Mr. Speaker, I move—

Sir, this Bill deals with various administrative matters relating to the Public Service Commission. In opposing the Second Reading of this Bill we on this side made it clear that our objections were directed towards clause 4. It was the contents of clause 4 which prompted us to oppose the Second Reading. Firstly, Sir, we were opposed to the arbitrary powers of transfer of non-Whites from the control of the Public Service Commission to the control of non-White authorities when, in the first instance, this could be done without the consent of the official or employee concerned and, secondly, when it could be done without protection as to salary, promotion and other personal rights of the employee or the official concerned.

At the Second Reading we accepted the necessity that trained start would be required when the responsibility for the administration of any particular department of State was transferred from the Republican Government to a particular communal authority in so far as the affairs of that communal authority were concerned; in other words, when the social welfare of the Coloured people is transferred for administrative purposes to the Coloured Representative Council, quite obviously staff is required and a transfer from the Public Service to the Coloured Representative Council would become necessary. Similarly, when the responsibility for the education of a particular communal group is to be transferred to the council responsible for that group, staff would be required. Sir, this has been done in the case of White officials and employees under the Public Service Commission in the past; transfers have taken place to provincial administrations, for instance, where those officials have been absorbed in the provincial service under the control of the provincial council. They have been transferred to statutory bodies where, with their consent, they have taken up employment under the control of those statutory bodies. Sir, the amendment which was moved during the Committee Stage and which was accepted, removes, so far as we on this side of the House are concerned, the arbitrary and objectionable aspects of the powers which were to be exercised unilaterally by the Commission without the consent or collaboration of the official or the employee concerned. That arbitrary power has now been removed and in those circumstances we will support the Third Reading of this Bill.

Sir, when the House adjourned I was dealing with the two groups into which hon. members opposite divide themselves as soon as we speak about labour and the labour problem. The one group, of course, does not want to find any solution to the problem, and the other group on that side consists of hon. members who sit and wait until we make suggestions and who then seize upon those suggestions. I referred to what happened in the mining industry, and I was on the point of referring to what happened to a suggestion which the hon. member for Durban Point made in connection with fork lift drivers. Within a few weeks the following was announced—

Sir, I could go on in this vein. Earlier this year we had the instance of the hon. member for Rosettenville referring to the greater employment of non-Whites in hospitals. Within a few weeks the M.E.C.s in control of hospitals in the Transvaal and in the Cape fell over each other to tell us how they were going to make greater use of non-Whites. For example, I have here a cutting that reads as follows—

Sir, there is always an excuse. Concessions are made, and then it is still said: “No, our policy still stands.” There sits the Minister of Labour. He and the other Ministers are, after all, in touch with the Government departments, and they ought to know where the causes of friction lie. Why do they not make concrete suggestions? We on the Opposition side are only here while the House of Assembly is in session, and the session only lasts for five to six months. What happens during the rest of the year? What happens, in fact, after the two or three hours have passed in which a Minister’s Vote is discussed? We can only indicate guide lines. That side is fond of referring to our policy, and now the next speaker on that side must tell me what is wrong with the United Party’s labour policy when we say that “we shall devote special attention to the education and re-education of our Whites … to enable them to do new and better work in an economy that is progressing technologically”. Why do they reject it when there are increasingly more people today making a study of the labour question and agreeing with the United Party’s standpoint? Here I have an article that appeared in Volkshandel of last August. It reads, inter alia, as follows (translation)—

Sir, mention is made here of the “big potential” of the worker and when reference is made to “big potential” it means only one thing, and that is that that potential is not being utilized at present. Whose fault is it? Is it our fault, or is it the fault of the hon. the Minister of Labour? He is the person who is in a position to ensure that the potential has to be utilized. How is one going to upgrade the White worker in a technological society unless it is done in terms of the United Party’s policy?

Questions were put to the hon. the Minister, inter alia, by the hon. member for Hillbrow, about the changing labour pattern in South Africa. We are still waiting for replies. We can ask questions and offer guide lines, but positive action must come from those who are in power today. We are doing our job here. As I have said, there are people who have made a study of this, and whether one now agrees with them or not, one finds comments such as these which appeared in the series of articles in the Sunday Times: It is stated that wherever one applies this process, one finds that “Whites will move up to better paid posts in supervisory and managerial roles, as skilled Whites will always be in demand”. In other words, if the State honours its obligations and wants to positively implement the United Party policy, a big future awaits South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I want to tell the hon. member for Durban Central this afternoon that the National Party is not static, like the United Party. We are a dynamic young party. [Interjections.] The National Party can adapt itself to these problems. I want to tell the hon. member, moreover, that we do not allow ourselves to be taken in tow by the Sunday Times. The National Party formulates its own policy.

Sir, taking part in this debate this afternoon, I first want to thank the Minister and the Department for the annual report … (Interjections.] Those hon. members have so little to say thank you for that they always have to cackle and crow when one is saying thank you. I want to tell the hon. the Minister and the Department: We are grateful for this annual report that we have received. We are grateful to see that in April, 1969, a manpower survey was again conducted. In that manpower survey of April, 1969, we find that there was a total of 3 955 887 economically active persons. We see that 30,5 per cent of these are Whites. If we look at the Industrial Council Agreements that were negotiated, according to the report, we find that there were altogether 166 of them in the year 1969. We find that in 62 of these agreements provision was made for fringe benefits such as pension, provident, holiday, medical aid, training, etc. The pension benefits involve 549 300 White workers. It also appears from the report that 274 600 workers joined the medical aid scheme. In the light of the fact that there are 1 318 000 Whites economically active today, I want to ask whether progress is being made in the sense that more Whites are being included in these provident or medical funds. I would be glad if the hon. the Minister could tell us how many of our workers are really included in these medical funds and in the other funds. These funds serve a good purpose, because today medical expenses are very high.

I also see in this annual report that three agreements were concluded in which provision is made for the establishment of training schemes. In 1969 an Act was piloted through this Parliament in which provision is made for training schemes. I am glad to see that in this connection three Industrial Council Agreements have already been concluded with employer organizations. I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister could tell us how many workers are already included in these training schemes, and whether additional Industrial Council Agreements have, in the meantime, been concluded in connection with these matters.

But there is another matter that bothers me and which I should like to refer to. In this connection I should like to refer to a report that appeared in this morning’s Transvaler. The heading of the report reads: “Welders struggle to find work”. This report relates to my constituency, and I should like the hon. the Minister to investigate this matter. I should like to quote this report, and I want the United Party and all the people, who shout so loudly, to listen. It reads as follows (translation)—

That is attributable to your uncontrolled policy.

It is not our policy that is uncontrolled. If there has ever been a controlled policy, it is that of the National Party. But if we were to implement the United Party’s policy and be led by certain bodies in this country, we would regularly have the kind of reports, which I am now referring to, in both the morning and evening newspapers. That is why I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to investigate this matter and determine whether it is true that there are welders on the East Rand who are without work. If this is the case, I ask the hon. the Minister to ensure that these people get jobs as soon as possible. But I do not believe that the information that trade union organizer gave to the newspaper is altogether correct. I therefore ask that the matter be investigated.

But let us come back to the policy of the hon. the Minister. What do we find the position to have been daring the past few years? Let us look at a few of the newspaper reports that appeared during that period. I am referring to a few headings: “Labour Muddle Swings into 1970”; “Labour Shortage; Builders Blast Government”, “Plans to end flow of skilled workers to South Africa”, and then “Government slammed on labour policy”. In spite of all these headings, and in spite of all these various bodies and persons continually trying to give advice to the Minister of Labour, the National Party continues to implement its policy of the ordered employment of Whites and non-Whites in the Republic of South Africa. It is specifically as a result of this National Government’s policy—and we are grateful for the fact—that we do not need to read in our newspapers, as one does in overseas newspapers, that there are so many people who are jobless. Today it is so vital to us and to our country to ensure that ordered employment takes place. It is today a fail accompli that the White man and the Black man will have to work shoulder to shoulder in our factories. Since this is the case, I want to advocate this afternoon that the hon. the Minister and employers ensure that certain things within those factories are changed, since it has now become necessary to work together and to help each other to keep the wheels of our labour rolling. We know that it is inevitable that the White man and the Black man will have to work together, but then we ask the employers—and here I make a very serious plea to them—to help to preserve the labour peace in the country. If we want to preserve the labour peace in the country, and this Government has done so for 22 years, there is a heavy task and responsibility resting on the industrialists of our country. I want to tell them that there are certain matters that our workers do not like, matters that can be put right. There are the toilet facilities in our factories. We want to ask our employers and the Department to ensure that where Whites and the non-Whites are working together, the toilet facilities are properly separated and that maintenance is carried out on a proper basis. We also want to ask that the Whites and the non-Whites shall not have to stand in queues next lo each other when pay is being distributed, because we do not want to have that friction developing between our White and non-White workers. This afternoon I want to advocate to the hon. the Minister that White and non-White workers do not clock in and out in the same office. It must be done in such a way that they do not have to mingle. These things cause friction between our White and non-White workers. Let us look at the canteen facilities. We want to ask that the canteen facilities be established in such a way that the Whites and the non-Whites do not have to go through the same booths. I then want to refer to the first-aid stations. We know that everyone wants to help govern the country properly, but when we come to things where separation can be introduced properly, we must not create friction.

Today we ask the industrialists to help, thereby ensuring that proper separation is established. This must be done because it is necessary for the Whites and the non-Whites to work together in our industries. When I speak of the fact that they must work together, I am not referring to the United Party’s policy. I mean that the Whites will always be in control of those posts. Ft is inevitable that they must work together on many occasions. It is these small matters that cause the friction at factory premises. I also want to appeal to the hon. the Minister and his Department to carry out regular inspections. They can thereby ensure that these measures are properly complied with and that separation and those facilities are provided for the White worker and the non-White worker. They must be provided in order to avoid friction in our factories. [Time expired]

If the United Party wants its labour policy to succeed, as we have already heard, it means only one thing, i.e. that an open labour field has to be established where all races can participate on an equal footing. This inevitably means that certain fundamental principles of our industrial law in South Africa will have to be deleted. In short, the United Party’s labour policy can be summed up in these terms. It will mean that what has been built up conventionally through the years, must be destroyed. The legal provisions forming our industrial law in South Africa consist of two things. Firstly they must establish industrial peace in South Africa, and secondly, and this is very important, they give recognition to the multi-national set-up of our country. Those are the pillars on which our industrial law in South Africa rests. The Industrial Conciliation Act of 1956 gives recognition and protection to this conventional colour bar that has developed in South Africa through the years. I am reminded of the fact that in a debate this year the hon. member for Maitland said here that he acknowledged this conventional colour bar.

Are you cross about that?

No, I am not cross about it. I am only quoting what the hon. member said. The United Party claims that it advocates this conventional separation, but at the same time it states that one of these basic principles, section 77 of the Industrial Conciliation Act must be deleted. But one cannot say that one accepts certain conventions and then want to have the legislation deleted that is established to protect those conventions. That is illogical. Now the hon. Opposition, and also the hon. member for Yeoville who is making so much noise now, say that it must be deleted because it does not mean anything in practice, since statutory job reservation only affects 2 per cent of the labour market. I want to allege that this low percentage of statutory job reservation is specifically the result of section 77, because it gave the South African worker that additional ability to negotiate. It gave him status to be able to negotiate, according to which he can arrange certain administrative delimitations for himself in co-operation with his employer and within his labour organization. I also think that section 77 was a deterrent to the industries that wanted to exploit the labour market at the expense of the White worker. I think it was a safety valve for the White worker in South Africa. That is why we have this presently low job reservation percentage, i.e. 2 per cent. If we were to delete section 77 it would mean only one thing, i.e. that in the White worker’s negotiations with his employer he would not have that statutory authority. A person’s capacity for negotiation depends, after all, on the authority at one’s disposal. If this statutory authority, which is given to the White worker, were to be taken away from him, I think we would have many more problems in South Africa. We cannot so easily link section 77 to the low percentage of job reservation.

Why do you not apply it then?

The hon. member asks why we do not apply it. I have persona) experience of the implementation of this section. A few years ago there was a great deal of unrest and uncertainty in the mining industry, specifically with respect to the underground mining officials' association, [Interjections.] I shall come to that in a moment. There were problems in respect of the samplers and ventilation officials. In their negotiations they could not succeed in convincing their employers of the fact that it was creating problems for them and that it was placing them in a position where they would have to compete with the Bantu in the mining industry on an unequal basis. After long negotiations the hon. the Minister could eventually succeed in establishing the industrial tribunal, in terms of section 77, for the purpose of investigating this dispute. I then want to tell hon. members that since the establishment of this industrial tribunal, and since the Minister made a statement in this connection, we have found the utmost peace and quiet in the mining industry; because our people have the assurance, and see in it the guarantee that their position as White workers can be protected, since they must compete with the Bantu on an unequal basis.

We know that this investigation covered a very wide field. We want to ask the hon. the Minister whether the industrial tribunal has progressed so far that it can now eventually place its recommendations before the Minister. It is important to this industry. It is necessary for them because, as I have said, there were many problems so much so that some of the other trade unions were also affected by it, for example the Mineworkers’ Union. We look forward with great expectations to the recommendations of the industrial tribunal which, as provided for in section 77, must protect this last guarantee, this last fortress of the White worker in South Africa that the hon. members want to destroy.

Mr. Chairman, I wonder sometimes why it is that the Minister blushes. Now I know. He blushes, because he has to keep on rectifying the mistakes he is making, and he blushes again this afternoon. Last year the hon. the Minister told us in this House that, as far as the Bantu miner’s advancement in the homelands was concerned, the sky was the limit, He still says that. That is so. I take it that the Minister has not changed his mind as far as that is concerned. He must tell us “yes” or “no”. He virtually scrapped industrial conciliation as far as the Bantustans, or the homelands, are concerned. Today he suddenly replied to the hon. member for Rustenburg—a put-up job obviously. The hon. member for Rustenburg asked him to introduce the scrapped legislation, and immediately he reacted and said “yes, we will re-introduce industrial reconciliation legislation in the Bantustans”. Sir, he talks of peace in the labour field. I want to ask him a question. I want to ask him, if the labourer in the Bantustans is going to progress to the highest levels that can be obtained in mining, will he encourage the White miner to teach him the work? Is that going to be part of his programme? Because very soon, according to the Prime Minister, there is going to be an independent Bantustan, a sovereign, independent state in the Transkei. Who is going to teach these Black miners to reach the levels that they have to reach in order to do their work properly? Is he going to encourage that? What is he going to say to the Mineworkers Union now?

He pointed a finger at TUCSA and he said he could not trust them. They were too “pink” for his liking. I want to ask him a question again. We have asked him the question before, but he has not answered it yet. Does he think that TUCSA is an enemy of the White worker; and if so, in which way? He must tell us.

I will answer you in my reply.

I want to leave it at that. There is another matter I want to bring to the notice of the Minister. I want to ask him whether or not he is in favour of immigrant White skilled workers coming into this country. Because if he is and if that is the policy of this Government, then he must realize that for the employment of every White skilled immigrant worker in this country he will have to bring in at least five Bantu to keep that skilled immigrant in employment. Is he going to allow the Bantu to come in, or is he going to bar these people from coming in? If he bars them from coming in, the White immigrants will have no work. He must bear that in mind.

I will leave that now, but I want to deal with one or two points that affect the White, Coloured, Indian and Bantu workers. I want to deal firstly with unclaimed money under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. I have here two Government Gazettes, containing no fewer than 8 000 names of persons of all colours who have not been traced and who have not been able to collect moneys due to them. Last year and the year before I asked the Minister whether he could please bring in some form which should be used by the employers to make sure that every worker who is injured is able to be traced. I do not know whether the Minister has done anything about it, but I see that on May 5th and on March 10th of this year there were two Government Gazettes containing altogether almost 100 pages of names, and there are virtually 80 names on each page. These people still have money owing to them and I want to know what steps the Minister is going to take to see that these people get their money. It may be a very small amount of money, or it may be a large amount. There are some figures here which reach up to R1 000; others are only a rand or two, and in some cases only cents. But the point is that not enough care is taken to make sure that these people are traced to their homes or from job to job.

Then I want to talk about the people who are injured and have to stop work temporarily or permanently. I want to know whether something cannot be done to make sure that the economic consequences that flow from a sudden cutting off of the earnings of the breadwinner can be investigated to ensure that the families will not have to suffer any privation at all. The hon. the Minister knows that it is a terrible blow for a family when the income of that family is suddenly cut off by the breadwinner being taken to hospital as the result of an accident. He may be off work for a short time, or for months and months. We find that some families suddenly find that they do not have money for the following month’s rent. Things like that are terribly important to a family, if they cannot pay the next month’s rent and if they cannot pay their hire-purchase commitments. I find that in some of the families where there is a son or a daughter or two children at university, there is trouble in keeping the children at the university during this period, especially if it happens at the beginning of the year when the fees are due and they cannot pay the fees for this higher education. The hon. the Minister knows what a blow that can be to any family, so I ask him to find ways and means of encouraging, in the first place, the employer to pay some part of the salary of the worker to the family that is suddenly cut off from the earnings of the breadwinner.

