Mr Speaker, as this is the first occasion on which you have taken the Chair since we last met here on Friday, I should like to raise a point of order regarding the regularity, or lack of it, of the proceedings of the past two days.

Order! The hon member cannot raise a point of order in this House on procedure in the extended public committees. However, if the hon member wishes to address me on a matter which is of great importance to him and his party, regarding the procedure mentioned, I shall, under the circumstances, permit him to address me on this—because this is the first occasion on which we have been involved in this procedure.

Mr Speaker, as it pleases you. I shall therefore address you in terms of this concession of yours.

Mr Speaker, hon members of the Official Opposition raised the same point of order in each of the four centres where the extended public committees sat yesterday and the day before. [Interjections.] Its drift … [Interjections.] Oh, Sir, I am dealing with a serious matter as far as my party is concerned. [Interjections.] Let the hon gentlemen create a commotion and shout as much as they like; they will not disconcert us. I am speaking to you in any case, Mr Speaker. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Soutpansberg may proceed.

Mr Speaker, if any of my hon colleagues wish to add something to this, I should appreciate it if you would furnish them with the opportunity of doing so too. The drift of it was that proceedings took place in an irregular manner because the meetings of the extended public committees did not take place in terms of the Rules.

Rule 163 provides for the referral of a matter to an extended public committee. Rule 163(2) reads:

1. (a) the joint committee under which financial matters fall and a joint committee on provincial affairs, to a maximum of seven consecutive Parliamentary working days’,

Rule 66(4)(c) provides:

The keywords here are “during the period … in terms of Rule 163”. During that period an extended public committee may also sit as regards the accounts for provincial services.

In all four cases in which this point of order was raised, the Chairmen invoked a ruling which you, Sir, supposedly gave to clear up the irregularity.

The hon the Chief Whip of my party raised the point of order in Natal and, after he had done so, the drift of the Chairman’s ruling—I shall not quote his ipsissima verba because they are not available at this stage—was more or less as follows: That it should be taken into account that we were in a transitional stage. The Chairman indicated there, according to my information, that our hon Chief Whip’s point of order was correct but, to overcome this, Mr Speaker had amended the Rules in terms of Rule 2 of the Rules to legalise the sittings of these extended public committees.

The hon the Chief Whip then asked whether this Rule had been brought to the attention of hon members in some way or other, to which the Chairman replied that he would establish whether this had been done and furnish us with the details later. The Chairman then announced just prior to the afternoon adjournment that the amended Rules had not been made known to hon members and had not been recorded in the Minutes of Proceedings but that the relevant details appeared on the agenda of the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders which would meet on 1 June.

My hon Chief Whip thereupon adopted the standpoint that there had been no proper proclamation of the Rules if this had not been made known. He also contended that Rule 2 was not applicable. [Interjections.] He contended that to continue with the proceedings held serious implications for the Bill.

Subsequently the Chairman requested the hon the Chief Whip to abide by his ruling as he could not pursue the matter any further because it was Mr Speaker’s ruling.

In Pretoria the point of order was raised by the hon member for Pietersburg, whereupon the Chairman gave Mr Speaker’s ruling and he was not prepared to hear further argument.

In Bloemfontein the point of order was raised by the hon member for Randfontein. There the Chairman listened to him and his reply was that you, Mr Speaker, had given a ruling on 18 May which intercepted the point of order and he called upon the next speaker.

A point of interest then occurred in the sense that the hon member for Randfontein wrote a note to the secretary of the committee and asked him whether the ruling had appeared in the Minutes of Proceedings and, if so, when. The hon member also requested that, if it had appeared, he should be furnished with a copy.

The hon member for Randfontein then received a photocopy of the Speaker’s ruling from the secretary of the committee, whose name appeared on the relevant document. It was the English version of it and it had been signed by you, Sir. The following note was attached:

The note was signed by the committee secretary.

The point was raised here in Cape Town and the Chairman of the committee was addressed fairly comprehensively about the matter. After that he certainly also referred to the ruling, Sir, which you had supposedly handed down in terms of Rule 2. He then stated that he was bound by that ruling. When I asked whether he could tell us when that ruling by Mr Speaker had been promulgated because we could not trace anything of the kind in the Minutes of Proceedings, the Chairman gave the date of Mr Speaker’s ruling as 18 May of this year. I then asked whether this had been recorded in the Minutes, to which the Chairman replied: “According to my information, it was not recorded in the Minutes but it is a ruling given by Mr Speaker which, to my knowledge, the presiding officers of the four extended public committees were furnished with it by Mr Speaker.” I then addressed him on Rule 2 but I shall be addressing you on it shortly and shall therefore not repeat it now. [Interjections.]

Further argument followed by the hon member for Bethal and the hon member for Losberg but the Chairman concluded by saying that he was bound by your ruling.

As far as we are concerned, the regularity or validity, or lack of it, holds very serious consequences for this Appropriation Bill and, if the proceedings were not altogether regular, they need to be rectified rapidly.

Our points are the following: Firstly, the fact that Mr Speaker has given a bridging ruling confirmed the correctness of the point of order which we raised that the proceedings were irregular. If it had not been for Mr Speaker’s ruling, the proceedings would not have been in order. The test therefore is whether Mr Speaker’s ruling is in order in the light of my next two questions. In all cases the committees were told that the ruling had been given in terms of Rule 2. Rule 2 (1) reads:

It is my submission, with respect, that the matter of extended public committees is dealt with very comprehensively in the Rules and that every aspect of it is covered by the Rules. If the hon member for Ermelo wishes, however, I shall request you to hear him further as regards the matter of Rule 2.

My second question is whether the rule framed by you was proclaimed properly and timeously by whatever person was responsible for the proclamation. According to our information and the date below your signature, the rule was promulgated on 18 May. According to our observation, that rule was not announced from the Chair on 18 May nor has it been announced to date.

With respect, the hon member for Losberg will address you on the question of whether a person may be bound by a rule which was not proclaimed. Our submission is that a rule must be proclaimed for it to be binding.

Order! Would the hon member mention what authority he will refer to?

Mr Speaker, my colleague the hon member for Losberg has the authority to which he will refer.

We examined both the Minutes and Hansard and we could find no proclamation of this Rule. I wish this introduction to suffice and I should appreciate it highly if you would permit my other two colleagues to address you on the points to which I have referred.

Order! As a result of newspaper reports I am under the impression—I merely want the correct facts—that the CP left the council chamber in two of the four Councils in protest after the Chairman’s ruling. This did not happen in two of the four council chambers. Could the hon member give me an explanation of the events which occurred in the various council chambers?

Mr Speaker, our committee members left the council chamber in Pretoria. [Interjections.]

Order!

There the Chairman would not permit any further discussion of the matter whatsoever and CP members absented themselves from the proceedings.

The other place where the CP members left the council chamber was here. In this regard my colleague the hon member for Ermelo indicated to the presiding officer that, with the greatest respect for the Chair’s ruling, we could unfortunately not be associated with a sitting which in our opinion was irregularly constituted.

We did this in Cape Town in view of the fact that we had conducted a fairly comprehensive debate on it.

Order! I should like to know what happened in Pietermaritzburg and Bloemfontein.

In Pietermaritzburg the members remained.

Order! And in Bloemfontein?

There too.

Order! Did they participate in the debate there?

Yes, they did.

Mr Speaker, I should like to address you on two points. The first point is related to Rule 2 and Rule 3 as compared with each other. Rule 2 (1) provides:

We submit that Mr Speaker could not make use of this Rule when he gave his ruling on 18 May. Both Rule 66 (4) (c) and Rule 163 of the Rules regulate the matter as regards the sittings of the extended public committees which took place. Because this regulation is contained in the Rules, it is not within Mr Speaker’s power to give a ruling—such as that of 18 May 1988—as is provided in Rule 2(1).

The argument is therefore that Rule 2 (1) cannot be raised here and, with respect, that Mr Speaker’s ruling of 18 May could consequently not have been given within the framework of Rule 2 (1).

To draw a distinction between the two, I should like to refer you to Rule 3 (1) which deals with suspension. I quote:

This Rule could be raised to make it possible to solve the dilemma as put forward in the CP legal argument in the four provinces to which my hon learned colleague referred. [Interjections.] This could not happen, however, because it should have taken place by means of a resolution of each House.

In consequence, if we are dealing with the suspension of a Rule here, that suspension should have been sanctioned by resolution of each House concerned here. Because this did not occur, Rule 3 (1) cannot apply. [Interjections.]

The second argument revolves about the following. It is our standpoint, and I shall quote the authority for it—it is not only our standpoint either but an age-old principle of South African law and, as far as we could establish, of every legal system on earth—that a Rule can only apply as binding on those whom it concerns when it is published, in other words when it is promulgated.

In this regard I want to refer you to the general standpoint which is adopted in Die Uitleg van Wette by L C Steyn, as updated by various other writers. Throughout this manual, with reference to the Interpretation Act as well, the standpoint emerges that promulgation is a sine qua non, a prerequisite, for the binding power which arises from a legal ruling.

I also wish to refer you to a new manual in this regard, written by Lourens M du Plessis, The Interpretation of Statutes, in which he refers to this principle as follows on page 17:

This means therefore that the giving of the ruling—I want to suggest that what happened on 18 May was the giving of a ruling—should be distinguished from its promulgation and, because its promulgation did not take place, it is a provision which is null and void and which is invalid ab initio until it is promulgated.

Order! May I interrupt the hon member? Did you accept the Chairmen’s ruling in Bloemfontein and Natal?

The ruling was not accepted in Bloemfontein and Natal, Mr Speaker. [Interjections.]

Order! May I put a further question to you? Was your party’s action in Bloemfontein and Natal, after the Chairmen’s rulings, not tantamount to the acceptance of a ruling through your presence and participation?

With great respect, no, Mr Speaker. The distinction which is to be drawn in this regard is the following: Something which is invalid ab initio cannot be made valid by later participation. Something which is all together invalid, cannot be made valid by later participation by whatever person because this would have the absurd consequence … [Interjections.] Mr Speaker, I am in the process of expounding a complex legal argument. [Interjections.] If I might address you without continuous interjections, I should appreciate it. [Interjections.]

Order!

It would come down to the absurd consequence that an invalid meeting would be made valid in that a part of a body or meeting made that meeting valid. It cannot be the legal position that, when certain people allege that a meeting is invalid, they are able to lend validity to invalid proceedings.

Order! May I put another question to the hon member? I am asking it for the sake of clarity. Is there any particular reason why the hon member’s party did not raise this point of order at the start of proceedings on Monday morning?

Mr Speaker, the standpoint was of a twofold nature. In the first case, Monday’s proceedings and the objection which the CP raised as regards Monday’s proceedings were of a different nature from the objection raised on Tuesday. The objection raised on Monday was related to the inherent discriminatory method of the allocation of time …

Order! The hon member’s party did not adopt the standpoint on Monday that the proceedings were invalid. I merely want to know why. On Monday the hon member’s party participated in the alleged invalid proceedings.

Mr Speaker, I should like to mention the second reason, which is that on Monday morning intensive research was carried out by the following four members of the legal profession whom I want to name to you.

Order! I do not wish to interrupt the hon member unnecessarily; I am pleased to listen to him. I only want a reasonably short, relevant reply to why the hon member’s party did not raise the point on Monday morning that the proceedings were invalid but participated in the alleged invalid proceedings as if they were valid.

Mr Speaker, during the course of Monday morning the CP discovered this point of invalidity through research, if I may express it like that. Research was carried out in the course of Monday morning … [Interjections.]

Order!

… and by reading Rule 163 in conjunction with Rule 66 this hiatus was discovered. That is why the point was raised at the first opportunity on which it could be raised.

Mr Speaker, in the third place I wish to refer you to the following authority. It is the well-known, tried and generally accepted manual on parliamentary practice, namely Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice. I shall read from the 20th edition, page 214. Here the writer discusses two types of rulings which can be handed down by a Speaker, namely a so-called “public enactment” and a so-called “private enactment”, if I may summarise it like that. As regards the former, the writer says the following:

The “public enactment” is summarised as follows:

It must therefore be possible to find it there and in our case in South Africa it must be possible to find it in Hansard.

In the second place, however, other arrangements apply:

Order! Would the hon member please read the preceding sentence—the sentence just before “all such decisions are to be found recorded”.

Mr Speaker, I omitted a few sentences to read it to you in context. I can read you the entire paragraph.

Order! Would the hon member please just reread the portion read.

Mr Speaker, could you furnish the introductory words, please.

Order! It is the portion linking up with “all such decisions”.

Mr Speaker, I shall reread the entire paragraph to avoid misunderstanding. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Speaker, I shall read the entire paragraph in context:

Mr Speaker, that is what you asked me to read. It comes down to the fact that a general precedent may be created:

I shall omit a few lines to give it in context:

The learned writer then proceeds to a discussion of private rulings given by the Speaker. He says:

I wish to suggest that this is the point at issue here because, with respect, I consider that we are dealing here with a private decision given on 18 May. The writer then proceeds to say:

I then refer hon members to a case of precedent which is mentioned here:

I want to suggest that we are dealing here with something of general interest—

I therefore want to suggest that this passage means that when the Speaker should decide to give a private ruling for specific circumstances, as is currently the case and as took place on 18 May, as soon as possible afterwards he should have it included in the “official records of proceedings” and in this case it is Hansard.

The extended public committee in the Transvaal was informed only after the CP objection that this decision of Mr Speaker’s was, in fact, recorded in Hansard, as this case of precedent indicates …

That was in the Free State.

Yes, that was in the Free State. I apologise. I shall repeat that. It was stated explicitly in the Free State that Mr Speaker’s ruling of 18 May had been recorded in Hansard. This was done by telephone and explains why the CP did not immediately withdraw in the Free State. Its members were provided with a document which indicated that such an official ruling had been included in Hansard.

Order! Am I understanding the hon member correctly? The hon member is telling me that his party made enquiries of the Chair in the Free State and that the Chair said that the ruling had been given and promulgated by Mr Speaker in Hansard and that the Chair confirmed this to them in writing? Are those the facts as the hon member claims them to be?

That is correct, Mr Speaker.

Order! Thank you.

On the other hand, there was no mention of such a procedure in the Transvaal Extended Public Committee. In fact, the Transvaal CP members of Parliament made enquiries of Hansard arising from what had been intimated to CP members in the Free State, which the Free State members had conveyed to us by telephone. The enquiry was made personally by the hon member for Bethal. Hansard here in Cape Town informed the hon member for Bethal that no such ruling by Mr Speaker had been recorded in Hansard roundabout 17, 18, 19 or 20 May.

I should like to request permission to hand up the official document which was made available in the Free State.

Order! I should like to put the hon member right on this point. I am not prepared to permit the House to develop into a court case this afternoon. Neither am I prepared to permit the House to develop into a select or standing committee which has been specially appointed by the House to inquire into this matter. Neither am I prepared to be cross-examined by the hon member and to be asked to hand over documents to him or to the House.

I am listening to the argument of the hon member for Soutpansberg on behalf of his party as a gesture. He is to confine himself as closely as possible to the argument as if he were involved in the procedure for a point of order, although I ruled that I did not accept it as a point of order. Would he please limit his argument accordingly and not range beyond this because I shall point out to him later that he should move a substantive motion if he wishes to proceed with this. Would he therefore please limit his arguments accordingly. He is going altogether too far at the moment and I am not prepared to permit this afternoon’s proceedings to develop into a court case.

Mr Speaker, may I assure you that I had no such intention.

Order! Then the hon member must move a little closer to the point.

Mr Speaker, in the light of the situation, enquiries were made in the Transvaal and it was established that no such record had been included in Hansard. In consequence of the factual circumstances that it had not been recorded in Hansard, read in conjunction with the authority which I presented to you from Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice, I therefore wish to suggest by way of a final submission that there was no promulgation of your ruling which was recorded in Hansard immediately after it had been announced or at a later stage.

By your leave, I want to distinguish between this and the procedure which was adopted on 5 May. In contrast with what occurred on 18 May, a specific procedure was adopted by you on 5 May. I shall read a single sentence from the Minutes of Proceedings of the House of Assembly of 5 May to you. It reads:

I want to suggest that, as a basis for the specific procedure which was adopted on 5 May, promulgation appears to be a requirement. This did not take place as regards the ruling which was given on 18 May and that is why I submit to you finaliter that the ruling of 18 May is invalid because it was not promulgated and consequently the sittings of the extended public committees in all four provinces were invalid and should be treated as such.

Order! Before the hon member resumes his seat, I wish to put another question to him. I now understand the reason why they participated in the Free State but why did they participate in Natal? The hon member did not tell me that Natal was aware that there had been no promulgation.

Mr Speaker, may I request your leave for the Chief Whip of the CP, the hon member for Brakpan, to reply to the question first-hand because he was present?

Mr Speaker, I should like to clarify that point. This point of order was also taken at the beginning of the sitting in Natal. The Chairman ruled …

Order! Was the point of order raised in Natal on Monday?

It was taken in Natal on Tuesday morning because, as the hon member for Losberg said, research was done in the course of Monday and the point of order was then taken at the earliest opportunity on Tuesday.

After the matter had been argued, the Chairman there, as the hon member for Soutpansberg said, gave the ruling that you had laid down the rule in the light of Rule 2. [Interjections.] I assume that those hon members will reply to this argument and they had better keep quiet now.

Order!

When the hon the Chairman gave that ruling, I asked him whether the rule which you had laid down had been announced to hon members, to which he replied that he was unsure of the circumstances and that he would make a statement on it in the course of the day. Just before the lunch-hour adjournment, he said that the ruling had not been recorded anywhere in the minutes of Parliament and had not been announced to hon members anywhere. That was his reply to my argument in that regard.

One of our hon members had already participated in the debate at that stage and I told him I wanted it recorded that it was out of order, that there had not been proper promulgation of Mr Speaker’s ruling and that we also wanted it recorded that we persisted in our opinion that the proceedings there were invalid. The proceedings then continued in spite of our objection.

The Chairman added that he could take the matter no further because it was Mr Speaker’s ruling and he appealed to me to abide by it. That is the position, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, I merely want to react to one aspect of your question about why the point was not raised on the Monday in question. I merely want to state that I, who raised the point in the Cape, initially explained the position by saying that we had not raised the point yesterday because it had only come to our attention on the Monday, having ascertained the fact by way of research we had conducted. Thereupon we notified the other provinces of our standpoint from here. On Monday we were therefore initially not aware of the possibility of such a point being applicable, and we raised the matter at the first possible opportunity. I am merely mentioning this to you by way of explanation.

Mr Speaker, in regard to this point of order I merely wish to submit that hon members of the CP did not do their homework.

Hear, hear!

They could very easily have approached you to ascertain your ruling if only they had wanted to take the trouble and had not been trying to score political points. [Interjections.] If they had come to you and asked what the ruling in regard to this matter was, they would not have been caught napping in regard to certain aspects. [Interjections.] Now they are lamenting the fact that you gave a legal ruling on this matter and are trying to allege that illegal action was taken. Anyone who is well-versed in law requires disclosure of evidence before he stands up in court. Those hon members make a big fuss about being well-versed in law. They have not done their homework, however, and that is why they find themselves in this situation.

Now you are disclosing your intentions! [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Soutpansberg mentioned certain interesting aspects. There are certain interesting aspects which have also struck me—I am now linking up with what the hon member for Parow has just said. I made sure that I was in my office the whole of Monday and Tuesday to help any of the four committees with any matters necessitating a ruling by Mr Speaker. I am sorry to say that at no time did any enquiry ever reach me about the problem now being brought before the House. I also find it interesting that two of the Committees proceeded with their business with the Official Opposition present in the Committee after the point had been raised, without adopting the same attitude as that adopted by the other two Committees.

I find it disappointing that so much trouble was taken to consult the parliamentary staff, even Hansard, to ascertain whether Mr Speaker had had something recorded in Hansard, without first consulting Mr Speaker or his office. I shall leave the matter at that, however.

I should like to formulate my reply to the hon member for Soutpansberg in the following terms. The Standing Rules of Parliament came into effect on 9 May 1988. The Standing Rules do not contain bridging provisions, ie provisions prescribing how business which had not yet been completed, or was pending on that date, should subsequently be dealt with.

Rule 2, however, provides that Mr Speaker may give a ruling or frame a rule in respect of any eventuality for which the Standing Rules do not provide. On 9 May the period provided for deliberations by Rule 163(2) had already lapsed as far as the Appropriation Bill was concerned— the relevant reference is [B55-88 (GA)]—while the discussion of Votes on provincial affairs, as envisaged in Rule 66(4)(c), had not yet taken place.

Under the circumstances I gave a written ruling on 18 May 1988 to the effect that such discussions which would take place, in accordance with the Order Papers, on 23 and 24 May in the provincial capitals, could proceed as if the said period has not lapsed and included those dates. The ruling I gave reads as follows:

I notified the designated chairmen of the respective extended public committees of that ruling on 20 May 1988 and handed them copies of the ruling for use if the matter were to come up in the meetings of the Committees, something which did, in fact, happen. The ruling eliminated any irregularities which could have applied to the meetings of the Committees owing to Rule 66(4)(c)(i).

Of course the ruling would not have had any validity if I had not made it known. Under the circumstances I regarded it as sufficient that I had notified the designated chairmen. They in turn made the ruling known in the meetings of the Committees when the matter was raised. I do not think that it was necessary to publicise the matter any more widely or that the fact that this was not done, in any way prejudiced or could have prejudiced the Committees in the implementation of their respective terms of reference, or the participation of any member in the proceedings of the Committees. In passing I just want to mention that I have been informed by the Secretary that the Clerk at the Table in the Bloemfontein committee meeting meant that the ruling would appear in the Hansard of the Committee’s proceedings. That is the information I received from the senior official, and I trust that the Committee will accept it as such.

I am not aware of a rule or custom that prescribes that I must make a ruling of this nature public in any way other than the method I adopted. I listened carefully to the hon member for Losberg and took note of the authority he quoted to me. In terms of the quoted passages I am of the opinion that my ruling was in order, that it was consequently not a conflicting ruling in the sense in which the hon member presented it in his argument.

I also want to tell the hon member for Soutpansberg that it was definitely not my intention to leave any relevant party in the dark about this matter. All parties are aware of the fact that I go out of my way to ensure proper and timely communication—in this I include all hon members of the House—so that as few misunderstandings as possible can occur and so that we can conduct proceedings smoothly in Parliament in a congenial spirit of co-operation.

The hon member for Soutpansberg’s objection, as I have said, can therefore not be accepted by me as a point of order and cannot be raised by him as a point of order either. If he wishes to take his objection further, however, he may do so by way of a substantive motion. That is my ruling on the matter which the hon member brought to my attention.

Mr Speaker, on a point of personal explanation there is just one matter on which I wish to make a further comment to you. I want to make it clear that the enquiries we made from Hansard were only made after we had been notified from Bloemfontein that the official had said that the relevant ruling had been recorded in Hansard. We did not do so for any other reason.

Order! I accept the hon member’s bona fides in this regard.

Mr Speaker, on a point of personal explanation …

[Inaudible.]

Mr Speaker, I do not know whether the hon member for Kimberley South regards himself as being Mr Speaker. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Speaker, I merely wish to make a personal explanation about your remark that you were available in your office and that we did not contact you there. We accepted in good faith that the chairmen in the respective provinces were actually your representatives there. When they consequently gave a certain ruling, we accepted that it had come from you. We could not go behind their backs to ascertain whether it was, in fact, your ruling.

Order! I have given my ruling. I am not prepared to reopen the debate.

Mr Speaker, I shall not take up much of the House’s time. With a view to guiding the debate on the Vote in the right direction I merely want to indicate that the Works component of the department—this is basically programme 5—will actually be discussed on 6 June in the debate on the Vote of my hon colleague the Minister of the Budget and Works, and that we should therefore confine this discussion to the other facets of my department.

While I am speaking I should like to say briefly that this is the first time this department and the Vote are to be discussed since the appointment of Mr Wessel Marais as Director-General of the Administration: House of Assembly. For my part I not only want to welcome him but also convey to him the appreciation of my department and I for the co-operation and guidance we get from him.

I should very much like to tell hon members that I am sorry that Mr Willie Marais, who is at present the chairman of the Development and Housing Board and who was for many years the chairman of the Housing Commission, is going to retire at the end of the year. Mr Marais was involved in housing for 31 years and made a major contribution to South Africa in this sphere. [Interjections.] I should like, on behalf of the department and I, to express our greatest appreciation for his loyalty, zeal and great politeness and the expertise he placed at our disposal over such a long period of time. I should like to wish him and his wife everything of the best.

I am really looking forward to a very pleasant debate.

Mr Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to take part in this debate. Firstly, I should like to thank the hon the Minister for the annual report we have received. The report is a good reflection of what occurred in his department during 1987.

I also want to take this opportunity to congratulate the officials of the department who were promoted during the past year. I wish them everything of the best in the great task awaiting them.

I want to compliment the hon the Minister, too, on the large number of his officials who are continuing their studies to qualify themselves better for the tasks they have to perform. I think this is something we must promote in the Public Service.

The report is a most comprehensive one and gives an overall picture of the various housing projects undertaken in an attempt to counter the great need for housing. From the report it can also clearly be seen what the hon the Minister plans for the future when it comes to the provision of housing to people in the lower income groups. These efforts and housing schemes will certainly help many people in the lower income groups to get a home of their own.

Because housing is such a basic need for every individual, any steps taken to make it possible for everyone to own a home are very welcome. The progress made in achieving this objective will definitely be followed with great interest by everybody, except the hon Whip sitting there on the other side muttering to himself.

Do you not want to boycott again?

In terms of paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works is, inter alia, responsible for housing and rent control, this being the subject of my speech.

