal, where I come from, there are thousands of hectares of agricultural land not being put to use, firstly, because it cannot be made available to Indian agriculturists because of the Group Areas Act. People could possibly lease it, because there are always people who hold onto their dear possession of agricultural land, while they are no longer using it. However, nobody else can use it either, because of the restrictions of the Group Areas Act.

The South Coast Agricultural Union was up in arms and attacked me, saying that there is no land available. I understand, because they live in a very small world. They are looking at their own seaside agricultural land, but I was looking at a wider area. My constituency stretches along the Lesotho border down to the Transkei, including Matatiele and the whole of that area. There is plenty of land there which could be put to use. The fact of the matter is that the Group Areas Act does not allow people to lease the land out and we cannot even buy it.

We see in the general affairs budget that there is provision for agriculture. Of course, in the House of Assembly budget a certain amount is provided for agriculture. Who is the own affairs Minister of Agriculture and who is the general affairs Minister of Agriculture? We would like to see a difference in that. I believe under general affairs the present hon Minister and his hon Deputy Minister serve the whole country, irrespective of race, because that is what general affairs is all about. There is a general affairs provision for agriculture. I heard the hon the Deputy Minister say that they are prepared to give financial aid to farmers. That is good, because that is what the Ministry is all about. However, this should not only be for farmers of a certain race group.

Then one will have to do it in own affairs—not that I like it, but when one looks at the Budget and public accounts, one finds that in a certain year an amount of R400 million was allocated to help farmers. Only R30 million was used because of the criteria. I accept that that was to assist farmers who were in dire straits, who were about to go bankrupt and who were in financial difficulties because of the drought and the floods.

If an amount of R30 million was used, it still leaves us with a balance of R370 million. What about the other farmers, because droughts and floods are not an own affair. The people who were affected by those unfortunate acts of nature, should be assisted. The hon the Minister of Finance undertook to approach the hon the Minister of Agriculture and discuss with him to entertain such consequences which occurred in the other race groups. We have already instructed our Ministry and the House of Representatives to make this suggestion to the hon the Minister. That matter will be taken up by the respective Ministries. I therefore do not need to say more about it.

A further problem we have is the market traders in Durban. Unfortunately we need to debate this issue. There is supposed to be a White Paper on deregulation, but what really happens there is that those markets have leases with the Durban City Council. They are restricted from buying anywhere else other than from the Durban City Market, whether they have the produce or not. If they do not have it, they cannot bring it from anywhere else. They are paying rent which is raised from time to time. They cannot buy their produce anywhere else and sell it at their market stalls. Due to deregulation everybody else is allowed to buy from everywhere else and to sell it. This does not make sense! I am not against deregulation. It is fair enough if it helps the small businessman, but these people are paying rent and they are licensed to do business, but they are not allowed by the Durban City Council to buy products from anyone else and to sell them at that market. This is ridiculous. One cannot have deregulation, while there are inhibitions from an authority that dictates to the country at the same time. This is a case of the tail wagging the dog. These people cannot carry on doing things against the country’s wishes.

Mr Chairman, it is unfortunate that while every effort was made by the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in this House towards the upliftment of Indian agriculture, the devastating Natal floods drew the attention of the entire community. However, no time should be lost in giving agriculture a new lease on life.

The recent floods have created a lot of problems for those farmers whose farmlands have been severely damaged. Although some assistance will be given to these farmers, I wish to make a special appeal to the hon the Minister to assist these farmers in the same way that the Government has helped White farmers.

All of us are aware of the fact that the Government helped White farmers by means of land grants and financial assistance. They were also able to acquire implements at a minimal cost. The price of meat during the last couple of years has been so high that it has become beyond the poor man’s means to buy meat, especially mutton and lamb. Meat has become a weekend dish.

I would like to comment on what the Chairman of the Small Stock Committee, Mr D P Coetzee, said:

At the same time the country’s sheep herd had dropped considerably.

I would also like to quote what Mr Frans Pieterse stated:

This is what Mr Pieterse said. Furthermore, Mr Faan van Wyk, the General Manager of the Wool Board, warned meat farmers that the road ahead was an uphill one. Every farmer will have to face the fact that he will have to sit down and recalculate his operation and systematically aim at greater productivity and better costing.

In respect of the Transvaal a lot of agricultural guidance is needed. We appreciate the appointment of the two Indians from Natal on the special committee for the reconstruction of agriculture, but I would appreciate it if the hon the Minister would consider appointing an additional member from the Transvaal so that there can be a satisfactory input from the Transvaal.