Then I want to ask the Minister whether he will not encourage the worker himself to do everything in his power to insure himself over and above the insurance cover that he enjoys under the Workmen’s Compensation Act; in other words, to take out private insurance, if at all possible. Medical aid societies will not pay for accidents which occur during working hours, and I think it is very important that the worker himself should be allowed to insure himself against accidents in respect of which he has no insurance cover if he is already covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

I think the whole question of the amount of compensation paid to workers should be reviewed and brought up to an amount which is in keeping with the present value of money. Under the legislation recently introduced by the hon. the Minister a man can earn R5 460 and still be covered by workmen’s compensation, but if that man sustains an injury and becomes 100 per cent disabled, the best pension that he can possibly get is only R1 800 per annum or R150 per month. Out of that amount the man has to keep his family going; he has to pay his rent and meet all his other commitments and meet his future medical expenses as well. Sir, I do not know how these people manage. My plea to the hon. the Minister is that these amounts of money which are being paid as compensation to people for partial disablement or 100 per cent incapacitation, should be reviewed immediately and brought up to a level which is commensurate with the present-day value of money. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Rosettenville asked the hon. the Minister quite a few questions, and I believe that he will get satisfactory replies in that connection. He asked, inter alia, who would train the Black man in the homelands. I should now like to ask him a question: Would he tell me who will train the Black man here in South Africa where the United Party wants to throw open all spheres of work to the Black man? Might I just add; The difference between their policy and our policy is that in the homelands the Black man can climb to the highest rung in terms of our policy, while here in South Africa the United Party wants to have him climb to the highest rung above the White worker.

The hon. member for Durban-Central concluded his speech with the word: If we want to carry out the policy of the United Party, there is a fine future awaiting South Africa, Sir, do you know what kind of a future it is? It is a future for the Black man here in South Africa, a future for the materialist and capitalist here in South Africa. I want to tell the hon. member again that the National Party regards the survival of the Whites as being more important and valuable than any temporary economic prosperity which they project for the future. Sir, I say “temporary prosperity”, because if we were to abandon our policy, that prosperity would only be temporary, and it would also be short-lived and disastrous for the Whites here. In our policy of controlled employment of non-Whites, and the proper protection of the Whites, lies the key to the racial peace we are experiencing here in South Africa at present. The United Party and the materialists, who are incited by the English-language Press, fancy that here in South Africa, they have black gold which they can simply mine without considerations for the price that has to be paid for it. We are also in favour of economic growth here in South Africa, but we are not prepared to sell our birth right for a mess of pottage. They had the opportunity—and the hon. member for Turffontein would do well to listen because at that time he was still wearing a diaper. As I have said, they had the opportunity to develop South Africa economically. They had enough White labour for that, but they did not want to utilize it. You see, then Mother England had to be fed while South Africa came second.

We on this side of the House are in favour of order in the country. We are not, like the United Party, prepared to allow an uncontrolled influx of non-White labour into our White cities for the purpose, as they say, of selling their labour on the best market. But even more than that—the non-Whites must come on a family basis and they must also obtain proprietary rights here. We, on the other hand, guarantee our White worker protection against that United Party policy, the policy of “the rate for the job”. Actually their policy is nothing more than allowing non-White labour to stream into our cities unchecked, thereby driving our White workers out of their jobs. But when we repeatedly lay this accusation at the United Party’s door, they deny it. Let us look at what is written in this booklet of theirs, this peddlars’ pamphlet. Here on page 7 it is stated —

We agree with that, of course. It continues—

In other words, we have here the following: No restrictions … [Interjections.] Goodness me, here I have just quoted that there must be no restriction on non-White labour. Otherwise there is a misprint in the booklet I have here. After all, it is stated very clearly here that there must be no restrictions whatsoever on the non-Whites with respect to the kind of work they can do. What does this mean other than throwing the gates open to them? The hon. member for Maitland recently let the cat out of the bag by saying that the White worker does not want protection and does not need it either. Surely this agrees with what is stated in this booklet. The hon. member for Maitland said very clearly, after all, that they do not intend to protect the White worker. Well, if that is his approach to the White worker, he is living in a fool’s paradise. It is clear that they obviously have no contact with the White worker. All that counts, as far as they are concerned, are materialistic interests.

Is that what happens in Boksburg?

I wish I could get the opportunity to say a little about Boksburg, because there their biggest opportunist rode on the back of the National Party in an endeavour to win a seat there. He was too scared to say what his policy was, and so the National Party’s policy was pushed forward. Sir, I do not want to go any further. Unfortunately my time is limited, but I should still like to make a request to the Minister. There are many pensioners who are still able to do useful work, and who would like to do this work. However, they do not see their way clear to doing a full day’s work. There are also many of our industries who want to make use of their services, because their services are only needed for a few hours per day. Unfortunately they are prevented by Industrial Council Agreements from doing the work, because certain wages are prescribed and no provision is made for shorter working hours and accordingly lower wages. I therefore want to ask the hon. the Minister whether consideration cannot be given to lifting certain of these wage measures. Those pensioners could thereby get the opportunity to do certain work on a part-time basis. While we are now speaking about pensioners, I also want to point out that there are many married women who are perhaps, because of circumstances, able to work for half a day. Their children are perhaps at school, and they are therefore able to do very useful work in the mornings. They could consequently make a big contribution to our economy and to the development of our country.

Mr. Chairman, in the very limited time at my disposal, I should like to make use of this opportunity to compare the National Party’s policy with that of the United Party. In this debate we get the opportunity to compare the policy of these two parties. I want to begin by saying that the National Party’s policy actually has two very important foundation stones. In the first place this policy promotes the interests of the White workers in our country for their utmost benefit, and in the second place our policy also takes care of the interests of the non-Whites, particularly those of the Bantu. There is also a third consideration. Our labour policy is very closely linked to the decentralization of our industries and the expansion and strengthening of the industries in the homelands and in the border areas.

In order to clarify this aspect, I want to try and make the following important point. The National Party is the White worker’s party. It is the National Party that has given the White worker's interests the best protection in the past and ensured those interests. Historically this is true. It is also the National Party which takes the White worker under its wing in the present age in which we are living. It is within the framework of the National Party’s policy that the White workers are presented with a future which embodies occupational security. If I ask myself the simple, but very important question: “what is troubling our people?”, then the answer is that the White workers in South Africa are essentially looking for occupational security. That is what is disturbing our people. Our White workers knew that this Government stands by them, and they know it. Because the White workers know it, they leave the safeguarding of the future in the National Party's hands. That is why they have consistently voted for the National Party throughout the years and why they will also vote for them in the future. The National Party gives our workers that security by way of its policy. That is why the workers of South Africa are also prepared to leave the future in the hands of the National Party, because they trust the National Party. The National Party refuses to use the workers in our country as barter. The workers in South Africa trust the National Party, because it has given them job reservation and the industrial colour bar. That is their guarantee. As we heard in the House yesterday, without that job reservation our country would be faced with strikes that could ruin it. That is a foregone conclusion. The White worker in this country, as in any other country, is entitled to State protection. It is only under National Party rule that they can get that protection.

What protection is there for the White worker under the policy of the United Party? The United Party is always telling us how non-Whites must be trained and placed on the lower rungs in the industries, and that the Whites would then progress to higher posts. They are constantly asking that the Bantu be used productively. That is why the Bantu must sell his labour on the best market. Wherever he offers his labour he must be able to do so without any restrictions. If that is the case, the other important foundation stone, i.e. influx control, falls away. But what is more, the United Party also advocates that the Bantu should come along and settle himself here on a family basis as against the principle of migratory labour of the National Party They want the Bantu to bring his family with him and that he should even have the right to own land in the White urban areas. The United Party’s policy is a dangerous one. There is no future in it for the Whites, only dangers. But neither is there any future in it for the Bantu, because they will be placed in a position where they will be subservient for the rest of their lives. Under their policy the Bantu will not have the opportunity to reach the highest rungs.

The survival of the Whites is important to the National Party. It is more important than any other possible temporary economic benefit. We want to keep our White cities White. But neither do we begrudge the non-Whites opportunities they have never before bad in this country. The National Party’s task is a difficult one. We want to acknowledge that. It is a difficult task because, on the one hand, we must keep the country’s economy at a high level and, on the other hand, because we must also ensure that our policy succeeds. The United Party sits and waits and would like to see our policy failing so that they can say that it is a failure.

There are problems that we are faced with, such as the opposition we are encountering from certain trade unions. We know that there are also industrialists who are opposed to it, industrialists who are only thinking of their pockets and not of the survival of the Whites. We know that there are labour shortages. We shall not ignore the fact. But we also realize that labour shortages are characteristic of a country that is developing so rapidly. It is the result of our country’s sustained development and growth over the years. Full employment is one of the National Party’s greatest achievements as against the misery and dangers resulting from unemployment.

In conclusion I just want to say that apart from the fact that there are labour shortages, we must not lose sight of what the National Party is doing to combat that problem. If I had the time at my disposal I should have liked to point out how progress has been made in training. Today there are work and training opportunities for everyone. Anyone who wants to work can work, and anyone who wants to be trained can be trained at university, high school or technical college level, etc. However, I am not going to bother hon. members and the Minister with unnecessary figures. This also applies to our selective immigration policy which endeavours to supplement that shortage.

I want to conclude by advocating to the hon. the Minister particularly with respect to my own constituency, that his Department's inspectors should ensure that our policy in our factories and our industries is implemented. There are places where the racial separation is such that we cannot put up with it. Our people feel that we are leaving them in the lurch in this manner. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to help us in this connection with the aid of his inspectors. I also want to appeal to the trade unions. They are the watchdogs that must take action and help in the implementation of the National Party’s policy. In conclusion I want to advocate to the Minister that more inspectors be appointed to ensure that the Government’s policy is implemented. The National Party’s labour policy is clear; it gives us the labour peace and quiet that has already been in existence for a very long time. This labour peace was brought about thanks to this responsible Government that has succeeded in giving us security, a sound growth rate, work for all who want to work and a fair wage for everyone.

Mr. Chairman, one of the important matters which has come to the fore during the discussion of this Vote, is the attitude of the Opposition. What it amounts to is that they regard labour purely as an economic matter. The Opposition is only concerned with more and more workers who, regardless of social considerations, have to produce more profits. Basically there is no difference in this regard between the views and outlook of the hon. member for Houghton and those of the representatives of constituencies neighbouring on hers, i.e. the hon. member for Yeoville and the hon. member for Hill [brow. Their constituencies are situated in the same geographic region. In regard to these matters they broadcast on the same wavelength. The one may broadcast more loudly than the other over that wavelength, but basically these two parties broadcast on the same wavelength. As opposed to that, there is the National Party view, which supports economic progress. In fact, if this were not the case. South Africa would not have been able to be one of the fastest-developing countries in the world today. If it were not for the fact that we supported economic progress, we would not have had a standard of living surpassed by very few countries in the world today. To the National Party, economic considerations have never been decisive as far as dealing with the national situation is concerned. To us the social aspect of our multi-national country is a determining factor, also as regards our labour situation. Something else has also come to the fore in this debate, and that is the protesting of the United Party against our description of their policy as amounting to opening the flood-gates to allow the free influx of Black labour. I think it has become necessary to indicate categorically the exact extent to which the flood-gates would be opened if the United Party’s policy were to be applied. Before dealing with this, I first want to deal with the various individual matters raised in this House.

I want to start by referring to the hon. member for Bloemfontein East, who delivered his maiden speech here. I want to congratulate him most sincerely on the speech he made, because it was indicative of study and an understanding of affairs of current interest in the labour world. The hon. member made a plea here in regard to increasing productivity. He pointed out that this was the task not only of the State and of the employer, but also of the employee, and for that reason I cannot support it strongly enough. I said here before and want to repeat that the peace which is prevailing in South Africa in the field of labour is attributable to the administration and legislation of the National Party, and in conjunction with that, to the loyalty of our workers towards South Africa. The hon. member praised that spirit, and I want to thank him for that and express the confidence that he shall continue to show this interest in labour matters in this House.

The hon. member for Hercules made a plea in regard to the training of trainees at Westlake. This is a matter to which we pay attention continually; in fact, at the moment we are again considering a further subsidy increase for them. We trust that it will contribute towards engendering added interest.

Are you aware of the fact that too few students go there?

Yes, and does the hon. member know the reason for that? It is the tremendously wide employment opportunities in South Africa. This is the main reason why we have so few there. There are so many employment opportunities that there is no need for the people to go there for training. For that reason the allowances are increased from time to time. While I was still Deputy Minister of Education quite a few years ago, we calculated that it cost the State, and at that time we spoke in terms of pounds, £1 000 per annum to train one single person there. This is because of the expensive training, since there are few people who make use of that expensive apparatus and of the staff. In spite of that, we increased the allowances and, as I have just indicated, they are to be increased further. We are in fact competing with our own prosperous situation as regards employment opportunities in South Africa.

The school is not being advertised widely enough.

Since the hon. member has mentioned that, I may just as well furnish a few facts now which I wanted to mention to the hon. member for Hercules in any event. In regard to advertising, pamphlets are displayed on notice boards at magistrate’s offices, social welfare offices and also at the offices of the Department of Labour. When people conduct interviews with the officials of our department, their attention is drawn to the existing opportunities. In addition, articles are published in the Farmer’s Weekly. Previously, advertisements were placed in newspapers as well, but it was found that the costs were tremendously high. I do not want to mention the amounts now, but I just want to say we found that the expenditure in that regard was excessive. The radio is also being used. Recently the Secretary for the Department gave a talk over the 9 o’clock news service for the very reason of bringing this matter to the attention of people. Therefore, attention is in fact being given to this aspect on a fairly large scale.

†I now come to the hon. member for Houghton. The hon. member referred to the disparity in wages of skilled and unskilled workers. I must admit that there is a disparity which is due to a number of factors such as productivity, different standards of living, the type of industry involved and also the locality. Those are factors which affect the disparity in wages. I take it the hon. member is aware of the fact that new and amending wage agreements are continually being gazetted and that these instruments invariably prescribe higher wages for the unskilled worker, that is to say in this respect mostly for the Bantu, i want to quote the following particulars in this respect: During 1970 alone 50 such agreements were also declared binding on Bantu. By the end of 1970 altogether 94 wage agreements were in force which covered approximately 900 000 workers of whom 480 000 were Bantu. As far as wage determinations under the Wage Act are concerned, the Wage Board submitted 22 recommendations during 1970. Seven determinations were made. Altogether 76 determinations were in force at the end of last year which covered about 500 000 employees, of which 292 000 were Bantu.

As far as the activities of the Central Labour Board are concerned, I can only point out that they continually endeavour to get improvements in the wages of Bantu workers. At the request of the board, employers in the iron and steel industry, for example, agreed to up-grade about 232 occupations in a higher wage category, in consequence of which about 50 000 Bantu received wage increases of about 3 cents per hour. As far as the motor industry is concerned, a similar regarding took place. In 1970 the board scrutinized 104 agreements and submitted proposals in this respect, proposals intended to increase the wages for Bantu workers. I can also point out that the wage improvements effected during 1970 total over R11 million in respect of approximately 235 000 Bantu. During 1970, as far as the Teal increase is concerned, to get an idea of what the tendency is, the following will interest the hon. member: During 1970 wage increases varied between 7,8 per cent to 15,8 per cent for the lower-paid categories in the engineering industry, and from 8,4 per cent to 10.5 per cent for unskilled workers in the clothing industry. That indicates what the tendency is.

*I want to refer now to the hon. member for Pretoria West, who pleaded here for more use to be made of prison labour. It is the attitude of the Government that we want to reaccept the ex-prisoners as useful citizens, and for that reason I want to mention a few details in this regard. During 1970 use was made of the vocational services section of my department in respect of altogether 692 ex-prisoners, and 367 could be placed in employment. Furthermore, in terms of the Training of Artisans Act, long-term prisoners are also afforded an opportunity of doing trade tests so that they may continue performing their useful work. In conjunction with the Department of Prisons and the Department of National Education, 82 prisoners wrote the trade tests during 1970,

As regards the plea that we should force Indians who are still working in White areas, for example, to go and live and work in Indian townships, this is a matter which falls under the jurisdiction of my colleague, the Minister of Community Development, and I trust the hon. member will raise the matter on his Vote. I can only give the assurance, and this is the assurance which I also want to give the last speaker, the hon. member for Kempton Park, that in regard to the undesirable mixing of different races working together in the same employment situation, my department is continually engaged in rectifying that situation.

†I now come to the hon. member for Constantia. The hon. member expressed the view that Coloureds should be allowed increasing opportunities as far as white collar jobs are concerned. In this respect I can say that the Government is fully alive to the necessity of providing employment opportunities for all population groups in South Africa. In so far as Coloureds are concerned they are to be found in many spheres of employment, ranging from unskilled to the highest professional level. I need quote only one example in this respect, and that is that during the last six years the number of Coloured artisans alone increased from 19 000 to 28 500. The hon. member expressed the fear that the position of the White workers might be affected by the employment of Coloureds at lower wages. In this respect I can give him the assurance that where applicable the minimum rates of pay are in force in all such cases. As an example I would like to quote the exemption granted to the City Tramways, Cape Town, to permit of the engagement of Coloured bus drivers and conductors. That exemption was granted subject to the very clear proviso that they should not be paid lower wages than Whites employed in similar occupations.

The rate for the job.

What about Johannesburg?

I shall come to Johannesburg in a moment, and then the hon. member will be given more information when such information is relevant.

The hon. member for Brakpan raised the question here of the integration of provident and medical funds and wanted to know how many of our workers were at present integrated with such funds. In this regard I may announce that 575 000 workers are integrated with those funds. The hon. member also referred to the training schemes, a matter to which I had already replied yesterday. I mentioned the number of schemes which had been established in the building, engineering and motor industries. I also said yesterday evening that because the schemes had come into operation only recently, we were not in a position as yet to furnish the numbers at present benefiting from those schemes, but that when we met again in January, I would be in a position to give the details in this regard.

