laid upon the Table:

1. (1) Judges’ Remuneration Amendment Bill [No 94—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Justice).
2. (2) Judges’ Pensions Amendment Bill [No 95—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Justice).
3. (3) Attorneys Amendment Bill [No 96—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Justice).

To be referred to the appropriate Standing Committee, unless the House decides otherwise within three sitting days.

laid upon the Table:

[No 97—85 (GA)]—(Minister of Finance).

Mr Chairman, I shall only take a few minutes. I hope I will not keep the Committee as long as I did yesterday.

In the first place I want to convey my cordial thanks to the Women's Club of the NP for the beautiful little tree I received—I received my buttonhole from my secretary and my department. It is a beautiful young camphor tree. I shall plant it on my plot and I hope it will grow very well, just as the NP has grown over the years. [Interjections.]

I should like to associate myself with speakers on both sides of the House by conveying my particular sympathy to Mrs Kirsten Hawkins and her family on the death of Flight Sergeant W J Hawkins, to Mrs Geraldine Clench and her family on the death of Corporal D G Clench and to the parents and family of Airforce Officer M S Knoetze who died at the tragic accident that occurred at the fire at Sasol in Pretoria. I want to thank the hon members for having also referred to them. I also wish to express the hope that the people who were injured and who are still in hospital will recover very soon.

Then too I should like to associate myself with what hon members have said by conveying my and the Government’s condolences to the wives and family of the late Dr Meiring Naudé and the late Dr Ampie Roux. I do not think there is anyone in this Committee who was closer to these two gentlemen over the years, because as a very young man one of them was my physics professor and the other was my engineering professor at Stellenbosch. I should like to convey the Government’s sympathies to their next of kin.

On the retirement of Dr Wessel van Wyk, who played a very important role in the Geological Survey Department, in the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs and later in the investigation of the diamond industry, Mr Engelbrecht has been appointed his successor. He is present today and I want to extend a cordial welcome to him and congratulate him on his appointment. We also have with us today Mr McRae, who has been appointed the new general manager of Escom. We want to congratulate him wholeheartedly and we hope that he will have a very successful career with Escom.

†I am really at a loss for words in trying to reply to the speeches that have been made so far in the debate, because they have been of a very high standard. I want to thank and congratulate the hon member for Edenvale especially for a very excellent speech. I have very few remarks to make about the speech because I agree with just about everything he said and support every point he made. I also want to thank him for supporting the programme the department is working on at the moment. I should like to refer to only a few points made by the hon member because it is of no use whatsoever repeating everything he said, seeing I agree with it.

One golden thread ran through all speeches, namely the need for greater utilization of local natural resources. This point was made in the speeches of the hon members for Edenvale, Mooi River, Koedoespoort, Rustenburg and Welkom. They all referred to the necessity of exploiting our natural resources more fully.

I have here a document entitled South Africa’s potential for mineral-based added value products, which is being prepared by Dr Edwards of Mintek. We hope to table a mineral strategy plan for South Africa, of which this document will form the basis, early next year. This document deals with a strategy in regard to every mineral in South Africa, and will entail a ten-year plan in which we will highlight the possible import of technology, possible co-operation on know-how exchange etc. We are canvassing financial support to be able to implement this strategy, as well as marketing knowhow to be able to market the products flowing from this strategy. I wish I had the opportunity to show hon members what we are really doing in this regard. However, I want to thank hon members for supporting the idea.

*The next aspect to which the hon member referred is the issue of a scheduled person. I had hoped to deal very fully with the issue of a scheduled person but unfortunately time does not permit me to do so. I hope to table my statement in order that it may be included in Hansard. Perhaps I shall make history, in the sense that Mr Speaker will decide that it may indeed happen. Nevertheless, after this I shall issue a full statement to the Press.

I am going to quote just a brief extract from the statement to indicate that as far as a scheduled person is concerned, the standpoint of the Government on the principle of his replacement by a competent person is very, very clear. We have made a great deal of progress. Four years sounds like a very long time, but a very large number of people are involved here. In order to give the hon member the assurance that we are giving the matter positive attention I just wish to quote part of the statement.

According to my most recent information, renewed efforts are now being made to expedite the negotiations. I have been informed that a series of meetings have been planned for the coming months in order to discuss the relevant points. It will be realized that there is a wide spectrum of employees and employers in the mining and related industries as a whole, and negotiations inevitably take time.

After discussions—which took place yesterday—with representatives of employees, the Government decided to set 31 December 1985 as a target date for the finalization of the discussions on the alteration of the relevant legislation.

I have only a few minutes left but I do want to say, with reference to the energy plan to winch the hon member and other hon members referred, that we hope to table it very early next year. It will deal in great detail with the points which the hon members broached.

I thank the hon member for Edenvale for his support of the Koeberg investigation. I think we all agree that if we err, it should be on the side of caution. I thank the hon member for supporting that view.

To co-operate with a group such as the one of which the hon member for Rustenburg is the chairman is truly a pleasure. I want to thank him most sincerely for his friendly words concerning the department. I want to tell him that the feeling he expressed is mutual. We, too, feel that way. I think I have already replied to the hon member’s speech. His main theme was also the better utilization of our natural resources. I sincerely thank him for what he said in that regard.

The hon member for Koedoespoort referred to diamonds. I agree wholeheartedly with him that we must make better use of our local skills. If the hon member wants to exercise a little patience, there is the prospect that we shall introduce amending legislation next year, which we shall do everything in our power to draft in such a way that we shall develop our local skills to a greater extent so that everything does not have to be done abroad. Therefore I agree with the hon member.

I shall react later as far as Soekor is concerned. As far as Northern Natal is concerned I just want to tell him that we have already carried out intensive investigations there but there is no oil. As far as we have been able to ascertain there is no gas either. We could not even find signs of it.

†I want to thank the hon member for Mooi River for his support and kind words. He made the very, very valid point that we should establish the image of a reliable supplier of minerals. I quite agree with him and I want to thank him for a very excellent contribution.

*For the moment I shall let these few ideas suffice. I shall reply at a later stage to the speeches made by other hon members.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister can count on our support for any steps he takes to eradicate job reservation on the mines. He can also count on our support for the principle of a 10-year mineral strategy plan. We must beneficiate more of our natural resources in this country. However, he will forgive me if I proceed to mention some points of criticism of his policy.

On 23 January 1985 the hon the Minister announced a massive increase in the price of petrol. At that time the hon the Minister declared that he was basing the increase on an exchange rate of R1,00 to $0,465. Subsequently, in reply to a question on 19 February this year, he said that South Africa was paying a landed price of $29,71 per barrel during January this year.

During the intervening four months both these critical price elements have improved. The exchange rate has strengthened and has settled at just over 50 US cents to the rand—yesterday’s Business Day reported the rate at 53,3 US cents to the rand—and prices per barrel of crude on the spot market reduced to the range of between $25 and $27 per barrel. Assuming we have been able to take advantage of both these factors, it is quite clear that landed cost savings of about five cents a litre or more must have been effected during the past four months.

The hon the Minister’s statement of 24 April 1985 on the subject of the fuel price, however, indicated that in spite of reduced costs the Government was not prepared to pass on any saving to the public at this stage. What the hon the Minister’s statement did not refer to, however, was the fact that the Government’s receipts from GST as a direct result of the fuel price increase had increased dramatically. It is clear from a study of the figures that the January increase represents a GST bonanza by stealth for the Government’s coffers. I calculate that GST receipts on fuel sales will have increased by between R160 million and R200 million a year as a direct result of the increased fuel price.

According to statistics released by the AA in early 1984—in their magazine AA Viewpoint—the Government’s total income from GST on fuel during the financial year 1983-84 was R241,6 million—that was when the GST rate was mainly 6%. During the past year this will have increased as a result of the GST increase to 10%. Now, under the new price, and as a result of the increase of GST to 12%. I estimate that the Government’s total annual receipts will rocket to over R500 million a year from GST on fuel.

This massive increase is accruing to the Government at the expense of the consumer. My point is that the fuel price increase announced in January will not all go towards offsetting the increased cost of importing crude oil, which was the main motivation. As I have shown, this in itself is of course less of a problem than it was four months ago. A substantial slice of the money has simply to be paid over to the Government through the 12% GST mechanism.

To my mind, Sir, the present fuel price therefore represents something of a tax rip off of the consumer by the Government. We should apply this extra GST revenue and the lower landed cost of crude in rand terms towards reducing the huge extent of the latest fuel price increase. On the basis of my analysis of all the figures involved, I believe the Government could afford to reduce the price of fuel by at least five cents with immediate effect.

Another matter I should like to raise in this debate is the question of solar energy. This is part of the golden thread to which the hon the Minister referred earlier. It seems to me that our energy policy-makers could be doing far more than they have done in the past to develop solar energy in this country.

In a Financial Mail Energy Supplement some two years ago the department set out a nine-point list of strategic energy priorities, and item 9 on that list provided for what they called “adequate long-term policy planning to provide for orderly and timeous phasing in of alternative sources of energy”. This was the last item on the list of priorities. Obviously, while I am pleased that that is on the list, it is clear from the latest departmental report that the development of alternative sources of energy—and of solar energy in particular—is the Cinderella of our energy policy. We are fiddling about at the experimental level whereas in other parts of the world production plants have been built and other meaningful practical steps have already been taken.

Let me mention just two specific examples—there are others. The Australian state of Victoria has established a full-blown Solar Energy Board with meaningful powers which is actively promoting a wide range of solar energy generating and conservation measures in that part of Australia.

Another practical example is an electricity generating plant designed and built for the US Department of Energy and called Solar One. It generates 10 megawatts of electrical power from an 80-ha field of heliostats reflecting the sun’s energy onto a tower mounted boiler. That plant is situated in Southern California where they average about 300 cloudless days a year. It is a full blown, functioning, 10 megawatt power station based purely on solar energy. Although there are many parts of our country too that have more than 300 cloudless days per year—and those parts are often in far-flung areas which are expensive to service from the Escom grid—we here have not begun seriously to tap this source of energy in South Africa.

Planners in the USA are now talking in terms of systems as large as 100 megawatts, whereas we here, with our abundant solar resource, have been lagging in a field where we could have ranked among the pace-setters.

To my mind, we in South Africa must take all possible steps to reduce this country’s dependence on imported energy. This means that, hand in hand with developing our fossil fuel reserves to their full potential, and armed with a far more active programme to conserve energy by using it more efficiently, we must take more positive and practical steps to develop alternative sources like solar power. We have the sun and we have the space; all we seem to lack is the willpower.

I would also like to use this opportunity to raise once again the question of lead in petrol in South Africa. As far back as December 1982 it was reported that the former Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs had undertaken to investigate the question with the energy branch of his department. In 1983 and again in 1984 I called for a two-stage phase-down programme to reduce the lead content in our petrol which is among the highest in the world—if not the highest!

In the debate on 4 May last year, the hon the Minister seemed to agree with me—I have his Hansard here. He went on to say that he had an announcement which he wanted to make but because of the time limit it was not possible to do it then. He said (Hansard, Vol 116, col 355):

I thank him for that. [Interjections.] Mysteriously, however, no action—at least action I can track down—seems to have taken place, and more than a year has gone by. So what he was about to announce on 4 May 1984, we are still waiting for.

Did the hon the Minister forget about it?

I forgot nothing.

Mr Chairman, while we have been neglectful of this issue, other important developments have taken place elsewhere in the world during the same period. For example, on 30 July 1984, the United States Environment Protection Agency announced via its head Mr William Ruckelshaus that a new regulation was to be introduced in the USA which would reduce lead used in gasoline by 91% as of 1 January 1986. They estimate that their new standard will save US society $1,8 billion in 1986. The saving would result from reduced vehicle maintenance costs, reduced levels of exhaust ignition pollutants by discouraging misfuelling, and a lowering of the medical and rehabilitative costs that result from excessive exposure to lead.

Another development was an article in the British Medical Journal in which a certain Dr Robin Russell-Jones, an international expert on lead poisoning, said the following, and I quote:

With great respect, it is my view that in South Africa we have the highest permissible lead content of petrol in the world directly as a result of the fact that those with vested interests in this country are very good at lobbying.

Order! I regret that the hon member’s time has expired.

Mr Chairman, I have a Press statement in this connection which I shall send to the hon the Minister.

Mr Chairman, I shall leave the privilege of giving the hon member for Constantia a hiding to the hon the Minister. [Interjections.] Therefore I leave the matter at that because I have another topic I wish to discuss briefly with the Committee.

Although it is true that South Africa is threatened in many spheres, and although some people may be thankful that they do not five here, I want to point out that, on the other hand, there are as many signs indicating that South Africa is a blessed land. We have the most beautiful scenery and the whitest beaches. We have the Karoo. We have the Bushveld. We have the mountains and the gorges. I could carry on in that vein.

Pretty girls and women too.

My good friend the hon member for Standerton who has an eye for the ladies, says we have pretty girls and women too. I agree with him wholeheartedly. South Africa is also rich in bird life. [Interjections.] I could carry on in that vein.

It is also true that this country is particularly rich in minerals of which, figuratively speaking, gold shines most brilliantly. It is one of the most important assets of this country. It is the importance to South Africa of this precious metal which has enchanted kings and queens as well as the simplest of people over the centuries that I want to highlight today.

The mineral industry again proved its worth in 1984. The total value of mineral sales increased by 17% to the formidable amount of R19 008 million. Gold sales represented 60,8% of this amount. According to Mr Thompson, chairman of Amgold, gold did not perform badly when one bears in mind the exceptionally strong dollar, the lower inflation rate in most of the industrial countries and the high interest rates locally. That confirms the faith in gold and the importance of gold particularly on the industrial market which grows steadily year after year.

In the midst of the sombre economic plight of this country of which everyone is aware, inter alia, as a result of the prolonged drought, gold was once again the backbone of the economy in 1984. There is absolutely no doubt about that. Although gold production in 1984 was only 0,5% higher than in 1983, the value of gold sales increased by 1,4% to R11 560 million. According to the Central Statistics Service gold constituted R9 271 million or 10% of the GDP. In order to underline the importance of this figure I want briefly to compare it with that of agriculture, forestry and fisheries, for example, whose contribution to the GDP was 5% and that of the manufacturing industry which was responsible for 23% of the GDP. In spite of the weak international gold market where the average gold price in 1984 was 362,08 American dollars per fine ounce compared to $423,68 in 1983, the gold mining industry—supported by the low international value of the rand, of course—continued to maintain its level of employment and income and by so doing made a considerable contribution to the financial and economic stability of the country.

The gold mining industry is the biggest single contributor by way of income tax. In 1984 the direct contribution was no less than R2 314 million. To this we could also add the indirect contribution from the salaries of the various employees in the industry. During the first quarter of this year the industry paid about R200 million more in tax than in the corresponding period last year.

We can ask immediately: What about the future? It would appear that prospecting for gold in the Transvaal, and particularly in the Free State continues to take place. By the end of 1980 there were no fewer than 80 gold drilling machines in operation. According to an article in The Citizen of 18 December 1984, Mr George Nesbitt, president of the Chamber of Mines, stated that large-scale prospecting for gold costing several millions of rand and involving more than 90 gold drills would be undertaken. There is therefore no doubt that prospecting for gold has entered a phase which promises us a bright future in this respect.

I said that the gold mining industry was a notable provider of employment. During 1984 the goldmining industry provided no fewer than 510 171 people of all races with work. It was 4% more than in 1983. Apart from the fact that the goldmining industry is an important provider of employment—10% of the employment figure for all sectors in 1984—statistics show that this industry continues to employ more people at a considerable rate in the present difficult climate in comparison with a falling trend in other sectors.

Therefore, also as far as employment is concerned, this industry is definitely the backbone of this country. In discussing this now, I wish to pay tribute today to all the people who are involved in this outstanding industry. As a result of this golden goose we all share in this prosperity. Very often, however, we do not take sufficient cognizance of those—Whites and people of colour—who earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow. Anyone who is aware of the circumstances under which especially the White and non-White mineworkers work underground, will agree with me today that we owe them a special word of thanks and appreciation. I think these people deserve only the best. However, I want to put the matter in perspective because the Chamber of Mines are of course doing everything in their power to improve the working conditions, and the mining houses are also certainly not lagging behind in what they offer their employees either. Of course, it is also a fact that these mining houses are entitled to the profitability of their enterprise. This is so, but I ask them today to gratify within reasonable limits, the reasonable demands in the employment sphere, eg in relation to conditions of service, of these people who are responsible for the physical mining of gold. This applies not only to the financial aspect and pensions but also to the risks to which they are exposed daily, and so on.

Let my say immediately that I have the necessary appreciation and respect for the various organized trade unions dealing with the workers in the mining industry. In this respect I refer not only to the Mineworker’s Union but also to others. Those people have the right to bargain responsibly for what is in their best interests. I have respect for the various trade unions as long as they go about their business in a responsible manner.

I want to conclude by saying that although the good Lord has blessed us with mineral wealth in this country, it would not benefit us at all if we did not also have the people who are prepared to sacrifice their lives in the interests of the exploitation of this precious metal. For that reason I address a special word of thanks to everyone involved in the exploitation of minerals—and especially of gold—who makes it easier for us to meet our economic responsibilities.

Mr Chairman, I should like to speak to the hon the Minister about the expansion of Escom to the rural areas. Escom is expanding to the rural areas and I want to say to the hon the Minister that the people involved in this process of receiving power, are very grateful. It is true that it is the remote parts of the rural areas that are now beginning to receive power, and those parts of South Africa are relatively sparsely populated. The development is taking place in such a way that a scheme is being worked out for a specific region. For example there is the Vivo scheme, the Alldays scheme and the Waterpoort scheme, and each of these schemes is being planned separately. Each is budgeted for separately, too. Moreover tariffs are determined with regard to the use of these schemes.

I now want to say to the hon the Minister that that electricity for those people is as expensive as it is welcome. In the scheme to which I myself belong, the extension charges payable where the smallest transformer is used at a consumer’s main supply point—I think it is the 25kVA size—amount to R120 per month. The cost for the next size is approximately R190 per month, and that of the next biggest size is a great deal more than R200 per month.

The hon the Minister knows that part of the world. He knows that a farmer’s house is usually situated next to one borehole and the next borehole is 2,3 to 4 kilometres away in the veld and a third one is a few kilometres in another direction.

If a farmer uses two of the smallest transformers at two different points on his farm the power costs him R240 before he has used a single watt. If he takes a small transformer and one of the next size, that power costs him R310 per month before he has used a single unit of power. As soon as the consumer begins to draw power, then of course he begins to pay for that as well.

My scheme works as follows: In terms of the scheme near me, which is a little older, the consumers pay R38 per month for the smallest transformer, in comparison with the R120 which his neighbours, virtually across the road, have to pay. I know that a subsidy was granted in time of drought but I think that it is reconsidered on a three-monthly basis. Therefore this is not something permanent that one can budget for. The closer to the Witwatersrand one is and the older the scheme is, the smaller the extension charges.

The point I want to make is that Escom was established by the Parliament of South Africa to provide electricity to South Africa. As the hon the Minister said, Escom provides 93% of South Africa’s electricity. I think that the main idea behind that Act at the time was to distribute power as equally as possible across the country and offer it to everyone as cheaply as possible. I think that that is the basis of the Act.

It is logical that the supply should have expanded from the points closest to the source and that the people who received it first should have received it at the tariffs that prevailed at the time. That we accept. Now, however, it is a case of “hoe later, hoe kwater” (the later it gets, the worse it is). The late receivers have to pay astronomical tariffs—they find them astronomical, and I do not think the hon the Minister will dispute that—because they are situated far from the source. They are not consciously penalized, but after all, that is the effect. Not only did they have to forfeit the benefit of cheaper electrical power as against the more expensive fuel; they also had to forfeit the convenience of electricity. The only reason was that they were situated in such a remote area.

The hon the Minister is acquainted with the situation. He knows that they live in remote areas. They are border farmers who are few and far between and they have to travel long distances. They are, quite regularly, plagued by droughts. For the most part they are cattle farmers with a low turnover. However, there are irrigation farmers as well.

The hon the Minister also knows that those people perform an extremely important function in the overall South African setup. They are providers of food, and by occupying the border areas they perform a strategic role of inestimable value for all of us. I feel that we must try to remove the discrimination against these people, who are in the front line. I want to ask the hon the Minister to give urgent consideration to this and to ask Escom—I do not know if it is going to remain Escom—or its board to investigate this matter.

In its initial development Escom distributed its power in the densely populated areas. Now one has a consumer with a farm. He has three or four points where he would like his power in order to utilize it effectively. This is extensive farming. There are areas in that part of the world where the carrying capacity is 70 ha per single stock unit.

For that farmer to have power at all those points, he needs a transformer at each point. For each transformer he has to pay as if it is a new point; in other words, he pays his extension charges per transformer. Accordingly it is impossible for many of those people to utilize the power for their farming operations, due to the cost involved. I therefore suggest that other options be considered in this regard. One is that when people pay extension charges, they be paid per farming unit, per geographic unit. Another option is that the farmer does pay for each main distribution point but that such a farmer, with the help of Escom, may distribute the power, using a weaker line, to more points. It is impossible for an extensive farmer to make full use of these benefits of Escom if he has to pay extension charges per power distribution point. I therefore want to ask the hon the Minister to give serious consideration to this as well.

Another matter I wish to mention is that of consumers who obtain their power through agents, eg through municipalities. Apparently there are benefits that sometimes accrue to the direct consumers which agency consumers feel are not passed on to them. Where a consumer renders a service such as food production, then in my opinion this should be investigated. I feel that it is right and just that that benefit should be passed on to the end user.

One final point I want to mention—this is usually the case—is that consumers concluding new contracts are told that they may expect that their power will be available more or less by a certain date. Farmers, irrigation farmers in particular, immediately begin to plan with that date in mind. However, the fact is that it very seldom happens that the power is delivered to those farmers on the specified date. This causes considerable inconvenience. East of Messina they are developing a scheme. I want to ask the hon the Minister to ensure that an effort is made to keep to that time schedule. Many of those farmers are not developing now. They are sitting and waiting for the power, and they are unable to tackle certain schemes, for example, before they have electrical power available.

What is past, is past, but I feel that Escom should occasionally speak to its contractors about the respect they show when they enter private property. They simply loosen a farmer’s fencing and drive over the wires. They dig holes, and although Escom says that they have to fill the holes, they take a little branch, as long as one of these benches, and put it over that hole, and it becomes a trap for animals. I make this statement because I can prove it. Giant marula and other trees are felled injudiciously due to mistakes made at the outset which could have been prevented. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member will excuse me for not following up his argument. It is quite clear that there are some troublesome issues but it will undoubtedly be possible to do something about it.

Today I should like to discuss the issue of asbestos and the possible dangers to health that it poses, and what can be done about it. The reason I want to discuss this is that I should like to try and restore some balance and logic in this regard. During the past 18 months to two years, a great deal of publicity has been given to this subject and in my opinion it has often been discussed in an unbalanced and illogical fashion. Dr Wiles, whom I know very well personally as a man of undoubted integrity, commented inter alia on the asbestos debate, if we may call it that, in The Star of 28 November 1984. He said the following:

I think that is the essence of the matter.

Perhaps I could just say in lighter vein that once, when I was a young doctor working with the husband of the hon member dr Rina Venter in the Military Hospital, we were sitting in the old wards at the back and one day, while she was sitting there studying—it was in the early sixties, and sheltered labourers were working in the gardens there—she heard one of those sheltered labourers tell his friends: “Have you heard, Koos has been given promotion to the Union Buildings.” Apparently, among those people it was a great honour to work in the gardens of the Union Buildings. The other man was most indignant and replied: “What! Has Koos been promoted to the Union Buildings! He has not even had hosepipe experience! Unfortunately, the fact is that for understandable reasons, this discussion of asbestos can sometimes become fairly emotional. Moreover, there are many people who take part in this discussion without even having had “hosepipe” experience. It is important, as Dr Wiles put it here, “… to stress the important distinction between scientific objectivity and publicity-seeking sensationalism”.

By way of background I just want to say that world production of asbestos was 50 tons in 1877, whereas in 1984 it has increased to 5,1 million tons. By and large we have three types of asbestos in South Africa, viz blue, brown and white asbestos. Russia is the biggest producer of asbestos in the world, followed by Canada, and South Africa is third on the list. All the mines in South Africa yielded 1 000 million tons of ore last year. Five million tons of this ore was asbestos ore.

The asbestos mining industry employs between 9 000 and 10 000 employees. If one had to include the asbestos manufacturing industry and everything that that involves, one is left with a total of approximately 50 000 employees, and then, too, there are the dependants, who are also involved. South Africa’s asbestos sales are aimed chiefly at the foreign market, because we sell more than 90% of our production abroad. In the past few years these sales have amounted to more than R100 million. Another interesting statistic mentioned in the latest report of the Compensation Commissioner is that whereas we speak about risk shifts in mines or industries—viz where the work entails a risk—in the asbestos mining industry, more than 2 million risks shifts per annum are worked. It is true that asbestos can be dangerous and can cause various diseases such as asbestosis, which is comparable to silicosis, which people contract in the mining industry. There is also a plaque, which is troublesome but not dangerous. In contrast to this there are also the very dangerous conditions of lung cancer, the so-called bronchogenic carcinoma or ordinary lung cancer, and in addition mesothelioma, which is a rare cancer of the lung membrane. This cancer is very dangerous and the average period of survival after diagnosis is 8 to 9 months, and in extremely rare cases, 2 years. Mesothelioma has a frequency in America of one out of every million people, while in Canada the frequency is two out of every million, and in South Africa—where the incidence is calculated to be the highest in the world—it can occur among as many as eight people out of a million. It is a tragic and a very dangerous condition, but it is therefore extremely rare.

Another statement which I may just mention by way of background, is that the ILO, in co-operation with the best doctors in the world and experts in this field, have established a safety limit of two fibres per millilitre in an eight hour shift. The hypothesis underlying this is that even if a man were to work for eight hours in air containing two fibres per ml every day of his life, then over a period of 50 years he has approximately a 1% chance of contracting an asbestos-related illness. South Africa has accepted that figure. It has been said that in 1940 the asbestos mines contained approximately 120 fibres per ml of air. In the majority of places this has been reduced, in many mines, to less than one fibre. In certain places it is still two fibres. The asbestos cement industry is already working with 0,5 to 0,3 fibres per ml. Therefore something is definitely being done about this matter. The asbestos mining industry, as well as the asbestos manufacturing industry, have spent more than R20 million on safety measures in this regard over the past three to four years.

Now there are people waging an anti-asbestos campaign. Who are these people? There are people who are really in earnest about the problem and who wish to combat pollution. There are people who have in fact contracted diseases. There even people who have never worked in asbestos mines but who have lived outside the mines and who have nevertheless contracted the disease. These people are now trying in earnest and with honest intentions to do something about the matter. Those people deserve our support.

However, there are also people with ulterior motives. There are people who are overplaying their hand completely. It is a simple fact that labour organisations can size upon a health problem and exaggerate it in an effort to achieve certain other objectives. Unfortunately it is a fact that in South Africa and throughout the world people have totally exaggerated this problem.

People speak about all asbestos products as if they are the same. For example, one calls to mind a very well-known sub economic housing scheme, the housing scheme at Acacia Park, where the houses are made entirely of asbestos. Then one can understand how emotions can be aroused. The chances of anyone in Acacia Park contracting a dangerous disease as a result of the asbestos used there is, however, less than one in 100 000. In England it has been found that if one lives the whole of one’s life in a dwelling constructed of asbestos, one has a chance of one in 100 000 of contracting such a disease. What this means in practices is that in England, one person per annum out of the entire population can die of that. What I am calling for is balance.

There are just two opinions I want to quote. Prof Coetzee of the University of Pretoria, a very important expert, had the following to say:

What I want to say is that there are indeed people in South Africa who die of asbestos related diseases, but that if one bears in mind, for example, that over the next 30 years we shall have to built more houses than we have built over the past 300 years, and if we think of the number of people who will die as a result of the housing shortage, then we should maintain a balance as far as this problem is concerned. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to participate in a debate in which all hon members speak so positively. In this regard I should like to refer to the hon members for Edenvale and Constantia of the Official Opposition, as well as the hon member for Mooi River. I find their positive speeches gratifying. I also find it gratifying that the hon members of the CP have been so positive. In this regard I refer to the hon member for Koedoespoort.

I wish to associate myself with what the hon member for Waterberg said: Escom should really be careful when they enter people’s property. I myself had the experience that after soaking rain had fallen, Escom came to my farm, and by driving to and fro in a camp made deep tracks. Although I asked them to level the ground at a later stage, they never came back to do so. I should like the hon the Minister to put it to them that they should be careful on other people’s property.

South Africa has a tradition of pioneering thought and farsighted planning in the energy sphere. We have always been in the forefront as far as the application of the most modern available technology is concerned.

By way of illustration I wish to mention three examples of the fruits of imaginative thinking in the past.

In the first place I want to refer to Escom. Escom was founded in 1923 and is today the sixth biggest electricity utility company in the world, and the fifth cheapest supplier of electricity in the world. Escom maintains 50 000 kilometres of high-tension power lines extending across a large country. Nowhere in the world is there a utility company which provides power over such a large area, or which does so so effectively.

In the second place I want to refer to the planning that has resulted in our being able to provide a considerable proportion of our own requirements of liquid fuel as a result of our oil-from-coal project—a project which helped us survive the oil boycotts.

I also want to refer to the pioneers in the field of nuclear energy who saw to it that we mastered the technology of the whole nuclear fuel cycle, from the extraction of uranium oxide as a by-product of our gold mines, to uranium enrichment and the manufacture of fuel elements. Up to and including its forced temporary closure this year, which was due to negligence on the part of the supplier and his subcontractors in the manufacture of certain pipework, Koeberg occupied the position of the top-achieving first reactor on any Fromatome terrain in the world.

I trust that our descendants will enjoy the benefits of the imaginative energy planning of the people of our time until well into the twenty-first century.

When we speak about energy planning we often speak in first World terms about nuclear power and all kinds of sophisticated systems, but I contend that we should also take note of the needs of the Third World sector of our population. Last Friday I was privileged to visit the Energy Research Institute of the University of Cape Town and observe its activities. It is clear that they are performing very effective research. I want to refer to one project, viz the development of a cheap and simple drum in which to make fire. With an open wood fire, only about 3% to 8% of the heat released is effectively utilized. In our childhood days in the rural areas one often saw Black people making fire in such drums or “konkas”. The energy research institute tells me that 25% of the heat released in such a drum is effectively used. This means that Black people who make fire using wood, maize cobs or cattle dung can get up to eight times further if they bum it in a drum. The importance of such research aimed at the primary energy sources used by a large part of the population cannot be overemphasized.

The energy research institute at UCT is also carrying out important research on cheap, integrated solar water heating systems in which water is not only heated, but is also stored, so that if someone comes home late at night he can draw warm water from the system. I want to ask the hon the Minister to give special attention to this institute and provide it with considerable financial support.

In my opinion we get the biggest return on research allocations to well-managed departments at universities.

We are also planning to meet the energy requirements of motor vehicles of the future, and in this regard I want to refer to three aspects.

The National Electrical Engineering Research Institute of the CSIR has made important breakthroughs in developing batteries with increased storage capacity. In future, electrical vehicles will have to play an important role.

Hydrogen, too, is a wonderful fuel, and has the potential of playing a role in urban transport in the twenty-first century. Hydrogen, when burnt, produces water, and there is no pollution problem. The problem with hydrogen is the well-known danger of explosion, and accordingly research is geared to the storage of hydrogen in a safe form so that it can be recovered easily when it is required for burning. The Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of Stellenbosch is engaged in a research project in connection with the storage of hydrogen in metal hydride form. I want to ask the hon the Minister to please consider support for that university department too. In my opinion it is the university departments of the Universities of Cape Town and Stellenbosch that are doing outstanding research in the field of energy, and we must support them.

We have the possibility of three exciting projects for the manufacture of petrol and diesel, ie from natural gas, and oil shale and coal respectively. I refer here to the Mossel Bay project and the feasibility study in that regard, as well as the oil shale or torbanite in the Eastern Transvaal, and as far as coal is concerned, to an indirect fluidation project on the Springbok Flats.

I assume that the Government will tackle these projects in partnership with the private sector from the outset. Fortunately the Government is in my opinion in the position that there ought to be sufficient money in the Central Energy Fund to pay for its share, so we shall not need to borrow it.

In this regard I want to ask the hon the Minister something. If these projects are tackled, it must be done on condition that there is the maximum of South African content, not only in regard to valves, pipes and other equipment, but also in regard to the use of South African professionals and technicians such as project engineers.

Our technicians often complain that foreign companies get a foot in the door here as a shareholder in such a project and subsequently try to make maximum use of the expertise of foreign companies. Let us try to tackle these projects with our own people, even if we have foreign partners.

Nuclear energy is indisputably the only known long-term source of electricity in South Africa and the world. South Africa can be proud of its achievements in this sphere.

I should like to refer to the statement by Prime Minister Vorster in the House of Assembly when he made an announcement about South Africa’s so-called unique uranium enrichment process. At that time there were great hopes for this process as far as the refinement of uranium was concerned, and the State—wisely—spent a great deal on the development of the process. But since 1973 the international energy picture has changed dramatically. New processes have been developed, for example the gas diffusion process and the laser processes. In my opinion those processes leave our process in the shade. Moreover, atomic energy has not developed as rapidly as had been expected at that time. Accordingly there is very strong international competition in regard to enriched uranium nowadays. Therefore it is not easy for us to negotiate internationally if our process is not the very cheapest.

The argument in favour of an independent uranium enrichment corporation, which could co-operate with international partners in working on vast projects based on our process, has fallen away, and accordingly the Government has decided, in my opinion wisely, to rationalize the nuclear energy installations and bring them under a unitary management once again.

Nevertheless I think the time has come for the hon the Minister to inform the taxpayers as to the progress made with our own uranium enrichment process and how we are going to deal with it in future.

Mr Chairman, I have very little time at my disposal, but I wish to refer in particular to certain trends that have been predicted in the steel industry overseas and of which I feel we in this country should be very much aware.

It is anticipated, for example, that improvements in steel-production technology in the United States of America could reduce the consumption of imported manganese ore and ferro-manganese by 50% by the year 2000. This should be seen as a warning that technological advances can minimize dependence upon certain minerals which we today consider as indispensable ingredients of the steel industry.

It is therefore important that the steel industry in this country should now apply the maximum flexibility in its marketing strategies in order to meet this possible eventuality.

We have certain advantages in our country when it comes to mining expertise in that the experience gained over many years of mining development in this country has resulted in South Africa being rated as a country with some of the most advanced mining techniques in the world.

I wish to turn my attention at this stage to certain facets of the asbestos industry. I would like to associate myself with remarks that have been made by the hon member Dr Vilonel with whom I had the pleasure of visiting Lebowa briefly on Wednesday. I was also fortunate to be able to accompany a parliamentary group on a two-day visit to an asbestos mine at Palmiet in the Northern Cape, and to a factory manufacturing asbestos products in the Transvaal. As a layman I must say that I was greatly impressed with the obvious awareness of the companies concerned in regard to the dangers of asbestosis to the public and also to their employees. I was pleased to observe the unrelenting efforts that these concerns are making—with apparent little regard to cost—to ensure that adequate safety precautions are being regularly applied.

There was also clear evidence that the dangers of contracting asbestosis from asbestos products have been minimized in that quality standards have been strictly enforced by the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs. The fact that South Africa is the world’s fourth largest producer of asbestos necessitates that the quality of our products also conform with international standards. It is interesting to note that the United States Environment Protection Agency has seen fit to abandon its campaign against asbestos products. I regard this as significant in that it indicates that the quality and safety factors of asbestos products have been improved to such a degree that the dangers of asbestosis have been greatly reduced. This can only be good news for South Africa.

In turning to the fuel and energy functions of the department, one notes with a sense of relief that crude oil supplies continue to reach the shores of this country in adequate quantities. However, it would be irresponsible to assume that our worries in this regard are over for ever. I do not intend to dwell to any degree on the reasons for the freer availability of supplies as these are already well known. It is, however, worth noting that the fright Opec gave the world in 1973 has, to a large extent, boomeranged in that the Western World immediately set out to find alternative sources of energy and at the same time sought ways and means of conserving fuel. It is gratifying that South Africa is also well to the fore in this regard.