The general affairs Ministry has an important parent role to play in agriculture and I wish to make an appeal to the hon the Minister to assist the hon the Minister in this House in the upliftment of Indian agriculture. We have 60 to 65 farmers in the Transvaal, leasing land of between 3 000 and 4 000 hectares. It is sad to say that only 20 hectares are owned by Indians. I would like this House to know that the Transvaal has many active farmers on leased land and on a nominee basis. I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister, who is an experienced person, to fully apply his expertise to raise our agricultural standards.

Mr Chairman, having heard the debate this afternoon I think that the call has been made in this House for the hon the Minister of Agriculture to allow the Indians to play an important role in providing the food for the needs of the country.

I would like to refer to an article that appeared in January of this year in The Natal Mercury, where some very startling disclosures were made about farmers that provide this country with its staple food and the number of people that have gone bankrupt and how this particular field of farming has deteriorated. From the records it would appear that this situation is escalating. This is a cause for much concern because we have to survive in this country. We have to live. South Africa does not only provide food for South Africa as a whole, but we also provide food for our neighbouring states. Their basic food is none other than grain, so that if these grain farmers are affected to the extent that they have been, I believe it is a very serious situation which has to be addressed by the hon the Minister of Agriculture. If these figures are true and correct, I think it is, as I pointed out, very serious indeed. Now I would like to quote this article from The Natal Mercury where it states:

A total of 1 208 farmers have been sequestrated since 1984 and a further 3 000 face possible sequestration in the next year if they cannot find new sources of credit. Even worse, the question of these farmers maintaining their farms is in doubt. I am particularly concerned about the provision of this essential requirement for survival. If the situation is going to continue then I should like to know what we are to do in this country. Are we to import maize from outside and pay dearly for it as we are paying so dearly at the moment by limiting this particular field to a limited number of people? Perhaps this is done to keep up the price structure, which at the moment does not even ease the problem where the poor Blacks are not in a position to pay the amount that is called for.

I want to go further. The organisation which controls the affairs of the maize farmers is called the National Maize Producers Organisation. This organisation looks after the production of maize in this country and they only monitor farmers who have less than 50 ha. However, 50 ha could also provide food. There are many people who only own 50 ha and play an important role in providing food; why should they not be part of Nampo? Why should they be restricted?

Most of the areas that have been affected are the summer rainfall areas of the OFS and the Transvaal and a call made by the hon member for Actonville very clearly amplified the fact that there are people in the Transvaal who have the money and who want to get into this farming industry. It is only the situation of land not being available that prevents this. As we have this situation, I am of the opinion that the hon the Minister should investigate this problem and open up as much agricultural land as possible for the production of maize as a whole. After all, maize is the staple food of this country. Why should it be restricted? I see the hon the Minister is having a good laugh about this. However, I am of the opinion that he is restricting the production of essential food. Or is he rather protecting the number of farmers? This may even be possible because the farmers have to be productive to some extent to keep the Government in their position.

The other issue that I should like to raise here is the question of fanning land in the Transvaal that is now being sold to Anglo Vaal for mining purposes. Now I want to say that if farm land is going to be taken away for mining purposes, are we going to be limiting our country and the land that in the past has been suitable for agriculture to mining? I think that this is a sad state of affairs.

If this is the situation I want to say that there are a number of Indian farmers in the Natal Midlands area and the Northern Natal area who would like to become involved in maize farming, but they are restricted by the Maize Board in the area. I know of several people who have applied for membership of this Maize Board, but they have not received membership. I therefore want to appeal to the hon the Minister to consider very seriously opening up as much farmland as possible, particularly to this type of farming, to all race groups. He should now think of organising a national campaign to encourage more people so that in the year 2000 when the population would have reached a peak we will have enough food to supply our own country without having to import from foreign countries.

Mr Chairman, I am very glad to be able to say something about agriculture. I am sorry I could not speak the day the hon the State President was here, but one of my hon colleagues suffered a heart attack and was in hospital and I had to be there. I would have liked to have asked the hon the State President about the aims of this Parliament when they brought the Indians into Parliament, because we cannot, after all, do anything for our people.

What I would like to know now, is the following. At present we Indians do not have any land in respect of which we can say we would like to farm. If I want to farm, I could not even buy a piece of land, because it does not belong to us. I cannot ask our own hon Minister for this, because he says the same. He says we do not have the land and we did not think about this. If I ask the hon the Minister, he will say the same, namely: “When we brought the Coloureds and the Indians into Parliament, we did not think you would farm or that you would ask for land to farm.”

*Mr Chairman, that is a fallacy, because every Afrikaner in this country knew that when they came to South Africa, the Indians came here as farmers. They did not come in as businessmen; they became business people afterwards, as did the other people who came in afterwards. However, they initially came into the country to help the country grow; that was Natal. That is where they started, and they are still here. They educated their children in farming in the sweat of their brows, and the Government did not give them a cent for doing so.