It is clear that by virtue of the Development and Housing Act, Act 103 of 1985, powers regarding housing and related matters are vested in the department. In terms of section 57 of the Development and Housing Act, the hon the Minister is empowered to approve the repeal of the provisions of any bye-law, regulation or town planning scheme of a local authority. I shall return to the subject of the hon the Minister’s powers later on in my speech.

In considering this department, let me describe it as follows: I see before me now an ox-wagon with a snow-white tent. Pulling the wagon there is a team of 16 red Afrikaner oxen with beautiful laid-back horns. The wagon-leader is Mr Callie Reynecke, the head of the department. The driver is the hon the Minister swinging his whip. What is on this wagon? At this stage I see very little on the wagon. It is for that reason that I want to convey a few ideas to the hon the Minister to see if we cannot get the wagon moving, because it is very important.

It is evident from the report that the provision of housing is an enormously expensive process. The improvement in the quality of life of the residents of Government villages and the various housing schemes offered are proof of this. It is desirable to counter the formation of any further low-grade residential areas at all costs. Relief could be provided to a considerable number of prospective home-owners through State-supported home-ownership savings schemes, 90% housing schemes, and the responsible utilisation of housing utility companies. The investigations at present being undertaken by the department, as well as those already finalised, will hopefully contribute to alleviating the shortage.

All the above efforts and other efforts by the department are appreciated, but I doubt whether sufficient attention is being given to helping social pensioners. The department has committed itself to the promotion of the living conditions of the aged so that they can continue to be a part of the community for as long as possible. With this statement by the department—it appears in paragraph 2 on page 24—no fault can be found. However, the social pensioner’s actual position is such that they can no longer afford an independent lifestyle.

One appreciates that there cannot be unlimited increases in social pensions allowing those who receive such pensions to live independently. It is of the utmost importance that a mechanism be found to assist them so that these people are not driven from their homes because of unavoidable financial obligations, thus becoming a further burden on the State. Unavoidable financial burdens, which I want to bring to the hon the Minister’s attention are property rate payments, basic levies, telephone accounts, general sales tax and TV licences. This is where the hon the Minister can come to the assistance of a social pensioner through the powers vested in him in terms of section 57 of the Development and Housing Act.

I want to divide our aged into two groups on the basis of the circumstances in which our White aged find themselves today, struggling to exist because of economic circumstances and other circumstances beyond their control. One group consists of those aged who were able to provide for their old age and invest their small savings, and to provide accommodation for themselves, such as a flat, through the utility companies, a sectional title flat or whatever one may want to call it. In cases of this nature in which I have been involved, peoples’ circumstances have changed to such an extent in a period of as little as three years, that whereas these people used to be well-to-do and were able to look after themselves, they are now living on the breadline and will have to approach the State for help any day now. That is one group of people.

The second group consists of those aged who are lucky enough to live in a small flat, a room or whatever, built with Government funds, but where they are responsible for the water and electricity they use, sewerage, refuse removal, etc. The average monthly municipal account, based on an average household of two aged, amounts to approximately R70. As a result of inflation and other factors, this burden on the pensioner increases year by year with tariff adjustments. Pensions do not increase to the same extent, and the consequences are clear. In many instances, both now and in the future, pensioners will not be able to live independently. The majority of city councils already provide a rebate on property rates to pensioners falling within a specific income group. This concession is not enough, however. Authorities are not empowered to impose differentiated tariffs.

I should like to ask the hon the Minister urgently to consider suitable measures whereby social pensioners are exempted from payment of basic levies on services such as electricity, water and sewerage, so that in line with the department’s policy, these people can remain independent in their homes and not become a burden on the State, having been forced, through unavoidable financial obligations, to give up their homes and their independence. I am convinced that these concessions to the aged can be carried by every town. In fact, I think that the urban taxpayers who enjoy a regular income owe this to the aged in their towns.

I have specifically said that I am referring to the hon the Minister who is responsible for local government, because I want to make a very specific request to him in his capacity as Minister. Local authorities, as I know them, would really like to do a lot more for their aged through property rate rebates, as I have said. It is incredible that it has taken local authorities in the Transvaal almost 10 years to get the responsible associations to accept special rebates on property rates for pensioners as a subject for discussion in a draft resolution.

What is involved is that the provinces should amend an ordinance to enable local authorities to allow a 50% property rate rebate to pensioners. I ask the hon the Minister to appoint a commission or persons to undertake an in-depth investigation to see if local authorities could allow a 100% property rate rebate. This may not be a lot of money for hon members sitting here today, but for someone living on the breadline a saving of R20 or R30 a month, or even more, is a lot of money.

I want to go one step further. I should like to ask the hon the Minister to recommend that the ordinance be amended so that local authorities can exempt all pensioners in South Africa from payment of basic levies on electricity, water and sewerage. This would also mean that these people would save between R20 and R30 per month. I think the community owes this to its aged who made their contribution, in earlier years, to the growth of such a town.

I also referred earlier to the payment of GST by the aged. The custom that the aged can make free use of bus services operated by local authorities has prevailed for some time now. The SATS gives special travel-cost rebates to the aged. A special interest rate for the aged on fixed deposits has recently been announced. Many thanks, but how long will this remain in force? Why should those aged who only have a social pension, whose buying power is relatively low, be further burdened with GST?

Order! The hon member’s time has expired.

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

I thank the hon Whip on the other side.

We wanted to boycott you!

The hon Whips are obviously sorry for me; they are probably too ashamed because of all the other boycotts. [Interjections.]

The tax collected from the aged by way of GST could surely be absorbed by the State.

Another expense the social pensioner has to face every month is that of the telephone account. For these people, for security reasons and because normally they are subject to deteriorating health, a telephone is a necessity. Newspapers are full of reports of attacks on the aged. Relief should be given to these people as far as the payment of telephone accounts is concerned. TV licence fees should also be suspended.

The department’s report also lays great stress on safety of the aged. I shall not elaborate on that. The department has committed itself to the promotion of home-ownership. The fact that over the years more than 94% of the 140 000 units available for sale have been sold is proof of the need for home-ownership. The report refers to various investigations which have been and still are being carried out into a number of housing aspects. The investigation into the simplification of expropriation procedures and other investigations are to be welcomed. The investigations cover matters which should have received attention a long time ago and which can promote and speed up procedures for achieving the housing objective.

For the past few decades the State has provided low-cost housing, inter alia, by the provision of economic housing. An economic dwelling is erected at a minimum cost and is made available for purchase by the prospective home-owner who qualifies under the scheme. When the preemptive period expires, the owner can sell the house on the open market should the local authority and the department not exercise their pre-emptive right.

To my knowledge, local authorities and the departments concerned with housing in recent years have only exercised their pre-emptive right in a few cases. In the course of time these houses are sold on the open market at amounts considerably higher than the original purchase price. The result is that almost all these houses are no longer available to people in the lower income groups.

The aim of low cost housing is to help people with a low income to obtain accommodation. There will always be people with a low income. Therefore these houses, which were originally erected for this purpose, should be retained for this group of purchasers. When the financial position of someone who originally qualified for an economic house has improved to such an extent that he can afford better accommodation, he must see to it that the economic house which he occupied is not put beyond the reach of the next person who qualifies for it.

Economic housing units which were sold in the late sixties for approximately R5 000, are now sold for R60 000 or more. These houses could have brought great relief to those in the lower income groups who need housing. Would it not be possible, through departmental schemes, for home-owners in the lower income groups to progress from economic housing to State-subsidized home-ownership saving schemes, retaining the economic house at an economic price?

I think the housing need survey, which has ascertained that at present there are 31 000 White people with incomes ranging between R150 and R1 250 a month who qualify, justifies my request. In Middelburg alone there are 225 such people who already qualify.

I note further in the report that the hon Minister is also responsible for museums. I could perhaps draw his attention to a small place near Middelburg called Botshabelo—it is not the Free State Botshabelo. The word Botshabelo means “place of refuge,” and it was established many years ago, in 1860, by a missionary named Alexander Merensky. In later years it became a training college, and still later the town council of Middelburg purchased it and they are restoring it to its former glory. They have also set up a model of an Ndebele village in all its various facets. Because of economic circumstances and the fact that the province can no longer make a contribution to this scheme, this place is now in danger of being privatised, eventually to be lost to the local authority. I want to ask the hon the Minister to give urgent attention to this matter.

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in following the hon member for Middelburg. I want to remark that he is the first speaker for the Official Opposition and has therefore taken over from the hon member for Pietersburg in this particular capacity. I want to congratulate him on this.

The hon member used the two days of self-imposed exile very well and in general made a very good speech. [Interjections.] I only want to react to a few of the statements the hon member made in his speech, particularly as regards social pensioners and the financial problems which affect the quality of life of social pensioners. I believe that there is no disagreement between the hon members on this side and the hon members on that side of the House regarding the fact that the financial pressure on pensioners, and particularly social pensioners, is drastically eroding the quality of life of this category of senior citizens.

However, I must point out to the hon member that this side of the House and the Department of Local Government and Housing are going out of their way to relieve the distress of the social pensioners. Let me give the hon member a few examples.

When rent control was phased out, this was done with specific provisos, namely that rent control would still apply to certain categories of social pensioners. Rent control was further phased out with the proviso—the hon member for Sea Point made this input—that persons over the age of 70 years would remain protected lessees.

The department went on to lighten the burden of the social pensioner by providing that where housing schemes were erected, the rentals had to be determined according to the incomes of the residents of those particular homes. The rental is determined at 5% of the incomes of residents. In effect this means that at the end of the day the fund in respect of development and housing subsidises interest and capital redemption to a phenomenal extent in order to relieve the rent burden of social pensioners.

I want to refer to another facet in which this department has shown its compassion for the social pensioner, namely the recently announced measures which make it possible for senior citizens to make loans from the department at a very low cost for security purposes. To summarise this point, I want to tell the hon member for Middel-burg that the problems of senior citizens are being considered compassionately, as regards the jurisdiction of this department, and it is doing everything in its power to relieve the financial burden on this category of people. Basically this is the only way in which I can and want to react to the relatively constructive speech of the hon member for Middelburg.

This year Parliament made R294 million available for the eight programmes falling under the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. If one reads the annual report, one is again struck by the wide variety of activities dealt with by the department. At this stage the activities of the department are aimed mainly at the financing and provision of welfare housing. Administratively the department is also engaged in administering the various State-aided subsidy schemes for home-ownership. Personally I would very much have liked to have stood up here this afternoon and discussed the transfer of the functions of the local authorities to the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. I hear this is in the process of being finalised, and I hope this matter will be very fruitfully discussed in forthcoming debates.

The department has been in existence for four years now. On behalf of this side of the House I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on the exceptional achievements of the department under his guidance. We want to assure the hon the Minister of our continued support for the difficult task resting on his shoulders.

The aspects of rent control, urban renewal, slum clearance, the administration of own housing and local government matters all centre around the senior officials of the department. Wherever these aspects are dealt with either administratively or in practice, there one finds Mr Callie Reynecke, Mr Frank Gerber, Mr Neville Karsen and Mr Jan Koekemoer. We on this side of the House wish to place on record our great appreciation for the work of these senior officials of the department.

It is so easy to assume that housing is a nonrecurrent process. It is assumed that it is a building with a roof over it and nothing is further from the truth. There is virtually no State activity which has as many social and socio-economic consequences for the entire national economy as the building of a single house.

When we consider the creation of security which is connected with housing, the care of the aged in social and welfare projects, the inflation monster which is controlled by home-ownership, the stimulation of the construction and the manufacturing industries and the fact that housing forms the foundation of an orderly and stable community life, then I want to tell the hon the Minister and the departmental officials that the department is not simply building a house. The department is regulating a community. They are in the vanguard of the fight to maintain order, stability and peace in South Africa.

Next I want to refer to the ministerial representatives and express my thanks for the work they do. I think they are an essential link between the local community and the department in order to bring certain specific problems to the attention of the Minister.

The Development and Housing Board is the pillar and the think-tank in the department. I think that if one were to draw up a list in South Africa today of the 10 people who have done most for housing in South Africa, the names of Messrs Willie Marais, Boet van Straaten, Myers, Van Zyl and Swart would appear on it.

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

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

I want to make special mention of the Development and Housing Board. Owing to a shortage of time I cannot refer now to the extensive functions undertaken by them on behalf of the department in respect of the housing shortage.

Next I want to dwell for a moment on certain policy aspects with regard to the Development and Housing Fund in terms of the relevant Bill. The Development and Housing Fund is the engine-room of the department. The innermost nature of the fund is that it is a revolving fund. It is a fund which is supplemented by parliamentary appropriation. It is also a fund which is supplemented by repaid interest and capital, and it is a fund which is supplemented by interest earned on its own investments.

In 1987 when the fund was established, its initial balance was R55 million. Owing to the addition and the flowing back of capital it is expected that the net balance in the fund will amount to R105 million for the 1988-89 financial year.

On the other hand there are approved capital projects for welfare housing totalling R119 million. In saying this I want to tell the House that it seems to me that the capital is available to build welfare housing, but there is a problem, and I suspect that the accent in welfare housing has shifted from the provision of capital for the erection of welfare housing to the operating subsidies which the Department of Health Services and Welfare provides for these projects.

It seems to me that there are insufficient subsidies to make the operating of new welfare projects possible. Unfortunately this has resulted in there being real distress in the community, particularly as regards Category C welfare housing, which cannot be relieved owing to a shortage of subsidies.

I want to argue that ways and means must be devised to swing around and prop up the operating subsidies which totalled R7 million last year, as happened with the Development and Housing Fund, by turning it into a revolving fund so that, as regards the operating subsidies of welfare projects, the benefit of a returning cash input or at least a constant cash input in the fund, over and above the parliamentary appropriation can be enjoyed. There are various ways in which this could possibly be done.

With all due respect I want to draw the attention of the hon the Minister and his department to the fact that a component exists in the determining of the rental formulae of State-aided housing schemes which makes provision for arrears rentals. Over the years local authorities, welfare organisations and utility companies have never utilised these funds to prop up arrears rentals. I want to ask that we move in the direction of mustering these funds and using them as a starting balance for a revolving fund as regards the operating subsidies of social and welfare projects. This must be further supplemented annually by a minimal levy on the rentals of State-aided hostels. I am calling this a minimal levy.

The position will be that there will be a starting balance and that there will be a constant flow to this operating subsidy revolving fund, so that the real distress which exists in my and other hon members’ constituencies can be relieved.

In conclusion I shall refer briefly to the 33,3% subsidy scheme for first-time home-buyers. This scheme is so popular that the financial obligation is becoming a problem. According to my information approximately R22 million will have to be provided this year to finance this subsidy scheme. I ask myself whether we should not reconsider the purposes of subsidies. The purpose of a subsidy is to achieve home-ownership.

As the scheme is being administered at the moment, single and married people can apply for this form of State aid. Has the time not come for us to reintroduce our subsidies and say that this must be aimed at creating housing for married people, in that a house is provided which gives a family social and economic security, instead of for individuals.

I merely want to mention the fact I raised with the hon the Minister before. Please, let us see whether we cannot make this scheme applicable not only to new houses but also—there is a great need for this and great justification for this—to existing structures and existing houses so that first-time home-buyers are not forced always to buy new houses, and provision can also be made in this category for existing housing. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, it is my pleasure to follow on the hon member for Bellville. I think his speech was largely non-controversial and I find it very easy and a pleasure to associate myself with much of what he had to say this afternoon.

I would also like to convey the good wishes and thanks of this party to the officials and Director-General of this department, and I would also like to congratulate the hon the Minister on an informative report concerning the activities of his department.

I would like to start by quoting from that report, which in fact quotes the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act in which the universal right of the various population communities to pursue their own way of life is acknowledged, and resulting from this, matters of specific concern to the White group are controlled by this House.

The Department of Local Government and Housing represents one of five departments within this legislature. As is well-known, the PFP has always opposed this isolation of racial own affairs, and views it as the entrenchment of apartheid in our Constitution. Not only are we opposed on political or ideological grounds, but we also believe that the separation of own affairs on the basis of race is both impractical and divisive. It promotes competition among races for scarce resources and ultimately leads to a deterioration in race relations.

It is, for example, not possible to distinguish between own and general affairs in economic matters. The GDP of the South African economy results from the input and efforts of all South Africans. It is indivisible and cannot be allocated to race groups according to their input.

I raise this matter as I believe that certain aspects of local government are equally indivisible. Actions taken in the interests of one group have an impact on the affairs of another group, and we in this House must be aware that many of our decisions cannot be taken in a vacuum. In many instances decisions taken here will adversely affect members of another group, and this is merely a manifestation of this contrived distinction between own and general affairs.

On Monday and Tuesday of this week we experienced, for the first time, joint sittings of members of the three Houses of Parliament to discuss provincial affairs. This party was highly critical of these procedures, but I would like to acknowledge one significant change. For the first time we had public debate between Black and White South Africans about the inequalities caused by apartheid.

I raise this because in the Cape provincial debate beach apartheid was raised most frequently by hon members of the House of Representatives and the House of Delegates. Their total rejection of beach apartheid, often based on personal experiences of deprivation and humiliation, was compelling. We had the case of an hon member of the House of Representatives having to explain to his young son why the law does not permit them to fish off the Strand beaches …

But they can speak for themselves! [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, if this does not illustrate the inhumanity of beach apartheid, then I do not know what will. [Interjections.] Beach apartheid is enforced by White local authorities, and hence I raise the matter here. It is those local authorities that erect the “Whites only” signs. They patrol the beaches and ask people of colour to leave. They in fact have to do the dirty work of this Government. I ask the hon the Minister to reflect on the damage that these actions do to race relations.

Some local authorities have in fact gone ahead and opened their beaches to all races. Examples are the Cape Town City Council and the Divisional Council of the Cape. I was a member of the Divisional Council of the Cape during the time that decision was taken, and I am proud to have been associated with it.

Take a drive, however, along the Strand beachfront. The “Whites only” signs are an affront to human dignity. They represent the lowest form of racism, something of which the Whites in this country can only be ashamed. Yet it is our White local authorities which execute these laws. Interestingly enough, I am not aware of a Coloured local authority having to perform a similar task. I believe the reason for that is quite simple. The vast majority of beach frontage areas fall within areas under White jurisdiction. I do not believe I need explain why that is so.

Mr Chairman, it seems to me that every avenue must be explored to end this injustice, and although the ultimate responsibility rests with the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, I believe that this hon Minister, who is responsible for White local authorities, also has to use his influence for change.

The second area in which the interests of racially determined own affairs overlap is that of the allocation of land. It has been suggested that group areas could be or should be an own affair. I am totally opposed to this as a decision taken in the interests of one group will often have an effect on the interests of another group. We live in dynamic times. Present allocations of land in terms of group areas legislation cannot remain static. Already land allocation is grossly unfair, and the position will worsen as a result of, among other things, differing rates of population growth. Should the Coloured people require more land this will have to be taken from another group—probably the Whites.

Now, I would ask, who is going to be the arbitrator? Local authorities, representing their own ratepayers, will be hard pressed not to relinquish anything. Acting contrary to the wishes of the people they represent will certainly not be in their interests.

For many years now local authorities have had to contend with the squatting problem, and for many years their response has been to demolish shacks and forcibly to drive people from their homes. Such actions have been a sad reflection on those local authorities. They have caused bitterness and resentment and have tarnished our image abroad.

There is an unwillingness on the part of any individual local authority to provide facilities for Black squatters, and their reason is quite simple. If one shows so-called weakness by providing the necessary facilities, Blacks squatting in other municipal areas will be attracted.

So once again White local authorities take the gap allowed by Government policy, and hound people off their land. Once again, their actions impact upon the interests of another race group, and self-interest within the ambit of own affairs creates division, not unity.

Mr Chairman, I should like now to refer to the issue of Lawaaikamp as a case in point. The plight of some 1700 Black residents in this area has been much politicised and, in fact, last night was featured on television. As we all know, here we have a settled community some of whom have reportedly lived in the area for 47 years, and who, despite the development of a Black township nearby, do not wish to move. As I mentioned in a debate earlier this week, I do not take issue with the hon member for George relating to the actual facilities that have been provided for these people. However, that is their decision.

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

Certainly.

Has the hon member visited Lawaaikamp?

Yes, I have. In fact, I was there recently, and I want to recount what one old man told me. He told me that he had been forcibly removed four times since living there, and that this time it would require a bulldozer to get him out. That was a gentleman aged 83.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member is discussing Black housing now. The area he is referring to has been proclaimed for Coloured housing and my point of order pertains to the fact that it has no bearing on this debate. [Interjections.]

Order! If I understand the hon member for Pinelands correctly, he is referring to the George local authority’s involvement. However, his time has unfortunately expired and he will not be able to continue with that.

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

Mr Chairman, I thank the hon Whip.

I have raised this question because it is an issue that requires enforcement by the George Municipality which has reportedly stated that if the people do not move by the end of May, they will have to seek a court injunction.

One ray of light in this whole issue for me was that, according to the Cape Times of this morning, it would appear that there is some reluctance among the officials regarding this forced removal, and the hon member for George was quoted as having stated that the officials are hoping that the disputed settlement may be declared a grey area. [Interjections.]

That is an untrue statement!

Mr Chairman, I am merely quoting from a report in the Cape Times. [Interjections.] However, if that is not the truth, then I am disappointed because I saw it as a ray of light in this whole situation.

I should like to quote the report further as stating that the mayor of George told a Press conference yesterday that none of the Lawaaikamp residents would be forcibly removed. If these people are not moved and if they are allowed to continue to stay in a so-called grey area, I understand that it will then be up to the House of Representatives to become involved in the decision. It appears highly likely that this will be favourably received by that House because the Labour Party have themselves assured the inhabitants of Lawaaikamp that they would be allowed to remain. On 22 July last year the Labour Party made the following statement.

The situation we have here is one where Black people wish to continue to stay in the area and Coloured people reportedly support their staying in the area, but where a White municipality is being forced to move them in terms of Government legislation.

Today I handed three petitions to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning containing a number of signatures from people both inside and outside the George area. However, I also want to point out that many of the signatories in this regard were Coloured people.

I want now to refer to another case in which the rights of groups overlap and conflict with one another. In the Sunday Times of last week there was a report headed “Former Minister Wiley’s son said to lead watchdogs”. I quote as follows from that report:

It is further reported that it is the intention of this group to harass the Black people living in the area by doing such things as reporting minor transgressions like the selling of firewood without a licence, something the squatters do in an effort to eke out a living in this area. They are further reported to have said that they will run the squatters out of town.

In contrast, the chairman of the local civic association is reported to have said that people in Noordhoek are evenly divided on the issue. He concluded that many of the squatters had lived in the area for a long time, and that the sensible solution would be to set up some form of village for the squatters.

What is to be done? That is the question. I believe that the municipalities in the area have to get together, because one thing of which I am certain is that there is a crying need for Black housing in the Southern Cape outside Khayelitsha. Someone is going to have to make a sacrifice. As this is a White area, the hon the Minister of Local Government and Housing bears at least part of the responsibility for dealing with this problem. Moving people to Khayelitsha is no answer. When men earn R10 a day, no-one can expect them to pay R7,40 for transport to work.

I believe that separate, racial, own affairs government is impractical, undesirable and fundamentally unjust. Addressing the extended public committee earlier this week, the Administrator acknowledged that the Executive Committee had to function within the laws of the land, but he also said that, despite this, the province was committed to removing hurtful racial discrimination. I call for an equal commitment from this hon Minister.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pinelands has merely reminded us once more of the fact that the PFP is opposed to own affairs departments, something we already know. [Interjections.] He has now confirmed that he is very strongly opposed to that. The NP believes in an own community life, own schools and everything that goes hand in hand with that. [Interjections.] I should like to draw the attention of hon members to the fact that during the past few days hon members of the House of Representatives reproached the PFP-controlled Cape Town City Council for not looking after the interests of the Coloureds properly. In mentioning that, let me ask hon members who has the best knowledge of the interests of each group? Are they not the people who are in the best position to look after the interests of their own people? It is therefore perhaps a good thing to re-examine the composition of these own affairs departments.

Let me focus the attention of hon members on the fact that the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works was established to implement the own affairs functions described in paragraphs 5, 6 and 13 of Schedule 1 of the Constitution. The own affairs of the White population group are controlled by the House of Assembly as the legislative authority and by the Ministers’ Council as the executive authority.

The Administration: House of Assembly consists of the following five departments: Health Services and Welfare; Education and Culture; Agriculture and Water Supply; Local Government, Housing and Works; and Budgetary and Auxiliary Services. The Department of Local Government, Housing and Works is a two-pronged department, ie local government on the one hand and housing and works on the other, and I should like to confine myself to the first.

I want to point out to hon members that this department plays an extremely important role within the own affairs context. That is the sphere in which all four of the other departments also function, and in that context the importance of third-tier government cannot be over-emphasised.

Since the inception of the first rural body in Stellenbosch in 1682—the establishment of the first Cape municipal committee in 1786—up to the large and comprehensive local authorities of today, there has been a very clear line of development that runs like a golden thread through all these bodies, that of local involvement, ie participation by those who live and work in a specific area, the local inhabitants. Throughout the centuries this has remained a fundamental principle in our political set-up, and today this is even more true than it was then. I am referring to the principle of constitutional development or reform, as it is called today, which covers three centuries and which even our children will still be shaping in the future.

These days local government, in some or other form, controls the lives of more than 90% of the White population from the cradle to the grave. No well-ordered and progressive community could function without the services of a local authority. It simply could not survive.

Local authorities are locality-orientated; they are conversant with local problems, conditions and needs. Here personal involvement is the cornerstone in the rendering of service. To demonstrate the importance and scope of local authorities, let me refer to the budgets of a few large municipalities. Germiston’s budget is R254,6 million; Johannesburg has a budget of R1 351 million; Cape Town’s budget is R1014 million; Port Elizabeth’s budget is R360 million and that of Pretoria is R861 million. Thus one could go on listing the figures. In contrast the overall budget of the Cape Province is R2 746 million. Hon members will therefore see that the budgets of a few of the large local authorities are equal to that of the province as a whole. They are rendering a selfless service for which we owe them a vote of thanks.