While it has not yet been possible to determine to what degree nuclear energy will be required to meet our future energy needs, it is clear that nuclear energy in this country has come to stay. The Valindaba and Pelindaba projects must surely be rated as being as much in the forefront as any in the world. One is conscious of the responsibility that Dr De Villiers and his staff carry in developing this important source of energy.

In closing may I just say that we in these benches are fully aware of the problems that have been experienced at Koeberg, and that we too commend Escom for the manner in which it has dealt with these problems. We commend it too for having given precedence to safety factors when confronted with the recent problems that were being experienced at Koeberg.

Mr Chairman, I should like to convey my cordial congratulations to Escom on its fine annual report which we have just received. It is the sixty-second annual report of Escom and the last one that will be submitted to this House by the Electricity Supply Commission. Therefore it is a very historic report.

I also wish to convey my sincere congratulations to the hon the Minister and the new management on the intentions they have already expressed. In addition, I want to congratulate Escom on its achievements and those of its 65 000 employees over a period of more than 60 years. When one considers all the affairs of Escom, one realizes what a wealth of positive things can be said about Escom. In one of the latest editions of the Financial Mail we read the following interesting remark:

This also recalls to my mind the gross misconception created by certain sectors of our media in connection with Escom, its gardens, its flower account and so on. Of course, I do not know whether the buttonhole that the hon the Minister is wearing today perhaps cost R28 million. Nevertheless it is a beautiful flower. [Interjections.]

However, we must bear in mind that the amount about which such a fuss was made was spent over a period of five years and on average, therefore, amounted to a mere R5,6 million per annum. Moreover, this comprises 0,15% of Escom’s total annual expenditure and does not include expenditure on the sports fields, which were also mentioned.

In this regard I want to refer to the hon member for Mooi River. After all, I am now getting the opportunity to react to what he said yesterday with regard to the so-called “floral extravaganza” in Megawatt Park. It is remarkable that today two hon members—one on this side of the House and one on the opposition side—spoke about Escom’s so-called contempt for nature conservation. However, what I find interesting now is that I can again only speak about the positive side of Escom’s approach to nature conservation.

At the Karkloof power station there is a valley with beautiful indigenous trees and plants. Escom did not want to harm that valley when it established its power network there. Escom even made use of helicopters to erect its power lines there—purely in order to avoid harming the environment. That is what Escom did there.

Then, too, I want to refer hon members to what Escom did in the Drakensberg, near Bergville. Escom built a pump storage system inside the mountain there. Excavations were carried out and roads were built. In spite of the tremendous excavations, the indigenous vegetation was fully restored by Escom. Moreover, this was done in a very constructive and effective way.

Then, too, I should like to refer to what happened at the Sterkfontein Dam on top of the Drakensberg, where the indigenous bird life was also protected in such a way by the conservation of water by Escom that there is no threat to the birds there.

The millions of rands spent by Escom are therefore not simply used for the decoration and maintenance of Megawatt Park. They are also spent on the construction, development and maintenance of premises, on the stabilization of plant life, on the laying out of gardens and so on. This includes expenditure on buildings, townships, power stations and substations.

By and large it comprises three main sections, viz security, environment conservation and general improvements, with a view, too, to improving the quality of life of people. The workers employed at the substations, whose remuneration is also paid by Escom, are maintenance staff who are constantly doing the maintenance work that power stations and substations entail, on the basis of a state of readiness.

This is certainly important. Therefore the workers of Escom do not merely build fish dams, as people are so quick to allege. They also build dams to store stormwater for irrigation purposes—water which is of course also used for the purposes of fire-fighting. The water that is stored and kept in dams in this way also supplement the subterranean water supply, of course. Therefore it is incorrect always to refer to this as something that is wrong.

Do hon members know what Escom’s money is spent on? At present, Escom has 26 power stations in operation, while a further six are under construction. Then, too, there are 250 office buildings which have to be maintained—each with a pleasant garden—as well as 27 township areas that have to be decorated. These township areas comprise a total of 16 300 dwelling houses. In addition there are 200 main substations and a power network of 130 000 kilometres. It is everywhere the case that Escom does not confine itself to the provision of electrical power but also focuses on nature conservation. Moreover, as far as the project of garden beautification is concerned Escom provides accommodation to 102 300 people in 16 300 dwelling houses. In addition, Escom maintains 50 premises and 250 office buildings, as well as training centres. As I have said, Escom’s total operating expenditure on horticultural and landscaping services in 1983 comprised 0,15% of Escom’s total operating expenditure, whereas the capital cost of the above services comprised a mere 0,1% of Escom’s nett expenditure on fixed assets.

This was an interesting analysis I received, because I really investigated that since it is so wrong to keep attacking Escom. We must begin to convey a positive image of our country. We hear so many negative things, and it appears in the foreign Press, as if we were building a terribly weak infrastructure in this country.

Expenditure on staff development and maintenance for 1984 was R9,48 million, which comprises 1,24% of Escom’s total expenditure on the capital operating account for 1984. The maintenance cost of premises is estimated at approximately 1,5% of operating cost, which means that the consumer pays a mere 15 cents on a monthly account of R100. Is it not worthwhile to do this for nature and environmental conservation?

[Inaudible.]

Is the hon member opposed to four cents of that money being utilized for security purposes? Four cents of those 15 cents is utilized for security purposes, four cents for control of environmental influence and seven cents on the general quality of life of the staff in order to improve the conditions of employment and residence. If all these matters, such as neatness, security consciousness and interest in the staff are taken into account, those seven cents on a consumer account of R100 are very worthwhile.

The value of Escom’s assets at the end of 1984 was R19 000 million. The expenditure of R9,48 million in 1984 to improve and maintain these assets amounts to approximately 0,05% of the value of these assets. Is it not important that ultimately we should see the plants in a totally new context?

These are not merely administrative buildings; the beauty and attraction of nature are brought back again. In the same way the floor area of the buildings in Megawatt Park is not so bad. A great deal of money was saved because insead of building more rooms, partitions in the form of plants were provided. This enables people to work there in a pleasant and natural environment. After all, it is the new idea that one should take far more account of one’s staff in the social context.

Accordingly I want to wish the hon the Minister and Dr Louw Alberts and the staff, who are on the threshold of tremendous progress, every success in the 63rd year that lies ahead. May Escom bloom like the flower in the hon the Minister’s buttonhole.

Mr Chairman, it is always a pleasure to follow the hon member for Rosettenville who, in his modest way, defended Escom today with regard to the gardens that they established.

What I have found striking in the discussion of this Vote thus far has been the emphasis on the mineral wealth of South Africa and the gratitude conveyed to the mining houses for their contribution to our country’s revenue. I have no fault to find with that at all.

What about the miner’s contribution?

If that hon member would give me the opportunity, I should like to associate myself with the hon member for Virginia and convey my thanks to the thousands of workers who have made it possible for us to sell those minerals on world markets. We in this Chamber are all aware of the importance of gold, in particular, and the sale of gold for our country and its economy. Even in these difficult times we are experiencing at present—as was also pointed out by the hon member for Virginia—the mining industry is one of the few industries that continues to employ more people. Owing to the importance of this industry, good relations between employer and employee must always be maintained.

I regard it as a great pity that unrest has developed on the mines, and in this regard I have in mind in particular the incident at the Vaal Reef mine. What one finds somewhat troublesome in this regard is that in fact it has nothing to do with the mining industry as such. Unfortunately one also finds that there is a degree of suspicion between the mineworkers’ union and the Chamber of Mines, sometimes for good reason. I want to mention one example in this regard to the Committee today. When a post falls vacant in the mining industry, the management of that mine decides to change the name of the post and then advertises the so-called new post at a much lower level of remuneration. In this way, what the trade union has fought for many years is totally nullified. The trade unions would like to see the names of posts in this industry being standardized and submitted to the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs. In this way it will be possible to prevent the names of posts being changed at will.

I should now like to refer to a matter raised by the hon member for Edenvale, relating to the sixth part of the Wiehahn Report. This part of the report deals, of course, with the “scheduled” person who is to be replaced by a “competent” person. The Government has committed itself to eliminating discriminatory legislation in the labour sphere, and accordingly it accepted this recommendation as well. However, it is important to know that the Government does not wish to implement this until agreement has been reached between employer and employee. The White workers—and 75% of my voters are White mine-workers—are very happy with the present setup because they feel secure and protected. However, I want to add at once that they are quite prepared to consider this change on certain conditions. I should like to put a few of these conditions to the Committee today. I believe that these conditions could very easily be complied with by the employer. The first condition is that job standards should be strictly maintained. Training and experience must be precisely the same for all. There must be equal remuneration for work of equal quality. The employer and employee must be consulted in the matter before a change is put into effect. In addition, certain job security measures must be effected.

These are not such unreasonable conditions that are being set, but if these conditions are not complied with, the mineworker will fear that the employer will again introduce cheap labour and drive the Whites out of the industry. I can assure this Committee that the White worker does not flinch from competing on a fair basis with any other worker. I therefore appeal to the hon the Minister not to be overhasty, but to give the employer and the employee enough time to reach agreement.

I also wish to associate myself with what the hon member Dr Vilonel said here, viz that the workers in the country’s mining industry play such an important role—in the economic sphere as well—and ask the hon the Minister today whether consideration could not be given to granting these workers a risk allowance. These workers work in dangerous and unhealthy conditions. Apart from the fact that rockfalls can take place at any moment, the worker spends the greater part of his working day on his knees in a dark, stuffy and dusty place. He exposes himself to one or more industrial diseases and this means that he sometimes has to retire from the industry at a relatively early age. Since all his training has been in the mining industry it is not easy for him to obtain another job, and it also happens that his health is affected to such a degree that he is unable to work at all. I appeal to everyone in this Chamber—the Government and the Opposition parties—to convey our appreciation to these people in a tangible way by giving them a risk allowance for the job they do.

The hon member for Mooi River referred to mechanization in the mining industry. I want to refer briefly to the problems that exist as far as the Chamber of Mines is concerned. Nowadays it is very difficult for the mining industry to obtain people who want to work with a shovel and spade, and for that reason careful consideration must be given to mechanization in the mining industry. This will of course entail that there will be a far smaller labour force but a far more skilled labour force.

Because there is no fixed price for the product placed on the market, productivity will have to increase considerably, particularly when the gold price drops. This can only be done by way of mechanization. We have an acute shortage of trained men to maintain these machines, and if training can take place far more rapidly these workers will have to be recruited overseas.

I conclude by saying that the mining industry is a main artery of our country’s revenue. All of us in this Committee want to pay tribute today to all the workers in this industry.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Carletonville made an interesting speech. I think his claims on behalf of the mineworkers are perfectly reasonable. I could find nothing wrong with the suggested items that the mineworkers require, namely equality of pay, similar standards and equal pay for equal work; there is nothing wrong with those things.

Something that the hon member added towards the end of his speech did give me slight cause for concern. He suggested that wages should be kept high even if there was an excessive supply of labour of the kind that we are talking about. I think the free market system is such that one buys and sells one’s labour or goods in an open market. Things that create high or low levels artificially are in fact not a part of the free enterprise system. I therefore believe free enterprise should play a role in the rate of pay for the work. However, I will get back to that subject later.

I want to move on to the oil business and I want to assure the hon the Minister that I do not intend to raise the Salem issue this time. I want to talk instead about oil exploration off South Africa.

I want to start by saying that we should look at Southern Africa rather than South Africa because the position of Mozambique is most interesting and also in view of the Nkomati Accord. Mozambique has a recognized oil potential which is far greater than the recognized oil potential of the waters off South Africa. By the end of this decade—in a few years’ time in fact—exploitation of the oil resources off the coast of Mozambique could well be under way.

Recent geological data indicate that the chances of finding a sizeable oil deposit off the Mozambican coast are far higher than was originally suggested. It begins to look like quite a good bet.

Apparently Mozambique has divided its offshore area into 17 offshore oil and gas blocks. They have these on offer for exploitation and investigation by companies throughout the world. The bidding for these blocks was postponed on several occasions and I have not quite been able to ascertain what the latest situation is. Whether in fact those 17 blocks have been bid for and allocated at this stage, or whether they are still available, I do not know. The question I want to ask the hon the Minister is whether it is not possible for Soekor to participate in the investigation and drilling of areas off the Mozambican coast. In other words, cannot we bid for a block in which we can carry out investigation? We have the whole infrastructure close by; we have the drilling rig, and I would submit that to spend R100 million drilling off the Mozambican coast is likely to be far more productive than R100 million—which is of the order of what we are spending at the moment—spent drilling off the South African coast. It might well be better spent there.

Last year, in 1984, we spent R97 million on oil exploration. We found gas in four holes off Mossel Bay in the FA and EM fields. In 1985, according to the answer to a question that I asked the hon the Minister in the House, we found one additional hole. We tested the volume of a number of these holes, and again I am a little bit concerned about the secrecy aspect, because in answer to my question, the hon the Minister said;

It is going to be impossible for us as members of Parliament to judge the viability of a conversion plant to convert that gas into oil unless we have some idea of the volumes concerned. Obviously we as a party welcome private sector participation in every aspect of these matters, but if we as a House are going to have to make up our mind one of these days as to the establishment of a conversion plant to convert that gas into oil, part of the essential information that we will need is what the volume of gas is, because on that volume is going to depend to a large extent the viability of the whole situation. The Minister’s reply also mentions “existing private sector involvement in this”. I was not aware that there was any private sector involvement other than the report which has been asked for, which I will get to in due course. I would ask the hon the Minister if he could please tell us what the existing private sector involvement in the drilling off Mossel Bay is.

Later this year we will receive a report which is going to cost some R2,2 million from Foster Wheeler Energy, Bateman Engineering and Emso, regarding the exploitation and conversion of this gas. I confess that I am somewhat concerned about the viability of this scheme. I am told that it could be more expensive to do this conversion than to convert coal to oil as we do in our Sasol process. I wonder whether Sasol 4 might not ultimately make better economic sense than this possible project.

I am even more concerned at the Government’s ability to judge the commercial value of the project. They are not businessmen, and they are not meant to be businessmen. They do not have the background to be able to evaluate, in my view, the business aspects of the scheme properly. Sishen-Saldanha, which is going to cost the taxpayer R814 million, is an example of bad commercial judgment in relation to a scheme. I should like to recommend to this hon Minister that the report that he ultimately receives in regard to the viability of this scheme, should go to a panel of commercial and industrial experts—obviously from the private sector—for their opinion, not on the political aspects of it but purely on the commercial viability of the scheme. It is not the strategic aspects that they should take into account, but simply the hard-headed business return on capital expended. I believe that this will be of great advantage to everybody concerned. Perhaps it is the State President’s Economic Advisory Council that should be consulted, but I believe that consultation is vitally necessary because we cannot afford major mistakes in the allocation of scarce resources within the Southern African context.

Let us assume that it all goes according to plan and we approve the plan and the scheme, then on behalf of the area for which I am elected may I make a plea for Port Elizabeth to be considered to have the onshore plant for the scheme sited there.

Something will have to be transported from the area. It will either be gas or fuel products. Now, Mossel Bay will in any event have the benefit of the offshore installations and supply etcetera. It does not make it any easier for me, Mr Chairman, that you are in fact the hon member for Mossel Bay, but Mossel Bay is going to get that offshore infrastructure anyway. So, they are going to get something. However, Port Elizabeth has an established infrastructure which could save millions compared to Mossel Bay. That infrastructure is underutilized as the hon the Minister well knows. We have a harbour and a communications network, including a very good rail network, which is far better placed to distribute the products throughout South Africa than they can be distributed from Mossel Bay.

We also have a large and skilled labour force, whereas Mossel Bay will have to import a labour force, the majority of whom will probably be Black. They will have to build houses, townships and schools and provide services for those Black workers. Now, all this already exists in Port Elizabeth. Finally, of course, Port Elizabeth’s unemployment is causing untold misery and, if we have to spend Government money of the magnitude of this project, I believe Port Elizabeth must be considered as a site. [Interjections.]

Before I leave the Soekor situation, I want to refer very briefly to the fact that Soekor is to built or has built a new head office in Parow—I believe there is some R12 million involved—I want to know whether funds that we have set aside for the purpose of oil exploration have been used to build this head office. I believe that is a misallocation of resources because I do not believe that money was intended to build magnificent buildings where Soekor can have its headquarters. I believe that the State should keep out of the private enterprise sector as much as possible and if the private sector can provide the business accommodation from which Soekor can operate—I believe it can—they should do so. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I do not want to say much in response to the arguments of the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central except to say that, if consideration is to be given to a natural gas processing plant, the standards to be applied should be standards in the interests of South Africa as a whole and not just in the interests of a particular region. If a certain region meets the requirements, well and good. However, South Africa’s interests should enjoy preference.

I would, however, like to concentrate my attention on a matter that was raised in a previous debate on mineral and energy affairs when the mining activities in the North-West were referred to as a lot of meerkat holes in which the people were scratching around. I want to focus my attention on a few of these meerkat holes and look at what happened there.

Who was so stupid?

Yes, the hon member will actually be quite surprised. [Interjections.] On the basis of what happened there, I want to refer to a mine in my constituency. Today they are extracting 7 million tons of gravel per year by means of an open-cast system. When one compares that to the big hole in Kimberley, where a total of 21 million tons of gravel was extracted, one can project how big this quarry will eventually be. I do not want to devote too much attention to this aspect, but a considerable infrastructure in terms of housing developed around that so-called meerkat hole. One fifth of all saleable diamonds produced in South Africa are produced in that area. This mine has made an enormous contribution to the development of that area and so I would like to pay tribute to it for not only looking after itself but also the community. As far as aid to the community is concerned, the Finch mine has not been close-fisted even though it was not really necessary for it to render such assistance. It was instrumental in the development that took place there.

If one looks at Kimberley which, after all, also developed around such a meerkat hole …

A hole like that made by an antbear.

Yes, one could call it that. The meerkat hole has grown a little larger. Today 156 000 people there actually owe their livelihoods to the infrastructure that rose out of the developments after the first mineral rush in South Africa. That was the start of mineral exploitation in South Africa. It arose out of the first diamond rush to Kimberley and environments.

This is not a small industry. Today a great city stands where 120 years ago there were just bare plains. This is not something one can simply ignore. Initially diamond mining was a case of every man for himself. As a result of this there was a huge surplus of diamonds. It was very soon realized, however, that the mining for diamonds had to be rationalized. Thus an establishment such as De Beers came into being in order to do the mining. A marketing organization also developed out of this which eventually not only controlled the marketing of diamonds in South Africa but also formed a sales organization which controls the marketing of diamonds throughout the world. Moreover, it controls it in such a way that supply matches demand so that a reasonably constant price is obtained. If all the diamonds were to be placed on the world market at the same time, the diamond price would fall and the consequences of this would be extremely adverse, not only for us but also for other countries such as Botswana, for example, which are heavily dependent on diamond production.

In the course of time this organization, which has already been in existence for 50 years, has rendered valuable service to South Africa. In South Africa the industry has grown steadily. It reached a peak in 1983 as far as carat production is concerned; 11,3 million carats were produced and this yielded earnings of R537 million. No improvement in production or sales is anticipated for 1985, but foreign earnings will amount to approximately R640 million, mainly as a result of fluctuations in the exchange rate and not so much as a result of increased sales. In 1984 diamonds earned R318 million in foreign exchange. This is approximately 2% of total earnings from minerals. The diamond industry’s share in the total mineral earnings in the RSA of approximately R19 billion amounted to nearly 2,7%.

The mining industry as a whole employs a total of 711 272 workers. There are approximately 17 000 people working in the diamond industry. This constitutes about 2,4% of the total number of workers in the mining industry. The total earnings of the employees in all the mines in South Africa amounted to R4 137 million in 1984. The diamond industry paid out R140 million to its employees.

For a number of reasons there was a sharp decline in the sale of diamonds in the past six months. However, thanks to the activities of the central sales organization in this regard, there is a possibility that this will be set right in the future. It is also interesting that, in spite of the fact that sales declined, largely as a result of the strong dollar, there was an increase of 6% in the dollar value of world sales of gem diamonds or diamonds used in jewellery. This increase is heartening. It shows that this industry, which is largely dependent on the fickleness of women’s ability to appreciate good things, is on a sound footing. It is interesting that in a country such as Japan, for instance, there is a huge increase in the sales of jewellery in the form of engagement rings, something which is actually alien to their culture.

Some time ago the hon the Minister expressed the intention in the House of Representatives to revise the legislation concerning the diamond industry. This move is to be welcomed as, in my opinion, certain shortcomings and deficiencies can be identified in the existing legislation and those can then be corrected. That such deficiencies do indeed exist is manifested, for instance, in the steps taken by the diamond cutters themselves to improve the physical control over the export of polished diamonds.

Control over the diamond industry is currently divided among a number of State departments. The Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs is responsible for legislation, the Department of Inland Revenue handles the issuing of licences, and the South African Police exercises control over uncut diamonds and also carries out an investigative function in respect of illegal diamond smuggling. Then there are also the diamond cutters who exercise control over polished diamonds. This divided control must necessarily go hand in hand with red tape and duplication of work. That will certainly be eliminated by the new consolidated measures which the hon the Minister has in mind. It is to be hoped that the new legislation will contribute to the further expansion of the diamond industry in the RSA and that this industry, which is an important earner of currency, will play a greater roll in the country’s economy.

I want to raise another matter, namely ad valorem tax. Ad valorem tax of 35% is levied on all jewellery and objects made out of precious stones, semi-precious stones and precious metals. This tax has a depressing effect on the sales of processed minerals in South Africa. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I follow gladly upon the hon member for Prieska. I agree with the thoughts he has expressed here and if I have to react to his speech I would say that it was a “cute” speech.

I should like to refer in my speech to Escom and its supplying of power to the platteland. In the course of my speech I will also refer to points raised earlier by the hon member for Soutpansberg.

Escom has recently passed through stormy waters. Much publicity has been given to matters concerning Escom and in some cases matters were wrenched out of context. Still, in spite of all these things that have been said and written about Escom, this mighty ship sails on. Escom ranks among the biggest electrical utility companies in the world. At the end of 1984 it had a sent-out capacity of 23 000 megawatt. It provided more than 90% of the electricity sold in South Africa and plant with a sent-out capacity of 19 000 megawatt was under construction or on order. Escom’s most important objective is to provide an adequate supply of electricity at cost price so that this can be used for the economic advancement of the RSA. It is estimated that electrical energy constitutes 23% of the total net energy usage in South Africa. It is expected that Escom will supply nearly 33% of the country’s total net energy requirements by the turn of the century. In addition to its direct contribution to the economy, Escom indirectly promotes the level of wealth in the country by spending about 80% of its capital expenditure on local goods and services. Considering these facts, one can say that Escom is really an organization which our country cannot do without.

After the De Villiers report and the White Paper which the Government has issued, and exciting time of restructuring lies ahead for Escom. In such an important organization it is necessary that renewal should take place from time to time so that the organization can meet the needs of the times. Sir De Villiers made seven recommendations in his report.

In my view recommendation 6, wherein he argues that changed circumstances justify an amended tariff structure, is the most important. In recommendation 6(c) it is also proposed that the extension tariffs should be pooled. This proposal concerns the platteland and so we are grateful that it has been made. I would therefore like to ask the hon the Minister to have this proposal implemented as speadily as possible.

In the past Escom played an important role in the supplying of power to the platteland. It is clear from the Escom report that the net total of new connections during 1984 amounted to 6 198. That exceeds the 1983 record by 545. At the end of 1984 the total number of supply points to the farming community amounted to 56 000. That is indeed an achievement. I believe that this contribution by Escom will certainly help to curb the depopulation of the platteland.

In my constituency we really worked hard to procure a reasonable acceptance rate in respect of the offer Escom made to farmers in that region. We succeeded and Escom undertook to complete the scheme known as the Schweizer-Reneke scheme by the end of 1986. I might point out that that scheme will eventually comprise more than 1 000 points.

More farmers would have wanted to utilize the offer, but they did not see their way clear to paying the very high extension charges that were levied for that scheme. I have the figures here and I would like to draw the Committee’s attention to them. For 20 kW an extension charge of R182 was asked; for 40 kW, R242; and for 100 kW, R302. The farmer would have to pay this amount before he could press any button. If the recommendation in the De Villiers report is accepted, it will benefit the platteland because more farmers in that region would then make use of electricity.

I would like to take the matter a little further and ask that the newly appointed Electricity Council which the hon the Minister announced yesterday investigate as soon as possible the idea of pooling in respect of extension tariffs, as proposed in the De Villiers report, and that it make a positive recommendation to the Government.

The main objective with the levying of the extension charge is to ensure that the development of Escom’s transmission and distribution systems can proceed on a sound economic basis. However, extension charges are responsible for a relatively small portion of Escom’s total income. In 1984 income from extension charges constituted the following percentages—and I present these percentages gladly for consideration—of Escom’s total income from the sale of electricity: In respect of Tariff A it was 1,4%; in respect of Tariff B, 4,1%; in respect of Tariff C, 1%; and in respect of Tariff D, 16,7%.

From these figures it can be noted that the total extension charges paid by the small power users in accordance with Tariff D constitute 16,7% of the total income obtained from this source.

If recommendation 6 (c) in the De Villiers report is put into operation, a greater pooling will result of the costs recovered by the standard levy. There will also be a consequent decrease in the income from extension charges obtained from the Tariff D group of power users. The loss which Escom will suffer as a result of this can be made good by a minor adjustment to the tariff structure for all power users.

According to the SA Agricultural Union—and I agree with them—the pooling of the extension charges will have the following implications: Firstly, the whole country will be able to contribute to a reduction in the input costs in respect of the production of food which is indispensable to everyone. Secondly, the resettlement and retention of Whites in the border areas would be facilitated, not only for the farmers but also for the small businessmen such as traders, mechanics and medical practitioners.

The risks attached to a depopulated platteland—unemployment and also inadequate production of food—are just as real for the large users of electricity as they are for any other enterprise in or inhabitant of the country.

I would also like to thank the hon the Minister for the positive attitude he has adopted towards agriculture ever I have known since him as Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs. He has always lent an ear to the farmers in connection with problems regarding power. Last year we heard him announce that the extension tariff in respect of the power supply to farmers was suspended. An amount of R30 million was involved and the suspension came into effect from April last year. On behalf of the farmers I would like to express my gratitude to the hon the Minister for that assistance. It meant a great deal to us in extremely difficult times. I also believe that, if there are a few rand over somewhere and it is possible for him to do this again, the hon the Minister will allow this concession to continue for just a little while longer, perhaps until we hear what the proposal of the Electricity Council in this regard entails.

On this occasion I would also like to thank the hon the Minister for appointing Mr Malan, Chairman of the SAAU’s Electricity Committee, to the Electricity Council. Now that agriculture also has a representative in the Electricity Council, we also have a direct say in Escom’s on-going planning for the future.

However, I had better resume my seat before I ask the hon the Minister to appoint more people anywhere! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, it is such a pity that the hon member for Constantia, who is actually a very intelligent man, cannot do simple sums. He just now referred to a reduction of five cents. However, he forgets a few very basic things. The first of these is that, when we decided to increase the price of fuel—that was when the exchange rate was 46,5 American cents to the rand—the actual tariff amounted to 42c. We should have increased the price on 1 January already, but for economic reasons we postponed the increase to 23 January. In order to finance this the Equalization Fund had to borrow an amount of more than R300 million. With the exchange rate fixed at 46,5 American cents to the rand, we are today in any event still subsidizing the petrol price by four cents per litre. We are subsidizing the farmers’ diesel fuel by 10c per litre, and we are subsidizing the diesel transport tariff by four cents per litre. We are also subsidizing the other users of diesel fuel by two cents per litre, and we are still subsidizing paraffin by 19c per litre.

That money has to come from somewhere. We cannot just reduce prices simply because there is a reduction somewhere in the landed cost. We first have to make good our other losses. Once we have made good those losses, we can consider a reduction in the price of fuel. Even so, there are still some other factors which I have already mentioned. We then still have to determine first whether or not the Road Fund is at a manageable level and so on.

The hon member also referred to the lead program. A little while ago—on 15 May—it was announced that the first of four phases for the reduction of the lead content of fuel will now be tackled. However, this is not a process which can be carried out without cost. The first phase, which comes into operation on 1 January 1986 and through which the lead content will be reduced from 0,836 grams per litre to 0,6 grams per litre, will cost 1,4 cents per litre. This cannot therefore be done free of charge. After all, things like this do not just fall out of the sky. The second phase, whereby the lead content of petrol will be reduced to a 0,4 grams per litre, will cost 1,8 cents per litre. We have already completed development of all four phases, and the first phase will already come into operation in January 1986.

Naturally, we are constantly giving attention to the possibilities of solar energy. When our energy plan is made available next year, we will submit a complete report on alternative sources of energy. We will explain our program and we will explain how we are going to deal with this question and what we are going to do in this connection.

The hon member for Welkom and the hon member for Virginia quite rightly lauded the mining industry, and especially the workers in the mining industry. The hon member for Carletonville did likewise. I would like to associate myself with their point of view and with that of the Government. We have great appreciation for the absolutely competent and efficient way in which the mining industry as a whole in South Africa is being managed and is operating. There are some small hiches here and there, but we are constantly giving these attention and we feel sure that we will eliminate them completely in due course.

The hon member for Soutpansberg is not present in the House at the moment, and so I will respond to the speech of the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke who raised the same subjects. We are also concerned here with the supply of electric power to the platteland areas.

I can assure hon members that Escom is wide awake—as also this department. Naturally, I do not know where the hon member for Soutpansberg is. [Interjections.] The investigation in respect of the sixth recommendation of the De Villiers Commission’s report has already been completed. The draft report has already been submitted to the Cabinet. However, we are not going to publish it yet because I think it is important that the report be first considered by the new council. The new council may want to introduce amendments in respect of extension fees and pooling. Both the investigation and the report have thus been completed and the draft report is available. We hope to put the new platteland tariff structure into operation by January, 1986. Attention is really being given to the question of extension fees and pooling.

I want to thank the hon member Dr Vilonel and the hon member for Mooi River for their comprehensive explanation of the asbestosis problem. I think it is high time that somebody in this Chamber, the highest Chamber in the country, put the asbestosis problem into perspective because I think it is exaggerated. We in South Africa are doing everything in our power to combat this problem; and, indeed, I think we have the problem under control in the present circumstances. The hon members also referred to that.

I also want to express my heartfelt thanks to the hon members for Pretoria East and Rosettenville for their fine testimonials in favour of Escom. What they said is really quite true. It is not necessary for Escom just to be criticized. I think Escom has done much, much better things for South Africa, for its future and for its prosperity than it has been given credit for. I would therefore like to thank the hon members very sincerely for using this opportunity to pay that tribute to Escom. The hon member for Pretoria East referred to various matters in respect of our achievement at Koeberg and our energy research. I can tell him that Prof Lucowic’s research programmes are financed by the department via the CSIR. I can also tell him that the hydrogen research programme is one of my pet projects and we hope to make announcements in that regard soon. If people do not agree with me on that, then I will do it of my own accord. We will definitely devote attention to that.

I have already referred to the hon member for Mooi River and I have already thanked the hon member for Rosettenville, but I want to thank him again for his explanation of a rather troublesome affair which, in my opinion, does not deserve the criticism levelled at it.

The hon member for Carletonville referred to scheduled persons. I agree with the hon member. We have put our point of view and I said just now that we have decided on the target date of 1 January 1986. We are not trying to box each other in but are trying to find a solution that will satisfy everyone.

The hon member for Prieska spoke on the subject of diamonds. He referred to the ad valorem tax. I agree with him that we should help the diamond industry and we will probably investigate this matter in the course of the year. We will amend the legislation slightly to adapt it to the changed and new circumstances in respect of both the marketing and the mining of diamonds. That we will definitely do. I have already taken up the question of the ad valorem tax with the hon the Minister of Finance. He has already received my memorandum and we will probably discuss the matter shortly.

†Mr Chairman, I do not follow the reasoning of the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central. We have appointed some of the world’s most acknowledged experts on gas exploration and processing. They are the best we could manage to lay our hands on. Their task is to make a viability study—not only a technical study but also an economic study—because they are the only people who know what technical aspects have to be considered and who are familiar with the economic considerations involved. We really have appointed some of the world’s most acknowledged experts. So I really do not see why, once we have received their report, we should still refer the matter to somebody else.

*Who must we still refer the matter to? We have appointed the best experts in the world to carry out the investigation for us, and yet the hon member still wants us to refer the matter to somebody else. [Interjections.]

Order! May I make a recommendation to the hon the Minister in this regard? I can recommend someone from Mossel Bay. [Interjections.] The hon Minister may continue.

I do not think that we can still refer the matter to someone else. These people will study it for us. The Government took a decision in respect of Sasol and I believe that that was not such a bad decision. I think the hon member should trust the Government. We will take the right decision in respect of the gas development at Mossel Bay. There is one point I should like to put into perspective. We have already decided that the facilities will be established at Mossel Bay, but there is no reason why Port Elizabeth should not also have a large share in the project. I want to tell the hon member that I have already had lengthy discussions with the mayor and the town clerk of Port Elizabeth about what can be done to ensure that Port Elizabeth derives the maximum benefit from this project. I want to give the hon member my assurance on that.

Mr Chairman, may I please ask a question? The hon the Minister has said that it has been decided that the onshore plant will go to Mossel Bay. What if these great experts whom he has appointed suggest that it should be sited elsewhere?

If economic considerations indicated that it should be sited more effectively and economically we shall definitely consider that. However, I think that is raising false hopes.

*I should like to thank all hon members very sincerly for their participation. I am very impressed with the quality of the speeches. I apologize if I did not react to some of the subjects raised by hon members. I did not react to the hon member for Witbank but we are negotiating with him about the coal set-up in the Witbank area. I thank all hon members for their contributions.

Vote agreed to.

Vote No 26—”Environment Affairs”:

Mr Chairman, I should like to request the privilege of the half-hour.

As a result of the hopelessly limited time available for debating this interesting subject in terms of the new rules, I will have to confine myself to only some important issues.

The first is the Table Mountain Nature Area which includes Sandy Bay. There was a special debate on the subject on 16 April when the hon the Minister said that he was awaiting the recommendation of the management committee on the Hall Kerzner proposal. What he did not say was that there are at least three previous recommendations to hand which quite clearly reject any development at Sandy Bay, and I have the references to hand. In the light of this background the public is entitled to ask why the hon the Minister did not nip the Hall Kerzner proposal in the bud when it was presented in January. Why this silence? Why his co-operation with these two gentlemen and what is his personal view on the issue? Is he in two minds about development at Sandy Bay; if not, why call for yet another recommendation on the subject?

Since the management committee reported to him on 23 April, I would like to know what the nature of its recommendation was. Does it still stand by the previous recommendations on record? I feel it is high time that these details were made public and I call on the Minister to do so in this debate.

I further take this opportunity to support the concept of a land swop or rather an exchange of rights between the State and those affected landowners in the nature area. This is an unprecedented procedure but the need to take conservation land into State ownership in a general sense applies elsewhere in the country, and it would be useful to establish a procedural precedent for such a preservation strategy. If developers such as Dr Hall and Mr Kerzner have substantial development funds available let them channel this money into areas where such development is acceptable. I would, for example, welcome development funds being channelled into the development of a fisherman’s wharf facility or a small boat harbour facility at Victoria Basin, Granger Bay and elsewhere, although this is only one example of how a land swop type arrangement could be directed.

On the subject of the Peninsula nature area I should also like to raise the matter of the setting of boundaries with particular reference to the Noordhoek section the history of which I believe should be examined in public. The facts as I know them—certain of these facts came to my attention only recently—are as follows: During the early part of 1981 a boundary subcommittee which was established for the purpose of defining the proposed nature area, proposed that the whole of the so-called Chaplin Estate at Noordhoek above the Noordhoek main road should be included in the nature area. At that time the owner of the Chaplin Estate was a Miss C E Godman who lived in England. However, in March 1981 the present hon Minister acquired an option to purchase that estate. With this option the hon the present Minister of Environment Affairs and Tourism, in his capacity as the developer, applied quite correctly to the Cape Divisional Council for approval to subdivide approximately 100 ha of the estate into 45 2-ha smallholdings.