What I want to know now, is this. If I want a piece of land anywhere, who do I go to? I cannot go to our own Minister because he has nothing to give us. Since the early thirties I personally have been asking for a piece of land from the Group Areas Board, and I am sure that if the records are consulted the hon the Minister will probably find that at that time I was in Rustenburg, and I have been telling our former Minister of Housing this too; I also mentioned it in the South African Indian Council. I have mentioned this several times here and I have approached hon Ministers but until today I have not been able to get a piece of land. Here I stand in Parliament, and nobody listens.

One of my colleagues introduced farming legislation, too; I mentioned that several times as well. It has never come to our House for debate. What, then, are we in fact doing here? If we are here today to work in conjunction with the other Parliamentarians of the Houses of Assembly and the Representatives then I think we shall be able to come to the nitty gritty of what is ours or what we want.

We do not want the whole of South Africa; I once mentioned this in passing as a joke, and the HNP used that in elections, namely that we wanted to take over South Africa.

That was utter nonsense.

However, I said that and they used it; never mind whether it is nonsense or not. I did say it. The point now is, however—I am not asking to take over South Africa; I do not want it—that we are farmers, some of our people are farmers, although today I would say that not everyone is a farmer. The fact still remains, however, that we want land for farming. Our Minister does not have land to give us. Everyday we hear appeals from people who practice farming that ask for land to be made available.

At the same time we want to going in for cattle husbandry. It is not everybody who wants to go in for farming or market gardening. There are people who would like to buy land and create a game reserve or game farm.

*The hon the Minister probably knows that there are many private game reserves. These are owned by farmers who do not work, who sit in Johannesburg and have enough money to buy a large piece of land, thousands of hectares in size. They convert it into a reserve and then they go there over weekends to hunt and make a lot of money.

The hon the Minister must think carefully about this. There are some of us who would also like to farm. Perhaps there is a colleague of mine, a doctor who is sitting here, who would like to start a game reserve. Why does he not have the right to do so?

There is a question I would like to put to the hon the Minister. In the old days they started the Vaalharts scheme. What was the aim in those days when they brought the poor farmers there and built canals and spent money? Today those Vaalharts farmers are virtually millionaires. It is of no use for the hon the Minister to shake his head.

That is not true.

There are several of them; I have been in that area; I have been in Bloemhof and all over. I can tell the hon the Minister that those people are not the poor farmers that were sent to Vaalharts in those years. [Interjections.]

They are a hundred per cent better off today than many people with big businesses in the big cities. I therefore want to ask the hon the Minister to keep in mind that there are not only White farmers. There are many Coloured farmers such as the Griquas and those in the area around Kimberley. There are also many Black farmers. I was in the homelands when the first sugar-cane was planted in the KaNgwane area. Today the best and the cleanest sugar that comes to the mills comes from KaNgwane.

At that time I was the only Indian in the Eastern Transvaal. I did not plant sugar-cane there but the seed for sugar-cane. My hon colleague mentioned cattle husbandry. Although he does not eat meat, he at least has a knowledge of it. We must be believed when we say that the non-Whites in this country are not all businessmen or politicians—they are farmers too. They have all sorts of professions. If there is a willing seller and if there is a willing buyer who happens to be Indian he should have the right to buy that land.

Mr Chairman, the contributions made to the debate on agriculture this afternoon are distinct evidence of the concern of the Indian community with regard to the upliftment of agriculture. Let us, however, accept the factual situation of the country in that there has been various discriminatory pieces of legislation that we have been subjected to. We do not want to remind ourselves of that legislation.

Since the time that we have come to Parliament we, together with the relevant departments, have applied our minds to the establishment of the required infrastructures and to look at the backlog of frustration regarding Indian agriculture. As the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition mentioned, there is a need for co-ordination and for specialised assistance from the departments. In the absence of that it is not possible for us to meet all the agricultural requirements of the Indian community in a year or two.

One must also acknowledge in all honesty that over the past few years the Department of Agriculture in the House of Delegates has enjoyed tremendous co-operation from the general affairs department of Agriculture. One could not have expected better co-operation than what we enjoyed, notwithstanding the strong comments that were made in this debate. One can understand the impatient feelings of people who want to see Indian agriculture regain its rightful position.

One of the most important aspects of the establishment of an infrastructure for Indian agriculture has been the appointment of two men from the Indian community on the Jacobs Committee. This was done with the co-operation and recommendation of the Department of Agriculture. This is one of the most important committees on agricultural matters in the country; so much so that today we are fortunate to have two men at that level who are providing inputs into the needs of Indian agriculture.

On the other hand there are recommendations now flowing from that committee of which my hon colleague and his department are aware, and certain financial questions have come up which we have addressed to the hon the Minister in question in the House of Assembly, where he has reacted to them.