In addition the majority of local authorities render some or other form of assistance to Black or Coloured local authorities or town councils, whatever the case may be. This applies to all departments—the department of the town clerk, health services, the Treasury, works, etc. The functions of all these departments are aimed at achieving success. These established bodies— one could also call them mother municipalities— look after the interests of Black and Coloured local authorities, helping them to function properly and successfully.

The success of regional services councils depends on the dedication of local authorities. The coming municipal election is a very clear demonstration of this. Specifically because of the importance of third-tier authorities, the CP has already announced its platform or plan of attack. [Interjections.] In the future our city councillors therefore have an extensive and important task to perform. They have a great responsibility. We must therefore also appeal to municipal voters to ensure that they elect councillors who are equipped and competent for the task awaiting them. [Interjections.]

Liaison with the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works is of the utmost importance, because it is the hon the Minister and his department who have to look after the interests and see to the needs of third-tier government. Of equal importance are the ministerial representatives. I trust that we shall develop the post of ministerial representative so that it achieves its proper stature, because these ministerial representatives can actually play a major role, particularly when they function at the level of third-tier government.

For the 1987-88 tax year the department spent R83,8 on White housing. In this local authorities also played a tremendously important role as agents for the Government, in selecting applications, allocating loans, collecting monthly payments, providing serviced stands and everything that that entails.

The hon the Minister’s interest in, and sound knowledge of, local authorities, is a great asset. It is interesting to note that all the recommendations in the reports of the Venter Commission on township development have broadly been incorporated in new ordinances by the Transvaal and Cape Provinces. An inhibiting factor, however, is that the provision contained in paragraph 6 of Schedule 1 of the Constitution of 1983 has not yet been implemented. Own affairs local authority functions are still being controlled at present by the various provincial administrations.

According to the 1987 annual report it is envisaged that the transfer will take place early in 1988. I want to state that many functions have already been transferred from the first to the second tier of government and that in the process second-tier government has to bear a very heavy burden, with officials really having to shoulder an extraordinary load, something for which we wish to thank them.

I think it is extremely important for these functions to be transferred. The Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly is the foundation for own affairs. Subsequent structures must have a sound foundation. We should like to help build and reinforce these structures so that they can remain as beacons for succeeding generations.

That is why we are advocating that these functions, which are to be transferred, should be rounded off, because as soon as these functions are allocated to the department to which they belong, ie the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works, I think it would be the right time for our hon Minister and his department to investigate the devolution of further functions to local authorities. We believe that there are many functions that could very effectively be dealt with by local authorities because they are properly equipped and have the knowledge and expertise to implement those functions at the local level.

We should like to wish the hon the Minister and his department everything of the best for the year ahead.

Mr Chairman, I should like to confine myself to an aspect which the hon member for Walvis Bay just happened to mention in passing, ie the coming election for local authorities on 26 October.

We know that on various occasions the NP has held conferences on this matter, ie on 13 September 1986, Saturday, 28 February 1987 and on 5 September 1987. These conferences ultimately gave rise to a thick manual on how municipal elections should be conducted. I quote what Mr Olaus van Zyl had to say. He said:

It is also interesting, however, that at one of these conferences they recommended dealing with the public sector in a specific way. We have the extraordinary situation of the hon the Minister of Defence having stated in a directive:

Referring to the participation of teachers, on the other hand, the hon the Minister of Education and Culture has said that they should not make public statements about matters which could promote or prejudice the interests of a political party or embarrass the department.

If the NP’s ideas are those reflected in its manual, surely that is party politics and surely they are then telling teachers and those in the Defence Force they are not allowed to participate in local government affairs.

On the other hand, various hon Ministers expressed opinions on that issue. The hon the Minister of Defence, amongst others, said the following at Modderfontein recently, and I quote from The Citizen:

He then went on to challenge the CP by saying:

That is what he told the CP there. [Interjections.]

I now want to ask the hon the Minister what the NP’s latest decision in this regard is and whether they are going to leave every constituency in the hands of the divisional executive. It seems to me that party has become completely indecisive. On the one hand the hon the Minister of Defence challenges us by saying: “Come out into the open.” On the other hand, now that we have accepted that challenge, particularly in the rural areas of the Transvaal, they have taken to their heels.

According to newspaper reports the previous chairman of the divisional executive of Pietersburg has flatly refused to stand under the NP banner. [Interjections.] The present chairman, who is also a city councillor, says that politics should be kept out of council affairs. He says the NP is going to adopt the “best man” policy. [Interjections.] Let me now tell that hon Minister that it is not going to work, because the voters are going to put certain questions to prospective candidates, for example: What is your standpoint and that of your party, in the first instance, about the Group Areas Act? Are you in favour of residential areas which are open to all races? Surely that is what it is all about. They are going to ask the prospective candidate: Are you or your party in favour of opening up places of entertainment or recreational areas to all races? They are going to ask him: Are you in favour of local government franchise for people of colour in business areas or wards where they own property or in residential areas which are open to all races? They are going to ask the prospective candidate whether he is in favour of regional services councils with their underlying philosophy of redistribution of wealth, mixed third-tier government and an additional tax burden on John Citizen. They are going to ask that candidate whether he is in favour of ultimate Black domination, as the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs said a short while ago to foreign correspondents, according to Friday’s Die Burger: “Blanke oorheersing sal ten einde loop.” Those are the questions that will be asked. Those are the bothersome questions, and for that reason the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning was quite right when he said, at Gordon’s Bay, that it was of the utmost importance to elect councillors whose policies accorded with the patterns of life that voters wanted to have maintained. [Interjections.]

Let us now look at where the NP stands on this issue. In Pietersburg there is a former NP candidate who stood in the general election last year. He is now a member of the President’s Council. He took part in the debate on the President’s Council’s report on the Group Areas Act and lodged an outright plea to have that Act accepted as such. He is still doing so in Pietersburg today, and this applies equally to the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act. He repeated this at a meeting recently. This is the sort of thing that is at stake in the election on 26 October of this year, because in contrast to these standpoints adopted by NP leaders, the CP confidently states its policy. We on this side state unequivocally that we are going to participate in order to get the majority of elected members elected to local authorities because, in the future, those city councils will have to take important, politically significant decisions. Decisions on public facilities, White residential areas and central business areas will, to an increasing extent, rest with city councils. It will therefore be the CP’s task to protect the rights of Whites in their own communities. That is why this side of the House is opposed to regional services councils. We shall dismantle them, as the hon member for Lichtenburg rightly said. We shall dismantle this tricameral Parliament, but in the meantime, within the framework we have been forced into, we shall negotiate the best possible dispensation for our voters at large. [Interjections.] The CP will guarantee our people’s community life within the areas of jurisdiction of our local authorities by implementing influx control. We therefore state unequivocally that non-White employees in White cities and towns will be strictly limited and controlled. We therefore demand an own community life for our people. [Interjections.] CP local authorities will give urgent attention to the housing crisis which has developed amongst the White community under this Government, particularly that amongst our aged, indigent and young White married couples. Just look around in cities such as Pretoria and see what young White married couples have to pay today for a plot and a simple two-bedroomed house.

The CP will strive for effective, honest and clean administration at local government level. The quality of service rendered must also be acceptable, but our taxpayers must also be able to afford that service. When the CP is in control of the Government, it will empower local authorities to take effective steps to eliminate things like escort agencies and other morally corrupt practices from our community—we cannot permit things to go on the way they are at present. [Interjections.]

The CP is therefore not afraid to say frankly and unequivocally that it will fight for the rights of the Afrikaner and other Whites so that they can go on living in safety and prosperity under their own local authorities and under conditions which make life worth living for our people and offer our children a future in South Africa.

Hear, hear!

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pietersburg put certain questions here to the hon the Minister. I am not going to react to them now, but I do just want to react, at the outset, to a statement he made, ie that when, if ever, the CP came to power it intended to abolish the RSCs and this Parliament. My question to them today is how precisely they are going to manage that. If we look at their conduct over the past two days—conduct characterised by boycotts—how are they going to succeed in changing the system if they do not want to speak to people of colour in an endeavour to bring about democratic change?

Don’t you worry about that! [Interjections.]

We expect to receive an answer from them. The whole of South Africa is waiting to receive an answer. [Interjections.]

I should like to exchange a few ideas about the housing challenge of the future and certain relevant planning guidelines. Firstly, hon members must permit me to refer to the annual report of the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works. I specifically want to mention the composition of the Housing Data Bank, as described on page 39 of the report:

In my view this is a very important development which has taken place, since the provision of housing needs is the first basic step in the process of providing housing. As a result a purposeful policy can be determined and implemented. On the strength of comprehensive information from the Housing Data Bank housing bottlenecks are identified and future policy is formulated.

It is an accepted fact, however, that at present our country is undergoing a process of urbanisation. The expectation is that in the years ahead this process will increasingly gain momentum. This statement of fact is borne out by the figures provided by the Commission of Inquiry into Township Establishment and Related Matters, also called the Venter Commission. It is estimated that by the year 2000, 90% of all Whites will be living and working in the urban complexes. The estimated figure for White urban dwellers by the year 2000 is approximately 5,34 million. These figures confirm the statement that in the future increasing demands are going to be made on the State and the private sector to supply White housing in urban complexes. Accepting the figures given for the population increase, one can rightly ask: Where and how are people going to be meaningfully accommodated in the future, particularly in the light of the increase in population, with less and less land being available for proper township development?

From what has already been said, it is clear that in the planning of housing new criteria will have to be investigated. One will also have to succeed in providing proper housing and home-ownership to all members of the White population. Bearing these factors in mind, it is essential, in the years ahead, that we make every effort to plan seriously on the basis of the data available to us. As a result of the future scarcity of land, it will not be possible to continue adopting the present conventional method for housing people in this country. This does not mean, of course, that someone cannot be properly accommodated if he does not have a plot of a certain minimum size and does not have certain facilities.

Proper housing and the ideal of home-ownership can take place on a high-density basis if correct planning is done in good time. The needs of high-density housing have already been focussed on by several Government commissions. In this regard I refer to the Niemann, Fouche and Venter Commissions. Not only would high-density housing be a cost-saving and cost-effective measure, but from a social point of view it would also enable families to obtain acceptable accommodation in accordance with their specific needs.

Let me also mention that from a security point of view high-density housing is much safer, particularly when it comes to the housing of the aged. Internal sports facilities will increasingly have to be created on a high-density basis to save valuable land. I want to state that the planning of high-density housing is one of the keys for solving the future housing problem. Given this fact, I want to state that even now local authorities, and authorities entrusted with township development, will have to begin reviewing restrictive regulations and any building regulations which impede the development of high-density housing, with a view to making this possible.

A survey conducted a few years ago into the average size of families, indicated that 25,2% of all families had no children, while 23,1% had one child, 27,1% two children and 15,1% three children. According to these figures almost half of all White family units, or 48,3%, consisted of three and less than three persons at the time of the survey, while approximately 25% consisted of only two individuals per family unit. This incontrovertibly indicates that there is no sound basis for the generally accepted norm that a house must have at least three bedrooms, and in the future provision will increasingly have to be made for smaller units to meet the needs of all the people.

The ideal shared by most people in this country is that of having proper accommodation in acceptable surroundings. It is unfortunately true that in the future, with a view to ensuring that all people can be properly accommodated in this country, individual preferences will have to take a back seat to the general interests of others.

I hope and pray that the policy-makers in the housing field will display the necessary far-sightedness—I know they will—to make this country, in the field of housing, a model for the rest of the world.

Mr Chairman, let me say at once that this afternoon the hon member Mr Danie van Gend made a very important contribution to this debate. He touched upon an extremely important matter when he said that in the light of the limited availability of land we should increasingly have recourse to the provision of high-density housing and that we would inevitably have to pay attention to the size of stands, etc. With a view to future planning it is also imperative for us to obtain further support from the private sector. At a later stage I shall be replying in more detail to the hon member’s speech, and I want to thank him sincerely for the contribution he made.

I also want to thank the other hon members who have participated in the debate thus far. Generally their contributions have been very constructive There were a few exceptions here and there, however, to which I shall return at a later stage.

Firstly I want to deal with the question of housing. One frequently thinks about which things in one’s life give one a sense of security and peace of mind. When a child is still under his parents’ roof, whether he is at school or on holiday, he knows that he has a place to stay, wherever he may be. If he does not have a home, he still has the assurance that he will be looked after in a children’s home. He also has the assurance that he is safe there, can get his meals there and can live there.

Let me say today that the Government and the department regard that as a priority. Looking at what has been accomplished since the establishment of this department under the Ministers’ Council of the Administration: House of Assembly, I should like to tell hon members that during the period 1 September 1984 to 30 April of this year more than R15 million has been spent on children’s homes, providing safe refuge to more than 300 children in this short period, apart from the fact that more than R4,5 million has been spent on the establishment of créches for preschool children. I am therefore confirming that it is a priority to ensure that children also have peace of mind if they cannot get this in their parental homes.

Mr Chairman, when one is young or gets married at a young age, one’s ideal is to own one’s own home. The excitement of having one’s own home—a home for oneself and one’s loved ones—is a very important element in the ideals one cherishes, including those one generally cherishes in regard to one’s fatherland. Let me say that that is also a priority as far as the Government and this department are concerned. I should like to refer—the hon members for Bellville and Middelburg, amongst others, also referred to this—to the specific financial aid schemes administered by this department. I am only going to deal with one—the 33,3% interest subsidy scheme. At a later stage I shall say more about the home-ownership scheme and the 90% loan scheme. The 33,3% interest subsidy scheme is now approximately in its fifth year. To those individuals who do not have any form of housing assistance or an interest subsidy from any other source, it offers an opportunity to become homeowners. Between November 1985 and the end of March of this year this department has paid out R33 122 600 to White first-time home-owners by way of subsidies. At present there are more than 12 700 participants in this scheme. During the past financial year R17,794 million has been spent on this scheme.

I also think it can rightly be said that it is not only a priority to help young people with housing, but that we have succeeded in achieving and promoting some of the goals of this scheme. One of these goals involves the promotion of more modest housing standards. The hon member Mr Van Gend did, in fact, refer to that.

The White housing supply has progressively been augmented. Home-ownership has, in particular, been promoted amongst young people. Homes have been brought within the reach of many people, and during periods of economic decline the building industry has been stimulated.

I should like to say that there have been specific abuses, which I also dealt with last year during the discussion of this Vote. Representations have been made from various quarters, inevitably from the private sector, in particular, in which proposals have been made, amongst other things, to have the maximum costs for building improvements increased above the present cost limit of R40 000. It was consequently decided to review the 33,3% interest subsidy scheme for first-time home-owners and to introduce the following adjustments. The existing maximum building costs for improvements have been increased from R40 000 to R45 000. A further maximum amount of R5 000 will be permitted in the case of dwellings for which the topography of the land on which the dwelling is built or the situation of the land is such as to necessitate the additional costs.

The maximum total cost of the property, including the cost of the stand, the dwelling, administrative costs, tenure and consultancy fees may not exceed R65 000, except perhaps in exceptional cases which, in my view, are justified, and then a limit of R75 000 may not be exceeded. The interest subsidies will still be payable on the maximum amount of R40 000. The scheme is still regarded as a bridging measure, and with the commencement of the amended scheme the term of five years will be extended to seven years.

In the case of new applicants, during the first two years the monthly payment will still be equal to a subsidy of 33,3%, as is payable at present by the existing participants. In annually decreasing proportionate amounts the balance of the subsidy will be spread over the last five years, and payment will take place on a monthly basis. What is important—I should like to place this on record here—is that the amount of the subsidy will not be more than 33,3% of the monthly interest portion of the payment calculated over the present term of five years. For all loans involving building costs of R20 000 and less, a fixed subsidy will be paid. After two years these monthly payments will also be spread over the remaining five years in equally decreasing annual amounts. If the building costs of a dwelling are R20 000 or less, the cost of the stand may either partially or wholly be incorporated in the calculation of the subsidy.

†Mr Chairman, a further important aspect is that should a first-time home-owner be transferred he may enjoy the benefit of the subsidy for the remaining period on a new dwelling at his new station. For the sake of clarity I want to point out that people who are currently participating in existing interest subsidy schemes are also included as far as the remaining period of the original five years is concerned. I am convinced that the moderate increase of the building costs from R40 000 to R45 000 will partially compensate for the eroding effect inflation has had on building costs since the determination of the R40 000 limit, and that the maximum all-inclusive cost of R65 000 will eliminate possible misuses in cases in which the building costs were circumvented—for example, by lowering the valuation of the land.

In general, land is expensive and it calls for precision planning in order to remain within the budget of the comprehensive limit of R65 000. I trust that this new limit will stimulate development so that the cost of properties will be reduced by means of the application of more realistic standards of services and smaller erf sizes. The hon member Mr Van Gend also referred to this aspect. All the other qualifying measures which are not affected by the aforementioned remain. The adapted interest subsidy scheme will take effect on 1 August 1988. The application of the scheme goes hand in hand with the needs of first-time home-owners for which I am responsible in the housing field. It has also been accepted by the Ministers entrusted with housing that their departments and administrations should decide on the further application of the scheme, and I am applying my mind to this.

*In this connection let me say that I am also very seriously considering the extent of this subsidy scheme to existing housing in many cases. I am also saying this with reference to what the hon member for Bellville said. There are specific financial implications that have to be considered, but I hope to be in a position to make a further announcement about this soon. I must first, however, give the matter my careful consideration. Firstly I should just like to discuss the matter with our committee of Ministers responsible for housing.

Mr Chairman, I referred to the security one has. In dealing with housing in the various phases of one’s life, it is necessary for me to refer to the aged. What concerns the aged is having a roof over their heads and being cared for when they become debilitated. Then a place to live, and particularly the certainty that they will have such a place, is what gives them peace of mind in their daily lives, whilst uncertainty about that constantly gnaws at them. The Government, the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly and the department also regard this specific aspect as a priority.

More than 70% of this department’s expenditure on housing is expenditure on welfare housing. The expenditure on welfare housing during the past three financial years was R54,58 million, R41, 1 million and R68,37 million respectively, ie more than R164 million. In addition a special housing project to the tune of R200 million was launched, and during 1984-85 R140 million of that was spent on the construction of 4 731 units. The following year 639 units were constructed at a cost of R25 million, with 1 383 units constructed at a cost of R35 million in 1986-87. Provision was made for welfare housing to accommodate 1 079 people.

Since the establishment of this department a great deal of attention has, in fact, been given to the provision of housing and to the housing needs of the Whites. I shall be referring to that at a later stage, because there have also been complaints that we do not give attention to the housing needs of the Whites. I want to point out to hon members that in the financial years since the inception of this department an amount of R405,523 million has been spent on the establishment of 9 865 units for Whites. [Interjections.]

Housing is a priority, and since the NP has been in power for 40 years and is celebrating its 40th anniversary tomorrow … [Interjections.] I am glad hon members opposite are also saying “Hear, hear!” [Interjections.] There is a further point I should like to make in regard to the field we are now dealing with, and in a moment I shall also be referring to the hon member for Pietersburg.

Throughout that period housing, amongst other things, has constantly been a priority. Since April 1950, R1 322 827 has been spent by the State on housing for the White population group, 104 305 dwelling units having been constructed for Whites. [Interjections.] That is an unprecedented achievement for a country with South Africa’s means. These figures do not include the various subsidies which are also paid in regard to White housing.

Apart from this the State has, over the years, also sold houses, which it has constructed, to the Whites. Of the houses made available since 1922, 131 275 of the 139 346 saleable dwelling units have already been sold. This means that 94% of the houses which could be sold, have indeed been sold on very reasonable terms. This has helped to increase the quality of life for many people. It has also helped Whites, who have had to struggle, to build up their assets. It has given them some substance. It has placed them in a position in which they could also leave their assets to their children and their heirs. That is why I should like to refer to the hon member for Pietersburg. I find it regrettable. The hon member for Middelburg really made a very good speech this afternoon. That hon member, however, is chairman of the municipal committee of the Official Opposition which published its election manifesto on the municipal elections. It would be a good thing if the perspective which the hon member evidenced in his speech this afternoon could be reflected in the election manifesto.

The hon member for Pietersburg also referred to the fact that in its election manifesto the CP stated that it would give urgent attention to White housing. In the same paragraph it is stated:

[Interjections.] In the second paragraph, under item 12 of the election manifesto, it is stated:

Let me also quote paragraph three under item 12 in the manifesto:

Mr Chairman, I respectfully want to say, from what I have indicated, that housing is a priority in South Africa. To draw this distinction in this election manifesto is unreasonable. From the data I have presented to hon members it is surely clear that over the years housing has been a priority as far as the Government is concerned. I think that the distinction drawn by hon CP members in the election manifesto is …

Correct!

… unfair. It is not fair! The hon member for Lichtenburg should perhaps just bear in mind the other matters to which I referred. [Interjections.]

Order!

If hon members were to look at the figures, they would see that since April 1950—I have just quoted the relevant passage— more than 104 000 dwelling units have been made available for Whites. This is over and above the subsidies which have been granted. More than R1 300 million has been spent on this. Since more than R405 million has been spent in the past four financial years, with 9 865 units having been made available, it is unfair of the CP to inform people that this Ministers’ Council does not care about White housing. That is unfair. [Interjections.]

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

I should just like to complete my argument. There will be quite a bit of time to put questions.

The CP refers to the housing crisis for the White aged, the indigent and young White married couples. Note the figures I have just quoted, the use that is being made of the schemes—that indicates that this matter is given priority! I think it is unfair to present that incorrect perspective to the world at large.

They say that their city councils would conduct a survey of the housing crisis amongst the Whites and liaise with the central Government to relieve that crisis. [Interjections.] In this very House such a survey was announced. In fact, the hon member for Middelburg referred to it only this afternoon, did he not? Is that fair? What the hon member for Middelburg said—and he is moderate in his views—is not reflected in the CP’s election manifesto. That survey of existing needs was conducted and elicited a good reaction.

[Inaudible.]

The hon member referred to that. Why is that perspective not presented, however? The CP said that it would conduct such a survey, when such a survey is already available. That is an incorrect perspective which the CP is presenting to the public. With all due respect, if that is the way in which the municipal elections are going to be conducted, that kind of information will be nothing but disinformation. [Interjections.] It is disinformation. I really do want to say that we should stamp out that approach in our society. Let us fight this municipal election on the basis of facts. Let us confine ourselves to the facts. [Interjections.]

Order!

I have given the facts here this afternoon. Now I am asking the hon member for Middelburg to convey the facts about housing, which I gave here this afternoon, to the voters. [Interjections.] That is all I am asking. I am not angry with the hon member. The hon member made a very good and reasonable speech this afternoon. All I am saying is: Let us repeat that in the document the CP is going to use during the municipal elections. That is a very reasonable request on my part. [Interjections.] It is not right, when fighting the municipal elections, to play the interests of one population off against those of another. [Interjections.] I am only trying to present the facts, because I find it regrettable that these documents which the CP is sending to the voters do not reflect the correct perspective.

We shall also give the facts about Black housing. [Interjections.]

Order! I do not object to an occasional interjection, but I am not going to permit a running commentary.

I could not quite hear what the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis was saying, but if he has a substantial question to put, he is welcome to do so. I have no difficulty with him. I gather, however, that he wants to draw a comparison between the provision of housing to other population groups and that which is provided for the Whites. We need not be ashamed of those figures either. Nor do the Whites have any need to be ashamed of those figures. [Interjections.]

Let me refer to the survey of existing needs to which the hon member for Middelburg referred. I am glad he referred to that, because that specifically confirms that we are addressing the housing crisis of the people and that we want to adapt our planning to the housing needs of the people we have to serve. When the survey was being conducted, there were more than 31 000 respondents. I am speaking about Whites. The survey reflected specific age groups and income groups so that one could determine the financial means of the applicants. By far the largest number of respondents were in the age group 61 years and older. There were more than 22 000; there were almost 23 000 of them. This survey enables us to focus our planning on those areas in which there is a crisis. Surely that is good and meaningful administration.

The hon member for Pietersburg alluded to the fact that in the city council elections they were going to say that the city councils should ensure that proper administration was implemented, etc. I think that in time to come the hon member is going to have to explain that to our local authorities.

Because of the requirements laid down, this survey cannot be duplicated. This survey is kept up to date on an on-going basis and is available to every welfare organisation and local authority, and it can therefore be used to good advantage. The point I therefore want to make is that attention is being given to this aspect. It is unnecessary for the CP to present incorrect perspectives in its election manifesto.

I now want to refer to the safeguarding of the aged. That is also enjoying a high priority in our department and in other departments, for example that of my colleague, the hon the Minister of Law and Order. In all honesty I want to say that when this scheme was announced last year, we realised that the implementation of such a scheme would not be painless. We wrote to local authorities and sent them circulars saying that we accepted that there would be certain practical problems and that local authorities should also tell us what the problems were. On 26 January, for example, we wrote to them saying that the question of the registration of bonds was apparently a problem, although in terms of the law we were compelled to take out a mortgage when such loans were granted.

That is the major problem.

It is a problem. The only point I want to make is that we did realise this. We are evaluating the situation on an on-going basis to facilitate matters. The position, of course, is that old people are involved, and because an income limit is imposed, one must logically also examine the financial means of the people who are involved. We have been looking into the matter on an on-going basis.

It has been decided, inter alia, to look into the distinction that is drawn between the ages of men and women—men have to be 65 years or older and women have to be 60 years or older—and to allow everyone who is 60 years and older, and whose income is subject to certain limits, to participate in the scheme.

We think that the question of using a bond to secure the loan is impractical. We should like to correct this by way of an amendment to our legislation, and this amendment will be contained in the Bill we hope to introduce in the House of Assembly in the near future. In terms of that legislation the Development and Housing Board will be empowered to regard that as sufficient security in these special cases.