Subsequently, on 16 July 1982 a special meeting of the Interim Management Committee for the proposed Peninsula Mountain Nature Area was held. The question of boundary fines in the Noordhoek area was discussed and the following significant recommendation was adopted by a firm majority:

It must be noted that that recommendation did not provide for the exclusion from the proposed nature area of any land on the Chaplin Estate for the development of housing or township subdivision.

In spite of this formal recommendation the subdivision application was finally considered and approved on Thursday, 29 July 1982, oddly, at an unscheduled meeting of the Housing Committee of the Cape Divisional Council. In this connection one of the councillors at the meeting stated the following:

The point to note here is that if the subdivision had not been approved at that stage, the present hon Minister, in his capacity as developer, would have had to put a proposal to himself in his capacity as Deputy Minister at that stage. It must be stated though that at that time—I think on the morning of the meeting of the Housing Committee; perhaps a day or so earlier—he issued a public announcement that he had a personal interest in the Chaplin Estate, and recused himself from deliberations on the matter.

Subsequently, two months later, the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, on 7 October 1982, issued a Press statement, with a draft map attached, which showed a basic outline of the proposed area, excluding the Chaplin Estate. It must be noted that this map was at odds with the recommendation which had been adopted on 16 July by the Interim Management Committee.

Today the nature area has been proclaimed and the boundary excludes a large part of the estate—which estate is now owned by the present hon Minister. The process of developing and marketing the subdivided township is far advanced.

The reason why I have set this out in some detail is because I believe that this House needs to know what transpired to bring about the overriding of the boundary recommendation of 16 July 1982. There is no doubt that the placing of the boundary line affects the value of the Chaplin Estate drastically, and because I feel the hon the Minister should be especially sensitive to the potential conflict of interest between his roles as Minister of Environment Affairs and as a large property developer—which he conceded by implication when he previously recused himself from deliberations on the matter—I feel that it will be best if the hon the Minister be given the opportunity to deal with this issue in public. I request him to do so today.

Furthermore, in view of the hon the Minister’s dual role as Minister of Environment Affairs and as a major property developer in the Cape Peninsula, I believe it is important for the hon the Minister to completely allay any public fears of a potential conflict of interest in the future by, firstly, confirming that he has completely recused himself from all matters relating to the Noordhoek area to date, and by saying who is responsible for them; and secondly, by considering recusing himself from dealing with all property development matters in the Cape Peninsula.

Turning to the question of the pelagic fishery, I would like to repeat my strong criticism of the hon the Minister’s continuing policy of a split quota in respect of the South African pelagic fishery. The strange split season experiment has now terminated, but the split quota policy is still in place. Apart from permitting a level of pelagic catch which far exceeds the recommendations of the first Alant Commission which recommended a total global quota of 300 000 tons, it is a policy which I have repeatedly warned will lead to dumping and the misidentification of quota fish.

I believe it is significant that the latest pelagic catch statistics up to 19 May 1985 show that the pilchard quota has been 85% filled and the anchovy quota only 50% filled. The non-quota fish catch amounts to over 77 000 tons, which is 33% of the total catch to date. The implication of these figures is that there will be increasing pressure and temptation from now on to dump or misidentify pilchards to avoid exceeding the pilchard quota.

The non-quota fish tonnage catch to date indeed gives rise to the suspicion that misidentification has already taken place, while at the same time we know that dumping has been detected at least once on the West Coast. This was reported in The Cape Times of 18 April.

I would like to ask the hon the Minister to provide information on that incident and any others that may have taken place. What were the circumstances? What was the scale of the transgression detected? What steps have been taken to deal with the transgressions and prevent their recurrence?

In general, I would like to place on record that I am most concerned about the effects of the present policy in respect of pelagic fishing. We must abandon the split quota and revert to a global quota. We cannot afford to tinker with experimental policies in respect of this industry; it is too important. We cannot afford a collapse on the scale which occurred in South West Africa/Namibia. Too many jobs and precious foreign exchange are at stake.

I welcome the appointment of the Diemont Commission into the question of fishing quotas. I hope the commission will report expeditiously. Furthermore, I hope it will examine the possibility of applying the principle of public tendering to the allocation of quota in the various categories of the fishing industry as a whole. I am particularly concerned that the fishing industry should not be permitted to be a closed shop and that free entry of bona fide newcomers to the industry should be encouraged in terms of free competition and free market principles.

On the question of rock lobster and perlemoen, I would like to take the hon the Minister to task for the fact that he has seen fit not to circulate the second Alant report until the very eve of this debate. Hon members will be interested to know that the second Alant Commission report was made available to the hon the Minister in what from the date in the book seems to be December last year. I wrote to him asking for a copy on 30 January this year. On the same day the hon the Minister advised that he was not prepared to release the report to me and that he had in fact only released it to the South African Frozen Rock Lobster Marketing Organization for their comment.

That is not true. You know it is not true.

I have a note in front of me in your handwriting.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order. The hon the Minister said that that is not true and that the hon member knows it is not true.

Order! The hon the Minister must withdraw that statement.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it.

The hon member for Constantia may continue.

I actually have it in the hon the Minister’s own handwriting.

Why does the hon member not read it out?

I do not have the time, unless that hon member wants to give me some of the time allocated to him. Can I have it?

The hon member knows it was circulated to all in the industry concerned.

The hon the Minister’s note gave me the impression that it was not, but I accept his word now.

Firstly I think it is a wrong principle to circulate to an interested part of the industry and not other interested parties. I believe this approach opens the hon the Minister to the accusation that he is exposing himself only to advice from vested interests.

The hon the Minister’s delaying tactic in circulating this report means that we are not able to pay due attention to it in this debate. However, I would strongly recommend that it now be submitted to the Standing Committee on Environment Affairs for comment because some very disturbing findings and a number of important recommendations are at issue.

On the subject of the rock lobster and perlemoen fishery, I would like to raise the question of licences for private individuals. I believe it is unnecessarily cumbersome to require individuals to take out separate licences for rock lobster and perlemoen and I would like to appeal for a consolidated licence for these species to be issued in future. I believe a consolidated licence should be issued with the regulations and rules governing the catching of these species so that there are no misunderstandings on the part of holders of these licences. I would further like to request that the consolidated licence be accompanied by some form of waterproof disc or tag. The paper licence is cumbersome and deteriorates in the wet conditions that naturally accompany such fishing expeditions.

On the subject of the Council for the Environment, I regret that I do not have much time to deal with this matter. However, I would like to note firstly that there are still five vacancies on the main council and that no people of colour have been appointed to the Council for the Environment in spite of repeated requests from this side of the House for the council to be made more broadly representative. I repeat the request this year. The council should reflect participation by all communities, including the Black community, for it to enjoy credibility and to be able to make its important contribution properly across the whole spectrum of South African society.

I would also like to note four items from the council’s annual report which, incidentally, I must welcome as it makes its first appearance this year.

Firstly, according to item 3.2.3.1. the working committee for the coastal zone reports that draft regulations are in the process of being prepared and have been submitted to the committee for consideration. In the light of the recent tragic incident on Milnerton beach I would like to call for the urgent finalization of this matter. It has been dragging on and we need to bring it to a head as we need firm control to prevent this kind of incident.

The second item I wish to query is item 2.6 concerning the Overberg Committee, which is a subcommittee of the council. This is presumably the committee formed to monitor environmental aspect of the Overberg/De Hoop missile testing range. I would like to have confirmation of this and request the hon the Minister to make public that committee’s terms of reference since this is a matter of great public concern.

The third item I would like to refer to is the question of the proposed take-over of the Cedarberg wilderness area. It is reported in the council’s annual report that after public hearings and a site inspection, the council has submitted its recommendations to the hon the Minister for his consideration. It would appear that the hon the Minister would have received these recommendations towards the end of last year, although no date is mentioned in the report, and I would like to appeal to the hon the Minister to set out both the council’s recommendations and any decision which has been taken, so that the public at large can have clarity as to the future policy in that area.

The final point I wish to note is the fact that a lack of money and a niggardly budget clearly still limit the full potential of the work of this council. It has an important role to play, and I am glad that it has started out on that road. It has made an important contribution to date, although not enough, and it is unfortunate that the budget has been cut. It limits their role now.

I regret that time does not permit me to review other aspects of this portfolio such as forestry or tourism on this occasion. However, some of my hon colleagues will discuss these issues.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Constantia says that he is concerned about the policy relating to the control of marine resources. I have been concerned with this matter for several years and my experience has been that it has always been one of the greatest sources of concern in our country. Marine resources have been not merely exploited, but destroyed, owing to too little control. If there is one reason why the hon the Minister has achieved renown in South Africa then in my opinion it is due to his concerted efforts to conserve marine resources. [Interjections.]

I just find it strange that this criticism should be advanced now, while we are dealing with that matter. Hon members must realize that there is a degree of experimental action in this regard. Of course this must be so—or is the hon member for Constantia a fish, that he should understand what fishes think and do? [Interjections.] Surely there has to be experimental action. Why is the hon member exploiting this now? Is it to make the hon the Minister feel that he is not as grand as he thinks he is? We think he is grand and we stand by him.

Allow me to take this opportunity to extend my cordial congratulations to the hon the Minister, since this is the first time that he is in charge of this Vote as Minister of Environment Affairs and Tourism. We came to know John Wiley as a doughty champion of the conservation of marine resources and a zealous participant in all conservation projects aimed at preserving the wonderful natural heritage entrusted to us by the good Lord. The new Ministry, Environment Affairs and Tourism, in which Fisheries is included, is a meaningful coalition of interests with the right helmsman at the helm. We wish him and his department, under the Director-Generalship of the able Mr Fred Otto, every success.

†The object of the Department of Environment Affairs is firstly to promote the forestry and timber industry; secondly to control the utilization of the country’s marine resources; and thirdly, the conservation of the living environment. The functions of the forestry branch must be seen against the following background: Of the total afforested area in the RSA if approximately 1,13 million hectares, the department controls some 260 000 hectares which is of the order of 23% of the total area. It also operates four sawmills and two timber preservation plants. In addition to this the department operates on a 50/50 basis with the Hans Merensky Foundation in the Tweefontein Timber Company which operates two sawmills, one at Sabie and one at Weza.

Conservation areas under the department’s control comprise the following: As far as mountain catchment areas are concerned, 603 000 hectares are in private ownership and 925 000 hectares are State forest land; there are 246 000 hectares of wilderness areas, 70 000 hectares of nature reserves and 139 000 hectares of indigenous forests, also State forest land.

There is close collaboration between the National Hiking Way Board and the department in providing and administering the well-known hiking way system which at present comprises a length of trails of some 850 km on State forest land. Another function of the forestry branch is to provide information which is necessary to develop the forestry and timber industry on a national basis. Scientific data based on research for the development and advancement of the industry is made available to promote the planning and development of the industry.

*The environment conservation division of this department, the task of which is to promote conservation of the living environment, is the smallest division of the department. However, it is increasing in importance due to the growing interest in conservation of the environment over the past decade. For the most part the section performs a co-ordinating function, while the departments or institutions which have statutory powers to promote environmental conservation implement the relevant laws. For example, the Department of Health and Welfare is concerned with pollution; the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing with soil conservation; the Department of Transport with oil pollution etc. The relatively new Council for the Environment under the chairmanship of Prof Roelf Botha is playing an exceptional role in this regard and in the short time that it has existed already made an important contribution. This board advises the Minister on all aspects of environment affairs.

The marine development division of this department carries a wide-ranging responsibility to promote the development and conservation of the Republic’s marine resources. The division’s two most important functions are, firstly, to provide the necessary scientific information concerning the availability of marine resources; and, secondly, to exercise control over the exploitation of marine resources.

In addition to the various components of the department I have already pointed out that there are four statutory bodies that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Director-General but which are accountable directly to the Minister. Firstly there is the National Parks Board, which controls nine national parks in the Republic of South Africa. Secondly there is the National Botanical Gardens Board, which controls eight botanic gardens. Thirdly there is the Council for the Environment which, as an advisory body, advises the Minister in connection with all conservation matters in South Africa. Fourthly there is the SA Tourism Board.

Tourism holds a tremendous economic potential for South Africa. The objective of the SA Tourism Board is to operate a purposeful opportunity-exploiting and problem-solving tourism organization, in accordance with prevailing economic, political and social conditions, to promote the sustained growth of the South African tourism industry by way of the orderly development of, firstly, domestic tourism; secondly, foreign tourism; thirdly, tourism within and to South Africa; and fourthly, the necessary standards and their maintenance. These objectives set a major challenge to the Board and its related institutions. One of the most important aspects being dealt with at present is, for example, the improvement of our hotels so as to be better adapted to the demand in the tourism industry. We look forward a great deal to the developments that will take place under the leadership of the Tourism Board, and in this regard we also want to say to the hon the Minister that we stand by him and we shall keep our eyes open and help where we can to promote this matter.

The appeal one wants to make in regard to the whole range of the functions of the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism is to make the public aware of the importance of the conservation of our natural assets.

Order! I regret that the hon member’s time has expired.

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

My sincere thanks to the hon Whip of the Official Opposition.

I said that if there is one appeal we can make, then we make it to the public at large to ask them to become involved in this great effort to conserve our nature. In a case like Sandy Bay we must not only consider the development possibilities of that area. Of course it is a beautiful area, and anyone would like to own land there—I would too—because there is money in it. However, since we in South Africa enjoy the privilege of still having areas of unspoilt nature, we must ask ourselves what, in the long term, is more precious: Nature in its natural state, or concrete structures to make money? One feels that one cannot encourage this balance strongly enough. People must not simply believe in making money; they must also believe in the conservation of a God-given natural environment.

Mr Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon member for Swellendam on the fact that when he did not expect any extension of time, he was immediately able to continue when the stroke of luck came his way.

I want to associate myself with the congratulations conveyed by the hon member for Swellendam to the hon the Minister on the appointment as Minister of this department. As a Transvaler I have always gained the impression from the sidelines that the hon the Minister has the fishing industry, in particular, fully under control, and I believe that this will also be the case in regard to the other activities of the department. We are dealing with environment affairs, and although I had intended to begin to speak about something else, I now wish to begin on a local note. I came across a newspaper report dated a few days ago about litter in Cape Town. In this article it is contended that in 1983, 64% of Cape Town’s litter found its way into the streets, and only 36% into waste bins. In 1984 there was a slight improvement; 59% of the litter was left in the streets and 41% in waste bins. This 41% means a total cost saving of R225 000 for the city council. The removal of 59% from the streets therefore costs the city council an additional sum of about R335 000 per annum. I hope the report is mistaken, because I find it disturbing reading. If that is the position in Cape Town, it is probable that the same goes for the majority of cities, and I want to ask whether consideration could be given in the future, as far as environmental pollution is concerned, to the possibility of prosecuting the person who deposits litter in the streets or in a public place. If I leave my car at a parking place for five minutes too long, I am given a parking ticket. It is not to anyone’s detriment if my car stands there—not that I say that that is right, but when people litter their cities and towns in this way, they harm the entire community. I ask that municipal officials, and other officials authorized to issue tickets, be authorized to issue tickets in such cases as well. This is an educational task and I think that we shall have to give attention to it in future.

If there is one thing that every person has to deal with every day of his life—he lives in it, he is surrounded by it and is influenced by it, it is part of his education and influences that and it influences his health and even the length of his life—it is the environment. The word “environment” also forms part of the name of the department we are dealing with today. I want to associate myself with the statement by the hon member for Swellendam that the extent and influence of the department is virtually immeasurable. That is why the environment is so important for child and adult. Food exerts an influence on the growth and development of the child. Poor nutrition gives rise to poor growth and development, whereas healthy nutrition gives rise to good growth and development. In this way the environment, like food, has a tremendous influence on the development of the child.

Why does the environment have an influence on the child. Because the environment is the ground he walks on, the water he drinks, the air he breathes, the space he has to move in. All this is part of the forming of the child.

Is it orderly or is it not to have an increased population? Do we have over-population or do we have orderly population in our part of the world? Here I want to quote what a great authority had to say about this:

He goes on to say:

One could continue in this vein. I spoke about over-population. I heard this morning on the radio how Mr John Knoetze and Dries Niemand of the Witwatersrand Development Board submitted evidence to the President’s Council yesterday and advocated that influx control should not be abolished in large Black towns because they said that this would promote unhealthy conditions. It promotes poor housing. It is also bad for the children who grow up there.

Let me quote a report of what Mr Timo Bezuidenhout said recently:

Of course they would not reply to him on this.

I could continue in this vein, but lunchtime is going to catch up with me. I just want to say this: We have a beautiful country.

I want to conclude where I began, with my argument about litter in Cape Town and other cities. I conclude by saying that we have a beautiful country. It has been well endowed by nature—its mountains, its ocean currents, its rivers, its Bushveld, its dry Karoo, its cultivated fields in the Free State and Transvaal. The people of South Africa must help to keep and make this country beautiful.

Last year we had a few hundred thousand tourists from abroad—it is close to the half a million mark, and in a few years’ time it will be half a million, and they spent R900 million in foreign exchange in South Africa. It is estimated that last year domestic tourists spent R1 500 million as tourists. We must help to ensure that, just as our rural areas and our natural environment are beautiful, particularly to foreign tourists, our cities and towns will become steadily cleaner, so that these 300 000 tourists who return to their countries overseas, will each be a living advertisement for the scenic and other beauty of the Republic of South Africa and the neatness of our cities and towns.

Business suspended at 12h45 and resumed at 14h15.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in speaking after the hon member for Meyerton. He really has a feeling for environment affairs, and accordingly I always like to listen to him when he is discussing matters of this kind. However, the hon member must excuse me for not pursuing his theme—which is of course a very important theme—but unfortunately I have little time at my disposal and there are certain matters which I want to bring specifically to the attention of the hon the Minister to enable him to consider them.

I want to refer to the proposed inclusion of the West Coast islands in the Langebaan National Park, the interim protection of Bird, Stag and Seal Islands until such time as finality has been reached with regard to the status and protection of these and other sensitive areas and, last but not least, the obvious clash of interests between the skiboat anglers and amateur anglers in general and the inshore trawler industry.

The finalizing of the land requirements of the Langebaan National Park is clearly being delayed because the Department of Fisheries does not wish to give its permission for the inclusion of Dassen Island in the territory of that park. In my opinion the attitude being adopted by the department is most unfortunate, particularly since Dassen Island is generally regarded as the most important of the group of islands on the West Coast and also as the one with the highest potential as a tourist attraction. The other islands in that group are also key areas in their own right and are worthy of conservation. Therefore it is essential that they, too, be preserved.

However, Dassen Island is the second biggest island on our coast, with a surface area of 224 hectares. The wealth of seabird and marine life, the situation and topography of that island and its aesthetic potential make Dassen Island worthy in all respects of an elevation in status from an inaccesible guano island with a limited economic value to an interesting and important national park of great educational, scientific and aesthetic value.

Perhaps it is unnecessary to provide the whole history of this matter this afternoon. In any event, I do not have the time to do so. The Treurnicht Commission, of which the hon the Minister was a member, has already, however, recommended as follows on page 39 of this commission’s report; and I quote:

Particularly in the light of the above I should therefore like to make an earnest request to the hon the Minister to persuade his department to drop their present standpoint with regard to Dassen Island. The standpoint and the reasons they are now advancing for the exclusion of Dassen Island were similar to those they advanced when the department opposed the extension of the seaward boundary of the Tsitsikamma Park. As you know, Mr Chairman, that standpoint did not succeed in that case. All it achieved was a delay in the proclamation of the new boundary, and I ask that the department should be unsuccessful in its opposition on this occasion too. If the Government is in earnest in developing tourism and the National Parks Board, it will be essential to include Dassen Island in the Langebaan National Park.

The declaration of Langebaan as a national park would, of course, also open up interesting possibilities for further acquisition of land by means of the new park idea in terms of Schedule 5. This will entail additional challenges, too, which would herald an exciting future for that park.

The group of islands consisting of Bird, Stag and Seal Island close to Port Elizabeth not only represents a unique ecological unit but also has great historical value because the wreck of the Doddington in 1755 draw attention to that group of islands even in those times. It is part of the interesting early history of the Eastern Province.

At present there is a guano concession with regard to that island and I must say that it is being operated in a very praiseworthy fashion, in that Bird Island is today in a better condition, as far as the buildings and other things there are concerned, than I have seen it in during the past ten to twelve years. I also note in the annual report that last year for the first time guano was successfully collected and removed from the island. Therefore one knows that the management techniques being applied there are sound.

There has also been a notable improvement in the size of the bird population, which consists almost exclusively of Cape gannets. This, too, is of course an indication of sound management. Nevertheless the reef fish resources of this island system are at present under pressure from skiboat anglers as well as trawlers. I request the hon the Minister to give consideration to, or at least to order an investigation of, interim protection to this island group until such time as a final decision can be taken in regard to areas of this nature along the South African coast that are worthy of preservation. The department already has an island manager resident on Bird Island who is in radio contact with Port Elizabeth. Therefore there ought not to be any problem ensuring that the protective measures, if they are taken, are complied with. Doddington Rock as well as North patch ought to be included in this. These are on the Port Elizabeth side.

The idea I have advanced here links up with remarks that the hon the Minister himself has made from time to time with reference to the necessity of setting aside certain areas for a number of years so that they may be left undisturbed for a number of years and so recover. This island group may in future perform a key function as far as marine national parks on the East Coast are concerned. Therefore they ought to be protected at an early stage. Tourism will of course benefit considerably by this in future and this is an aspect that we must not overlook when we refer even at this stage to its protection at an early stage.

I also wish to refer to the obvious clash of interests between the inshore trawling industry and the skiboat and other amateur anglers. Both of these extremely important interest groups utilize the same sea area and in some cases the same marine resources, and are therefore in competition with one another. Therefore accusations are constantly being made about the destruction of reef fish resources and as far as the seabed itself is concerned. In the interim these resources are simply becoming further exhausted and are deteriorating.

It has become clear to me that it is essential for the Government, in the first instance, to try to reconcile these interests with one another, or at least to regulate them. The hon the Minister is aware that about a year ago I asked here that the area close to the coast in which commercial trawling interests are prohibited from operating, be extended. Today, however, I want to ask him something else. I want to ask that certain regions or sea areas be declared out of bounds for the trawling industry.

I add to that that he must please refer this matter specifically to either the line fishing committee, which is at present doing outstanding work under the chairmanship of Mr John Matthews, or to another body in his department which can advise us authoritatively in this connection. No one can really say today how much capital has been invested in our recreation fleet. If the outside world can serve as an example, then South Africa, like Canada, make the startling discovery that the recreation fleet represents a far greater investment than the commercial interests. Therefore it is important that this matter be considered as soon as possible and that arrangements be made to consider and regulate the interests of these two groups.

Finally I want to say that we all studied the report of the hon member for Pretoria East in the time that was available to us. I think he deserves high praise for an exceptionally interesting report, and this is not the first that that hon member has produced for us. Indeed, I think that he has done outstanding work.

Hear, hear!

I find certain disturbing data in the report, eg that an extremely sensitive resource like the South Coast rock lobster resource is being managed very loosely. I therefore request the hon the Minister to give specific attention to this matter because it is, of course, one that has a considerable affect on my constituency and its environs.

Mr Chairman, I would like to compliment the hon member for Uitenhage on his excellent and very interesting speech. I fully support the concept he suggested, namely that there should be a clearer distinction in definition between people who fish for pleasure and those who fish commercially.

We see this in its practical form in that there are conflicting interests on the Natal South Coast during, what we call, the sardine run.

When sardine shoals come in close to the coastline one finds that the skiboats of commercial fishermen tend to move in with their nets and literally deprive the surf fishing public of the pleasure of being able to participate in that very pleasant sport.

I, too, wish to express my congratulations to the hon the Minister on his appointment as the Minister to this portfolio. As we know, last year during the discussion of this particular Vote he was the Deputy Minister. He is a man dedicated to nature conservation, and fits the bill extremely well and we look forward to working closely with him.

I want to raise a point of particular significance to Natal in relation to the proposed changes in the provincial government system as announced by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. I consider it expedient that the future status of the Natal Parks Board should be dealt with in this Vote. The question that all environmentally oriented Natalians are asking is whether consequential changes are envisaged in the structure of the Natal Parks Board. It is for this reason that I seek an assurance from the hon the Minister that, when provincial councils disappear next year, the Natal Parks Board will be allowed to function on the same basis as it has in the past. I would seek the assurance too that there be no attempt made to remove the autonomy that the board has enjoyed over many years. It is this autonomy that has contributed so largely to the achievements of the board and the excellent reputation that the Natal Parks Board enjoys not only throughout this country but overseas as well. In motivating my call for a firm commitment on the part of the hon the Minister I feel it would be as well to trace the progress that the board has made in the 38 years of its existence. This in itself bears testimony to the spirit that has existed within the board and how it is that this spirit has contributed so greatly to its many unique achievements.

Tell them to be careful about Palm beach, though.

I will not refer to the desecration that has taken place in the constituency of the hon member for South Coast and which he has allowed to continue.

I am going there quite soon to do something about it.

I shall be happy to show the hon the Minister around. The Natal Parks Board was established in 1947.

It does not say much for the province, does it?

Would the hon member like to make my speech?

The Natal Parks Board was established in 1947 as a statutory body responsible to the Administrator-in-Executive. It is as well to note that the functions of this board are those associated with nature conservation as delegated to the provinces by the Act of Union. Prior to 1947 Natal’s conservation authorities were directly responsible to the Provincial Secretary and it can be said without fear of contradiction that since the establishment of the board, progress in conservation and environmental education in Natal has been almost unprecedented.

I should like to draw the attention of this House to the composition of the board itself. It is made up of men from all walks of life who give their services voluntarily and whose main task it is to take decisions on policy matters. The position of the board is such that it is representative of the people of Natal, and this is combined with the fact that appointments are made solely in the interests of conservation and—this I would like to stress—are made on a non-political basis. It is interesting to note that included on the board are two Zulu academics who serve on the board in a very constructive manner.

No Nationalists?

In reply to the question that has been raised by the hon member for Vryheid, I would like to assure him that it cannot necessarily be stated that there are no Nationalists on the Natal Parks Board because these appointments are made on a non-political basis and nobody is obliged to indicate what their political affiliations are at the time of appointment. [Interjections.] This fact has resulted in the board being able to adopt a policy whereby it and its staff have been able to maintain close contact with the public. This has meant too, Sir, that it enjoys the wholehearted support of all sections of the community.

I want to point out that last year no fewer than 1,9 million people visited the areas under the board’s control. This fact alone testifies to the high regard the public has for the excellent facilities that are provided by the board. It is worth noting that of the 1,9 million visitors 1,3 million of them visited public resorts—both inland and on the coast—while the remainder, in other words 600 000, visited Natal game and nature reserves. I may as well point out that the latter are open to and shared by people of all races. This has been the case for the past seven years, so it is worth noting that support is not confined to Whites alone.

At this stage I would like to list some of the conservation achievements of the Natal Parks Board. The first and most important—from an international point of view in particular—is the fact that the board pioneered the capture of rhino’s with immobilizing drugs. This has cleared the way for the same technique to be used on other animals. It is worth noting too that since 1962 more than 3 000 rhino’s have been translocated to other parts of the world and, despite the ongoing annual surplus, not one has had to be destroyed or culled by shooting.

Order! I regret that the hon member’s time has expired.

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

The hon member for Mooi River may continue.

Sir, I would like to thank the hon Whip for this opportunity to complete my speech. It is worth noting too that revenue from this source, in other words the sale of rhino’s, has been ploughed back into conservation.

The second noteworthy aspect that I would like to bring to the attention of the House is that certain staff members of the Natal Parks Board have enviable reputations in numerous fields at international level. I refer particularly to marine turtle and crocodile research, as well as research on otters, rhino’s and other animals. Members of the staff are also called upon regularly for advice in many other fields of nature conservation. The board can therefore claim to be rendering an important form of extension service to game farmers and environmentalists.

Another achievement that I would like to refer to, is that the Natal Parks Board successfully pioneered and launched the so-called self-help conservation scheme for landowners, in other words, the conservancy concept. This became necessary because of the high incidence of poaching and game destruction that was being experienced by farmers. These landowners were also concerned about the harm that was being done to protected, indigenous trees, as well as the need for the protection of certain vital natural resources.

Under the conservancy concept farmers are encouraged to co-operate with one another and to form conservancies embodying individual properties. The board’s advice and the training of rangers in regard to law enforcement and conservation education has meant that the staff employed by these conservancies have been made fully aware of ‘this responsibilities and it is worth noting that other provinces have now introduced similar conservancy projects.

The conservancy concept was originally introduced in 1978 and it is interesting to note that in the period of eight years Natal can boast of some 78 conservancy organizations covering an area of some 650 000 ha which is now larger than the total area covered by the Natal Parks Board.

It must be remembered that these conservancies are regarded as self-help organizations which are founded by landowners, and it is interesting to note that there are now some 8 000 private properties in Natal that are now incorporated into conservancy areas.

May I also refer to the fact that the Natal Parks Board controls some 53 separate reserves and resorts, many of which are quite small. Yet they are unique in their own context. They are valuable too for their many facets of conservation and they form part of a larger environmental pattern covering the whole province of Natal.

It is very important that reserves in Natal be controlled at local level in order to ensure their continued success because they are of a diverse nature and contain many aspects which are peculiar to the province of Natal.

I also want to draw the attention of the hon the Minister to the fact that the Natal Parks Board exercises control over many natural resources along the coast and endeavours to the best of its ability to prevent their exploitation. All legislation in this regard is strict and specifically designed for the Natal situation.

Finally, may I reiterate that we in these benches feel it would be extremely unwise to remove control of the Natal Parks Board functions from the local level as this would inevitably break down the very base on which so much has been achieved so successfully over so many years.

I might point out in conclusion that the provincial administrators themselves agreed at a combined meeting a few years ago that nature conservation should remain under the control of the provinces. It is with this in view that I request the hon the Minister to give a clear indication, during the discussion of his Vote, as to how he sees the future of the Natal Parks Board.

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in speaking after the hon member for Mooi River. I listened attentively to the plea he made in this House on behalf of the Natal Parks Board. Some time ago I was privileged to serve on the committee appointed to investigate environmental conservation and the establishment of the Council for the Environment. In the process, we also visited the Natal parks, and I want to say that those parks are really in an excellent condition. I want to support him in his plea on behalf of those parks.

We in South Africa are truly fortunate in having large areas of land which are still relatively unspoilt. Our natural and semi-natural areas possess a wealth of life forms and landscapes which constitute a heritage of inestimable value. Due to economic growth and development, however, these areas are being subjected to constantly increasing pressure, and the inviolability of this precious heritage is being gravely threatened. Although it is true that there is a profit to be made out of projects which result in the destruction of natural areas, it is equally true that undeveloped systems are of benefit to all people. In fact, if all these systems were properly managed, this benefit would be preserved for future generations as well. This can only be done if a delicate balance is maintained between development and conservation. Has the time not come for all South Africans to ask whether we know enough about nature to sacrifice indiscriminately animal and plant species which may hold the key to human survival? What is the value of an unspoilt area? What do such areas mean to the developer and the community?

This country is blessed with a wealth of natural assets, a large variety of mineral resources, a fascinating diversity of people and cultures, and a proud heritage and beautiful wildlife. Apart from the provision of food, South Africa’s stable and productive agricultural sector has also made possible the exploitation and orderly development of our mineral resources. South Africa’s farmers are also the custodians of our future. Because of our variable climate and extremely high rate of population growth, it is imperative that we protect this country, its soil, its fertility and its ability to retain water. We must invest in order to protect our capital. We must protect not only our soil and water, but also living resources such as plants, animals, insects and other organisms which make this country the source of potential abudance which in fact it is. There is such a diversity of life forms in our country that their protection cannot be left in the hands of the Government alone. Dr Anton Rupert, the president of the South African nature Foundation, has appealed to land-owners and farmers voluntarily to protect and preserve small habitats, and he has argued that this is indispensable to a national conservation programme. The South African Natural Heritage project, launched by the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism in co-operation with the private sector led by the South African Nature Foundation, complies with these requirements. One of the most important objectives of the South African Natural Heritage project is to illustrate the value and importance of private conservation projects and to create that partnership between the State and the individual which will encourage the preservation of South Africa’s proud natural heritage.

This project is one of the most important projects ever launched in our country. It is conservation in the widest and most important sense: The voluntary protection of our future by the individual, with the support of the Government, commerce and industry.

The individual farmer or land-owner, inspired by his pride and attachment to the soil, and by his love of the variety of nature, is the key to the success of this project. We need the help of farmers and land-owners to identify areas, irrespective of size, which form important habitats for certain plant and animal species, or which play a key role in supporting a natural population. These are areas such as vleis.

This does not mean that areas must be withdrawn from production. In many cases, farmers are so proud of an important breeding colony of birds, or of an endangered plant species which may be found on their property, that they have already set these areas aside of their own accord. This project will help them, because their efforts will receive recognition, the fanner concerned will be thanked and expert advice on the successful management of the area and assistance with the future management of the area will be provided free of charge. The setting aside of such areas will often hold other benefits for the farmer as well. It may ensure, for example, a constant supply of pure water in the case of vleis and mountain catchment areas, or the natural control of pests by birds or other animals which are being protected. Support for this South African Natural Heritage project, whether financial, moral or active, is an investment in the future of this country. It is a positive contribution, and all South Africans will be proud to be involved in this project.

I take this opportunity of conveying my best wishes to the Department of Environment Affairs, the participants and the sponsors of this project. May this truly national project receive all the support it deserves. I am sure that the project will play an important role in the improving the quality of life of every citizen of this country.

Mr Chairman, we on this side of the House support the plea of the hon member for Ladybrand for the maintenance of natural resources in all their forms. We must prevent at all costs uncontrolled overdevelopment in South Africa. As far as the hon member for Mooi River is concerned, I shall also deal with his plea.

I should like to deal principally with tourism. The 1984 report of the South African Tourism Board is well presented and the board should be complimented. However, it discloses that, with the deepening economic recession lapsing into a depression, South Africans are finding it difficult enough to travel in their own country but, with the weak rand, overseas travel has become prohibitive for many South Africans. Nevertheless, during 1985 the South African family man will have to settle for local and regional travel rather than overseas travel. The Tourism Board should therefore concentrate to a far greater extent on domestic South Africans of all colours. I trust that their Sales Guide will provide for all income groups.

Foreign tourism provides foreign earnings and foreign goodwill. Despite the international recession, the weak rand makes South Africa the cheapest tourist country in the world. What American can stay at a five-star American hotel for US $40 to $50 a night? However, the huge marketing campaign we have, is being negated by Government policy which causes civil riots in South Africa so that TV screens in overseas countries, night after night, show scenes of violence in many parts of South Africa. This frightens away more foreign tourists than anything else and negates our advertising campaign because, whatever we may say, they are afraid to put themselves at risk.

I was very perturbed last night to read the following headline in The Argus’. “US warns tourists about travel in South Africa”. The report says the following:

There were more in Miami a couple of years ago.

That I agree with, but I am just saying that this is the problem.

I wish to compliment the Tourism Board for appointing a Tourism Liaison Committee, which is most representative of the travel trade in South Africa. However, I strongly want to advise the chairman and members of the board to take cognizance of the recommendations of this Liaison Committee, and even to consult them before taking policy decisions. So far this does not appear to have been the case. I am informed that the board has been of great help with portable material and stalls when any South African tourist agent wished to promote tourism in South Africa itself.

As far as the “Indaba” Congress is concerned, there is disquiet among travel agents that the Tourism Board, the SA Airways and Sun International will select foreign tour operators to bring tourists out to South Africa and so bypass the registered local travel agents. There is a belief that the foreign travel agent will be getting a better rate in the Sun Hotels than the local travel agent. For example, the foreign travel agent may get a room for, say, R30 per night while the local agent has to pay R50. Can the hon the Minister ensure that the local travel agent will not be worse off than the foreign travel agent because of agreements by large hotel groups?