These matters have now been pursued in a different direction, through the hon the Minister of Finance, and consideration is being given to finding the required finance to uplift Indian agriculture.

Here again, I fully agree with the hon member for Lenasia East and the other hon members from the Transvaal in their cry for agricultural land. The same situation exists in Natal, where we have the main concentration of our Indian community.

The Indian community has been attached to the sugar industry. Let us look at what is happening to the sugar industry at the moment. There is a decline with regard to the sugar industry, so much so that the timber industry is now gaining momentum. There is therefore a need for an adjustment in agriculture in that respect. Aside from that, however, how has the Indian community been involved in agriculture?

We have ventured into the sugar industry, for which purpose we were brought into this country. We then went into cash crops without any satisfactory assistance or guidance. Notwithstanding all that, we were able to weather the various storms in the country and to survive in that field.

Today, however, as my colleague the hon the Deputy Minister has mentioned, a committee has been established as a result of negotiations at the highest level and this committee is actively engaged at the moment in looking at available land in the various regions. It will then make its submissions to the Cabinet so that the Cabinet will be able to take a decision with regard to the acquisition of those lands.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister whether he would agree that until the Group Areas Act was enacted, farm lands, particularly in Natal, were under no restriction and that Indians could lease any White farm or buy any farm anywhere in the Province of Natal?

Mr Chairman, I mentioned in my opening remarks that we should accept the factual situation in the country and adapt ourselves to changing times. What are the changing times? We do agree that before the Group Areas Act …

What about the wrong that was done?

Order!

… one was allowed to buy land. Subsequently the Group Areas Act was introduced, but no hon member of this House could have spoken out any more strongly with regard to the Group Areas Act.

The hon member for Southern Natal mentioned that agriculture should be depoliticised. I myself have constantly mentioned that we should not politicise agriculture because it must get the attention it requires in order to uplift agriculture. We cannot lag behind any longer by politicising it. Therefore, whilst it is our contention that agriculture should not have a group character, we cannot live side by side on the laurels of history. Therefore this committee has been established to look into the availability of land and, as I have always mentioned, to instil the confidence that is required within the Indian community.

Gone are the days that our people must be beggars as far as the agricultural field is concerned. We must be able to motivate our needs. I am not raising unrealistic expectations. On the basis of negotiation, irrespective of who will man these departments, we have to have a direction, as with the development aid for the Black states. Look at the progress they are making as a result of the expertise and the guidance that they are given today.

If timber is gaining momentum, our community has no expertise in that field. We have to provide the expertise, because we do not want our people to be removed from agriculture simply because timber is gaining momentum. Besides that, there are other aspects in the field of agriculture. We cannot only look at sugar cane and other cash crops we have at the moment. One has to look at other issues, like cotton, for that matter. However, side by side with agriculture there must be co-ordination of agricultural industrialisation. All these are aspects which we have to look at.

Another aspect which I wanted to mention, was also mentioned by some hon members. The hon member for North Coast made a very strong point with regard to the subdivision of agricultural land. Here again, I want to appeal to the hon the Minister that we cannot equate White agriculture with Indian agriculture. Therefore, the question of consolidating small pieces of land should be given careful consideration in relation to the needs of our people. My colleague, the hon member for North Coast, is an experienced man in this field, so we should be able to look at subdivision on that basis.

The hon member for Cavendish spoke about the Durban market. I think the hon the Minister will remember that he promised to visit Natal when the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council made a request, but unfortunately last year we experienced a very difficult period with the various dislocations. However, I am satisfied that the hon the Minister will visit Durban after this session. One of the contentious issues as far as the Durban market is concerned, is the lack of co-operation from the Durban City Council. I want to assure this House that there is sound communication between my department and the hon the Minister’s department at the moment with regard to solving this problem. We are not going to allow attitudes to bear upon innocent farming communities, nor are we going to allow petty political attitudes interfere with those farming communities.

The hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council and I, together with other officials and the hon member for Isipingo, visited the market area and we looked at all those issues. However, I am now satisfied that the hon the Minister has agreed to appoint a specialist to look at these issues in conjunction with my department.

I want to say to my colleague, the hon the Minister, that I personally am grateful to him and his department for the co-operation that they have given us and I feel very strongly and I can honestly see that if we are able to build on the foundations of the relationship which we have built within the short period, we are going to make progress.

The hon member for Camperdown literally touched on national agriculture. I agree with him. However, I believe we should start at grass-roots level and look at things as they are at the moment and develop from there. My department will be dependent on the parent department and with co-operation we will be able to succeed.