There are also inspection fees involved. This amounted to R50 per loan. We have decided that inspection fees will no longer be levied for loans which are dealt with directly by the department. Agents and agencies, of course, do have inspection costs. Those loans which we deal with directly will no longer be subject to this levy of R50.

There are unfortunately certain local authorities which are not very willing to administer the scheme. We have appealed to them once more to administer the scheme on an agency basis in the spirit of a service rendered to the community.

An important consideration is that one should, for as long as possible, respect the wishes of the aged or those who have retired to remain members of the community by always bearing their welfare and security in mind.

†I would like to point out that there are many local authorities who indeed give their co-operation, for which I would like to thank them. Should any problems with the administration be encountered, they should not hesitate in forwarding such applications to the department. I also want to point out that the department’s respective regional offices are also receiving and processing applications in this regard. I should also like to say that of course the repayments with regard to this scheme are highly subsidised. For instance, in the income group of R201-R250 per month, of the payment of R46,30 we subsidise R41,24. In the income group of R501-R550 per month, of the payment of R46 per month, we subsidise R22,67.

*What I want to say is that this incorporates a very large subsidy for our aged, even as far as the repayments are concerned. That is why I am saying that this aspect, ie the provision of housing, for the lower income groups in particular, is a high priority as far as we are concerned.

About this subject let me just say in conclusion— we have not received many applications as yet— that loans in regard to 6 389 applications have been approved; that does not include the R100 000 we have also approved to safeguard specific housing projects for the aged. Not only has the provision of accommodation been a high priority for years now as far as this side of the House, the NP Government, is concerned, but it will always remain a priority. Our doors will always be open to those who cannot afford housing. I want to assure hon members of that, and I also want to assure people who cannot afford housing that they can depend on our assistance in this regard.

There is only one subject, in connection with what the hon member for Bellville said, which I still want to deal with. I want to thank him for the very fine contribution he made. He is also the chairman of the study group. The hon member Mr D P de K van Gend is the secretary of the study group, and I thank the executive of my study group for the dedication and co-operation received from them. I thank the hon member, in particular, for his kind words—about the annual report too—and for his goodwill towards the department.

In my speech I have already dealt with many of the matters mentioned by the hon member. The hon member raised a very important matter. I am referring to the possibility of establishing a revolving fund for operating subsidies or operating costs so as to introduce an element of certainty into those projects in which operating costs are contributed by the State. I think this is a very important matter which the hon member raised, and it seems to me that there is a great deal of substance in what he said. I should just like to inform the hon member and other hon members that recently a task group of the Ministers’ Council was established to consider the financing of welfare projects. The task group is at present doing so. I shall also refer this matter, raised by the hon member this afternoon, to that task group.

The hon member referred to specific expenditure trends which, I think, also confirm the important point that the provision of accommodation and the promotion of home-ownership do, in fact, lead to the stabilisation of a community. A final matter which relates to this, and which also relates to the fact that there are limited funds available, is the fact that the department has also developed an alternative to service centres so that progress can be made with the establishment of new projects.

The concept of a community hall has been publicised because, in contrast to a service centre, there are no operating-cost implications, whereas this can, in fact, encourage community involvement. The design of this community hall is such that it will slot in with new and existing projects, and it is also ideally suited to the provision of basic services.

One can therefore launch projects, which have already been allocated a high priority, as the available funds allow one to do so. Existing projects can also benefit because the financing of a community hall can be given immediate consideration. The benefit is that the welfare organisation concerned can use its own funds to run the community hall without there being any operating-cost implications.

We realise that some people still regard this concept with some scepticism. I should like to emphasise the importance of providing basic services from a community hall as an interim measure. I want to invite welfare organisations, local authorities and housing utility companies to make use of this facility, as far as is practicable, because the design of a community hall is such that extensions can be effected at a later stage to convert it into a full-fledged service centre.

Funds are readily available for the establishment of a community hall to help prospective applicants to provide for at least the need for basic welfare project services. The concept of keeping the aged in the community as independent individuals for as long as possible would therefore still be promoted and facilitated.

I should also like to take this opportunity to impress on the promoters of such projects that funds are, in fact, limited and that they should therefore be employed as effectively as possible. I am the last person to advocate inferior facilities, but on the other hand I should like to warn against the establishment of luxury buildings which do not necessarily mean that a more effective service is being rendered to the community and its inhabitants.

At a later stage I shall be referring in more detail to the speeches of hon members who have already participated and also replying to them in more detail. In conclusion I merely want to say that in the course of time certain changes also take place, of course, as far as the staff of the department is concerned. For example, the regional representative in Pretoria, Mr Piet van Rensburg, has recently retired. I greatly appreciate his services. Mr Ebersohn, the regional representative in Cape Town, has been promoted to that post. Mr Chris van Niekerk, a member of the parliamentary team, has been promoted to regional representative in Cape Town, and I should like to congratulate him on that promotion. Mr Thompson, the regional representative in Durban, will be retiring later this year, and in this House I should also like to extend my sincere thanks to him for his very loyal service and dedication to the activities of the department. Mrs Christa Patterton, who was a liaison officer in the department, has accepted a similar post in the House of Representatives. I also want to express my appreciation to her for her work in this department.

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

Yes, Mr Chairman.

I should like to ask whether the hon the Minister could tell us what portion of the amount, which he said has been spent on White housing over a period of 38 years, was spent in the period from September 1984 to the present day, and how many dwelling units for Whites were erected during that period.

Mr Chairman, let me tell the hon member, with all due respect, that I have already dealt with that. I have given the figures for 1984-85 and 1985-86. Since the establishment of this administration in 1984, R405 523 000 has been spent on 9 865 dwelling units. I am actually glad that the hon member has now given me an opportunity, by way of his question, to confirm the fact that priority is given to the housing of Whites.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon the Minister?

I shall be reacting to the hon member’s speech again at a later stage, and he is welcome to put a question to me then.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister has covered a wide range of aspects of his Ministry during the course of his speech and I do not plan to react to those. One aspect that he referred to, namely housing for the aged, is a topic which I wish to cover today, particularly with reference to people living in blocks of flats.

The past 15 years have seen many changes in respect of rent control and sectional title. These changes have had both positive and negative results. There is no doubt, however, that the people who have suffered most as a result of these changes are our senior citizens of modest means. Thousands have been forced to move and ten of thousands are living with a cloud of uncertainty hanging over their heads.

I believe that the Government has not done enough to provide protection or affordable accommodation for these people. It is heart-breaking to see the misery caused by the fear or the reality of being evicted from a home in which a pensioner has lived for a decade or more.

There are three issues on which I wish to obtain clarity from the hon the Minister today. The first is in respect of Proclamation No 24 of 1987 which was dated 26 January and stipulated that tenants who were 70 years of age or older would not be prevented from being protected tenants because their income was in excess of the prescribed limits. I welcome the provision that was made in that proclamation.

However, section 10(4) of the Sectional Titles Act, No. 95 of 1986, provides occupancy protection to tenants over 65 years of age but only if they are within the income limits laid down in terms of the Rent Control Act. I have no doubt that part of this confusion is caused because these Acts are administered by different Ministers. The one is an own affairs Act and the other a general affairs Act.

The effect is that a tenant who is over 70 years of age may be a protected tenant in terms of the Rent Control Act even if his income is above the previously prescribed limits but could still end up being evicted under the Sectional Titles Act when it comes into operation because his income is too high.

If this interpretation is correct—I accept the possibility that my interpretation is not correct— it is a highly undesirable anomaly and I would ask the hon the Minister to take action to get this loophole closed before the new Sectional Titles Act comes into operation. I am aware that the new Sectional Titles Act was passed before the new provision in respect of these people over the age of 70 years was gazetted in January last year but I believe a grave injustice will be caused if nothing is done to protect the people concerned.

The second issue on which I wish to obtain clarity from the hon the Minister is what the position will be of tenants in rent controlled premises that were sold under sectional title prior to the new Act coming into operation. As I understand it, at present the Sectional Titles Act and the Rent Control Act prevent their being evicted to enable the new owner to occupy the flat concerned.

When the Sectional Titles Act of 1986 comes into operation, will the unit owners who had bought previously be able to evict tenants either to occupy the unit themselves, or to lease the unit to some other lessee? I do not know the answers, and I would be grateful if the hon the Minister could advise me of what the position is, because it affects thousands of people around the country and certainly scores, if not hundreds, within my own constituency. It is clearly likely to cause major problems if protected tenants, particularly those over the age of 65 years, are going to lose their protection and be subject to possible eviction.

I am concerned about both these issues which I have covered so far, and the lack of action in addressing them. I wrote to both Ministers concerned—this hon Minister and the hon the Minister of Public Works and Land Affairs—in November 1987. They both acknowledged those letters early in December 1987, and one of the hon Minister’s acknowledgements stated that it was “receiving urgent attention”. I have received further letters to the effect that the matter is still receiving attention. No action has been taken to date, however, and the Sectional Titles Act, as I understand it, could come into operation very soon. I would be very grateful if this hon Minister, although it does not fall under him, could advise the House when it is in fact going to come into operation. I hope the hon the Minister will have some good news for us today, and that those people whose security of tenure is endangered by this anomaly and these new provisions could in fact be given that security.

The third issue I wish to raise, is the question of the tenants who are given six months notice to vacate their premises in terms of the Rent Control Act, and I quote “for essential repairs and renovations” as is provided for in that Act. This is often used to drive protected tenants from their homes permanently. The procedure is that a notice is served on the tenant giving that tenant six months’ notice to vacate while the premises are repaired and renovated. The pensioner—and I am primarily concerned with the older tenant in this case—has a choice either to comply with that notice or to contest it. If he or she decides to contest it, the possibility of a court action arising and the expense involved in that deters most people from doing so. If they are protected tenants by definition their incomes are very limited, and for them having to start having to go to attorneys to contemplate a court action is unthinkable. This is something which has to be taken into account.

On the other hand, if they comply and accept the six months’ notice given in terms of the Act, the pensioner then faces the following. Firstly, he or she has to find alternative accommodation for an indefinite period because the notice given does not have to stipulate for precisely how long the premises are required. Secondly, the tenant himself has to arrange and pay for the removal of household goods and personal possessions, and here again one also has to bear in mind that we are talking about a protected tenant—someone within a low income group.

Thirdly, because the accommodation required is of a temporary nature, it is inevitably more expensive than the accommodation that the person had originally.

Fourthly, there is always the possibility of storage costs of furniture, because if one is looking for temporary accommodation, one very often goes into furnished accommodation, and then, as one has to take one’s furniture out, one has to pay to have it stored.

Then, fifthly, there is the question of arranging and paying for the return of household goods and personal possessions to the original premises. When the renovations and repairs are finished, the pensioner therefore again has to pay to have all his possessions moved back into his original flat.

Sixthly, there is the uncertainty at the beginning and all along the way as to whether the pensioner will be able to pay the new rent that is likely to be determined in view of the fact that the premises have now been renovated. The question is whether he will be able to afford it. Given the fact that it is very likely that the pensioner is living in that sort of accommodation because it is not of too high a quality, the chances are that he may well not be able to afford the new rent.

What happens is that most older tenants give up and accept eviction. I believe that in practice this legal provision is often iniquitous. It discriminates against the aged and against protected tenants and is widely abused. I would be interested to know whether the hon the Minister has any figures as to how many people over the age of 70 years who are protected tenants ever end up returning to the flat in which they used to live after it has been repaired and renovated in terms of the provision requiring them to vacate temporarily.

I appeal to the hon the Minister to have another look at this provision in order to see whether something cannot be done to ensure that tenants are properly protected in practice.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens dealt with several minor points with which one can agree. I just want to tell him that at the time the Rent Control Act was considered by a standing committee, a previous member of his party in this House, Mr Alf Widman, was a member of that committee. He agreed with most of the provisions contained in the Act at present.

I also want to tell the hon member that not having the Rent Control Act—ie if we abolished it— would be a good thing, because that would upgrade the present housing position. I have always felt that this Act contributed to the deterioration of residential areas.

Mr Chairman, I want to confine myself to another aspect which has not been raised this afternoon. It is an aspect which seriously affects the metropolitan areas of our country. Mr Clem Sunter said recently—he put this very clearly to South Africans—that this country could be a winner in the nineties only if certain concepts were accepted. These include political concepts as well as concepts on other levels. Should the country not do so, he said, it would find itself, along with other African countries, in the cadre of the down-and-out countries, and our descendants would not be able to do anything to rescue themselves from that situation.

I agree entirely with Mr Sunter’s viewpoint in this regard. I agree that reform must not only be brought about in this Parliament, but that it must be focussed upon in every sphere of life in South Africa, and we must reconsider the question of whether we are to travel the “high road” or the “low road”. Once we have decided that, we will then have to take steps to extricate ourselves from that situation of stagnation. I feel we should now begin to give serious attention to the process of urban deterioration in some of our metropolitan areas.

I want to discuss the aspect of White urbanisation this afternoon, and I want to draw the attention of the House to the spiral into which we are already being drawn. If we do not want to be heavily in debt in 20 years’ time, we must now begin to tackle this question in all seriousness. My submission is that our present urbanisation pattern for Whites must be reviewed, and we must then decide how to change it so that we can become a winner in the nineties.

All my life I have lived in one of the eleven biggest cities in South Africa, and what I am putting to hon members here this afternoon can be substantiated by many Whites. Hon members who have been city councillors can confirm that what I am saying here today is true. This is a planning problem which must be tackled by every local authority. Not only must every local authority tackle it individually, but every metropolitan area must also review it jointly; otherwise it is doomed to failure. If one local authority in a metropolitan area solves the problem on its own, while the neighbouring authority does nothing at all, it has only one ox pulling the plough and so does its neighbour, whereas if they had both been pulling the plough, they would have done a great deal more ploughing.

A pattern has developed in many metropolitan areas, viz that the old town, the original residential areas have become depopulated, while well beyond the urban boundaries, new areas have often developed, areas in which the younger people of necessity had to settle, from the very start placing a financial burden on their city councils, their churches, their provincial administrations, the central Government and themselves, something which I think is inflationary and which contributes to putting South Africa on Clem Sunter’s “low road”.

In many of the old suburban areas of our cities, the existing infrastructure is falling into disuse. Eventually it degenerates because the people who should be using it have been drawn or forced to go elsewhere. Our system of first-home loans for young married couples is one of these attractions which draws young people to settle in new residential areas.

The hon the Minister has made some welcome announcements here this afternoon in this connection, but that system is creating problems for us. Wherever those young people settle, they come with demands for new schools, and new churches have to be built. New tennis courts, swimming baths and all sorts of sports facilities must be provided, because the people there expect it. New police stations must be erected and new post offices, libraries and other central government services must be provided, because there is a demand for them. Where local authorities have not provided the infrastructure such as roads, storm-water drainage, sewerage, power and water, these too must be laid on, while in the old sections of the towns, these facilities are completely unutilised.

While hectare upon hectare of smallholdings and town plots lie unused and undeveloped, even in many of the East Rand towns such as the one from which I come—they serve merely as sleeping locales for Black people coming to the towns—large companies are building new towns on the periphery of these large towns.

Under the new “granny flats” scheme announced a few years ago, young people could buy an old house, if that R40 000—now raised to R65 000— to renovate an old house were made available to them. The young family could then build a separate flat for their grandparents, thus keeping the family intact. This would also mean a saving for the central government because it would then not have to provide for the needs of pensioners.

One would then find that the existing schools and churches in those old towns, as well as the infrastructure, could therefore be utilised to better advantage because at present these old towns are becoming depopulated. It also calls for more money to be found by those young married couples, because in the new areas in which they settle there has to be a new manse and a new rugby field. All sorts of demands are made on them just because they want to settle in that new residential area, while the older areas remain underdeveloped.

If we could attract them to the older houses, there would be the added advantage of existing public transport, the other local authority infrastructure and optimal use of facilities. The property rates would be lower, because there would be no need for a new infrastructure on the periphery of the town.

By saving on all the expenses which new developments call for in the young couples’ budgets, calls for increased salaries and wages by these young couples would also be curbed. One would not then have to approach the boss so often for a wage increase to be able to afford all these items which the school, the church and the local authority call for. The need for higher wages arising from these expenses would be controlled. We would then automatically increase the productivity of that young married couple as well, because since they would not have to be considered for such large wage increases, their productivity would become correspondingly higher at a lower wage level.

Order! Hon members must not talk with such enthusiasm. The hon member may proceed.

At lower, more stable wages, one gets at least the same productivity.

I am not saying, however, that one could carry on with this for decades. That is not what I am advocating. I ask that this be looked into both now and in the nineties. Since the increase in the White population is very low at this stage, this period must be used to better advantage to upgrade the older residential areas.

I want to give one example. Boksburg North was proclaimed in 1910, and since then there have been 16 erven which have belonged to the State at different times, on which it considered erecting houses, but today, after 78 years, not a single foundation has been laid in that residential area. Many of those existing erven are half a block in size. I am referring to my own town, but I believe that it is the order of the day in many other metropolitan areas.

If it were made possible for young people to buy and renovate homes in those residential areas, which have meanwhile deteriorated, those empty erven could find new owners. In that way the existing infrastructure, which is completely underutilised, could be used to better advantage and the land on the periphery of the town could be used for agricultural purposes. It is a pity that we are moving further and further into the outskirts while the centre of the town becomes older and older. I believe this matter must be tackled in the metropolitan areas if this country wants to be a winner. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Boksburg touched on a very important matter, and I want to wish him everything of the best in his efforts to do something about this.

If one looks at this pamphlet which was published by the National Council of the Aged, Die Wekroep van die Bejaarde, and one reads the discussion on the care of the aged, one comes across the following:

It goes on to say:

It is a recognised fact that our population is undergoing an ageing process. Consequently the number of aged persons is systematically rising. It is estimated that this process will continue until it stabilises in approximately the year 2035. Ageing consequently gives rise to increasing distinctive needs, which present great challenges to both the State and the private sector, particularly as regards housing, facilities and supportive services.

If we consider the functions and actions of the hon the Minister entrusted with this matter, we are grateful to see that in this regard the State has fully accepted its responsibility. I am glad that the hon the Minister again told us about the high priority which the Government gives to the housing of our people.

Let us tell the Official Opposition that the proverbial cow is on this side of the House and we will not allow the propaganda calf of the CP to drink this cow dry.

It is an old cow!

Even if it is an old cow we are looking after it and we on this side of the House will carry on looking after it and looking after our people. [Interjections.]

As regards retirement villages in South Africa, the hon the Minister tackled the problem in 1986 by appointing a committee of inquiry under the chairmanship of the then chairman of the Development and Housing Board, Mr D J Marais, to report on the entire matter of housing for retired persons. At that stage it was already clear from departmental investigations that in some cases the aged invested their life’s savings in retirement villages without adequate attention being given to the particular needs of the aged. The security for capital investments made by the aged was in many cases also totally inadequate.

The report which the committee presented to the hon the Minister in September 1986, dealt mainly with the securing of the interests of the individual in retirement projects. Although the development of retirement projects by the private sector is a sound development, which should be promoted, there are unfortunately certain negative factors which must be investigated.

The committee of inquiry also found that apart from the securing of the interests of the economy, the securing and the utilisation of investments, essential facilities and services, as well as complete and proper contract documents, were matters which should specifically be tackled. The Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly agreed to measures for the urgent implementation of this in order to achieve these objectives. The eventual goal was to embody the measures in legislation in order to enforce this.

The result of all this is at present before us, namely the Housing Development Schemes for Retired Persons Bill. With a view to consumer protection this was agreed to by the standing committee and submitted to Parliament by the Department of Economic Affairs and Technology.

The Bill carries into effect the recommendations proposed by the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly, and initiated by this hon Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works. The Bill has already been agreed to by the other two Houses and is item No 3 on today’s Order Paper for this House.

I do not want to discuss the details of this legislation now, except to say that the importance of the legislation is clearly reflected in the Second Reading speech of the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Technology, which has been tabled here. This will be discussed when the Second Reading debate takes place in the near future. With the acceptance of this legislation we are placing our seal on the concern of the hon the Minister of Local Government, Housing and Works and his department regarding the interests of our aged. We on this side of the House want to thank the hon the Minister most sincerely for initiating this legislation, because no one can have any doubts about the necessity for it.

Mr Chairman, the hon member will forgive me if I do not follow him as I wish to deal with a few other matters.

Firstly, an aspect which appears to fall under this hon Minister’s jurisdiction but which I am not quite clear on, is that of the rent boards. In 1986 there were proclamations, and suddenly there were no rent boards dealing with Coloureds and Indians. There were many representations made to this hon Minister’s predecessor, and eventually legal action was instituted. I understand that the rent boards were reconstituted in November 1986 to deal with all applications. It seems therefore that from 1986 until May 1987 the rent boards were handled as a general affairs matter, dealing with applications and matters relating to Indians, Coloureds and Whites.

On an agency basis.

That makes it even more complicated. Is it own affairs, general affairs, agency-based or directly under the department?

In Durban the situation is now such that an Indian tenant, for example, approached the rent board in April for a hearing and received a letter on 25 April of this year that said, inter alia—

At the beginning of this month the Durban Central Residents’ Association, which deals with rent control complaints, established from the regional representative’s office of the rent board in Durban that they could not proceed with matters dealing with Indians because it was said they had administrative problems, namely that members for the Indian and Coloured boards had not been reappointed.

What is happening? I understand at the moment no Indian and Coloured in Durban can have his complaints relating to rent control dealt with by anyone.

That is not true.

The hon member says it is not true. That is typical, he has no idea what is going on. Those are the facts of the matter.

†The boards exist at the moment for Whites only. Is this now an own affair, or is it still a hybrid, agency-based 1987 model where everyone can apply, whether Coloured, Indian or White? There is confusion, and the department has not done its homework in the sense of notifying the population that there is going to be change. For example, a case was set down for the beginning of this month, and when the people came for the hearing they were suddenly told there was no longer a rent board. Could the hon the Minister please give us clarity in this regard and also tell us whether he has just dropped the responsibility altogether in terms of Coloureds and Indians, whether he now regards that as irrelevant and whether steps have been taken to establish rent boards for them because at the moment there are none.

I should like to deal with another aspect relating to the question of own affairs local authorities. In the annual report the hon Minister’s department indicates that the composition of this department is likely to be extended as a result of the expected transfer of own affairs functions from the provincial administrations. I understand that in respect of Natal such transfer has not yet taken place. During yesterday’s debate in Pietermaritzburg there were some anxious new rightists when members of the NP were trying to play the CP game of forcing own affairs onto Natal. [Interjections.] The hon member for Umhlatuzana wants own affairs imposed on Natal local authorities, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in Natal do not want it. I still find it very difficult to understand what the difference is in principle between the partition which the CP propagates and the own affairs local authorities in an orthodox form which the hon member for Umhlatuzana wants. The only difference seems to be that the NP coats it with a sort of sugar-sweet language; in effect, the hon member for Umhlatuzana, who wants to enforce own affairs in Natal, is much closer to the CP in his approach than should be the case with NP members. [Interjections.]

What do the people of Natal want? The NP constitutes a very small part of the population in Natal. At the Indaba, where there were representatives from a far wider section of the population, one had a clear message as to what the people of Natal wanted. I am not only talking about NP members; I am talking about the population as a whole. They want a form of local government in which all the ratepayers in a particular local area have a say in municipal affairs and therefore have a vote in that area. They want that system to be worked out by the people themselves. [Interjections.]

Order! Hon members of all political parties will still have an opportunity to participate in this debate. Then they can reply to the hon member for Durban Central, not now. The hon member may proceed.

That is what the people of Natal want. However, now the NP wants to impose its will on them, when in fact there is no problem with local government affairs in Natal.

We have a situation where the City Council of Pietermaritzburg last year was considering the possibility of establishing a non-racial local government for Pietermaritzburg. That is the feeling of the local people. The mayor of Pietermaritzburg, Mr Marc Cornel who was very supportive of that notion, was going to speak to the hon the Minister, Dr Stoffel van der Merwe, about it. However, again the NP quashed it and said that they would impose their will, irrespective of what the people of Pietermaritzburg wanted. I therefore want to appeal to the hon the Minister—as far as he has influence in this area—not to force local government own affairs down the throats of the people of Natal and not to create tensions and problems where they do not exist.

All those municipal candidates in Natal who will be opposed to the imposition of own affairs local government will, during the municipal elections, I hope, point out that hon members like the hon member for Umhlatuzana prefer the decisions of Pretoria to be imposed in Natal rather than to let the electorate of Natal decide what should happen. [Interjections.] That applies to local government and to regional government.

The question of RSCs in Natal is also a sensitive one, where once again the Government is applying pressure on the Provincial Executive to demarcate, announce and establish its four RSCs. The Provincial Executive seems to be yielding to this pressure and it is determined to proceed with RSCs in a province where the Black population has said no to the RSC as it stands now. They will not participate in the RSC as it stands now.

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

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

If this Government persists in pushing RSCs down the throats of the people of Natal, against the wishes of Inkhata and the wishes of many other people in Natal, they will again be pushing us back into the past instead of assisting in resolving the problems of the future. [Interjections.] It is illogical to constitute RSCs in Natal in an area which looks like the skin of a cheetah with black and white spots all over and with the RSC area covering White municipal areas only and not affecting the Blacks. I therefore ask the hon the Minister, if he has the influence, to respect the wishes of local authorities and the representatives of the people of Natal by not pushing RSCs down the throats of the voters. [Interjections.]

Quite clearly hon members of the NP are now starting to look to the election and are starting to try to pull out issues which they think might appeal to the conservative voters. In Durban they have made a major error in the handling of the mayor, Mayor Klotz, whom they have now suspended from membership. [Interjections.] This is the same situation as the one the hon member for Pietersburg told us about. He tells us that in the Northern Transvaal they are now scared to stand under party colours. Let me tell this hon member that in Durban they are now running scared as well. They were also determined to stand in Durban under the proud flag of the NP, but now they are running scared.