I should now like to deal with the Travel Agent and Travel Agencies Act, no 58 of 1983, which was assented to in this House on 4 May 1983. Only sections 1 to 13 and section 43 apply. It is now two years later and on 26 April 1985 for the first time a notice of intention to make regulations in terms of section 43 was published in the Government Gazette for comment.

This Act resulted from the report of a commission which set down two basic principles, namely, firstly, the establishment of a statutory body and, secondly, the provision of special arrangements in respect of consumer protection. The statutory body was to be one concerned with self-regulation of the industry. The consumer protection was to be provided by the safeguarding of money held in trust by the travel industry by establishing a Fidelity Fund. The purpose of the Fidelity Fund was to reimburse clients of a travel agency which failed to carry out obligations for which the client had paid, so that the services and facilities for which such travelling client had paid could be forthcoming.

The tourist industry is experiencing a very rough time. A large number of travel agencies have gone into liquidation. Those who were members of Asata, which has a bonding scheme covered by an insurance company, have to some extent had some form of protection for their clients. Nevertheless, the situation is unsatisfactory.

I want to refer to some of the companies that have run into trouble. Breakaways is a member of Asata, but has no IATA licence so that it cannot issue air tickets. It has some R200 000 outstanding, which may or may not be paid, depending upon whether personal guarantees of certain persons can be met. West Tours has been liquidated but has met all its commitments. Fantasy, which is not a member of Asata, has a shortfall of R70 000. Intereis, run by one Peter Strydom, sold overseas tours principally to churches and schools. It was not a member of Asata and neither did it have an IATA licence, so it bought its air tickets through Constantia Travel. Intereis did not pay Constantia Travel, resulting in its liquidation and, although the public did not lose anything because of the liquidation of Constantia Travel, nevertheless the air carriers lost some R120 000. It is believed that the same person who operated this company is now operating under the name of Peter Mayers, and another debacle may occur.

Two years after promulgation of the Act, notice of intention to make regulations has been published. It may take at least another year after the regulations have been approved by the Minister to effect the registration of the various categories of travel agents and agencies. With the economic climate worsening, many financial problems which this Act was meant to avoid may occur to the detriment of the travelling public.

The regulations make allowance for an annual payment to the Fidelity Fund of R1 000 once a travel agency has been licensed. When does the Minister anticipate that all travel agencies and the various forms of travel agents will be registered? In addition, when will the remaining sections of the Act be promulgated?

Section 28 refers to trust accounts. Is it the intention of the Minister to promulgate the whole Act together with the regulations, or does he intend to leave Section 28 out?

In conclusion I should like to deal with the National Parks Act which is controlled by this Minister. As we know and as has been mentioned, the control and maintenance of 10 beautiful national parks is involved.

I am informed that the Kruger National Park on average has an 80% bed occupancy and other parks 50%. The system of booking accommodation is antiquated. The Parks Board has never considered the important role played by the travel agent in arranging tours for both local and overseas tourists. Communication with the central office in Pretoria is difficult if not impossible. The board’s office should be connected to the Safari Satamars computerized booking system as provided by the SA Airways so that a travel agent can be aware some months ahead when arranging tours, especially if bookings are heavy, what parks have accommodation during the period of a projected tour so that overseas visitors can be diverted. Although the Kruger National Park is the most popular, it is important that overseas visitors in particular should visit some of our other parks. The Parks Board should consider paying a commission to travel agents.

Finally, with the demise of the provincial system, what is going to happen to provincial game parks and resorts? This point was also raised by the hon member for Mooi River. Surely they should fall under the hon the Minister’s department. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, may I in the first place commence by thanking hon members of all parties who have congratulated me on my appointment not only today but also previously just after I was appointed.

Secondly, I would like to thank the Director-General and his staff for the work that they have done in briefing me for this debate and also for enlightening me on the problems of the department.

*I should also like to extend a cordial welcome to the two new Deputy Directors-General, Mr Van der Dussen of Forestry and Mr Bill Visagie who will be responsible for Environment Affairs and Marine Development. On this occasion I should also like to congratulate the new chairman of the Tourism Board, Mr Danie Hough, on his appointment. He is a person who has already achieved considerable distinction in other spheres of society and has already made a considerable contribution to the success achieved by the Tourism Board.

†I should also like to take this opportunity to thank my predecessor, Dr Dawie de Villiers, for the work that he has done in laying the groundwork for tourism in the Republic. In fact, if we achieve any success, we will really be plucking the fruits of the trees he has already planted.

*I should also like to welcome Prof Roelf Botha here this afternoon. He came to listen to the debate this afternoon and is chairman of the Council for the Environment. I want to congratulate him on the board’s first report which was tabled recently.

†I am well aware of the responsibilities that fall on my shoulders. I think this department which I have been honoured to be given the opportunity to administer is going to become a very important department indeed, if it is not already so. I must obviously find my feet in the realms of forestry and tourism, with which I am not wholly familiar, but as my friend Hendrik Schoeman has said on occasion “Gee my net tot die einde van die jaar en ‘watch’ my dan!”. I get help and advice from many participants and for that I am grateful. With their assistance I will perhaps not make too many mistakes.

*I want to congratulate my old friend, the hon member for Swellendam, most sincerely on his appointment as chairman of the NP group on Environment Affairs. I wish him every success and I have not the slightest doubt that we shall enjoy cordial co-operation. I also wish to thank Mr Toy Vermeulen, the secretary of the group, for the good work he has done thus far. I can promise him that he is going to work very hard in future. Finally, I want to congratulate the hon member for Uitenhage on his appointment as chairman of the Fisheries Group.

†So far the report of the department has been tabled, as well as the report of the Council for the Environment and on Monday the report of the Tourism Board. The previous year’s report of that board was also published recently. In all those publications there is a wealth of information. I should like to congratulate all those concerned on what I regard as excellent publications.

*The report of the Alant Committee has been published during the last few days. It concerns the local marketing of rock lobster and abalone. I want to take this opportunity to convey my sincere thanks to the hon member for Pretoria East, not only for the work he did as chairman of this committee but also for the activities of his previous committee in connection with pelagic fish. [Interjections.] In think he has already made a very good impression not only on us as members but also on the industry as a whole.

†I wish to make one or two observations about the policy in general of the department. Conservation is obviously the keyword for environment, forestry and fisheries. We have a duty to those who come after us to ensure that our natural resources are handed on to them in a good condition and, if possible, with an opportunity for them to grow.

Tourism, however, is a different concept. In the case of tourism, with the opportunities which have been presented to us, we have to be business like in our marketing of the tourist wares of South Africa. I think the first is essential if the second is to succeed. In other words, one has to have conservation of one’s natural resources if one want to be able to attract tourists to South Africa because tourists will hardly come to a country where the natural resources have been over exploited.

*I want to refer briefly to the results of the conservation efforts made thus far. I want to say that all our marine resources are in the process of recovering. All the different species which are regulated by quota are being caught with ease. In fact, there are recommendations from the scientists that some of the quotas may be increased, but I am conservative in my approach and it will only be after very careful throught that I shall decide to increase the quotas further. Nevertheless the prospects seem to me to be very promising, particularly as regards the resources which have been under great pressure over the past number of years.

The same programme also applies to environmental activities. We are conserving the natural environment. We are conserving water catchment areas. I shall shortly be making further announcements in this regard.

As far as forestry, too, is concerned, we are engaged in conservation programmes.

†I am wearing the tie for the environment this afternoon. The circle represents the whole world while the three figures in the middle represent soil, water and air. On the top is a little man who is symbolically in charge of the environment. I want to say to all hon members who have spoken so feelingly this afternoon about the need to conserve the environment that the responsibility rests on us as humans to conserve our natural resources and to preserve our heritage for the future.

*I wish to say something in connection with the Council for the Environment. After a period of consolidation, the Council for the Environment is now well established and, by means of five standing committees, in-depth attention is being given to a wide series of subjects. For example, the council’s findings with regard to coastal management are serving as a basis for the function oriented investigation of the Commission for Administration, which I am informed has just been completed.

A report of the council dealing with the very important subject of environmental education is in the final stages of preparation. It will serve as a basis for consultation with relevant bodies and it is foreseen that a White Paper on national policy for environmental education will flow from this. I want to convey my sincere thanks to Prof Botha and the members of his committee for their contribution thus far.

There are a few announcements I should like to make. The first is in connection with a new national park. In 1982 the Cabinet decided in principle that a national park be established in the Langebaan region. The stage has now been reached at which a proclamation will appear shortly in the Gazette in terms of which the area of the Langebaan lagoon that is under water, certain islands—in fact, four in number—and specific areas of State land in the region are to be declared a national park, as the first phase of the eventual park.

Hear, hear!

As far as the reserve at De Hoop is concerned, I am pleased to be able to announce that after extensive negotiations I have decided to extend the seaward boundary of the reserve at De Hoop to three sea miles with the inclusion of the adjoining littoral and sea area of the Overberg arms-testing terrain of Armscor. This will mean that the landward part of the De Hoop reserve will form a unit with the marine reserve from Infanta to Waenhuiskrans. Details of the practical implementation of the proposal must still be finalized with the Cape Provincial Administration.

†The Tourism Board is intent on stimulating domestic tourism within the Republic of South Africa and will shortly be undertaking an extensive national campaign to exhort South Africans to see their own country. The campaign will utilize television, the Press and radio, and will be launched by the State President on 4 June 1985.

It is hoped that the South African travel industry will make use of this umbrella campaign to launch their own marketing campaign in which they can feature their own particular travel products. The board’s campaign will last until the end of next year, and it is hoped that the resultant increase in domestic tourism will not only stimulate the local industry but will also save vital foreign exchange by encouraging would-be travellers abroad to see the undoubtedly worthwhile attractions of their own country first. The slogan for this campaign will be “See the world in your country. See South Africa”.

The hon member for Meyerton referred to the vexed problem of littering. I am therefore delighted to be able to make the following announcement.

Littering remains a very serious problem. Of particular concern is the state of our sports grounds after sporting events. It is the intention therefore of the department and the Keep South Africa Beautiful campaign to launch a concerted anti-litter campaign to coincide with the forthcoming tour of the All Blacks and of the Australian cricketers. The Keep South Africa Beautiful campaign organization will play a leading role in this campaign, with the assistance of the Department of Environment Affairs, and I intend also to solicit the co-operation and the assistance of the SA Rugby Board and the various provincial unions which, I am sure, will be forthcoming. I have indeed already been in touch with Dr Danie Craven and I will be given the opportunity of addressing the board at its next meeting.

*The kind of slogan we had in mind for the campaign is for example—with reference to Loftus Versfeld—”Play hard, play clean, keep clean”.

That, of course, only applies to the Springboks—not to the Northern Transvalers! [Interjections.]

We also hope to enlist the help of the police and the traffic police, as well as that of the Boy Scouts and the Voortrekker Movement. Municipalities, too, will be approached with a view to this campaign. Further announcements in this regard will be made in due course.

During the debate on this Vote last year I referred to the need for a national policy and strategy with regard to the development of our marine resources. Indeed, this relates to one of the recommendations made by Dr Theo Alant and his committee on pelagic fish resources. Last year I announced that a White Paper would be submitted to Parliament in which the national policy with regard to living marine resources would be set out. This task has now been finalized but one of the important components of this policy, viz the basis for the awarding of quotas, will be investigated shortly by a commission. As soon as the recommendations of that commission have been received and accepted they will be incorporated in the policy document and the White Paper will be submitted to Parliament.

I should also just like to say something about the Diemont Commission. During the discussion of this Department’s Vote a month ago in the House of Representatives I announced the appointment of the commission of inquiry into the quota system in the fishing industry. The commission, which will consist of five members under the chairmanship if Mr Justice Marius Diemont, has been requested to make recommendations concerning a wide variety of matters affecting the awarding of quotas to the various fisheries. One of the requests is that the commission make recommendations about the transferability of quotas. The transfer of quotas from one person to another or the purchase of quotas by organizations within the fishing industry has in the past been agreed to or rejected by me personally. The reason for this is that I want to make sure that the quotas did not unnecessarily fall into the hands of a small number of persons or bodies.

Although the transfer of quotas from one person or body to another is more the exception than the rule, I now wish to announce that until such time as the commission of inquiry has submitted its proposals to me and they have been approved, applications for the transfer of quotas will in the interim be held over.

Finally, I want to exchange some ideas about the research ship Africana. As all the hon members are probably aware, the research ship Africana experienced mechanical difficulties during its recent voyage in the southern oceans. I should like to convey my cordial congratulations to Captain Krige and his crew on the outstanding way in which they dealt with a very difficult and potentially dangerous situation.

Hear, hear!

I am also pleased to be able to announce that the damage to the Africana has been repaired and that the ship is already being used once again to continue with further valuable research programmes.

†Penultimately, Sir, I want to say that the value of trees—both materially and aesthetically speaking—need not to be emphasized. Their tremendous importance in the creation of an acceptable environment is widely recognized. National Arbor Day is observed on the second Friday of August each year. This year it will fall on 9 August. Although the first two Arbor days in 1983 and in 1984 met with overwhelming success, it is obvious that even more should be done to obtain the active support of the total population for this important cause.

With this end in view, it is the intention to approach all MPs, Administrators of provinces and local authorities in the near future with an appeal for their full co-operation to assist us in realizing the objective expressed in our slogan, which is: “Plant a tree for a greener South Africa on 9 August.”

*My final announcement concerns the registration of tour guides. Section 12 of the Tour Guide Act reads:

The relevant article has not yet been put into operation, in order to give the large number of people operating as tour guides the opportunity to register as such. After consultation with the Registrar of Tour Guides I am of the opinion that the time has now come to impose this guillotine provision during the first quarter of 1986. I give notice today that I shall do so.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister has received many compliments. I want to pay him another, viz that he is a very good captain of the Parliamentary cricket team which has not lost one game this year. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister referred to nature and the environment. I should like to say today that we do not always need to look for a beautiful environment only outside the city. Often we have the greatest and probably the most valuable treasures in our cities. These are often distorted by abuse, however, to such an extent that the man in the street no longer sees them, and can no longer realize their value.

I should therefore like to plead for the first and second ties of government to assist the third tier, the local tier, in restoring our city centres, which are often of great historic interest, to their full glory. The city and town environments are so easily robbed of their beauty and character. Culture-historical preservation is imperative, not as an effort to restrain progress, but for the very purpose of maintaining the balance between the architecture of the past, the present and the future. This not only strengthens the visual quality of the city and town environments, but also serves as a psychological crutch for the urbanites in their subtle search for stable landmarks in a fast changing world.

Our city centres are so often over commercialized and distorted by traffic that man feels truly unwelcome there. Fortunately many examples throughout the world have proved that a concerted effort to bring people back to the city centres can be extremely successful if those efforts are tackled in a correct and positive way. We all realize the days when one could drive right to the shops where one wanted to make purchases, as in the rural areas are past. Today the urbanites have to make use of public transport or have to stop on the outskirts of the city and walk further. My plea to the hon the Minister is for the city centres to be made as attractive as possible so that once again they can truly become the meeting place and visiting place of the people—more beautiful and more serviceable for the workers, the inhabitants, the owners, the developers, the visitors and the tourists.

One can refer to a few fine examples abroad. Many hon members have been in various overseas cities where one finds traffic free zones of this kind. One need only look at Vienna’s old main street, Kärntnerstrasse, which has been closed and decorated beautifully with flowers, trees and benches. The interesting point is that the business undertakings in that street are doing better business now than ever before. One can look at Cologne with its closed main street from the cathedral to who knows where. Salzburg is the best example of a whole city centre which has been closed to traffic.

What about Hamburg?

Hamburg too, but not the section the hon member is thinking of. [Interjections.]

In my opinion South Africa’s cities are ready for this kind of development. Let us take the mother city as an example. Through the years Cape Town has been smothered by traffic and people no longer live in the city centre. I believe this is an ideal opportunity to make it a safe city to walk about and to sleep in.

It is that already.

It will bring the people back in greater numbers, business will flourish and its culture-historic value will be appreciated once again.

Perhaps Cape Town’s people are not awared of the golden opportunity at their disposal. Ten years ago Cape Town’s city council—and I want to take off my hat to them—undertook a study with the title City for the People. A few years ago it was followed up with another study Greening the City. Both are excellent reading matter. One should like this to put into practice progressively. I jotted down six points which I want to list quickly for the consideration of the hon the Minister, and specifically for that of the city council.

In the first place they should continue—in co-operation with the Council for the Environment and the National Monuments Council—to compile a complete register of all the buildings in this city, which are worthy of being preserved as in other cities.

Secondly the idea of traffic free zones should be extended. I do not know whether hon members have been to the section of Church Street which has been closed to traffic. Hon members should go and see how pleasant it is there. See what a pleasant atmosphere the Golden Acre has, a centre which links a whole number of street blocks by means of an underground concourse, but we must go much further. We should encourage the city council—perhaps this is a radical idea—to close Adderley Street or perhaps St George’s Street or Parliament Street to traffic and to change them into real pedestrian malls. When one speaks of pedestrian streets, one means streets which have been paved, where trees and shrubs have been planted, where there are benches for people to sit on, etc. The same applies to a side street like Long market street. The ideal is to connect residential areas around the city with the city centre so that people can walk easily.

In the third instance Cape Town’s squares, such as Greenmarket Square, Church Square and the Parade, should be restored to their old glory. There should be more trees and greenery, and fewer cars. They should be able to link up with the envisaged traffic free streets to make the pedestrian at home and safe in the city once again.

A fourth idea is that much more effective use should be made of public transport. An example is the extremely successful “City Hoppers”, which convey people through the city free of charge.

A last idea is that the through traffic in the city can be decreased by the additional practical implementation of the ring road system with which a great deal of progress has been made. I request the hon the Minister and the Government to help our local authorities to bring the people back to the city.

Mr Chairman, it is my pleasure to follow upon the hon member for Paarl. He has prepared the immediate environment for us, and I think it is time for us to go touring. We thank him for a fine contribution.

Allow me to associate myself with other hon members by conveying my sincere congratulations to the hon the Minister on the way in which he is dealing with the Vote. I address this word of thanks to the Director-General and his two Deputy Directors as well; also in connection with what they are going to do for us in future. We should also like to thank the members of the Tourism Board. I think they deserve our thanks for the diligence they display in promoting tourism, not only abroad, but here in South Africa as well.

We realize the value of tourism, and especially of overseas visitors. Last year more than 400 000 people visited South Africa from abroad. We share in the Tourism Board’s anxiety about the problems they have to contend with, especially in connection with the anti-South African campaign in the USA, and the termination of SATOUR advertisements by some of the most important television networks, such as inter alia the CBS and the ABC, as well as a number of radio stations. We have also taken note of the action and statement of a certain Mr Michael Bosazza, the so-called “advanced scout” of Trek America. I read an article in The Argus of 2 February, from which I should like to quote to the Committee:

Sir, apparently this gentleman visited other states as well, and he went on to say, referring to South Africa, that he had found no rubbish, fighting, intoxication etcetera in those states.

I want to say immediately—I shall come back to it—that I am of the opinion that Mr Bosazza never put his foot in the Free State. I have no doubt, however, that this Tourism Board will take the necessary steps to place the statements of this man in the correct perspective once again. More than ever before, we shall have to see to the neatness of the facilities at resorts and camping sites for tourists. I do not think camping sites are registered, but I think this can only be to the advantage of the tourism industry.

I want to air a few ideas, however, in connection with an area which I believe to be neglected and about which people have a great misconception especially with a view to tourism, viz the Orange Free State, which does not consist only of grasslands and maize fields as many people believe. Indeed, the Free State offers each tourist, according to his preference, a rich and easily accessible variety of pleasure resorts, game reserves and places of historic an culture-historic interest, comparable with the best South Africa can offer. I should like to mention a few.

Where else does one still see a herd of eland together? Where else does one see a park which contains 2 000 black wildebeest at present? These black wildebeest were once an endangered species, but thanks to the provincial administration of which the hon member for Welkom was a member at the time, the 22 remaining black wildebeest were protected and today they are no longer an endangered species, but are found throughout the country and in most of the country’s parks.

How many of the hon members know where the reserve “Tussen die Riviere” is? [Interjections.] It is near Bethulie. It is a hunter’s paradise.

Where does one find a better planned and more luxurious five star holiday resort than the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam and the Willem Pretorius with all the facilities, spacious and luxurious rondavels, golf courses, tennis courts and bowling rinks, as well as sailing, skiing and fishing facilities which are a dream for the fisherman? [Interjections.]

There may be one other place in the country, but not a second, like the Willem Pretorius Game Reserve. Where else does one find herds of buffalo and impala? Indeed, this is the only place apart from “Tussen die Riviere” where herds of wild animals are protected absolutely against foot-and-mouth disease. All these wild animals comply with the demands of the Roland Ward Award and therefore with international standards. Twelve of those buffalo are being bought by the Parks Board for distribution to other parks. Thanks to the conservation campaign in the Free State there are more than 22 000 wild animals in that province today. The Willem Pretorius Game Reserve alone covers an area of more than 13 000 ha.

Where else in South Africa does one find a dam with silverblue water so clear that a fisherman can choose his catch? Where else does one catch trout of 2 kg to 2,5 kg? In case the hon members do not know, I am referring to the Sterkfontein Dam at Harrismith. There is no other place in South Africa with trout of this quality, not even in Natal. [Interjections.] A beautiful modern holiday resort is being developed at this dam at present.

Where else in South Africa does one see a more breathtaking picture of colour than where 10 000 or 20 000 flamingoes are grazing in the water-pans around Welkom? Apart from in Welkom, is there any other inland town where one sees sea-birds making their characteristic noise being fed in the streets? Which town had the only monument to the Afrikaans language before the Taalmonument was erected in Paarl? It was Welkom.

Tourists will find it worth while, as will hon members of this House, to take a walk in President Brand Street in Bloemfonein, from the statue of General Hertzog to the equestrian statue of Genl De Wet, which is also one of the most beautiful of its kind in the world. There is also the Appeal Court, the Raadsaal and the Nasionale Afrikaanse Letterkundige Museum, the only one of its kind in South Africa. Anyone who wants to know anything about his language can visit it, for it is definitely worth while. Further down the street one finds the restored old presidential residence and the presidential burial ground, the Old Fort, the War Museum and the Vrouemonument. One can continue with the list in this way, for there are still many others such as for example Fauresmith, Jagersfontein and Magersfontein. There is Ficksburg’s cherry festival. I want to tell the hon member for Ladybrand there is not a festival in South Africa to equal the cherry festival in Ficksburg. Then there is Golden Gate and hospitable farmers who offer their farms to tourists. If I were an overseas visitor, one of the 300 000 who landed in Johannesburg, I would return home the poorer for not having visited the Free State. I shall tell hon members why those 300 000 people who land in Johannesburg do not visit the Free State. The Free State is not presented as a tourist attraction in any travel brochure. I am not critical, but here I have a brochure entitled South Africa with all the different bus tours that are possible, and Bloemfontein’s name is not even mentioned. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member made an interesting speech, and by and large I agree with him that it should be seen to that the sights in our country ought to be numbered in brochures according to preference. The important point he mentioned—whether the Americans attacked us in this regard or not, it is true—is that the restrooms, toilet facilities and other similar facilities at some of our tourist attractions are not of world standard, and certainly do not comply with South African standards. This is a matter we must attend to. I do not believe that our open-air terrains comply with world standards and I believe that we must look into this. Criticism is not always a bad thing; it can be beneficial, too.

It is true that the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism is one of the most important departments. The tourist who comes to this country and is well treated, returns as an ambassador. The Department of Foreign Affairs, on the other hand, is only really an extension of the Government’s propaganda machinery and never really succeeds, in the true sense of the word, in making a country known. It is tourism that is important in making our country known.

In fact I am very pleased that a Minister like Mr Wiley has this department as his portfolio, because he is a person who has shown us that he always deals with his departments and portfolios in a way that merits one’s profound appreciation.

Another important issue is our hotels. A tourist who is exploited is a person who leaves with a bad taste in his mouth. He is always angry when one exploits him in a hotel, or offers him poor travelling facilities. Anything of this kind makes him angry.

†We can take him for a ride 120 times in a shop, and he is not worried about that. If he is buying something for his wife which only looks like a diamond, he is not perturbed. The point is that he can buy something and spend his money of his own free will.

*I do just want to make an earnest plea that we give attention to that. The activities of hotels and hotel groups in our tourist industry, and particularly in our Tourism Board must always be conducted with restraint. Just bear in mind that tourism earns this country R2 400 million per annum. The Department of Tourism has one Minister and one Director-General. Now I want to draw a comparison, and the hon friends of the NP must not become angry when I do so. Think of own affairs; the amount allocated to the own affairs of the total White population is R2 200 million, and they have five Ministers and a Deputy Minister as well as directors and other officials—you name it, they have it. However, the total budget is a mere R2 200 million, whereas the revenue of this one department is R2 400 million.

Rather tell us about Uncle Charlie.

No, the NP wants to hear everything except the facts. This Tourism Board cannot function properly under a temporary chairman.

He is doing good work.

I do not say that he is not doing good work.

You are implying it.

Of course, I know what I am talking about. One cannot have a man sitting in the President’s Council and on top of that administering an industry with an income of R2 400 million per annum in a temporary capacity. He occupies a political post in the President’s Council and he has to be present there, because that is his job and he has to attend committees. Why must a department and its officials arrange appointments for the time the chairman is available? That is totally unacceptable! [Interjections.] I do not care what the NP thinks, but they cannot trifle with tourism and our revenue from tourism in this way. I reiterate that I have nothing against the person, but I am definitely opposed to his appointment.

Say for example a group of American or European travel agencies that make arrangements for tourists want to make an appointment with the chairman of the board, but at the same time a President’s Council investigation is in progress—the appointments with the tourist group would have to be cancelled. I am sorry, but the country and its tourism, and its revenue from tourism, are far more important than the person who occupies the post. If the Government does not want to replace the chairman, I want to ask that the chairman, who is a responsible man, withdraw from the post in the interests of the department.

The work being done by the people in the Department of Tourism today is such that one simply has to take off one’s hat to them and thank them. I am often in a city like Johannesburg, and I note the dedication with which these people do their work. The way in which the department introduce people to the country cannot be improved upon. However, we should very much like to see the suggestion I have made implemented, and in addition, that guidance be given to some of these agencies so that they do not merely bring a tourist to the country from overseas, offload him at the Carlton and then pick him up the next day and rush him straight to the Kruger National Park. The poor man is so tired he cannot keep his eyes open, and they pick him up and rush him to the game reserve or to KaNgwane, and from there take him 300 to 600 km further to go and drink tea. No, rather bear in mind that the finest water organ in the world is in Johannesburg. Tabulate the sights on the basis of the department’s experience, ensure that facilities that are up to standard, are provided. Show the tourist the miniature city. Show him the mine for tourists at Crown Mines where he can see how gold is refined without disturbing activities in the working mine.

As far as our open air areas are concerned I want to say that people who attach so much value to our climate should utilize our hut facilities and particularly our sunshine at a reasonable price.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Langlaagte must excuse me if I do not react to him now. I should like to concentrate on my own constituency, Walvis Bay. I merely want to remark that personally I have the highest regard for Mr Danie Hough. He has done tremendous work in South West Africa and is doing so here as well. I merely want to mention that.

The annual report of the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism is truly a testimonial to our hon Minister, his Director-General and the department, upon which I should like to congratulate them. I also want to congratulate the hon the Minister on his enlarged portfolio and express my thanks towards the Director-General, Mr Otto, who has done a great deal for my constituency in the past. In addition I should like to convey my sincere thanks for the appointment of Mr Bill Visagie as Deputy Director-General as well as my congratulations to both deputies. As chairman of the Walvis Bay Development Advisory Committee Mr Bill Visagie left his stamp on Walvis Bay. We need not tell him anything about Walvis Bay. We cannot teach him anything about Walvis Bay. We cannot pull the wool over his eyes.

According to the annual report of the Marine Development Branch the research boats—especially the Africana but also the others—were utilized very intensively and the research team was very busy. They also undertook six voyages on behalf of the Department of Sea Fisheries of South West Africa to do research along the coast of South West Africa. We should also like to thank the department for that assistance which is rendered and for the fine co-operation between the two departments. It is of vital importance to Walvis Bay because the fishing industry is Walvis Bay’s fife-blood. To us it is the pivot on which everything hinges.

That is why I should like to ask the hon the Minister this afternoon to give his attention to the fishing industry in Walvis Bay. The first factory licences were allocated in 1950 for a period of 25 years. Later licences were allocated with the same term of expiry, viz December 1985. Once the fishing season nears its end, the usual capital intensive maintenance work and repair work has to be done to buildings, equipment and boats to prepare them for the following season. It is imperative that the renewal of these licences receives urgent preference. Large capital investments are involved.

I should like to direct attention to the replacement value of the four existing processing factories. There are 9 or 10 licence holders, but as a result of the small quota they rationalized so that at present the quota is processed only by the four processing factories. There is a great deal of surplus capacity, however. Any one of the three factories which also have canning facilities, can process the total quota with ease. The replacement value of buildings and machinery in this industry amounts to R85,2 million. The replacement value of the company boats amounts to R48 million and that of private boats to R19 million. Fish products to the value of R58,9 million were processed last year. Salaries and wages for more than 2 500 employees amount to R6,6 million. The expenditure on municipal services amounted to R1 639 000. As Walvis Bay is South African territory, I want to ask the hon the Minister to eliminate this uncertainty and make the grants so that the bodies can continue to do the necessary repair and maintenance work. I also want to ask for the grants to be made for reasonable periods, for example for a period of five years or preferably ten years.

As most of the fish is caught in South West African waters, we accept that they will have the right to allocate the quotas. This can take place in two ways. In the first place it can be in the form of an overall quota to the RSA for re-allocation to the licence holders, as SWA is doing at present with the ICSEAF countries which operate on that coast. In the second place it can be allocated to the factories by means of direct quotas. No matter how it is done, we believe it to be in the best interests of Walvis Bay, South Africa and South West Africa for the closest and greatest possible co-operation to take place between the two countries. I therefore want to ask for any decisions made by South Africa to be made in consultation with South West Africa, and in the same way for any decisions made by South West Africa to be made in consultation with South Africa.

As far as the white fish industry is concerned, I should like to direct attention to the fact that the industry is experiencing an extremely difficult period. Indeed, the industry is being faced by ruin, mainly as a result of over-exploitation by the ICSEAF countries. They now have to voyage very much further and stay at sea longer to make catches and the only possible assisting measure we can advocate here is a decrease in the price of diesel for the white fish industry. This will serve as an incentive to the industry.

An additional stimulant for Walvis Bay’s economy will be the opening of the harbour to foreign trawlers, as well as the use of the fishing harbour and boat hoist by foreign trawlers. They may use the facilities at present, but at twice the tariff local boats have to pay. At present foreign trawlers use Luanda’s harbour because it is cheaper. Each boat that visits Walvis Bay spends approximately R100 000 there in maintenance work, provisions and expenditure by the crew. Something of this kind will therefore be of great value to Walvis Bay. These facilities belong to FDC and I want to ask the hon the Minister to have consultations with FDC’s management and board of directors, for I am convinced they are prepared to be of assistance in this connection. I received a letter from the general manager of FDC from which it is clear that they are not unwilling to render assistance where it is at all possible. I believe a decrease in tariff should be the watchword here. Local boats will always have to receive preference, however.

As far as the fishermen at Walvis Bay are concerned, I want to direct the attention once again to the fact that the Industrial Conciliation Act has not been applied there yet and I want to request that it be applied soon.

A last question to the hon the Minister is in connection with the Diemont Commission. I should like to know whether or not Walvis Bay is also included in his terms of reference.

Mr Chairman, I am delighted to follow upon the hon member for Walvis Bay. He is an expert in his sphere. I should like to speak about something else, however, viz forestry.

The available statistics show that there is a decrease in afforestation while at the same time there is an increase in the demand for round wood. It was calculated that for South Africa to be self-sufficient, we should plant an additional 70 000 hectare in 1975 and thereafter establish 40 000 hectare per year. This is not being done and the main reason for this is the high cost of afforestation and reafforestation and the long deferred period before any return is obtained. The present high interest rates and risk factors, such as drought, plant diseases and borers, are further causes in the long term. The backlog can therefore reach critical proportions, and the disadvantage of not being self-sufficient is obvious.

Forestry and its associated industries are labour-intensive. This is labour provided on a decentralized basis, but because these industries are locality bound, they do not qualify for decentralization concessions. I do not want to criticize this policy of the Department of Industries, for I agree with it. I am simply pointing it out as one factor in financing which is not available.

Research can contribute a great deal to the increase of production, and therefore I welcome the increase of R1 219 000 in the Budget for research. It appears from the annual report that very good results have been attained with tree improvement and that 11 650 kg seed was sold, more than half of it for use abroad. It appears too that research on vegetative reproduction can be very successful. Certain optimistic experts are of the opinion that an increase in production of up to 30% can be attained in this regard.

After saying all this, we still have to contend with a shortage. I should like to plead for favourable consideration to be given to the proposals for financial support received from the Forestry Council. The assistance, if instituted, will constitute a relatively small amount, especially in the first years. Possibly the scheme may be self-sufficient after a period of approximately five years, because the necessary repayments will be available then. I therefore trust the hon the Minister will grant favourable consideration to the request.

In South Africa were to be self-sufficient, it would promote the export of certain types, and this would earn currency for us. It would generate tax and provide job opportunities on a decentralized basis. This will truly be a very good investment for the future.

In general the State should limit its involvement in trade and industry as far as possible, but in the case of forestry certain factors should be kept in mind. I should like to sketch a few. The State has an important preservation function. Forestry also involves the control over and the management of catchment areas, indigenous forests and driftsands. All these are of national importance. I believe this to be a function which can best be fulfilled by the department itself.

I must also point out that one must consider that it must not impede research, that it must not impede development, that it must not have a detrimental effect on the stability of the industry itself and that it must not hamper the provision of certain types.

There is an additional very important component of forestry—the socio-economic component of the industry. I should like to know the hon the Minister’s view on this and whether the factors I have pointed out will be taken into account.

Schedule B to the Budget is the first trading account in terms of the recent amendment to the Exchequer and Audit Act. This will be illuminating information as far as the trade and industrial activities of the department are concerned, especially in future, when comparative figures will be available.

I also want to congratulate the department on its annual report to which a previous speaker referred as well. It is not quite as elaborate as last year’s, but we accept that one can seldom attain such heights as those of last year when we received that fine informative volume. It contains statistics which are of the utmost importance to the industry.

Then I should also like to congratulate the department on some of its other publications, which are not merely publications for the sake of publications. I should like to refer here to a publication entitled Commercial timber resources and roundwood processing in South Africa. The last edition of this publication appeared in 1983, and we are truly looking forward to the next edition for the information contained in it is of the utmost importance to the industry and to those who are involved in the industry, especially because it enables them to plan and to organize their future activities. I therefore want to convey my sincere congratulations to the department on the publication.

Mr Chairman, it gives me pleasure to follow on the hon member for Nelspruit. In his speech he raised certain matters pertaining to the forestry industry, which is obviously a most important industry in his constituency. Not only did he raise the problems in the industry but he also dealt with its social and economic importance. Happily I have chosen to address myself this afternoon to the one aspect which the hon member for Nelspruit did not raise in relation to the industry. That is the contribution which it makes to environmental conservation. I should like to spend at least some of my time this afternoon on that particular aspect.

When one takes into account the fact that the department controls some 1,6 million hectares of land, it can be appreciated that the department has an enormous capacity for exercising good or evil in conservation. Fortunately, Mr Chairman, the department has a most impressive track record in this field. It has for example succeeded in formulating a policy of sustained-yield harvesting of forest produce in the indigenous forests under its control. Under this policy the quality of the forests, through the removal of dead and dying trees, is actually improved. At the same time the propagation and planting of valuable indigenous trees as replacements ensure the continued existence of those trees, and the forests can at the same time pay their way through the sale of highly prized furniture wood. This is a tremendous change, Mr Chairman, from the reckless exploitation which characterized the early use of these forests.