Finally, once again I want to invite my colleague, the hon the Minister of Agriculture, and his hon Deputy Minister to visit the whole Natal region and various other regions to see for themselves and meet the requirements of our people. As the hon the Deputy Minister commented, the best thing that happened was that he went out and saw for himself the needs of the people. In the next exercise the hon the Minister will be able to sort out the Durban market issue and together we will look at the whole agricultural situation in this country.

Mr Chairman, for the first time since the creation of the tricameral system, and as a result of the devastating floods that hit the country last year, the general affairs Ministry assisted the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates. The hon the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Dr Jacobs of the Reserve Bank, accompanied by other officials, went to Natal for an inspection in loco of the flood damaged areas in Natal. I have written to the hon the Deputy Minister and thanked him personally, but I wish to record it here, as well, that I thank both these gentlemen for the interest shown in the plight of the Indian farmers. This relationship and co-operation must be an ongoing thing. Disaster should not bring us together. We should always be seen to be working together.

The mere fact that we all went out on an inspection at a time of need, was half the problem solved. We went out there to see for ourselves and to talk to the poor farmers. Even if we could do very little to assist, our presence there must have been a tremendous boost to these farmers. It was the first time that a White Deputy Minister went out on inspection of Indian farmers devastated by the floods.

What has happened since? Committees have been set up for flood relief. A committee to identify agricultural land for Indian farmers was also set up by the hon the State President. I want to place on record my sincere thanks to the hon the State President for his concern.

Let us look at these two reports. The one is the general affairs report. I beg your pardon, I said two reports but there is only one report. Our hon the Minister here does not have anything to report. I want to thank the hon the Minister and his department for this report. It is excellent and it makes very good reading. It gives us an in-depth knowledge of their involvement in agriculture, economics and marketing.

The hon the Minister has budgeted for R316,116 million to run his well-oiled machinery which is involved in organising the ordinary marketing of agricultural products. His department is also involved in co-ordinating the policy in respect of local trade and agricultural products. It also renders professional and auxiliary services, undertakes marketing and economic investigations, evaluates investigations conducted by certain bodies and renders auxiliary services to the National Marketing Council. It also promotes the dissemination of agricultural and economic information.

Our own affairs Minister has budgeted for R12,42 million. If one subtracts the amount for flood relief—which is R9,65 million—he is left with R2,177 million. What can he do with this meagre amount? He has no staff, no machinery, no know-how, no muscle and no might! I believe this portfolio should be scrapped, because it is meaningless. If, however, this own affairs concept has to carry on, for whatever it is worth, I make a humble plea to the hon the Minister of Agriculture to please assist our hon Minister wherever possible, so that he can in turn assist the agricultural sector of the Indian community.

The hon the Minister has men and machinery and an abundance of knowledge through his research facilities. Pass them on. The hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture is a very good musician, but he is not conducting an orchestra. He is operating as a one-man band!

I appeal to the hon the Minister to do his best in the circumstances, and with the hon the Minister’s assistance he will do better.

Mr Chairman, is the hon member aware that the Japanese have invented an instrument that can play the music of 10 people like a one-man band?

I saw that in Piccadilly Circus, Sir.

One burning issue that I want to highlight this afternoon is that I have identified 500 ha of agricultural land which has been inspected by Dr Jacobs and Dr Hugo of the Land Bank, as well as by the Regional Agricultural Manager of the First National Bank. With the Chair’s permission I would like to read certain extracts from the report from the Regional Agricultural Manager of the First National Bank, and I quote:

In addition to that it will also help with influx control and urbanisation.

The hon the Deputy Minister spoke earlier on about the timber giants. They have also looked at this farm, but this European gentleman is prepared to sell it to us as a Government institution so that we could streamline any problems with transfer etc. However, I am now told that we do not have the structures to purchase this land. We have been here for four years and only now do we realise that structures have to be set up. Why were we not told about this earlier? This is absolute nonsense and we must rectify this immediately. I appeal to the hon the Minister to use his influence under general affairs to purchase this farm.

So the Land Bank can come in.

I would like to discuss other items I noticed in the report of the department. I am happy to see that technikon training is encouraged and financial assistance is being made available to officials to improve their qualifications in specified fields. However, I see that there were no suitable candidates for university training during the year. What about considering people of colour?

I believe that the hon member for North Coast has covered the subdivision of agricultural land. However, I would like to emphasise that the reverse is the case with the Indian market gardeners because of the non-availability of land as a result of the Group Areas Act.

The prohibition of the use of certain herbicides in the Tala Valley by the hon the Minister is appreciated, as is the reduction in the price of yellow maize as announced last week. Ultimately it is the joint responsibility of the Government and the community to get all the citizens of this beautiful land to strive towards national objectives, including those involved in agriculture.

Finally I want to thank the hon the Minister and the hon the Deputy Minister and their staff for the assistance given to us and for their concern for Indian agriculture.