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

I have only two minutes. They are running scared in Durban. They are ashamed of their party flag in Durban. They will pose as independents but we shall identify them and tell the voters that they are Pretoria’s henchmen and that they are not going to worry about the people of Durban. They are only going to implement decisions made in Pretoria. We shall tell the people that they are hidden Nats and that they must not vote for them. [Interjections.] They represent a party which is scared to identify itself. They are doing the same in Pietermaritzburg.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Durban Central will forgive me if I do not react to his argument. [Interjections.]

Order! I regret to say that I cannot hear the hon member for Langlaagte. We shall not proceed until there is relative silence in the Committee. The hon member for Langlaagte may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I merely wanted to say in all honesty that I am not very up to date with what is happening in Natal. I was born in South West Africa and grew up there, and I walk around very proudly in the WP today. [Interjections.]

I want to express a few important thoughts about urban renewal and redevelopment. I want to indicate the practicability of these thoughts by linking them with the circumstances in Langlaagte, my constituency. In order to sketch the background, I want to make certain factual statements, which I shall obviously not be able to discuss in detail.

The first factual statement I want to make is that the acquisition and provision of sufficient land for housing, and specifically for urbanisation, is undeniably one of the greatest problems and therefore challenges facing the new South Africa of the eighties and the nineties. Viewed from a different perspective, there are other important matters such as the prevention or at least the control of the population explosion, education and training programmes, the upliftment of our depressed communities, the improvement of their quality of life, the maintenance of existing norms and standards among the so-called developed communities and so on. It is extremely important, however, that one will not be able to succeed in solving all the other problems I have mentioned unless there is sufficient land for the reasonable housing of all our people, in which respect there is already a large backlog, and, what is more, without sufficient land for the handling and establishment of the progressive rapidly growing and uncontrollable urbanisation of literally millions of people. In brief, unless sufficient land is provided, we are on the highway to our own third-rate banana republic.

The second factual statement that I want to make—Dr Malan said this a long time ago—is that the future of South Africa and all its people will be determined in and around our cities. We can forget about these little daydreams of partitions here and there. The future of South Africa will be determined in and around our cities.

When we talk about cities and about urbanisation, the PWV area stands out as the highest priority. Johannesburg and its surrounding area are situated in the centre of the area, literally and figuratively, and are the heart of the problem situation. That is why I want to pay attention to Johannesburg in this own affairs debate, and more specifically to my constituency of Langlaagte. The crux of my argument is that the better, more comprehensive and more effective utilisation of the available land, housing and services is of the utmost importance in view of the shortage of money and the serious shortage of land that I have just spoken about. This fact is also very clear to us Whites.

In that case urban renewal and redevelopment are the key to the answer. What is the set-up in Langlaagte? By Langlaagte I mean the area directly adjacent to the Langlaagte station, with Paarlshoop as its centre, and the Abraham Kriel Children’s Home, with its transport and housing. Directly adjoining this area is Langlaagte North. I regard this area as the centre of Langlaagte, with Homestead Park, which makes up an extremely important and essential part of this White community, without which the community—church and school—cannot function in a practical way or even exist.

I know you will not permit me to discuss this, Sir, but I do want to make the following statement. I want to say that if we should permit Homestead Park to be anything but what it is, viz a White residential area, this community, including the church, the school and the Abraham Kriel Children’s Home, will not be viable and will not be able to continue to exist. That is a fact, and therefore I shall do everything in my power to ensure that Homestead Park remains a White residential area.

Although Crosby, Mayfair West and Brixton are closer to the periphery, they also form an essential, integral part of our community, which, for the purpose of this argument, I shall call Langlaagte. There are clear signs of deterioration and decline in our area which have given increasing cause for concern in our community during the past few years. There are many relevant examples. The membership of schools and churches has dropped, and then I am not even talking about the adjacent area of Mayfair, where DR and Reformed Churches, and also schools, had to close. In areas such as Crosby and Mayfair West, where this group areas problem did not really play an important part until relatively recently, deterioration, the levelling-off of the White population growth, the ageing of the White community itself and the reduction in the number of children, have manifested the same trends of reduced numbers of children, membership figures, etc.

White residential trends and people’s preference of townhouses and new extensions have also been to the detriment of this development in Langlaagte. This led to our having large numbers of vacant White residential units at the end of last year, and that is one of the specific reasons for my wanting to move into that area.

What is our answer to this problem? As a result of discussions which were held at various levels over a long period with Ministers, Deputy Ministers, officials and people such as Mr Tom Gunning, the ministerial representative, etc, we have launched a campaign by means of the co-operation of churches, schools, city council members and community leaders, which we call Aksie Bou Langlaagte. It is a non-party-political programme, which has people with differing partypolitical views in the pilot committee. It is a positive, active, exciting and challenging programme, with the objective of ensuring the continued existence of our area for our people and community now and in the future. In other words, the programme is aimed at the proactive development of our area, our people and their institutions, and the preservation of what is dear to us, including our own culture, history, churches, schools and community life. The successful implementation of this programme will have advantages which will extend much further than only Langlaagte.

What do these programmes entail? As I have said, we had discussions with the city council and the respective departments, and we plan to launch an urban renewal programme. Good progress has been made with the assistance of the departments and the city council with reference to questions such as the nature and scope of the programmes, the number of vacant plots, whether or not sufficient facilities exist, and so on. The argument is that we have reasonably cheap land in Johannesburg. There are plots, schools and roads, and there is a need, with everything that has to be even closer to the Johannesburg city centre, for an urban renewal and development scheme.

I know that the local authority should actually play the important part, whereas the central Government plays a more supportive part, but I was pleased to read that the task of the hon the Minister’s department is to grant mainly professional and financial support.

I want to conclude by saying that we in Langlaagte have an ideal situation. I can almost say that we have a unique situation. It is a situation in which we can prove that by means of urban renewal and replanning, we can make proper and good provision for our own people, in this case the Whites. In this way we can also provide for the problems that are experienced elsewhere in Johannesburg.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Langlaagte must forgive me for not reacting to his speech. The only thing I want to tell him is that although Langlaagte initially accommodated a large White community, the other population groups are rapidly increasing their numbers in that area. I think his problems will also increase in magnitude in future. [Interjections.]

A great deal was said here today about boycotts. Nevertheless I find one thing very strange. When I look at the benches opposite me, it appears that barely more than 50% of the 133 Government members are present at the moment. It may even be less. This leads one to wonder whether perhaps this is because this own affairs debate concerns the interests of the Whites. Is that not perhaps the reason for the lack of interest on the part of hon members on the side of the Government? [Interjections.] In a debate on general affairs, the NP normally enjoys much greater representation in the House. Then they can shine in sacrificing their White rights, after all! [Interjections.] In this regard the hon pink member of Benoni is the shining star—not because of a speech, but because of his assenting interjections. [Interjections.]

I should like to tell the hon the Minister that we are not claiming that he does nothing. Nevertheless we feel that he does far too little, especially where the Whites are concerned. [Interjections.] The country’s economic and financial deterioration is impoverishing its people to an increasing extent. The Government is responsible for that. This means that fewer and fewer …

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May the hon member for Nigel refer to the hon member for Benoni as an hon pink member? [Interjections.]

Order! Did the hon member for Nigel say that?

Yes, Mr Chairman, I did. All I meant was that he is very liberal. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, the NP is responsible for the country’s economic deterioration. We say that that is why fewer and fewer Whites can qualify with the restrictions and norms that are being laid down by the Government today. [Interjections.] I should be pleased if the hon the Minister would listen to this. By the concessions he announced here today, he is admitting that what I am saying is true. Just as the means test with reference to the White pensioners must be reviewed, the hon the Minister and his department must review the restrictions and norms, so that more and more people can qualify.

Mr Chairman, permit me to convey my congratulations to the new Director-General, Mr Wessel Meyer, who is succeeding Dr Jooste. I met Mr Meyer many years ago, when he was secretary to the former Prime Minister, Mr B J Vorster, who of course represented the Nigel constituency in this House. Mr Meyer is very well-known in my constituency. He is also acquainted with many of the Nigel voters, whom he came to know when he was Mr Vorster’s secretary. Once again we congratulate him on that appointment.

According to the annual report, it is clear that this department does not control all the facets of its administration yet, since some of these functions still fall under the provincial administrations. We believe it is essential for all relevant functions to fall under one department, and we trust that the necessary transfers will take place this year. The annual report is an excellent, concentrated piece of work. It is comprehensive and fully self-explanatory. We thank the chief official and his officials for this.

When I look at the reference to the ministerial representatives in the annual report, however, and at their job description—especially with reference to their functions and duties—I am simply amazed. These comprise inter alia the appointing of chairmen of various committees, the approval of certain steps such as the changing of towns’ names, the granting of authority, the extension of instructions to local authorities, the nomination of arbitrators and so on. Apart from that they are nothing but political functionaries, who attend official functions and ceremonies. They have been appointed. They do not represent a single voter. They are not indebted to any taxpayer. Nevertheless they hold political meetings during by-elections, as was the case in Standerton.

I think it is a disgraceful waste of the taxpayers’ money to accommodate NP politicians, who have had their day in this way, and to ensure that they in turn appoint and nominate people who are useful to the NP.

The functions they perform can be performed by the hon the Minister himself, his head of department or his officials. [Interjections.] I think they have enough time to do these things as part of their normal duties. I should like the hon the Minister to tell me what the six ministerial representatives are costing the country’s taxpayers. [Interjections.]

I should like to refer to a distressing matter in respect of the provision of funds to utility companies for the erection of housing. In this respect I want to refer in particular to the East Rand Utility Company which was placed under provisional liquidation by the department. This company received a loan of R3,7 million, of which they used the full amount. I should like the hon the Minister to tell me how many units this company was supposed to erect with that loan. According to page 84 of the annual report, 85 units were completed, but upon enquiries I made to the Nigel Town Council, I was informed that only 83 units had been completed. Of these units, 20 are standing vacant and have already been stripped of baths, basins, heating systems, geysers etc.

This area is adjacent to the new KwaTsaduza Black residential area, and is not popular among buyers of houses. I should like to know from the hon the Minister whether the necessary financial guarantees were provided by the utility company, whether the full amount was collected before the units were completed, whether the department suffered any other losses and whether or not this company is also managing other projects on behalf of the department.

Enterprises such as this one are to the detriment of the local authority in that infrastructure, which has been established at great expense, is not used to its full and that vacant, robbed and damaged houses have a detrimental effect on the value of the surrounding property. [Interjections.] I believe that stricter conditions and guarantees should be called for when funds are requested.

While I am talking about a matter that affects my constituency, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the department sincerely for the R215 000 that was granted for maintenance and repairs to the Tienie Vorster Home. I think this is a service which means a great deal to the community. As far as I know, they render a very good service, and we want to thank those people in particular. This institution has large grounds, and we want to ask whether there is any possibility of effecting extensions, because this kind of accommodation for the infirm aged and disabled is very scarce. This home accommodates 210 infirm aged and disabled people, and at the moment there is a waiting list of more than 50 people.

I want to come back to the repairs, in respect of which there is an enormous backlog. I know that with regard to schools and hospitals the backlog amounts to approximately 14 years. I am convinced that the appointment of one or two factotums at such complexes on a permanent basis will contribute a great deal to reducing those maintenance costs. If repairs are done on a regular basis, the eventual cost of repairs will be reduced considerably as a result of the elimination of the long duration of repairs. Unfortunately my time has now expired.

Mr Chairman, with the modus operandi typical of the CP, the hon member for Nigel tried to count people and, as usual, he reached an incorrect answer. It is mere coincidence when hon members of the CP make sums and get the right answer. To tell the truth, shortly before the hon member began to speak, there was an announcement in the passage that all CP members should come to the House. [Interjections.] He should have a talk to his Whips. [Interjections.]

I should like to devote my speech to the imminentmunicipal elections. The municipal voters are going to have a choice between reasonable participation by all population groups in the first place, domination of Whites over people of colour on a basis of racism and selfishness in the second, and the handing over of White participation by everyone in the third. [Interjections.] I want to begin by referring to the PFP.

Under the heading “PFP municipal thrust” the Cape Times reported that Mr K Andrew—I think he is in the House at the moment—said the PFP would decide on how they would take part in local government elections.

†He said that the manner of involvement would be decided on a regional basis. Then the Cape Times of 31 October 1987 reported the following:

*I am trying to constitute the facts before I go any further. The PFP also appointed a committee, the so-called Leon Committee, which was to give a decisive answer on this whole matter. The PFP of the Western Cape decided at a recent meeting—this was reported in the Press—that they would not take part in municipal elections as a party. That is common knowledge; it was in the newspapers.

Just like the Nats?

Just keep quiet now; I shall come to the CP in a minute. I promise I shall come to the CP in a minute. [Interjections.] I know the hon member for Pietersburg cannot wait, but his mother waited a long time for him; he can also wait a moment. [Interjections.]

I have in my hand a circular sent out under the name of one Bill Sewell, which bears the PFP’s letterhead. It was sent to “constituency and branch chairmen, constituent secretaries, current councillors who are PFP members, assistant councillors”—a whole number of people. This is the document. It is very interesting. They say they are not taking part in the municipal elections as a political party. Let me read to hon members what this document says, however.

Did you steal it, or what?

The hon member must not tell me I stole it.

I was merely asking.

No, I did not steal it. If the hon member’s organisation is in such a state that we can get hold of their documentation, he must not accuse me. He must not accuse me if that is the state of affairs! [Interjections.]

†I want to read this to the hon members:

*What a difficult word that is! [Interjections.]

The hon members said they were not standing as a party, but at the same time they are standing as a party; they are being rather underhand in the whole business. [Interjections.]

[Inaudible.]

Oh, the hon member at the back here can make such a noise; he will never be elected to anything again. He will never be able to stand for anything and be elected again.

Unfortunately time does not permit me to deal with the hon member for Durban Central. The hon member had a great deal to say about the municipal elections, but his party decided that they were not going to take part, that they were not going to take part at all! That is where they stand.

I promised the hon members on that side that I would come back to the CP. I do so with pleasure. I do not want to say anything about the other provinces today. I should merely like to talk to them about our strategy in respect of the Cape Province. They say the objective is the factual control over town councils in the Transvaal, a good performance in the Free State and a breakthrough in the Cape rural areas. The hon members will realise that those hon members are not prepared to put up candidates in the urban areas in the Cape.

We have a surprise for you!

I want to ask those hon members whether they are going to be prepared to put up candidates for the Cape Town City Council. [Interjections.] I want to know that. [Interjections.] Good, we shall look forward to it.

The hon member for Lichtenburg said they were going to try to gain control over town councils in the imminent municipal elections so that they could sabotage the regional services councils. I studied the Regional Services Councils Act, something those hon members may not have done yet. There is no way in which they can sabotage that system. They are lying to the voters. One cannot call it anything else. They are deceiving the voters, because if the regional services councils cannot function, there are appeals to the Administrator.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: May the hon member claim that we are lying to the voters? [Interjections.]

Order! Did the hon member say that these hon members were lying to the voters?

No, Sir, I said the CP was lying to the voters. [Interjections.]

Order! That is one of those difficult borderline cases. I would prefer the hon member to withdraw what he said.

I withdraw it, Sir. [Interjections.]

I want to ask the CP this question today, however: Is their policy in the coming election going to be to criticise the Government, or are they going to tell the voters what their policy in respect of local government is?

Both! [Interjections.]

I want them to tell their voters what their policy is. [Interjections.] Let us take Black local government as an example. In this booklet of theirs, the hon members say that the establishment of Black local government in the rest of South Africa for Blacks who do not live in independent states will be permitted. That is the standpoint of those hon members. They will therefore give political rights to Blacks in the White area. [Interjections.] They want to give Blacks political rights over White property, but then criticise us because we want to give Blacks political rights in this country.

What do the hon members want to do in respect of the Coloureds and the Indians? Do they want to convert those areas which they want to keep aside as Coloured homelands into local authorities for Blacks, Coloureds and Indians? [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Parow has just made a rather interesting speech. He stood here and outlined the policies of all the parties in this House except that of his own party. [Interjections.] The hon member set out the PFP strategy, using a circular which he somehow obtained from the PFP. We are very happy to say quite openly that that is our strategy. [Interjections.] We have said it before and there is nothing new in what we have heard here this afternoon. I shall say it again in this House: Our policy in this election in the Cape Province is that we are going to use our influence, wherever we have any influence, and our structures to put the best kind of people into councils. They will be people who are either PFP members or supporters of our philosophy or fellow-thinkers. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Parow then went on to set out the policy of the NDM. They have made no bones about their policy either. They are quite open about what they are going to do; they are not going to participate. He set out the strategy of the hon members of the CP. They also make no bones about their strategy. The one gap in what we heard this afternoon, the gap that everyone wants to hear—here in the Cape Province, anyway—is what the NP is going to do. [Interjections.] Is the NP going to stand under the banner of the NP in the Cape Province? Are they going to do that in every case? [Interjections.] The hon member is speaking for the Cape Province now; he says yes.

I did not say “in every case”. [Interjections.] That will not be necessary in Parow, because there are no Progs or CPs there. [Interjections.]

I will assume from the hon member’s reply that there may be some places where they will fly their banner, and there will be other places where they will do their best to do the very same thing that we are going to do, which is to try to get our own kind of people elected. Let us leave it at that at this stage.

The only other thing on which I want to challenge the NP is to ask what their policy will be when they go to the electorate, either with their banner flying or with their attempts to elect people who think their way. Will they try to elect people who want to abolish apartheid on the beaches? Will they try to elect people who want open beaches, or will they try to elect people who want closed beaches? The hon member for Parow sits next door to the hon member for Newton Park, and the hon member for Newton Park is on record as saying that beach apartheid is not worth having, or words to that effect. [Interjections.] The hon member for Parow is not saying what he actually thinks about it.

I stand by my party’s policy. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member stands by his party’s policy, but what is his party’s policy? What is the party policy by which he is standing?

Open beaches for Parow!

This election is going to be a very interesting one, and it is going to be interesting to see what the NP do and what documents they put out as being their policy at local government level. We are going to give them a run for their money. [Interjections.] We will wait and see what happens on 26 October.

I would like to take the rest of the time available to me to concentrate on a matter which is of great importance to my constituency on the one hand, but also of great importance to a number of areas in the constituencies of many of the hon members throughout the Cape Province. I am referring to the orphan areas, the local areas of the Cape Province which now have no facility to be represented on the regional services councils that have been created. In October last year we passed in this Chamber the Local Councils Act (House of Assembly) of 1987 which made provision for the establishment of local councils. The Constantia local area is one area affected by this situation. On 19 November we immediately made application to the hon the Minister in terms of section 7 of that Act, which empowers the Minister to perform certain acts in contemplation of the establishment of a local council, to recognise the ratepayers’ association which has been formed in that area to represent the interests of the area on a pro tem basis. In that letter we set out the credentials, the unanimous support that has been received from the ratepayers’ associations of the area, for the application of this recognition. We set out that our objective was to obtain representation where there is no representation at the moment, and to secure a formal mechanism for deciding what the constitutional future of that area is to be.

Is it to be in amalgamation with the Cape Town City Council or is it to be in a separate municipality? There is a whole list of areas with the same problem throughout the Cape, including Hout Bay and Melkbosstrand, which have also applied. However, I will let hon members for the relevant constituencies speak for those areas.

What we know in Constantia is that we want a mechanism to assess the best constitutional future for the area. At this stage we have not been given the mechanism, although the Act exists. In the Constantia Valley ratepayers’ executive we took the initiative by commissioning a wellrespected firm of auditors who have had great experience of local council auditing to prepare a study in order to give us some guidance as to what direction we should embark upon. They produced a comprehensive document which makes very interesting reading. On page 24 of this document they say that one can deduce from the result of this draft budget that a saving of at least R210 000 and possibly R1,45 million could be made if an independent municipality was formed.

I conveyed this report to the hon the Minister and requested the opportunity to discuss the matter with him. The hon the Minister was good enough to meet with me on 18 February. At that meeting the hon the Minister said that the matter was in hand, regulations were being prepared and they would be available by the end of April. He also said that steps would follow very quickly thereafter to implement these structures. This was formally confirmed in the House in his reply to my question on 15 March.

What I want to raise in this debate is the question of where these matters stand now. It is more than six months since that Act was adopted and we have gone past the target deadline for the publication of the regulations which the hon the Minister, in all sincerity, I believe, indicated would be the target. We are moving very rapidly towards the general election for local authorities on 26 October. The matter is becoming one of great concern for the people in my area and I am sure people in other areas are similarly affected.

At present there is no representation. I believe the department must be snowed under with applications and queries coming from the local areas which have no other route, but must go straight to the department. I think it is a matter of great importance that some rudimentary form of representation be created as soon as possible.

In my particular case major town planning issues are at stake. We have an application from a developer to cut up one of the historic farms of Constantia and the local people have no way of taking that matter up and making a decision as to whether that application should be granted or not. I am opposed to granting it and the people in the area are overwhelmingly opposed to granting it, but there is no mechanism to deal with this matter. We are unrepresented. For all those reasons I would urge the hon the Minister to clarify the position. It is a matter of great concern to the people of my constituency.

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in speaking after the hon member for Constantia. I agree with him, particularly as regards the last part of his speech. I am not going to participate in this debate because of the quarrel in respect of the city councils and who is going to win and what is going to happen.

About the beaches!

Yes, hon members can quarrel about the beaches too. They can come and quarrel about anything they like in Newton Park. [Interjections.] I should like to carry out an instruction by my bench-fellow, the hon member for Parow. He said that owing to a lack of time he could not complete his speech, and asked me to tell the CP and the PFP that wherever they have a candidate in the Cape, we are going to chase them from Dan to Bersheba, and from there to Gath, and if they are not careful, to the other side of Prieska, while we are at it. [Interjections.] Now I have done my bit for the hon member for Parow. [Interjections.]

I should very much like to talk about the new procedure with regard to the financing of welfare and housing projects and the funds allocated. I want to start with the determining of priorities for the purposes of a budget plan.

After the need for a project has been agreed to, the applicant is informed by letter by the regional representative. The approval of the need for a project represents the start of a negotiation process to acquire funds for it. Only limited funds can be acquired annually with the result that as a rule it is impossible to meet the demand fully. For that reason it is essential to allocate available funds on merit and, when at all possible, to economise in order to achieve the maximum benefit.

Because all projects, although deserving, may not be equally urgent owing to the nature and variety of needs which must be met, the careful determining of priorities is a prerequisite. If a low priority is allocated to a project this may, depending on the fund position, mean that the project must be delayed. However, priorities are reviewed annually on the basis of prevailing conditions. No expenses in connection with the project must therefore be incurred without the necessary authorisation.

As soon as the need for a project has been approved, it is included in a multi-term budget programme. The voting of funds for a specific financial year is linked to the laying down of guidelines within which expenditure in subsequent financial years must be kept.

This way of budgeting facilitates the administration and maintenance of a consistent building programme, because it gives a certain degree of certainty regarding the availability of funds in future financial years. Consequently the moment projections indicate that funds will be available for the implementation of a specific project in a future financial year or financial years a start can be made, subject to the necessary authorisation, with the planning thereof. On the completion of the planning further steps for the completion processes can receive attention with the minimum of delay. Apart from unforeseen circumstances, and provided persons undertaking projects take the respective steps in the completion process within the given time, continued progress should be made.

Priorities are determined annually at three primary levels, the first of which is the local level. When the need for a project is approved the first indication is given of the precedence which a project should enjoy, and this is taken into account by the department. In this way needs which are particularly urgent are identified as exceptional cases. The recent floods were a good example of this.

Every year on a specific date local authorities must submit a return to the department’s regional office in respect of all approved needs for projects which are to be executed in their area by the local authority itself, housing utility companies, welfare organisations, and utility companies. These needs include needs in respect of projects which have been formally agreed to, as well as projects which have been submitted for approval, but regarding which finality has not yet been reached. Particulars of projects for which the need has already been approved or of projects which are to be executed by housing utility companies, are given to the local authority by the relevant regional representative of the department.

Needs must be assessed objectively, while each need must be weighed up separately against the criteria embodied in the priority classification, which is the second primary level at which priorities are determined annually. The priority classification is divided into five categories. The first category is the absolute priority where the postponement or omission of the proposed project could have catastrophic consequences. The second category is the essential need for a project which cannot be neglected or postponed without seriously prejudicing the public interest. The third category is the preferential need for a project which should receive priority owing to its nature, scope and urgency. The fourth category is a proven need which, although indispensable, can be postponed without seriously prejudicing the public interest. The fifth category is a need for a project which can be left in abeyance or delayed with minor disadvantages to the public interest.

An A-priority classification must be reserved for an exceptional need which arises as a result of a disaster or other event which leaves people, for whom no suitable accommodation is available or can be made available by other means, homeless.

A B-priority classification must be allocated to an essential need which, on the basis of concrete evidence, is considered so urgent in the public interest that a project should be proceeded with immediately in order to meet this need. In this case it is preferable for the allocation of funds to be generally justifiable.

Thirdly there is the regional level. After the closing date for the submission of returns the relevant regional representative of the department will receive the various returns from the local authorities in the service areas, check them, and then summarise and assess them at regional level. The priorities are then submitted for consideration to the regional committee of the Development and Housing Board, on which an official of the Department of Health Services and Welfare serves in order to assist with the determining of priorities for welfare projects. That official must convey any evidence to the committee which regional welfare boards wish to submit. The regional committee determines the regional priorities in consultation with the relevant ministerial representative.

In the fourth place there is also the central level. On the receipt of the priority allocations from the regional offices, the priorities are assessed at national level by the department. Depending on the available funds and the priority given by the Government to the provision of housing to specific groups of people, the priority is rearranged at national level.