Of the total area under the control of the department, only some 257 000 hectares is under exotic plantations, and only 43 000 hectares of the balance is suitable for afforestation. This means that even when the full potential for afforestation has been exploited, only 300 000 hectares—or some 20%—of the land which the department controls will be under afforestation. The rest of the land consists of either mountain catchment, indigenous forests or driftsand.

This land is considered unsuitable for afforestation but is nonetheless invaluable to conservationists for a number of reasons. It includes some of our most glorious scenic attractions. These are the “ewige gebergtes” immortalised in our National Anthem. Generations of South Africans have marvelled at the beauty of our mountains and have found peace in their solitude. Every year growing numbers of tourists are being drawn to them. The pressures of modern life make increasing demands on body and mind, and the need to revitalize ourselves in beautiful surroundings becomes more important.

Our mountainous areas represent our most important water catchment areas. In a land where rainfall is erratic, water is our lifeblood, and we destroy our mountain sponges at our peril. One of the great tragedies of our countryside is that so much of our mountain catchment area was allowed to fall into private ownership. Much of this land consists of steep slopes and is totally unsuited to farming. One could weep when one sees what burning and stocking have done to those steep slopes and to the perennial streams which used to rise out of them.

The third important feature is that the mountain and forest reserves serve as important conservation areas for rare plant and animal life. The protection thus afforded complements the work being done by our national parks. One thinks, for example, of the importance of the Drakensberg forest reserves in the conservation of the lammergeyer, the mountains of the South Western Cape for the mountain zebra, and the Knysna forests for various valuable and more hardwood tree species such as stinkwood. For all these reasons, the Department of Forestry is a vital link in the conservation chain. We in these benches congratulate the department on what it has done in this field.

We would, however, appeal to the department to make every effort to acquire control over as much mountain catchment and indigenous forest as possible. The hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply has launched a national grazing strategy aimed at restoring our grasslands and preserving our Karoo. I believe it is equally important that a national conservation strategy aimed at preserving our mountains and forest areas be launched as well. I would suggest that the best way to do this would be to set about identifying mountain catchment areas unsuitable for farming. The State could then set about acquiring this land as a long-term objective.

I want now to move away from forestry and direct the attention of the hon the Minister to a matter of more specific concern. This is the use of poison by agriculturists who are being troubled by either problem animals, problem insects or problem plants. Of the three instances, the use of poison to control problem plants appears to create the least problems, and since herbicides are generally specific in their action, and their application is well controlled, few problems arise. It is with the first two of these uses that there are problems.

During this debate last year I raised the matter of the poisoning of Cape vultures. Since that time I have been approached by various people who have pointed out to me that one of the worst poisons, strychnine, is easily procurable through a veterinary prescription. It has also been pointed out that many farmers do not even go to the trouble of procuring strychnine. Poisons such as Lebaycid and Malathion which are every bit as lethal and which are available in the form of insecticides, are being used. A few millilitres of either of these poisons injected into a piece of meat will serve to kill a vulture or any other animal which eats it.

There are only two possible strategies to counter this. The first is to legislate. I believe it should be made illegal for any person to set poisoned bait out in the veld or outside of a building.

Hear, hear!

Fines for breaking this law should be sufficiently severe to act as a deterrent. I believe that only officials of this department or of the provincial nature conservation departments should be authorized to set poisoned baits in the veld, and even this should be strictly controlled.

The second strategy should involve educating the public in general and farmers in particular about the dangers inherent in the indiscriminate use of poison. The use of certain residual poison such as Dieldrin has been much in the news of late. I do not have the time to go into the pros and cons of the case of Dieldrin. I would, however, like to say that I consider it highly improper that we should ban the use of Dieldrin in this country and yet permit the manufacture of the poison and the sale of it to neighbouring states. A host of reasons have been advanced by the company which is involved in the manufacture of Dieldrin in an attempt to justify its actions. However, as long as we—quite rightly, I believe—ban its general use in this country, we have no moral right whatever to sanction its distribution to other countries.

I therefore make an urgent appeal to the hon the Minister to conduct a thorough investigation into the problem of the poisoning of our environment by agriculturists. The vast majority of farmers are responsible people, and we should not let our environment be detrimentally and permanently affected by the irresponsible actions of the few.

Mr Chairman, I should like to refer to certain important general recommendations in the report on the pelagic fishing industry. I was involved in that investigation two years ago and I should like to ask the hon the Minister how much progress he and his department have made in regard to those recommendations.

Earlier this afternoon, the hon the Minister referred, to one of the most important recommendations, which conerns a general national policy for the optimum utilization of the renewable marine resources under our control. This policy must lay down priorities for clearly defined objectives which may serve as guidelines for written research and management plans. When one talks about optimum utilization, one means utilization which is in harmony with the long-term survival of the resource.

I also wish to direct the hon the Minister’s attention to the White Paper on Agricultural Policy which was tabled last year, as well as the national grazing strategy announced by the hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply last week, and to the speeches made by the hon members for Prieska and Fauresmith and the hon member Dr Odendaal. Those speeches are in fact applicable to the sea just as much as they are to grazing.

Secondly, we referred to the structure of the Sea Fisheries Research Institute. We recommended that the structure of this institute should be similar to that of a CSIR institute. By that I do not mean that the institute should be linked to the CSIR in any way. The best place for the institute is in the department, but we believe that the structural development in the CSIR should serve as an example.

A third general recommendation concerns the existing Fisheries Advisory Council. We recommended that the Fisheries Council be abolished and replaced by a council of knowledgeable persons. We ascertained, for example, that of the 69 person who served on the council between 1950 and 1983, not one was really qualified to advise the Minister. We believe that the new council should have two functions. Firstly, it should be able to perform the same function the research institute as an advisory committee of a National Research Institute of the performs vis-à-vis a research institute there. Secondly, it should be able properly to evaluate the scientific basis of advice given to the Minister. This applies not only to natural scientific advice, but also to economic-scientific and social-scientific facets.

I believe that the report to which I have referred has already done much to promote a positive attitude on the part of industry towards the work of the scientists, and in addition, many people have read the report, and I notice that they have adjusted their views in accordance with the report. The concern about the survival of the pilchard resource has come to be generally shared, for example, and there has also been a reapproachment between the ordinary fishermen and the natural scientists. We said that the natural scientists could also learn much from the knowledge and experience gained by the ordinary fisherman at sea.

I should also like to refer to the report dealing with the local marketing of rock lobster and abalone which was released to the Press this week. Our committee trusts that this report will contribute to the realization of the long-cherished ideal of marketing seafood in the best interests of our society. I want to request the hon the Minister to give attention to many suggestions made in the report. It is the first paper we have produced on the subject. We had very little to go on, and I have no pretentions in connection with this report. If one wanted to write a thesis on the subject and to devote a few years to it, one could properly evaluate every conceivable facet. The hon the Minister initially asked us to produce the report within one month, but since some of our members were overseas and out of town, it took several months before we were able to report to him.

In this connection, I should like to refer to the Treurnicht Commission of a previous Parliament, which recommended unanimously in 1980 that 25% of our rock lobster quota and 50% of the abalone quota be marketed locally. At the moment, only 10% of the abalone quota is being marketed, and in the case of rock lobster, 25% has been accepted by the hon the Minister.

I just want to say that my committee was not satisfied beyond all doubt that the local rock lobster marketing figures did not include possible re-exports. However, we are not saying who the guilty ones may be in this connection.

I feel that the local marketing of these products must always be seen against the background of the high prices obtained abroad. There are quite a number of people in the industry who try to oppose the Government’s arrangements in connection with local marketing by arguing that it amounts to interference with a free market situation. However, Sir, the fishing industry is not based on a free market system. It is an industry in which the State controls the resources. It is a closed industry in the sense that only certain people have quotas. From the outset, therefore, there is not much question of free market principles and free competition. We would like the fishing industry to flourish, and we would like the best possible dispensation to obtain with regard to this industry. However, the fishing industry must also take into consideration the wishes of the Government in this connection.

In the short time I have left, I only wish to refer to the abalone industry. Tinned abalone is exported to the East, where it fetches very high prices because of its supposed value as an aphrodisiac. For the abalone packers, this is an extremely profitable industry, with low overheads, low operating costs and no risk. If there if any risk, it is the one taken by the diver. The profits of the industry are excessive, with the result that it is not really interested in the local market. One can understand that they would like to export the product, as the earning of foreign exchange for the country happens to coincide with their own best interests in this case.

It has become clear to me that the whole question of fishing quotas should be investigated, and I welcome the appointment of Mr Justice Diemont’s Commission. I wish him all possible wisdom, because he will need it. I want to ask the hon the Minister to arrange for the Competition Board also to give evidence before Mr Justice Diemont.

If handled imaginatively, the local marketing of our seafood could contribute much to the promotion of tourism. I am not referring only to rock lobster and abalone; these are only two seafoods. One should see the matter in its proper context, because there are also mussels, calamari, oysters, hake, snoek, kingklip and many other kinds which one could mention. We have recommended a system of Cape seafood restaurants in which there should be no State involvement. We have recommended that something of this kind should be promoted, for example, by the hotel industry, by the private sector, which would be in the best interests of the country as well.

We also referred to the utilization of harbours for a variety of purposes. This could also form part of such a marketing strategy. I want to refer to The Fisherman’s Wharf at Hout Bay, which is the kind of enterprise which I would like to see established in Table Bay harbour as well, and on the Parade. [Interjections.]

Furthermore, my committee was disappointed at what had been achieved in establishing the kreef route along the West Coast. The SA Transport Services is in fact the only organization which distributes the pamphlet in connection with this kreef route and which takes people on bus trips along that route.

I believe it is important—I wish to refer to what is said about rock lobster and abalone on page 62 of the report—to mention briefly the general or philosophical premises of the committee.

The committee is not in favour of price control for rock lobster and abalone products. On the other hand, we have appealed for these products to be provided at reasonable prices. I do not want to define “reasonable”, because I do not want to get involved in price determinations.

Furthermore, the committee strongly feels that our renewable marine resources are national assets, and that both the general public and commercial exploiters must always bear in mind the fact that they are actually reaping where they have not sown. Their limited right to exploitation is actually a privilege.

One does not wish to say that the industry does not have any rights, because they have of course invested in fishing equipment, etc. Of course one cannot simply take their rights away from them. The same applies in the case of a farmer who has taken transfer of his land. However, it has been argued in this Parliament that a farmer does not have the right to over-exploit a farm. The same applies mutatis mutandis in respect of the sea.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pretoria East has made an interesting speech. There are three subjects on which I would perhaps like to comment. The first is the crayfish report which he put out recently and which seems to have landed him, together with his crayfish, in some hot water. Crayfish are improved by hot water but…

Where do you get that from?

There have been reports to this effect. I heard on the radio this morning that the hon member’s report has been criticized in certain circles. [Interjections.]

Any report concerning vested interests gets criticized.

Of course. I am not arguing.

Secondly, the hon member mentioned perlemoen which are apparently exported to the Far East as an aphrodisiac. Perhaps, with a view to our population growth, we should export all our perlemoen to the Far East. [Interjections.] Finally, he pleaded for a fisherman’s wharf in Table Bay. I think it is a good idea and I would certainly also welcome the establishment of a fisherman’s wharf in the harbour at Port Elizabeth. I think it would be of great advantage.

I want to discuss two subjects today. The one is a national botanical garden and the other is what are called FAD’s—I think the hon member for Uitenhage may be interested in this—which are fish aggregation devices.

Last year the hon Minister of Environment Affairs and Tourism mentioned that new national botanical gardens were to be established throughout South Africa. I asked him where they were to be established but he could not answer me at that time. Kindly he subsequently wrote to me and told me that Port Elizabeth was one of the areas in which it was intended to establish a national botanical garden. I asked when this would happen. It was obvious that it would be when funds became available and, obviously, the hon the Minister did not know when this would be.

I have subsequently looked into this matter and I found, firstly, that Port Elizabeth has an ideal site for a national botanical garden. This is the Baakens River valley above the William Moffat expressway. The municipality of Port Elizabeth owns 77,5 ha in that area and I understand that about three or four years ago they offered this area for the establishment of a national botanical garden to the Government. The Government has not as yet accepted this offer and I would like to know in the first place why not.

If the offer is accepted, it becomes necessary to buy from private owners a further 29 ha and we understand that this could have been bought sometime ago for R174 000. This is, of course, a drop in the ocean in comparison with Government standards of expenditure and I am sure that this amount could have been found relatively easily. However, no negotiations have apparently been started as yet to purchase this ground.

Finally the Municipality of Port Elizabeth offered at that time to donate R30 000 per annum to develop the garden. I understand that they have heard nothing on this subject from the hon the Minister’s department since 1982 and again I would like to know why not. I would like to urge the hon the Minister to investigate this as a matter of urgency.

A garden of this nature, and the establishment thereof, is fairly obviously labour-intensive. We could do with the job opportunities in Port Elizabeth, as the hon the Minister well knows. The hon the Minister of Manpower has recently been given R100 million for creating job opportunities, of which R7,6 million has been specifically earmarked for the Eastern Cape. Would it not be possible for the hon the Minister of Environment Affairs and Tourism to approach his colleague the hon the Minister of Manpower for some of the money for a national botanical garden in Port Elizabeth? What better way could there be of creating jobs than to create beauty at the same time?

It would not be a major contributor to employment but I believe that, for the amount of money spent a significant number of jobs could be created. I believe that the rate of job creation per rand spent would be high. Perhaps as many as 100 people would be employed in such a job. We are also fortunate in Port Elizabeth to have a first-class municipal Parks Department of which the people of Port Elizabeth are very proud. I am sure that they could be of great help in providing stocks of plants, and in providing help with and advice on the establishment of such a garden. I really see no reason why this cannot be proceeded with certainly in this current financial year, I believe the funds could be made available. The land is also there. Can we then not start with the negotiations to buy the extra 29 ha and get started on this wonderful project?

In concluding this matter, I should like to quote Mr Peter Gibbs, the director of the Port Elizabeth Municipal Parks Department, who says as follows:

I hope the hon the Minister will give this his consideration.

Secondly, I should like to speak about FAD’S—fish aggregation devices. These are artificial reefs. Several years ago, Dave Bickell, who writes for the Eastern Province Herald, wrote an article in this newspaper on artificial reefs, and at that stage a copy was sent to the Department of Sea Fisheries. The result was that the department said that they were totally against the establishment of such reefs, because they could come adrift and cause pollution of the area. This is what Mr Bickell tells me. Subsequently we had a surface barrier of floating car tyres put up in Port Elizabeth, and, certainly, it very soon broke apart and the tyres had all to be taken away.

Lately there has been an article on fish aggregation devices in Ichthos by a certain Prof Mike Bruton, who is, I understand, a professor at the JLB Smith Institute at Rhodes University, and I have taken certain facts from that article. Firstly, the reef can consist of car bodies, wood, cement blocks, pipes, rocks, and a number of such things. Once in place, such reefs costs absolutely nothing to maintain. There is the initial expense of placing them, and thereafter no further expense.

They can be laid in deep or shallow water. In fact, the Japanese have done this over a long period of time. On these reefs, which are artificially created, sea plants and sessile invertabrates can grow. The Japanese fishermen, over a period of time, have harvested crayfish—which may interest the hon member for Pretoria East, though he is no longer here—sea-urchins and sea-cucumbers. They have done this for no less than 30 years. They have laid many of these fish aggregation devices, as has been done in other parts of the world, for instance in Hawaii, in Europe and in Zaïre. I should like to quote briefly what happened in Hawaii as a result:

We can learn from this. The problem is—and there is a problem—that they become subject to wave action and to the movement of sand. This can be overcome partly by wiring these things together, and alternatively by putting them in areas of low energy, where the wave action is not so strong or where the currents are not so strong.

Again, I cannot think of a better area for experimentation in this field than Algoa Bay which is certainly protected by comparison with the normal sea environment off the South African coast. The bay does provide lots of protection from the westerly wind and the wave action built-up by the westerlies. It does catch the south-easter but it catches it no worse than other areas off the coast.

Once again, I believe that this is something which could make a positive contribution. It could help with sport fishing—the hon member for Uitenhage in his speech mentioned the ski boat anglers, etc—it could make a wonderful source for ski boat angling, etc, and it could be a tourist attraction for the area which I believe would be very advantageous.

I would recommend these two matters to the hon the Minister for his attention.

Mr Chairman, I agree with the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central on one specific point, and that is his plea for a botanical garden in the Bakens River valley. I am referring specifically to the part which is situated above the William Moffat freeway, because that part falls in the Newton Park constituency, and this would help to make Newton Park even more National. [Interjections.] The hon member will also be able to count on the co-operation of my hon colleague.

I also want to refer to a speech made by the hon member for Langlaagte earlier this afternoon, and to say that I also appreciate the important work done by the Department of Tourism. I agree with him that this is one of the most important departments in our dispensation. What I cannot agree with is the attack he made on the Chairman of the Tourism board, Mr Danie Hough. I regard Mr Hough as one of the ablest and most competent people in our service, even though it is on a part-time basis. I regard the attack on this good friend of mine as uncalled for, especially coming from the hon member for Langlaagte.

It is a recognized fact that we have decentralization and industrial growth points at present. It is right that this should be so, but I think that in the process, we have grossly neglected our potential for tourism. I want to plead that just as we have developed industrial growth points in this country, we should also give attention to tourism growth points, especially as far as our coastal areas are concerned.

It is my belief that we should link such tourism growth points to small-boat harbours. This means that we should build small-boat harbours in areas where such facilities are not yet available. The State, and specifically the Tourism board, should take the initiative in identifying possible growth points. What are the facts? Private firms are in competition with one another, and we cannot expect them to take the initiative in launching such a project.

The development of tourism in those areas should be centered around these small-boat harbours. I think we should develop them in three different phases. In the first place, the small-boat harbour; in the second place, a zone for light industry, which would naturally include boat-building and boat repairs; and in the third place, a business district providing for hotels, motels, restaurants and various speciality shops.

In my opinion, there are four principal tasks involved in carrying out such a project. The State should be fully involved in the first two tasks, while it should only be responsible for the financing of the remaining two. In the first place, the requirements must be identified; in the second place, suitable areas must be identified; in the third place, the harbours must be designed and built; and in the fourth place, the harbours must be operated.

The general tendency in considering a small-boat harbour is to concentrate only on the water area. However, this forms only a small part of the potential of such a development, because one needs a much bigger area on land. Where could we find a better example of this than the yacht harbour in Cape Town? The parking facilities and mooring places only provide for half the number of boat owners that could be accommodated in the harbour itself. The potential of that area is not being fully developed, therefore.

Moreover, it is a recognized fact that our vleis—here I am thinking in particular of our coastal lagoons and tidal rivers—are completely over-utilized. I am sure that if such developments, were undertaken along our coast, it divert boats from our vleis, and it would enable us to make much better use of our tourist potential. This was strikingly illustrated by a motor-boat accident last weekend in which a woman was killed on the Touw River in the George constituency. She had to swerve and ran into a riverbank. To me this shows that our tidal rivers and vleis are already over-utilized.

Naturally the hon the Minister will tell me that financing will be a problem. If it cannot be done by the Government, I want to say that one cannot expect it to be done by private organizations or local authorities either. I want to add that our whole approach to such schemes should not be a socialist one in the first place. The State should eventually get its money back, therefore. Naturally, it will not be possible to make use of loans at the present market-related rates, for that would be too expensive. The State will eventually have to undertake these developments on an agency basis so that it may get its money back in the end. The State must provide the financing for the design and building of the small-boat harbour on condition that the organization in control of it should pay back a part, say 25% of the gross revenue from the mooring and launching fees, into a revolving fund, in order to make possible the financing of other small-boat harbours.

Our objectives should be simple. I want to identify a few. In the first place, such a harbour should be the focal point for all sport facilities in the region concerned. Secondly, it should relieve the pressure on our overcrowded vleis. I have have already referred to this. Thirdly, tourism and recreational activities should be promoted around these activities. Fourthly, facilities should be provided for various types of boats such as ski boats, big tourist boats and yachts. It should be available as a haven when dangers arise at sea. In the sixth place, the National Sea Rescue Institute must be able to use it. In the seventh place, the Navy must be able to use it for smaller kinds of patrol vessels. In the eighth place, it should be able to serve as a growth point for tourism and recreational facilities. Then, as a bonus for the Minister, it may also serve as a central point for the enforcement of mesh sizes as announced by him.

Finally—and I do not want to spoil a good case—I want to say that I believe that the first experiment should take place at George, for several reasons. The first one is that there are no such facilities anywhere between Great Brak River and Wilderness. A second reason is that we already have a large number of people concentrated there. Thirdly, we still have undeveloped areas which are ecologically less sensitive and which we can therefore use to achieve such an ideal. Moreover, we have the supporting infrastructure. George is the only area in which such an ideal model can be put into practice. Existing developments at our neighbouring towns, such as Mossel Bay, have already prevented such an ideal model from being built. In addition, we have the airport, so that tourists may be conveniently transported to that area.

I want to express the hope this afternoon that this plea of mine will not meet with an unfavourable reception, but that the Minister will select George as the place where we can make a start with such a great project.

Mr Chairman, I am pleased that the hon member for George discussed the tourist industry, because I want to devote my time to that subject as well.

At the outset I want to congratulate the chairman and members of the SA Tourism Board on a comprehensive and informative annual report. I found it most interesting and I wish them all success in their important task.

In a time of financial stringency such as we are currently experiencing, it is important to adopt strategies that are appropriate to the situation. I was pleased therefore to hear the hon the Minister on the radio the other morning explaining that it was the intention of the board to promote tourism at home and to encourage visitors from abroad. Incidentally, I was also pleased to hear Mr Hoffman, the president of Fedhasa, this morning explain that at their congress which ended yesterday, it was decided to press for racial discrimination in hotels to be done away with. We will certainly support him in that regard.

With the rand in its presently weak position vis-a-vis the dollar, we have no alternative but to press for South Africans to stay at home and spend their holidays here. Those who might normally plan an overseas holiday, should be encouraged to stay at home so that we can ensure that local attractions maintain a high standard of service. Let me give a “for instance”, as Groucho Marx might have said. In the Cape Peninsula the most popular attraction after Table Mountain and Groote Schuur must surely be Kirstenbosch, but I am informed that the service at the restaurant there is of third-rate standard. If this is correct, it can only irritate potential patrons and something should be done to ensure standards are kept at a high level.

The other attraction of a weak rand is the potential for drawing foreign tourists to this country. I suggested to the previous Minister the need to vigorously pursue the question of allowing charter operators to bring planeloads of tourists into South Africa. In this connection I want to refer to an article by a certain Mr Danie Stoltz which appeared in the January edition of the Flying Springbok, which is not Minister Hendrik Schoeman’s favourite magazine. I do not have time to discuss the article fully but I would recommend it be made required reading for all employees of the board. It really is a realistic and sober look at the tourism scene in South Africa.

Mr Stoltz makes the point that 60% of the overall expense of an overseas holiday is the airfare and Americans still have to pay for in dollars. We should therefore seek to reduce that percentage and I want to suggest that the way to do it is to allow as many tourists as possible to travel to this country under the auspices of charter operators. In this connection I would recommend that the hon the Minister should approach his colleague the hon the Minister of Transport Affairs, with the proposal that he allows this type of operator to transport tourists to South Africa. They would not necessarily take passengers away from SAA because the type of tourists who will come on charter flights would not necessarily pay the normal fares. Once they are here they leave behind badly needed foreign exchange. The annual report of the department estimates that foreign tourists spent R900 million in South Africa in 1984. That is a great deal of money and is not a loan which has to be repaid or investment capital which has to be repatriated at some future time. Every cent spent by a tourist is a cent that remains in South Africa, and we must surely strive to increase the number of such tourists. Not only will an increase in the number of tourists help our foreign exchange position but it will also help to build up our local tourist infrastructure. I refer to the development of hotels, transport facilities, coach companies and car-hire companies. I hope the hon the Minister will pursue the question of charter companies as vigorously as he possibly can.

I want to call on him to arrange an annual tourism conference, where all those involved in the local tourism market such as I have just mentioned, could take part with a view to formulating an aggressive marketing strategy to increase the number of tourists to South Africa.

I believe that an annual conference can become a major event where all those interested and involved in the tourist industry could meet and exchange ideas with a view to increasing the number of tourists to South Africa. This will also help to promote the country. I hope the hon the Minister will seriously condersider the suggestion.

Mr Chairman, I do not find much to criticize in the speech made by the hon member who has just resumed his seat. One point on which I do not agree with him is the idea of charter flights, for there is a great deal that needs to be said about that, but unfortunately I do not have enough time at my disposal to discuss that in full. I think we should also be guided and warned by what we have seen and heard about the fate of the so-called charter flights in other countries. I think it would be much better to give more support to our own SA Airways. In the second place, I think it would also be a good idea if lower air fares could be negotiated in co-operation with the SA Airways and all the other parties involved, as has in fact been done. Many tours are already being arranged which offer maximum benefits to the tourist. Unfortunately, as I have said, I do not have time to discuss this matter any further.

It is still too expensive.

I want to add my good wishes to those of other hon members who have congratulated the hon the Minister on his appointment to this portfolio. I also want to express the hope—I am very serious in saying this—that he will be with us for many years as the person in control of tourism. We should devote more attention to tourism than we have done in the past, and I think he is the right man for the job.

I want to convey my thanks and congratulations to the chairman and members of the Tourism Board and to all the officials for the good work that is already being done. Because I want to concentrate mainly on foreign tourism, I should also like to convey a word of thanks at this stage to our representatives in our foreign offices all over the world, where they promote the interests of South Africa with great enthusiasm and loyalty. We thank them for working and selling our country there sometimes under very difficult and even dangerous circumstances.

I am very impressed by the fine brochures and films, a few of which I have been able to see. The same applies to other publicity material which is available to market South Africa overseas.

Tourism is and remains one of South Africa’s major industries. In 1984, this industry experienced a total growth of 15%, while our country went through a serious economic recession during the same period. The promotion of tourism continues to be regarded as a top priority by our authorities. Purposeful marketing strategies are continually being implemented to ensure sustained growth in the South African tourist industry. The editor of Momentum, Mr Hein Toerien, wrote in a recent publication:

I think the value of tourism as a whole is summed up for us in that paragraph.

Foreign tourism is very important, because we earn valuable foreign exchange from these visitors from abroad. According to calculations, we earned an amount of R900 million in foreign exchange last year, and this does not even include the cost of travelling to this country.

In Travel News it is alleged that the USA earned $370 billion from tourism in 1983. That is more than $1 billion a day. This tourism created 13 million job opportunities in the USA, which means that approximately 12% of the total labour force of the USA was employed in this field. The number of overseas visitors to South Africa rose by 12,2% in 1984, to a record number of 454 880. This is indeed a remarkable achievement. According to the annual report, however, this increase can be attributed in part to the intensified marketing campaigns of the SA Tourism Board, the SA Airways, the private sector, the hotel groups, holiday resorts and so on, all of which participated in these campaigns.

Moreover, the depreciation of the rand in terms of the dollar has made it cheaper for people to come to South Africa, and this has also helped to make these record figures possible, in spite of the long distances and high transport costs. In this way, for example, 1984 was a record year, during which 70 502 visitors came to this country from the USA—an increase of almost 23% on the figure for the year before.

However, the value of tourism to South Africa should not be measured in financial and numerical terms alone. Its true value lies in the attitudes which are created. There is no better way of showing and explaining South Africa’s image to the world. At a marketing conference, Satour’s representative had the following to say in this regard:

I believe that 1985 would have been another record year, had it not been for the fierce propaganda campaign which is being waged against us, especially in the US. Hon members are aware of the campaigns which are being waged against us in the US. This has already been mentioned in this House today. It is an organized onslaught. These are those who allege that it is not only a campaign against South Africa, but that South Africa is being used by the liberals in their own domestic struggle against the administration in the US after the defeats they suffered in the recent election.

The image which the American should have of South Africa—that is the aim of those who are conducting the campaign against us—is that it is not a safe country to visit at present, and that we are faced with a so-called confrontation between White and Black. Of course, the unrest which we are experiencing in our country at the moment is a factor which helps to strengthen this perception in the US. The negative publicity is causing planned tours to South Africa to be cancelled. A large firm, Hemphil Harris, for example, planned 18 tours to South Africa between January and April 1984,16 of which took place—a success rate of 90%. Between January and April 1985, however, 39 tours were planned and marketed, only 12 of which took place—only 30%, therefore.

As far as the future is concerned, therefore, we shall have to do everything in our power to maintain our presence in the tourist industry. Therefore we have to plan very seriously for the future. Unfortunately, my time is limited. Therefore I shall refer briefly to only two more matters.

I believe that we shall have to explore other avenues in order to regain the ground we have lost. A great deal could be achieved by launching a campaign to persuade tourists who have already been here to return to this country, and to influence their friends and relatives to visit South Africa. After all, it is a very well-known fact that 32% of all visitors come back to this country a second time. I believe, therefore, that this is where our greatest potential lies in these difficult times. We would do well to give more attention to the smaller regions of America, and to concentrate less on the big metropolitan areas. I do not think we would make much headway in New York, Los Angeles or Chicago at this stage. However, I am convinced that we would achieve much more in the smaller, more conservative parts of America. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it was a privilege to listen to the hon member for Kempton Park. He is an expert on the subject of tourism, and I could see the Chamber filling up while the hon member was speaking. He is promoting tourism here in the House of Assembly as well, therefore, by encouraging people to come and sit here in larger numbers and to pay attention to what is being said.

The hon member for Langlaagte referred to two places in my constituency. The one was the musical fountain at Wemmerpan and the other one was the miniature city called Santarama. I think these are two beautiful places to visit.

I want to congratulate the hon the Minister. In my opinion, the Minister is truly the captain of the sea and of the fishes. He also knows what environmental conservation is, and he knows how important it is that the harvest of the sea should be multiplied. I know what he has done for Simonstown, which he has represented in the House of Assembly for a long time. If my information is correct, he is also the captain of the parliamentary cricket team and he knows how to attract visitors from distant countries to come and watch his game. As captain he leads a team which we have reason to be proud of.

It is also his responsibility to ensure that our cities and beaches are kept clean. I was present when the hon the Minister addressed meetings in Hillbrow and in the Carlton Hotel recently. I want to thank him for what he did there. There we were able to meet the business people in order to find out whether it would be possible for us to promote tourism in Johannesburg as well. He and I strongly feel that more flexible business hours should be introduced in the cities. Local authorities should be given a greater say with a view to promoting tourism.

So you want late nights, do you, oom Sporie? Bottle stores, late nights …

Wait a minute, the hon member should not start talking about liquor. That is dangerous at this hour of the night. [Interjections.]

The chamber of commerce and the chamber’ of tourism of the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut recently gave attention to this matter in Cape Town. Certain shops—of which the hon member for Standerton has an intimate knowledge—are now allowed to stay open until nine o’clock on Friday nights. They may also remain open until five o’clock on Saturday afternoons. However, every province has a different ordinance with regard to shopping hours. I heard a short while ago that longer shopping hours were being advocated in the Orange Free State as well. [Interjections.] They are not satisfied with the short shopping hours. [Interjections.] The Transvaal is not getting nearly enough, of course. [Interjections.]

The chairman of tourism here in the Cape has argued that there is no need to introduce any change with regard to the 61 hours during which shops are allowed to do business at present. They say that the shopping hours should be rearranged to suit the needs of the tourists.

The hon member Mr Vermeulen spoke about the number of visitors who come to our country, namely 454 000. Of these, 356 000 visit Johannesburg. When he was in Johannesburg that night, the hon the Minister very strongly emphasized that in the light of the large number of visitors to Johannesburg, and with a view to the big centenary celebrations to be held there in 1986, it is essential that extended shopping hours be introduced there as soon as possible. However, this it the problem with which I am faced at the moment, because I have not received a satisfactory reply in this regard. I have talked to the Administrator of the Transvaal, and I have received the following reply:

It seems to me, therefore, that it may only be done on certain days or on two occasions. What is going to happen when the provincial councils are phased out entirely? What will the position be then and who is going to exercise control then?

Can we not have more uniform hours, especially with a view to promoting tourism? Those tourists do not only want to see the sights during the day; they also want to do some shopping and to buy souvenirs which they will be proud to take abroad. In this way they are also boosting our economy. I very strongly believe that we should introduce a pattern in this country which will be similar to that which one finds in overseas countries. If we want to promote tourism, our shopping hours must be extended.

Mr Chairman, I very much regret the tone that the hon member for Constantia saw fit to use in this debate this morning. For the second time in a matter of only a few weeks, using parliamentary privilege, he has insinuated improper conduct by me in respect of my landholdings in the Southern Peninsula about which I have given full details publicly from time to time including the time before I was appointed Deputy Minister. I have no intention whatsoever of taking up the limited time allowed for this debate by replying to his insinuations.

[Inaudible.]

If he has any allegations to make he is surely aware—and if he is not, I am sure his hon Chief Whip is—of the various procedures that are open to him both in Parliament and out of Parliament. The high standard of the other speeches that have been made may make him a bit ashamed of his own performance here today although, knowing the hon gentleman, I very much doubt it.

The hon gentleman raised the question of Sandy Bay. A brief letter from the Management Committee for Table Mountain and the South Peninsula Mountain Areas was received by my department on 23 April. Dr Hey, the chairman of that committee, has been overseas for the past four or five weeks, and he has only just returned. The minutes of the meeting which concerned, inter alia, the Hall/Kerzner application for environmental approval in principle for the development of a portion of the coast between Llandudno and Sandy Bay has just been forwarded to me, and only reached my office in the past few days. I shall be seeing Dr Hey in the near future to discuss all aspects of the matter with him at first hand. I thought it was being courteous to see the chairman of the committee that considered this matter, before I took any decision in this matter. I will call him in and discuss with him the background to the decision which his committee has taken. That is the way I would normally handle this sort of thing. The hon member probably will not agree with me. I shall, in due course, announce whether the proposed development and all its consequences is acceptable in terms of environmental considerations.

The hon member made the suggestion of landswops. Landswops is a very simplistic solution. They have wide implications and wide ramifications for the department and for the people concerned, and for others in similar positions. They are too numerous to enumerate and to elaborate on in the House today. However, I want to give the assurance to hon members of the House that the proclamation of the Peninsula Nature Area is evidence of the Government’s deep concern, and mine, for the conservation of a part of South Africa’s priceless heritage. [Interjections.]

The hon member then went on to the question of a split quota in the fishing industry. His advisers, some of whom I know, have long believed that there should not be a split quota, but we have had to face up to the fact that of the two pelagic resources the pilchard—in previous years in South West Africa and in recent years in the Republic—is the resource which is the most valuable one and is the one that is under the most threat. That is the resource that we are trying to allow to recover. We have, therefore, imposed a split quota. The split quota means that this year, at this stage, the industry is entitled to catch 275 000 tons of anchovy, 15 000 tons of pilchards and an additional by-catch—because sometimes the anchovy and pilchard shoals are mixed—of 10 000 tons. That is the system that has been followed in other parts where one has had this problem. For the information of the hon member, in my experience the mixing of the shoals does not last all that long. It usually occurs in the months of April and May. Before that period one gets pilchards and not the anchovy, and after that period the pilchards seem to disappear and one gets the anchovy in quantity in May, June and July.

We are at the moment trying to combat the problem of dumping. Obviously the fisherman who finds a lot of pilchards in his net, when he is not supposed to catch so many pilchards, is tempted to dump. We take a very serious view of this and, if we find anybody dumping and it is proved that he is dumping, then I have warned the industry and the fishermen that we will confiscate not only their equipment but also their boats and we will also take their licences away. We are engaged in a process, in consultation with the fishing industry, the scientists and the fishermen themselves, of trying to monitor the catches that are taking place. When dumping came to our attention about a month ago, we immediately stopped all fishing for a week. Then we allowed it to proceed under a monitored situation for two weeks and thereafter for another three weeks. We are continuing to meet regularly with the skippers, the scientists and with the industry—the factory managers and others—who monitor the situation, and I understand that the problem that existed a month or two ago is now under control.