Mr Chairman, I shall try to reply to all the questions that were put to me, but hon members will realise that because of the shortage of time it will not be possible to answer in detail. I shall reply to some of these questions in writing.

I can quite understand the impatience of hon members of this House as far as land problems are concerned. However, I want to put it to them that I am afraid that as a general affairs Minister of Agriculture I do not have the ability to solve this problem. It is a constitutional problem and my hon colleague the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council will support me when I say that the necessary legislation is being prepared with a likelihood of quite possibly going through this session in order to make it possible even for Indian people in the so-called open areas to get hold of more land. I believe that agricultural land will be included in this step. We are still waiting for the results of the investigation being carried out under the chairmanship of my hon colleague. This committee has been appointed by the hon the State President himself. It is a very important and responsible committee.

I also want to thank my colleague the hon Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in this House for the very responsible way in which he is acting. It is a pleasure to negotiate with my hon colleague as he is a very calm person. Today I heard that he is a musician. My wife is also a musician and I can assure hon members that they are not always as calm as they look.

We have had discussions on several occasions on common matters and I want to report to this House that there has been a lot of development and a lot of progress has been made during the past year. I want to congratulate my hon colleague on his efforts and the successes he has attained in developing an administrative infrastructure for Indian agriculture in his department.

It is no use having agricultural land and everything at one’s disposal if one does not have a proper department to handle one’s problems. That is very important. My hon colleague has informed me that he has a very good working relationship with organised agriculture, which is also a very important factor for agricultural development in the Indian community. It is part and parcel of the structure of agricultural development and I should also like to thank him for the excellent co-operation that exists between him and me and between our respective departments.

My own experience in the field of agriculture is that one should, on a continual basis, consult the farmer himself. Now it is quite obvious that there are a few farmers in this Chamber as well; one could judge that from their attitude. I am thinking of my friend, the hon member for Camperdown, who is a real farmer and can cause a lot of trouble. Like most farmers, he can be very noisy and it seems to me some of the Indian farmers can also be very noisy and difficult. However, he is an old friend of mine and I enjoy debating with him.

My hon colleague invited me to visit Durban, but unfortunately I could not manage to do it. However, I am very thankful that my colleague, the hon the Deputy Minister, visited the Durban area where the Indian farmers are having a problem with marketing. A lot of progress developed from this visit and I shall report on that later.

There are other very important points, and some of them have been made by my hon colleague, but I wish to confirm them.

Firstly, I wish to start off with the special committee for the reconstruction of agriculture, which was appointed by the Government in April 1987. It is a special committee appointed by the Cabinet and maintains a very high standard. Its main task is to prepare a programme to assist deserving farmers to remain in agriculture.

Its first charge was to devise a scheme whereby deserving farmers, particularly those in the summer rainfall crop-growing areas who faced possible sequestration, to continue with their farming operations. That was the main purpose, but their second task was to recommend a longer term programme for reconstruction of agriculture; this is a very important point. In October 1987 it was agreed between myself and the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates that the committee’s investigations should embrace Indian agriculture as well. In addition to the representative from the Department of Local Government and Agriculture, two members of the Indian farming community in Natal were co-opted to the committee to look after the interests of Indian farmers.

The committee’s working programme may in certain respects overlap with the investigation conducted by the Cabinet Committee under the chairmanship of the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture, whose terms of reference are to look into the possibility of obtaining additional land for the settlement of Indian farmers. I wish to convey my personal congratulations to that hon Minister on his appointment, by the hon the State President himself, as chairman.

A preliminary survey is at present being conducted by the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply to ascertain where Indian farmers can be resettled. The report will be ready during May 1988.

I am acquainted with Dr Jacobs; he is a very hardworking and dedicated man in agriculture. I am sure this will be a report to take notice of.

The special committee has nevertheless taken cognisance of any financial assistance extended to Indian farmers under this programme since this assistance obviously has a bearing on the reconstruction of Indian agriculture.

Secondly, Indian farmers can make use of the whole range of resources available to agriculture. Although a recent survey indicates that besides a heavy reliance on banks for credit, Indian sugar cane and vegetable farmers predominantly avail themselves of finance from either the Land Bank or private persons.

Although the Agricultural Credit Board for Indians has provided a substantial amount of funds to so-called Category 3 farmers, this has no legal status at this moment as it does not operate in terms of legislation approved by Parliament.

In fact, the special committee believes that the number of Indian farmers does not justify the establishment of a separate Agricultural Credit Board to serve their needs. I believe that is the short-term position but as soon as more land becomes available even this financial structure will develop.