The hon. member referred to White welders who allegedly were unemployed because of the non-White’s entry into that sphere of employment. In the first place I want to say that my department and I are not aware of that. I shall ask my department to pay the necessary attention to the matter at once. I trust that the fact that the hon. member raised the matter here, will have the effect that they will give the necessary notification to my department so that we may investigate the matter immediately and place these people in suitable employment.

The hon. member also requested us to ensure that employers provided the necessary prescribed separate facilities to their White employees, such as toilets, payment, and docking-in facilities. A few months ago my department had a very extensive investigation made into this matter. During the recess a deputation of Members of Parliament from the East Rand, under the leadership of the hon. member raised these matters with me. In consequence of that, I caused an investigation to be made at factories on the East Rand so as to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Factories Act, and in the event of noncompliance, to ensure that it would be possible for us to remedy the situation. Therefore I want to give the hon. member the assurance that my department will continue to see to it that these facilities are established.

Then the hon. member for Bethal referred to the matter of the inquiry which had been conducted into job reservation in the mining industry with regard to sampling, surveying and ventilation. The hon. member rightly said that that had been a comprehensive inquiry; this is true. Because of that, the Industrial Tribunal could complete its inquiry only recently. The inquiry has now been completed; the report is being formulated and I have been informed by the Secretary that the report will be submitted to me before long, at which time I shall take the necessary steps in this regard.

The hon. member for Rosettenville raised a few matters. He referred, inter alia, to the suspension of the proclamation in the Bantu homelands and went on to ask me whether I still felt “the sky was the limit” for the Bantu there. Yes, yesterday I put it so clearly that there can be no doubt about the Government’s policy. I said it was our policy that the Bantu in the Bantu homelands might progress to the highest rung of the ladder in the economic sphere, in mining. These were the words I used in this House yesterday. We do not have an Afrikaans expression for “the sky is the limit”, but the highest rung of the ladder is an equivalent. I hope it is dear to the hon member.

May I put a question to the hon. the Minister? Does this mean that section 77, the job reservation section, will not be made applicable although the Act is applicable?

The amending proclamation to which I referred yesterday and which is going to be issued by my colleague this coming Friday, will provide that as far as the Bantu homelands are concerned, the suspension of that measure will not apply to Whites. This means that they will have the trade union rights, as I said yesterday, that they may have reconciliation boards, and that section 77 will remain in force to be applied in the discretion of the Government.

So the sky is not the limit?

This reaction is extremely significant. You know. Sir, we have the responsibility of preserving industrial peace in this country, not that side. A short while ago the hon. member for Durban Central pointed out very dramatically that this Government had the responsibility of governing and that their task apparently was to criticize. Let them go ahead and do just that, but while we have the task of governing, it is our task to act in such a way that we have industrial peace in this country. If there were to be strikes, they and their Press would feed on those strikes. It is our side that has to ensure that there is industrial peace, and this is the way in which this Government will ensure that industrial peace will be maintained. We shall allow those people to progress to the highest rung of the ladder.

But another naive question was put to me by the hon. member for Rosettenville, and that was whether I would encourage the White mine worker to train the Bantu there. I assume the hon. member has sufficient knowledge of human nature to understand this. Once upon a time there were mine workers in his constituency as well; in which case he should know them. Does the hon. member think we can ask White miners in those Bantu homelands to train Bantu if we as a Government are not prepared to assure them of the bargaining machinery to which they have always been used? If we have to deprive them of this bargaining machinery, does the hon. member think those White miners will be prepared and willing to train any Bantu in those homelands? Of course they will not be willing to do so!

In that case, why did you issue the proclamation?

This has never been the spirit and the intention, as I told the Mineworkers’ Union. I mentioned this here yesterday, but the hon. member could not or would not understand it. It was not only in pursuance of what had been raised by the hon. member that I jumped up and said that we would do so. Did he not hear me saying here that the Mineworkers’ Union sent a deputation to me and my colleague, the Minister of Mines, at the beginning of the year? Was he not in this House when I said that? Was he here?

Yes.

In that case I am astounded that the hon. member can come forward with something so stupid and he really does not deserve a further reply.

The hon. member also referred to the question of the amounts which had not been paid out. I shall furnish him with the details I have here.

†The regulations have been amended to reduce unclaimed moneys. The effect of the amended regulations cannot be determined as yet, and no new steps are contemplated at this stage. Statistics thus far available show that 15,6 per cent of the awards issued during 1969 had to be transferred to the Unclaimed Benefit Account, as against 13 per cent in 1970. Since the implementation of more intensive measures to trace beneficiaries, the statistics also revealed that, while only 231 beneficiaries were traced during 1966, this figure increased to 3 218 in 1970, and that the amounts paid out during those two years were R8 610 and R94 633 respectively. Arrangements have also been entered into with the bigger employers to make payments to injured workers and to obtain refunds from the Accident Fund.

Do the new regulations include instructions to employers to take down the surname of African employees? Could the Minister also tell us whether regulations have already been framed about the return of benefit funds? In the furniture industry in Durban, for example, it apparently takes two years after an employee has left the service to claim the contributions he has made to the benefit fund.

I would advise the hon. member to discuss those points with my department.

*The hon. member for Boksburg pleaded for the employment of pensioners and made the request that we should stimulate their employment. In this regard, I can say that it is in fact our policy to encourage the employment of pensioners. My department is favourably disposed towards this matter and is doing everything in its power to encourage employers to do so.

Now I want to come back to that matter which has come to the fore in this debate, and that is the protest of the United Party against our description of their policy as being one of opening the floodgates. Mr. Chairman, you will remember that two members in particular protested very dramatically against this yesterday. One of them was the hon. member for Orange Grove. He apologized for not being able to be present here this afternoon. Apparently he is in Waterberg.

He is looking for the Nationalist Party’s candidate.

Apparently the hon. member for Yeoville was there last week in an attempt to get a candidate. Since he could not succeed in that, they thought that the old editor of Kruithoring would perhaps achieve more success. In any event, the hon. member is not here. We remember how the hon. member for Orange Grove denied very dramatically yesterday that the United Party’s policy was one of opening the flood-gates. Later no less a person than the hon. member for Maitland also added his protest to that of the hon. member for Orange Grove as to the way we had described their policy. But what is the United Party’s policy in the main as far as this matter is concerned? In the main there are three things. In the first place, they plead in season and out of season for greater use to be made of Black labour in White areas. This is in fact one of the matters for which they plead in season and out of season, not so? In the second place, they plead for “a crash training programme” for the training of non-White labour, a “crash training programme” for 20 million people, as the Leader of the Opposition put it. In the third place, the United Party issued a statement through the mouth of their Leader, one which was subsequently repeated in a periodical by the hon. member for Hillrow, i.e. that the United Party would abolish statutory job reservation. According to them, the reason why they wanted to abolish section 77 was, that in the first place, the fact that it would be useless because it covered only 2 per cent of the labour force and, in the second place, that too many exemptions were being granted in terms of it. These are the two main reasons we learn of in this House why they want to see statutory job reservation abolished.

That is not true, of course.

But if section 77 is really so useless, why this agitation year after year for its abolition? Surely there are many other measures on the Statute Book which are no longer being applied either.

Mr. Chairman, there is only one reason why the United Party is agitating for the abolition of statutory job reservation, and that is because it realizes full well that the value and meaning of section 77 go much further than simply the 2 per cent determinations. The United Party knows full well that section 77 in fact constitutes the statutory pedestal of our whole traditional labour pattern in South Africa. If section 77 was to be repealed, that would, not only undo the 2 per cent determinations, but the whole statutory pedestal would be wrenched out from under our whole traditional labour policy. The fact of the matter is that without section 77, the Government and I, as Minister of Labour, would not have the power of taking action against the ousting of White workers from spheres of employment to which, inter alia, reference was again made here today by the labour representatives on our side. Employers would then be able to appoint Black workers in White positions to their heart’s content, and the protection which the United Party offers them is that it would consult the trade unions, amongst whom the leftist TUCSA is the main advocator of increased Black employment Towards the end of yesterday evening’s debate, the hon. member for Maitland put a question to me and he thought that I would not wish to reply to it. He asked whether I would say that TUCSA would sell out the White workers. I can tell the hon. member that TUCSA will not tire itself to protect the White worker, because it is more concerned about the employment of Black labour than about the protection of the White workers in South Africa.

That is absolute nonsense.

As regards the undesirable mixing of Whites and non-Whites in the field of employment, without section 77 the Government would also be powerless to prohibit such mixing of the races in the field of employment. Without section 77, I, as Minister of Labour, would have had no grounds to get up and prohibit the mixed employment of races which was threatening, to be specific, in our chain stores and banks. Without section 77, those particular establishments would have been able to proceed with the employment of White and non-White to work together on the same floor and in the same employment situation, and we would have been powerless to take action against it. If section 77 were to be repealed, the disappearance of the colour bar from our mines would be the logical, natural and unavoidable consequence.

The United Party would not content itself with that. It is not only in this way that the United Party wants to open the flood-gates. It in fact wants Bantu to be employed in skilled spheres of employment in White areas as well. Surely this will necessarily lead to the repeal of the Bantu Building Workers Act. That Act is the very one which prohibits Bantu from doing skilled work in White areas. What is the further consequence going to be of the United Party’s attitude towards our border area development, our homeland development? The United Party has no love for border area development. I experienced this once again yesterday, and all my colleagues who are concerned in this matter probably experience this as well.

May I put a question to the hon. the Minister? I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is true that Bantu workers are doing building work in White areas at present?

The hon. member, who participates in labour debates as well, should have made a closer study of this because now I have to put the crux of the matter to him in a few words. I want to refer to the Transvaal now, where one has the best example of Bantu work in this regard.

Refer to Natal as well.

Yes, but let me discuss one at a time, or are you allergic to the truth? Let us take the position in the Transvaal now. It is the position there that Bantu are being used in the building industry, but they are there as a result of an arrangement made with the building workers’ industrial council. They decided that certain sections of the skilled work should be cut off and should be reclassified. These are the terms they used. They decided that sections of the work should be cut off as they were less skilled jobs which did not belong with the skilled artisans. These proposals made by the industrial council in the building industry in the Transvaal were approved of jointly by the trade unions and the bosses. Surely this is how an industrial council acts?

Did you approve of them?

Yes, I approved of them after the industrial council … [Interjections.] The hon. member must listen now, before he becomes ecstatic about his own foolishness. Just listen now, and I shall explain the ins and outs of the matter. That arrangement was made by the industrial council. It is the very same arrangement which exists in respect of the engineering industry. That arrangement is also applied from time to time in all industries in the country. Therefore when hon. members produce the fallacious arguments that we do not want to allow any non-Whites into more advanced jobs, that argument of theirs clashes with the true state of affairs, which is that jobs are continually being reclassified, as was done in this case as well. Therefore, if that hon. member sees a Bantu working on a building site, that Bantu is doing so in terms of this agreement of the industrial council which has allocated certain less skilled work to the Bantu. Is it clear to the hon. member now?

Do you need section 77 for that?

Of course we need section 77 for that, as well as for all measures of this nature. We also need section 77 in regard to the sort of case raised by the hon. member for Bethal in respect of the mining industry. There is no point in saying that in the case of the mining industry we have had a colour bar since 1926. That sort of matter is governed by section 77, the measure those hon. members now want to have abolished. I want to go further, I can understand why those hon. members are feeling nervous now, because I am going to indicate exactly how the United Party is going to open the flood-gates to allow the influx of Black labour into the White area. On the one I hand these flood-gates are pushed open and on the other hand they are pulled open. The attitude of the United Party is that it does not want border area and homeland development, and because of that there would be a concentration of Black labour that would be prepared and would prefer to offer their labour in the metropolitan areas at higher wages than those they could obtain in the border areas. As we know the United Party, it would not be concerned about that because we continually hear that we should make use of the “available manpower’’. This is in fact the slogan being used on that side. Day in and day out we have to hear that we are too stupid to make use of the “available manpower”— and by that the United Party means Black labour.

What is more this influx and opening of the flood-gates is going to influence the attitude of the White workers. Here I am referring specifically to the Johannesburg bus workers. This is a matter which was raised a short while ago. Do hon. members know what the attitude of the White Johannesburg bus workers was? They said before the industrial tribunal that if Coloureds were allowed to work with them on the buses in Johannesburg, it would be the beginning of the exodus of the Whites from the whole bus industry in Johannesburg. That same attitude …

What about the Cape?

In the Cape we have another situation. [Interjections.] Here the Coloureds are together with the Whites. This is their traditional homeland. They must be accommodated here. [Interjections.] It is very interesting that only yesterday we had complaints from the hon. member for Constantia that we allegedly did not want to afford the Coloureds adequate employment opportunities. This is the cry we heard yesterday. I replied to the hon. member a short while ago and said that in this bus service, to which hon. members opposite are referring so sneeringly, we were granting the Coloureds employment opportunities by way of exemption and that they were working here at the same wages. Now this is no good. The Western Cape is the home of the Coloureds and they, too, will have their rightful place here, in spite of the hue and cry of the United Party aimed at clouding race relations. [Interjections.]

Order! I want to appeal to hon. members to give the hon. the Minister an opportunity to make his speech. I cannot allow continual interjections.

Mr. Chairman, may I put a question to the hon. the Minister? Are there any indications that Whites have resigned from the bus service here in the Cape?

Whites have resigned in the course of years. Initially the determination was that 84 per cent of the workers on the bus service had to be Whites. As a result of the extension of routes and other employment opportunities, Whites have resigned from the bus service here in the Cape. Because of that exemptions have been granted to permit of the employment of Coloureds. But this has been done in a controlled way. Control, of course, is the one thing which is completely strange to the United Party.

But let me draw attention to the fact that the attitude of the United Party in regard to the abolition of job reservation will result in the White worker completely foregoing his acknowledged position in the field of labour. With the abolition of job reservation, which the United Party is in favour of, the flood-gates are going to open by themselves. This will be an automatic result of the abolition of job reservation. We continually hear the story from the United Party that non-White labour, and especially Black labour, should be allowed to come in so that the White may move to a higher position and in this way obtain a higher income. This is in fact one of the favourite platitudes of the United Party, not so? Under the United Party policy the Whites will allegedly move up and occupy higher positions. Surely this is one of the most fallacious arguments which is being advanced in the local field of labour, because the experience has been, as I indicated in respect of the Johannesburg bus service, that if Coloureds are allowed into certain spheres of employment, the Whites will move out. We have had the experience that if Bantu are allowed into other spheres of employment which, traditionally, have always belonged to the Whites, the Whites are on the point of moving out. For that reason I say to the United Party that its cry of higher positions and higher salaries is a fallacious argument, because it will simply result in the Whites moving out of the spheres of employment into which the non-White labour is allowed and therefore they will not be there to receive those much feted incomes. No, the United Party’s offer of higher incomes to the White workers, is nothing but the poison-cup which it wants to offer the White worker. For that reason I want to say that slogans of this nature will not force the National Party off its course and have it offer our White heritage to the golden calf.

To the National Party, the continued existence of a separate White people is worth much more than material advantages, imaginary or otherwise. For that reason we shall continue to fight against the direction the United Party is taking and which will lead to nothing but an integrated society in this country. The National Party will continue fighting against that direction. Our task in the labour field is to manage economic matters in such a way and to direct our labour policy in such a way that we may have a happy and satisfied labour corps in this country. Only with a happy and satisfied labour corps can we ensure our progress in this country and can we keep the Republic of South Africa strong. The National Party binds itself to this task.

I did not intend to speak again at this stage, but I think that it is absolutely vital that the attention of the House be focussed on the strange display by the hon. the Minister. We as the Opposition—and I include the hon. member for Houghton—have taken the opportunity under this Vote …

What belongs together will be found together,

… of discussing certain principles with the Minister and asking him to explain them to us and to defend certain aspects of his policy as they appear in practice. Sir, the Minister did not react to any of the series of questions that the hon. member for Hillbrow, other members and I asked. On the contrary, in order to conceal his own lack of policy and insight, he virtually devoted his entire speech, except for matters of detail, to ex parte statements and unmotivated attacks, based on false premises, against the policy of the United Party, He is wonderfully competent in discussing and attacking the policy of the United Party, but he is unqualified to defend his own policy and that of his own Government here before the House, and I can well understand this. I think it necessary that we realize this. I just want to point to the allegations and the wild accusations that the Minister made. He says, for example, that we merely dealt with the materialistic aspect of labour and that we regard labour as a commodity. But why then did he not reply to the matters we raised, matters which are proof that we do not regard labour as a commodity? Why did he not reply to the fact that he is responsible, not only for the economic aspect of labour, but also for the happiness of every worker in South Africa? In elaboration of that, we pointed out that the increasing unemployment among the South African Bantu is threatening the peace and the happiness of all the workers in South Africa. But he did not say a word about this phenomenon, the increasing unemployment among the Bantu of South Africa. We asked him, with respect to the security of the White worker—not with respect to materialistic things, but to the security, the safety, of the White worker— what his attitude is to the fact that economically low wages are being determined and are being allowed in the border industries, entailing unfair competition with the factories of the Whites manned by workers in other parts of South Africa? We mentioned the name of Rustenburg, which is about 50 miles from Johannesburg, but where the wages in the border factories are 60 per cent lower than in the White factories. But the hon. the Minister did not say a word about that. He did not say a word about the border industries or about the manner in which the Government wants to make skilled labour possible among the Natives. There was no word about that. There was no reaction. He said nothing about his own policy, but spent most of his time on the United Party’s policy, giving false pictures of it. We pointed out that the progress of the Whites is restricted if one forces them to occupy posts that can be occupied by non-Whites. There was no reply, except an ex parte denial; there was no motivation and no argument in support of it. We asked him what he is going to do to make the re-training of White workers possible so that they could, in fact, occupy higher posts, that are available to them, but there was no word about that. The Minister is not even aware of the things we raised.