The national priorities are then submitted to the Development and Housing Board, after which they are submitted to the Minister along with the recommendation of the Development and Housing Board, and he in turn finally approves the priorities in co-operation with the various ministerial representatives.

On the basis of the priorities which are finally approved by the Minister, the funds are allocated for the financing of the following: Loans for the execution of formally approved projects; loans for the purchase of land; and the planning costs of projects the need for which has been approved.

The determining of priorities also enables the department to classify all approved needs and projects on hand in a multi-term budget programme which promotes the maintenance of a goal-orientated, effective and stable housing supply programme. The allocation of funds takes place on the basis of this programme. The priorities only apply for a year, after which they are reviewed. This enables the department to use funds for projects with the highest priority.

In conclusion, Mr Chairman, I feel that this is an excellent piece of work. It is a fine way of regulating procedure. I also want to join my hon colleague the hon member for Bellville and reemphasise that in my opinion it would be a very good thing if, as regards the initial purchase of houses and the subsidising of this, existing dwelling units could also be considered. There are many dwelling units in our country which are standing empty, and I really think the time may have come for the department to take another look at this. I should like to hear what the hon the Minister has to say in this regard.

Hear, hear!

Mr Chairman, I know you are about to call us to order to interrupt business. Should I therefore proceed, or can I … [Interjections.] Must I start my speech?

The hon member for Newton Park will forgive me if I do not react directly to him.

Order! The hon member asked so nicely, and the time has so very nearly elapsed … [Interjections.] … that I think this is an appropriate time to interrupt business.

Business interrupted at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Mr Chairman, I have already indicated that I shall not react to the speech made by the hon member for Newton Park. By the way, I see he is not here now. I should like to touch on a few other matters.

As regards local government, this year has been one of the most important years since the process of constitutional reform took shape in 1983. The Government’s policy with regard to local government rests on two pillars, viz self-determination in respect of own affairs and joint responsibility in respect of general or common affairs. As regards this department the idea of own affairs at the third tier of government has always remained a focal point, and with the coming into operation of the Local Councils Bill (House of Assembly), Act 94 of 1987, which was agreed to just before last year’s session of Parliament ended, it has gained a new dimension.

On the one hand this Act brings specific new concepts with regard to the independence of local communities, no matter how small they are, to the fore, and on the other it promotes the idea of devolution on which the Government placed so much emphasis when the new constitutional dispensation came into operation. The said Act is aimed at allowing each community to have a say with regard to matters which affect it closely.

With the abolition of certain divisional councils in the Cape and the simultaneous establishment of regional services councils, the implementation of every law in local areas which previously vested powers in divisional councils in those areas was transferred to the Minister entrusted with local government matters in the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly. The needs of these local communities or local areas falling outside a municipal area of jurisdiction, which in the past were divisional council wards, have come to the fore since the abolition of divisional councils.

Shortfalls which have arisen since the abolition of the relevant divisional councils already total R3,5 million. This may be ascribed chiefly to the falling away of the property tax levy of divisional councils. However, local communities, mainly through their taxpayers’ associations, are enthusiastic and positive about the new legislation, and several requests for the establishment of local councils, for which this Act makes provision, have already been received.

Regulations in which inter alia provision is made for the procedure in terms of which application must be made for the establishment of local councils, franchise qualifications and the powers and duties entrusted to such a council, are at present being drafted and will in the near future be submitted to interested groups and published for comment. A local council will in terms of this Act be vested with legal personality and will be able to look after the interests of the inhabitants of its area. At the same time it will be able to handle the interests of its community in its own right through representation on the regional services councils.

The practical arrangement has meanwhile been made that own affairs functions can, as an interim measure, be ratified on an agency basis by regional services councils on behalf of own affairs institutions. Although it is not desirable for a general affairs institution to handle own affairs functions, this arrangement is working well. This arrangement was made because immediately after the abolition of divisional councils, the own affairs institutions and this department did not have the necessary staff structure simply to take over the functions, and also because it was decided that in order to cause as little disruption as possible for the staff of the former divisional councils, they would all be allocated to the regional services councils for the time being. This is very important, Mr Chairman.

However, in due course serious consideration will have to be given to the future execution of own affairs functions of local councils by this Parliament itself. With a few exceptions, however, the execution of the functions on an agency basis is still subject to the approval of the Minister entrusted with local government matters in the Ministers’ Council of the House of Assembly. The exceptions referred to deal inter alia with the approval of building plans which have been delegated to the engineer of the relevant RSC for approval, and over which this department does not have any control.

The year 1988 is also historic because in October all population groups throughout the country will for the first time go to the municipal ballot box to test Government policy in respect of local government. For the first time who will take the lead at local government level will be determined on a party-political basis. [Interjections.]

In order to ensure that the election progresses successfully, candidates will have to display great responsibility and insight. This means that they will have to be acquainted with local government and its two underlying principles of self-determination and joint responsibility.

The holding of a national municipal election also indicates that this Government is serious about executing its policy of decentralisation of power and devolution of authority so that the man in the street can make known his needs at the third level of Government, the level closest to him.

The involvement of the Minister in the RSCs goes as far as the granting of permission for the various steps in the establishment of an RSC. Once the Regional Services Councils Bill, which was agreed to recently, comes into force, however, he will also be involved in the establishment of rural councils for regions or areas outside the area of jurisdiction of a local council, in order to give representation to communities which did not have representation in an RSC before.

In conclusion I should like to ask the Official Opposition to cease their boycott strategy, because boycotts destroy. [Interjections.] Let us rather build a third tier of government which has become an extremely important facet in our national economy. Let us go to the voters with truths. Let us refrain from telling lies and halftruths. It is strange how many presiding municipal CP members are suddenly paying their membership fees to the NP. One gains the impression that there are people who pay their dues only until they get what they want, and then stop paying.

In conclusion I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate the new Director-General, Mr Wessel Beyers, and welcome him here. I also congratulate Mr Chris van Niekerk; we shall definitely use him here in the Western Cape. [Interjections.] A final word of sincere thanks and appreciation goes to Callie Reynecke.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Beaufort West again referred to the CP’s boycott strategy. [Interjections.] I want to tell him that I prefer to boycott something if in doing so I am standing up for the rights of the Whites. [Interjections.] I prefer to do this than to believe in the politics of surrender, because then one is too paralysed to fight. [Interjections.]

I should like to refer to the department’s annual report. On page 21 there is a paragraph regarding the inquiry into the continued existence of the town Venterspost. It reads as follows:

Mr Chairman, I do not know to what interested bodies reference is being made here. Nevertheless this investigation has been under way for several years now. In the late sixties sinkholes appeared in that area and development virtually came to a standstill in Venterspost. At the moment there are approximately 300 families still living there. Mr Chairman, you will not believe this; those people do not even have tarred roads. However, year after year it is said that the matter is receiving attention and steps will be taken.

I have here a letter written by the previous MP for Carletonville, which he addressed to his voters. In this letter he said:

Order! The murmuring of voices in the House is too loud. Hon members must please lower their voices. The hon member may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I continue to quote—

He went on as follows:

Up to now not a single cent has been spent on carrying out this promise made to Venterspost. As they say, this was nothing but another Nat promise—a damp squib. [Interjections.] I have confidential information that the Government supports the recommendation and that the proposals will be implemented shortly.

I want to appeal to the hon the Minister today to tell those people what their future is. No more than 10 kilometers from Venterspost there is a Black town, Bekkersdal. Only last year R33,5 million was spent on upgrading that Black town. Yet again this proves that when Whites need the help of the Government it is not given to them, but that assistance is pumped into the Black towns on a large scale. [Interjections.]

Furthermore I want to point out that business undertakings in Venterspost are now threatening to close down. Last year the people could not buy petrol there. The oil companies did not want to deliver petrol because there was no progress there. After negotiations they agreed to deliver petrol for another year. [Interjections.] I therefore request the hon the Minister to tell us what is going to become of Venterspost. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Albany is speaking very loudly. Did he say that the hon member for Carletonville was a liar? I could not hear precisely what he said.

Yes, Sir, I did.

Order! The hon member must withdraw what he said.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw it.

Order! The hon member for Carletonville may proceed.

Mr Chairman, I have here in my hand a map which was published last year by the town council of Westonaria. In it they refer to a proposed area for Black urbanisation. According to this map a Black squatter camp is going to be developed between Randfontein and Westonaria. Take note, Sir, it is not an ordinary Black township; it is a Black squatter camp which is going to be developed there. A total of 180 000 concrete slabs are going to be laid on which Blacks will be able to urbanise and squat. Once they are squatting there it will be impossible to remove them. According to this map the area stretches across the Randfontein-Vereeniging road right up to Venterspost.

Now I want to ask the hon the Minister to tell me this evening whether this is why they are not continuing with the development in that area. Is the Black town which is going to be established there, which is going to stretch right up to Venterspost, the reason for this? We should like to know, because these people do not know whether they are coming or going.

I also want to refer briefly to the municipal elections. There was quite a bit of boasting by speakers this evening about who was going to do what. I merely want to make it clear that the CP is going to put their policy to the voters very clearly and openly. [Interjections.] I am going to make it very clear in my constituency what the people can expect if the NP wins there, and what they can expect if the CP wins there. [Interjections.]

I want to go further and say that the CP is going to tackle these municipal elections openly on a political basis. At present we are engaged in canvassing under the banner of the CP, and I can tell hon members categorically that in Carletonville and Westonaria one cannot find a Nationalist who goes about telling the people that he is standing under the banner of the NP. [Interjections.] They give themselves different names. They are under this or that organisation. They are afraid to say that they are standing under the banner of the NP. The reason is that they are ashamed. They cannot tell the voters that if they win the election as Nationalists they are going to have to implement the policy of the NP. They cannot tell them that they must vote for mixed areas, or that there must be open business areas. All those things must be said, and that is why they are not campaigning under the banner of the NP. Now we will see which party is the boycott party of the election. They are going to boycott their own party. [Interjections.]

Order! Before I call upon the next hon member to speak, I want to make it quite clear that the hon members for East London North, Jeppe, Albany and Germiston are to limit their unnecessary interjections. Other hon members should take note of this too.

Mr Chairman, it is my dubious pleasure to speak after the hon member for Carletonville. His opening remark was that he preferred to be a member of the boycott party. It is true that they are boycotting everything, and they are doing so for one purpose only, namely to overthrow this system. It is tragic that in this respect they are playing straight into the hands of the ANC. In this respect they both have the same objective in mind.

The hon member had a map in his hand. I was starting to get excited, because I was hoping that it was their partition map which they have not yet spelt out to us. [Interjections.]

He also said that the NP would battle to find candidates to stand in Carletonville and Venterspost, or Ventersburg or Ventersdorp. He confused these names a couple of times. However, I want to tell him that the CP are still wandering around in Germiston and cannot find candidates there. They have one of the independent ladies helping them in the person of a Mrs Haveloh. She has not been able to find candidates for them either.

That is not true!

Then those hon members must supply the names of their candidates if they can find any. I have not seen them yet. I have only heard about them. [Interjections.]

I do not want to dwell on this any longer. I think one of my hon colleagues is going to give attention to conditions in our Government villages later on in this debate. I am therefore going to concentrate on the Government village in Germiston District, my constituency. If I have enough time at my disposal I shall try to discuss all their problems in detail.

Apart from Oribi, Germiston’s Government village is the largest, and approximately 213 families are accommodated there. The annual maintenance costs for this village alone total R46 500, which amounts to approximately R250 per family. It would therefore seem as if this contribution, weighed up against the service which it offers in sheltering a needy community, is very small, but this is not the full picture. As is the case in other Government villages, the Government village in Germiston was established after the Second World War when existing military barracks were converted to accommodate soldiers returning from the war. Gradually these units were used for the accommodation of persons with low incomes at extremely reasonable rentals.

Conditions in Government villages have been causing serious concern both physically and socially for some time now, because they do not promote a healthy community life, and as far as I know this is definitely the case in Germiston. I want to dwell for a while on the physical condition of this village. The houses are all fairly dilapidated—understandably so, if one takes into consideration that they have stood for decades now and are made of wood. When they were built, research in this field had not progressed so far that they could be permanent buildings; as a matter of fact, at that stage they were planned as temporary units. Consequently enormous sums would have to be spent on the constant maintenance of these houses.

Apart from this one of the biggest problems that is being experienced is the state of the roads—if one can call them roads—and services like electricity, sewerage and water. I am not blaming anyone for this. It has been caused by the conditions and the age of the place, which is the result of subsequent history. It is an accomplished fact that these roads, which can hardly be negotiated in parts, can no longer be graded, because this would uncover services such as sewerage pipes and water pipes. The village is subject to erosion, and even if soil were to be brought in, it would simply wash away again unless enormous costs were incurred on permanent structures.

As is the case in any community, this small community also has its social problems. I make it my duty to visit this village regularly, and during the past year I have shared in the weal and woe of these people to a great extent. It is sometimes heartbreaking to visit some of these little houses. Although a few individuals tend to let things slide, a large section of this community still has pride and dedication. Beautiful little gardens, flowers and vegetables are very proudly displayed by people who can barely afford this. Wonderful people create homes in every sense of the word, which have become a real refuge to them. I have met people here who have such sincerity, Christianity and integrity that they humble one. In spite of their circumstances some of these people want to stay there, because they feel at home in what they have created for themselves.

I have no doubt that the hon the Minister has the greatest compassion for these little communities, but I should like to have it placed on record today that it is our duty to maintain this service and to look after the welfare of these people.

The alternative would be to move this village and to provide permanent houses elsewhere. The land on which it is situated at the moment adjoins one of Germiston’s luxury suburbs, and is obviously very valuable. However, the possibility of such a move makes the residents feel threatened because they are afraid they will not be able to afford higher rentals. At the moment some people’s rentals are already in arrears, and in most cases there are bona fide reasons for this.

This brings me to another real problem. Many of these residents are really not able to handle their own affairs, which makes them victims of exploitation. Without in any way jeopardising the handling of problems by the officials, I want to appeal to the hon the Minister for the management of the Government villages to include a local welfare service.

Most of these people live on a meagre pension and have tremendous personal problems which can easily be solved with a little assistance and a little advice. It is touching to experience the appreciation of these people when I have solved a simple problem for them. As a matter of fact, one feels grateful, because frequently a single telephone call is enough to solve what to them was an insurmountable problem. In this regard I want to thank the officials who so frequently deal with my representations in this regard.

Furthermore I want to thank the hon the Minister for his understanding and for the committee he appointed to investigate the quality of life of people in Government villages, and for their directive in this regard. This committee consists of representatives from the Development and Housing Board, the Department of Local Government, Housing and Works, the Department of Health Services and Welfare, as well as the relevant town councils. The committee decided to concentrate initially on Benoni’s Government village to make it a model for investigations in individual Government villages. I understand that the investigation has been completed and that their report is at present under consideration.

I should now like to bring it to the attention of the hon the Minister that the MPs in the relevant areas are constantly involved in the problems of these villages, and I want to request that they be involved in these investigations to a greater extent. We have the interests of the inhabitants at heart. In the course of our activities we have gained valuable knowledge of their problems and we believe that we can also make a contribution to the findings of this committee.

I thank you, Mr Chairman, for the opportunity I have had to broach this matter with regard to problems in my constituency, and I want to wish the hon the Minister, his department and the new Director-General everything of the best for the financial year. They have a big task and I know with what dedication they perform it.

Mr Chairman, I want to deal with two matters under this hon Minister’s Vote. The first one is the loan scheme to secure the homes of aged persons. This is a matter which the hon the Minister has already referred to during one of his addresses under this Vote.

There is no question that this is an important element in the lives of South Africans. It has become increasingly important in the lives of South Africans over the past three years. We have witnessed a great degree of political tension and political violence on a level that we have not experienced before. This in turn has had an effect on the crime rate and it has had a generally degenerative effect on the quality of life and on society in South Africa in general. Obviously it has affected the basic feeling of physical security and other elements of the personal security of a whole lot of South Africans. I think it is appropriate that a system exists to make cheap loans available, particularly to elderly people, in order to enable them to afford at least the basic requirements to make their homes more secure. As has been indicated, the purpose is to fund such basic things as burglar-proofing, security gates and other possible elements which can increase the basic security of their homes.

I put a question on the Question Paper asking the hon the Minister earlier this year to what extent use had been made of this particular facility and how many applications had been lodged with his department. I also asked what the response had been. I must say that I was amazed to find out how little interest had been shown on the part of the public at large in this particular facility. I was amazed until I saw the conditions applicable to these loans, particularly the condition that a mortgage bond had to be registered to secure a loan of as low as R1 000. I was therefore delighted when the hon the Minister announced in his speech earlier this afternoon that the department had decided to abolish this particular requirement and that legislation would be introduced to improve the situation. I really do believe that this can make an enormous difference. In these days it is simply nonsensical to require the security of a mortgage loan for an amount up to a maximum of R2 000. Quite frankly, even if people who borrow this kind of money default, I would suggest that it would quite easily cost the State more than R2 000 just to put the legal machinery in motion to obtain repayment of that loan in respect of which people had defaulted.

It was also interesting to notice that a number of institutions, mainly old age institutions, have applied for that facility and have been funded in this way. In fact, the lion’s share of the money paid out by the hon the Minister’s department has been paid out to these institutions. As has correctly been indicated by the hon the Minister himself and in the departmental report, that was not the primary objective. The primary objective was to create a situation in which elderly people could remain independent in the community in which they had always lived with a certain degree of security. The objective was therefore to give them some kind of financial assistance and incentive to make it easier for them to remain in their own homes instead of moving to old age institutions for the very simple reason that they have begun to feel insecure in their own homes. I am therefore very pleased that the hon the Minister has made certain concessions to make this facility much more easily available. I want to suggest further in this regard that I think the time may very soon come when the hon the Minister may want to consider increasing the maximum allowable amount that can be borrowed for this purpose. I do not think R2 000 gets one very far these days and one could quite easily have security systems or burglar-proofing fitted to a relatively moderate sized house that can cost one in excess of that amount. Therefore I think this is something that may require his attention.

In his speech this afternoon the hon the Minister indicated that while they will in future not require security by way of mortgage bonds, the board will have the authority to insist on other forms of security and will then be able to determine on an ad hoc basis or in a case of individual merit what kind of security is applicable and adequate. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister once again to make that as easy as possible for people. Very often these people on a low income level whom we are talking about do not possess cars and they find it difficult to make use of public transport. It poses a problem for many of them to move from one Government office to another and from one bureaucratic institution to another. We must try to get as close as possible to a one-stop service situation as far as this kind of thing is concerned. People can then make one visit, make an application, be interviewed briefly, give information about their bank accounts and be notified either on the spot or in writing at some later stage. We shall then avoid the situation in which people have to queue up and be referred from pillar to post in order to obtain this facility. That is the kind of thing which could very well make an enormous difference between whether the public is going to benefit from this very appropriate facility or not.

The second issue I wish to refer to affects a very different element of our society. Generally this situation affects people in a much higher income group, but I still believe it is important. I am referring to the recent phenomenon of foreign buyers investing in residential property in South Africa via the use of the financial rand. As I have indicated, this applies mostly to people in a higher income bracket—people who can afford somewhat more expensive property and yet are not necessarily wealthy enough to pay any price. This situation has burgeoned to such an extent that a number of estate agents have opened offices overseas and in some cases they have even established special departments of their firms abroad to deal with prospective buyers of South African residential property. I am specifically drawing the distinction between residential property like houses and flats and property used for any other purpose.

I suppose it can be argued that it brings money into the country when foreign investors invest in South African property. It can also be argued that this stimulates the property market to some extent. However, I believe that at the same time it has serious consequences for many South Africans who want to buy a house or a sectional title flat in their own country.

Very often we are talking about flats of high quality, beachfront flats in Sea Point, Three Anchor Bay and that kind of area, or fairly expensive housing. The situation that prevails— that the financial rand can be used for this purpose—simply means that foreign buyers are being given a completely unfair advantage when competing price-wise against South African citizens and other residents of this country, and I do not for one moment believe that the financial rand was created for this purpose in the first place. I am not suggesting that the Government should move in and use a heavy hand against agents who conduct property deals across international boundaries. This is the right that one should have within a free enterprise system, but what I do object to is a system introduced by the South African Government in respect of South African property, residential property in particular, which puts South Africans at a disadvantage vis-a-vis foreigners when it comes to purchasing their own homes and their own flats.

Hear, hear!

This situation does not only have damaging results in specific cases where there is a competitive situation between a foreign buyer and a South African buyer; it may also well bring about an inappropriately high level of property prices in certain areas. It may well inflate property prices in this country quite artificially, and while a lot of people will be making lots of money out of it, I do not believe that overall this is the kind of ideal situation we are looking for from the perspective of the prospective South African buyer. [Interjections.] I have always imagined that the original purpose of the financial rand was to create investment, to invite and generate investment that would create job opportunities locally and would improve our competitive position with regard to exports from South Africa to other countries, and I do not believe that any of these considerations apply to the property market. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, when I listened to the hon member for Green Point’s speech which, by way of exception, was mainly constructive, I could hardly believe that it was this very same hon member who was still unperturbed last year when the UDF distributed their pamphlets at his own political meeting. [Interjections.] I think his gradual progression from the far-left spectrum of the party of which he is a member to the middle, is possibly due to the fact that even he has discovered to what extent the support of the voters for his party has been eroded. [Interjections.]

Well done, Renier! Fan the flames!

You are still lagging behind!

Coming back to the Official Opposition, I also want to say that it is a pity that the hon member for Nigel chose to refer to the office of ministerial representative in contemptuous terms earlier in this debate. I simply find it highly ironic that that hon member and his party have elected to attempt to attack an office which has the potential to reinforce the interests of Whites in this manner, when they set such great store by the interests of the Whites.

They hate the Whites!

Since this is a discussion of an own affairs Vote, I should also like to refer more specifically in my speech to the role of the ministerial representative, and I want to make an appeal for the active development and implementation of this post. We are living in times in which Government, that is to say the executive authority in general, is seen by many people throughout the world as a remote and almost hostile institution. There is sometimes a feeling of distance between the rulers and those who are ruled, and there are many reasons for this, some of which are even valid. The question which arises, however, is what can be done about this.

I want to suggest that the office of ministerial representative can fill an important void in this regard—that is to say in bringing the client, if I may call him that, the one who is governed, closer to the decision-maker, the one in power.

In terms of the official exposition of the activities and functions of ministerial representatives, it is clearly the intention that they may also play an important part in the formulation of policy for the House of Assembly by way of their contributions to the Ministers’ Council on a continuous basis. In addition, as fully fledged members of the committees of that House, they will play an important part in formulating the executive policy of that same Ministers’ Council.

This simply emphasises the role of the ministerial representative as an intermediary or a link between the White community and the Government’s decision-makers. He or she must be a proactive sounding board for the Ministers, just like this hon Minister, specifically in the increasingly sensitive field of local government, to name but one field of activity.

It has become commonplace to say that the importance of local government in the future of our country cannot be overestimated. Other hon members have referred to this during the course of this debate. In my opinion it is, in many respects, the first tier of government, because this is the level to which most of the citizens of the country are exposed first every day. Never in our history has the need for continuous feedback from that level to the Ministers’ Council been greater than it is now.

The direct impressions of the ministerial representative as to how the policy of the central Government is being implemented and experienced at the local level, and as to what bottlenecks or inadequacies could possibly arise, will most certainly be recognised as indispensable in the future.

What about an elected provincial government?

Mr Chairman, as far as that interjection by the hon member for Durban Central is concerned, I just want to tell him that one need not be elected in order to serve as an efficient sounding board. That is precisely what these people can do. [Interjections.]

Order! There is too much loud conversation in the House. I simply will not allow it.

Mr Chairman, apart from the great task of serving as a link from the lower to the higher level, there is also a need to do the same from the higher to the lower level. We are living in an era of communication, in which information regarding the reasons for Government action must be made known clearly and timeously. In this respect, too, the ministerial representative has a key part to play. At a time when misrepresentations, distortions and even flagrant untruths are continuously—almost daily—being dished up to the voting public, inter alia by hon members of the Official Opposition, the need …

The court says so, too!

Yes, the court says so as well. … the need for a communicator to place decision-making and the formulation and implementation of policy in perspective, has never been greater.

In many respects the ministerial representative is the salesman or saleslady of the entire concept of own affairs at the primary level, and he or she stands in the front line.

They have an impossible task!

It is not an impossible task at all. The success or lack of success of this concept will depend to a considerable extent on the people who occupy these posts. I therefore want to ask the hon the Minister to do everything in his power—not only in his own department, but also in the Ministers’ Council—to give this important office even greater form and content.

All of us on this side of the House who want to see the concept of own affairs expanded, in contrast to the hotchpotch of general affairs which the hon members of the PFP—and inter alia the hon member for Durban Central—are advocating here so vociferously, would owe the hon the Minister a vote of thanks if he were to accede to this request. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, …

“Jan Asblik!” [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Umhlanga referred to the fact that we should keep general and own affairs separate. I believe the two are so directly related to one another that his argument is absurd. It is absurd to want to separate the two. It is precisely like removing a man’s lungs and heart from his body and keeping them apart. The body cannot survive without those organs. The sooner we realise that these two components form a unit, the better for us all.

Do you acknowledge own affairs?

I acknowledge own affairs. How could I fail to acknowledge own affairs? However, I do not need legislation in order to do so. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, at the end of this year elections for local government structures will take place throughout the country. I just want to dwell on a few aspects in this regard. Firstly, I want to ask whether there really is a devolution of power, as the Government maintains, to the third tier of government. To illustrate my point, I want to refer to the application made to the Cape Town City Council two years ago by a developer, one Mr Smit, to have an erf which he had purchased on the corner of Main Road and Baker Road in Kenilworth, in my constituency, rezoned so that he could erect a filling station on that residential erf.