The committee recommended that the Agricultural Credit Board for Whites should also serve the Indian farming community and that Indian members should be co-opted to the Agricultural Credit Board whenever matters relating to Indian farmers are considered. Funds allocated to Indian agriculture in the annual Budget should be continued to be included in the Vote of the Ministry of Local Government and Agriculture in the House of Delegates.

In so far as the financing of individual Indian farmers is concerned, the Land Bank provides for the primary financial needs of the so-called middle class, full-time farmer who conducts farming on an economically viable farming unit which with the production factors available under normal circumstances can generate sufficient income to enable a farmer to meet his financial obligations, including any loan commitments. The normal loan facilities which are available to Indian farmers are mortgage, long-term loans and section 34 short and intermediate term loans. If co-operative movements should be established there would also be specialised financing systems to help farmers to get into production.

Mortgage loans from the Land Bank are granted only against a first bond on the farm property. Second or further bonds are granted where the Land Bank is the holder of the first and any subsequent bonds. Sometimes this causes a problem but that is the regulation according to the Land Bank Act. These mortgage loans are provided to effect improvements to fixed properties, to purchase stock and equipment; to take over existing bonds from banks, etc as well as other debts; as well as for the payment of costs incidental to the subdivision of land, the establishment of agricultural undertakings, the purchase of land, and for any other purchase connected with or incidental to farming.

The Land Bank Act stipulates that a mortgage loan may not exceed the fair agricultural pastoral value of the land concerned. The maturity of these loans normally ranges from five to 25 years. The interest rate payable on a long-term loan is currently 12% per annum.

I want to interrupt myself at this stage. I have made investigations concerning agricultural finance for many years. Even in the international world the Land Bank is a model as far as agricultural financing is concerned, taking into account the specific conditions of agriculture. Agriculture has its own distinctive problems and it differs from all other sectors. The Land Bank is a financial institution which can handle even Indian agricultural development in South Africa, as has been the case for White agricultural development in South Africa.

Section 34 of the Land Bank Act stipulates that loans by the Land Bank are granted to owners of land and lessees of farm property upon completion by them of a promissory note to cover their credit requirements of a short and medium-term nature. All the necessary schemes are available and hon members can make a study of that as well.

My time is short but I want to react to one very important point which was raised here concerning the R400 million. My hon colleague approached the hon the Minister of Finance and consulted him on the position of the R400 million which has not been taken up by the Administration: House of Assembly, that is to say by the White community. The hon the Minister answered him, but I want to react further on this point.

I am glad to say that we have good co-operation between the two departments of agriculture and the special committee which I have mentioned. I have already informed Minister Naicker that the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply received the amounts of R30 million and R185 million of the R400 million for the 1987-88 and 1988-89 financial years respectively. The remainder will only be allocated to the department for the 1989-90 financial year. As hon members are aware, however, the R400 million was committed by the Cabinet to the Administration: House of Assembly, that is to say the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, over more than one financial year and it is therefore not possible to transfer part of the commitment to the Administration: House of Delegates. I must say, however, that my hon colleague was invited by the hon the Minister of Finance to take part in further consultations in this respect.

However, in view of the aforementioned facts and due to the fact that the original amount of R400 million will eventually be fully utilised by the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, I regret that I cannot accede to the request that some of the funds be allocated to Indian farmers.

I am of the opinion that the Ministerial Committee, under the chairmanship of the hon the Minister of Local Government and Agriculture in this House, should, when submitting its recommendations to the Cabinet, also point out the financial implications thereof. The Cabinet will then have to take a decision in this regard and I am sure that my colleague, the hon the Chairman of the Ministers’ Council, will assist in making this representation.

I can tell hon members that Dr Jacobs is an expert. There is a very good connection between Dr Jacobs and the hon the Minister of Finance. I am giving the hon the Minister a good tip now. [Interjections.] He must therefore make use of this man.

Mr Chairman, my time has nearly expired. The hon member for Camperdown mentioned the problem with regard to the Tala Valley and, in what I think is his usual way of stating his case, said that nothing had been done. [Interjections.] I have here a report of two and a half pages long and instead of reading this report I shall send the hon member a copy of it so that he may make a good study of it. I hope that when my next budget is due for discussion in this Chamber, he will congratulate me. [Interjections.] I shall make it available to the hon member.

In the one or two minutes still available I want to say that my hon colleague and I have written to one another on a regular basis regarding the temporary farmers’ market at Durban. He has requested me to appoint a capable person to assist in resolving this matter to the satisfaction of all the parties involved. I have agreed to this request and I have a specific person in mind. He is a very able man. He is an absolute specialist on fresh produce markets and as soon as the negotiations have been finalised with the gentlemen concerned, I shall inform my hon colleague accordingly. I trust that this delicate and very important matter for the Indian farmers will be resolved. [Interjections.]