We have no intention of reverting to the global quota. We believe the split quota system is the best way to build up the pilchard resource which is the one that we are trying to build up. From my own observations and the information I receive from people who have been catching during the first few months of this year, there are vast shoals of anchovy and pilchards on the West Coast, and that is where there are problems. I want to say to the hon gentleman who a couple of years ago criticized me for introducing two seasons and for cutting the quotas, that that policy of mine in those two past years is paying dividends today. [Interjections.]

I am pleased that the hon member welcomes the appointment of the Diemont Commission and I note that he has made a suggestion that there should be a tendering quota system to allow newcomers to come into the industry. As many years as I have spoken in this House, I have urged the authorities to allow newcomers to come into the industry if it is possible. However, I am not going to prejudge the Diemont Commission’s findings and suggest that there should be tenders. It is one of a number of possibilities at which that commission will look.

The hon member then referred to the question of the Alant committee report dealing with rock lobsters and abalone. He says that I told him that it was only circulated to Safroc. If he says that I told him that by way of a note, I must accept that it is correct. However, I think that he will find that I told him at the time that when the report came out I would circulate it to all the interested parties including Safroc and the Cape lobster organization, exporters of live rock lobster called clea. Having got a report on the industry concerned, I thought it would be a good thing to give those bodies a chance to comment on the report before coming to any final conclusion. Then, as a matter of courtesy, I sent the hon member a copy of the report about three days ago, as also to the hon member for Mooi River and the CP spokesman on these matters.

I turn to the question of separate licences for the catching of kreef and perlemoen. I think that, if the hon member looks in my Hansard for last year, he will see that I said that we were talking about the possibility of consolidating licences. In fact, that is going to be implemented during the next season.

Then he referred to the question of vacancies on the Council for the Environment. He asked why we do not appoint people of colour. Luckily, people of colour are members of Parliament these days, and I listened to the representations they made in their Houses. I can say that they made them very much more effectively than the hon member for Constantia made his. As I said to both the House of Delegates and the House of Representatives, we have vacancies on the Council for the Environment and I will fill those vacancies on the basis of appointment on merit and not on grounds of colour. I then appealed to both Houses to give me the names of those people whom they would like to have considered for appointment on the Council for the Environment.

Then there is the question of the coastal zone. I think the hon member will know, as it was probably in one of the reports, that the Council for the Environment has made the recommendation that many of the Government bodies involved in coastal administration should be consolidated. That recommendation has been referred to the Commission for Administration because of the involvement of all the different Government departments and bodies and their report will very shortly be made available to us.

As regards the Overberg Committee, the committee more commonly referred to as the De Hoop Committee, I want to point out that it is not a monitoring or watch-dog committee—that is the sort of emotive language that hon gentleman is prone to use. It is a review committee. It works in close cooperation with Armscor, with the Provincial Administration and, because it is a subcommittee of the Council for the Environment, also with my department. I see these gentlemen from time to time and I understand that they are perfectly happy with the arrangements at the moment. I have had no complaints from them at all.

As regards additional money for the Council for the Environment, I agree with the hon member that we do need more money; we do need to prop up the infrastructure of that council. As soon as funds permit, something will be done about that.

*The hon member for Swellendam was very kind to me and I want to thank him for that. He explained the objectives of the department admirably and called for greater public involvement in conservation programmes. He said people had to believe in conservation. I agree with him one hundred per cent. I do believe, however, that over the past ten years, for example, there has been a greater awareness of conservation among all South Africans than before. The need to conserve our environment has never received more attention than in the past ten years.

I should also like to thank the hon member for Meyerton for his congratulations. I agree with most of what he said. I think he laid his finger on a very controversial issue when he spoke about littering. I made a statement this afternoon about the possibility of obtaining the co-operation of the sports bodies in combating littering during sports meeting. We are dealing with this matter. He also asked whether we could not consider imposing fines for littering. We have considered this aspect. I believe he was a member of the select committee which investigated the subject of littering a number of years ago. This was one of the proposals before that committee. At this stage we feel that persuasion and education will yield better results than the imposition of fines and prosecutions. He also mentioned how extensive the department is; I agree with him. The department has a tremendous task to perform. He mentioned over-population, and in this regard, too, I agree with him. It is a major problem, but fortunately it is not something which my department has to resolve. He concluded by saying in a very touching and emotional manner that we have a very beautiful country, and once again I agree with him one hundred per cent. We have a world in one country. We have the most beautiful country in the world. He asked whether we should not consider the desirability of legislation and I think I have reacted to that sufficiently.

I also want to thank the hon member for Uitenhage for his compliments. He made a special plea for the establishment of more national parks, and I have already announced this afternoon that a new national park is going to be established at Langebaan. He pleaded that Dassen Island be included and added that the department was against it. I do not know whether that is correct. I do not want to say that the department is against it. All I want to say to him is that the department is conducting a special investigation into Dassen Island, since Dassen Island is completely different from the other bird islands which have been included in the park thus far. We shall investigate the matter and I hope that one of these days Dassen Island will in fact form part of the national park at Langebaan. I know that the Treurnicht Commission did recommend this ten years ago. I myself was a member of that commission and, therefore, one of the signatories to the report. Personally I support the idea. I visited Bird Island with the hon member last year and it was really an experience. I agree with the hon member that there has been a substantial improvement since the guano concessionary took over the control of some of the activities on the island. The wharf which has been erected there is a beautiful piece of work and I believe that under the present management and with the attention given to nature conservation on the island by the concessionary the situation can only improve. I am also aware of the problems in respect of the trawlers and ski boats which are aggravating the problems of the island. We shall attend to this matter, but in the meantime I want to say to him that at present we are seriously considering the possibility of declaring large areas along our coastal line prohibited areas; in other words, there will be areas where trawlers will not be allowed.

†There will be people asking me: What about the sole trawlers from Mossel Bay? My thoughts in that connection are that the limited number of sole trawlers should be allowed to catch their soles in limited areas.

*The other inshore trawlers and the deep sea trawlers should be allowed to catch fish within a certain distance from the coastal line. They should not be allowed to catch fish within those boundaries.

He mentioned competition between certain sectors, for example between the game fishermen and the skiboats. His brother serves on that committee, therefore he should know that the National Line Fish Committee does excellent work. They are now trying to reconcile the diverse interests of the game fishermen and the skiboat owners. The different groups do have conflicting interests.

†In connection with the speech of the hon member for Mooi River, I want to give him the assurance that he has in me an unashamed admirer of the Natal Parks Board and the work that is being done by that board as a result of my experience during a number of visits there during the past couple of years. He referred to possible changes in the system of government, and he wondered what the effect would be on the Natal Parks Board. I would give him this opinion: Where there is an organization that is functioning efficiently and well on a decentralized basis, why ever interfere with it?

Hear, hear!

The whole question of nature conservation—as the hon member will know—is being looked at, and a report will emerge in due course, but I shall take this matter up particularly with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

The hon member does not know the political sympathies of all the members of the Natal Parks Board, so let me give him the assurance that there is not only one Nationalist on that board but a great number of them! [Interjections.] He also referred to conservancy areas in Natal and I must say I am impressed with the system they have there. I think it is something that can be looked at by Nakor, the committee going into the whole question of nature conservation. We shall see whether the Natal system cannot perhaps be imported into some of the other provinces to their benefit. [Interjections.]

*The hon member for Ladybrand supports my idea and he, too, subscribes to the fact that the Natal Parks Board is doing a fine job. He advanced a good idea about the large areas of land which are still unspoilt but are under increasing pressure. I agree with him that there should be a balance between development and conservation. He is a well-known and prominent farmer and I want to say to him that I believe that there is a greater awareness than ever before among the farming community of South Africa of the absolute necessity for conservation. I know from my own experience that there are many Karoo farmers who practise conservation on a large scale and who are doing very fine work in promoting conservation. I am pleased about the flattering things he said about the natural heritage project and his reference to the participation of the private land owners. I want to thank him for that. I think this project should be extended, and we shall have much more to say about the natural heritage project within the next six months.

†The hon member for Bezuidenhout had to leave, but he raised a great number of matters dealing with tourism. I accept his apology for his absence, but I think under the circumstances and looking at the clock, it would be better for me to reply to him by letter.

*The hon member for Paarl delivered a fine, constructive and interesting speech, as usual. He referred to the preservation of the city centre as a stable landmark for the inhabitants. The Council for the Environment, and more specifically its Standing Committee for the Built Environment, is at present investigating the possibility of protecting elements in the built environment worthy of conservation. I believe the first step is to make the public, government bodies and private organizations aware of the riches at their disposal, so that every reasonable effort may be made to conserve what is worthy of preservation. I agree with him that there is a need for a national register of buildings which have to be conserved and I shall support that project.

I agree with my friend the hon member Mr Toy Vermeulen that the letter by a so-called American which appeared in the Press created a completely distorted image. I think the existence of such an American is also in doubt. The Tourism Board immediately investigated the allegations by the so-called representative of Trek America. It became apparent that the person was not a representative of Trek America and that the allegations were unfounded. The report was then withdrawn. I want to add that I was deeply touched by the hon member’s enthusiasm and love for his province. The brochures of the Tourism Board contain full details of all aspects of the Free State. The inclusion of local information in local brochures, brochures published in Bloemfontein, for example, is the responsibility of the local private sector and not that of the board. I thank him for a fine contribution and I am looking forward to accepting his invitation to get to know the Free State a little better during the recess.

The hon member for Langlaagte spoke about poor toilet facilities throughout the country, and I agree with him. The Tourism Board and I will make representations to local bodies, the provinces and all the other parties concerned. In my opinion the toilet facilities are not up to standard and they are certainly not an advertisement for South Africa.

It is unfortunate that he mentioned Mr Danie Hough’s chairmanship of the Tourism Board. All I want to say to him is that the position of chairman has always been a part-time position and will remain so, and has never been an executive position. The executive position is that of the Executive Director, Mr Spencer Thomas. I am fully confident that Mr Hough is capable of carrying out all his duties. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Walvis Bay is an expert on fisheries and over the years he has made fine contributions to the debates on fishing matters in this House. I want to react briefly to three or four points he raised. The first is the question of the licences of factories in Walvis Bay. They will be renewed within the next few months. This will be undertaken by the RSA from now on. Secondly, there is understanding for his request for a reasonable term of quota allocations, and this will certainly be kept in mind. Thirdly, close consultation will take place between South West Africa and the Republic before the allocation is made. Fourthly and finally, the Diemont Commission’s terms of reference include Walvis Bay.

I now come to one of the subjects I do not have much knowledge of at this stage. Therefore I am relying on notes I have received from the department to react to the speech by the hon member for Nelspruit. The answers are as follows: It was decided recently that a current account should be introduced in terms of the Exchequer and Audit Act of 1975 for the administration of the commercial activities of the Branch: Forestry. This account has, in fact, been operating since 1 April this year. Secondly, in connection with the commercial activities of the department, the Government has also pronounced upon the findings of the interdepartmental Committee of Enquiry into the Commercial Activities of the Branch: Forestry. Largely, what they amount to is that privatization may be considered provided that in each individual case certain criteria be adhered to in respect of the conservation functions of the department, overconcentration in the industry, socio-economic considerations and the supply of specific types of forest products—a new product development which has already been embarked upon.

Finally, as a result of the proposal by the Forestry Council, the Cabinet is at present considering measures to encourage new afforestation with a view to providing for the country’s future timber needs. It is not possible to furnish any further details about these matters at this stage. I hope the hon member will accept this.

†The hon member for Albany has also had to leave, and I think that, in view of the time factor, I shall reply to the matters raised by him by letter.

*With regard to the speech by the hon member for Pretoria East, I have already reacted to some of the points raised by Dr Alant in his report but in respect of the restructuring, as recommended in his first report, I can say that we and the Commission for Administration are considering it. With reference to his suggestion in his first report that the advisory council should be made smaller I want to say to him that I wholeheartedly agree with him. In the legislation to be introduced next year provision will be made for a small advisory council consisting of experts.

With regard to the conflicting standpoints which arise between the scientists and the skippers from time to time I might mention that they are now reconciled. They meet regularly and try to reach agreement. I think they have mutual admiration and respect for one another as a result of their meeting on a regular basis during the past year.

I have already thanked the hon member for his report on lobsters and abalone. I agree with him that there is already interference in the free market system. The Government has to control the resource and allocate the quotas, and therefore it is not a free market system in the true sense of the word, but rather an artificial system.

I agree with the hon member that the Competition Board should also give evidence before the Diemont Commission. I also agree with him that seafood restaurants should be established in the Western Cape. I agree, too, that our harbours should be turned to multi-purpose use and that Table Bay should be put to far better use. We are discussing this matter with the SA Transport Services.

†I want to come to the speech of the hon member for Port Elizabeth Central. The City Council of Port Elizabeth did offer the land in question for a national botanical garden as well as an annual grant of R30 000 for development. The fact is that the development of the Transvaal Botanical Garden at Roodepoort was given a higher priority, and the Port Elizabeth garden will receive attention after the infrastructure for the Transvaal Botanical Garden has been established. I give the hon member the undertaking that this matter will not be put on the back burner but will be brought forward and given fair priority.

The hon member asked that there should be artificial reefs and referred to other countries in the world where such artificial constructions have been used with success to bring back fish. I have sympathy for this idea and I should like to refer it to the scientists. It has worked well in False Bay where they have sunk motorcar tyres, shipbulks, cars etc, and the marine fife has undoubtedly returned. However, there is a problem in a place like False Bay. One has a problem with the Navy for obvious reasons because the Navy does not like to have to contend with all sorts of underwater objects. There may however be similar problems in other areas.

I think I have come as far as I can in answering questions. Those that still stand over I will answer by letter. I thank the hon members for George, Johannesburg North and Kempton Park. I apologize for not being able to get around to such a senior member of the House. I also thank the hon member for Rosettenville and I will reply to his very valid points, criticisms, and suggestions in a letter as soon as I can.

*I should like to thank everybody for their fine contributions to this debate. I have enjoyed the debate and there was only one discordant note—that sounded by the hon member for Constantia.

Vote agreed to.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No 19.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

laid upon the Table:

1. (1) Second Finance Bill [No 99—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Finance).
2. (2) Financial Institutions Amendment Bill [No 100—85 (GA)]—(Standing Committee on Finance).

To be referred to the appropriate Standing Committee, unless the House decides otherwise within three sitting days.

Mr Chairman, I move the amendment to the Vote printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:

1. 1. To substitute the amounts indicated below for the corresponding amounts in Column 1 of the Schedule:

Schedule

This motion serves to make available funds amounting to R150 million as further drought aid under the programme “Agriculture Financing” of the Vote “Agriculture and Water Supply”. In this connection it is important to note that, in spite of what I have said in my reply on 28 March, namely that for the moment we are making provision for only nominal amounts because we do not know what the weather and farming conditions are going to be, a further amount of R50 million over and above the announced amount of R100 million is now being asked for in respect of loans for fodder, the subsidization of fodder and the transportation of fodder.

Since it has already become clear at this stage that relatively high expenditure in this connection is unavoidable, I felt compelled to vote substantial funds for this purpose at once.

My colleague the hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply is prepared to enter the debate if necessary.

Mr Chairman, the amount of R150 million which is required by the Department of Agriculture and Water Supply forms a major part of the revised estimate. The provision of this supplementary amount is an indication that an unusual combination of circumstances has been at play over the past months. These circumstances are to be found in the aftermath of one of the worst droughts with which this country has ever had to contend.

A great deal has already been said about the drought and its effects on the farming community in previous debates, and it is not my intention to take up the time of the House in repeating this. I would simply like to state that by having made it possible for farmers in financial distress to have access to agricultural loans, production loans, fodder loans and similar assistance, the department has played a major role in stabilizing our farming community. I must make particular mention of the debt consolidation scheme which has been of inestimable value to a large number of farmers.

The question which inevitably arises is whether or not funds which are made available for loans and subsidies of this nature provide a long-term solution to the financial problems of the farming community. My candid reply to that question would be that they do not, and neither are they meant to. They merely represent emergency aid that has been made available to meet an emergency situation which was unforseen and unpredictable. This is the reasoning behind the request for additional finance such as that we are being asked to agree to this afternoon.

There are a few important points that have to be made. It would be most unfortunate if aid of this nature were to be taken for granted by the farming community, and if it were to be seen as some sort of right rather than a privilege. The way in which aid of this kind has been dispensed in the past has led to much criticism from outside of the agricultural sector. To be frank, this criticism has often been justified. For example, it has been said that those improvident farmers who abuse their farms during the good years and then spend their money on fancy cars, beach cottages and other non-essentials, are usually the ones who stand first in the queue for handouts and subsidies when the hard times come. Few people who have had experience in agriculture will deny the validity of this claim.

It is for this reason that we in this party were particularly pleased to hear the hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply introduce his new grazing strategy and pledge his every effort to making it work. Unless a fanner can now be seen to be complying with certain strictly defined conservation practices he will be refused assistance in the future, and this is the way it should be.

If the hon the Minister and his department are able to identify those who truly need aid as opposed to the “chancers”, and if they are able to couple aid to strict conservation practices and make this policy work, then I feel sure that the need for such large amounts of relief aid in the future will not be necessary.

Mr Chairman, I shall respond briefly to the hon member for Albany. I can in part agree with some of his comments, but I cannot help saying that the impression he created, rightly or wrongly, that some of our farmers in good times waste their money on unnecessary luxuries and then in times of adversity queue up for “hand-outs”, as he put it, from the State, is incorrect. I do not think it is right to send such a general impression into the world. I think it just is not true.

In the times in which we are living we are thankful for this additional amount of R150 million that is now being voted for agricultural loans, subsidies on interest and also for relief of distress in respect of fodder and its transportation. I want to emphasize, however, that this aid to agriculture which has now become essential cannot be ascribed merely to the drought conditions that have struck agriculture in the past few years. Apart from the drought conditions there are also other factors to which it must be ascribed. Put shortly, in certain sectors of agriculture the farmer is insufficiently compensated in respect of his input costs and his efforts in the interests of the country in general. In particular, there are also the excessive—I want to emphasize this again—and prohibitive interest rates which the farmer has to pay in respect of his input costs and his livelihood. Were it not for that, I am prepared to say that a large portion of these subsidies would not have been required.

As the hon member for Albany said, the solution for agriculture in general cannot rest with ad hoc State assistance from time to time. A long-term solution for agriculture—and in particular for agricultural marketing—and also for agricultural financing, which after all go hand in hand, must provide the final solution for agriculture in our country, as in other countries in the world. That is why I believe that, although the amount now to be voted represents a marked improvement for and will bring relief to the agricultural industry, it cannot in any way be seen as a long-term solution. I doubt whether it is even a short-term solution.

After all, looking especially at conditions particularly in the summer grain industry, the rise in production prices—particularly in the past year—and the fixed price the farmer gets for his product at the end of the day, I think this will prove to be a measure providing but scant relief. I fear, however, that for many farmers it will be insufficient to enable them to become economically productive in agriculture again. That is why, as the S A Agricultural Union demanded—or, at least, requested—and as I believe we have already demonstrated in the past, not only has it become imperative that the State undertake a comprehensive investigation of the financial position of the farmer, but the time is also more than ripe for the authorities, with the aid of the S A Agricultural Union and also with the aid of the various co-operatives, to determine which individual farmers can really still be helped to become economically productive again.

With those few words I want to indicate that we in these benches welcome this supplementary appropriation but also ask that the long-term solution which is still awaited be sought as speedily as possible.

Mr Chairman, we in these benches would like to lend our support to comments that have been made in relation to the additional amount of R150 million in respect of the various forms of financial assistance that are envisaged for farmers. I want to make it clear that we stand firmly on the point that, when applications for loans are being processed, there should be a thorough study made of the applicants’ farming practises; in other words, it should be ascertained that these practices conform to all the necessary requirements in relation to soil conservation methods and also in relation to the conservation of agricultural resources generally.

It serves little purpose to pour water down the drain as it were, by making assistance available to applicants who are not in any way farming in accordance with conventional principles and procedures. That is why we in these benches feel very strongly that greater attention must be given to a person’s ability to meet the commitment for which he has sought assistance.

I want to point out too, Mr Chairman, that while welcoming the national grazing strategy announced last week—which happens to be a very fine document—one should also not lose sight of the fact that intensive and semi-intensive agricultural enterprises are the ones with high input costs, and these are the ones that are probably in the most serious financial predicament at the present time. It is for that reason that particular emphasis will have to be given to farmers who are involved in intensive and semi-intensive aspects of farming.

The one other point I would like to make, Mr Chairman, although it is more or less a repetition of a point I made during the debate last week, amounts to a genuine appeal—and I make no apologies for reiterating it—to the Government to take note of the need for financial assistance to be made available in respect of housing facilities for farm employees. When one considers the amount that has been made available for this purpose by the Department of Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure over the past few years and one relates it to the overall financial assistance that has been granted in the form of relief measures, one realizes that it is no more than a minimal amount. It is, however, a very important component of an agricultural undertaking and it is vital that attempts to improve the housing conditions and the living standard of the farm workers receive the encouragement and assistance they deserve.

Before resuming my seat I wish to make a final point. We hear much emphasis being placed on the private sector being involved in the development of housing schemes in the urban areas, but I would point out that a similar responsibility also rests heavily on the agricultural sector to do the same. The difference is, however, that the agricultural sector has been meeting this commitment for years.

Mr Chairman, at the outset I should just like to express my heartfelt thanks to the Minister of the Budget for the fact that, in his capacity as Minister in charge of the Budget for own affairs, he was able to obtain this sum of money for us. This amount has been made available in consequence of certain recommendations contained in a report of the Jacobs Committee. It is with great pleasure that I can say that, apart from R6 million, the full amount recommended by the Jacobs Committee was eventually accepted by the Government. I therefore wish to thank all those who co-operated to obtain this sum for us, and that at a time when, as all will admit, the finances of the country really demand the greatest discipline from all of us—not just from us as hon members here, but also from people outside—when it comes to the spending of State funds. It will be quite impossible for us to get the economy going again if we do not all make a contribution in this regard. I am thankful, therefore, to be able to say here today that we indeed obtained R150 million.

I am not saying that it is not justified that we are getting an additional amount of R150 million for agriculture. I think it is entirely justifiable. No matter how well the farmer farms, as a result of circumstances totally beyond his control he was unable to avoid certain difficulties. In our summer cropping areas certain farmers have this year already experienced their fourth bad harvest. I wonder whether hon members all realize what it means to have four bad harvests in succession, particularly in the light of the input costs per hectare to plant maize or wheat—I shall come back to that in a moment. Those costs have increased considerably over the past four years. Farmers are optimists by nature. So they all tried in this period to plant as much maize as possible in an attempt to make up the losses they suffered.

I therefore want to use this opportunity today to express my heartfelt sympathy with the farmers who are now facing their fourth bad harvest. I should perhaps warn that we should not be too defeatist concerning agriculture and its future. At the time of the drought of 1933 I was still very young. I personally experienced hardship. I saw farmers trek hundreds of miles with their stock. I recall that my late father said at the time that he did not know whether agriculture would ever be able to recover. Those who experienced subsequent events know that agriculture did indeed recover and at one stage was reasonable prosperous.

In the late 60’s and the early 70’s we had the same experience, in that we were confronted with a disastrous drought which in some regions persisted for more than seven years, but despite that agriculture recovered.

Therefore, I want to sound the warning that we should think very carefully before saying that agriculture is done for. Agriculture—we saw this in recent times with regard to our economic position—remains for me the foundation of a healthy economy in a country. About that I have no doubt whatsoever. Therefore, although in certain sectors of agriculture things are not going at all rosy today, I want to say we can but hope that the rains will come, and I believe firmly that everything will come right again.

Allow me shortly to set out the details concerning the amount of R100 million, the amount which has been put aside for the summer cropping areas. R40 million was voted for the consolidation of debt at the Agricultural Credit Board, but the recommendation has now been made that an additional amount of R15 million be made available. For the subsidization of interest on carry-over debt an amount of R172,65 million was voted, but now there is an additional amount of R46,5 million. For production loans provided by Agricultural Credit—those are the loans of R75 000—an amount of R36 million was voted, but now an additional R37 million is proposed.

That makes up the total amount of R100 million that is now proposed, and that is why I want to return to a remark made by the hon member for Lichtenburg last week to the effect that it all concerns loans. If we analyse these amounts, we find that the total sum to be spent by way of subsidies, including the voted sum and the proposed additional sum, amounts to R219,15 million. That is all subsidies. The total proposed in respect of loans is R129,5 million. Therefore, I do not know how the hon member arrived at his figure. It is very clear to me that the largest amount is still being made available by way of subsidies. Although making this point, I am not complaining about it. Indeed, I am very grateful for it.

I want to agree with hon members that we must take great care to ensure that these amounts, the voted amounts as well as the additional amounts, will be applied in such a way as to benefit those who need it most. It is true—and I should like to emphasize this—that in the past we had difficulties with regard to the application of drought aid, but fortunately that relates to the exception. I can agree that the majority of farmers profitably use the aid that is provided. They use it to the benefit of their farming operations. I shall come back to that too.

I want to direct a friendly appeal to co-operatives today, because the interest subsidies on carry-over debt, although monitored by the Land-Bank, are mainly administered by co-operatives. It is cash credit loans granted to the co-operatives on which an interest subsidy is earned. In all seriousness I want to appeal to co-operatives today to ensure that interest subsidies are used only, and I repeat, only for production loans to farmers. I make this appeal with good reason. It is a pity that the good offices of the State in attempting to keep farmers on the land are sometimes abused. I am not saying that that is generally the case and agree with the hon member for Barberton that that happens by way of exception, but one must sound an early warning.

An amount of R50 million has been set aside for fodder loans and fodder subsidies and also for a rebate on the transportation of fodder. The hon the Minister of the Budget initially wanted to vote a larger sum, but we decided on R50 million because over the years we adopted the approach that, since we does not know when it is going to rain and when areas are going to be descheduled, it is dangerous to vote too large a sum at the outset. It is better to provide a supplementary amount in the additional appropriation. It is a good practice preferably to make provision for disaster aid in the main Budget or in the supplementary estimates. That is why we have this amount of R50 million in the supplementary estimates. It is impossible at this stage to say if it will be enough, but if it is not, I want to give the assurance that we will make provision for it in the additional appropriation.

†I want to reply briefly to what was said by the hon member for Albany. He inquired about aid as far as the fodder scheme is concerned. I think we are entering a completely new era in relation to subsidies on fodder. When I announced the new grazing strategy, I stated very clearly and explicitly that farmers who continue mining their land will no longer get aid from the State. This must be very clearly understood by all.

*We will screen people. In terms of the new stock grazing scheme it is stated clearly that before a farmer can qualify for any aid in the form of subsidies on fodder, he must reduce his stock by a third in terms of the new provisions relating to carrying capacity. As I stated very clearly in the debate on my Vote, we will apply the regulations very strictly. We are moving away from the time when the man who damaged his land most was the first to apply for and receive subsidies. There is no doubt in my mind that every member in the House and any responsible person outside will agree that we cannot go on in this way. We cannot use the man who allowed his land to be over-grazed as criterion for the introduction of drought aid. Under the new scheme we will have a national drought committee and also a regional drought committee in every region, which will consist of members of the conservation committees and members of the agricultural credit committees, and they will monitor the situation carefully before recommending to the national drought committee that a region should qualify to receive aid. I hope we will get widespread rains so that we will be able to deschedule all regions and hopefully will be able to start next year with a clean sheet and apply the new scheme.

The hon member for Barberton in his glib way again tried to drag me into the question of determination of prices for agricultural products. I do not want to join issue with him on that. Perhaps he has something there in certain respects. Allow me just to put the following question: If he had sat in these benches this year, would he have made the maize price R270 per ton? [Interjections.] The hon member says “yes”. Then I want to ask him a second question: What would the consumer have had to pay if maize cost R270 per ton? The consumer would then have had to pay very close to R290 per ton for maize, unless the Government injected R500 million, R600 million or R700 million into the industry. We must be realistic after all. That hon member farms with a product that is exported. Over the years he has grown accustomed to accepting the price he obtains from the foreign markets. He has no choice. He does not have the option to have the production costs of his product built into the price.

Must we not reach the stage where we pay a good price to the producers of basic foodstuffs for internal consumption, such as wheat and maize, but say to them that everything they export must be exported in accordance with a pooling scheme such as applies to all the other export industries in this country? Does the hon member not agree with me? The hon member shakes his head. I think we have to come to an agreement to start considering this point, because in my opinion that would result in a meaningful debate.

I want to agree with the hon member—I am not an expert in this field, but speak as a layman—that the suppliers of the means of production did not sufficiently discipline themselves when fixing their prices. I do not want to dwell on this too long, but I just want to say with all the responsibility at my command that I am aware of the fact that certain fertilizer companies go to the larger farmers and say to them: If you demand my product at the co-operative, I will pay you a certain amount under the counter after it has been delivered. They decide together on the price. If that is done with larger farmers, why can it not also be done with the middle sized and smaller farmers? Surely it is not right that only the larger farmers who are large users of fertilizer should get the advantage of that? Why is it not also given to the smaller farmers? Those are, after all, the farmers for whom I must fight. It is those younger small farmers I should like to see remain on their land. It upsets me to have to say that, but that is what is really happening. I issued warnings and stated very clearly that if this practice should continue, we would be forced to take other steps, because this concerns subsidies paid in respect of input costs. We cannot afford that. In that regard I want to support the hon member by saying that the people who supply our farmers with their means of production in my opinion did not sufficiently discipline themselves in order to keep the farmers’ costs as low as possible.

I believe the Government set an example by at least trying to keep increases in administered prices below 10%. Then we must also ask—and I am glad the hon member mentioned it—why others cannot do the same. It is true that we have a free market system, but if those people want to kill agriculture and particularly those sectors producing our basic foodstuffs, they must continue along that road.

†I want to react very briefly to the hon member for Mooi River. I have already clearly stated that applicants for drought aid who do not follow proper farming practices are out. There is no doubt about that.

I do not wish to pursue any further the question of the houses of farm labourers. However, I cannot but fully agree with the hon member. I wish to concede to the hon member that it is of the utmost importance to have good and proper housing.

*A few weeks ago I visited the Rural Foundation here in Stellenbosch. I went and had a look at what these farmers in the Western Cape have done. This does not concern merely the improvement of housing, but also a strategy of total upliftment. One starts with one’s house. One ensures that one at least has a bathroom in the house and also a good stove. There are many examples of how it must be done. Hon members need but consult Messrs Boland Coetzee, Okkie Bosman and others in Stellenbosch about what they have achieved: How they increased the productivity of their labourers, and particularly how the attitude of those people changed absolutely since their housing has been improved and changed measures for their upliftment have been introduced. I therefore regret it very much that we had to suspend this scheme temporarily. I regret that very much and I really hope that we will be able to reintroduce it next year and will also be able to increase substantially the amount available for loans.

Once again I should like to thank the few hon members who took part. It is very good to know that all are appealing to people not to abuse drought aid. I want to associate myself with the remark of the hon member for Albany that it is not something one simply accepts, but that it is something one is granted because of difficulties one is faced with due to circumstances beyond one’s control. There are, however, certain factors over which one does have control. I think we should consider those. I am very grateful to hon members for their contributions in this connection.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister mentioned that certain farmers will receive aid provided they reduce their livestock by a third. Like the hon the Minister we too would not like to see our farmers allow our veld to be overgrazed.

However, I want to draw his attention to one category of farmers—and they are mainly young farmers—who, because of the circumstances recently, have been placed in a position where they cannot make ends meet. I want to give him an example. It is the example of a young farmer who has a farm of 3 000 morgen—according to the norms of that time, an economic unit. He received a Land Bank loan and at that stage paid 6% interest on the loan. In the meantime the interest on this Land Bank loan has risen to 14%.

He could farm with 1 000 units of small livestock on this farm. However, as a result of soil conservation decisions, that have been taken in the mean time, the carrying capacity was increased so that this man could no longer farm with 1 000 units of small livestock on this 3 000 morgen, but only with 750 units of small livestock.

When this young farmer initially farmed with 1 000 units of small livestock and paid 6% interest, he could cope. When, however, the interest rate rose to 14%, he began to experience great difficulty. As a result of soil conservation measures, that man can now farm with only 750 units of small livestock on that 3 000 morgen. Added to this, there is now the condition that, if he wants to qualify for aid, he must still reduce his livestock by a third. In other words, this man who, a few years ago, could farm with 1 000 units of small livestock, who paid 6% interest, and who could cope, is now burdened with 14% interest. Apart from that, if he is to qualify for aid, he must farm with a mere 500 units of small livestock. We will be chasing this man off the farm if he cannot be assisted.

I want to ask the hon the Minister to take cognizance of these people. I know he is a man who has much sympathy in his heart for this type of case. There are at present people in his constituency who are suffering a great deal because of this problem. There are such people in my constituency too. I would therefore just like to ask him to take these people into consideration. They have been placed in a difficult position as a result of the increase in the carrying capacity and also as a result of the increase in the interest rate of even the Land Bank. We must help these people because we would still like to see them on the farms when the interest rates eventually come down—and we hope that will eventually happen—and when the Good Lord has sent rain. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to consider these people.

Mr Chairman, I did not intend to speak in this debate, but the hon member for Springs asked me to take part and that is why I am doing so.

I just want to tell the hon member for Kuruman that one should, in my opinion, always strike a balance between the financial position of the farmer and the condition of the soil. I believe, however, that the hon the Minister will respond further to what the hon member said.

[Inaudible.]

I believe the hon the Minister will respond to the points raised by the hon member.

Do you still stand by the maize price?

Mr Chairman, that hon member for Kuruman must not mess about with the maize price—I shall shove a cob into a place where it will hurt him! [Interjections.]

I rise just to thank the hon the Minister for the comments he made this afternoon about the input costs. I am very grateful that he, as Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, who is concerned mainly with handling the affairs of White farmers, put forward the viewpoint here that input costs are one of the biggest problems in agriculture.

[Inaudible.]

Order!

As Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, he did not hesitate to take a stand in this, the highest Chamber in the country, against those suppliers of the means of production who are, in some cases, seriously exploiting our farmers. I want to associate myself with that and I want to appeal to him that we not only talk about it here, but that we also take the case further and possibly confer with those people in an effort to provide our farmers as cheaply as possible with the means of production. If we can cheaply provide our farmers with the means of production, we will enable them to produce more cheaply. This will also be to the benefit of the consumer. I just wanted to express my support for the hon the Minister in this regard.

Mr Chairman, I wish to reply shortly to the plea by the hon member for Kuruman. In the first place I just want to say that I cannot recall when the interest rate of the Landbank was 6%—it must be many years ago.

1976.

No, we are talking about many years ago.

Six or seven years ago.

Aikôna!

Seven, eight, nine, ten years ago …

Twelve years.

The hon member there says it was 12 years ago. In any event, that is not the point at issue.

Let us analyse the problem. This man had 1 000 head of cattle on 3 000 morgen of land. We know that is too many—so, what happened on his farm? His position was gradually deteriorating, and what happened in the process? His production dropped year by year.

[Inaudible.]

If his production did not drop at that specific time, it would in any event have started dropping very soon.

It was the drought of three or four years.

It has been incontrovertibly proved—these provisions relating to the carrying capacity are scientifically very sound. The hon member must make no mistake on that score. The hon member must now not draw us into an argument with the agricultural scientists, because these reasonably homogeneous areas were established absolutely scientifically.

[Inaudible.]

All right, I say that if we do not at some stage introduce a check, a lot of farmers will in any case become uneconomic within ten years.

[Inaudible.]

No, wait the hon member must not interrupt me—I listened to him very quietly.

If we do not introduce a check today, a number of farmers will in any case become uneconomic within a few years because with the over-grazing of the veld they just will not be able to make a living. About that there is no doubt whatsoever. Surely that is the truth. I have seen them ruined in their hundreds in my lifetime for just one reason, and that is that the land simply could no longer carry them after a time.

I now want to make a second point. The hon member said he had to reduce his stock to 750 head of small stock. I want to claim, as I also did in the Agricultural debate, that the number of head of stock does not determine income. It is what the stock eat and produce that determine the farmer’s income. I want to state today without fear of contradiction: Fewer head of stock does not necessarily mean a lower income.