This application was unanimously rejected by the Cape Town City Council for the simple reason that virtually the whole of Kenilworth which, by the way, falls in my constituency, had expressed its opposition to this proposal. Despite this opposition the Administrator ignored the City Council’s objections and approved the rezoning after the developer had made an appeal to him. [Interjections.]

After the City Council had obtained legal advice, it was found that technically the Administrator had acted incorrectly, and for that reason his approval of this rezoning was withdrawn.

Not long afterwards the developer submitted another application to the City Council for the rezoning of this erf. After a lengthy discussion the residents made it very clear by way of a petition that they did not want this filling station there. The City Council once again unanimously rejected the application. All the representatives in that area, that is to say the two city council members, the ratepayers’ association concerned, and I, as a member of Parliament, opposed this application. Despite all this opposition the Administrator approved the rezoning for the second time.

The Administrator’s decision came as a tremendous shock to all the interested parties in the Kenilworth area. That section of Kenilworth along the Main Road is one of the few areas which is still purely residential, in which there are no business concerns, and where people are still living in houses and flats free of the noise made by business concerns. Those involved were also shocked at the fact that no reasons for this decision were furnished by the Administrator.

†If this Government treats the opinions of local residents with the sort of contempt that was exhibited in this case, they should not be surprised if people question the usefulness of taking part in local government elections.

Is your party going to stand?

My party? [Interjections.]

The decision to overrule the opinions of the local community, the local city council, the local councillors, the local ratepayers’ association and the MP makes a mockery of the Government’s claims that it is delegating decision-making power to local government level. [Interjections.] If a local community cannot even keep a petrol station out of the residential area, what chance do they have of changing a political decision taken by this Government? It is time that the hon the Minister looked into this sort of abuse of power by people above the third level of government.

The Administrator treated the people of Claremont with contempt. He behaved like a typical bully, totally disregarding local opinion and democracy when it did not suit him. That is typical of how the Government operates all the time. [Interjections.]

However, when I ask for more devolution of power to the third level of government, I do not mean that local authorities should be allowed local option when it comes to racial matters, since this results in these local authorities practising racial discrimination.

A good example is to be found in George, where the municipality is forcibly evicting about 2 000 Black people from an area in which they have been living for 30 years or more. Having observed the way in which the George municipality has been hounding the Black residents of this township for the past seven years in an attempt to move them, I would suggest that we are desperately in need of legislation that will prevent local authorities from doing this sort of thing. [Interjections.]

*When I look at the hon member for George and the enthusiastic manner in which he supported the forced removals on television yesterday evening, I can only tell the CP …

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

I do not have the time to answer a question. [Interjections.]

I just want to tell the CP that they need not put up a candidate for election in George; they have a very good ally in the hon member for George, who supports those forced removals. [Interjections.]

Order!

He supports the removals! He also supports the town clerk, Mr C P du Plessis— quite typical good initials—who stated very clearly that those people were being moved because George did not want Black people in its municipality. [Interjections.]

Order! I have a problem with the hon member’s discussion of Black removals under this Vote. The hon member must come back to the Vote under discussion.

I am referring to the campaign by the local authority of George to remove those people.

Order! The hon member may proceed; I am listening to the hon member.

Mr Chairman, that hon member is attempting to hide behind the Government’s policy. They say that the Coloureds of George do not want the Black people there. That is not true. The town clerk says it is the Coloureds who do not want the Black people in Lawaaikamp. That is an infamous lie. Just ask the Labour Party whether they want Lawaaikamp to be Coloured. No! But perhaps he is co-operating with the management committee.

Mr Chairman, it is a great pleasure to speak after the hon member for Claremont. He made a fairly tame speech today—in contrast to what we usually get from him. However, it was clear that the speech he made here this evening had been prepared for the provincial committee where he should have spoken yesterday or the day before. He did not turn up there, however, eventually arriving right at the end, when the debate adjourned.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member says that I attended the provincial debate yesterday where I should have made a speech. That is not correct, because I was not given a turn to speak.

You were; you were given ten minutes!

Order! No, the Chair is not an arbitrator when it comes to who has or does not have a turn to speak. The hon member may continue.

He did turn up at the end of the meeting, but it was too late to speak … [Interjections.]

Order!

The speech he wanted to make there was the one he made here this evening. He did not want to make use of the opportunity he was given to speak directly to the Administrator of the Cape Province. It is quite clear that it is just tripe, which is what he usually talks here.

Mr Chairman, I am also pleased that he has remained in his seat this evening, because we have got used to him. He makes a speech, says certain things, gets everybody worked up, sends people’s blood pressure soaring, and when he has finished he walks out of the House. Because of this he has earned himself a very good nickname, the Flying Dutchman. He is called that because he takes flight.

Order! The hon member may not refer to another hon member as being afraid.

I am sorry, Sir. I withdraw that remark. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, he represents a constituency. I wonder if he holds report-back meetings in that constituency and, if he does, whether he tells his voters the same sort of thing he tells us here?

I shall invite you!

I do not think he would dare, because then they really would get rid of him. They cannot do so before the next election, but he is certainly going to hear from them. [Interjections.]

On various occasions he has said things in this House and we have not known where he got them from.

You really are stupid!

He is very fond of giving a distorted version of the problems of Coloured people in this House. No one will ever know where he gets his information. [Interjections.] It is clear to me that he frequents certain haunts where other hon members would never want to go. [Interjections.]

Order! Did the hon member for Claremont say that the hon member for Meyerton was stupid? [Interjections.]

If I said he was stupid, I withdraw it, but I cannot remember having said it. [Interjections.]

He cannot always remember what he has said. It is also obvious on Tuesdays, when we get replies to questions from our hon Ministers, that no matter how many questions he has on the Order Paper, he is never here to listen to the replies. I wonder if he reads the answers somewhere or if he just ignores them.

That hon member must be called to account. I wonder if he could tell us approximately how many hours a month he spends in this House. There are many days on which he spends only half an hour or 20 minutes here. One sees him come in, he walks through and sits in his seat, but within five or 10 minutes he leaves again. [Interjections.]

Order!

I wonder if he thinks that is fair to this House …

Order! If I call for order, hon members must give me a chance to speak. Interjections are being made here that have absolutely no bearing on the speech of the hon member for Meyerton. Those interjections and remarks must cease immediately. The hon member for Meyerton may proceed, but he must come back to the discussion of the relevant Vote.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I should, however, just like to ask the hon member for Claremont to tell us one day where he gets all the nonsense he talks here. He must get it from elements who ask him to come and say these things here. I hesitate to say which elements they are …

Order! Those elements cannot be discussed here now. The hon member must come back to the Vote.

Mr Chairman, I shall confine myself to that and now come to the point which I actually want to speak about, viz housing.

The Government is often criticized for not doing enough for White housing. I differ with that viewpoint, because in fact a lot is being done in that regard. Quite a few other speakers have referred to the various measures available to assist those wanting to purchase or build homes. There are also other measures available, eg housing subsidies and so on. I do not want to repeat that information, because it has already been mentioned by various speakers and I am therefore not going to do so too.

I want to refer to the Government villages in this country. The hon member for Germiston District has already referred to the matter this evening, and I want to link up with that. We have seven such Government villages. They may not be the most attractive, convenient and the best homes we are accustomed to in this lovely country of ours, but the people who live in them are very proud of them.

Accommodation has been offered to approximately 1 200 families, generally people with low incomes. We are proud to think that we are also providing accommodation for those people. [Interjections.] Yes, it has been said here that Akasiapark is also a Government village, but it is not one of those on my list. I have seven others on my list. Akasiapark is the eighth, but these are really needy people. We shall come to them at a later stage.

The seven Government villages consist of a total of 1 216 dwelling units, and these include 484 one-bedroomed, 409 two-bedroomed, 303 three-bedroomed and 17 four-bedroomed dwelling units. The rental is very low.

The rental for a one-bedroomed unit in the economic class is R11 per month, and R13 per month for the subeconomic class. The rental for a two-bedroomed unit is R13 per month for the economic class, and R16 per month for the subeconomic group. The rental for a three-bedroomed unit is R16 per month for the economic class and R20 per month for the subeconomic class. The rental for a four-bedroomed unit is only R24 a month for the economic class, and R30 per month for the subeconomic class. Unfortunately some of these people find themselves in economic difficulties and cannot always pay their rent.

The total annual revenue is approximately R180 000 as against expenditure of R207 000. It is clear, therefore, that despite the low rental charged for the units, the scheme has to be subsidised to a large extent to make it easy for people to live there. In addition to the accommodation enjoyed by those people, their interests are cared for by a manager in each Government village to whom they can take their problems. He in turn has a factotum with a team of workers at his disposal who look after the Government village. The people living there are very happy. In every one of these Government villages there are waiting lists of people who want to live there. Improvements to these places are often requested, but that is out of the question. We cannot afford to make improvements with the limited amount of money coming in.

These places were planned adjacent to our larger towns, and over the past 40 years, since Government villages were built, these towns have expanded to such an extent that most of them have begun to develop around the Government villages. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I understand this evening that it has been announced outside Parliament that Parliament is to end its proceedings on 1 July and reconvene on 22 August for two weeks. I believe that this could constitute a breach of parliamentary privilege, because this is a matter which relates to Parliament. I understand it has been disclosed to the Press by a person who is not a member of Parliament—by the hon the State President! [Interjections.] I believe that in matters relating to Parliament the sittings of Parliament should be announced in Parliament by either the hon the Leader of the House or by Mr Speaker. I ask you to consider this point of order.

Order! I regret to inform the hon member that I cannot deal with it as a point of order at this stage.

Mr Chairman, we too have just heard about this television announcement that Parliament is going to adjourn on 1 July… [Interjections] … and I want to say that as far as we are concerned, it was improper. It is not fit and proper that hon members of this House should be told by an outside body of matters that concern them. It should have been announced in Parliament in the first place. [Interjections.] We want to express our displeasure and disappointment at this kind of behaviour.

I want to address myself to the hon the Minister and ask him to assist me with a problem I have in my constituency, particularly with regard to the town of Ermelo itself. The City Council of Ermelo decided recently that the central business district of the town would not be thrown open. I now want to know from the hon the Minister what the situation is. Is he going to abide by the policy of the Government that central business districts must be open? It is not a difficult question. We would really like to know what the hon Minister’s attitude is in this regard.

Will they now act contrary to the desires of the local authority and force their policy on the town of Ermelo? [Interjections.] I shall tell him why I am asking this. We have the peculiar situation that this city council, consisting mainly of NP members, decided that notwithstanding their membership of the NP, they were going to keep the central business district closed. I now want to know whether any action will be taken against those councillors as members of the NP. What will be done in this case? We should really like to know what action will be taken.

Since 1983, local government has been an own affair in terms of the Constitution of the Republic, and here we are in 1988. In point of fact, up to now local government has been vested in the province in an appointed racially mixed provincial authority. [Interjections.] Hon members of the governing party constantly present local government as the vehicle through which self-determination will be implemented in this country. It is still being presented to us in this light.

However, the situation has now been reached where we have to ask the hon the Minister for clarity. We are under the impression that local government, as we know it, is in the process of being totally phased out. That is how we see it, but I wonder if the hon the Minister has not been told—as the hon the Minister of Education and Development Aid was told—to work himself out of his post.

He must work himself out of his job.

Yes, he must tell us if he has received that instruction. As far as the disappearance of local government as we know it today is concerned, provincial government, the provincial executive authority, finds itself in the situation that in all probability it will not only be an executive authority, but a legislative authority as well. If I read the weekend papers correctly, the hon member for Umlazi said that as far as the joint executive authority of Natal and KwaZulu was concerned, there were no problems. Apparently, there is nothing in the way of that authority’s becoming a legislative authority as well.

Oh no, you are talking rubbish!

As long as this situation continues, therefore, and these functions are not transferred to own affairs, as they were supposed to be, the fewer chances there are, and it is obvious that they will never become own affairs which we can deal with in this House.

Even when functions have been transferred, there are additional factors to be dealt with, such as housing. According to the Constitution, local government within a group area of a specific population group is an own affair for that group. What is going to happen when open areas are established in local government areas? Will we have the situation that an open area in the local authority will become a general affair? How can it be dealt with otherwise? Will these open areas become a general affair within the same authority? The closed area, however, remains an own affair and falls under the same local authority.

It becomes a general own affair!

Yes, we are simply trying to indicate that the NP is in the process of generalizing its own affairs. We have a further argument to put to hon members.

The regional service councils are in themselves an abolition of local authorities. According to NP statements regional service councils are a horizontal extension of local government. That is how this is defined, and it is even referred to as such in legislation. We now have the strange situation that local government is an own affair and a vehicle for self-determination, if that definition is correct.

In reality, own affairs are continuously being abolished. We are told that self-determination will be ensured by the shift of power to local authorities. We say today that we do not agree with that. The so-called shift of power is just another misleading title for something which in fact does not exist. It will only succeed if the shift of power means that the local authority will become more autonomous, with a form of self-determination, and for that reason it must be autonomous to the extent that it can lay down its own policy, thereby having authority to determine policy and not merely execute instructions.

In our view, this instance also clearly indicates that there is no question that the so-called shift of power holds any benefit for us. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, before I reply to the hon member for Ermelo, I should like to return to the hon member for Claremont. Arising from a speech by the hon member for Meyerton, the hon member alleged that he had not had a turn to speak in the provincial debate. Surely that is untrue and the hon member knows it. I have the list in my hand and printed here is “House of Assembly: Van Eck”. I have it here for the hon member to inspect and what he said is therefore not correct. [Interjections.]

There are a few interesting aspects with regard to the hon member. He had a great deal to say this evening about the relocation of people at George and attendant matters. What did the hon member do, however? He telephoned a member of the PFP executive at George and asked him kindly to arrange for the Civic Centre at George to be available for him for a meeting next Friday evening. That member of the PFP executive telephoned the hon member for George, conveyed the request to him and asked him whether he could assist him in this regard. [Interjections.] The hon member can say what he likes. I think I have already reacted to him as regards this.

I should like to get to the CP. I found it enormously interesting that the hon member for Carletonville said in his speech that CP candidates would fight the coming city council elections openly under the CP banner.

I have a working document in my hand for municipal elections of 1988, its origin being the CP of South Africa in the Transvaal. It was published by Mr A S Beyers, the General Secretary of the CP. I should like to read to the House what the CP have to say in this document of theirs. They mention two concepts here, namely official CP candidates and unofficial candidates.

That is the AWB!

It is very interesting that the words “unofficial candidates” are printed in bold type to make them stand out. It is even more interesting that they have the following to say in point 4 under the caption “Wyse van deelname en kandidate”:

But that is not good enough, however. They do not trust their own channels.

Just listen to what they have to say in point 6, under the caption “Wyse van deelname en kandidate”:

This is again printed in italics, naughty boys! [Interjections.]

And then the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke is extremely upset when the hon member for Springs points out to him that contracts may exist, but what does this “Bylae A” say? If the candidate, that is the official and the unofficial candidate, were to stand, point 3 of “Bylae A” says that—

To carry out AWB policy! [Interjections.]

The sacrosanct CP says the following under point 4:

This applies to the unofficial men—

I also see that they have to give a deposit of R100 toward the fund. [Interjections.]

Is that for the new bottle, or what?

It is toward the Andries Treurnicht campaign fund. [Interjections.] The most interesting aspect of this document, however, is that they say here:

What good image?

I don’t know!

[Interjections.] What do you think of that for an opportunist, Mr Chairman? [Interjections.]

Does he get his R100 back later too? [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to make only one point. The hon member for Ermelo had a great deal to say about own affairs and local government and he wanted to confuse us with words.

He is confused himself!

The facts are that there is a councillor in Ermelo who was a mayor—that hon member must listen very carefully now—who told us that he would not vote for the CP again, because CP leaders changed their standpoint from day to day. [Interjections.]

Then he definitely cannot vote for the NP!

I want to make only this comment about the CP. The self-confidence of our Official Opposition in this House has increased appreciably since a certain magazine paid attention to, I think, one of the youngest members, if not the youngest member, of that party.

[Inaudible.]

That was when the pin-up princes of this House appeared. [Interjections.] What those hon members do not know, however, is that in that process there was also a search for a teaser … [Interjections.] …

And not a sterile cow!

… which is typical of the CP political teasers because they are making the voters’ mouths water proverbially out there for something they cannot produce! [Interjections.]

Order! [Interjections.] Order!

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I should like to know whether the use of the word “teaser” (“koggelram”) is parliamentary?

Order! The hon member may proceed. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, I want to tell the CP that their candidate in ward 9 in Pretoria, in my constituency, Prof Henning, is free to walk about and distribute pamphlets on Ascension Day; the House must take note of this. The voters of Pretoria Central have already tumbled to the CP and they will show the CP this on 26 October. They have tumbled to the CP, as has the rest of South Africa.

Hear, hear!

Tonight I want to express only a few thoughts concerning Church Square in my constituency. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may proceed.

Church Square in Pretoria was established in 1854 as a result of a need which arose. A century later, in 1954, it was renovated and Pres Kruger’s statue was moved there from the railway station. It is now 1988 and when we look at Church Square we are very grateful that it still forms part of the city centre of Pretoria. We are also grateful that a specific cultural-historic value has been attached to Church Square. I am also grateful, as the member of Parliament for that constituency, to be able to say that the voters of that constituency and every hon member on this side of the House are proud of the fact that Church Square still forms part of our cultural-historic heritage.

When we read the annual report, it is pleasing to note that R6,5 million—it is expected ultimately to be R7 million—will be spent on the renovation of the Ou Raadsaal on Church Square. We wish to thank the hon the Minister and his department very much for taking the trouble to settle that matter for us.

I want to conclude. As a geographical and historical centre, Church Square and the adjacent area do not belong only to the city of Pretoria, but to the entire country of South Africa and it offers enormous possibilities to everyone. That is why I hope the authorities will remain involved in the preservation, the renovation and the maintenance of Church Square. We welcome involvement there. Furthermore I hope that a centre like the Capitol Theatre on Church Square, which forms part of the whole complex, will be included in the overall renovation process of Church Square.

Mr Chairman, in the last few minutes available to the PFP I should like to deal with a matter that arose here in Cape Town on 23 March of this year, when the inaugural meeting of the Community Liaison Forum was held. This was a meeting convened by a local Cape Town businessman, addressed by a member of the SA Police Force and attended by 25 carefully selected members of the public.

I wish to summarise the basic functions of that organisation as outlined in the brochure accompanying their invitation, but before I do so I want to remind the House that I addressed a question to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning regarding that meeting and asking what its purpose was. His reply was that the meeting had been held to establish a community liaison forum between the private sector and the joint management system. The written invitation to the meeting expanded on this basic function and explained that the meeting was to be held to deal with matters relating to the security situation and what the community expected in specific circumstances in relation to socio-economic projects of upliftment and upgrading of communities and in relation to acts of a disruptive nature within the community, and how meaningful steps or measures could be taken to establish normality.

Mr Chairman, what is particularly noteworthy about that meeting is that all of these functions are supposed to be performed by the country’s elected representatives and the forums they are serving. Specifically socio-economic projects of upliftment are surely the preserve of Parliament and of local authorities, and I ask why such responsibilities should be usurped by some secretive network formed at the selective invitation of the National Security Council. Those elected to office are expected to attend to the needs and the requests of the communities they serve, and yet when I asked the question of the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, I was advised that the relevant members of Parliament and city councillors in the area concerned had not been invited to that meeting in their official capacity.

My own investigations have further revealed that they were in fact not invited at all. The hon the Minister further advised that the forum was not responsible to any specific body, but served as an organised liaison committee between the community and the joint management system.

I believe that the public at large are owed some answers to the following questions. Who decided which groups should be invited to that meeting?

What criteria are used in deciding that someone has committed an act of a disruptive nature, and to whom are those who serve on these bodies responsible? Above all, if we are to have constitutional government, why is this form of shadowy alternative administration being built up?

Let me be more specific. This hon Minister is responsible for local government, and I would like to know whether he is in fact involved in JMCs. Does he know about the activities that I have recounted, and are officials of his department involved? Do they attend meetings or, alternatively, do they receive copies of the minutes of such meetings?

We are left with this question. Who is responsible for local government? The hon member for Sea Point described the introduction of JMCs as a most sinister political development. [Interjections.] Despite the fact that the hon the Minister of Defence has denied that these organisations are secretive, there is ample evidence that that is not correct. [Interjections.]

We do not need alternative government structures. We need responsible government from elected representatives. I would be interested to hear the hon the Minister’s answers to these questions.

Mr Chairman, I should like to devote my speech to Government villages. The hon member for Meyerton said earlier this evening that there were seven Government villages in the Republic. These Government villages originated in that accommodation had to be created for returning soldiers after the Second World War. Military barracks were converted into residential units and these units were gradually made available to Whites in the lower-income group.

The rental for a one-bedroomed house, for example, is R11 if the tenant’s income is below R150 per month and R13 if his income exceeds that. The corresponding amounts for a two-bedroomed house are R13 and R16. The maximum income varies from R250 to R520 per month, depending on the number of children such a tenant has.

One of these villages, Collondale at East London, is situated in the Albany constituency, and I have been concerned for a considerable time about the physical and social conditions in which the inhabitants of Collondale live. In the light of the conditions in which the inhabitants of this Government village live and to enhance the quality of life of the inhabitants of Government villages, the hon the Minister appointed a committee.

The terms of reference of the committee were to inquire into and make recommendations on the following: The conditions of buildings and infrastructure in Government villages; the acceptability of town planning and possible replanning; occupation density; appearance and improvements; community facilities; services furnished to inhabitants, including the maintenance of structures and sites; social aspects; qualification requirements for admission and continued residence in Government villages, as well as selection of tenants; rentals; integration of Government villages into the rest of the community; improved utilisation of land; the desirability of the continuance or replacement of accommodation; location of Government villages; transfer of Government villages to local authorities, and the possible sale of dwellings to tenants.

This report has been completed as regards Benoni and is currently under consideration. There is one aspect which concerns me and that is the transfer of Government villages to local authorities, because I should not like to see Collondale transferred to the East London city council, which has a record for unreliability.

Collondale consists of 99 residential units, of which 97 are occupied.

The fact is that there is a demand for three-bedroomed houses for couples with three or more children whereas there are only three residential units with three bedrooms. There is nowhere for children to play here and that is why I want to emphasise this aspect.

As the Government village in Benoni is being concentrated upon at present with a view to using it as a model during the subsequent inquiry as regards individual Government villages, I wish to request that the inquiry in respect of other Government villages be completed as soon as possible and the recommendations immediately made operative.

The 90% loan scheme for housing is popular among those of our citizens who are having a house built for the first time. It is clear that there is considerable ignorance about the scheme. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister to bring this scheme more prominently to public attention so that more people may make use of it.

It is a sober fact that our White birth rate is static and I should like to appeal for this scheme to be extended to existing dwellings. It is true that there are old residential areas with well-built houses, but that the replacement value of these dwellings is double their market value. In this way our young couples could be put in a position in which they could acquire a house and improve and restore it gradually. In this way a renewal could take place in our residential areas.

I should like to pay tribute to the hon the Minister and his department for what they have done for the White part of the population by providing accommodation and supplying the needs of our senior citizens. The number of schemes which have been instituted is clear proof that the department is trying to satisfy all needs within the framework of its jurisdiction. I take pleasure in supporting this Vote.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pretoria Central spoke about our official and unofficial candidates. He appeared not to know why there is a need for unofficial candidates in these municipal elections. Surely he knows that it is his Government’s laws which have been drawn up regarding public servants which necessitate their standing as unofficial candidates. He should not pretend to be an angel; he knows exactly what the reason for this is.

Another reason is the fear which some people experience of intimidation measures which are applied by those hon members where they form the majority in a community. We all know about this; they must not come here with hypocritical faces.

Mr Chairman, the hon the Minister spoke about fairness earlier. He referred to housing. Earlier he quoted statistics to hon members in respect of White housing over the past 38 years. I did a calculation and the cost attached to each of those houses works out at an average of less than R13 000. I now ask him in all fairness why my people, the needy people of Krugersdorp, are obliged to pay R18 000 for subeconomic houses, which were erected at least 30 years ago, if they want to acquire them. The hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning recently replied to a question of mine and said that they had disposed of 58 000 or 59 000 houses and sold them to Black people at an average price of R183. That is not a fair approach. [Interjections.] It is a disgrace.

Order! Before the hon member proceeds with his speech, he must withdraw the word “hypocritical”.

I withdraw it, Sir.

Order! The hon member may proceed.

I also want to ask whether the hon the Minister thinks it is fair to permit councillors of local authorities to be misled into believing that they are concerned only with own affairs.

I again want to cite an incident which occurred in Krugersdorp as an example.

†I put a question to the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning concerning the relocation of Munsieville. The question I asked was:

Munsieville is located right within a White group area. The reply I received from the hon the Minister was that yes, the people of Krugersdorp had been given such an undertaking, by the Government of those hon members, the Town Council of Krugersdorp and the West Rand Development Board; that is, everyone concerned. The people of Krugersdorp and their council, the own affairs control of that town, were told literally that they could go and take a running jump at themselves because those hon members had decided that in spite of their undertaking, which, according to the reply to my question, has been given to them on more than one occasion over a period of about 20 years, those people would be moved to the Black town of Kagiso at Krugersdorp—there was a population of about 3 600 people involved—and in spite of the numerous assurances by the hon members on that side of the House, the people at Munsieville have now been told that they are to stay where they are. The hon the State President has said so and the present population is in excess of 30 000. I do not think even those hon members can calculate what the population is. That is how they honour the concept of own affairs and general affairs.