He will reply next year.

Yes, next year he will perhaps be able to tell us, but we have had the problem for years now, and the Minister says he will tell us in January whether he has a policy. Sir, what a display! What a sad state of affairs for South Africa! I still want to say this. The hon. the Minister comes along here with job reservation and he gives the reasons why we want it abolished, i.e. that it is unnecessary because there are too many exemptions. But in 1955 the United Party spent hours and days opposing section 77 of the Industrial Conciliation Act and forwarding its reasons why it was opposed to it, before exemptions could be given, before only 2 per cent of the people were effected, when it was still before Parliament. Why can the Minister not be honest, if he wants to argue, and mention the things that justify and support our 1955 standpoint? He now mentions later developments as the reasons why we want it abolished. We want it abolished for the reasons we advanced in 1955. He tells us that TUCSA is not fit to protect the White workers, and then he makes a big fuss about the actions of the Johannesburg Municipal Transport Workers’ Union. When we asked that Coloureds he used on the Johannesburg buses, they defended the White workers, not so? The Minister knows as well as I do that that trade union is a member of TUCSA. How can the Minister, in the same speech, try to defend two such divergent standpoints, contradict himself to such an extent and totally destroy his own arguments, if it is not for the fact that he is a Minister responsible for the maintenance of an indefensible policy that cannot be implemented?

I therefore do not blame him. It does not matter who one gives his Vote to. He would he as embarrassed as the Minister is, because he would have to defend the indefensible; he must defend things that adversely affect South Africa, things that are detrimental to the long-term, permanent interests of the White worker and the non-White worker in South Africa. He must misuse his Department of competent men in order to implement these things. He has my sympathy. But, Sir, if the Government must remain in power with such a policy and with such a Minister, under those circumstances, I can only feel sorry for South Africa.

Sir, it is unfair of the hon. member for Yeoville to say that this Minister is inefficient and that he is obstructing 1he White workers in their progress. Sir, in this country of ours, this multi-racial country, South Africa, it is this Minister of Labour …

Multi-national country.

Yes, or multi-national country; hon. members may call it what they like. It is this Minister that has brought about labour peace in the Republic of South Africa under difficult circumstances. If the hon. member for Yeoville thinks that by these means he will induce the hon. the Minister and the National Party to abandon National Party policy, he must think again. It is only under the policy of this Minister and his Department that South Africa could be governed throughout the years, and we shall not abandon the National Party’s policy; we shall ensure that this policy is implemented. It is this policy of the National Party that has brought peace and order in South Africa, and that is why I want to tell the hon. member that it is scandalous, at this stage of the debate, to hit out at the Minister after he has replied to all the points raised here.

Revenue Vote No. 24.—“Bantu Administration and Development”, R100 155 000, Loan Vote N.—“Bantu Administration and Development", R87 000 000, and S.W.A. Vote No. 10.—“Bantu Administration and Development”, R15 825 000:

[Interjections.] Sir, I do not know what all the noise on the opposite side is for, except that it may be the death rattle of a dying party. I cannot understand why hon. members on the opposite side do not want to give me a chance to move, introduce and elucidate my Vote in this Committee.

Since when has this been necessary?

hon. members on the opposite side do not realize that this Vote is our Vote, that the Votes of this Department are now on the Table and that I have the right to introduce my Vote here and supply information about it, as I now want to do. [Interjections.] Sir, the hon. members on the opposite side do not want me to talk, and surely I have a right to do so. The hon. members are apparently afraid of what I am going to say.

Sir, as I have just said, the various Votes in which my Department is involved are being submitted to the Committee here. These relate do Bantu affairs over a very wide field. Contrary to what hon. members on the opposite side think, I think it is quite fitting that I should say a few words in elucidation of this matter. As I have said, it is a very widely diversified field with many extensive activities. Of course I shall by no means be able to discuss everything here. Therefore I want to touch upon only the most important matters in this connection. It is so often said that the work in which my Departments are involved is major and important work. It is even said that it is difficult Work. I agree with that. I just want to say that it is always a very great pleasure for me to proceed with this work because my two colleagues, the two Deputy Ministers, and I draw a great deal of inspiration from the faithful assistance of all those who are doing this work in the two Departments. We derive much inspiration from them because they are all of them so obviously doing their best. In neither of the two Departments is there any chance of people not giving of their best.

When I say this I should like to bring to mind the name of one person in this Department. It is Mr. J. P. Dodds, the Secretary for Bantu Administration and Development, who is now, after more than 40 years, retiring from the service of the Department. He is no longer with us here in the Cape, because he has already left on leave. He is an official who rightly fits the words I have just spoken when I said that in this Department, and also in the Department of Bantu Education, there is no room for people who do not want to give of their best to this task. I should like to place on record here our great appreciation, not only mine and that of my Deputy Ministers, who often worked closely with him, but also that of the Government. We learned a great deal from him. Since he still has, we hope, many years left to him, we want to wish him very fruitful years. We hope that he will still be able to achieve as much distinction in other spheres and render the same excellent work he rendered for so many years in this Department, The person who will take his place is Mr. I. P, van Onselen. We have known him for many years too; he is a man who has grown old and, I am saying this with respect, grey in this Department. But he still has many years before him, and since we know him to be a man with great daring, fire and enterprise, we may just say to him in advance that we are looking forward to working with him. We know that he will radiate energy and leadership for the work of this Department.

As I have said, I just want to point out a few of the most important aspects of the work of the Department of Bantu Administration and Development. I am not referring now to the work of the Department of Bantu Education, for that Vote follows this one. I hope that what I say from my side of the House will be added to by hon. members. I hope that they will do this and in particular I hope that they will indicate in detail how we have already in many fields achieved much that we can speak of with praise, and have made great progress, something which does indeed deserve general attention. I cannot go into the matter in detail, but I want, in the first place, to deal with the economic sphere for a while. One of the severest challenges which my Department undoubtedly has to face is in the field of economic development in the Bantu homelands. Of all the demands which are being made, there is probably no greater demand than that which is being made in respect of the provision of the almost completely non-existent infrastructure in the Bantu homelands. In this connection there has, particularly during the past two to three years, been an adjustment or turning-point in the policy of economic development and the provision of an infrastructure, and this went hand-in-hand with the political development which we have experienced in the Bantu areas. The policy is now more specifically aimed at supplying the basic infrastructures, where that is possible, through the Bantu governments themselves. We support them of course, not only with finances but also with technical advice. It is therefore the policy that these matters should, to an increasing extent, be taken over by the Bantu governments, because it is undoubtedly the function of any state that some authority or other must meet those essential infrastructural needs. Of course we also have the South African Bantu Trust, which can also make its influence felt in this regard where this is necessary, supported by the three corporations, viz. the Bantu Investment Corporation, the Xhosa Development Corporation and the Bantu Mining Corporation. Last but not least there are of course the other State departments which play a direct part there, such as the Department of Transport, and that of Posts and Telegraphs, which supply services. The organizations directly concerned alone are already at present spending more than 25 per cent of their total allocation in providing the necessary infrastructure within the homelands. When I say “organizations directly involved” I mean those which are directly linked to and situated within my Department. The Corporations to which I referred a moment ago have in the years during which they have been in operation acquitted themselves with great distinction of their task. The oldest of these Corporations, the Bantu Investment Corporation, has been in operation since 1959, while the other two, the Xhosa Development Corporation and the Bantu Mining Corporation are of a much more recent state. The Bantu Mining Corporation, for example, has only been in operation for the past 15 to 18 months. The Bantu Mining Corporation, the youngest scion of the three is particularly active and has in the short while it has been in existence, been responsible for great expansion, particularly in regard to prospecting and the exploitation of mining possibilities in the Bantu homelands. The policy is not that the Bantu Mining Corporation should of necessity itself determine and exploit every mining possibility in the Bantu areas. Since it has been the custom over the years to apply the agency system in respect of mining activities in the homelands, the Bantu Mining Corporation is also continuing to do it in this way. Wherever it is justified, for whatever reason, the Bantu Mining Corporation can of course tackle undertakings itself and this applies to the Bantu areas in the four Provinces as well as to those in South-West Africa, because the Mining Corporation is also active there. Just to give an indication of how zealous and active the Mining Corporation has been so far in the short space of little more than a year, I may mention that they have in the past financial year alone, spread over no fewer than 150 farms within the Bantu areas, in respect of approximately 550 000 hectares, granted prospecting rights and mine permits to White enterprises to undertake either prospecting of mining exploitation work there.

The Xhosa Development Corporation, in its turn, has already established itself firmly in the Transkei and in the Ciskei, which is of course its sphere of action. There is already very striking evidence of what it has done. Particularly striking and significant proof is the very successful ploughing unit it has started there, where more than 150 tractors are already being used as tractor units to be of assistance to the Bantu in regard to their ploughing work in the sphere of agriculture. There is also the jute bag factory under construction at Butterworth, which could be a very important and even strategic industry for us in South Africa. Large numbers of Bantu have been absorbed for training in the commercial and other industrial undertakings which they have tackled in the Ciskei and the Transkei. It will in this way be possible for the Bantu to develop a class of entrepreneurs of their own. My information is that at present, in the Ciskei alone, there are more or less 300 Bantu persons who are already active as business owners and business managers and who were started off by this Xhosa Development Corporation.

Then I just want to say a few words in general about the Bantu Mining Corporation, the oldest of the three. From the nature of the case this is a much larger Bantu investment corporation, the last of the three I want to mention and one which has been in operation for all of ten years. For that reason it can show a much more extensive list of achievements than the others. There is literally no sphere of business life which has not already been ventured upon by the Bantu Investment Corporation on behalf of and by means of the Bantu This is the case in respect of the wholesale sector, the retail sector, home industries, the other ordinary industries and beer breweries. Exceptional success has even been achieved in developing thrift among the Bantu, for at present more than R5 million is being held in deposit by the savings bank division of the Bantu Investment Corporation. Then there is also the allocation of loans to Bantu entrepreneurs for business undertakings of all kinds, for example the construction of houses and other similar enterprises.

During the past year the Bantu Investment Corporation has also entered new fields in the training, not only of staff, but in particular of Bantu persons as entrepreneurs and managers in commerce and industry, including even the hotel industry, bakeries and vacation resorts. There is almost no facet of the activities of a people which cannot be enumerated as one of the aspects of the activities of the Bantu Investment Corporation. Hon. members, and particularly hon. members on the opposite side, will be able to spend their lime very profitably by reading through the annual report of the Bantu Investment Corporation, which is published in a very well-illustrated format. It makes fantastic reading, as the children say.

These three corporations have jointly made a very appreciable contribution in regard to capital formation inside the Bantu homelands, together of course with the Bantu authorities and even, to a lesser extent, Bantu individuals, so much so that in the year 1967-’68, this is the latest figure I could lay hands on in a hurry, as much as R41 million was spent by all the various Bantu authorities and other authorities and entrepreneurs in the way of capital formation in the Bantu homelands. In this way the corporations are continuing, each in its own sphere, to bring economic life into the Bantu homelands. To people who were in the Bantu areas years ago when there was nothing to be seen of these activities, and who go there now, this is a revelation. Nowhere was I more struck by this—and this is only on a small scale, relatively speaking, that achievements have been accomplished there—than when I recently paid a visit to the Eastern Caprivi, an area which I saw for the first time almost ten years ago and have since visited often, and saw how industry and business life has literally been brought into the heart of the bush. It is not only here that this happened, it happened in other places as well and in many ways. Now I just want to ask the hon. members this: If we review these matters there must be no complaints about how undertakings are only present on a limited scale and we must not be told that there is only one shop, or whatever it is there. There is nothing in this life which did not begin on a small scale, and there is nothing in this life, particularly in economy, which is not tackled on a modest scale at first. So we will in all the Bantu areas see the developing and expanding Bantu corporations continue with their work.

In connection with the work of all three these Bantu corporations the brightest star in the firmament is undoubtedly the agency enterprises with which a start has been made during the past year or 18 months in the industrial sphere. A start was made with these agencies barely 18 months ago. As I said earlier it has for years been the practice to apply the agency idea in respect of mining undertakings, viz. to afford White entrepreneurs these opportunities without entrenched permanent rights. This idea has during the past 18 months been expanded more specifically to the industrial sphere. I repeat that the success which is being achieved with these agency enterprises is the brightest start in the firmament of the activities of these three corporations within the Bantu homelands. If anything has ever been tackled by the corporations or the authorities which held great promise for the future, then it is an enterprise of this kind. Of course it was not easy. Apart from those areas which for reasons of localization acquired agency enterprises, there have been stirrings in three areas in particular. In the first place there is Butterworth in the Transkei, where in addition to others, the jute hag factory is being constructed—one of the largest single contracts so far on the agency basis. The second centre is in the Tswana homelands, called Babalegi, which is situated the other side of Hammanskraal. The third development point, and the most recent, is that at Eshowe in Zululand, at Sitebe. In little more than a year after the introduction of this agency basis 40 contracts have already been negotiated with White entrepreneurs for them to settle in these places, and almost half of those contracts are already in operation. This is of course a tremendous achievement, particularly if we realize that at Babalegi and Sitebe, in contrast to Butterworth, there were no established facilities available to the industrialist. To a certain extent this was not even the case at Butterworth. The facilities which were available there were also very limited. Many services had to be provided, services such as water schemes, roads and numerous others. At a place like Babalegi it was necessary to begin from the ground up. The necessary consent had first to be obtained from the tribe in question in order to acquire the land to lay out industrial sites there; the power had to be laid on; water had to be laid on; roads had to be constructed; rail facilities had to be supplied and buildings had to be erected from the ground up, etc. It may sound easy to judge from the way I am rattling these things off here, but the fact of the matter is probably that no industrial or residential area has ever been established in such a short time as was the case in the Babalegi/Hammanskraal area. And what is more, more than half of the contracts allocated there are already in operation today.

How many workers have been employed by these undertakings?

We shall furnish the hon. member with that information. Replying from memory, I would say that at Babalegi there will be between 8 000 and 10 000 Bantu in service, after all the factories are in operation. [Interjections.] At Babalegi alone. But we shall in due course furnish more details in this regard. What the hon. member for Hillbrow now finds in this to laugh about, is beyond the comprehension even of an imbecile.

You are making a row about nothing.

No, I am not making a row, but what I cannot understand is that the hon. member should laugh when we tell him that at a single border industry centre eight to ten thousand Bantu will be employed,

In future.

The future is on our doorstep. I told the hon. member that contracts for almost half of those areas have already been filled and that applications have already been made for almost half of the sites. The future is not so far off as far as the completion of Babalegi is concerned. The hon. member will see Babalegi operating at full steam a long time before he has any more grey hairs, if the dear Lord spares us.

The White entrepreneurs with whom contractual agreements have been entered into in regard to agency industries in Bantu homelands are at this moment already committed to he investment of more than R20 million of their own White capital in those industries. Then we hear from day to day the nonsense being brayed out that this Government does not want to allow White skills, knowledge or capital into the Bantu homelands. We have always said that this is admissible on the basis of our policy. The particular reason why I—and I hope the hon. member for Yeoville will also be pleased about this foresee an acceleration of activities of this kind in the approaching years, is because greater concessions are going to be granted in the near future to these entrepreneurs. Hon. members have already heard, in the debate which preceded this one when my colleague referred to it, that greater concessions are going to be granted in regard to the decentralization of industries. These greater concessions will make their effect felt not only in the border industries on the White side of the border, but also inside the Bantu homelands. It is obvious that White entrepreneurs who establish themselves in the Bantu homelands must also be of assistance there with the costs backlog which industrialists for understandable reasons have with their enterprises inside the Bantu homelands. I would be able to say a lot more about and go into this matter in greater detail but I want to conclude the ideas I have expressed in the economic sphere by saying that although the gross domestic product over the seven years between i960 and 1967 increased by the impressive figure for that year of 54 per cent, from R96 million to R157 million, I foresee that in the coming years as far as the gross domestic product of the Bantu homelands is concerned, there will be an equally impressive, if not an even more impressive increase.

Then there are other spheres of activity of my Department which I should like to say something about. I am now going to deal with another sphere, viz. that of political development. I have just said that many of the matters, particularly in regard to Bantu authorities in the Bantu homelands with the application of the activities in respect of the provision of infrastructure, such as the lay-out of industrial areas like Babalegi and others, came about precisely as a result of the political development which took place there in the Bantu homelands. Previously in the Bantu homelands, with the exception of the Transkei, there were no really appreciable Bantu governments which could be negotiated with in regard to matters pertaining to their homelands. But, as hon. members know, we have made phenomenal progress in virtually all our Bantu homelands in the four provinces, and even in certain parts of South-West Africa, to provide every Bantu people with a proper, established Bantu government, which is able to look after the interests of its people and its territory in respect of those matters conferred upon that government with, of course, the necessary assistance and consultation on our part. After the Act which we passed earlier on in this session in this Parliament, viz. the Bantu Homelands Constitution Act, it will be possible to make far more rapid progress with what I call the “activating” of the Bantu governments in the Bantu homelands; that is, to give them the inherent power to undertake matters for themselves and do things for themselves, because it is only fitting that every people should have a government which can look after the aft airs of that people and that homeland. Now all these Bantu peoples have received governments. There are the Tswanas, the Ciskeians, the South Sothos, the North Sothos, the Vendas, the Shangaans and the Zulus, In addition to that there are still in South-West Africa the Ovambos and the Kavangos, with the Damaras hard on their heels, who will one of these days have their own government. Just to give hon. members, and particularly hon. members on the opposite side, an indication of what I mean when I say that we have given established governments to each of those Bantu territories, I should like to mention a few points. Do hon. members realize that we cannot simply select six Bantu leaders and nominate executive councils for them? We cannot then say: “Hooray! Now we have a government.” We cannot then sit back and clap each other on the back. For each of these peoples I have now mentioned, a public service structure had to be worked out. A number of departments had to be established, Altogether we have today, not counting the Transkei, almost 50 departments in the various Bantu homelands, which are already in operation. In addition the Transkei has six departments of its own, which are already in operation.