It is the drought aid …

No, we are coming to the drought aid. I say that fewer head of stock does not necessarily mean lower income. An animal that is fed, produces twice as much as other animals. I recently quoted statistics to prove that. There are small farmers in my constituency who, although they have considerably fewer than 1 000 head of stock, make a good living, but hon members must go and have a look at their veld.

Let us now turn to drought aid. The farmer must now reduce his stock by one third— he must therefore reduce his stock by 250. For that third by which he reduces it, he gets R1 per sheep per month as a free gift. He therefore gets a net amount of R12 per sheep per year and has no expenditure whatsoever. That is why we introduced an incentive for farmers to reduce their stock. A farmer therefore gets R1 monthly for each sheep he gets rid of. It does not matter how large his farming operation is. He has to reduce his stock by a third and is subsidized to a maximum of 1 250. Surely that is an incentive for a man to reduce his stock, because he gets that R1 per month and there is no expenditure involved. In other words, that is a net contribution by the State to his farm. We created this incentive precisely so that also the small man can reduce his stock. Therefore, I do not think that the hon member’s argument holds water, because it is not true that by means of drought aid we enable farmers to farm uneconomically; on the contrary, we have created an incentive precisely so that that farmer can reduce his stock.

That is not what I said.

I asked you to adopt a sympathetic attitude towards these people.

But we are sympathetic towards them. That is why we introduced this scheme. The point I just want to make is that we must be careful. We are looking at this matter because on paper a number of people are going to be made uneconomic by the provisions concerning carrying capacity. That is so, because they will then not be able to keep more than 1 000 breeding ewes while according to us 1 300 breeding ewes constitute an economic unit. A number of farmers will have fewer than 1 300 ewes, but that will not mean that their net income will ultimately decrease, because I claim that an animal that is fed produces twice as much as one that is not fed.

As regards the speech of the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke, there is one further small point I want to make relating to input costs. A few evenings ago I was chatting to some farmers from the Western Cape about the application of fertilizer, and they stated categorically that some of them were able, by means of soil analysis, to cut back their fertilizer account by as much as 50% per year. With the aid of soil analysis they were able to establish exactly what they required and therefore they did not use fertilizer unnecessarily. I think that that is a matter we will have to follow up, because it is very easy to make a soil analysis. Any farmer can do it. I must really say that in many cases too much fertilizer is used. A few nights ago I obtained positive proof of that and I think that that is something we shall have to look into. I take note of the hon member’s point and think we must really investigate this matter thoroughly and ensure that input costs do not rise so rapidly.

Mr Chairman, it gives me pleasure to thank the hon members who took part in the debate.

†I could clearly detect a note of responsibility. I also wish to appeal to members of the industry and co-operatives to assist the department to make sure that aid is given to deserving farmers. I think hon members all agreed to that particular point.

The hon member for Albany referred to the stabilizing role played by the Government in granting this aid to the agricultural industry, and I wish to thank him for that positive note.

*I should also just like to refer to the hon member for Barberton who justifiably spoke about the high interest rates. I just want to draw his attention to the fact that more than 50%—in truth, 87%—of this R150 million consists of subsidies, inter alia also on the high interest rates. The hon member will also concede that we are engaged in a very important fight against inflation which necessitates these high interest rates. The hon member referred to long-term solutions and I agree wholeheartedly with him that we must seek those, but nobody can come up with a better solution than the industry itself. He and I are both farmers and I think that, like me, he too believes that an industry saves itself.

I wish to thank my hon colleague the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply for participating in this debate. I think he replied fully to all the points that were raised and therefore I shall not add anything.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule, as amended, agreed to.

House resumed:

Bill, as amended, reported.

Mr Speaker, I move, subject to Standing Order No 52:

We have been discussing the budgetary proposals in this House for almost 32 hours with a view to the voting of funds for own affairs expenses by the Administration: House of Assembly for the financial year which ends on 31 March 1986.

The meaning of own affairs is no longer a symbolic concept, but has manifested itself in an administration, with its Ministers’ Council and its departments, for which money has been voted in principle for the execution of their respective functions, through which the principle of own affairs will be established with increasing firmness. The debate covered the role of the Minister of the Budget and the functions of each of my hon colleagues, as is shown more clearly in the printed Budget which hon members have in their possession. I thank hon members of the House for positive contributions in respect of the mentioned spheres and for proposals made to me and to my hon colleagues with a view to better provision of service and a refinement of the concept own affairs.

As far as the members of the Opposition parties are concerned, I accepted that they would use this Budget to try to show that the system is expensive and duplicatory. It is my opinion that I have given enough evidence to prove that this is not the case. In addition the full scope of the sphere of the functions in respect of own affairs is not yet in the hands of the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly, but in future, as I have pointed out on a prior occasion, we shall be able to reach a point where we can quantify the administrations for own affairs and compare these with possible alternatives.

On 6 May 1985 the hon the minister of Constitutional Development and Planning made an interesting speech in this House, in which he made certain announcements which have a very direct effect on second tier government, as we know it today, and the administration for own affairs. One of the most important aspects of his speech was the statement that those functions in respect of own affairs, which, according to the Constitution, have to be transferred to the Ministers’ Councils and still fall under the provincial administrations at present, should be transferred to the Ministers’ Councils as soon as possible.

This announcement has given added momentum to the fulfilment of the constitutional process launched by the Constitution of 1983. The actions connected to this will probably be of the most important ones the Ministers’ Councils will deal with during the next few months.

A task group for the administration has been formed under the leadership of the Director-General of the administration, assisted by the head of my Department of Budgetary and Auxiliary Services. This task group has already got to work with the Commission for Administration’s project team with a view to submitting final recommendations on the distribution of functions, manpower, funds and other assets to the Cabinet for final decision-making as soon as possible.

In a conversation with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, the Ministers’ Council transferred three directive policy standpoints as far as the Administration of the House of Assembly is concerned. I regard it as important to direct this to the attention of hon members at this stage, namely: Firstly, functionaries on the second tier should not deal with general and own affairs at the same time. Secondly, the executive and other functions of own affairs functionaries on the second tier will have to be cleared with the Minister by negotiation before final decisions are taken. Thirdly, the executive and other powers of own affairs functionaries on the second tier will be obtained by delegation from Ministers of the Ministers’ Councils.

There is confidence that by the time we deal with the budgetary proposals for the 1986-87 financial year of the Administration in this House, there will be much more clarity concerning the actions which have been launched now as I will be in a position to give hon members much more information, not only as far as the provision of funds for own affairs is concerned, but also concerning the transferring of provincial own affairs functions to this Administration.

In my introductory speech to the handling of the Committee Stage of Vote 5 of the Administration of the House of Assembly’s Budget I pointed out that terms such as “collective bargaining”, “solidarity” and “combined search for solutions and attaining of consensus” have emerged during the past nine months. These terms are characteristic of the type of government system which has manifested itself in the Ministers’ Councils and which will inevitably lead to the establishment of new conventions.

In this third reading debate we want to establish the possibility of a further convention. The age-old motto of “no supply without redress of grievances” is still valid. As it is the last debate which deals with provision of funds and it gives hon members the last opportunity to talk about it or about any other grievance or problem, I should like to invite my hon colleagues of the Ministers’ Council to enter into this debate freely.

This kind of practice will not only emphasize the collective nature of the Ministers’ Council, but also give my colleagues a final opportunity to reply to questions and provide the House with further information on important aspects of their department’s activities, thus rounding off the debate very nicely.

Mr Speaker, the debate that is now being concluded is of course a significant one in the sense that it is the conclusion of the first Budget for own affairs under the new Constitution. It is perhaps then appropriate to review what is really taking place in regard to the constitutional development of South Africa.

What I think is significant is that the new Constitution which to many people of all colours in South Africa was designed to be a period of reform has also coincided with a period of instability. I think it is a most unfortunate situation that we have had a concept that reform and instability go hand in hand. This holds some very serious dangers for South Africa.

What is even more significant is that this period of reform in the constitutional sense has actually coincided—I think it is unfortunate—with a period of what I regard as serious economic conditions but which the hon the Minister of the Budget does not regard in so serious a light as he is already talking of a 2% growth rate during this year. I may add as an aside that I challenged him to put some money on the Table of the House and I am still waiting for it to appear. I hope that perhaps the hon the Minister will do it during this debate. [Interjections.]

The reality is that whichever way one looks at it, it is this combination of reform on the one hand and adverse economic conditions on the other which has brought about instability in South Africa. It is indeed tragic that we find ourselves today debating this first own affairs Budget in the House of Assembly at a time when we have actually never had the degree of endemic violence which has existed in many parts of South Africa during recent weeks. One has to ask oneself then what actually can be done in order to improve that situation. That is the challenge that I want to issue across the floor of this House today: What can we do in order to improve that situation?

I think there are quite a few things we can do. The first thing we can do, I believe, is recognize that in South Africa the major problem confronting us is the question of providing work for all our people. It is interesting to look at the statistics that are available. Let us take, for example, the period of the past 10 to 12 years. What has happened in South Africa during that period? Our population has grown at a rate of some 2,8% a year while employment has only shown a growth rate of 2,6% a year. The result of this is that every single year the pool of unemployment in South Africa becomes greater and greater and, unless we actually set as a major priority for South Africa the creation of jobs, all the constitutional structures which anybody cares to evolve are not going to solve the real problems of South Africa. When people are unemployed and when they have no jobs and no means of support, instability creeps into the system causing those people to become a fertile ground for agitation. It is then that politics is regarded as the panacea for all ills. In other words, it is held out to the unemployed and deprived that if only they had political power everything would change overnight. The fact that it will not change is entirely another matter.

The reality is, however, that to the deprived that panacea is offered, and that is what ultimately becomes the key to the whole problem. Until such time …

What is the magic formula for creating jobs? Tell us!

The magic formula for creating jobs? I do not claim to be a magician, Sir. I do not claim to have any magic formula. If, however, I am asked to give what I believe to be the solution I will tell the House what that solution is. The solution, I believe, lies in the ideas, for instance, of Prof Lombard, which—and I hope the hon member has listened to them or read them—show that the greatest market for our manufactured products is in South Africa. That means that if we were only to turn inside to South Africa and create the jobs to produce the goods and raise the living standards of our people and give them increased purchasing power which, in turn, will increase a demand for manufactured goods, we will indeed have created self-generating work. [Interjections.]

Orderly urbanization and the creation of production of that kind, I believe, is the magic formula, if the hon member really wants a magic formula. [Interjections.]

You know, Sir, it is really one of those strange things. The National Party—and I will talk about it again later—talks about consensus and about trying to be constructive, but the moment one talks about the real problems of South Africa and asks for a solution to be sought to those problems, one is met almost with hysteria from the hon backbenchers of that party. That is because they do not want anybody to find a solution to South Africa’s problems since they want to remain in their dominant position and to use that as an excuse for what is going wrong. That is the tragedy, Sir. They do not want anybody else’s ideas. That is indeed the tragedy of South Africa. They talk about consensus … [Interjections.] Yes, they talk about consensus, Sir, but one only has to listen to that hon member at the back there. In his stupidity—which is the only way one can describe it—he fails to understand that I, who am an optimist for South Africa, despair when I see the power to effect changes in South Africa in the hands of people like himself. [Interjections.] That is the danger that exists. That is the tragedy of South Africa and that is what the problem is.

We are hearing far worse from an hon frontbencher.

You know, Sir, that hon member’s morality is something he is going to have to account for one day. He must just remember that. He must remember that his lack of political morality has not helped him that much. [Interjections.] Just look at him today! He is a rather sad old man, sitting there. Then he talks about political morality. [Interjections.]

Is your conscience troubling you?

Order! As far as this point is concerned, I think we have heard enough. The hon member must please proceed with his address.

I will leave it alone, if those hon members leave it alone. If they start again, I shall come back to it. I shall respect your advice, Sir.

Nobody spoke about your morality. It is only immorality! [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Yeoville must proceed with his address.

As I say, Sir, I try to preserve my optimism for the future of South Africa, but I find myself in great despair when I have to listen to this kind of talk and am confronted with this kind of behaviour. However, I am going to try to continue in an optimistic frame of mind. Despite all the noise, the abuse and the frustrations of the gentlemen opposite, I am going to try to continue in that optimistic frame of mind.

What I want to say—and this is what I was leading up to before the rather crazy interlude from the back there … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

What I wanted to say is that I think that at the present moment a halt must be called to certain practices if we are to solve the problems relating to the endemic violence which affects South Africa. Not only is the cause of endemic violence an economic one, but the endemic violence is also in turn affecting the economy. There is no doubt that as regards foreign investment and investor confidence in South Africa, they are in turn affected by the endemic violence which exists in South Africa. I think the time has come for people to stop introducing preconditions for talks between the various race groups in South Africa. I think that responsible leadership in the Government should take things at face value and that responsible leaders of other race groups in South Africa should also cease introducing preconditions for dialogue. If they wish, they can keep what they call their non-negotiables for the conference table, but I think that the concept of preconditions before dialogue should not be applied. I think that what we need in South Africa is for people to say: “Let us at least begin talking in order to put an end to violence”. If we start talking and then put an end to violence, then one may find that at that conference table there will be grounds on which one can agree and matters on which one can make common progress even though it seems that people are poles apart. That is why I wanted to start off today making an appeal that people should cease introducing preconditions for talking to one another. They should get together around a table and try to find some common ground from which to proceed to the next stage of perhaps creating structures within which more formalized dialogue can perhaps take place in South Africa. I make that appeal and I hope it will not fall on deaf ears.

The second thing I should like to touch upon is the whole question of the own affairs with which we are really supposed to be dealing. If I may say so, I am to a large extent disappointed in the hon the Minister of the Budget because he has not really dealt with some of the issues we raised during the course of the debate. On certain issues answers are still outstanding at the present moment. I want to touch upon some of them once again. This relates particularly to the question of the provincial councils.

I asked the hon the Minister whether he would tell us how they were going to take over the various functions from the provincial councils and how they were going to divide them up. Very humorously he said, with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning sitting in front of him—they made a big joke about it—that they were going to divide those functions into general and own affairs. Ha, ha, very funny!

I think that is ludicrous. It actually makes a farce of the whole thing. I want to repeat my request to the hon the Minister to tell us during this debate how the provincial functions are going to be divided, who is going to get what and where the particular things are going to be.

I should like to give an example to the hon the Minister. I raised the question of the assets and liabilities, the buildings of the provincial administrations. Where are they going to go? Are they going to go to general affairs or to own affairs? How are they going to be divided?

In passing I raised the question of the Raadsaal and the question of using it. To the use of the Raadsaal the hon the Minister responsed positively, but he did not tell us whether the Raadsaal was an own or a general affair. If I may guess, I would imagine that to the hon members of the CP the Raadsaal has a great historic background. I would imagine that they would like it to be an own affair. Yet it is a matter which possibly fits better into general affairs. Surely they are entitled to know and I am entitled to know what we intend doing with it. Where do we intend putting it? The Raadsaal is just one example.

Let me mention some other examples. There is for instance the question of road traffic control. This I think is a general affair, and I hope I am right. Is there perhaps an own affair road-traffic control? Is it going to go to the local authorities? Is it going to be centralized and, if so, where is it going to be?

Let me take a further example, perhaps a funny one. Let us take horse racing. Is horse racing an own affair or is it a general affair? [Interjections.] It depends upon whether one regards horse racing as a recreation or whether one does not regard it as a recreation. If it is a recreation, then it should be an own affair, but if it is gambling, then it should be a general affair. If it is related to agriculture and the breeding of horses, then it should be an own affair.

Leave sport out of it.

I should like to, but it is part of the issue. [Interjections.]

Let us take nature conservation for example. Nature conservation, I would imagine, is a general affair. If nature conservation is, however, used for recreational purposes, does it change from a general into an own affair?

I give these examples not in order to try to score a debating point but in order to try to provoke the hon the Minister into telling us where everything is going to lie. When the hon the Minister said:

He forgot that he had told us that his own department needed 2 000 extra jobs from outside. He said that he had proved that it was not so. The fact that there are 2 000 extra jobs is forgotten but they are clearly there. [Time expired.]

Mr Speaker, I want to return later in the course of my speech to the anomaly pointed out by the hon member for Yeoville in connection with the reform programme on the one hand and today’s economic situation on the other and then more specifically in respect of the unemployment this results in. Once again he has succeeded in identifying a few general problems without producing really useful solutions to those problems. I want to agree with him, however, that dialogue in South Africa is very necessary and that we should enter into dialogue with one another.

Before I deal with that aspect, I want to make a statement and hear the hon the Minister’s commentary upon it. It concerns the Auditor-General’s function of reporting on the management of State funds. He does this by means of submissions made to Parliament, which are then monitored by the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. The budget of the House of Assembly has to be monitored in the same way. I find it difficult to imagine how a standing committee can perform this House of Assembly function. What I should like to know, is whether the House of Assembly is going to appoint a committee to perform this monitoring function and whether the White component of the standing committee is going to accept this responsibility. I am asking this merely to gain clarity, because as the budget is only in respect of Whites, I find it logical that this House should fulfil the function. The other two Houses will fulfil the same functions in respect of their budgets.

We are probably all aware of the present economic conditions in the country and it is probably not necessary to say that on the economic level many people are having great difficulties. The economic levelling off is claiming its victims every day and every day there are entrepeneurs who have to throw in the towel. A distressing number of business undertakings have become insolvent, not merely as a result of the inability to manage, but because of the lack of liquidity and available cash. Recently the relationship between own capital and borrowed capital has changed dramatically. Borrowed capital has increased drastically, to such an extent that such capital is barely available or has become extremely expensive. Another factor also plays a role. The consumer of borrowed capital has overburdened himself to a great extent to obtain such capital. He has borrowed more than he can pay, which, in view of current interest rates for the borrower, makes it almost impossible for him to fulfil his interest repayment obligations. What is happening now, therefore, is that viable undertakings are also becoming victim to this condition. The owner has to throw in the towel while his business undertaking is still sound and viable, because he has reached a condition of complete liquidity exhaustion.

Conversations with owners of smaller and medium undertakings show that a spirit of total and absolute despondency has set in. One can argue that the stage of the “survival of the fittest” has entered. One can argue that the time has come for an economic clearing of the throat, that the economy is getting rid of appendages, difficulties, non-viable economic colds and that this process of elimination must take its course and the victims merely have to accept it. It is not that easy. Most of these entrepeneurs, and in this case the smaller ones, are Whites. It is mainly the Whites who fulfil this role. Inevitably it is also true that the Whites are the ones who are becoming the victims of this so-called cleaning up process. The White entrepeneurs are the ones who have to close the doors of their enterprises and hand over the keys. They are the ones who have to go home and tell their people there is no longer any income. It does not end there, for their employees, White as well as non-White, are in the same boat. Suddenly there is nothing and no income is available. The official available unemployment figure is that of December 1984, viz 40 298 registered Whites, Coloureds and Asians and more than 500 000 Blacks in the non-agricultural sectors. It is probably reasonable to accept that at present the figure is much higher than that official figure. I want to assert, however, that it is not as high as the hon member for Walmer said in the Committee the other day. Our people are getting hurt in this process. There are many who are affected by these conditions. There are children who cannot be fed sufficiently. We are already seeing the warning lights in Press reports of children who go to school hungry, of congregation and community auxiliary services which have to establish emergency services to render assistance. We shall have to take hands in future to make a stand against this situation.

There is already anxiety because more and more house-owners are not capable of fulfilling their instalment obligations. Bond interest rates have risen dramatically in the past year and a half—by approximately four per cent. The alarming thing about this situation is the tendency of some building societies to increase instalments disproportionately to the increase in the interest rate. I have received certain enquiries in this connection from people in my constituency. Building societies will have to accept their responsibility in these difficult times. Surely reasonable or realistic increases of instalments are necessary if interest rates rise, and I am not fighting those institutions which have adjusted their instalments to the increased interest rate in a responsible way. Fortunately there are still building societies of this kind. I am speaking, however, to those institutions which have to ask themselves why there is a sudden increase in reminders and demands sent out by their offices and then have to conclude that the increases in premium obligations are the cause. They will have to consider this matter soon. I really do not hope that it is the motive of some or certain of the building societies’ to foreclose mortgage bonds. Let us accept that this is not the motive. In that case a maladjusted instalment increase does result in an obligation of this kind placing the house-owner in a dilemma. I really hope that this observation of mine has bearing only on certain isolated cases and has not become a general tendency in our economy.

I want to return to the unemployment condition to which the hon member for Yeoville and other speakers referred repeatedly and to their linking of it to the unrest situation. If one accepts that unemployment can surely result in those people affected by it over-reacting in certain situations, surely it is also true that there has to be a certain built-in self-discipline in actions. The statement that unemployment is the cause of the present unrest and that it leads to blatant and reckless stone-throwing, the stopping of cars, the stoning of people and the burning down of buildings, is over-simplified and naive. A game which can no longer be accepted in South Africa is being played with this unrest. There is no better way of promoting disinvestment and instability in South Africa—to which the hon member for Yeoville has just referred—than by this very cancer of unrest which is being experienced in South Africa at present. If this is to continue and the conditions are to be extended, one must accept that many people in South Africa are going to be hurt bitterly in this process. Eventually the group against which the unrest is supposedly aimed will not be the only one to suffer. Eventually the Blacks themselves will be the ones to suffer most in this process.

Today I truly want to plead with these people to stop this senseless action. To those who want to continue to throw stones, raise fires and take people’s lives, I want to say the following: Be careful! Where the creed reads at present, “unemployment is the cause of the unrest”, it can change tomorrow and people will have to tell one another, “unrest is the cause of unemployment”. Unrest, as experienced in the RSA at present, has the ability to lead to complete polarization in South Africa.

This Government has placed itself on the road of reform. This Government, and also the NP, is prepared to extend the hand of negotiation to the Black people in South Africa. I therefore seriously want to ask the Black people not to allow that hand to be spumed. Initially one can argue that the unrest is being activated by a group of activists and revolutionaries. Their purpose is to take the mass with them in order to effect complete disorder in this way. It appears that they have succeeded to a certain extent.

If the Black majority is going to allow these ringleaders to take them into tow, they will succeed effectively in bringing about total polarization and a gulf between Black and White which will be difficult to overcome. The majority of Whites were prepared to take the road of reform, and I believe this is still the case today. Where we as Whites are prepared to extend the hand and to display the will to negotiate, that hand must not be spurned.

The present condition is not to the advantage of anyone in South Africa. A condition such as this one cannot be endured for much longer. The Whites are going to allow the demolition of what was build up over a long period only with great difficulty. We are grateful that the majority of Blacks share these sentiments with us. It is necessary, however, that they, that is those people who share our sentiments, declare their interests and rearrange their priorities so that they can co-operate in the search for an attainable and acceptable solution to the political problems in South Africa.

Mr Speaker, I am not going to respond to the hon member for Gezina’s speech, but possibly I shall refer to it briefly later.

We have now come to the end of the discussion of the first Budget of the Ministers’ Council for so-called own affairs. It is significant that where we are moving towards the end of this session of the House of Assembly, no other Bill has been brought forward by the Ministers’ Council in connection with or referring in any way to so-called own affairs, apart from the Bill under discussion which is in its third reading stage at present.

If one looks at the new dispensation objectively and level-headedly one cannot but conclude that where in our previous Constitution we had a three tier Government institution—the first tier, the second tier and the third tier—we now have a new development according to which the second tier government as we knew it by means of executive committees and provincial councils is in reality to be replaced only by these Ministers’ Councils which we have at present. I shall tell hon members why. This afternoon we had the proof of this in the shape of a welcome addition to the Budget for Whites’ own affairs, viz R150 million for agricultural financing and subsidies. This could not be done upon the decision of the Ministers’ Council or the House of Assembly alone. This is an indisputable fact. The hon the Minister and the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply had to go to the hon the Minister of Finance and the mixed Cabinet hat in hand to obtain allocation. In addition, although we are now on the point of quite probably passing the third reading of this Appropriation Bill, it is interesting that in the final instance the three Houses of Parliament will once again have to approve the total appropriation which was determined, for otherwise this will be a senseless practice. The R150 million which has now been added by means of a Supplementary Budget already appears on the Supplementary Budget of the hon the Minister of Finance. Yet we are told that the Whites are retaining their right of self-determination over so-called own affairs. In reality, even if the Ministers of this Ministers’ Council sit together with us in the House of Assembly, in the first place they are not members of the Cabinet, they cannot decide as a Ministers’ Council about the scope of their Budget and the total appropriation to each one’s department, and they are completely dependent upon the mixed Cabinet for their financing. This is a fact.

We have heard repeatedly, from the side of the NP and in particular from the side of the State President, that they are not in favour of a so-called unitary state; they reject a unitary state. I believe, however, the time has come for us to ask them to spell out to us what they understand under a “unitary state”. We are told a unitary state is not acceptable. We are told a federal scheme will not be acceptable. I want to ask, however: What is acceptable then? I want to assert that the dispensation we have at present in terms of this Constitution, which involves Whites, Coloureds and Indians, can be regarded as nothing but a unitary state. We are not dealing here with separate states. We have one general Budget which is applicable to all three of those population groups—White, Coloured and Indian.

Was it different before?

Of course it was no different! In the past this House of Assembly was the sovereign legislative authority of South Africa. [Interjections.] That was the factual situation, after all. To argue now that this new dispensation is not a unitary state, is a colossal bluff in my opinion. [Interjections.] If the Government, in their search for a solution—for they themselves know they have no solution—move in the direction of a confederation eventually, we should like to remind them that a confederation is not a single state, but a loose unit of sovereign, independent states. Is that where the NP is heading? Evidently the answer is that this is not the case, for it is not the answer the NP has given in connection with the Coloureds and the Indians.

What I find interesting, is that the NP and its leaders make such easy use of terms. We were told that the NP’s new point of view is that relatively speaking. Whites, Coloureds and Asians are now one nation. [Interjections.] The hon member confirmed this. The argument was that nation is a constitutional concept. Relatively speaking if we are one nation, we all share one state which is of necessity a unitary state. It has to be. If the NP then continues with the development of its concepts, also in respect of the Blacks, and tells them what it does not find negotiable, but neglects in particular to tell its own people what it does not find negotiable—and even more important—what else it is prepared to sacrifice in respect of the measure of sovereignty the Whites still have over themselves … [Interjections.]

The Whites sent the people who are sitting here to the House of Assembly. A referendum was held about a new Constitution and in that dispensation there was no talk of Blacks being involved in a new dispensation as individuals or as nations. Now, without a further mandate, or even an explanation to the White voters, this government—in their own words—is seeking new structures. They are negotiating without a mandate and the White voters want to know what their negotiations with Black leaders are about. They want to know which additional concessions the NP is prepared to make. [Interjections.]

What is left of so-called own affairs? All that is left is, perhaps, own schools. Universities are no longer an own affair for they too have been thrown open. Fortunately my alma mater is still keeping its head.

Which one is that, Oom Cas?

Tukkies. [Interjections.] Hospitals remain an own affair and one can argue that at least in third tier government, in municipal and town management as a last ditch effort, the Whites will retain complete control over their own affairs. Is that what will happen, however? Even now, according to the plans spelt out to us by the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, he is going to introduce legislation which will force White local authorities willy-nilly into a general multiracial scheme of things. They will not have a choice as to whether they want to be part of it or not.

Not willy-nilly.

The future legislation determines that White local authorities will have no choice but to join in with the new multiracial regional services councils.

That is not true.

We shall debate it later. [Interjections.] I want to be fair and concede that the phasing in of the new system has experienced certain problems and will still cause problems. We are being accused of not stating our alternative. Our alternative was the classic alternative of the old NP, viz that the Whites want all facets of political power over themselves in their own hands. [Interjections.] In that process we also grant all the peoples of South Africa, including the separate Black peoples of South Africa, that same political power. Now the NP, which has led this country on that specific course for decades, is turning in its tracks and removing one piece of legislation which it placed on the Statute Book after another. This is praised as a victory for reasonableness, love and reform.

I am not referring to measures placed on the Statute Book by other people, but to measures placed on the Statute Book by the NP. These are being referred to today as if they were monstrosities, something that should have never taken place. They are removed from the Statute Book and this is regarded as the great breakthrough for the new Utopia which is going to descend on South Africa. We are dealing here—and I choose my words carefully—with a calculated process which is being extolled to our people unobtrusively step by step. Gradually they are being made used to one small step after another, until eventually we shall have full political integration.

Mr Speaker, after having listened to yet another speech of the hon member for Barberton, it leads me to wonder whether he and we who sit in these benches can really debate the future of South Africa together. I say this because his perception of things in South Africa is totally different certainly from my perception of things. I see him as a man who perceives that we as Whites can be totally independent in this country. He said that he would like to see a budget and a political structure allowing the White man to be totally sovereign with regard to his own affairs and his future. He accused this Government of creating a system whereby “today we are entirely dependent for the financing of own affairs on a mixed Cabinet”.

I want to ask that hon member—and I believe he is a farmer—whether he is entirely independent as a White man in operating his farm. What role do his employees play? Maybe they or their grandparents were born on his farm and, if not on his farm, then certainly in the vicinity. What is the hon member for Barberton saying to those Black people who help him make his money? Does he say to them that they are aliens there and must abide by his will? It reminds me of Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the American constitution …

So are you going to give him a vote in the unitary state?

Will that hon member just keep quiet? He will get his turn to talk and can then tell me what he thinks I was going to say. [Interjections.] Thomas Jefferson said: “All men are born equal”. However, he was a slave-owner. He said that everybody would have equal rights under the constitution as far as votes were concerned, except for slaves who had three fifths of a White man’s representation as far as voting was concerned.

That hon member has the mentality of those founding fathers whose minds and thinking were still entrenched in the old ideas of slavery and the White man’s domination over Blacks. [Interjections.] I want to put it to him that there is no way in which he or any of his hon colleagues who sit in those benches can operate their businesses without the aid of a Black or Coloured man working in those businesses. Somewhere along the line we have to come to terms with this.

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

No, Sir, my time is limited and I wanted to speak to the hon member for Yeoville. I told him that I was going to refer to his speeches and requested his Whip to see that he would be in the House. I sincerely hope that he will be here when I come to addressing him.

The hon member for Barberton asked: “What are you negotiating with the Black leaders?” He asked that question. I now want to put it to that hon member that what this Government is negotiating is self-respect for every group in South Africa. That hon member waves these words away, Sir. He is not prepared to give self-respect to the Black labourers working on his farm because he wants to treat them as aliens in Barberton. What we are negotiating is the need for mutual respect. The hon members sitting in those benches do not have the perception of the future South Africa that will enable them to negotiate a system which will breed mutual respect between races and groups in South Africa. [Interjections.]

I want to speak to the hon member for Yeoville. I reminded him beforehand that I wanted to respond to his speeches. Oh, there he is. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Yeoville made a statement on Thursday in reply to the hon the Minister’s statement that inflation was more dangerous than unemployment. The hon member for Yeoville replied to this by saying (Hansard, 23 May 1985):

The hon member went on to say:

Quite right!

We think that hon member was playing to the emotions of the public of South Africa. I would say to that hon member that I believe inflation is more dangerous to South Africa than unemployment. I honestly believe that.

That is because you are a fat cat and not unemployed!

I employ people—probably more people than that hon member employs. Therefore I know about unemployment and people’s needs.

I want to say to that hon member that not only does the hon the Minister believe it and not only do I believe it, but Mr Raymond Parsons, Assocom’s chief executive, also believes it. I want to quote as follows from The Natal Mercury of 23 May, which is the very day on which the hon member made that statement:

I want to ask that hon member how he and his party propose to overcome the unemployment problem in South Africa. [Interjections.] He spoke earlier on of the population growth and the lack of economic growth. The reason why our economy has not grown at the rate that we require it to grow is because of inflation.

In referring to the creation of jobs, in his same speech last week the hon member for Yeoville said (p 191):

He referred to the need for savings so that we can have reform in this country because out of economic growth will come reform.

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

No, I do not have the time. I only have three or four minutes left. [Interjections.]

That hon member criticized the Government while the hon Minister of Finance is following the correct economic policy in order to put things right in South Africa. That hon member said in his speech that we should rather create jobs by bringing in capital from outside. We do need a certain amount of foreign investment in South Africa but most of all we need savings in South Africa so that we can invest in our own development. We dare not rely on imported capital for our total economic growth in South Africa. In order to achieve this growth we have to save. I therefore say that what the hon Minister of Finance is doing is correct for South Africa.

He is tightening up on the money supply and consumer credit and causing people to save so that we can beat inflation and reduce our debts. In this way we will bolster our rand which, because of inflation, has now dropped to the very low level of some 52 USA cents.

I want to say to the hon member for Yeoville in conclusion that one only has to look at the other countries in Africa and South America which have not been able to get on top of inflation to see how dangerous inflation really is. Time magazine of 29 April refers to the problems facing these countries, and also to the recent meetings of the world’s financial leaders. It says that Brazil and the Argentine have been refused IMF help in order to roll over some of their debts because they did not meet the IMF’s requirements in their efforts to control inflation. It is no use leaders of Africa and elsewhere crying about the IMF exerting some new kind of colonial pressure upon them. The nations of the Third World and South Africa must learn to manage their economies correctly so that they can generate productivity within themselves and pull themselves up by their bootstraps. The Western World has for possibly 3 or 4 decades been pumping billions and billions of dollars and pounds into aid to the Third World but this has been to no effect whatsoever. Until we learn to save, work, grow and build we will not be able to reach the standard of living which we would like to have for all our people. I say to that hon member he should think again. He should stop simply accusing the hon the Minister here of being callous. Hon Ministers are doing what is right for South Africa. The hon member also has to think of his responsibility to the public. Instead of telling the public that this or other hon Ministers are simply wasting public moneys and so on, he should tell them that the time has come for politicians to be honest with their electorates … [Interjections.]

You would have been unemployed! [Interjections.]

The hon member for Mooi River must be very careful. It requires a number of people to be honest with themselves. [Interjections.] I should remind him of certain things that happened prior to a particular congress. The time has indeed come for hon members to be honest with themselves and their voters. [Interjections.] It is time for the hon member for Yeoville, who is his party’s official spokesman on financial matters, to tell the public of South Africa openly that he backs the economic reforms of the hon the Minister of Finance. I believe I should remind the House that the hon member for Yeoville left the United Party as a Reformist, along with one or two others of his colleagues and formed the Reform Party. [Interjections.] Mr Speaker, if he is a true reformist he must look at what this Government has been doing in recent times since it is this very Government that is led by the greatest reformer South Africa has ever seen.

He reformed the labour laws in this country. He reformed the Constitution. He reformed the economic policy of South Africa. He is reforming South Africa almost week by week. [Interjections.] He is probably changing things in South Africa so fast that he has even left the arch-reformist, the hon member for Yeoville, far, far behind.

Who passed those laws he is reforming? Tell us that!

Mr Speaker, the hon member for Yeoville keeps returning to 1948. Meanwhile hon members of the Conservative Party would like to go right back to the Great Trek. I put it to those hon members that we in the National Party are living in 1985; we are not looking to the past; we look to the future. We are looking to the year 1990 and to the next century. [Interjections.] If this party has its way then, by the year 2000, we will have the economy which will be able to provide the jobs on which the hon member for Yeoville keeps harping all the time. [Interjections.]

Mr Speaker, the hon member for future integrity … I am sorry, Sir, the hon member for Amanzimtoti … [Interjections.] The hon member for Amanzimtoti made a very interesting speech. I should, however, merely like to make the point that he stated that the economy had not grown because of inflation. With due respect, Sir, who caused that inflation? It was largely caused by the same party that the hon member is supporting today. [Interjections.] How did they cause it? Why did they cause it? They did it in the same way in which inflation was caused in the countries of South America, to which the hon member indeed referred—and also of course in African countries. It is inflation caused by too much money spent on arms, on prestigious buildings and on wasteful projects generally. This is where our inflation has come from, Sir. [Interjections.] I will, however, leave the hon member for Amanzimtoti at that and go on to a more important matter. [Interjections.]