I want to react to some of the hon members’ remarks. In his usual way, the hon member for Camperdown said that the Marketing Act should be scrapped. We have had many discussions and debates on the Marketing Act as well as on the philosophy of agricultural marketing in South Africa.

I do not want to repeat myself, but the conditions of agricultural marketing are different from the marketing of any other commodity. We have many examples of this in South Africa. One moment one has a surplus, and the next moment one has to import staple food, as we did two or three years ago. It is also not only a matter of importing staple food like maize or wheat, which we also had to import. It is also a matter of the quality of that importation. We cannot build a food strategy and industry with the dumping of surpluses by other countries. That is exactly the situation at the moment.

I agree with the statement made by the hon member, who is not here at the moment, that we must be very concerned about the production of especially our staple food such as grain. However, at the moment we have a surplus. We have to export maize at a loss. Therefore, the Maize Board has developed a very efficient marketing strategy by way of giving quantity discounts on the basis of maize which was taken up by the industry last year, which causes a decline of more than 6% on the consumer price of yellow maize. Yellow maize is related to many other food industries in South Africa, such as cheese, all the dairy products, meat …

Poultry.

… poultry, etc. Yellow maize is therefore the basis of many foodstuffs in South Africa. Why is it possible that the Maize Board can be so efficient in its whole marketing strategy? It is because it is acting in accordance with a marketing scheme in terms of the Marketing Act of this Parliament. Otherwise it would not be possible. I want to predict that if one scraps the maize scheme tomorrow, one will have absolute chaos in South Africa. One can scrap a marketing scheme in the United States and one will have chaos. The same applies to Australia, Europe and Japan. Even a staple food like rice in Japan in the Far East is controlled by the government to a certain extent. Why does my hon friend always argue in this manner, saying that we must scrap the Marketing Act? I hope this will be the last year …

He is resigning from Parliament.

Well, maybe I can convince him after he has resigned from Parliament. [Interjections.] I do not think I can convince my friend. He is a very difficult old farmer.

He has a scheme for the marketing of cabbages.

I listened very carefully to the remarks made by the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition …

[Inaudible.]

Order! I will be pleased if the hon member for Camperdown would withdraw the statement he made.

I withdraw it, Sir.

… about the position 40 years ago when a certain area which was under cultivation by the Indian community was lost. Hon members have my sympathy. I therefore agree with the hon member.

Order! Will the hon member for Camperdown please resume his seat?

He is threatening me! [Interjections.]

I feel that that is something which we must bring to the attention of the Committee.

The hon the Leader of the Official Opposition is not here at the moment. I would also like to react to his points regarding the timber industry. The problem with timber development in South Africa is that it is a big industry. It is not an agricultural activity that is very popular with the ordinary small farmer. There is a lot of money involved. It is a long-term investment and that is one of our problems. The structure of timber development in South Africa is moving away from the ordinary farmer to big business. That is one of our problems. In certain countries one has specific Acts that control timber development so that it does not move away from the ordinary farmer.

The hon member for Actonville also referred to the R400 million. I have already answered that question.

The hon member for Havenside referred to the self-sufficiency of our staple food. The hon member is not present here, but I shall give him the necessary facts so that he can make a study of it. I can assure hon members that South Africa is supplying its people with the cheapest bread in the world. Not only do we supply the cheapest bread, but this bread is also of a very good quality. Hon members can go to Zimbabwe. We are competing with Zimbabwe as far as the price of their bread is concerned. We have made investigations and found that they put maize meal into their bread. This is what makes their bread cheaper. However, the shelf life of the bread is decreased in this process, because it affects the quality.

There again, the Wheat Board controls the price and quality of bread. One can buy bread in Messina. One can buy bread anywhere in South Africa. One will find that it is always fresh, and that it costs the same everywhere. Let me put this very straight: The policy of deregulation does not mean no regulation. There must still be regulation to a certain extent. We cannot deregulate wheat and bread altogether.

*The hon member for Lenasia East spoke Afrikaans. Unfortunately he is not here, but this does give me a short respite. [Interjections.] He also talked about the problem of the availability of land. We hope this will be solved very soon.

Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity I had to participate here. It was a privilege.

†One has to act quite differently when one comes from the House of Assembly to the House of Delegates. The way agriculture is debated, is quite different from what it is in the House of Assembly. Well, they say: A change is as good as a holiday. However, I must say I have listened to some very good speeches today. Most of them did not sound like holiday speeches. Many hon members have attacked our policy. I have respect for their problem. The Cabinet has taken notice of it and I hope that in the coming years it will be solved. The only plea that I have at this very moment is for hon members please to be patient. Let us not start shouting at one another because in that way we will never solve the political problems of this country, let alone our agricultural problems.

Vote agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

Mr Chairman, I move:

Agreed to.