Hon. members will now be able to imagine how much effort goes into establishing and getting one department into operation, to say nothing of 50 departments. Sir, it puts me in mind of old Tyll Eulenspiegel who said that he had slept for one night on one chicken feather. He had never in his life spent such an uncomfortable night. He was therefore only too pleased that he would never have to sleep on a mattress containing a thousand chicken feathers. Sir, if the work of establishing one department required so much effort, hon. members could imagine how much work is involved in establishing all the other departments, it is not only a department which has to be planned. An entire Hierarchy of posts has to be worked out, from the chief official to all the officials below him. A work load must be worked out and allocated to every post. Having done that, you must recruit the officials. Do members in this House realize that to get 50 departments operational, it means that 50 departmental heads have to be found? These are all White officials from my department who have to be loaned to the Bantu governments, as was in fact done in the case of the Transkei. Can hon. members imagine what doing all this requires in the way of administration? Of course, there are not only the work loads which have to be worked out. Offices have to be established, constitutions have to be drawn up, standing rules and orders and financial regulations have to he devised and establishments have to be worked out. The greatest problem of all is still of course to find the staff. In addition to that houses have to be built for everyone. All this we have during the past two years accomplished in respect of all those peoples I mentioned a moment ago. I tell you. Sir: It took some doing! If I were in the habit of wearing a hat—I feel like buying one just to be able to do this—I would have taken it off to my two Departments which accomplished this work in a phenomenally short time. When one sees such achievements on the part of my Department, then I tell you there is no challenge in regard to the performance of our work which I, with these two Departments, do not see my way clear to accepting. Then too, Sir, you must know that we very often have to do this in the face of sharp ridicule and disparagement. But I also want to say this. When I praise these two departments, I also want to say, because it would be unfair of me if I did not say this. We have in every respect … [Interjections.] Sir. I would be grateful to know who is talking now.

Rude thing that you are over there on the other side.

Order! Would the hon. the Minister of Community Development please withdraw those words.

I withdraw them.

I say that it would be unfair of me if I did not mention that apart from this great and enthusiastic work on the part of my two departments, we have in every respect and without exception, received an enthusiastic response and support from those Bantu authorities we established. Those Bantu authorities, one after the other, threw themselves into the tasks allotted to them and they also deserve the praise which has to be meted out in that connection. As I have said, we had to find staff and of course teach them to adjust, because those things which had to be done were completely new to them. We had to help and teach and instruct alt the councillors who had been elected, Bantu persons, Bantu staff members and Bantu members of executive councils, to bring their processes of government into proper operation and to keep them in operation. When I speak of the Bantu public services, I just want to lift the veil a little and furnish the hon. members with a few statistics to indicate what the position is. I have the details here of all the different peoples, but I am not going to enumerate them. But do hon. members realize that at the moment in all the Bantu homelands of the authorities I mentioned a moment ago, viz. the Ciskei, the Tswana, the Lebowa, the North Sotho, the Shangaan, the Venda, the South Sotho, the Ovambo, the Okavango and the Transkei there are at this moment approximately 1 333 White persons, including teachers, who are working for them, as against 49 725 Bantu persons who are working in those homelands and which also include the teachers This is the establishment of the public services. In other words, it is 49 725 Bantu persons of all the different peoples as against 1 333 White persons who are working there This is a tremendous achievement. Sir, and you can also see what the ratio is. I could just tell you that it is of course the fixed policy to increase the Bantu establishment, the Bantu complement, of those public services day by day and in that way to cause the number of Whites to diminish.

Our multi-national policy and our relationships policy with these Bantu governments have advanced along the entire front of all the activities, and we have come forward with very fine steps, particularly on a high representational level and particularly in recent times. I want to single out only one matter here, but there are others. This is the meeting which had been arranged for these Bantu Governments with the hon. the Prime Minister himself. You will recall how, during this Session, three of these Bantu governments have already been here to meet him. I can only say that by August of this year the Prime Minister will in the seven months from the beginning of the year, have been able to have met all the Bantu governments from the Bantu areas in the four Provinces, together with myself and my officials. Then there are still people who say that there is no contact anti no communication between the Bantu governments and us. As far as the Deputy Ministers and I are concerned, and the members of the Bantu Affairs Commission and the officials, it is of course an everyday matter to meet the Bantu governments and to have talks with them. I want to tell you that where there are such governments with which there has been and is liaison, it is possible to communicate with them very successfully, and we (including myself) have in fact communicated with them very successfully, in regard to the miscellaneous activities of their people and homelands, matters such as the establishment of towns, the removal of Bantu persons from one area to another, industries which have to be established, emergency loans and the demarcation of the boundaries between these nations. One of the best achievements which our officials, including myself, were for years unable to accomplish, we accomplished about two to three months ago when we were able to effect the demarcation of boundaries between two Bantu nations, because we now had two Bantu nations that were able to settle the matter between themselves by means of their two cabinets, their two executive councils. This is the progress we have made, into which I should like to give this Committee a brief glance.

Sir, in this work it is always our policy of course to apply a nationally orientated approach in all things. Just as we have on the political level established a government of its own for every nation, so we are trying in all things to concentrate on every nation as a unit, and this makes it possible for us, far more than in earlier years, to realize now a development administration in respect of our Bantu homelands far more preferable and to a far greater extent than what could previously be called a mere control administration of or a control policy for the Bantu homelands. Sir, hon. members would see this national orientation, this concentration on each separate Bantu nation if they would only take the trouble to page through the Estimates in order to see how our Budget already gives a mirror image of this national orientation of our administration and of our development policy. It has not been perfected yet; it is not yet complete, because not all the processes have been finalized and because not all the Bantu nations have been properly geared to this, but this is how we shall see it reflected to an increasing extent in our documents.

Sir, this multi-national concept is of course a fitting one, not only on the political level in the establishment of a government as I have just said, but it is also a fitting one in regard to the economic development; it is a fitting one in regard to the health services which we are offering every nation in its own homeland, so that we have by now already organized the Transkei into one separate health unit, which has now become possible after health matters in the Bantu homelands became the work of the Department of Health, which does this work on behalf of our Department.

Sir, in this way too this national orientation, this multi-national concept, also has its special application, is concentrated on land purchases, on the establishment of districts so that one does not have integrated districts, where White district and Bantu district overlap, but where they are separate: that process is coming into operation. In fact, our census and statistics are already being compiled on that basis and definitely give us a better image of what is in progress in this respect in South Africa. Further substance is of course given to this multi-national concept by the representatives who may be appointed by every Government in the White area to represent that government here, and I hope that hon. members will later in the debate hear a little more about this from the hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education who deals with these matters.

Are they too going to make shop-window speeches first?

Sir, the hon. member is complaining about my speech now; he just called it a shop window speech. I am proud that my shop has a window. His shop is a bricked house of clay, and when you look at his shop, all you see is walls; everything is bottled-up inside; it is as “closed-up" (toe) as day oxen. Sir, it is specifically in regard to this very approach of national orientation as far as our policy is concerned that we find the greatest contrast between the United Party policy and the National Party policy. We know that the National Party, as I have already said before, and as I want to repeat now, sees every Bantu individual as a person within his own ethnic context. Whether he is living and working within his homeland, or whether he is sojourning in the White homelands, we see every Bantu individual as a person within his own ethnic context with all the human interests which that involves. I have already mentioned some of these human interests this afternoon, These are, for example, education, economic development, agriculture, etc. Over and against this we have the United Party policy, as we experienced it again a few hours ago in the labour debate, in terms of which the Bantu persons in South Africa are simply seen as potential manpower to be shoved in and drawn in wherever one wishes.

You know that is not true.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, may the hon. member say that the hon. the Minister knows that that is not true?

Order! The hon. member must withdraw that.

I withdraw it.

Mr. Chairman, if the United Party is then, under the pressure of circumstances, forced to look a little further, they see the Bantu only as people who are capable of being freely integrated with the Whites into one unified community in South Africa. In this sphere, the contrast between the policy of the two parties is most clearly discernible.

I should also like to refer to the field of agriculture, and I want to say a few things about many of the innovations which are being planned in this connection. But I want to refer to that only briefly, for I hope that my colleague will be able to elaborate on that matter. Despite the fact that the Bantu hold a very strong traditional view in regard to agriculture which really amounts to the Bantu having always considered agriculture to be an industry which they practice only for the sake of their subsistence, a great change has been taking place among the Bantu during recent years so that they, too are now beginning to perceive of agriculture as an economic industry with economic incentives attached to it. For that reason we have deemed it desirable to promote the idea of collective agriculture among the Bantu peoples in the Bantu homelands because collective activity is the basic feature of the economic activities of the Bantu. We have sent two officials overseas, inter alia to Israel, to make a study of collective agriculture with a view to the modernization of activities and methods in our Bantu homelands. We have also established a special agriculture committee which will function as a branch of the Bantu Affairs Commission.

This brings me closer to the aspect of the activities to which I want to refer, viz. the activities of the Bantu Affairs Commission. Hon. members will perhaps have realized how I have over the past few years in particular made attempts to make greater use of the Bantu Affairs Commission and to broaden the scope of its activities. Some time ago, for example, we established an economic committee under that Commission. Hon. Members will recall that I amended the Act to make this possible. This economic committee made a series of very useful investigations and furnished advice, particularly in respect of economic development such as decentralizable industries, internal industrial difficulties and possible economic assistance in regard to backlogs. The concessions referred to a moment ago were to a very large extent conceived by this economic committee. This committee has also investigated the matter of transport systems. Coupled to this we also have the Bureau for Economic Research and Bantu Development to which research and data-collection in this connection has been entrusted. They have already done excellent work for us by drawing up national accounts for every homeland. Thus we are now able to keep national accounts of every homeland, which could be of assistance to us in our work. The latest information in the Bantu Affairs Commission, to which I have referred, is the agricultural committee which we have established to function in exactly the same way as the economic committee, but which has to confine itself more specifically to the field of agriculture and supply us with advice in that sphere. I am making haste to complete what I want to say at this stage.

I want to say that all these facts which I have now enumerated.—and they are only a few of the facets which one could mention—offer very special challenges. I want to mention two of these challenges in particular, but without going into too much detail. The two challenges exist in the first place in respect of the consolidation of the Bantu homeland areas. The second challenge is to get an ever increasing number of Bantu settled in the homeland. I have already stated on a previous occasion and I want to remind hon. members of this again with a measure of pride that, as appears from the latest census statistics, five Bantu homelands are already accommodating more than half of their population group within their own boundaries. The five homelands are accommodating the majority of members of those specific groups.

What homelands are these?

These are the Transkei, and the Ciskei, which are both occupied by Xhosa, the area of the North Sothos, the area of the Shangaans, the area of the Vendas and the area of the Zulus. All five of these homelands are accommodating the majority of their population groups. I am of course referring now to the four provinces and not to South-West Africa, because there this is the case in each of the homelands. Since I have therefore said that there are already five of our Bantu homelands that are accommodating more than half of their specific population groups—in the case of the Vendas it is as high as 70 per cent—it is obvious that the challenge for us is not only to maintain the figure, but also to improve on it. The challenge is also to improve on the number of Bantu homelands.

Now I should like the hon. member for Yeoville to listen to the following particulars as well. These particulars which I now want to communicate to the hon. House are very interesting. The particulars I have just furnished are not all that is important. If we consider only the Bantu population of South Africa, and when I say that I mean the South African Bantu and not the foreign Bantu from Malawi, Angola and Mozambique who come to this country on a strict contractual basis, we shall see that just over half of them are living in the Bantu homelands. I worked out the figure last night, and this is the first time that these particulars are being made available. These are as follows: 50,1 per cent of the South African Bantu are living within the boundaries of their respective homelands. It was touch and go whether this would be the case, but the fact remains that it is just over 50 per cent. I therefore want to repeat that 50.1 per cent of the South African Bantu are living within the boundaries of the homelands, and 49,9 per cent within the White areas. Then hon. members must bear in mind that there are thousands and thousands of the South African Bantu, living within the White areas, who are full-fledged migratory labourers. They are labourers who come, on a regular basis, to work on the mines, in the industries and for major employers. They therefore go to these employers periodically, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that system. In other words, if one deducts the number of migratory labourers from the Bantu population of the White areas, this percentage will be even more favourable. Since we have already achieved this, I want to ask, in the banal words of the hon. member for Durban Point, whether we cannot then open our shop-windows a little. Do the hon. members not want to help us to get more of them? Do they not also want there to be fewer and fewer Bantu in the White areas, and more and more of them in the Bantu areas? That is what we want. That is our ideal; that is what we are striving after and working for day and night. However, we want the assistance of our White colleagues on the opposite side of the House.

In regard to the consolidation of the Bantu areas, I want to remind hon. members of what the hon. the Prime Minister said earlier this year, viz. that it is the desire of the Government that there should be an acceleration of the pace, particularly in the allocation of the areas which still have to be acquired for purchase to make up the promised number of morgen, as well as to eliminate Bantu-owned land and incorrectly situated reserves. It is our desire that there should be an acceleration of pace in this regard. In regard to both these matters, the purchase or the elimination, we must of course set about doing this in a consolidatory manner. We shall in regard to both these matters see to it that the usual investigations are always made. Hon. Members must realize, I want to reiterate this very clearly now, that the Bantu Affairs Commission in particular is being utilized for these investigations. When we talk about the consolidation or the purchase of Bantu areas, we shall at all times see to it that investigations in loco are held. The public must take particular note of the fact that nowhere will we catch our public or a section of our public by surprise by unexpectedly deciding that we are going to purchase land in a certain area. Wherever something like this is contemplated, the Bantu Affairs Commission, or one of its committees, will investigate the matter. They will also afford the public bodies an opportunity of expressing their opinions, after which they will publish their findings. They will then make their recommendations, subsequent to which the necessary decisions will be taken by myself and the Deputy Minister in question. We shall adhere to that policy, and the public need not be concerned about this.

Mr. Chairman, may I have the privilege of the half-hour? In the first place I want to associate myself, on behalf of the United Party, with the hon. the Minister’s words in respect of Mr. Dodds, the Secretary, who will be retiring shortly. He was always prepared to help us with information and advice in connection with the activities of his department. We have only the highest appreciation for his friendliness and helpfulness. I also want to address a word of welcome to his successor, Mr. Van Onselen. I am sure that we will receive the same helpfulness and friendliness from him as we did from Mr. Dodds. He has one advantage over his predecessors, and that is that he grew up, as I did, in the Humansdorp district and also lived in the Transkei for a number of years. In his career he was not privileged enough to have the many years of experience in the Transkei which I have enjoyed and still enjoy, but I am always prepared to assist him with advice in the interests of the Transkei.

I now come to the hon. the Minister and his lieutenants. Unfortunately they did not grow up in Humansdorp and have not lived in the Transkei either. This is to their disadvantage and therefore we must try to be patient with them and to forgive them their sins. It is difficult, but we shall try. Before we forgive them their sins, however, we must at least test and question them a little to make sure that they have acted in ignorance.

Who must not act in ignorance?

You.

†This Minister has followed the example of other Ministers whose votes have already been introduced into this House. Obviously they have been at a disadvantage in the country, because they were not getting the publicity they would like and were finding themselves continually on the defensive. Probably on the suggestion of Mr. Riezelman, they have therefore adopted a new tactic by making statements of policy at the beginning of their Votes …

I did it last year too.

I am surprised that you are doing it again this year, because it did not work last year. We will have over the subservient S.A.B.C.’s news service tonight ad nauseam till tomorrow extracts from the speech of the hon. the Minister. Practically everything the Minister has said could have been given to this House by way of reports by the Bantu Investment Corporation, the Bantu Development Corporation, the Xhosa Development Corporation or by the many other corporations. But, as I say, he wants to get it in the papers in order to satisfy his intellectuals and others who are criticizing the Nationalist Party for not doing enough to develop the reserves. What is his proudest achievement? He said that his proudest achievement was the development of the agency system, the development of industries in the reserves, by getting White entrepreneurs to use their capital and their initiative in the reserves. Why has this now become necessary? It is in conflict with the policy of the late Dr. Verwoerd. It has only been started, [Interjections.] If it was his policy, why did they not start with it long ago? The Minister himself said it is only 18 months that they have been doing this, and he is proud of what they have done. If it was the policy, why did they not do more before?

The Minister has given us instances of what is happening in the reserves. They are not even starting to meet the labour demands. The Minister also said that the difference between the United Party and the Nationalist Party is that the Nationalist Party regard the African as a human being, and that we only look upon him as a member of a labour force, a labour unit, I would like to remind him that this reference to the Bantu as a labour unit was not and has never been made by the United Party. The first man to use that expression was the late Dr. Verwoerd, when he regarded the Bantu working in industry as a labour unit. We said he was practising integration because he was using the Bantu in industry, and he said: “If you use an ox on a farm, you are not integrating that ox into your economy.” He regarded Bantu in the same way.