I was very interested to hear the statement made by the hon member for Yeoville. I believe that was one of the most important statements I have heard for some considerable time in that he believes that all should get away from the concept of preconditions to discuss the future of this country. I believe that is a vitally important change of policy on the part of his party, and I assume he enunciated that policy change on the strength of a mandate received from his party. The policy of the PFP—hon members will know—has been throughout that before one can have discussions one must have a declaration of intent. I should like to be assured that that is in fact the case because a declaration of intent indicates what one is going to achieve and how one is going to achieve it. So, the question of removing the declaration of intent is most interesting politically. We are very interested that there will now be no more preconditions.

If it helps you, the leader of my party agrees with me.

So, that is fine. I am glad to hear that there will be no more preconditions. We support that one hundred per cent. We are glad to hear that, when people come together, there will be no blocks in the way, there will be no limits to the discussions and that a declaration of intent will not be needed. I find that most interesting.

The hon the Minister of the Budget has had a very easy time of it so far. It seems as if almost everybody has been talking politics rather than considering matters related to the Budget. In the Committee Stage, while the Vote Budgetary and Auxiliary Services was under discussion, the hon the Minister of the Budget chose to take me to task for referring to certain aspects of the own affairs Budget as a burden. He looks upon them as an opportunity and a challenge to resolve problems. That was the expression he used. I was, of course, referring primarily to local government matters, of which, I assume, the Minister, judging by what he said, does not really have a great deal of experience. I feel that that must be the case, because to be so naive as to refer to this as an opportunity under these circumstances is really quite remarkable.

If I may quote from a speech that was made in the Natal Provincial Council only last week, the hon the Minister will understand what I mean. In that speech it was said that in Natal alone there have been, in the last few years, 22 commissions of inquiry into local authorities, 9 investigating committees into their various affairs and 38 problem local authorities. In addition, at this stage in time—I do not like that expression very much, but I have used it—there are 7 local authorities who are causing the Executive Committee tremendous concern “through maladministration, dishonesty of purpose and personality clashes”. These are long-established local authorities which, with a strong leavening of experienced councillors, are performing functions with which they are totally familiar. Furthermore, they also have a very strong corps of experienced officials.

Now, under the Government’s new proposals, many local authorities may well be split into three or possibly even four parts, thus, of course, substantially thinning out the number of experienced councillors and officials who, with their expertise, will be available. What is more, they are going to have to take upon themselves additional responsibilities and functions of which they have no previous experience. I therefore appeal to the hon the Minister not to underestimate the problems he is going to get with this local government business. It is all very well to have a Boy Scouts attitude of “Rah, rah, rah! We will do jolly well, old chap!”, and that sort of thing. That serves very well as a morale booster, but I can assure the hon the Minister that local government is a very, very serious business which requires a lot of common sense and a lot of hard work and experience. If the dedication to apply all those is not available when needed urgently, there is going to be a lot of trouble with local government. So, whilst I admire the hon the Minister’s enthusiasm, I feel that he is inclined to be a little flippant in his treatment of this matter.

Speaking of additional responsibility being given to local authorities, I should like to raise a current issue involving a local authority. You know, Sir, it has been stated on a number of occasions that the Government’s policy of the devolution of power is not devolution at all, but rather delegation. For some weird reason the Government believes this to be devolution. I just wonder whether the Government really believes in devolution as such or knows the meaning of the word. The City of Durban quite recently made application to the Department of Local Government and Housing for permission to build old-age homes at the South Beach in Durban. They investigated it very, very thoroughly indeed, and what was the result? It was turned down by that department, and I have the quote here if the hon the Minister is looking a bit perturbed about it:

The Administration Section of the House of Assembly’s Department of Local Government, Housing and Works turned down the council’s application for the subeconomic loan.

Here is one of the most responsible local authorities not only in Natal but in fact in South Africa in the sense that they are the only local authority in the whole of South Africa and one of the very few in the world which is totally free of external debt, and yet they cannot be held responsible enough to decide how and where and what type of accommodation should be provided for 200 or 300 elderly people for whom they want to provide decent accommodation! For that purpose they wanted certain subeconomic funds made available to assist them.

What sort of delegation is that when even a responsible body like that is not allowed to handle it? What on earth would the hon the Minister do if supposedly the less responsible local authorities of little places—I am not going to talk about Blikkiesdorp or Pampoenkop or whatever—had this type of responsibility in their hands?

But you want local option.

That is a twittish remark to make.

Yes, I know that. [Interjections.]

I want now to get away from that subject. In his reply to the debate in the Committee Stage the hon the Minister said that he would not support the concept of deductibility of compulsory school fees from taxes because it would narrow the national tax base. If ever I have heard utter nonsense in my life, that sort of statement is such. The very concept of charging compulsory school fees is a tax in itself and is in fact broadening the tax base. Making parents pay tax on this forced levy is tantamount to making them pay tax upon another tax. So, to say that to relieve them of tax burdens on this compulsory levy or whatever it may be which they have to pay for schools is a narrowing of the tax base, is absolute twaddle.

The attitude of the hon the Minister is, to say the least, quite thoughtless and on a par with the sort of speech made by the dearly lamented Marie Antoinette when she said: “If they cannot afford bread, let them eat cake.” We all know what happened to that lady. Not so long after that she lost her job and her head. I just give that as a thought to the hon the Minister to bear in mind too. It may well be that the hon the Minister’s munificent salary of R78 000 plus motorcars, houses and the like has insulated him from the needs and the effects of this sort of thing on the ordinary man in the street. I appeal to him to give a little more thought to this particular subject.

Frankly, I consider his attitude very coldblooded and callous because I know of people who are going to suffer. If this levy is compulsory and they send their children to school, they will be too proud to appeal for some sort of a means test. They will pay that levy, but they are going to suffer. The hon the Minister, however, apparently does not care a darn. I think that is appalling. I really believe that he will be doing himself and South Africa a service if he does review his thinking on this particular point. He should certainly not repeat the nonsense that it is narrowing the tax base.

Mr Speaker, the hon member for Umbilo raised certain matters to which my hon colleague will reply, but in passing I should like to tell him that I have great faith in the capabilities of our local authorities and in the responsible way in which they normally deal with matters. Since both of us served on the Commission of Inquiry into Township Establishment, the hon member knows what my attitude is towards the responsibilities of our local authorities. The commission, the hon member and I agreed with the delegation and the transfer of certain functions to local authorities. The hon member knows full well what the philosophy of my department will be in connection with the functions and the responsibilities which will be transfered to local authorities.

The hon member raised the specific issue of an application for the building of an old-age home in Durban. I am not in a position to reply to the hon member on this specific issue now as I have no particulars available. However, the hon member is always welcome to approach me or the department beforehand with a specific matter like this, which he has now unfortunately raised here for the first time, so that I can be in a position to reply to it fully during the debate.

*I should like to use the brief opportunity at my disposal to make a few intimations to the House on the strategy decided upon for the provision of land for housing. Before getting to that, I wish to congratulate my colleague the Minister of the Budget most heartily on the occasion of his first handling of the appropriation of the Administration: House of Assembly. On behalf of my department I thank him sincerely for the cooperation we receive from his department throughout.

Recently a committee of my department put forward recommendations as regards making serviced and unserviced land available for housing purposes. In the first place the recommendations were aimed at residential land in the possession of the department which would not be required within a reasonable period for own departmental purposes and which could be sold so that the proceeds could be applied for housing or the creation of infrastructure or for the acquisition of land elsewhere where the need exists.

In the second place the recommendations were aimed at ensuring that land would be available for residential purposes to all income groups on a continuous basis where such land was not acquired by the private sector itself and made available for housing. It might be necessary for the department to acquire additional land for this purpose on a programmed basis according to need.

The criteria taken into consideration by the departmental committee are the following: Alienation shall take place rapidly; alienation shall take place in conjunction with the minimum of restrictive conditions; complicated conditions shall be avoided; alienation shall take place on a competitive basis as far as possible; alienation shall take place at market value as far as possible; where alienation takes place at market value, no pre-emptive right shall apply; alienation shall take place for cash as far as possible; to prevent stockpiling of land and to ensure development, a development clause shall be formulated and registered in the title deed; to prevent monopolies, an excessive amount of land shall not be sold to a single developer; there shall be no encroachment upon the terrain of the private sector but, where there is no private land available for development, it shall be made attractive to developers to acquire land for development from the department; alienation of land for housing of lower income groups may take place out of hand at amounts below market value and taking the paying capacity of those involved into account; where sale is effected at prices below market value, a pre-emptive right shall be stated to prevent speculation and the amount of land available shall be in accordance with the short-term need.

In the light of these criteria the committee made certain recommendations.

Strategy:

A strategy shall be laid down comprising the following:

1. (i) The identification of the need for building sites and unserviced land in the light of details in the data bank and in consultation with local management for a period of say five years in advance;
2. (ii) determination of the degree to which the private sector and local management will fulfil the need under their own steam;
3. (iii) determination of the need which the department will have to fulfil as regards the acquisition of land and provision of sites;
4. (iv) five-year advance programming on an annual basis of the acquisition of land and installation of services as well as programming for the provision of necessary funds in respect of the responsibility of the department;
5. (v) allocation of funds, if necessary, on a priority basis;
6. (vi) identification of suitable land and acquisition on a continuous basis. All the necessary land and rights shall be acquired and all limiting factors identified timeously with a view to the avoidance of problems in consolidation etc;
7. (vii) provision of services as required on a continuous basis;
8. (viii) provision of main supply services where these cannot or will not be carried out by private developers;
9. (ix) provision of serviced sites and unserviced land as required.

Serviced Single Residential Sites:

1. (i) The department and/or local authority shall have a continuous supply of sites available especially for lower income groups to which it has an exceptional responsibility and which cannot be accommodated by the private sector. If departmental supplies are reduced and there is a need, as established by the housing data bank, the supply shall be supplemented either by its own establishment of townships or by setting conditions on the sale of unserviced land that after development the developers shall resell a certain number of serviced sites to the department at prearranged prices.
2. (ii) In the first instance sites shall be available out of hand on merit to people on waiting lists but may also be made available to utility companies and employers. Should there be a surplus of sites, they may also be made available to individuals not qualifying for housing assistance and preferably on a competitive basis to builders and developers. At places where the private sector does not supply sites, the department will have to pay attention to all market sectors.
3. (iii) A site ought to be sold to a breadwinner with a monthly income up to R1 200 at a price below market value depending upon the particular circumstances and the paying capacity of the purchaser. In such a case a pre-emptive right and building clause shall apply.
4. (iv) Where housing utility companies furnish housing to persons with an income below R1 200 per month, sites may similarly be alienated out of hand to such companies below market value. Where provision is being made for the income group above R1 200 per month, market value ought to apply but sale at a reduced price may nevertheless be considered depending on circumstances in order to launch a young utility company. Utility companies ought to register pre-emptive rights against properties they sell.
5. (v) Sites made available out of hand to persons with incomes above R1 200 per month, employers, builders or developers, shall be sold at market value. No pre-emptive right shall apply but only a building clause.
6. (vi) Payment shall preferably be in cash but short-term instalments may be considered in respect of individual buyers of plots.
7. (vii) Where sites may be made available to local authorities for the furnishing of housing to lower income groups, it may take place out of hand at an amount below market value as agreed.
8. (viii) A development right to sites may be granted to developers on a competitive basis to erect dwellings for specific income groups and for persons on waiting lists according to departmental instructions. An agreement shall be concluded with the developer regarding prices of dwellings marketed by him. Transfer of the sites, however, shall take place direct from the department to the purchaser. A pre-emptive right ought to apply only if the site has been alienated at below market value.

Flat and Group Housing Sites:

This type of site shall be alienated to local authorities, utility companies, employers and private institutions at a price below market value on the same basis as single residential sites.

Unserviced Land:

1. (i) Unserviced land designed for alienation shall be subdivided into viable “packages” for provision to local authorities, utility companies and private developers. Negotiations on the composition of such packages may be conducted with such institutions in advance.
2. (ii) The sale of land to local authorities and utility companies may take place out of hand at prices below market value depending on the paying capacity of the income group for which provision is being made. If provision is being made for persons with an income above R1 200 per month, market value shall be paid. Institutions shall themselves set pre-emptive rights in respect of persons to which land is sold at prices below market value. A development clause shall apply in respect of land sold to such institutions.
3. (iii) Packages of land shall be made available to private developers on a competitive basis for sale. Where no competition exists, negotiations may be conducted at market value.
4. (iv) Nevertheless negotiations ought to be conducted in advance with bona fide developers in order to arouse their interest in packages of land or combinations of packages to be offered for sale.
5. (v) The minimum restrictions possible shall be set in conditions of tender to private developers. Nevertheless it shall be required of developers to submit a development programme with their tenders and a development clause based on an agreed development programme shall be embodied in the title deeds at transfer. This will ensure that land is not stockpiled and left unutilized.
6. (vi) Should the department experience a need for building sites (either for its own use, local authorities or utility companies) it may be set as a condition of tender that a specified number of plots be resold to the department at a prearranged price after development.
7. (vii) Care shall be taken in the allocation of tenders not to create monopolies.
8. (viii) Conditions of payment ought to be: 10% cash on signing of the agreement of purchase and sale and the balance with interest at Treasury interest rates against transfer.

The successful tenderer shall be permitted to postpone transfer until immediately previous to the commencement of the installation of services if he wishes.

These recommendations are acceptable to me and have already also been approved by the National Housing Commission and the Community Development Board. The department is proceeding with the implementation of the foregoing approach and I am sure that, together with the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into Township Establishment and Related Matters, will assist in providing sufficient building sites at reasonable prices to fulfil the need.

Mr Chairman, I have no comments in response to the hon the Minister’s announcement which I believe will be generally welcomed.

During the debate members of the opposition parties, both the PFP and the CP, have done their best right from the Second Reading to belittle own affairs and to denigrate them as something of no importance. That is why I saw fit to draw the attention of the House of Assembly to a few of the matters transferred from the Ministry for general affairs to the Ministers of the Ministers’ Council because this emphasizes the importance of the Administration: House of Assembly.

There has been a transfer of inter alia 25 Acts or portions of Acts from the Minister of Community Development to the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works. Amongst others these Acts include Acts applicable to various settlements and the control of settlements, namely the Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, The State Land Disposal Act, the Community Development Act and the Housing Act.

In terms of the Marriage Act, certain matters have been transferred from the Minister of Home Affairs to the Minister of the Budget.

The Minister of Education and Culture has received 27 Acts or portions of Acts from the Minister of National Education, inter alia the Educational Services Act, the Technical Colleges Act, the National Educational Policy Act, various Acts applicable to universities, the Universities, National Education Policy and Technikons Act, the Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns Act, the Culture Promotion Act and the Cultural Institutions Act.

Eight Acts have been transferred from the Minister of Health and Welfare to the Minister of Health Services and Welfare, inter alia the National Welfare Act, the Aged Persons Act, the Children’s Act, the Mental Health Act, the Social Pensions Act, the Health Act and the Blind Persons Act.

A large variety of measures have been transferred from the Minister of Environment Affairs and Fisheries to the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply. These measures relate especially to the regulation of waterworks and irrigation affairs.

Measures relating to the training of apprentice artisans have been transferred from the Minister of Manpower to the Minister of Education and Culture.

The Minister of Agriculture has transferred six measures to the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply, inter alia the Tobacco and Wine Research Accounts Act, the Agricultural Research Account Act, the Agricultural Credit Act and the Promotion of the Density of Population in Designated Areas Act.

Consequently more than 70 Acts or portions of Acts have been transferred to the Ministers entrusted with own affairs. [Interjections.] The importance of this lies not only in the number of Acts and their extent; the nature of the measures is of greater importance. I believe that with these steps we succeed in complying with the spirit of the Constitution, that matters of cultural interest to a population group be transferred to that group as own affairs. By means of the measures mentioned, we have embarked upon the way of permanent and unique solutions in South Africa in the search for constitutional solutions for our country. The phasing into this department of duties currently undertaken by the provincial councils will increase its extent and importance. The CP objection to our current constitutional dispensation is that Whites have supposedly been deprived of their sovereignty. As a White I have never gained the impression that I have been deprived of my sovereignty or anything else when I only have to share it with someone just as entitled to lay claim to it as I.

Let us share your salary!

Even in our time democratic processes in this country will see such evolutionary development that they will be regarded quite differently and will appear totally different from the accepted form in which we have known them up to the present.

The CP now has to accept certain facts once and for all and I shall mention a few of them. We live in Africa and South Africa is an African state albeit with its own character and level of development. Our community is fully integrated economically. We form part of South Africa and share the full infrastructure in South Africa with other population groups and cultural communities. South African inhabitants of colour are not enemies of the Whites. Great mutual respect and co-operation exist among our respective population groups. No political party, whatever its policy, will have the financial means to institute total partition in South Africa. No political party in South Africa will succeed in achieving permanent political solutions in this country without the co-operation and agreement of all population groups.

These are a few facts members of the CP will have to take into account when they parade their selfish ideological daydreams. If in time to come they wish to contribute as a political party in this country to the future of the country, they will have to cease their political wishful thinking and their daydreaming. They will have to take note of the practical, hard facts of politics in South Africa and abide by them. They will become involved in those realities and will have to find solutions to them. They will not be able to build castles in the air, colour them to suit themselves and then say, “We selfish Whites have always had control over everyone and everything and wish this to remain.” In that way we shall ultimately have nothing in South Africa.

My last remark is directed at the hon member for Yeoville as he is present. When we put a few questions to him by way of interjections, the hon member for Yeoville immediately became personal. [Interjections.] This is so typical of that hon member. The moment he is unable to find an answer he becomes insulting and personal instead of, as a frontbencher and senior member of this House, suggesting a few solutions to us to the problems he can illustrate with such facility. [Interjections.] The identification of problems is something of which even I, the “‘stupid’ agterbanker” to which he referred, am capable in my stupidity. For once he should furnish us with solutions in this House to problems we have long since identified.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Springs referred to the importance of own affairs. I think my colleague the hon member for Barberton has already proved the contrary in his speech this afternoon. The hon member must remember that the R2 200 million which has been appropriated for own affairs constitutes only 7% of the total general affairs Budget. Moreover, if one were to include the Budgets of the SATS and the Post Office in the general Budget, the own affairs Budget of the House of Assembly would constitute a mere 4% of the total Budget. When one takes this into account, the hon member for Springs will see how much importance his Government attaches to own affairs budgeting.

I should like to respond to two points raised by the hon member for Amanzimtoti. He made the point—as I understood it—that the worker one employs on one’s farm or in one’s business necessarily has a say in the management or ownership of that undertaking. Surely that is not true. We all have workers in our employ but they are not co-owners and do not necessarily have joint control of the enterprise. The hon member also said that politicians should be honest with voters. I almost shouted from my bench: Look who’s talking! The hon member should look around him. There is a member of his party who, when asked during the referendum whether or not there would be Coloureds in the Cabinet, said: No, it is just a carrot which is being dangled before the Coloureds. [Interjections.] The hon member is sitting in this House. I do not want to embarrass him but he knows who he is. [Interjections.] Must I mention his name?

Yes! [Interjections.]

No, I am not a gossip.

I am not saying you are a gossip …

The hon member is in this House. He is sitting here in front of me and he knows who he is. [Interjections.] It is not the hon the Minister of Communications just in front of me.

Order! Did the hon member for Rustenburg say the hon member for De Aar was a gossip?

No, Mr Chairman, I did not say so. [Interjections.]

During the past few months we have experienced the most difficult financial situation since the depression of the 30’s. [Interjections.] The financial steps the Government is taking to bring about a redistribution of income so that the standard of living of the Whites will fall and that of the other groups in South Africa will rise are adversely affecting the lifestyle of the Whites, and it is the Whites who are being asked to make a substantial contribution towards the development of the Coloureds, the Indians and the Blacks in the financial, technical, agricultural, educational and other fields.

We have the problem that interest rates which recently reached record levels are bankrupting people throughout the entire economy. The consumer, the businessman—especially the smaller entrepreneur—and the farmer are being strangled to death by these high rates of interest. Over the years the farmer has been encouraged to produce food but, as a result of his financial retrogression, he is naturally dependent upon credit for his production. He has to obtain credit from either the commercial bank or from his cooperative, and in both cases he has had, until recently, to pay 25% interest on that credit—in most cases this situation has not yet changed. We have even had the situation in the case of one co-operative of which I know where the farmer has had to pay not only the 25% interest on his production loan but also a 2,5% commission to the co-operative in those cases where for instance, the co-operative pays for his electricity as part of his production loan. In such cases the farmer pays 27,5% interest, which is 2,5% higher than that paid to the commercial bank.

He can surely obtain his production credit in terms of a six year scheme.

Yes, he could normally do that, but I am referring to a specific case. In fact, I want to discuss this specific case with the hon the Minister.

As a result of the extremely high rate of interest it is understandable that the farmer’s production costs are increasing enormously. This also applies to those who provide the inputs for agriculture.

It is said that one third of the farmers in the RSA are in a critical financial state. This is indeed so; and it becomes clear when we look at the position of the summer crop farmers who last year had at their disposal only seven cents for every one rand of operating costs. Right up to today we have the situation in our own agricultural budget where provision has been made for R421 million of which R252,8 million has been made available for assistance to farmers. I am very grateful for the announcement made today of the additional R150 million. One has to remember, however, that the farmers paid out R1 300 million in interest alone last year.

The hon the Minister of Agriculture and Water Supply referred in passing to the maize situation. I just want to point out that the maize prices have only been fixed at the producer level. There is no price control in respect of the sale of maize and maize products in the retail trade. Consequently the consumer—this is a situation which will have to be looked at—pays R400 per ton to in some cases even R1 000 per ton for mealie meal and other maize products. The farmer receives R217 or R218 per ton. As I say, the consumer pays R400 per ton for mealie meal in 1 kg packing. So there is a gap between the R218 per ton and the R400 per ton; and in the case of maize products, the price rises to as much as R1 000 per ton. According to the economic indicators determined by the Directorate: Agriculture, it costs R267 to produce a ton of mealies. An amount of R48 has therefore to be absorbed by the maize farmer. I do not want to elaborate any further on this matter because I think it has already been discussed in a fair amount of detail.

The situation today is such that if the Government does not want to plunge the country into chaos, it will have to ensure that no further restrictive monetary policy measures are instituted. There will have to be drop in the rates of interest which have our economy in such a shambles at the moment. They will have to come down because such a situation cannot be endured for very long. Our people must be enabled to obtain the necessities of life and luxury articles taxed more heavily.

The MRA, Market Research in Africa, contends that 44% of homes in Black urban residential areas have television sets while 29% had television sets in 1983. The point I want to make is that, although one does not begrudge the people these items, one nevertheless has the situation where there are rich people among them while others cannot afford to buy food and clothing. The same situation prevails among Whites. There are also White children in our country who are starving.

Unfortunately my time has almost expired, but there are a few other matters to which I want to refer. There are a few situations we will have to look at because they really give one cause for concern. We will have to address the problem of depopulation on the platteland very soon because the survival of some towns which still have the right to exist is being threatened. The housing problems should also receive attention. As far as the provision of housing is concerned, we could possibly consider whether or not the housing bonds could be taken out over a longer period. Considering our situation, we should, I think, also look at the tax-free portion of the income of the working married woman with the view to increasing that portion.

Mr Chairman, it is with pride that I stand up here today as a member of the NP which, for all practical purposes, has been governing this country now for 37 years. [Interjections.] We look back with gratitude on those 37 years during which we achieved great success in this country. They were also 37 years in which we made mistakes; but we are correcting those mistakes now.

Is Rev Hendrickse also a member of the NP now? [Interjections.]

In pursuance of that remark by the hon member for Kuruman I should also say that we have also had a stroke of luck or two during this period. The NP had a stroke of luck the day that that hon member left this party. [Interjections.] That was one of the great days in our history. Just look at the great progress the NP has made since these hon members left the party. We are filled with gratitude.

Is the Rev Hendrickse a member of the NP?

No, the Rev Hendrickse is not a member of our party.

He is, however, a member of the Government!

He is not a member of our party.

He is governing the country!

Yes, of course he is a member of the Government.

While I am on the subject of the CP, there is one point I should like to mention. There is one thing that has always struck me since I became a member of the House of Assembly. I was always under the impression that we debated matters in this House but to my great surprise I found that the CP did not participate in debating in this House. [Interjections.] They have introduced a totally new style into this House, to wit, their shouting of political slogans. Every hon member of the CP makes one of two statements or both of such statements. The first is that the NP is an integrationist party. The second is that we are selling out the White man in this country. [Interjections.] Each speech they deliver is exactly the same as the previous one, apart from a few variations. One after the other they get up and deliver the same speech.

Let us look for a moment at economic integration. The hon member for De Aar referred to the depopulation of the platteland. The platteland, however, is not depopulating; it is simply a question of the Whites’ numbers dwindling. What are the facts of the economic situation? Were it not for the purchasing power of people of another colour on the platteland, many Whites would no longer be carrying on business there. Hon members know the platteland, after all, so they know what the situation is on a Saturday morning when the Coloureds, Indians, Blacks and Whites stand shoulder to shoulder to make their purchases.

We all know too that this applies not only to the platteland but also to the urban areas. On the mines, in factories, in local authorities and on our farms Whites, Blacks and Coloureds stand shoulder to shoulder and work. That is so, is it not?

I read an interesting allegation in the CP’s Programme of Principles and Constitution. I would like to recommend this reading matter to hon members on this side of the House. It will not take long to read and should, in fact, provide them with an entertaining hour of reading. It is even better than the articles in Rapport. Hon members would do well to read it. [Interjections.] In paragraph 1.5 the CP states that integration “…in whatever form and at whatever level is rejected.”

I want to ask the hon members whether or not they reject economic intregration. They must tell us. If they do reject it, how will they implement their decision if they come into power? [Interjections.] If they do accept economic integration, then surely they are an integration party. [Interjections.] Let me put this question to the hon member for Langlaagte.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member for Parow a question? [Interjections.]

No, I am putting the questions.

Order! The hon member for Langlaagte must please resume his seat. The hon member for Parow may continue.

I shall put a question to the hon member for Langlaagte; he need not put questions to me. This hon member is involved in the development of many townships and talks about economic apartheid. Have those hon members ever wondered how good the hon member for Langlaagte would look digging a sewage trench? [Interjections.] Hon members should give some thought to that.

Let us look for a moment at the political integration of which we are accused. This booklet makes very interesting reading. The CP’s policy in respect of Blacks is set out in paragraph 2.3.6, and I quote:

They go on to say in paragraph 2.3.7 that local authorities can be instituted for those Black residential areas on White land. In other words, in this White South Africa which we are always hearing about, Blacks can rule over White land. That is, after all, the purest form of integration that one can get. Yet we are accused of integration! [Interjections.] That party is an integration party. They are on the road to political integration. [Interjections.]

A second statement of the CP to which I should like to refer is that we, the NP, are ostensibly selling out the White man. I would like to make the statement today that a party which misleads the people of South Africa is selling those people out. A party which tells the people there is a farm for sale in Adderley Street is misleading the people. A party which tells the people that one can start an economic pig farm in Israel is misleading the people. [Interjections.] First a heartland which was not homeland but a speckled land à la Hartzenberg, then a homeland again, then an own fatherland, and than a geographical area of jurisdiction—which is really a group area but which is parenthetically a heartland—is the policy that is being offered. It is nothing but a dreamland; it is not a heartland.

You are being flippant.

Sir, one can only be flippant about such nonsense.

Order!

Let us talk about the CP’s slogan of freedom with justice. Let us test that against the policy of the CP. This party says that a Coloured heartland will comprise the existing Coloured group areas plus the few portions of Coloured rural land. The CP also says that the Indian homeland will comprise the present Indian group areas. The rest of South Africa will become a White homeland. I ask the CP: Is this freedom with justice? It is no wonder that the hon leader of the CP at their congress on 7 September 1984—

Naturally this is so, They cannot point out the boundaries to us.

What about Bophuthatswana?

Let us talk about partition and, with great respect to the hon leader of the CP, let us talk about Bophuthatswana. Partition can take place on only two grounds.

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

No, Sir, I am not prepared to answer a question. There are only two grounds on which partition can be morally justified. The first is the historic occupation of land. I challenge hon members to tell me which areas in this country have been occupied historically by the Coloureds and Indians.

The second way in which one can do that is on the basis of numbers. One could then have partition on the basis of numbers. That is moral. What would be the position, however, if we were to divide land on a moral basis among the Coloureds, the Indians and the Whites of this country? [Interjections.] Whites would get 57%, the Indians about 10% and the Coloureds 33%. Who would do the dividing and who would do the choosing?

What about the Blacks?

No, I am speaking in terms of the CP’s policy. [Interjections.] The CP has already demarcated the Black homelands. They say in their constitution that the 1936 provision is final. That is so, is it not? They do say the 1936 provision is final! Or is that not so?

Ha! Ha!

“Ha! Ha!” Now the hon member laughs. [Interjections.] I contend that anyone who tells this kind of story to the voters is selling out the people of South Africa and is selling out the Whites in this country. [Interjections.]

The hon member tells me they are going to follow the parliamentary way of instituting a Coloured homeland. The parliamentary way? They are going to persuade the Coloureds to accept a homeland, and the Indians too.

However, I heard another story—from reliable sources. Apparently they have realized that this is not going to work, and now they are wondering how to get the Coloureds and Indians out of Parliament. If they come into power they will reinstate section 16 of the Immorality Act and the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act. [Interjections.] The Coloureds and Indians will then have no alternative but to withdraw from the new dispensation. Where will they go then? To a Coloured homeland? [Interjections.] I think that people who gamble with the future of our country in this way are selling out the Whites in this country. [Interjections.] The CP talks in this booklet of promoting White majority occupation in the RSA. Yes, they talk about promoting White majority occupation in the RSA! Do they not realize that they will have to send 5,5 million Blacks—and that is not taking into account the increase in the population—back to their Black areas in order to bring about White majority occupation in this country? [Interjections.] These are the stories they are telling the voters. [Interjections.] Is it not enough to make one weep?

With this type of slogan about integration and with these slogans about selling out the White man, that party is trying to hijack the spirit of our people. They are trying to hijack it. Unfortunately, in this process they are exploiting two weaknesses in our people. The first is that our people sometimes feel superior to members of other population groups. The second is our fear of the Black man. That is a contradiction. It is a contradiction because if one is superior one is not afraid; and if one is afraid, one cannot be superior. However, that is what those hon members prey on.

When we take steps to remove and succeed in removing discriminatory measures, our actions are labelled integration. [Interjections.] This is not done because we are right—and we are right, after all—but for the sake of their political survival the CP has to give a name to our actions. So they call these actions “integration”. However, I should like to say today that this party will continue to remove discriminatory measures. We will continue to work our solutions for our survival. We will continue to present the facts and realities to our voters. We will go on not misleading our people and thus not selling them out by promising them farms in Adderley Street.

Order! Before calling on the next hon member to speak, I should like to read a notice to hon members at the request of the Chief Whip of Parliament. It relates to tomorrow’s proceedings and there will be no other opportunity of reading this notice. The notice reads as follows:

Mr Chairman, I thought the speech of the hon member for Parow was rather amazing. He is very good at making that kind of speech—I have heard them before in the provincial council. The theme of his speech was his pride in being a Nationalist and that his party has governed this country for 37 years. He proceeded to devote most of his speech to lecturing the CP on what is wrong with their policies. Their policies are, of course, essentially the policies of the NP of not very long ago, and he did a wonderful job of showing how ridiculous and unworkable the policies of the NP were. That is why they had to change.

I also find it strange that that hon member can be proud of a 37 year rule when we face endemic unrest in this country—the worst we have ever had—when we are fighting a rearguard action against disinvestment in respect of our trading partners, and when our living standards have dropped over the past decade. At this stage when the country is in a state of political and economic crisis, the likes of which we have not known before, the hon member for Parow is proud of the performance of his Government. I shudder to think what has to happen in South Africa before he will be concerned about or ashamed of that performance.

We have come to the Third Reading stage of the own affairs Budget, and it is appropriate to review a bit of what has gone before. With rare exceptions, the debates on the own affairs have been boring, irrelevant, unrelated to own affairs and, on many occasions, poorly attended by hon members, showing what they thought about them. During debates on many votes, unlike general affairs votes, the allocated time was not even used up by hon members. There have been few questions on own affairs and, if my memory serves me correctly, there has been no legislation whatsoever.

The whole concept of own affairs has been artificially bolstered in a transparent attempt to justify the existence of three separate Houses and Ministers’ Councils. It is an expensive charade that we can ill afford. The work could be done by half the number of Ministers and a reduced number of departments resulting in a considerable saving of taxpayers’ money. This charade is a natural consequence of the policy of separate development, a policy that is not working and is not going to work.

The whole approach of the Government is based on a false premise, namely that separation of the races is necessary to avoid friction, and that contact will lead to greater animostity.

Surely we recognize this to be false? Contact is more likely to produce understanding and sympathy than conflict. Our daily lives illustrate this to us regularly.

I should like to quote from something that Allister Sparks wrote in 1974, which I think explains it very well:

Is that not what we have in South Africa today? Separation has led to a breakdown in communication, to misunderstanding, suspicion, fear and violence in townships across the length and breadth of this country.

The Government needs to wake up before it is too late. For 17 years we have had the Prohibition of Political Interference Act. Apparently it is going to be scrapped now after much irreparable damage has been done. The new Constitution has polarized races more than ever before, something which has been belatedly recognized by Cabinet Ministers. The whole field of non racial political activity was handed on a platter to extra-parliamentary groups. Now the Government has taken fright. It realizes that it has lost control of the situation and that non-racial political movements are needed to play a vital role if peaceful negotiation and evolutionary change are to take place.

It is ironic that at the very time that the Government is conceding the importance of contact rather than separation we sit here debating the first own affairs Budget. We live in an increasingly integrated society—in the economic, political, sporting and even cultural spheres when one looks at the Nico Malan, Capab and the Afrikaanse Taalmonument, for example—but the Government insists on clinging to a diminishing island of racial exclusivity in residential areas and educational and welfare institutions.

Let us look briefly at education. The PFP believes in contact, in non-racial education and in freedom of choice, while the NP believes in enforced segregation. At most universities in this country racial integration is increasing all the time, but the Government nevertheless still insists—with very few exceptions—that technikons and teacher training colleges remain rigidly segregated. There is no logic in it; just expediency and racism.

School education suffers the same treatment. It is an own affair. According to section 14 of the Constitution, this means that schooling has to do with the maintenance of identity and the upholding and furtherance of the way of life, culture, traditions and customs of a population group; not a religious, cultural or language group but a population group; not English-speaking, Afrikaans, Catholic, Jew, Muslim or Hindu but White, Black, Coloured or Indian.

How do we know who to group together, forcibly, to protect their identity, way of life, culture, traditions and customs? We turn to the Population Registration Act which tells us the following:

Now that is the person whose identity, way of life, culture, traditions and customs we are trying to protect provided that neither of his natural parents has been classified as a Coloured person or a Black. A “Black” is—

A “Coloured person” is—

Now, these are the own affairs we are talking about. These are the identities, the ways of life, the cultures, the traditions and the customs that we are protecting. They are population groups, race groups and colour groups and certainly have nothing specific to do with the cultural groups that we heard the State President telling the BBC about on television last night. The sophistry of own affairs in education is nonsense. The reality is racism and compulsion. That is what it is.

Why does the Government not allow freedom of choice? Why should English speakers be forced to swallow segregated Christian National Education whether they like it or not? The future of South Africa is going to depend on our Children’s ability to find better ways of achieving peaceful coexistence. Their ability to do so will be enhanced by greater contact rather than by being kept apart and growing up as stranger or, worse still, as rivals or enemies. It is strange that leading Nationalists, in Parliament and in the President’s Council, have chosen to send their children to multiracial private schools. All due credit to them, but has the identity of those children been threatened? Should it be a privilege reserved for the wealthy? I believe not.

I believe that there are thousands of parents of all races who want their children to have a non-racial education. They know that their children need to be prepared to face the challenges of a multiracial South Africa. They know that contact with children of other races is what their children need, not separation. Let us move away from the doctrines of compulsory separation and contrived own affairs.

The intention to scrap the prohibition of Political Interference Act is a partial recognition of the need for contact rather than separation. That process must be extended rapidly if we are not to be overtaken by a future too ghastly to contemplate.