I want to go further and talk about the proposed establishment of a squatter camp in the Krugersdorp area. The Quadro Council decided as follows concerning any further development for squatters or other residential purposes on the West Rand—

*My colleague the hon member for Carletonville has a similar problem. The Quadro Council also says that—

What did the council say when it was approached about the possibility that Rietvallei should become a squatter area? Its members then reached a decision on 26 October 1987 that the council did not support the establishment of a squatter town on sections 4, 23 and 40 of the farm Rietvallei 241IQ. That is the voice of the inhabitants of Krugersdorp. The majority of councillors at the moment are Nationalists. We have not got rid of them yet, but their time will soon come, on 26 October. [Interjections.]

What does the hon the Administrator of the Transvaal have to say? He made a speech on 8 December 1987 to Black local authorities of the West Rand region. Do hon members know what he said? He said—

What he is saying here is that, regardless of the approach of the representatives of the voters of Krugersdorp and the West Rand area and in spite of their objections to this, the Administrator is now telling them to go and take a running jump at themselves; this is their decision, this is what they have done and the matter is closed.

I therefore appeal to that hon Minister to do something about this type of approach because it will not get them very far.

Mr Chairman, I shall refer to the speech made by the hon member Mr Derby-Lewis a little later on. [Interjections.] The fact of the matter is that the hon member is raking up certain matters here which really belong under the Vote of my colleague, the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. That Vote will be discussed next week.

The hon member can also feel free to put his case during the debate on that Vote. [Interjections.] He is very sure of himself as regards the municipal election in his part of the world, but I want to tell him in the words used by the hon member for Parow earlier this afternoon that a campaign still lies ahead of us.

Ask your hon colleague! [Interjections.]

The hon member Mr Derby-Lewis is going to talk himself out of this House, but he is also going to talk the other people out of Krugersdorp’s town council. [Interjections.]

I greatly appreciate the debate which took place; I think it was a pleasant debate. I shall endeavour to deal with the matter as quickly as possible. I want to say a few words about local government before I reply to hon members individually.

Earlier this afternoon the hon member for Walvis Bay made what I considered to be a very responsible speech on local government. I want to thank him for this, as well as for the good comments which he made regarding the department and the officials, which I greatly appreciated. On their behalf I want to thank the hon member and other hon members who referred to the functions of the department and to the report.

The hon members for Walvis Bay, Bellville, Ermelo, Middelburg, and I think the hon member for Nigel as well as several other hon members referred to the matter of local government. I referred to this matter and specifically the matter of the transfer of functions in this year’s debate on the Part Appropriation Bill (House of Assembly), and I am going to elaborate on this briefly. At that stage I said—I want to reconfirm this—that after the ordinances of the local governments in the provinces of the Transvaal, the Cape and the OFS had been promulgated, the jurisdiction of the Ministers’ Council within the area of local governments in respect of the White population group was confirmed in terms of these ordinances. On that occasion I also said that the transfer of functions was a very complex matter owing to the identification of the applicable provisions in the ordinances and obviously the powers derived from the ordinances. I said the following (Hansard, 23 February 1988, col 1858):

Further on I said:

The investigation phase in respect of the functions which can be transferred has been completed. I concede that the investigations took longer than was originally foreseen. The ordinances concerning the local government of the respective provinces and related ordinances which grant specific powers in respect of local government to the Administrators, had to be worked through article by article and in detail. I continued:

These discussions are taking place at present and this is also why the Director of Local Government in my department, Mr Jan Koekemoer, is not present at the discussion of this Vote. I therefore feel that we have very nearly reached the point where we will have dealt with this exercise satisfactorily and the transfer of identified functions will indeed be able to take place within the foreseeable future. Detailed information will obviously be made known as soon as this has been finalised, because there will obviously have to be absolute clarity in our local authorities regarding where the specific powers and functions will be vested and also regarding any associated matters.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon the Minister?

Order! Is the hon the Minister prepared to take a question?

Mr Chairman, I am prepared to take a question, but I have very little time.

Mr Chairman, I should very much like to know whether the idea is for the functions which are to be transferred to be greater than the functions local authorities had in the past. Will policy-making functions be transferred?

The fact of the matter is that what is at issue is which Government institution, whether the Administrator or the own affairs administrations, will be given specific functions, control functions and so on. At present the ordinance confers functions on the Administrator, for example, but in this case we are looking at those specific functions. In our opinion these will obviously be meaningful and significant functions. However, I think we can have that debate when the specific functions which are to be transferred have been announced.

While I am discussing this topic I should very much like to say that I greatly appreciate the services of the Director of Local Government, Mr Koekemoer, who initially handled this directorate in the department virtually single-handed. He was recently appointed as the secretary of the United Municipal Executive of South Africa. This is a tremendous promotion for him, but obviously I am sorry that he will be holding that post in future and will no longer be serving in his present capacity. However, I want to express my great appreciation in this House for his dedication to the department and its functions. He also performed a tremendous task as regards the matter of these functions. However, I want to wish him everything of the best in his new post as the secretary of the United Municipal Executive in South Africa.

The hon member for Beaufort West referred inter alia to the matter of local councils.

†The hon member for Constantia also referred to the local councils which were made possible by the Local Councils Act which was passed by this House at the end of the session in October last year. This is of course an absolutely new concept on local government level. As the hon member quite rightly set out, the Act makes provision for the establishment of local councils for certain local management areas. It also further defines the activities of these councils and, of course, provides for related matters in this regard. The Act was drafted specifically with certain local areas in the Cape Province in mind in which with the abolition of the divisional councils, the functions were transferred to the own affairs administration. The result was that they could not obtain representation in the RSCs and, in terms of this Act, the local council is a juristic person with assets and liabilities. The Regional Services Council Amendment Act makes provision for the Administrator to acknowledge a local council as a representative body. The principal Act was amended in Parliament this year. As a result thereof a local council may obtain representation on a RSC.

I must point out that we are dealing with a new concept in local government and it is necessary, in the interests of ordinary local government, to compile a well-considered set of regulations. These regulations are at present being prepared and I would like to tell the hon member that I have engaged the services of a private consultant, who is a legal expert, to be instrumental in the drafting of these regulations. This is a very technical and complex task—even more complex than I would have thought—and it must be compiled with the greatest circumspection.

I have requested that this matter be expedited. I pointed out quite rightly to the hon member for Constantia that the regulations would have been ready by the end of April, which unfortunately was not possible. We are positive that we shall have the draft regulations very soon with a view to obtaining comment thereon. I shall make the draft regulations available to the interested parties.

I also indicated to the hon member during our interview that I would let him have a copy of the draft regulations in view of the investigation that has been made by the Constantia Ratepayers’ Association and their memorandum, so that we may have the considered views and opinions of the bodies operating in these particular areas. I sincerely hope that we shall be in a position to promulgate these regulations after comment has been received in the near future with a view to starting to implement the Act and getting the local councils off the ground.

Obviously some of these local councils are situated in areas where one will hardly be able to hold a proper election if it is not, for instance, held during December when the owners of the properties are normally present at a particular resort which may be a local area. However, we shall make proper provision in the regulations for the elections for these local councils.

I would like to thank the hon member and other hon members who take an interest in promoting the establishment of local councils. I trust the hon member will accept it in this way.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon the Minister whether he would set a target date for the coming into being of the first of these bodies. Can he give the assurance that it will not be later than 26 October?

Mr Chairman, I think one would see that as a target date for at least getting those off the ground where one can have feasible elections in a normal situation, but obviously the circumstances in all local areas are not the same. We shall therefore have to be flexible, but I think that would be a reasonable target date. We are working towards that date and will be very pleased if we succeed. We are doing our best in that respect.

*It is very difficult to determine a fixed date for the introduction of these councils—the hon member asked me about this—because a great deal of work and preparation must be done to establish these councils. However, I am very keen for these local councils to get off the ground and be established.

While I am referring to the hon member, I want to thank the hon member for Beaufort West for his speech. I took grateful cognisance of the standpoints he adopted here.

This afternoon the hon member for Pietersburg discussed several matters, including housing. Of course he did not only talk about housing. I want to tell him and other hon members on both sides of the House who spoke about the aged and the less privileged that we are champions of the interests of the aged in South Africa. We are giving attention to the circumstances of social pensioners and are making provision for them.

Several hon members quite rightly referred to the fact that we are paying very careful attention to the position of our pensioners as regards their monthly obligations such as rent, board and lodging and so on. I merely want to tell hon members that we want to look after our old people. For this purpose we not only look at the needs survey, but our ministerial representatives—I am very glad that the hon member for Umhlanga referred specifically to this—who, as he said, are closer to the client, are specifically in a position to look at the circumstances in communities and to consult welfare organisations, utility companies and their local authorities to ascertain what the needs are, and are instructed to do so, so that one can give the necessary assistance and can plan for the needs which exist in specific communities.

They are doing excellent work.

I am glad that the hon member for Langlaagte interjected that they are doing excellent work. I should also like to place on record my appreciation for the work which our ministerial representatives do; not only for their co-operation, but also for the exceptionally positive results which are achieved through direct contact and negotiations in the interests of the community which we eventually have to serve. [Interjections.] The hon member need not worry. The ministerial representatives do their work with great circumspection in the interests of the people we have to serve.

Hear, hear!

The hon member for Pietersburg as well as several other hon members said something about the matter of the municipal elections. Because of the time factor I only want to say the following. I made the point this afternoon, and I think it is important for us to give the people at large the correct information on the facts during these municipal elections.

The hon member for Pretoria Central also referred to the CP’s approach regarding official and unofficial members standing for the party and so on, and I merely want to say that we are determining our strategy, and we are moving towards the municipal elections in our way, responsibly, but also open-heartedly. We are not ashamed to be identified as Nationalists, and a Nationalist is never ashamed to say that he is a Nationalist. [Interjections.] We shall also put the facts to the people with dedication, and I think this is the important thing. There are many matters in a local authority which are handled on a neutral basis, and the NP does not want to start ruling the town in the way the CP apparently wants to. [Interjections.]

Oh no, you are already doing so!

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon the Minister?

Give me a moment; I want to finish my argument.

Mr Chairman, I do not have the time to deal with the CP’s entire election manifesto, but I merely want to discuss one point which the hon member touched on in his speech this afternoon. Under the caption “Eie woongebiede” the following is said in this election manifesto:

[Interjections.] Where did the CP come by the idea that the NP is planning mixed residential areas on a large scale?

That is a lie!

Order! Which hon member said it was a lie?

Mr Chairman, I said so.

Order! The hon member must withdraw that.

Sir, I withdraw it. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: If someone were to say that the pamphlet contained something which was a lie, would that be unparliamentary? I am asking for your ruling.

Order! The Chair is not prepared to reply to hypothetical questions. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, with all due respect, it is a reality. A pamphlet was referred to, and this is what the pamphlet said, and the hon member said that what was stated in the pamphlet was a lie.

Order! At that specific moment in view of the circumstances I felt that the remark was not permissible and that was my ruling. That disposes of the matter.

Mr Chairman, may I please address you on this point?

Order! I have given my ruling, and the matter has been disposed off. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Mr Chairman, on 5 October the hon the State President said the following in this House, and I quote:

But! [Interjections.]

I am reading out the guidelines:

The point is that the foundation in South Africa is an own community life. [Interjections.] This is what exists. I want to repeat this respectfully, particularly to the hon the Leader of the Official Opposition, because this pamphlet of theirs does not give the correct view. [Interjections.] If we really want to stir up our communities, we must give the Republic of South Africa disinformation in these elections. [Interjections.] Let us fight this on the basis of facts. [Interjections]

Mr Chairman, in view of the reply of the hon the Minister in respect of the Government’s official participation in the municipal elections, may I ask him whether his party has taken a fundamental decision in respect of its participation in municipal elections, and whether they are going to leave this to the discretion of the divisional executives of the various constituencies?

Mr Chairman, I have told the hon member that we in the NP have a strategy on how we are going to approach these municipal elections, and the hon member need only debate his strategy. We have our own strategy, and we take our decisions and act accordingly. [Interjections.] However, I want to emphasise the point … [Interjections.]

Order!

The hon member for Pietersburg should rather look after his own affairs for a change. After all, the hon member for Pretoria Central and the hon the Minister of Education and Culture informed hon members here what the CP’s approach to this election was. The candidates were made known, but the CP’s candidates are not known everywhere. [Interjections.] Secondly, in certain places the CP is making use of taxpayers’ associations or other organisations, but the CP commits them whether they are standing officially or unofficially, and this was stated so well here this evening. [Interjections.] Why are those hon members pestering us so? We are entering this election with the facts of South Africa. [Interjections.]

The hon member for Boksburg, as well as the hon member for Langlaagte, referred specifically to the matter of urban renewal, as well as urban decay. I want to thank both hon members for the speeches they made here this afternoon and this evening. Apart from the fact that urban decay is a worldwide phenomenon, the situation is that the important approach to the specific problem— this became apparent from both hon members’ speeches, particularly the speech of the hon member for Langlaagte—is that the community is involved in the development and the urban renewal which must take place.

For that reason I should like to tell both hon members that the department and I again took cognisance with great interest of the schools of thought broached here. In addition, insofar as it is our task, we shall give attention to this. [Interjections.] Obviously we are receptive to proposals on how the renewal of residential areas can be promoted. Investigations are at present under way with a view to taking certain steps in this regard.

As regards the matter of unutilised State land, I merely want to say that the policy is to alienate surplus land. The envisaged coming into force of the legislation on the disposal of State land with effect from 1 July 1988 will probably also stimulate the development or sale of unutilised land in this regard.

I want to thank the hon member for Humansdorp very much for his speech. I think the hon member made a very good speech here on the housing of the aged and the question of retirement villages. For my part I want to say that we also welcome the Bill which is now on the Order Paper. In fact, we think it will also contribute to greater security for our aged in these retirement villages.

†The hon member for Durban Central—he apologised for his absence—referred to the question of the appointment of rent boards for Indians and Coloureds. I would like to say that rent control is included under paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the Constitution Act as an own affair. The administration of the Rent Control Act was transferred to the House of Assembly insofar as its application in areas declared for Whites is concerned. Rent boards have been duly appointed in these areas.

*I referred to the hon member for Carletonville when I spoke about the forthcoming elections. In the first place I want to say that my department and I are just as eager as the hon member to reach finality on the Venterspost issue. This is a perplexing matter. As I informed the hon member very briefly the other day, there are specific financial implications in the proposal. This is one aspect.

The second aspect is that I also requested comments from the relevant MEC. We received these a while ago. They are drastic comments to which we must give attention with regard to the entire matter of a decision in respect of the further development of Venterspost and so on. In addition we had to wait for the specific guideplan programme proposals in this regard.

In the near future—we also received those inputs—I intend to hold discussions with the town council of Venterspost inter alia and then take a decision. I shall inform the hon member on this, too. I want to assure him that I am also in a hurry to finalise this matter. The point is that it would obviously have further financial implications if we were to allow further housing development there and one has to take this thoroughly into account. However, at the moment this matter is receiving my considered attention.

†Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pinelands actually dealt with matters which do not fall under my authority. I do not know about the community liaison forum. I would like to thank the hon member for the positive remarks he made about the department and the annual report. The hon member dealt with Lawaaikamp— as did the hon member for Claremont—and squatter problems. I think the hon member must raise these points with my colleague, the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning.

*Mr Chairman, I have already referred to the hon member for Parow. I should like to thank him. He made a very interesting speech on the forthcoming municipal elections. I think he summed up the position very well. I thank him for his participation.

I have already referred to the hon member for Langlaagte. I merely want to say that the programme they have launched there is a very fine positive effort and I wish him every success with it.

The hon member for Nigel referred to the specific problems in respect of a housing utility company on the East Rand—a utility company which actually came into existence years ago and was financed prior to the establishment of the department. However, that is not the point. The company built a number of houses there; my information is that it was 85 houses. However, the hon member says that according to the town council, it was 83. Unfortunately the company would seem to have been unable to operate successfully and it was liquidated. A liquidator was appointed and unfortunately a situation developed which compelled us to refer this matter to the SAP. I do not want to pursue this matter any further. I merely want to tell the hon member that the matter is being investigated and obviously we shall have to report further on this to the House of Assembly. I shall keep the hon member posted in due course.

I have already referred to the ministerial representatives, and the hon member was also rather negative about them. However, I want to invite the hon member to find out more about them. The ministerial representatives are at the service of members of Parliament, including members of the House of Assembly. I think the hon member should become better acquainted with them and I am sure that then he would react positively.

†The hon member for Cape Town Gardens has apologised for not being able to be here this evening. I have quite a lengthy reply for the hon member. I indicated that I would advise him further. One point he raised concerned the protected tenants, and as far as they are concerned, I should like to say that my hon colleague for Boksburg has also given him a reply. An owner has the right to renovate his property in a bona fide manner. The Rent Control Act prescribes the procedures to be followed in order to protect the interests of a tenant as far as possible. A minority of landlords may circumvent these provisions. To control this, the inspectors of the department have been directed to pay particular attention to this matter.

Figures concerning affected tenants are not available. The hon member asked me what these figures were, and I am quite prepared to let him have the information if it is available. [Interjections.] The incidence of circumvention is as far as I am advised quite limited. As far as the other matters are concerned that the hon member raised, I shall inform him in due course.

*I want to thank the hon member for Newton Park. He gave a very good explanation of the new procedures in connection with the financing of welfare and housing projects, as well as the allocation of funds. I want to thank the hon member for this. I think his speech gave a very fine explanation of the procedures which are aimed at speeding up the eventual allocation of funds.

Like the hon member for Bellville, the hon member made an appeal for us to extend the first-time home buyer’s subsidy to existing housing. I think I gave an indication of our standpoint when I replied to the hon member for Bellville, namely that I would look into this matter.

The hon member for Germiston District and the hon member for Albany referred to our Government villages, as did the hon member for Meyerton at the end of his speech. They referred very appreciatively to that set-up, as well as to the position of our people in the Government villages. I want to thank the hon members for adopting such a positive approach towards the Government villages and their inhabitants, as well as the problems they may experience.

In the light of my speech earlier today, I merely want to say that we need the housing in the Government villages. There are many people who simply cannot afford other housing at the moment. The point is that we must always look positively at the circumstances of the inhabitants of the Government villages, undertake the necessary upgrading where possible, improve the situation and then see to it that a community life of good quality can always be achieved in the Government villages.

The committee which is investigating the matter is doing very thorough work. They have already visited the Government villages. The hon members to whom I have just referred all spoke about the Government villages in their constituencies. I have issued instructions not only for the investigation to be speeded up, but for us to get the reports as soon as possible.

As regards the request made by the hon member for Germiston District, I shall afford all hon members of the House of Assembly in whose constituencies there are Government villages an opportunity to make inputs when I receive the report from the committee; as a matter of fact, after I had received the report on Benoni’s Government village I gave the hon member for Brentwood the opportunity to make specific proposals and inputs, as the hon member in fact did. I shall therefore adopt the same approach with regard to the hon members for Germiston District, Albany and Meyerton, as well as other hon members in whose constituencies there are Government villages.

As regards the welfare component in a Government village, I shall convey the request of the hon member to my colleague, the hon the Minister of the Budget and Welfare. I want to thank the hon member for the speech he made.

I have already referred to the hon member for Umhlanga, and I merely want to have my appreciation placed on record for the good speech he made regarding the task of the ministerial representatives. I have referred to them too.

I think the hon member for Green Point made a very positive speech about the security of the aged. He also made positive suggestions to which I shall grant consideration, because what is actually at issue is ensuring that our aged are safe.

†The hon member also raised the question of foreign investment in residential properties. Obviously this matter does not fall under the scope of my authority, but under the scope of the monetary authorities—the Reserve Bank and the Department of Finance. I shall provide my hon colleague with the details of the hon member’s speech this afternoon. I shall then come back to him later as far as this is concerned.

*I want to tell the hon member for Claremont that the facts of the matter he raised here are not at my disposal at all. He also referred to Lawaaikamp again, as well as to the matter of rezoning.

†Then the hon member made the point that the Administrator of the Cape Province treated the people of Claremont with contempt.

*I want to say that this is not the Administrator’s style. I do not think it is fair for the hon member to make such a statement here either. One of my hon colleagues said that yesterday and the day before yesterday the hon member did have an opportunity in the extended committee to speak directly to the Administrator and bring these facts to his attention. [Interjections.] I therefore want to tell the hon member that he did have the opportunity to do so, but he did not make use of it.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon the Minister?

Mr Chairman, I have been very fair in replying to questions, but I really do not have the time to reply to any further questions.

The hon member for Ermelo touched on the matter of central business districts. I do not know anything about this. This is a matter which falls under the hon the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning. The hon member is most welcome to raise that matter next week in the relevant debate.

I have already referred to the hon member for Pretoria Central. I think he made a very good speech, particularly regarding municipal elections. As regards Church Square, I want to tell him that, as he knows, we agreed to the Development of Church Square, Pretoria (House of Assembly) Amendment Bill earlier on in the session. I am convinced that the cultural-historic heritage must be ensured. I think that legislation will serve as an instrument to preserve Church Square. In principle I have no objection to the redevelopment of Church Square, but every proposal on the development of Church Square must obviously be submitted to me and to the Ministers’ Council. We shall then hold discussions with experts in the Church Square committee and the Pretoria City Council on the meaningful development of Church Square in the interests of conservation.

I think I have replied to all hon members. I have already replied to a number of matters raised by the hon member for Middelburg, the chief spokesman of the Official Opposition. However, I want to discuss one more aspect with him, namely the pre-emptive right to which he referred. If I understood the hon member correctly, he said that the pre-emptive right was only exercised in a few cases.

Section 54 of the Development and Housing Act—by the way, this was the first Act which was agreed to in the House of Assembly as own affairs legislation in 1985—arranges the entire matter of pre-emptive right with regard to property which is sold to a natural person for residential purposes or in respect of which a loan has been granted. A ten year pre-emptive right applies in respect of new sales; under the old dispensation it was only five years. In the first place the local authority must decide whether or not to exercise its preemptive right. If the local authority does not exercise its right, the Development and Housing Board must consider buying up the houses.

The regulations promulgated in terms of the Act and the Act itself arrange the compensation in the case of exercising the pre-emptive right and repaying the amounts to the Development and Housing Fund in respect of the benefit which the buyer enjoyed by way of a low purchase price and subsidised interest rates, if the pre-emptive right were to be waived. The object of the pre-emptive right is to prevent speculation in State-financed houses as well as to reclaim part of the profit made on such a house on a diminishing basis over the ten-year period. In my opinion the system is fair and it allows, for example, for improvements made to the property by the buyer, while it allows funds to flow back for further housing development. I think I have replied fairly adequately to the hon member, but if there are matters in this regard or other matters on which he requires information, the hon member is most welcome to approach me or the department.

I think I have replied to all hon members. I hope I have not overlooked anyone. If so, I shall look into this and I undertake to follow up those matters to which hon members referred in the debate and provide them with further replies later.

I should like to say something about a matter which in my opinion is very important and to which the hon member for Beaufort West referred in passing, if I understood him correctly. This concerns the Regional Services Councils Amendment Act which was piloted through this House recently. In 1985-86, during investigations by the Council for the Co-ordination of Local Government Affairs into the future of specific development bodies, it was found that a deficiency existed at local government level in respect of the representation of communities outside the areas of jurisdiction of local authorities. When the RSCs were established in the Transvaal, the Administrator recognised all local regional committees, local authorities and Indian and Coloured management committees as representative bodies in terms of the Regional Services Councils Act.

Because an RSC covers a large area, it includes several local authorities as well as a large rural area. Although this rural area is responsible for regional settlement and regional services levies, it does not have representation on an RSC. When divisional councils were abolished in the areas where RSCs were established in the Cape Province, the above communities—which previously had formed joint wards and in that way had representation on a divisional council—similarly did not have representation. Another form of representative body therefore had to be found. In the Co-ordinating Council, in which all interested parties were represented, the establishment of rural councils was unanimously recommended.

In terms of section 12 (a) of the Regional Services Councils Act, which was piloted through Parliament recently, provision was made for the establishment of rural councils. This is a body vested with legal personality. The objectives of a rural council are to afford representation in a body to people in a region outside the area of jurisdiction of local authorities and to promote the welfare of those people. For this purpose a rural council is vested and entrusted with the powers and duties which may be conferred on it from time to time. It is constituted from members who could inter alia be elected by people resident in the relevant region or areas for which a rural council is envisaged. Specific policy decisions will still be taken on the constitution of rural councils as well as on the way in which they will be established.

The Minister entrusted with local government in the Administration: House of Assembly may, in terms of this amending Bill, establish between one and, if circumstances justify this, three rural councils in a specific region. I want to emphasise that these envisaged rural councils will have no power to levy taxes and that the expenses involved in their administration will be defrayed from funds voted by the House of Assembly.

The implementation of the provision of the Act goes hand in hand with the drafting of regulations and in this regard prior discussions will be held with all interested organisations, including the SA Agricultural Union. This matter is on the agenda for discussion during the meeting of the committee of action of the co-ordinating council on 27 May. By adopting this method we shall also ensure that possible problems are identified and eliminated timeously.

I want to point out to hon members that these rural councils are a new concept in their own right which took shape through reform in the constitutional sphere in the interests of rural communities. The Ministers’ Council intends to gear itself to getting some of these rural councils into operation as soon as possible. I feel this also affords certain exciting prospects to our people who are living in the rural communities.

In conclusion I should like to thank hon members for their participation in this debate. Lastly, I should sincerely like to thank my head of department, Mr Reynecke, the Parliamentary team, the head office staff and my personal staff for their consistent loyalty and co-operation. I think with this dedicated team at my disposal I am able to perform my task to the best of my ability in the interests of the people I serve and in accordance with my instructions. In this regard I should like to say that the department and I always rely on the co-operation and support we get from hon members in this House. Once again I want to place on record both my appreciation and that of my department for the attitude of hon members of the House of Assembly towards our department and its functions.

Business interrupted.