You are misrepresenting his words.

Then perhaps the hon. the Minister can tell us what he did say. The very policy of this Minister with regard to the urban Bantu shows that he regards them merely as labour units. I am not going to be diverted by the Minister. I am going to go on to something which they do not like. He hoped that by starting off this debate by enumerating his achievements in the reserves, we would fall for it and go on discussing the reserves. Why did he not tell us what he is doing in the urban areas?

I will reply to that.

Well, give me a chance now. The Bantu can he divided for administrative purposes into three groups, Firstly, there is the minority group of the Bantu who work in the rural areas, on the farms outside the reserves, and who play a vital, an indispensable part in fact, in the production of food and other agricultural products enjoyed by all the other groups in the country. They can never, or in the foreseeable future at any rate, be replaced. As far as the rural Bantu are concerned, the Government recognizes that they are indispensable and allows family life, although there seems to be a growing tendency to regard the Bantu labourer on the farms in the same light as other labour units, as workers on a migratory basis, simply as sojourners on the farms. The United Party desires a well-housed, stable labour force on the farms, and the family unit is accepted as the basis upon which such labour force must be maintained. We appreciate, too, that migratory labour is necessary for certain seasonal jobs; we are prepared to accept that.

Secondly we have the urban group. That is the second largest group, numbering, conservatively, probably some six million, and outnumbering all the other race groups put together. The Minister has very proudly announced just now that more than half of the Africans live in the reserves. I think the figure he gave us was 51 per cent.

South African Bantu.

Yes, well the fact remains that practically half of the South African Bantu are in the urban areas. It is exactly fifty-fifty, and he cannot escape that fact. They do most of the manual and arduous work. Without their aid, most of our essential services would come to a halt and our factories would close down. Imagine what would happen to our shipping traffic in the ports if they stayed away for just a few days, [Interjection.] The Bantu living in the urban areas are indispensable because they are irreplaceable, despite what the hon. member for Carletonville might say. This is the group which enjoys the least security and has fewer freedoms than any other colour group. Unfortunately for the Government, it is the group which concerns the outside world, especially our neighbours, the most. Their whole lives are spent in fear of breaching some regulation which may lead to their being endorsed out of the urban areas where they live and work to a homeland, which in many cases they do not know, where there is no work for them and in most homelands there is not sufficient agricultural land to provide an economic plot for them This policy is resented not only by the urban dweller but also by the Africans living in the reserves. Last year a motion was moved by a member of the Government Party in the Transkei Assembly and was supported by the Cabinet. This motion was carried. It asked our Government not to repatriate Transkeian citizens unless there is suitable accommodation and employment. Speakers there stressed that the repatriate, using the words of one of them “do not know a single person in this territory”. Another speaker said: “They only know the Transkei by hearsay, but they have never been to see it.” It is difficult to assess the harm done to our name by reports that come from settlements such as Mnxshe, Sada and Dimbasa. These places were mentioned in the Transkeian debate by Government speakers who do not want settlements of this type to be established in the Transkei. That is what they feared.

Recently we saw in the Press that Mr. Russell, a priest, made representations to the Minister with regard to Dimbasa. The facts as set out by him in his letter are most distressing. I think he wrote to him twice. I ask the hon. the Minister whether he will please give this House details of what is happening at Dimbasa and also at those other areas. We should like to have details especially in regard to Dimbasa in view of the very distressing facts which have been revealed by Mr. Russell.

I also want to mention the Transkei. Some old people want to return to the Transkei. Others are sent back. But there is not a place where old people can settle. There is not a home for them anywhere. They cannot acquire land. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister how far they got in doing anything for settling the old people back in the Transkei. One only has to read the Black Sash reports to realize the hardship caused by the unsympathetic officials … [Interjections.] Members can laugh about this. If it were not for that organization just think of what further misery there would be among people living in the Bantu areas. Those are the people who give assistance and aid. Every member on the other side knows that often through their efforts Bantu are allowed to stay on either as a result of a court ruling or by an official changing his mind.

Despite the insecurity and the ravages of the lawless elements in the urban areas, the reserve Bantu do endeavour to get into the urban areas. They know work is available and they want work. They know that if they cannot get it legally, they can get it illegally because of the shortage of labour. It is a shocking thing that the Stellenbosch Bureau of Economic Research should have reported that there is a shortage not only of skilled labour but also of unskilled labour when we know that there is a surplus of unskilled and unemployed labour in the reserves.

One of the complaints made by Chief Kaiser Matanzima in what was to the Government such a distasteful address to his congress was that a great number of people were unemployed. He asked for a complete reorientation of the Government’s labour policy and asked that attention be given to Transkeian work seekers. This appeal came despite the disclosure by the Transkeian Minister of the Interior that a record number of 185 000 work seekers were placed in employment outside the territory in 1970.

That Minister also referred to the upsurge in the number of desertions and refusals to work on arrival in the White area. Why are there these desertions? It is not because they want to get back to the Transkei. It is because they know they can get more lucrative employment here than that for which they are recruited, and they also know that if they stay with the contractor who recruited them, at the end of the contract they will have to go back, after 12 months, and then they must reapply to come down again. He also referred to the increase in the incidence of bribery and corruption, bribery by men wanting permits for the innocent and what should be a laudable purpose of seeking work where work is available. This Government treats the urban African as though he were a problem, whereas he is one of the biggest assets this country has. He is an embarrassment to Government policy and ideals because his very presence and his growing numbers are obvious and discernible proof of the failure of their policy. Ingenious and artful excuses and explanations are given for his presence, which is said to be only a temporary phenomenon. Listening to voluble Ministers, one would believe that his presence is a myth, a figment conjured up by treacherous industrialists, economists, statisticians and leftist politicians, and that it is merely done to embarrass the protagonists of apartheid.

Sir, but the facts speak for themselves. The hundreds of thousands convicted annually under the pass laws alone is proof of his presence here. The policy of apartheid as adumbrated in 1948 was first to arrest the trend of the influx of Africans to the urban areas and then to reverse it and finally to rely solely on migrant labour. This was in line with the attitude of the Stallard Commission which was appointed in 1922 and which recommended that the African should only be allowed to enter the urban areas to minister to the needs of the White man and should thereafter depart. But 10 years later this recommendation was rejected by the Holloway Commission, which reported that not only was it impracticable but also unfair to the Natives who had already become permanent town dwellers or dwellers on European farms.

Then 25 years later the Fagan Commission, after two years of investigation, also rejected the Stallard report, because it found it “to be a false policy, if for no other reason than because the proposition itself had in the course of time proved to be false”. There is much more justification now, 50 years after that commission reported, for saying that the policy has been proved false and that the increase in the number of Bantu in the urban areas since then proved it to be false. Also, Dr. Verwoerd, the architect of the present policy, himself gave vested rights to the Bantu living in the urban areas when he amended section 10 of the Bantu Urban Areas Act in 1957. I want to read what Fagan had to say, too—

I submit, Sir, that that is sound advice for any Government to follow. There was an attempt at one stage to bring about a gradual reduction of the number of Bantu in the urban areas. For instance, we know that there was the 5 per cent reduction proposed in the Western Province, but this has now been abandoned, and it seems that the only restriction now placed on the recruitment in the urban areas is the shortage of accommodation. Employers are encouraged to build their own permanent structures in the Native townships and to bring their labourers down on a contract basis. This is an extension of the migratory labour system which is condemned by every thinking person and certainly by every church. I have spoken so often on the evil of this subject, Sir, that I do not intend going into it again, except to ask the Minister how far he has progressed with the plan to relieve some of the hardships of his policy by arranging facilities for men to fly home to their families over the weekends. Sir, the Secretary for Bantu Administration and Development said in a statement in March last year that an interdepartmental committee had been appointed to investigate the provision of transport. That was a year ago. I would like to hear from the Minister what has happened about that inter-departmental report. Sir, one of the drawbacks of this system of allowing each employer to recruit his own labour is, of course, that he has to recruit more than he requires, because he has to build up a surplus to be able to draw upon when some of his employees fall out for some reason or other. This of course, means added expense which also promotes inflation.

Sir, the question of the Bantu living in the townships is one which should give the Minister much cause for concern, especially having regard to the dialogue which we are inviting with our neighbours and the states to the North and the reference to a change in attitude made by the Foreign Minister from Mauritius the other day. It is these people living in the urban areas, about whom the outside world is mostly concerned. But the Government’s aim is to make the urban areas as little attractive as possible, and in fact they are doing it. There will be less and less endeavour to give them amenities in townships in the White areas; more and more money intended for building up amenities in the urban areas will be transferred to the reserves; more and more profits which are made on beer and on liquor will go to the reserves; more and more the services levies, which were never intended for the reserves, will go there. Professional men are not encouraged to minister to their own people in the urban areas. The hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education will know that I made representations on behalf of the Law Society for an African attorney to be allowed to practise in Langa.

For one.

Yes, that would be one person who could serve his people there. This application was refused. He was told that he could go to one of three places in the Transkei where there were no attorneys. Sir, one of the reasons that this African attorney gave for wishing to establish himself in this area, was that he wished to make money so that he would be in a better position at a later stage to go to the reserves. The Minister then said, “I will give you money to go to the reserves”, but what about his people who should be served here? There is only one doctor in Langa, and how does he live? He has to live in a normal house built for people in the lower income group.

In some townships there are long leases under which an African can build his own house; he is allowed some latitude. In other places they have a site and service scheme under which there is also some latitude. But in the main these houses in the Bantu townships are monotonously the same.

Can the hon. member tell me what the maximum size of the land is which each Bantu individual may own in a White area under the United Party policy?

We have said, as the Tomlinson Commission did, that we will give them an economic holding, but obviously areas vary and you cannot lay down any fixed rule as to what you are going to do. Sir, for the great majority of the Africans sub-economic houses are still a necessity but there are those who can afford to pay economic rentals, and they are given no choice. Whether the African is a professional man or a teacher or a successful trader, he is compelled to live in a house built to cater for the lower-income group. The Government must devise some means of giving these people better opportunities. Our policy, of course, is that they will have home ownership.

Can they buy a farm?

Yes, they can buy farms in the Transkei, as they are doing now.

Can they buy a farm in a White area?

Only the urban African who is permanently urbanized can buy a house. Not only would we provide for his comfort and security in that way, but we would also be building a stable influence in the Bantu townships by giving them a stake in the welfare of the township and an interest in the maintenance of law and order.

Sir, what is the complaint of most of the young While people today against this Government? Their complaint is that because of the prohibitive cost they are not able to afford their own home. They want to own their own home, and so does the African; he also wants to own his own home. He is no different from anybody else. He does not want to live in a hovel. He does not want a lower living standard than a White man. Where he can afford it, he lives as well. To say that he has a lower standard of living is no justification for giving him lower pay than a White man or a Coloured man where he does the same work and for compelling him to live in a lower rental house. He must be given the opportunity to enjoy the same standard of living. The Government should pay more attention to the aspirations of the urban Bantu and recognize the fact of their permanence. The Government should give them more opportunities to improve their lot, such as technical training. There is no technical training, except for a small place in Johannesburg run by the Johannesburg Municipality against the wishes of this Government. I see the hon. the Minister is shaking his head. Can he tell me in what other township is technical training given to the Bantu besides in Umlazi near Durban?

In the Bantu areas.

I am talking about the urban Bantu in the White areas. Does the hon. the Minister not realize that? What provision has been made to train them there? Besides that the training in the Bantu areas can never satisfy the needs.

Why not?

Because it is not there. If this Government gave these people more respect and did not take the credit for always knowing what is best for the Bantu and treating him as a child to be continuously guarded, guided and lectured by way of allegories, which more often than not are an insult to his intelligence, he would become a bigger asset than he is now. In other words, if he were treated with respect as an adult and given guidance in local administration and if the Bantu people were trained in the same way as we have been trained, he would have much more respect for the Government and more inclination to co-operate with a greater loyalty to a country in which he would feel he had a stake and a meaningful place. This country would then be a refuge and a home to him and, as I have said, he would become a bigger asset than he is now. It is the attitude of patronage which upset African leaders. This attitude is typified by the attitude of the hon. the Minister to Chief Kaiser Matanzima recently.

This brings me in the very short time I have left, to the third group, namely the group living in the reserves. Why did the hon. the Minister react the way he did to Chief Kaiser Matanzima? The hon. the Minister’s anger in this House was almost unbridled. I have never seen anyone behave in this House as the hon. the Minister did that night. He must realize that Chief Kaiser Matanzima is a politician just as the hon. the Minister is.

I told him we were both politicians.

I am glad to hear that. The hon. the Minister must realize too that the people living in the reserves have been given by him far more freedom to speak their minds than any other groups. The leaders in the reserves are the only people really whom this Government regards as Bantu leaders. In the course of time through these Bantu leaders the Bantu people will consult with the Government and do whatever they think best for the Bantu living in the urban areas. They will use their ambassadors and each tribe will have its own ambassador. I am certain that all consultation will be with the leaders of the reserves, but the hon. the Minister must realize that the urban areas will be drawn into the politics of the reserves. Insults and supposedly broken promises made to the leaders of the reserves will be reflected here. They will use their people here, where they know it can hurt us most, to right wrongs which they think they have suffered. This the hon. the Minister must realize.

Utopias are being offered to the people in the reserves if they accept separate development. Every time a Native leader says he wants a territorial authority, great publicity is given to the fact that the Government’s policy has been accepted. After the jubilation, if there is any criticism by the leaders of the policy, there is annoyance on the part of the Government. The dispute the hon. the Minister had with Chief Kaiser Matanzima is going to be repeated again and again. The requests are not only going to be for more land and more departments, but there will be other requests too.

The request for land is a serious one. The hon. the Minister has again referred to the purchase of land this afternoon. We in the United Party have stressed time and again that it is the duty of the Government to state where the boundaries of the reserves are going to be. When the Transkei Constitution Bill was passed, we adopted that attitude, and we made a major point of the same question when we objected to the Bantu Homelands Constitution Bill which was passed just recently. We said then: “You should fix the boundaries before you put these people on the way to self-government. You do not want to have arguments about boundaries afterwards”. As Mr. Guzana, the leader of the Opposition in the Transkei Assembly, said after this argument between the Minister and Chief Kaiser Matanzima. “we are now-developing again the frontier mentality”, which existed in the 19th century when we had all those wars on the borders of the Eastern Province about boundaries. The same thing is going to happen again if you set these people on the way to separate states without the boundaries being finalized. Chief Kaiser Matanzima has asked for certain land to be bought, but the Minister and the Prime Minister have said that he cannot have those districts. At the same time, however, the Deputy Minister of Bantu Development, Mr. Raubenheimer, in a speech up-country, said that if the Transkei wanted more land, they would have to buy it themselves. Now I want to ask him: Where can they buy that land?

Where did you get that story?

It was in the newspapers. He said that at Kroonstad … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, first of all I want to associate myself with the words addressed to Mr. Dodds, who is retiring now. I, too, want to wish him a very pleasant period of rest. To us as members of this House Mr. Dodds has been a very useful Secretary during the time we have been able to work with him. We hope and trust that this time, which he is now going to have at his disposal, will be very pleasant for him. We hope that he will enjoy good health in order that he may enjoy the remaining years of his life.

Furthermore, we want to address a word of welcome to Mr. Van Onselen, who now holds this post. My acquaintance with Mr. Van Onselen dates back not only to the days of Humansdorp, but in fact to the year 1937, when we, as two country cousins, arrived in Johannesburg together. At the time he joined the department, where he still is today; I was working in another department. It was possible for us to be in each other’s company quite often. In later years, too, we got to know him as a very dynamic, diligent and hardworking official, especially when he became the secretary of the Bantu Resettlement Board of Johannesburg. Today it is possible for us to say with great conviction that the task that was performed there, is a monument to I. P. van Onselen. It was his dynamic personality, along with that of Mr. Heckroodt, which led to the clearance of the Black spots in Johannesburg and the establishment of areas such as Meadowlands. Diepkloof and the other surrounding areas. We got to know him for these things, and we are convinced that be will perform this new task, which rests on his shoulders now, just as dynamically.

Sir, you will appreciate that I cannot reply in ten minutes’ time to all the points mentioned by the hon. member for Transkei in the space of half an hour. However. I want to react to a few of them. In the first place, he referred to “the Minister and his lieutenants’’. I do not know to whom the hon. member was referring. If he referred to the hon. Deputy Ministers and the Bantu Affairs Commission, I want to say this to him; We worked along with this Minister for a long time, and it gave us great joy to be his lieutenants and to perform a grand task such as this one. I am referring to the development of the many Bantu peoples here in South Africa. It is pleasant to be a lieutenant of such a person.

I want to pause at the question of the urban Bantu. The hon. member dwelt on it at length. In this regard I want to ask the United Party a few questions, and I hope that they will have the time to reply to them. My first statement is that the United Party’s policy in respect of the urban Bantu is an immoral policy. They must prove to us where the morality is in their policy. If they want to grant these people ownership in any area, the United Party should tell us to what extent they will grant those people the every right to develop fully in that area. The hon. Opposition must bear in mind that their policy will make these people permanent inhabitants in that area. They will be granted ownership in that area. Certain rates and taxes will be levied on that property, and those people will want to have control over the spending of those rates and taxes. What else is the United Party going to do with them? Will the United Party afford those people, once they have been settled there, the opportunity of bringing their families there as well? And if their families expand, surely there should be room for expansion. In other words, additional property must be acquired in order to accommodate those people. At present there are more than 600 000 Bantu in the Johannesburg complex. If we bear in mind the normal increase of the Bantu in this area, for example, and if they are to bring their families there as well, it is clear that the time will arrive when the Bantu area of Johannesburg will have proprietary rights extending up to the far western areas, right up against Carletonville. This area will extend past Westonaria up to Potchefstroom. Now, is this the United Party’s policy? What is the United Party going to do with the people who will be there permanently? Is the United Party going to grant those people a say in the administration of those areas? Is it going to grant these people town councils?

Have you never read our policy?

But what are you going to do with these people under your policy? If the United Party is going to settle those people there on a permanent basis, it will also have to grant those people the right to serve on those town councils. In other words, those people will have to serve on every small town council and every large town council in this country. Is the United Party going to do the same with them as it wants to do with them in this Parliament? Is the United Party going to grant these people the right to have limited representation on a city council such as that of Johannesburg? If this policy of the United Party is carried through to its logical conclusion, the town councils will eventually be inundated with these people and they will eventually he in the majority, just as we fear that, under United Party policy, this Parliament will eventually become a Bantu Parliament. The pressure brought to bear by these people will become so strong that it will simply be impossible to resist it.

But there is another matter I want to refer to. Hon. Members opposite said that it would not be possible for the economic development of the homelands to absorb these people. The hon. the Minister referred here to the economic committee, which had been established under the Bantu Affairs Commission. That committee very exhaustively and carefully investigated the economic settlement of these Bantu in the homelands. After the exhaustive study which we made with the help of people such as Prof. Lombard and others, I do not share the pessimism of hon. members on the other side of this House. On the contrary, I take the optimistic view that we shall eventually be able to settle these people there on an economic basis, i.e. in a way which will afford them a means of gaining a livelihood. This advice has already been given to the hon. the Minister. At present the Riekert Commission is making detailed recommendations to the Government in this regard. We are eagerly looking forward to the day when those particulars will be made known. A start was made with border area development before 1960. I want to mention a few figures here. Although a start had only been made with it in 1960, as many as 81 000 were employed in those areas by the end of 1969. Yesterday the hon. member for Yeoville said here that Prof. Renders had stated in his report that 53 000 of these people were unemployed. If within this short space of time, during which only the surface of border area development had been scratched, we provided 81 000 people with employment, it means that in view of everything that is happening in the homelands at the moment, it will be easy to provide 53 000 people with employment. In comparison with what we have already done, surely this is nothing but child’s play. In view of the facts that have been placed at our disposal, we are quite optimistic and we can tell the world that there is nothing to fear. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Langlaagte is the Vice Chairman and he acts as chairman of the Bantu Affairs Commission and he used that …

He is chairman.

So he is chairman and he used about half of his ten minutes making a ridiculous, unbased and unnecessary attack on things which have nothing to do with United Party policy. For five minutes he asked questions of this side of the House, while he is the person who is supposed to be responsible, with the hon. the Minister, for the administration of this department. Yet he spends his time asking questions about what would happen under the United Party policy.

Answer them.

I will answer them. He accused us of making permanent residents of the Bantu in the White areas. I want to ask him: Are these businessmen whose photos appear in every propaganda piece which is sent overseas, the men with shops and bus services and so on, and who are the examples of progress in Soweto, all going back to their homeland or are they permanent residents of Soweto? Let them give us the answer to that question. I am referring to those people who are held up as part of the showcase of the hon. the Minister. Are they all temporary? Do we have railway lines, railway stations, electric street lighting and permanent houses for temporary residents? Are they temporary? Let the hon. member tell us that they all have to go back! [Interjections] I hope he realizes that he is saying to every businessman whom they are asking to establish businesses in the Bantu townships that he is prepared to lend the money, that he is prepared to establish him there, but he has to get out eventually.

I now want to give the House the alternative to this nightmare, this so-called vision, which is really a nightmare of the Government’s policy. I said in another debate that after all the hundreds of millions of rands we spend on defence, the real security of South Africa lies in the loyalty of our people. It lies in the loyalty of all our people of all races in South Africa. That is the ultimate responsibility of the civil administration of this hon. Minister and of his administration. What are the facts? When all the dreams have been dreamt and when all the plans have been planned, one cold fact remains to haunt them when they awake. That is the presence of millions and millions of Bantu permanently, in the White areas. They will be turning the wheels of our industry, they will be driving the tractors on those members’ farms and they will be caring for and nursing the Nationalist M.P.s’ babies. They will be working in our shops and they will be doing the jobs which they are doing today. When all the talk and all the words, the millions of words which have been poured out by those hon. members, have all been forgotten and all been erased from history, the Bantu will still be here in White South Africa. That is where this Government falls down completely. They give them a piece of paper and say “there is your passport”. They then close their eyes and say that they are not here any more. They are not here any more because they have given them a passport and they are now temporary sojourners. But in the meantime they are applying rules and regulations until more and more Bantu from the White areas, the “endorsed outs”, the “disqualified", the “not wanted for work”, and the “won’t works” are all grouped in the Bantu homelands with no work to do. This creates the most fertile field for the agitator—the best present for Chinese communist ambition in Africa which one could ever give them—dished up on a plate. But the real danger is in the urban areas. In the urban areas, apart from those whom the hon. the Minister counted as part of the 49,9 per cent, there are thousands upon thousands of illegal Bantu. Every hon. member on that side knows it is true. Every hon. member knows that there are tens of thousands of illegal Bantu in every township in South Africa. They are people beyond the law for whom the very thought of the law is a fear of banishment, and because they are automatically beyond the law before they start they have no respect for the law in any other field.

This is the fundamental difference between our approach and that of the Government, namely our fundamental approach to the question of loyalty. We see as the most urgent task of a Government the creation of the jobs for every pair of hands willing and able to work so that all will be able to find work. These jobs will provide the means and the money for people to live, to buy food and to support themselves and their families. When firstly you create the jobs in insufficient numbers and secondly withhold the people from those jobs which are available and waiting for them you are withholding from these Black people the opportunity to earn a living and thereby to achieve economic security. No person, Black or White, is going to lie down and starve because he has no food to eat. If he cannot work to earn money to buy food, he will steal to buy food. I therefore say that economic security should be the first priority. We have, however, not heard a word about that from hon. members opposite. The hon. the Minister never talked about the economic security or the home security of the urban Bantu. My colleague also dealt with social security. This is the right of a Bantu to have a home in which he can have his furniture and other things which belong to him. This will be something for him to protect. The policeman will then not become someone to fear, but will become the protector of his home, his furniture, his wife and his children. He will then become an ally of law and order. To him the policeman will then be his friend and law and order will be something he will want to preserve. He will find security worth something. One will then get what we aim at in the United Party, namely the responsible class of urban Bantu, the type we were developing in our time with the system of the exempted Bantu. These Bantu were exempted from the pass laws on a test of stability and on recommendation. We had some 50000 or more who had earned exemption. These are the responsible class of Bantu which will be the bulwark between South Africa and the communist and the agitator. That class is the class with whom we can talk, with whom the White man can talk, because he will then become what stands between the White man’s security and those who want to undermine it. And he becomes the body with whom we as White people can consult. He becomes the body of people to whom we can look for an ally in creating stability and security. He becomes the basis not only for consultation, but the basis on which we build the infrastructure for our policy of race federation, including local self-government in the townships. The hon. member for Langlaagte asked me what about local councils, and what our policy is. He knows or should know that it is, one of local self-government through Bantu councils in their own townships. And the basis of stable self-government will be this responsible class who can develop only from the sort of policy I have outlined, based on economic stability, the stability of home life, something which he can defend, something which he wants to defend, our way of living which is worth defending because it has benefit for the Bantu himself,

I shall not try to reply to the hon. member for Durban Point, for tonight the hon. member had a lot of loosely connected thoughts, and when he did not know how to connect them properly, he dramatized them. In a dramatic manner he only succeeded in implanting a few ideas in the minds of the Bantu and in the minds of those people who are only too keen to allow themselves to be used to stir up agitation amongst the Bantu. But the people are no longer listening to these things I think the hon. member has now, like Aunt Liefie of Sondagspoort fame, succeeded in talking himself into feeling melancholic. I think this is the comment his speech deserves.

When the hon. the Minister resumed his seat this afternoon, after he had briefly pointed out to us, step by step, the various aspects of what was being done and carried out in the Department of Bantu Administration, and how it was taking shape, outside, it was clear to South Africa and to the whole world that the policy of separate development was succeeding in this country. [Interjections.] It is succeeding to an increasing extent, and the best proof for my statement being correct, is the hollow laughter which we are getting from the Opposition now. The hon. the Minister pointed out to us the economic aspect and how progress was being made in that regard. He pointed out to us the political aspect, the development taking place in that regard and to what extent we had already made progress. He referred to the agricultural sphere, and also in other spheres he briefly indicated to us what the position was That was the clearest proof that separate development was succeeding in South Africa. It is true that there are many aspects to the policy of separate development, and in this department one must do one thing and not neglect to do the other. There is a great deal to be done. Now, for more than 300 years one had in South Africa a situation which developed in this multi-national country, where the various population groups had not been ordered. Then the National Party came into power with a policy, which has become a mandate and an instruction from the electorate to implement that policy, to order these various population groups in South Africa. In this process of the application and the implementation of this policy, the National Party has, since assuming the reins of government, had to deal with a very unpatriotic Opposition and an absolutely un-South African English-language Press, which have gone out of their way to thwart this Government in carrying out its policy and its mandate. This is what we have had from these people, who have been complicating our task.

One of the many facets of our policy deals with the clearance of Black spots and the resettlement of the Bantu when those Black spots are being cleared. It is needless to ask the Opposition whether they are in favour of the clearance of Black spots; whether they are in favour of the clearance of badly situated Bantu areas and whether they are in favour of the resettlement of those Bantu under more favourable and better conditions, with better and more favourable amenities for those people who are being moved. Sir, this happened in South Africa in every case where this Government had the courage of its convictions to clear those Black spots and badly situated places and to resettle those Bantu. Sir, I want to refer you to the conditions which used to prevail in the western suburbs of Johannesburg. In recalling those conditions, one could speak about them for a whole day and a whole evening as well. We, who grew up there and knew these conditions and saw what circumstances prevailed there and under what critical conditions people were living there —not only non-Whites, but also Whites, who were compelled to live there through economic circumstances—can go on talking about these things all day and all evening. It was the late Dr. Verwoerd and the Department of Bantu Administration that cleared those Black spots. When that clearance work was done, the Secretary-designate for this department was the secretary of the Resettlement Board under the chairmanship of Mr. Willem Heckroodt. I call to mind how Dr. Verwoerd was ridiculed in this House about indulging in so-called day-dreaming in foreseeing the establishment of Meadowlands. I call to mind the days when the agitators were driving around there in order to incite people not to move. This incitement took place under the leadership of people who were deriving financial benefit from the desperate conditions under which the Bantu and other non-Whites were living there. Sir, today Meadowlands stands there as a proud monument to the National Party, to this Government, and to the Department of Bantu Administration and Development because of the work that was done there.

But it is not only Meadowlands which stands there today as a proud monument to the National Government; for the Whites there is a suburb called Triomf, which was established in those dismal conditions which prevailed there at the time and today people are proud to be able to live there. Sir, this is the order that was brought about there in one of these cases. There are other cases as well. You will recall, Sir, how we conducted in this House a debate on the Mamathola tribe who were living in the Wolkberg, i.e. when Dr. Verwoerd wanted to move those people to Metz and wanted to grant them land there. The Opposition fought that proposal tooth and nail in this House; a formidable Press campaign was launched; a certain member of the Other Place went out of his way to fight those removal orders, so much so that we had to adopt a motion here in order to make that removal possible. Sir, here in my hand I have a clipping from the Star of Monday, 10th May, 1971, only a few days ago—

Having been egged on and incited by the Press and other individuals not to move, the Mamathola tribe decided to organize a two-day feast in August in order to pay homage to Dr. Verwoerd. I do not know whether the hon. member for Houghton has already received her invitation and whether she has seen the report, but according to this report both the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and the hon. member for Houghton will be asked to attend. Sir, these people have finally allowed themselves to be convinced and have agreed to move. Listen to what Rufus Letsoala, a son of the local tribal chief, had to say—

This is the proof of the work done by the National Party in regard to clearing these areas. Sir. I want to refer to a report by Father John Warden on Madikwe. He wrote a splendid report, in which he pointed out the conditions prevailing there. In that report he stated very explicitly that the conditions prevailing there, did not come about as a result of publicity, but that the department created them of its own accord. Over the past ten years we have moved 88 236 people in the Transvaal, 142 people in the Orange Free State, 13 686 people in the Cape and 21 836 people in Natal from these critical conditions to better conditions, where we afforded these people better amenities and opportunities, so much so that today festivities can be arranged in honour of people who initiated this policy, in honour of the National Party and its leaders. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, all this historical background which the hon. member for Wolmaransstad has made use of in order to try to deter us from dealing with the urban Bantu may be interesting, but it does not in any way annul the guilt of the Nationalist Party for the policy which it has declared with regard to the urban Bantu. If the hon. member is so proud of their achievements in Meadowlands and in other places, why are he and his party so busy trying to destroy what they have built up? We would like to know something else. We know that over the years in the history of a country every section of the community made some contribution in the course of the development of that country. But having built something of which the Government is proud, why do they now wish to destroy it? I say that the most important asset in our country today which we have to weigh very carefully, is the asset of the urban Bantu, playing his part, as he does, in every field in the economic life of this country, making his contribution in an endeavour to have a settled urban working community and giving an example in the areas in which he has developed, of good, orderly citizenship. I say that if the Government with its policy wishes to break that up, everything which it says it has achieved hitherto, will crumble into dust.

The hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education in the course of a debate on another subject, but dealing with similar issues, said—

He is talking about the urban Bantu—

That is exactly what we, the United Party, expect of any Government, because that is how we regard the settled urban Bantu. This was said in relation to the urban Bantu. The urban Bantu constitutes a vital asset in the economic field, an asset which we cannot ignore and which we dare not destroy.

Mention was made of the enormous township of Soweto, which grew, despite Government policy, from 1948 to this day, from about 200 000 people to nearly 700 000 people. It has grown in an orderly way; orderly townships have been established; even chambers of commerce have been established amongst them; a Bantu Council has been established and advisory boards have exercised supervision over the affairs of the Bantu in years past. It is all very well to smile and think that it is because of something the Government has done. The Government must do something that is of some value. But the points I have mentioned all point to the importance and permanent value of the Bantu people in our midst. Today they number in our cities well over 4½ million people. What we would like to know is whether 4½ million people are going to move in and out continuously just like a busy body of ants in the veld. Must they move in and out all the time, changing their personalities, their homes and their way of life? Must tribal Natives be brought in to be taught just to be sent back again?

Are we going to get rid of all the skilled labour we have? If the Government has done so well and the hon. the Minister is so proud of the developments in the homelands, why is there a continuous flow of people to the cities seeking labour? Why are they not returning to their homelands to seek labour? Because after 22 years the Government has nothing to show that is of any permanent value in the homelands, which can in any way help to establish a properly settled, permanent community. This fact has been acknowledged in the Tomlinson Report and they know that they cannot take back 15 or 16 million people into the homelands. It is a fallacy and every businessman and every young South African today—and I am glad that the hon. member for Transkei mentioned this—irrespective of party affiliations, is convinced that this Government’s attitude is entirely fallacious, foolish and destructive in so far as the future of the country is concerned.

Do the members opposite realize that the urban Bantu put South Africa in a position where we are the one country in the world which need not fear a depression? Do they realize that, with rising standards of living amongst the Blacks throughout our cities and even beyond, we will always be assured of a continuously growing and expanding consumer market? Are they aware that we also have a large untrained pool of labour, which is gradually being trained and integrated into our economic growth? Do they not realize that one cannot in any advancing country have constant changes of up to 100 per cent annually—for that is really what their policy amounts to—in the labour pattern of a developing economy?

Let me, furthermore, say that, despite the Government, we are beginning to show progress in the whole issue with regard to the Black people of this country, an issue which is carefully being watched by the rest of the world, because we, in fact, are almost a centre of one of the great experiments of race relations between Whites and non-Whites. Little can be achieved by the Government’s policy which leaves them nothing but an empty future in the light of the development which has thus far been achieved in creating a state of self-government or homelands for the Bantu.

May I ask the hon. member a question?

No, I do not have time for that. I would like to point out to the Government that capital investments have been made in Soweto today to the extent of nearly R67 million. That is one urban area alone. Surely that is not going to be allowed to be at the whim and fancy of a constantly moving and migrating population?

Why not?

Because it will harm the country. What the Government must realize is that this will not harm the Blacks, but the White people of this country. We want to avoid living with a sense of fear: we want to look on the positive side of life. We want to regard the urban Bantu as an asset to the country, as people who can stay in those areas near our cities and make their contribution to the production of the country.

100 million of them?

I hope that the hon. member for Waterkloof will get onto his feet and talk for a change instead of making those foolish and inane interjections. We require settled people, who, as has been pointed out, are loyal and friendly. We have been able to bring it about despite the Government. All we are afraid of is that they will go out of their way to destroy it. When the hon. member for Wolmaransstad says that he knows it, that he has lived with them, he knows very little apart from what he has heard of one or two isolated incidents. I have spent five years in an administrative capacity with regard to Soweto; I have seen a people grow, people who are and who want to be orderly, a people who want to work and who are not warlike and enemies of the Whites. He is a person who receives with gratitude whatever assistance and help he can get from the White man. They are our friends because our future is inextricably intertwined with all the races of this country. Anyone who thinks that he is going to unravel it, and that they are going to shift each into their separate areas and give them separate economies, is daydreaming and in fact—if it is not unparliamentary—crazy. I am not alleging that any member is so but my imagination runs rife when I think of how crazy people can get in thinking that this is what they can bring about. I want to say that it is time that we listen to the people who think. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to follow up the hon. member’s tirade, except to tell him it is quite true that I have said we want to make the Bantu in urban areas happy. We want to give them a fair modus vivendi. However, the hon. member failed to add that we had also said the Bantu was a member of a people as well as a member of the homeland which that people inhabited. He must get his rights in the Bantu homeland. For that reason I want to point out two very important aspects on this occasion. We on this side of the House are also desirous to give the Bantu a proper family life, in as far as that is practicable. One of the ways in which this may be done, is by establishing a proper transport network system between the Bantu homelands and the White area of South Africa. Progress in that sphere is almost unbelievable. First I want to mention very briefly the machinery our department has built up in order to achieve that object. In the first place, there is at the top an inter-departmental transport committee on which various departmental heads such as those of Planning, Community Development. Finance, Coloured Affairs, Bantu Administration and Development and the Department of Transport serve. The committee meets annually, sometimes biennially, under the chairmanship of the General Manager of the S.A. Railways. This committee takes decisions in respect of policy and makes recommendations on this important matter to the Minister of Transport. The main function of the committee is to decide on and make recommendations in regard to resettlement railway lines. If it is necessary to do so, further research is carried out in a specific field by subcommittees which then make the necessary recommendations to the inter-departmental committee. Then, on the second level, we find technical transport committees which have been established for larger urban complexes, for example, Pretoria, Durban, Johannesburg and Germiston. These committees decide on local matters, for example, the extension of rolling stock, the building of new lines, electrification, etc. Then there are the various departmental representatives who meet under the chairmanship of the System Manager and who make recommendations to the inter-departmental transport committee. In addition there is an interdepartmental committee for weekend transport under the chairmanship of an officer of the Department of Bantu Administration and Development, a committee on which the Department of Transport is also represented. This committee, whose function it is to determine the requirements for weekend transport and to arrange for such transport, whether by train or by bus, is assisted in its task by various local committees for weekend transport, under the chairmanship of the Bantu Affairs Commissioner, on which, inter alia, the managers of Bantu Affairs of the local authorities serve. Lastly, there are also liaison committees on road transport matters, which I do not want to go into now because of a lack of time. Some of the finest transport experts in the country have been brought in by my department to assist in the establishment of a transport network between the Bantu homelands and the White area.

Now I want to give hon. members figures illustrating the progress we made in this regard in the past year. The figures I give are to the nearest thousand. During March, 1970, the Bantu in Durban made 742 000 daily single journeys by train between the homeland and the place of employment. In March, 1971, this increased to 798 000. Therefore, there was an increase of 50 000 in one year. From and to East London 50 000 journeys by train were made in March, 1970, whereas 85 000 journeys were made in March, 1971. In Pretoria 368 000 journeys were made in March, 1970. This number of journeys increased to 418 000 in March, 1971, in other words, an increase of 50 000. In these three places alone 1 160000 journeys were made in March, 1970, whereas 1 301 000 journeys were made in March, 1971. This is an increase of 141 000. Now I want to give the number of journeys by bus made in respect of the Western Transvaal, Natal, the Northern Transvaal, the Northern Cape, the Eastern Transvaal and the Eastern Cape, between the homeland and the places of employment of the Bantu. At these places 1 956 000 single journeys by bus were made during March, 1970. These increased by 37 per cent to 2 678 000 in March, 1971, an increase of 722 000. These are the number of single daily journeys by bus for one month. The figures in respect of the bus services we approved in the past few months are not even included in this number.

In all this amounts to the fact—and this is a powerful fact which has not been mentioned before—that at present more than 4 million single journeys per month are made by train and by bus between the homelands and the White area each month. In other words, what this amounts to is that 173 000 workers are transported from their homes in the homelands to their places of employment each day. This means that in this way we are …

Promoting integration.

I know this hurts the hon. member, but he must give me a chance. What this amounts to is that we, through this transport network which has been established to give the Bantu the necessary family basis as well, are in fact keeping more than one million Bantu in the homelands who would otherwise most probably not have been in the homelands. In this way they are being kept integrated with their own economy. During the Easter weekend of 1970 alone, 36 900 Bantu were transported between the various homelands and their places of employment. But in 1971 this number increased to 45 200. Now I want to tell hon. members that we are continuing along these lines and with this planning as rapidly as possible so as to reach in this way a position which has become vitally important to all of us, and specifically to the Bantu who have the greatest appreciation for this. I can show hon. members who are interested literally a network of weekend and daily journeys which has been introduced for the Bantu throughout the entire Republic of South Africa. It is an experience to go and see how the Bantu, especially over weekends, avail themselves of the train services which have been introduced and which are thoroughly planned by the inter-departmental committee and the other committees I have mentioned. In this way these Bantu are being enabled to an increasing extent to keep in contact with their homelands.

Then I want to mention the second important point. This is that the Government has decided, and I am now putting it to this House, to introduce an incentive measure for the Bantu so that they may he able to settle in the homelands. This will be done on the following basis. A free residential plot will be allotted in a homeland town to the following categories of Bantu: Firstly, to the moneyed Bantu in cases where they can erect houses for themselves. They are given such a plot free of charge. These plots are given free of charge also to Bantu who are part of the natural increase of the Bantu in the White areas. In these cases houses in the homelands are built by the local authorities or by the South African Bantu Trust, which may then be bought at a very reasonable price by these Bantu. In this ease the plot will also be provided free of charge. Lastly, these plots are provided to Bantu who have a right to home ownership in the urban residential areas, but who have sold that right to local authorities and who are prepared to settle with their families in the homelands. Although this was introduced only a short time ago, and is being put to this House for the first lime now, we are already having a very favourable reaction to this offer.

In these two ways, which I wanted to explain to hon. members in the 10 minutes at my disposal, we are, therefore, vigorously carrying out our homeland-orientated policy. These two ways in which we want to encourage them are in brief: Firstly, the incentive measure and, secondly, the establishment of a transport network for the Bantu from the homelands to the cities. We are vigorously carrying out this policy and, as I shall indicate later, we are also doing so in other spheres. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister spoke about the transportation of Bantu from the homelands to their places of work. He did not tell us where those homelands are. I want to tell him that the vast majority of those Bantu are transported from Umlazi to Durban, and in the other case they are transported from Rosslyn to Pretoria. The hon. the Minister must not think he is going to bluff us and the people outside with statistics of the kind he came to light with. We debate this aspect with the hon. members opposite day after day.

You are a pipsqueak, do you know?

The hon. the Minister must not tell me I am a pipsqueak, because it will get us nowhere.

Nevertheless the dogma of and the stagnation in the approach of the Nationalist Party remain. The light at he end of he tunnel is very rapidly becoming bigger and brighter for the line of thought of the United Party. The light at the end of the tunnel is the light of the youth of South Africa. The indoctrination of Nationalism, and particularly the indoctrination of multi-nationalism and of total segregation, are not making the impact on the youth of today that it did when hon. members on that side were stirred up by political indoctrination and other kinds of incitement. The young South Africans of today know that what the older generation does today, will largely determine what problems the youth will have in the future and what privileges they will be able to enjoy in the decades ahead. Slogans such as “poor but White” are regarded as a motion of no-confidence in the integrity and the judgment of the young South African of today. The youth in South Africa today are prepared to accept and to tackle the challenge with courage and perseverance. That is why, when it comes to the policy in respect of human relationships, in this case the relationship between White and Bantu, the youth of South Africa become restless, ask questions and want to help to do something to solve the problem. Instead of the problems of South Africa being presented in their objective reality to the youth, we find chimeras and dream worlds being conjured up by the hon. the Minister and his Deputy. They present South Africa as they would have liked it to be, but not as South Africa really is. The youth of South Africa reject this sentimental indoctrination, they are looking for what is practical and they are questioning ideas which were previously accepted without any argument.

If there is one matter which is being questioned today, it is this new approach of multi-nationalism, balkanization and the so-called ethnically based nation-states envisaged by this Nationalist Party. Most important of all in this questioned absurdity is the future of the urban Bantu, that group of people who, according to spokesmen on the Government side, will be in White South Africa on a so-called temporary permanent basis, but will not only be here; they will work and live here, and for all practical purposes they will spend all of their lives here within White South Africa, Bantu who will never in the future, as far as I can see, see the inside of any Bantu homeland.

The hon. the Minister of Community Development and other hon. members opposite always ask the favourite question whether we, in terms of United Party policy, will throw open the floodgates for the Bantu to stream into the White urban areas with their whole families. Perhaps this hon. Minister will tell us. The hon. member for Durban Point has already dealt with the matter, but we hear nothing from the other side of the House. What does this Government envisage for the thousands of Bantu families who are today living in and around the White cities of South Africa, businessmen in Soweto, motor traders, shop owners, people who are absolutely permanently settled in White South Africa? We want to know from this hon. Minister what he envisages for these people. Just take the one million living in and around Johannesburg in Soweto. Is it the intention of the Government that all those Bantu permanently settled there will become migratory labourers, that all those Bantu families will be sent back to their homelands, and that all the thousands of houses standing there at present and still being built within the While area of South Africa, will eventually fall into disuse? If the reply is “Yes”, we want to know when you are going to start on this and how you are going to set about putting this process into operation; how long do you consider that scheme will take? We have heard about 1978. Perhaps the hon. the Minister or one of his Deputies can give the second kiss of life to this scheme.

The hon. member for Rissik asks us what size plots we will allow. What size plots are there at present in the Bantu locations in the White areas of South Africa? Then the hon. member for Langlaagte comes here and tags on something about proprietary rights. Sir, in principle we shall treat the Bantu as this Government is treating the Coloured people of South Africa. [Interjections.]

However much these hon. members may shout, the youth of South Africa today stand on the verligte and not on the verkrampte side of the political pendulum in South Africa. And the question is this: What right have you and I to expect of the urban Bantu who are in South Africa on a so-called temporary permanent basis, to join you and me in building up White South Africa, to join you and me in strengthening White South Africa economically, to join you and me in serving White South Africa and giving everything, the whole of their lives and their entire existence, and as soon as one no longer needs them, to tell them: “Thank you very much, you have helped us to build up the country, but now go back to your poor, underdeveloped homeland where you belong.”

Sir, multi-nationalism applied to the urban Bantu is the harbinger of frustration and jealousy. How different is the approach of this side of the House in respect of the Bantu in the urban areas! The definition of our approach is realism and responsibility. Our policy is well-known. Firstly, we believe in the economic development of the Bantu reserves with the aid of private White capital and initiative so that those areas may support the biggest possible proportion of the Bantu population of South Africa. But, secondly, we accept the irrefutable fact that our farmers, our industries, our businessmen and our housewives will all need Bantu labour. Bantu labour, men and women, will have to work permanently and live permanently within a reasonable distance from our farms, factories and homes. We accept that the Bantu who are permanently settled in the urban areas and who have to be accepted as urbanized Bantu are a completely different problem from the Bantu in the reserves. We believe that it is in fact the urban Bantu whose interests are being neglected and grossly neglected by this Government. Sir, in terms of our way of thinking separate residential, social and educational facilities must be created for these people. In order to give these Bantu an interest in the maintenance of law and order in South Africa, three things are extremely necessary: In the first place, it must be possible for the deserving Bantu to obtain controlled ownership of their houses in the large urban Bantu towns; secondly, we accept that responsibility is the first result of an undisturbed family life; and, thirdly, the development of a responsible Bantu middle class in South Africa must be actively brought about.

Sir, I want to accuse the Opposition this afternoon of being chiefly responsible for marring sound relations between the various population groups and between the Bantu population group and the Whites in particular. This was proved by the speech made by the hon. member for Transkei in which he once more flung at the hon. the Minister across the floor of this House the much discussed demands made by Chief Minister Kaiser Matanzima. This has been proved even further by the way in which this matter was dealt with by Opposition speakers in previous debates in this House as well as by the English-language Press. The hon. member for Turffontein says that, in terms of the United Party policy, there is a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. Sir, under the United Party policy there is only darkness and an unfathomable abyss; an abyss into which the Whites would ultimately be plunged if the integration policy of the United Party were ever to be implemented. There is only darkness on that road; there is no light either on that road or in the tunnel the hon. member mentioned. What he is doing, is to sow the seeds of destruction; to sow these seeds in the minds and in the hearts of the urban Bantu by holding out to them the ideal that they will eventually attain ownership in the White homeland which will then give them permanency. What he is doing, is to induce in them false expectations and to let them agitate for greater political rights around and in the cities, which will eventually cause the dark abyss to become a reality. Sir, I accuse the people of constantly marring relations. In our multi-national fatherland the establishment, the promotion and the maintenance of sound relations is one of the major tasks not only of this Government but also of every citizen of this country. As a matter of fact, I think it is the duty of a responsible Opposition and in particular of the Press which is constantly imitating them to try and improve relations at all times and under all circumstances.

Sir, points of friction will always arise on the contact level of these population groups; these we cannot eliminate. Minor points of friction will always arise. Further more, points of friction will arise which will be caused by the militant inciters, by people who are inspired and encouraged from outside our borders to incite responsible Whites and non-Whites in this country. It is our duty to eliminate those points of friction. Sir, it is ridiculous to try and play off members of the non-White homelands, such as Chief Minister Kaiser Matanzima, against the Government and to seize upon the Chief Minister Matanzima affair for example to prove that separate development has not succeeded; this is quite ridiculous. One should not seize upon an isolated case where, owing to a measure of over-idealism, an impossible or impractical demand was made by a non-White leader in a speech he made, to prove that the policy of this Government is wrong. One should also read and study the positive statements they make in regard to separate development. I want to ask the hon. the Opposition to do just that. As a result of all the things that have been said, all the fuss that has been made and all the publicity in the newspapers, Chief Minister Matanzima had, inter alia, the following to say—

He went on to say—

Furthermore, he said the following on television in Britain in 1965 (translation)—

Let us look at what the youthful Bantu intellectual, Stephen Montjane, a Johannesburg Bantu editor who obtained the B.A. degree in Leeds, England, has to say. I just want to quote briefly what his attitude and views are. He says (translation)—

I can continue to quote what else was said by this person but I shall leave it at that I now want to quote what was said by a minister of religion in an article in Die Kerkbode of 27th September. 1967. The person who said this was the Rev. Sol. Selepe of Lady Grey. I want to quote this in order to indicate to the Opposition that there are men and leaders among the Bantu who do not think as they do. They should not only seize upon those things which suit their purpose. What is actually of importance in this country and what we should actually take notice of, is this question of the increasing acceptance of separate development among the Bantu. In this article the Rev. Selepe said, inter alia, the following (translation)—

And what do you say now, Tienie?

I say the same. What I am doing is not to present to the House my ideas or those of the hon. the Minister or the hon. the Prime Minister, but to convey the real trends of thought and views of the Bantu themselves so that the Opposition can convince themselves that the non-White peoples of South Africa are to an increasing extent falling in with this political idea of the establishment of separate states which will eventually develop towards the stage of independence. This they accept. I challenge the Opposition to tell me whether, if their political idea of integration were to be implemented one day, they would reverse this development and whether they would say to Kaiser Matanzima and leaders of that calibre, “Look here, those legislative boards which are functioning in the Transkei and in the other homelands must now be dissolved and you have to vote for White representatives in this House”? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, everybody knows that the Nationalist Party lost scats to the United Party after the April general election. Very soon after that, a very well-known historian wrote that before you get change in the government of a country, you find that the rulers lose confidence in their policy. This is what is now happening to the other side. He went on to say that in the hard facts of the South African situation, you will find that the Government will have to do an increasingly complicated juggling act in order to holster the morale of their supporters. This afternoon we have seen one of the next stages of this increasingly complicated juggling act by the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Deputy Minister. The hon. the Minister has come to Parliament and rushed into the debate to tell us of the dozen and score of constitutions that he has managed to manufacture in the time. He has told us that on the agency basis R20 million have been spent, and he has hurled all this at us to prove the success of their policy. But he knows perfectly well that all these constitutions are much too premature. He knows perfectly well, when we asked him how many jobs had been created, that it was only a minimum number of those required in the circumstances.

Then the hon. the Deputy Minister juggled with facts about people going to and fro between the homelands and the White areas. He told us of all the journeys. As the hon. member for Turffontein said, most of these journeys are between areas which are called Bantu urban townships, which are really just ordinary suburbs on our main cities, just as Soweto is. If he had quoted to us the increase in the number of journeys from Soweto to Johannesburg, he probably would have had a more spectacular rise. The only difference is that there they take no trouble to ensure that it is a satisfactory service. So many of these other things are unsatisfactory for the urban Bantu that people well-disposed to the Nationalist Party, such as Dr. Worrall and others in his survey, said that there is no goodwill from the Bantu urban person towards the White man today. This is the stuff that hon. members must put in their pipes and smoke.

Another juggling act we saw from the hon. the Minister, was his reference to the numbers. Allegedly now we have equal numbers of South African Bantu in the Reserves and in the White areas. Of course, the juggling act is just to redraw the boundaries of the Reserves and include in it areas like Mdantsane and Umlazi which are not truly Reserve areas.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.